57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Tirian Thorn]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Anyway, I found the perfect definition for what we have right now: http://tvtropes.org/...in/GainaxEnding

Hopefully a true resolution is imminent. 

[Simon_Says]

balance5050 wrote...

Almost all the whispers you hear are from people that you "actually" had contact with, why wasn't the boy Kaiden or Ashley? someone you had WAY MORE contact with. 

It just had to be that kid playing with a model Normandy, (faux reality beginning).

For the same reason Allers is in the game and not Wong.

Also possibly because of newcomers to the series. If they started a new game, how would they know who Kaiden/Ashley were? So stick some generic child in there to tug at their heart strings, or something.

Modifié par Simon_Says, 26 avril 2012 - 05:32 .

[waldstr18]

Vahilor wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

Off-discussion but on topic:
So I just read Gamble's twitter discussion about Synthesis being the best ending acc. to him.

And once again I find myself at the much too common crossroads:
Is IT true or is this really just the face-value ending as-is?

I understand, that what Bioware says should be the law. After all, it's they're creation.
But then there's the in-game evidence for IT, that follows naturally and logically from the game. So they put the evidence (even if not necessarily for IT) that something's wrong. But comparing this to what Bioware keeps claiming as law seems not to coincide with the game.

So it comes down to simple logic vs. legitimate fallacies.

And I come full circle to three-weeks-ago - me telling Bioware: www.youtube.com/watch.

But only cause Gamble thinks synthesis is the best ending.. the customers do not have to agree with him..and even he needs to listen to his customers and his fanbase.... cause hey that guy needs his job and BW needs to make money to pay him... so only he is on the synthesis trip (and we don't even know if he is only trolling us) it doesn't have to be the best ending...

And only cause BW says it is law.. the fanbase has not to take it when it is totaly out of content... and BW has to take the consequences...

WOuld be the same as if McD now starts to sell vegetarian food only... cause the big boss is a vegetarian.. than MCD will lose all meat hungry burger eating people and will lose a lot of money ^^

wait what? does that mean even if bioware says the idt isnt true, you still say it is, because you are the customer and appearently king? isnt this whole threat about how bioware planned indoctrination all along? or am i missing the point here?

and i dont think your example actually works. he said the synthesis ending is the best, that doesnt mean you cant pick red or blue anymore. its more like you are pissed because the mcd big boss told you vegiburgers are better for your health. that doesnt mean you cant buy the meaty ones.

[Vahilor]

balance5050 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Eli Parker wrote...

I'm replaying Mass Effect 3 and during the dream sequences I thought of a theory.

The shadows represent the souls of the fallen and/or the souls that depends on Shepard. The shadows tries to surround the child in order to save Shepard from the child and to try to stop Harbinger from taking over Shepard's mind.

This might have been said, and if so my bad.

I don't know about the Shadows keeping him away from the child, but I agree that the shadows are basically faceless people that shepard let die while he's out playing politics.

The child retains his form because Shepard actual had contact with him. Everyone in the dream is dead. The last dream with Shepard holding the child is a bad sign, telling Shepard that he was going to die.

Almost all the whispers you hear are from people that you "actually" had contact with, why wasn't the boy Kaiden or Ashley? someone you had WAY MORE contact with. 

It just had to be that kid playing with a model Normandy, (faux reality beginning).

 I agree.. I never had a emotional bond to the kid.. if it had ben Kaiden im my case.. it would have ben much better if the real intend was to make the player guilty cause Shep didn't save so much people or him.
But for IDT the child is fine..

[balance5050]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

Synthesis is actually a pretty good deal, if you don't think about the ethics of it too much. Especially if you got transhumanist leanings.

Yeah this is why I think Synthesis is a blend of Renegade and Paragon.

Renegade because you change everyone's DNA against their will and paragon because there's peace without killing anyone else after that point.

Since the reapers are still around, the relays can be rebuilt.

Peace? No. Half synthetics can still create fully synthetics. If you saved the Krogan, we now have immortal Krogan running around. The entire Rannoch mission teaches that war doesn't start because of what species you are, it start when life is threatened, regardless of what container is holding that life.

Synthesis just creates more problems and logical fallacies.

[EpyonX3]

balance5050 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Eli Parker wrote...

I'm replaying Mass Effect 3 and during the dream sequences I thought of a theory.

The shadows represent the souls of the fallen and/or the souls that depends on Shepard. The shadows tries to surround the child in order to save Shepard from the child and to try to stop Harbinger from taking over Shepard's mind.

This might have been said, and if so my bad.

I don't know about the Shadows keeping him away from the child, but I agree that the shadows are basically faceless people that shepard let die while he's out playing politics.

The child retains his form because Shepard actual had contact with him. Everyone in the dream is dead. The last dream with Shepard holding the child is a bad sign, telling Shepard that he was going to die.

Almost all the whispers you hear are from people that you "actually" had contact with, why wasn't the boy Kaiden or Ashley? someone you had WAY MORE contact with. 

It just had to be that kid playing with a model Normandy, (faux reality beginning).

As much as Shepard didn't want to lose Ashley or Kaiden, they are soldiers. ar and they died protecting lives.

The boy was innocent and died for no reason. Shepard also had a chance to save him but failed. This event was also much more recent and during the heavy threat of a reaper invasion. Kaiden/Ashley died 3 years before.

[balance5050]

 <_< look who's back everyone.

[Tirian Thorn]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

Mystical Taurus wrote...

Has anyone come up with a reason why, if you take the endings at face value, the Star Kid even offers Shepard any choices at all? I know he says the Crucible changed him and opened up new possibilities, presumably the possibility of Synthesis. He obviously hates Destroy. Control, at face value, will delay the Reapers X years from doing their jobs, and so nothing good comes of that from his point of view. So since he favors Synthesis, why not just have some poor indoctrinated slob jump in the beam? Why even allow Shepard to make the decision?

Because, essentially, the dream sequence is still Shepard's, not an illusion fabricated by the reapers. The Catalyst being the most obvious exception.

Because Shepard's psyche isn't being surgically rewritten like Paul Grayson's was.

Because the Reapers need Shepard to submit to indoctrination.

The Catalyst offers two 'positive' choices to make that illusion of choice more believable. The Catalyst acknowledges destruction because not doing so would make Shepard suspicious. They have to convince Shepard to choose Control/Synthesis and give themself up.

But why do the Reapers NEED to indoctrinate Shepard in the first place?  Why not attempt to indoctrinate him, and if that doesn't work, kill him?  Or stasis and pod him?  Is Shepard immortal?

Because Shepard alive and Indoctrinated would be a incredibly powerful weapon in the Reapers hands. If Shepard says run the entire fleet will most likely follow him, if he says fight they will do so. He got the fleet together, he is the center of the resistance against the Reapers so if he became a Reaper agent the damage he could cause would be war ending.

As for trying and then killing him if it fails? Who says the first thing Shepard wont see if he wakes up from Indoctrination will be Harbinger looming over him saying "Impressive Shepard, but it is all in vain" (or similar) the question would then be what distracts Harbinger long enough for Shepard to get away...hmm I wonder if there is a ship or two who could take a few shots at Harby, like the Normandy

Wouldnt even be impossible that the Normandy could distract Harbinger with blast form the Thanix cannon. After all a Reaper has to take power away from its kinetic barriers to land on the surface of a planet and a Thanix cannon is known to be more effective against Reapers than conventional weaponry.

Exactly.  Shepard has become more than a soldier to members of the galactic community. 

And specifically, Harbinger has been interested in Shepard for a VERY long time.  Harbinger tried to get Shepards body prior to Cerberus.

The reaper you kill on Rannoch says "Harbinger speaks of you Shepard..."  

Harbinger is not about to just kill Shepard, if it can dominate him/her instead. 

If Shepard were to become indoctrinated he/she could do a lot of damage.  Other soldiers, ships, maybe even a fleet might follow him.  It would greatly disrupt the order of battle - which is exactly what happened to the protheans.  Without a means to destroy the reapers the war would eventually be over.  It might takes centuries but it would be over. 

A prolonged war gives the galaxy a chance to preserve knowledge and pass it forward to another cycle - something the reapers don't want too much of. 

[Vahilor]

waldstr18 wrote...

Vahilor wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

Off-discussion but on topic:
So I just read Gamble's twitter discussion about Synthesis being the best ending acc. to him.

And once again I find myself at the much too common crossroads:
Is IT true or is this really just the face-value ending as-is?

I understand, that what Bioware says should be the law. After all, it's they're creation.
But then there's the in-game evidence for IT, that follows naturally and logically from the game. So they put the evidence (even if not necessarily for IT) that something's wrong. But comparing this to what Bioware keeps claiming as law seems not to coincide with the game.

So it comes down to simple logic vs. legitimate fallacies.

And I come full circle to three-weeks-ago - me telling Bioware: www.youtube.com/watch.

But only cause Gamble thinks synthesis is the best ending.. the customers do not have to agree with him..and even he needs to listen to his customers and his fanbase.... cause hey that guy needs his job and BW needs to make money to pay him... so only he is on the synthesis trip (and we don't even know if he is only trolling us) it doesn't have to be the best ending...

And only cause BW says it is law.. the fanbase has not to take it when it is totaly out of content... and BW has to take the consequences...

WOuld be the same as if McD now starts to sell vegetarian food only... cause the big boss is a vegetarian.. than MCD will lose all meat hungry burger eating people and will lose a lot of money ^^

wait what? does that mean even if bioware says the idt isnt true, you still say it is, because you are the customer and appearently king? isnt this whole threat about how bioware planned indoctrination all along? or am i missing the point here?

and i dont think your example actually works. he said the synthesis ending is the best, that doesnt mean you cant pick red or blue anymore. its more like you are pissed because the mcd big boss told you vegiburgers are better for your health. that doesnt mean you cant buy the meaty ones.

Read my post properly.. and in my case if they keep the endings as face value (no IDT, no changing) I will have my own interpretation of the ending and say Bioware good bye and invest my money in other companys.. simple thing.

And if you had read properly.. I wrote sell vegetarian stuff only.. than I'm not able to buy any meat stuff at McD anymore.

[EpyonX3]

balance5050 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

Synthesis is actually a pretty good deal, if you don't think about the ethics of it too much. Especially if you got transhumanist leanings.

Yeah this is why I think Synthesis is a blend of Renegade and Paragon.

Renegade because you change everyone's DNA against their will and paragon because there's peace without killing anyone else after that point.

Since the reapers are still around, the relays can be rebuilt.

Peace? No. Half synthetics can still create fully synthetics. If you saved the Krogan, we now have immortal Krogan running around. The entire Rannoch mission teaches that war doesn't start because of what species you are, it start when life is threatened, regardless of what container is holding that life.

Synthesis just creates more problems and logical fallacies.

With people being half synthetic, there will be no more reason to create full synthetics. Also, this cycle will remember the reapers and the threat they posed. I'm pretty sure they'll avoid going down that path.

As for Immortal, I don't think that's the case with Synthesis. Prolonged life yes, but not immortal. They are still part organic, once that begins to break down the synthetic part is most likely to go with it.

[EpyonX3]

balance5050 wrote...

 <_< look who's back everyone.

Who's that?

[Tirian Thorn]

balance5050 wrote...

 <_< look who's back everyone.

I think his named was mentioned 3 times... that's why... 

[Tirian Thorn]

EpyonX3 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 <_< look who's back everyone.

Who's that?

I won't say his name.  Then he'll know we're on to him. 

[Vahilor]

Tirian Thorn wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 <_< look who's back everyone.

I think his named was mentioned 3 times... that's why... 

Noooo... The one you should not name...

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

EpyonX3 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

Synthesis is actually a pretty good deal, if you don't think about the ethics of it too much. Especially if you got transhumanist leanings.

Yeah this is why I think Synthesis is a blend of Renegade and Paragon.

Renegade because you change everyone's DNA against their will and paragon because there's peace without killing anyone else after that point.

Since the reapers are still around, the relays can be rebuilt.

Peace? No. Half synthetics can still create fully synthetics. If you saved the Krogan, we now have immortal Krogan running around. The entire Rannoch mission teaches that war doesn't start because of what species you are, it start when life is threatened, regardless of what container is holding that life.

Synthesis just creates more problems and logical fallacies.

With people being half synthetic, there will be no more reason to create full synthetics. Also, this cycle will remember the reapers and the threat they posed. I'm pretty sure they'll avoid going down that path.

As for Immortal, I don't think that's the case with Synthesis. Prolonged life yes, but not immortal. They are still part organic, once that begins to break down the synthetic part is most likely to go with it.

Even half synthetic beings might decide they need a buttler who dosent want a tip.

[waldstr18]

@vahilor

the first part i missunderstood - my bad.

your example on the other hand still doesnt work. cause just like with mcdonalds you are allowed to pick the other endings. just because synthesis is the best for him doesnt mean the other choices arent there anymore. thats what i meant.

by the way, i dont like the synthesis either. its pretentious again. just like rewriting the old machines following geth in the second part. hated that.

[Earthborn_Shepard]

I just realized something -

the Citadel blows up at the ending, right? In pretty much every scenario - except control.
So.. wouldn't that explosion kill/destroy the Catalysts mainframe or whatever?

[Simon_Says]

EpyonX3 wrote...

With people being half synthetic, there will be no more reason to create full synthetics. Also, this cycle will remember the reapers and the threat they posed. I'm pretty sure they'll avoid going down that path.

Unless synthesis also made everyone enlightened peaceful beings, uh-huh, nope.

Note the original flaw in the Catalyst's logic: synthetics will wipe out organics. Nevermind the krogan or rachni, who nearly overran the galaxy. Nevermind the yahg, who killed the first visitors to their planet unprovoked. And nevermind humanity itself, who rose from backwater to galactic superpower in a span of decades, and our own colorful history.

Peace aint gonna last I think.

[balance5050]

EpyonX3 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

Synthesis is actually a pretty good deal, if you don't think about the ethics of it too much. Especially if you got transhumanist leanings.

Yeah this is why I think Synthesis is a blend of Renegade and Paragon.

Renegade because you change everyone's DNA against their will and paragon because there's peace without killing anyone else after that point.

Since the reapers are still around, the relays can be rebuilt.

Peace? No. Half synthetics can still create fully synthetics. If you saved the Krogan, we now have immortal Krogan running around. The entire Rannoch mission teaches that war doesn't start because of what species you are, it start when life is threatened, regardless of what container is holding that life.

Synthesis just creates more problems and logical fallacies.

With people being half synthetic, there will be no more reason to create full synthetics. Also, this cycle will remember the reapers and the threat they posed. I'm pretty sure they'll avoid going down that path.

As for Immortal, I don't think that's the case with Synthesis. Prolonged life yes, but not immortal. They are still part organic, once that begins to break down the synthetic part is most likely to go with it.

This cycle already had laws in place to prevent AI creation before the reapers, it didn't stop them before and it won't stop them now.

People are going to keep advancing technology because that just how evolution works. We're still going to create full synthetics to be our servants and do our bidding again.

"this cycle will remember the reapers", eventually they will become the stuff of legend and society will forget.

You don't think that anyone will just replace they organic parts with synthetic parts?

Again, wars started because people have free will and other peopel want to stifle  that, There will never be peace.

The Krogans can already live for a 1000 years.

Synthesis literally solves nothing, and is a silly idea to begin with because it would only be possible through space magic. Out of all the billions of undiscovered planets, not every organic in the galaxy would have been touched.

[Tirian Thorn]

waldstr18 wrote...

@vahilor

the first part i missunderstood - my bad.

your example on the other hand still doesnt work. cause just like with mcdonalds you are allowed to pick the other endings. just because synthesis is the best for him doesnt mean the other choices arent there anymore. thats what i meant.

by the way, i dont like the synthesis either. its pretentious again. just like rewriting the old machines following geth in the second part. hated that.

 
On my first play through I picked destroy then got involved with IDT.
Any new times I play through I have decided to stop before assaulting TIM’s base. And then I will adjust my ending decisions after the DLC.
Certain characters I have made are created with a roleplaying aspect. Like picking renegade just to be a dick or a sociopath, etc.

[Simon_Says]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

I just realized something -

the Citadel blows up at the ending, right? In pretty much every scenario - except control.
So.. wouldn't that explosion kill/destroy the Catalysts mainframe or whatever?

Didn't Starbrat say something along the lines of the Citadel being only a part of it?

[EpyonX3]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

I just realized something -

the Citadel blows up at the ending, right? In pretty much every scenario - except control.
So.. wouldn't that explosion kill/destroy the Catalysts mainframe or whatever?

Perhaps. In Synthesis, the catalyst is no longer needed since there will be peace and the cycle ends. Same as destroy.

In Control, the Citadel must remain in tact so that SHepard can remain in control.

[MegumiAzusa]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

I just realized something -

the Citadel blows up at the ending, right? In pretty much every scenario - except control.
So.. wouldn't that explosion kill/destroy the Catalysts mainframe or whatever?

Perhaps. In Synthesis, the catalyst is no longer needed since there will be peace and the cycle ends. Same as destroy.

In Control, the Citadel must remain in tact so that SHepard can remain in control.

Only thing that is "strange" about that is that the Citadel is itself a Mass Relay so it should explode.

[waldstr18]

Tirian Thorn wrote...
 
On my first play through I picked destroy then got involved with IDT.
Any new times I play through I have decided to stop before assaulting TIM’s base. And then I will adjust my ending decisions after the DLC.
Certain characters I have made are created with a roleplaying aspect. Like picking renegade just to be a dick or a sociopath, etc.

i wish i could play renegade. from what ive heart the jennifer hales voice acting must be superb as renegade shepard, but i cant bear taking a renegade option for some reason. hmm.. i blame nintendo.

[Simon_Says]

waldstr18 wrote...

i wish i could play renegade. from what ive heart the jennifer hales voice acting must be superb as renegade shepard, but i cant bear taking a renegade option for some reason. hmm.. i blame nintendo.

For the most part it's true. Except for "Chaaarge."