57139 réponses à ce sujet

[DreamTension]

Today??? I don't think so.

[malikstarks2]

For those of you here that ascribe to this. Does it make it harder to replay the game not knowing what really happens at the end (no closure)?

I guess there are those who are replaying it for clues/evidence, but I'm talking froma purely enjoyment perspective.

Personally have not had time to replay it lately anyway, but I'm kinda curious as to how people feel about it.

Modifié par malikstarks2, 30 mars 2012 - 07:54 .

[Shooter__Andy]

 Okay, so here are my thoughts on the IT. I haven't replayed the game yet for obvious reasons, so my memory MIGHT be a bit wobbly now, but I'm open for all kinds of corrections.

I'll try to rate the arguments a bit, but obviously it's just my subjective opinion and shouldn't be viewed as fact. Anyway...

Moderate: It was pointed out multiple times already that the child at the beginning was running around unnoticed by anyone, opening doors that are closed and survived a direct hit of a Reaper's beam into the building he was in... but one thing bothers me even more than all that. Remember what he says to Shepard if you try to get him out of the duct?
"You can't save me"
Alright, people just DON'T talk like that, especially children. Of course, it might be just overly dramatic writing, but what if it's not? If the IT is correct, then the child is the representation of everyone Shepard failed to save, appealing to his basic guilt complex. What would be better for him to say if he was trying to guilt Shepard into obedience?

Weak: ME2 and ME3 spent an awful lot of time pointing out that Shepard had absolutely no control chip in his/her brain with a very weak explanation for it. And while it indeed shows that TIM controlling Shepard in the ending, no matter if it was a dream or not, was possible through indoctrination. But that was pointed out already, what I'm trying to say is that what if TIM planned to control him/her this way all along, but up until final moments of ME2 it was just unnecessary and after that he couldn't have affect him/her because he underestimated his/her willpower? I mean, the man was obsessed with indoctrination and building "improved versions" of Shepard in ME3, wasn't he?

Solid: Neither Vigil, nor Javik and not even the Prothean VI in ME3 EVER state that Reapers "saved" Protheans through harvesting them, in fact we clearly see Collectors running around instead of being made into a Reaper. I guess Harbringer might be the Prothean Reaper, which is why it controls them, but it contradicts the Alliance data which says it's the oldest and largest one of them all.
Same thing with Rachni, who are revealed to be more than 50,000 years old, and even back at the Prothean Empire they were smart and dangerous enough to be considered a threat and survive the attack of the Empire. Then they were indoctrinated by the Reapers at some point, but, again, NOT "ascended". In fact, if you kill their Queen, they re-create it only to be an asset of their own, not to save the species.
What's more, every bit of info we get until ME3 suggests that the process of creating a Reaper is NOT something made to "ascend" all sentient space-fairing species, which is why there is no, say, Asari or Quarian Reapers being made (I wonder if a Quarian Reaper would need a physical "firewall" to protect it from viruses...). It was almost implied that the Reapers collect only the best species of the Cycle. This might their way of evolving and improving themselves.
They try to destroy Quarians by improving Geth, they never attacked non-human colonies to kidnap their population and goo-ify it, the PTSD asari states that they just indoctrinate and husk-ify everyone. There is no reports from Palaven about mass kidnappings, vorcha are basically annihilated (aren't they?), the strongest and the most pure-blood asari are just turned into foot-soldiers instead of getting their potent genetic material, even Morinth isn't interesting enough to the Reapers, the Reaper tries to prevent curing krogan genophage, ensuring they'll never be "ascended" as the original species, only as modified inferior ones...
Also note that while Shepard and Anderson theoretise that the Reapers were buildning another Human Reaper at the Citadel, this would contradict the entirety of ME2, where the subjects needed to be ALIVE to be processed into gray goo, but the bodies in the Citadel are obviously dead. So, apparently, they just said "screw this. we need to destroy the resistance first and then BS around with all this stuff, otherwise we might actually be stopped".
In short, it seems that the claims of "salvation through destruction" meant something else than Reaper-fying every sentient space-fairing race of the Cycle originally.

Weak: Note how it was stated in ME3 that the idoctrination husk-ifycation works through the adrenaline, so it makes sense that the indoctrination kicked into full gear at the most climactic moment.

Weak: Also of note is that there are a few interesting similarities between the travel into the Geth collective and the final sequence. Remember how the gun was chosen as the symbolic means of destroying the Reaper influence because Shepard is just so familiar with it? Or that the images were made not from the "memories" of the collective, but from Shepard's? And the floating platforms...

Weak: The inability to contact any of the people left behind, even Admiral Hackett, is certainly weird. I mean, you're making a decision that changes the fate of the entire Galaxy, wouldn't you want to ask something who's not gonna faint from blood loss anytime now?

Weak: Also you are unable to use any of your abilities. It is somewhat understandable for stuff like biotic and tech powers, but what about Adrenaline Rush or stuff like that?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now for some points that seem to contradict the IT and my possible counter-points to them:

Point: Why is there a clipshow after the Red ending? If you won, wouldn't the images stop?
Counter-point: This one is pretty tough to explain without going meta (meta-explanation: the whole IT deal would be IMMEDIATELY obvious). My guess would be that at that point Shepard has difeated infoctrination attempt but is still dying/unconscious in the London rubble, which is why he/she gasps as if waking up. So the images might not even be the indoctrination, just the same stuff you see in the dreams or in near-death experiences. It certainly evokes the imagery of Eden, your loved ones and friends (which starts to come though at the moment you've picked the ending, for some reason it's just Joker and Liara though, but I'll talk about it later). So even the stuff you see after the Control/Synthesis choice is just your own dream, based on the idoctrination, but not directly caused by it. That also explains the following point:

Point: Why even show a clipshow if you've chosen the Control/Synthesis? Shepard's fully indoctrinated, no need to show them anything more, right?
Counter-point: As in the previous entry, I think this is something that is not directly cause by the indoctrination, just by the fact that Shepard is still dying, even if he/she chose to become indoctrinated. The only diffence being that after that he/she can either wake up from it being him/herself... or not.

Point: Why are there two "bad" endings?
Counter-point: Another diffiicult one. Really, there can be multiple explanations, but none are supported properly by any facts, so they're just assumptions. I myself think that:
a. The Catalyst knew that Shepard would want his/her "own" way. I mean, the supposedly "good" Control was the goal of TIM, your Arch-Nemesis at this point.
b. The Synthesis and Control MIGHT be actually different. There are different possible outcomes: Shepard can become indoctrinated like TIM or Saren, he/she can be the victim of ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL like what happened to Saren's corpse or the Collectors, he/she can become just a husk or something like that, he/she can become a Reaper, or become the main "ingridient" for a new Human Reaper (Harbringer wanted his/her corpse pretty badly, right?) etc. I'm not sure what means what, but the possibilities certainly are there.

Point: What about the Stargazer scene?
Counter-point: Honestly, I have no clue. It can be interpreted in any way. It might contradict TIM if you decide that it means that Normandy's crew has st up on this planet for real and that the Stargazer and his victim the child are their descendants, but it might as well mean that up to this point it was all part of the story and he'll tell the ACTUAL ending now...
Really, the purpose of it is at the very least questionable even at face value.

Point: Why can you die at the hands of TIM?
Counter-point: If we take the idea that Anderson is Shepard's willpower, then after the indoctrination "kills" it, Shepard can actually die just because of losing his will to live, unless he/she does takes control of the situation. And Reapers won't need to resurrect him/her - remember how Saren told that if you lose your will to resist you become useless to them, since your mental facilities drop down radically?

Point: Why can we lose if the EMS is too low?
Counter-point: Not really sure here. There's a lot of polarizingly different explanations, up to and including that because your EMS is low, you had spent almost no time being indoctinated and you actually WIN. This is a difficult moment in the IT, but it can potentially be explained or at least handwaved. And really, when you consider that if you take the ending at face value your EMS affects stuff it can't possibly affect in any way, like the choices you can make or the destructiveness of the Red Blast, or whether Shepard stays alive or not... Yeah, this idea doesn't seem that improbable in comparison.

----------------------------------------------
And now some points that I think MIGHT be important but I am not sure what to make of them:

1. After you choose what you do with the Reapers, the cutscene breaks to show still images of Joker and Liara. Why them? Why not, say, your LI? Is there any meaning to it?
2. What about the Stargazer scene, really? Why the hell is it even in there? I mean, Buzz Auldrin is a really cool person to have in your sci-fi game, but... is that it? Couldn't they've gotten him to narrate the epilogue or someting? Something that makes SENSE? Because really, the pic about him telling the story of "alien sex, violence and destruction of the entire species" to a kid points out how ridiculous this is. And remember - it can't be "just a dream" - Shepard isn't dreaming at this point, he/she gasps for air BEFORE that.

[zakaryzb]

malikstarks2 wrote...

For those of you here that ascribe to this. Does it make it harder to replay the game not knowing what really happens at the end?

I guess there are those who are replaying it for clues/evidence, but I'm talking froma purely enjoyment perspective.

Personally have not had time to replay it lately anyway, but I'm kinda curious as to how people feel about it.

For me, the end left a bad taste in my mouth, like I didn't want to replay it knowing that THAT was the end I was working towards, but now with IT I am replaying it and getting as much EMS as possible and waiting out on the -fingers crossed- forth coming DLC. 

[n00bsauce2010]

malikstarks2 wrote...

For those of you here that ascribe to this. Does it make it harder to replay the game not knowing what really happens at the end?

I guess there are those who are replaying it for clues/evidence, but I'm talking froma purely enjoyment perspective.

Personally have not had time to replay it lately anyway, but I'm kinda curious as to how people feel about it.

not for me at least. But I would like a wider array of endings then what we currently have. It's definitely fun to try and go look around for clues/hints though

[DreamTension]

malikstarks2 wrote...

For those of you here that ascribe to this. Does it make it harder to replay the game not knowing what really happens at the end?

I guess there are those who are replaying it for clues/evidence, but I'm talking about a purely enjoyment perspective.

Personally have not had time to replay it lately anyway, but I'm kinda curious as to how people feel about it.

I haven't replayed ME3.  I'm currently redoing entire series and I'm on ME2.

This theory makes me happier than the current ending.  I think it's very cool how BioWare indoctrinated the gamer and now there's the anticipation or uncertainty of getting the real ending. 

But let's say this is it.  The end.  No DLC.  I still prefer to think IDT is correct and that we never know what happens than believe BioWare managed to contradict and ruin every good thing they did in this series.  I hate the ending that much because of the many reasons.  It's depressing and I'm very disappointed in BioWare (If this ending is it) because after three games I expected more than this.

[Dwailing]

malikstarks2 wrote...

For those of you here that ascribe to this. Does it make it harder to replay the game not knowing what really happens at the end (no closure)?

I guess there are those who are replaying it for clues/evidence, but I'm talking froma purely enjoyment perspective.

Personally have not had time to replay it lately anyway, but I'm kinda curious as to how people feel about it.

In all honesty, this theory has HELPED me to keep playing.  I do look for the evidence, but only the stuff that has already been found.  I haven't found anything new.  I enjoyed the parts before the ending greatly, and with this theory, I can even enjoy the endings.

[Luiginius]

I took the plunge today when noticed someone saying about the shifting walls being from lotsb. That with rest of the clues would pretty much cover images shown during the last bit. So I'm now in the IT camp.
I'll be playing through the game to have a save that covers everything to coincide with pax, with as high a ems I can stand.
Will be some payoff if the color choice made on the 1st go was right.

[malikstarks2]

Shooter__Andy wrote...

 Okay, so here are my thoughts on the IT. I haven't replayed the game yet for obvious reasons, so my memory MIGHT be a bit wobbly now, but I'm open for all kinds of corrections.

I'll try to rate the arguments a bit, but obviously it's just my subjective opinion and shouldn't be viewed as fact. Anyway...

Moderate: It was pointed out multiple times already that the child at the beginning was running around unnoticed by anyone, opening doors that are closed and survived a direct hit of a Reaper's beam into the building he was in... but one thing bothers me even more than all that. Remember what he says to Shepard if you try to get him out of the duct?
"You can't save me"
Alright, people just DON'T talk like that, especially children. Of course, it might be just overly dramatic writing, but what if it's not? If the IT is correct, then the child is the representation of everyone Shepard failed to save, appealing to his basic guilt complex. What would be better for him to say if he was trying to guilt Shepard into obedience?

Weak: ME2 and ME3 spent an awful lot of time pointing out that Shepard had absolutely no control chip in his/her brain with a very weak explanation for it. And while it indeed shows that TIM controlling Shepard in the ending, no matter if it was a dream or not, was possible through indoctrination. But that was pointed out already, what I'm trying to say is that what if TIM planned to control him/her this way all along, but up until final moments of ME2 it was just unnecessary and after that he couldn't have affect him/her because he underestimated his/her willpower? I mean, the man was obsessed with indoctrination and building "improved versions" of Shepard in ME3, wasn't he?

Solid: Neither Vigil, nor Javik and not even the Prothean VI in ME3 EVER state that Reapers "saved" Protheans through harvesting them, in fact we clearly see Collectors running around instead of being made into a Reaper. I guess Harbringer might be the Prothean Reaper, which is why it controls them, but it contradicts the Alliance data which says it's the oldest and largest one of them all.
Same thing with Rachni, who are revealed to be more than 50,000 years old, and even back at the Prothean Empire they were smart and dangerous enough to be considered a threat and survive the attack of the Empire. Then they were indoctrinated by the Reapers at some point, but, again, NOT "ascended". In fact, if you kill their Queen, they re-create it only to be an asset of their own, not to save the species.
What's more, every bit of info we get until ME3 suggests that the process of creating a Reaper is NOT something made to "ascend" all sentient space-fairing species, which is why there is no, say, Asari or Quarian Reapers being made (I wonder if a Quarian Reaper would need a physical "firewall" to protect it from viruses...). It was almost implied that the Reapers collect only the best species of the Cycle. This might their way of evolving and improving themselves.
They try to destroy Quarians by improving Geth, they never attacked non-human colonies to kidnap their population and goo-ify it, the PTSD asari states that they just indoctrinate and husk-ify everyone. There is no reports from Palaven about mass kidnappings, vorcha are basically annihilated (aren't they?), the strongest and the most pure-blood asari are just turned into foot-soldiers instead of getting their potent genetic material, even Morinth isn't interesting enough to the Reapers, the Reaper tries to prevent curing krogan genophage, ensuring they'll never be "ascended" as the original species, only as modified inferior ones...
Also note that while Shepard and Anderson theoretise that the Reapers were buildning another Human Reaper at the Citadel, this would contradict the entirety of ME2, where the subjects needed to be ALIVE to be processed into gray goo, but the bodies in the Citadel are obviously dead. So, apparently, they just said "screw this. we need to destroy the resistance first and then BS around with all this stuff, otherwise we might actually be stopped".
In short, it seems that the claims of "salvation through destruction" meant something else than Reaper-fying every sentient space-fairing race of the Cycle originally.

Weak: Note how it was stated in ME3 that the idoctrination husk-ifycation works through the adrenaline, so it makes sense that the indoctrination kicked into full gear at the most climactic moment.

Weak: Also of note is that there are a few interesting similarities between the travel into the Geth collective and the final sequence. Remember how the gun was chosen as the symbolic means of destroying the Reaper influence because Shepard is just so familiar with it? Or that the images were made not from the "memories" of the collective, but from Shepard's? And the floating platforms...

Weak: The inability to contact any of the people left behind, even Admiral Hackett, is certainly weird. I mean, you're making a decision that changes the fate of the entire Galaxy, wouldn't you want to ask something who's not gonna faint from blood loss anytime now?

Weak: Also you are unable to use any of your abilities. It is somewhat understandable for stuff like biotic and tech powers, but what about Adrenaline Rush or stuff like that?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now for some points that seem to contradict the IT and my possible counter-points to them:

Point: Why is there a clipshow after the Red ending? If you won, wouldn't the images stop?
Counter-point: This one is pretty tough to explain without going meta (meta-explanation: the whole IT deal would be IMMEDIATELY obvious). My guess would be that at that point Shepard has difeated infoctrination attempt but is still dying/unconscious in the London rubble, which is why he/she gasps as if waking up. So the images might not even be the indoctrination, just the same stuff you see in the dreams or in near-death experiences. It certainly evokes the imagery of Eden, your loved ones and friends (which starts to come though at the moment you've picked the ending, for some reason it's just Joker and Liara though, but I'll talk about it later). So even the stuff you see after the Control/Synthesis choice is just your own dream, based on the idoctrination, but not directly caused by it. That also explains the following point:

Point: Why even show a clipshow if you've chosen the Control/Synthesis? Shepard's fully indoctrinated, no need to show them anything more, right?
Counter-point: As in the previous entry, I think this is something that is not directly cause by the indoctrination, just by the fact that Shepard is still dying, even if he/she chose to become indoctrinated. The only diffence being that after that he/she can either wake up from it being him/herself... or not.

Point: Why are there two "bad" endings?
Counter-point: Another diffiicult one. Really, there can be multiple explanations, but none are supported properly by any facts, so they're just assumptions. I myself think that:
a. The Catalyst knew that Shepard would want his/her "own" way. I mean, the supposedly "good" Control was the goal of TIM, your Arch-Nemesis at this point.
b. The Synthesis and Control MIGHT be actually different. There are different possible outcomes: Shepard can become indoctrinated like TIM or Saren, he/she can be the victim of ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL like what happened to Saren's corpse or the Collectors, he/she can become just a husk or something like that, he/she can become a Reaper, or become the main "ingridient" for a new Human Reaper (Harbringer wanted his/her corpse pretty badly, right?) etc. I'm not sure what means what, but the possibilities certainly are there.

Point: What about the Stargazer scene?
Counter-point: Honestly, I have no clue. It can be interpreted in any way. It might contradict TIM if you decide that it means that Normandy's crew has st up on this planet for real and that the Stargazer and his victim the child are their descendants, but it might as well mean that up to this point it was all part of the story and he'll tell the ACTUAL ending now...
Really, the purpose of it is at the very least questionable even at face value.

Point: Why can you die at the hands of TIM?
Counter-point: If we take the idea that Anderson is Shepard's willpower, then after the indoctrination "kills" it, Shepard can actually die just because of losing his will to live, unless he/she does takes control of the situation. And Reapers won't need to resurrect him/her - remember how Saren told that if you lose your will to resist you become useless to them, since your mental facilities drop down radically?

Point: Why can we lose if the EMS is too low?
Counter-point: Not really sure here. There's a lot of polarizingly different explanations, up to and including that because your EMS is low, you had spent almost no time being indoctinated and you actually WIN. This is a difficult moment in the IT, but it can potentially be explained or at least handwaved. And really, when you consider that if you take the ending at face value your EMS affects stuff it can't possibly affect in any way, like the choices you can make or the destructiveness of the Red Blast, or whether Shepard stays alive or not... Yeah, this idea doesn't seem that improbable in comparison.

----------------------------------------------
And now some points that I think MIGHT be important but I am not sure what to make of them:

1. After you choose what you do with the Reapers, the cutscene breaks to show still images of Joker and Liara. Why them? Why not, say, your LI? Is there any meaning to it?
2. What about the Stargazer scene, really? Why the hell is it even in there? I mean, Buzz Auldrin is a really cool person to have in your sci-fi game, but... is that it? Couldn't they've gotten him to narrate the epilogue or someting? Something that makes SENSE? Because really, the pic about him telling the story of "alien sex, violence and destruction of the entire species" to a kid points out how ridiculous this is. And remember - it can't be "just a dream" - Shepard isn't dreaming at this point, he/she gasps for air BEFORE that.

Good Post, but alot to respond to I think. You made some points I hadn't thought about. To your biggest point about the human reaper and perhaps the lack of a Prothean Reaper (I think that was your point, could be wrong). It does appear to be a bit inconsistent here, and I don't have good answer. It's possible that this was done from a story perspective so as not to be a dead giveaway, (You fight a Prothean Reaper, so guess who's next).  Perhaps also humans hold more potential/interest to the reapers than the Protheans  did for whatever reason. Kind of Grasping at straws cause the Reapers interest in the human race has not yet been fully clarified.

I also think that the body's on the citadel were beamed up alive, after being held in concentration camps. This is mentioned by EDI ealier.

Modifié par malikstarks2, 30 mars 2012 - 08:27 .

[Slaiyer]

malikstarks2 wrote...

Good Post, but alot to respond to I think. You made some points I hadn't thought about. To your biggest point about the human reaper and perhaps the lack of a Prothean Reaper (I think that was your point, could be wrong). It does appear to be a bit inconsistent here, and I don't have good answer. It's possible that this was done from a story perspective so as not to be a dead giveaway, (You fight a Prothean Reaper, so guess who's next).  Perhaps also humans hold more potential/interest to the reapers than the Protheans  did for whatever reason. Kind of Grasping at straws cause the Reapers interest in the human race has not yet been fully clarified.

I remember hearing on the BSN somewhere that the reason the Protheans weren't made to reapers was that their genetics didn't allow them to or something like that. It's the reason they were made into collectors instead.

[malikstarks2]

Slaiyer wrote...

malikstarks2 wrote...

Good Post, but alot to respond to I think. You made some points I hadn't thought about. To your biggest point about the human reaper and perhaps the lack of a Prothean Reaper (I think that was your point, could be wrong). It does appear to be a bit inconsistent here, and I don't have good answer. It's possible that this was done from a story perspective so as not to be a dead giveaway, (You fight a Prothean Reaper, so guess who's next).  Perhaps also humans hold more potential/interest to the reapers than the Protheans  did for whatever reason. Kind of Grasping at straws cause the Reapers interest in the human race has not yet been fully clarified.

I remember hearing on the BSN somewhere that the reason the Protheans weren't made to reapers was that their genetics didn't allow them to or something like that. It's the reason they were made into collectors instead.

I missed that, there still doesn't seem to be much differentiation between the Reapers though other than class (e.g. destroyer vs. Capital Ship). Some further clarification on the point Shooter__Andy is making here would be good.

Modifié par malikstarks2, 30 mars 2012 - 08:32 .

[Shooter__Andy]

malikstarks2 wrote...
Good Post, but alot to respond to I think. You made some points I hadn't thought about. To your biggest point about the human reaper and perhaps the lack of a Prothean Reaper (I think that was your point, could be wrong). It does appear to be a bit inconsistent here, and I don't have good answer. It's possible that this was done from a story perspective so as not to be a dead giveaway, (You fight a Prothean Reaper, so guess who's next).  Perhaps also humans hold more potential/interest to the reapers than the Protheans  did for whatever reason. Kind of Grasping at straws cause the Reapers interest in the human race has not yet been fully clarified.

 
Actually, my main point was that the Reapers seem to be perfectly fine with destroying/converting other races without trying to create a Reaper out of them. We see absolutely no evidence of any other races being turned into a Reaper now, in the past or in the future.

malikstarks2 wrote... 
I also think that the body's on the citadel were beamed up alive, after being held in concentration camps. This is mentioned by EDI ealier.

Possibly, but why keep dead bodies piled around on the Citadel (not to mention right outside the MAIN DEUS EX MACHINA CONTROL ROOM, but that's another point)?

Slaiyer wrote...
I remember hearing on the BSN somewhere that the reason the Protheans weren't made to reapers was that their genetics didn't allow them to or something like that. It's the reason they were made into collectors instead.

 
Never heard of that myself, but even if that's true, then it still doesn't explain the other inconsistences.

[DarthSliver]

DreamTension wrote...

malikstarks2 wrote...

For those of you here that ascribe to this. Does it make it harder to replay the game not knowing what really happens at the end?

I guess there are those who are replaying it for clues/evidence, but I'm talking about a purely enjoyment perspective.

Personally have not had time to replay it lately anyway, but I'm kinda curious as to how people feel about it.

I haven't replayed ME3.  I'm currently redoing entire series and I'm on ME2.

This theory makes me happier than the current ending.  I think it's very cool how BioWare indoctrinated the gamer and now there's the anticipation or uncertainty of getting the real ending. 

But let's say this is it.  The end.  No DLC.  I still prefer to think IDT is correct and that we never know what happens than believe BioWare managed to contradict and ruin every good thing they did in this series.  I hate the ending that much because of the many reasons.  It's depressing and I'm very disappointed in BioWare (If this ending is it) because after three games I expected more than this.

Well I dont find myself interested in the main story now for some reason. Its like the ending ruined the game but I told myself it didnt and that I can handle replaying ME3 but when i try to the game just feels empty knowing what the ending will me. Even IDT doesnt keep me replaying it, Id rather replay Origins and replay DA2. I thought I wouldnt let the ending get the best of me but it has the most i play of ME3 now is the Multiplayer because I play with my friends. Maybe i can replay ME3 if i go regenade but doing Paragon again seems like a dead end.

[Rifneno]

They take one species every cycle to make Capital Ships out of. The other species of that cycle are used for Destroyers. So sayth the codex.

The Leviathan of Dis was confirmed to the remains of a Reaper in ME3, so they have definitely been using organics to make more Reapers. For a billion years. At least. Not cool, Harbinger. Anyway, the thing about them not making a Prothean Reaper is from EDI. She said it in an investigate response when Shepard is at the proto-Reaper in ME2. She never elaborated on why she thought that though, so...

[Sencho]

I think the crux of all these discussions is the blasted "Shepard lives" cut-scene. If that one scene wasn't included in what Bioware obviously set to be the "best" ending (because in a character driven game like this, an ending with your character alive is to be considered better than one that he is not) then I think all of these theories fall short. However, since that one little cut-scene exists, I find the Indoctrination Theory very compelling. I sure hope there is some truth in it from Bioware's side of things. However, I have a bad feeling that that hope is misplaced.

[zakaryzb]

malikstarks2 wrote...

Slaiyer wrote...

malikstarks2 wrote...

Good Post, but alot to respond to I think. You made some points I hadn't thought about. To your biggest point about the human reaper and perhaps the lack of a Prothean Reaper (I think that was your point, could be wrong). It does appear to be a bit inconsistent here, and I don't have good answer. It's possible that this was done from a story perspective so as not to be a dead giveaway, (You fight a Prothean Reaper, so guess who's next).  Perhaps also humans hold more potential/interest to the reapers than the Protheans  did for whatever reason. Kind of Grasping at straws cause the Reapers interest in the human race has not yet been fully clarified.

I remember hearing on the BSN somewhere that the reason the Protheans weren't made to reapers was that their genetics didn't allow them to or something like that. It's the reason they were made into collectors instead.

I missed that, there still doesn't seem to be much differentiation between the Reapers though other than class (e.g. destroyer vs. Capital Ship). Some further clarification on the point Shooter__Andy is making here would be good.

The races are harvested to make up the insides of the Reapers and then they are made to look like each other.  I can't remember where I read/heard that but I'm pretty sure thats how it works.  So the one from ME2 would have been the core of a Reaper while the actual thing would have looked like all the rest.  Not sure on the rest though...

[byne]

Damn it Blizzard, I'm too busy playing Mass Effect to care about this at the moment!





Anyways, I was messing around as a panda for the last hour or so, did I miss anything?

Modifié par byne, 30 mars 2012 - 08:36 .

[malikstarks2]

Rifneno wrote...

They take one species every cycle to make Capital Ships out of. The other species of that cycle are used for Destroyers. So sayth the codex.

The Leviathan of Dis was confirmed to the remains of a Reaper in ME3, so they have definitely been using organics to make more Reapers. For a billion years. At least. Not cool, Harbinger. Anyway, the thing about them not making a Prothean Reaper is from EDI. She said it in an investigate response when Shepard is at the proto-Reaper in ME2. She never elaborated on why she thought that though, so...

Thanks for clarification.

[Chaosbrain]

byne wrote...

Damn it Blizzard, I'm too busy playing Mass Effect to care about this at the moment!





Anyways, I was messing around as a panda for the last hour or so, did I miss anything?

LOL same here

[lex0r11]

byne wrote...

Damn it Blizzard, I'm too busy playing Mass Effect to care about this at the moment!





Anyways, I was messing around as a panda for the last hour or so, did I miss anything?

[DarthSliver]

Chaosbrain wrote...

byne wrote...

Damn it Blizzard, I'm too busy playing Mass Effect to care about this at the moment!





Anyways, I was messing around as a panda for the last hour or so, did I miss anything?

LOL same here

If World of Warcraft could be played for free and paid for optionally it might hold more interest to me. But since it isnt it holds no interest, id rather not pay for a time passer game like what WoW is.

[Kill-Joy]

Hey guys, how about wild speculation? Really, really wild? This may even be stupid, but I'm bored at work and I've been reading IDT threads for all of this week

This thread here:
http://social.biowar...ndex/10654432/1

talks about the various voices in the dream sequences, and the shadows. There seem to be things like "just shoot him", "don't trust him" and so on and so forth.

The top post here:
http://social.biowar...dex/10654432/12

Gets some really interesting data dumps.

Here is my pet theory - ME3 is Shepard reliving the events. The kid is someone who found Shepard in the rubble. The shadows are the only "real" part as Shepard is struggling to recover from brain trauma, or indocrination, or both. Or maybe Shepard is doing things under Reaper control, and the strange events are reality leaking in.

This theory is HEAVILY inspired by American McGee's Alice in Wonderland

[byne]

DarthSliver wrote...


If World of Warcraft could be played for free and paid for optionally it might hold more interest to me. But since it isnt it holds no interest, id rather not pay for a time passer game like what WoW is.

But in what other game could I both ride a pink flamingo, AND have one as a pet?



No other game, I tell you!

[Rifneno]

... That looks a lot like a chocobo.