57139 réponses à ce sujet

[spotlessvoid]

Tirian Thorn wrote...

http://www.gamesthir...s-casey-hudson/    (from last month.)

So after reading this I am more annoyed at the ending and less hopeful for an IDT ending. 

I feel like Hudson had a plan but obviously didn't involve the rest of the writing staff... that's bad... 

I mean if Hudson came up with an IT ending, it would be better to keep as few people as possible in the know so it's harder to leak, but still.... 

Bioware and Weekes official stance was his account was hacked on that right?

[spotlessvoid]

[quote]schneeland wrote...

[quote]Tirian Thorn wrote...

[...]
That story has been around for quite a while - while there is probably some truth in it, I doubt that it can be taken to be 100% true.

[/quote]
I’m not quoting it as gospel or anything. 
[/quote]

Didn't intend to imply that. But the "Casey and Matt went to a secret chamber, smoked their best stuff and concocted this ending"-story seems as logical to me as the musings of hologram kid.

[/quote]

And even if they did go solo coming up with the ending, that doesn't preclude them from coming up with indoctrination

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 25 avril 2012 - 08:16 .

[Stigweird85]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Tirian Thorn wrote...

http://www.gamesthir...s-casey-hudson/    (from last month.)

So after reading this I am more annoyed at the ending and less hopeful for an IDT ending. 

I feel like Hudson had a plan but obviously didn't involve the rest of the writing staff... that's bad... 

I mean if Hudson came up with an IT ending, it would be better to keep as few people as possible in the know so it's harder to leak, but still.... 

Bioware and Weekes official stance was his account was hacked on that right?

I believe that this view was officially denied weeks ago, there is some debate about it but officially that isn't true

[Tirian Thorn]

bigstig wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Tirian Thorn wrote...

http://www.gamesthir...s-casey-hudson/    (from last month.)

So after reading this I am more annoyed at the ending and less hopeful for an IDT ending. 

I feel like Hudson had a plan but obviously didn't involve the rest of the writing staff... that's bad... 

I mean if Hudson came up with an IT ending, it would be better to keep as few people as possible in the know so it's harder to leak, but still.... 

Bioware and Weekes official stance was his account was hacked on that right?

I believe that this view was officially denied weeks ago, there is some debate about it but officially that isn't true

Good to know. 

[ExtendedCut]

[quote]schneeland wrote...

[quote]Tirian Thorn wrote...

[...]
That story has been around for quite a while - while there is probably some truth in it, I doubt that it can be taken to be 100% true.

[/quote]
I’m not quoting it as gospel or anything. 
[/quote]

Didn't intend to imply that. But the "Casey and Matt went to a secret chamber, smoked their best stuff and concocted this ending"-story seems as logical to me as the musings of hologram kid.

[/quote]



The whole "Casey Hudson completely took over the ending by himself" thing has always sounded fishy to me.  Sure this guy was the head-honcho of ME, but that doesn't mean he didn't have any kind of supervisors or oversight on the project.  Especially since EA took the reins.

Even if he did try to do the ending solo, why would none of the others writers go over his head to Bioware/EA executives to complain about his actions?  And why would no one actually look into the ending, before the game was released?

It's quite a stretch to just assume that Casey Hudson is maniacally egotistical enough to even want to do the ending by himself - that's just an idea disgruntled fans cooked up because they need to focus on a "bad guy" to rationalize the ending.  IMO.

Modifié par ExtendedCut, 25 avril 2012 - 08:17 .

[SubAstris]

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

[SS2Dante]

SS2Dante wrote...

So...this.

http://www.escapistm...-style-spoilers

So noone else thinks this is interesting?  

[balance5050]

[quote]schneeland wrote...

[quote]Tirian Thorn wrote...

[...]
That story has been around for quite a while - while there is probably some truth in it, I doubt that it can be taken to be 100% true.

[/quote]
I’m not quoting it as gospel or anything. 
[/quote]

Didn't intend to imply that. But the "Casey and Matt went to a secret chamber, smoked their best stuff and concocted this ending"-story seems as logical to me as the musings of hologram kid.

[/quote]


Whether it's true or not, they have both been in this industry a long time, and have overseen the ME production since it's inception. They both know the rules that the ME universe has set up.

Matt has said on his twitter a week or two ago "Remember how long it took Ridley Scott to reveal that Deckard was a replicant? Like 20 years?"
-this was in reference to Mass Effect Ending's ofcourse. 

That was the big debate about blade runner.
WHAT IS THE DEBATE ON THE MASS EFFECT ENDINGS IN YOUR LIFE?

I really hope that it doesn't take 20 years, but the mass effect question is more obvious then that question. We will get "more clarity" to our answers with the EC. Just like we did with the Blade Runner "Director's Cut".

Modifié par balance5050, 25 avril 2012 - 08:19 .

[ExtendedCut]

SubAstris wrote...

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

Considering that the whole opening sequence of ME3 was based on the crimes Shepard committed during "Arrival", I would say that it was a little more important than "supplemental".

[Earthborn_Shepard]

SS2Dante wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

So...this.

http://www.escapistm...-style-spoilers

So noone else thinks this is interesting?  

I do. But I'm not sure what to make of this. I mean.. if they actually recorded audio for this, wouldn't the scenes have been (almost) finished already? You don't record the audio before you actually program the game (I think).

[Tirian Thorn]

SS2Dante wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

So...this.

http://www.escapistm...-style-spoilers

So noone else thinks this is interesting?  

That's where I found the link to the article I brought up.  It's all Dante's fault! 

Modifié par Tirian Thorn, 25 avril 2012 - 08:21 .

[Xavendithas]

ExtendedCut wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

Considering that the whole opening sequence of ME3 was based on the crimes Shepard committed during "Arrival", I would say that it was a little more important than "supplemental".

I thought that if you didn't play Arrival, it was in the codex or something that a team of Alliance Marines were the ones who committed the acts depicted in Arrival and that Shepard was detained because of his dealings with Cerberus.

[Gormane01]

[quote]spotlessvoid wrote...

[quote]schneeland wrote...

[quote]Tirian Thorn wrote...

[...]
That story has been around for quite a while - while there is probably some truth in it, I doubt that it can be taken to be 100% true.

[/quote]
I’m not quoting it as gospel or anything. 
[/quote]

Didn't intend to imply that. But the "Casey and Matt went to a secret chamber, smoked their best stuff and concocted this ending"-story seems as logical to me as the musings of hologram kid.

[/quote]

And even if they did go solo coming up with the ending, that doesn't preclude them from coming up with indoctrination[/quote]

Honestly it's got to be untrue, firstly Weekes hasn't been fired, if he did post that Bioware would be more or less certain to fire him. Additionally, if if it had been written in isolation, it has to be programmed and voice overs recorded etc etc. During that process it has to have been at least somewhat peer reviewed just by people working on it. If they thought there was something terrible in the ending they would have said it during this process.

So I don't buy this. They really must have thought the ending was good and it got it's message across, whatever that message may have been.

[Tirian Thorn]

Tirian Thorn wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

So...this.

http://www.escapistm...-style-spoilers

So noone else thinks this is interesting?  

That's where I found the link to the article I brought up.  It's all Dante's fault! 

Those audio files are pretty impressive.  I wish they would have fully flushed them out in-game.  Maybe they will be restored in EC or something.... 

[Gormane01]

Xavendithas wrote...

ExtendedCut wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

Considering that the whole opening sequence of ME3 was based on the crimes Shepard committed during "Arrival", I would say that it was a little more important than "supplemental".

I thought that if you didn't play Arrival, it was in the codex or something that a team of Alliance Marines were the ones who committed the acts depicted in Arrival and that Shepard was detained because of his dealings with Cerberus.

Yeah you are right, my first import didn't have arrival in it. The start you are just in trouble for associating with terrorists etc. Arrival was done by Marines, who died (You lose some war assets from Hackett's fleet)

[Tirian Thorn]

SS2Dante wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

So...this.

http://www.escapistm...-style-spoilers

So noone else thinks this is interesting?  

And I REALLY like the idea of the UI where you assign your war assets - much like the suicide mission.

That would have been much cooler and made me feel like I was planning the battle.  Maybe Hackett and Anderson would offer suggestions, etc. 

[Stigweird85]

ExtendedCut wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

Considering that the whole opening sequence of ME3 was based on the crimes Shepard committed during "Arrival", I would say that it was a little more important than "supplemental".

Arrivial isn't cannon for Shepard, the events did happen but if the player didn't do them then somebody else did. Same with LotSB if Shepard didn't do it someone else did. 

If you did play arrival then you are stripped of the command for working with Ceberus in ME2, mutiny in ME1, releasing the rachni queen etc take your pick, many of your actions are pretty awful in the grand scheme of things. It is also assumed that Miranda leaves Cerberus which confused the hell out of me as I never saw this scence so was a little surprised when she turned in in ME3 with no explination of what happened.

[ExtendedCut]

Xavendithas wrote...

ExtendedCut wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

Considering that the whole opening sequence of ME3 was based on the crimes Shepard committed during "Arrival", I would say that it was a little more important than "supplemental".

I thought that if you didn't play Arrival, it was in the codex or something that a team of Alliance Marines were the ones who committed the acts depicted in Arrival and that Shepard was detained because of his dealings with Cerberus.

I don't know if that's true - maybe someone can help us out.  There are, however, multiple references to the Shepard blowing up the Alpha Relay and killing the Batarians in ME3.  Are all those scenes changed as well if you never played Arrival?

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

Did you play Arrival? They released while already in production for ME3. They stressed that it was supposed to be a bridge between ME2 and 3, LOTS OF WEIRD INDOCTRINATION STUFF HAPPENS AND SHEP IS THE ONLY ONE WHO SEES IT. If you would just put your money where your mouth is you would see why it's so weird, especially when Harbinger apears at the end in a yellow holographic form with no COMM equipment around as it was THE SURFACE OF AN ASTEROID.

Basically you are walking down the road to saying that "The Arrival" wasn't canon, and that would lead back to interpretation.

[SubAstris]

ExtendedCut wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

Considering that the whole opening sequence of ME3 was based on the crimes Shepard committed during "Arrival", I would say that it was a little more important than "supplemental".

I always thought that his detainment was due to his involvement with Cerberus, who are considered as a terrorist group by the Citadel Council and the Alliance. To save face, the Alliance brought in Shepard , the "rogue" operative. Also the Alliance by this time realises that the Reaper threat is real and need Shepard's expertise

[Xavendithas]

ExtendedCut wrote...

Xavendithas wrote...

ExtendedCut wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

A question to IT theorists who think that Arrival was a significant part of indoctrination, or even the start of it proper. If BW's artistic vision was to take Shepard throughout the trilogy on a process of indoctrination, why wasn't Arrival put in the actual game given its alleged massive importance, to the great disadvantage of those who haven't got internet/can't afford it/won't pay etc? Instead, Arrival was DLC, which as we all know usually supplements the main plot, not necessarily to continue to it.

Considering that the whole opening sequence of ME3 was based on the crimes Shepard committed during "Arrival", I would say that it was a little more important than "supplemental".

I thought that if you didn't play Arrival, it was in the codex or something that a team of Alliance Marines were the ones who committed the acts depicted in Arrival and that Shepard was detained because of his dealings with Cerberus.

I don't know if that's true - maybe someone can help us out.  There are, however, multiple references to the Shepard blowing up the Alpha Relay and killing the Batarians in ME3.  Are all those scenes changed as well if you never played Arrival?

I don't have a playthrough available where I haven't done the Arrival DLC. Hopefully someone can shed some light on it.

[Earthborn_Shepard]

I guess this has been brought up, but don't the Cerberus logs on the derelict Reaper hint to indoctrination very strongly?

I mean, there are people talking about how they thought they had seen something moving.. IN AN AIRVENT.

And there's that "shared memory" thing. Like the two guys having the same memories. Well.. isn't that very similar to what happens with Anderson and Shep at the ending? Seeing the same stuff at the same time, mirroring each other's wounds?

[SS2Dante]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

So...this.

http://www.escapistm...-style-spoilers

So noone else thinks this is interesting?  

I do. But I'm not sure what to make of this. I mean.. if they actually recorded audio for this, wouldn't the scenes have been (almost) finished already? You don't record the audio before you actually program the game (I think).

I'm not actually sure. The music can't really be too advanced cos it needs to sync up with the graphics, but the voice lines...I know for The Old Republic they record them well in advance.

I'm more interested by the original script and the extra stuff. it shows they did have a clear idea for AFTER you're hit by Harbingers beam (it really interests me that the IT theory syncs up with this perfectly, since in both scripts you're always hit by Harby's beam and are knocked out).

Anyhoo, can't stay around to discuss too much.

Modifié par SS2Dante, 25 avril 2012 - 08:28 .

[Stigweird85]

Tirian Thorn wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

So...this.

http://www.escapistm...-style-spoilers

So noone else thinks this is interesting?  

And I REALLY like the idea of the UI where you assign your war assets - much like the suicide mission.

That would have been much cooler and made me feel like I was planning the battle.  Maybe Hackett and Anderson would offer suggestions, etc. 

I find myself in an interesting predictament. I want to continue reading and talking about IT, however strange as it may seem, if Bioware are pulling a KOTOR style twist out of the bag I don't want to know all the details before the big event.

I'll happily discuss theories and opinions but I'm going to avoid leaks from game assets from here on out I think

[CmnDwnWrkn]

The ending suggests Shepard is having a near-death experience, not just simply your standard dream or hallucination.  Immediately prior to this, Shepard appeared to be on the verge of death.  Some of these factors don't seem to come into play, but many of them do.  Considering these are common traits of an NDE, the in-game evidence strongly points to NDE.

Straight from Wikipedia:
The traits of a classical NDE are as follows:

• A sense/awareness of being dead.[19][21]
• A sense of peace, well-being and painlessness. Positive emotions. A sense of removal from the world.[19][21][22]
• An out-of-body experience.
  A perception of one's body from an outside position. Sometimes
  observing doctors and nurses performing medical resuscitation efforts.[19][21][22][23]
• A "tunnel experience". A sense of moving up, or through, a passageway or staircase.[19][21][23]
• A rapid movement toward and/or sudden immersion in a powerful light. Communication with the light.[21][22]
• An intense feeling of unconditional love.[22]
• Encountering "Beings of Light", "Beings dressed in white", or
  similar. Also, the possibility of being reunited with deceased loved
  ones.[19][22][23]
• Receiving a life review.[19][21][22]
• Receiving a "life preview" in the cases of George Ritchie and Betty Eadie, which Ring calls an NDE "Flash Forward".
• Receiving knowledge about one's life and the nature of the universe.[22]
• A decision by oneself or others to return to one's body, often accompanied by a reluctance to return.[19][22][23]
• Approaching a border.[21]
• The notice of unpleasant sound or noise (claimed by R. Moody).[10]
• Connection to the cultural beliefs held by the individual, which
  seem to dictate the phenomena experienced in the NDE and the later
  interpretation thereof (Holden, Janice Miner. Handbook of Near-Death
  Experiences. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publishing Data, 2009.).

Kenneth Ring (1980) subdivided the NDE on a five-stage continuum. The subdivisions were:[24]

• Peace
• Body separation
• Entering darkness
• Seeing the light
• Entering the light