57139 réponses à ce sujet

[n00bsauce2010]

Extended cut needs to come out already. I'm getting tired of speculating. I want a concrete, tangible answer please.

[paxxton]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Extended cut needs to come out already. I'm getting tired of speculating. I want a concrete, tangible answer please.

Welcome to the club.

[Voodzik]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Voodzik wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...
I remember someone from Bioware yesterday Tweeted that Indoctrination theory will not be used in Extended Cut.

Wish I could find it again.

With due respect to Jessica, she also stated that EDI has no reaper tech, I enjoy her enthusiastic tweets but take them with a pinch of salt, unless of course it's something like the incident that happened to her.

Hmm. Can someone re link this tweet? It peaks my interest.

Piques. Something piques your interest. Sorry, pet peeve, I hate it when people do that, a peak is a mountain, or someone's appearance in the morning, a pique is a mood or interest.

D'oh, sorry, I should have caught that. It's just a typo though. No need to cut my head off in a fit of peek. 

[ElSuperGecko]

Vahilor wrote...
If you look close enough.. all bodies in the piles at the beam look like Kaidans and Ashs.. and the bodys on the citadel look not like dead bodys ..more like puppets to me.

I thought exactly this on my first playthrough.  So much so that I stopped moving forward and listening to Anderson's dialogue and explored the area with the Keepers before the bridge thoroughly.

Because of the lighting, it's quite difficult to make out all the details, but they do not look human at all.  Not even close to it.  Bald, jointed.. they look like mannequins.

It also struck me as odd that the Keeper turned to look at you when you arrived on the Crucible.  Since when have Keepers paid any attention whatsoever to anything other than the job they have at hand?

[Lokanaiya]

Lokanaiya wrote...

This has probably been mentioned before, but I realized a while ago that Shepard, as far as I know, would never have seen blue standing for paragon and red for renegade... the closest he would have come would have been TIM's sun at the end of ME2, and then it would just be a cool change to the background for who-knows-why. If you're renegade, you do get the red scars, but again, that probably wouldn't be more than a "huh, that's weird" and certainly wouldn't include blue as paragon. As far as I know, there are no other game-world examples of red renegade and blue paragon that Shepard would know. Thus, it seems that the colored chloices are solely for our, the player's, benefit. More evidence for the "indoctrinate the player" theory, I suppose. Just wanted to throw this out there since I hadn't seen anyone else discussing it.

Think this got lost in all the posts last night, so reposting it.

[McGrzegorz]

I forced myself to finish my second playthrough and I still can't believe it. Shepard behaves like puppet during last conversation, believes in every word... That is not my Shepard

Anyway,
- what's going on with all those 1M1 antennas? I did a long walk (just before making a decision) and I found them almost everywhere... It's like overused asset...

- and how is that possible that I make 360 degrees spin and see the Earth curvature all the time..
When you look through the "window" you see the bottom part of Earth's curvature therefore it's not possible to make 360 spin and still see the Earth (and yet that's what I see).

I think I know the answer but... it would be like medieval knight wearing modern shoes...

[Roxy Lalonde]

McGrzegorz wrote...

- what's going on with all those 1M1 antennas? I did a long walk (just before making a decision) and I found them almost everywhere... It's like overused asset...

Hm, I think the antennas could be explained by Bioware having to reuse models because of time constraints? Like how they recycled environments in DA2. They couldn't design different antenna for everything.

[Big Bad]

A while back I remember somebody stating that you can actually walk through the Keeper that is in the hallway after you take the beam to the Citadel. Is that actually true, or was that person wrong (or maybe nobody said it at all, and I'm just smoking crack!)?

[Golferguy758]

@gecko
the other thing you'll notice with the keeper in the emding scene is that you can walk through it. Tell me can you walk through any other keeper in game? Those lazy bioware programmers!

@loka
I agree with you in a sense, but that can also just be a device to show the player a paragon or renegade like choice. Remember blue, paragon, represents order to accomplish your goals. Red, renegade, is disorder and ruthlessness to accomplish your mission.

[Roxy Lalonde]

Big Bad wrote...

A while back I remember somebody stating that you can actually walk through the Keeper that is in the hallway after you take the beam to the Citadel. Is that actually true, or was that person wrong (or maybe nobody said it at all, and I'm just smoking crack!)?

Somebody did say that! 
You could still be smoking crack, though. Speculations for everyone.

[Roxy Lalonde]

Golferguy758 wrote...

I agree with you in a sense, but that can also just be a device to show the player a paragon or renegade like choice. Remember blue, paragon, represents order to accomplish your goals. Red, renegade, is disorder and ruthlessness to accomplish your mission.

Hm, but Control (blue = paragon) is shown as The Illusive Man, while Destroy (red = renegade) is Anderson. Surely both Shepard and the player would consider The Illusive Man to be Renegade, and Anderson to be Paragon.

[Revan87]

I was always questioning myself: If IT isn't true, why are there so many hints at it?!
I mean, Indoctrination is exactly that, what happens in the end (from Wikipedia): Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.
And in the end, I think BioWare is still collecting Feedback and integrating it into the ending DLC. Honestly, they wont be able to make a perfect ending without User Feedback. Now they have a lot of feedback and NOW they have the possibility to do everything right!

I hope my english isn't that bad...

Swiss Fleet out

[Big Bad]

Roxy Lalonde wrote...

Big Bad wrote...

A while back I remember somebody stating that you can actually walk through the Keeper that is in the hallway after you take the beam to the Citadel. Is that actually true, or was that person wrong (or maybe nobody said it at all, and I'm just smoking crack!)?

Somebody did say that! 
You could still be smoking crack, though. Speculations for everyone.

Very interesting.  I don't know jack about programming or image modeling, but to me that seems like something that would be hard to do accidentally!

[Golferguy758]

@roxy
I agree with you on that. I'm merely pointing out how the solutions to ending the reaper threat would play out. End it in a controlled fashion with trying to save everyone including geth and edi. Or end it no matter the cost because it's too important to risk.

I am a paragon and I still chpse destroy for that reason. That and I thought it was a trick because of all strange things that just happened so I was unwavering in my choice.

[Golferguy758]

Also i'm writing my responses on my phone and can't quote. Ignore the typos. I'm much better with a real keyboard or pen and paper

[Vahilor]

@golfer: I tend to be toral paragon as well in all my playrhroughs. The onl time i chose renegade was when I destroyed the heretics in me 2 and in the end of 3 cause I had to to rescue Anderson and cause of pickin destroy cause all other options sed ro fishy in the ending for me.

[SS2Dante]

Skillz1986 wrote...

*harbinger voice*: THIS TROLLS YOU!

ASSUMING DIRECT TROLL

[Dwailing]

Big Bad wrote...

Roxy Lalonde wrote...

Big Bad wrote...

A while back I remember somebody stating that you can actually walk through the Keeper that is in the hallway after you take the beam to the Citadel. Is that actually true, or was that person wrong (or maybe nobody said it at all, and I'm just smoking crack!)?

Somebody did say that! 
You could still be smoking crack, though. Speculations for everyone.

Very interesting.  I don't know jack about programming or image modeling, but to me that seems like something that would be hard to do accidentally!

I think I might have walked through the Keeper, but I can't remember.  I will try when I get to the end in this playthrough.  And when you consider that Shepard couldn't walk through the Keepers on the Citadel earlier, it seems very deliberate.  I mean, why wouldn't you use the same coding for that if you already have it?

[BatmanTurian]

SS2Dante wrote...

Skillz1986 wrote...

*harbinger voice*: THIS TROLLS YOU!

ASSUMING DIRECT TROLL

“YOU WILL KNOW TROLLING, SHEPHERD.”



Also if these direct quotes don't sound like every Anti-IT troll ever, then I don't know what does.

“Why do you resist us, Shepard?”


“Take what is useful, destroy the rest.” 
(implying they take from the theory what they think they can debunk and ignore the other mountains of evidence or that we are the ones actually doing that)

“You are ignorant, we are knowing.” 
(goes both ways, but it sometimes feels that it comes more from our detractors)

“Hope is irrelevant.” 
(ha!)

and my favorite: “You are arrogant, Shepard, you will learn.”


And then there is the one that perfectly represents GBGriffin: “Direct intervention is necessary.”


So basically Anti-IT people sound like Harbinger in the counterpoints they make sometimes, especially the aggressive ones.

[SS2Dante]

Arian Dynas wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Your not understanding...If shepard is being indoctrinated then they (Bioware) need the PLAYER to think that Shepard is NOT indoctrinated so that it does play out that way.

That's a bit dumb, isn't it? So, assuming IT is correct, they plant clues that hint at IT, then include all these post-decision cutscenes to make you believe it's not IT, so that they can ultimately reveal to you that it was IT?

Not really.

Are you familiar with the literary concepts of the Red Herring, and the Chekov's Gun?

Indoctrination, the Reaper IFF, the Derelict Reaper, Object Rho, the Nascent Reaper, ect. are examples of Chekov's Guns. Seemingly unimportant plot devices, that, big shocker, turn out to be important.

The Star Gazer scene, the Normandy Crash, the "Beings of Light" are Red Herrings seemingly important plot devices that are, in fact only there to build suspense and to trick the reader.

@OdanUrr, ok in terms of those final visions, yes, they are the symbolic representations of the happy ending your Shepard is imaging (s)he is creating. Now, you ask why they would try and convince you with the extra cutscenes, and keeping everything so subtle. To answer this we have to look at the recent changes that have been going on in the games industry.

You'll no doubt have noticed that we've tended to move away from long cutscenes and the like? It's because in the past few years the pressure has been on in gaming circles to push the medium in it's own direction, to utilise the unique points of a game over say a book or a movie. Attempts to simply mimic other media are not enough any more. If you watch Extra Credits on PA you'll see a lot of this.

Indoctrination is an active process. It requires a choice. The indoctrinated are not simply hypnotised, they slowly come to believe in the Reapers cause. This process cannot be done in any other type of media except games. In a film we may watch a character get hypnotised but we are apart from them. In books we may see the reasoning they follow as they fall, but we might not agree with it. Games are the only medium with interactivity, an interactivity that allows us to fall as Shepard falls. We are not meant to see through the ruse on the first playthrough. It is only afterwards that we think "how could I have fallen for it!?".

If you've ever had a discussion with anyone who picked control, it's funny. They sound like TIM. They insist that controlling the Reapers is the only moral thing, how it will save lives and how they REALLY CAN control the reapers, while the others who believed it were simply fooling themselves. But THEY are different.

This is a game to be played through twice (or at least to play through the ending more than once, hence the rather convenient restart option directly when the dream starts).

By the way, to anyone who doesn't believe Bioware likes to slip in foreshadowing and subtle hints, I direct you to ME1, and the MASS RELAY that you can walk up to in the citadel, way before you ever realise what it it. It even looks like a relay. And of course, the final straw in the "we-like-to-****-with-you" game. I posted it before but I'll post it again. It's the Map of Citadel Tower, the most important room in ME1 (the room you get promoted to Spectre in, and the location of the final boss)

guides.gamepressure.com/masseffect/gfx/word/-2060212578.jpg

[EpyonX3]

@balance5050

Here are the pics.

Object from the front.




Object from behind.




The one from the multiplayer may be the only one on the level so it makes sense that that made that one right. Since they had to scatter these all over the place essentially they probably went the quick route.

[BatmanTurian]

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

[SS2Dante]

BatmanTurian wrote...

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

You know, it'd be interesting to find out the number of athiests and religious types on each side

[Krakefer.ch]

Revan87 wrote...

I was always questioning myself: If IT isn't true, why are there so many hints at it?!
I mean, Indoctrination is exactly that, what happens in the end (from Wikipedia): Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.
And in the end, I think BioWare is still collecting Feedback and integrating it into the ending DLC. Honestly, they wont be able to make a perfect ending without User Feedback. Now they have a lot of feedback and NOW they have the possibility to do everything right!

I hope my english isn't that bad...

Swiss Fleet out

Swiss fleet #2 reporting fleet #1

So many hints. Unlimited ammo and botomless magasines for teh pistol. The trees from dreams, the overall ambiance that just screams "dream".
Not a coincidence for me, just artistic crap from BW ?!

[DirtyPhoenix]

holy crap that looks like Saren's head joined on a Mass Relay