Ce sujet est fermé
DJBare wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
Big G13 wrote...
That and the new audio find. That was a good find.
What audio file? I don't recall an audio file, except the one from this track: www.youtube.com/watch
I do believe I was being trolled with that one, but it's hard to be certain.
I think they mean this audio www.youtube.com/watch
No not that one. DJBare found some interesting audio while on the Citadel just before you talk to anderson. About 7 or 8 pages back. The electrical spark noises sound like gun fire. They talked about it for a few pages.Auralius Carolus wrote...
Big G13 wrote...
That and the new audio find. That was a good find.
What audio file? I don't recall an audio file, except the one from this track: www.youtube.com/watch
I do believe I was being trolled with that one, but it's hard to be certain.
OOOOOoOoOo. First post on Page 1911- 'twas a good year.
Modifié par Big G13, 01 mai 2012 - 01:42 .
DJBare wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
Big G13 wrote...
That and the new audio find. That was a good find.
What audio file? I don't recall an audio file, except the one from this track: www.youtube.com/watch
I do believe I was being trolled with that one, but it's hard to be certain.
I think they mean this audio www.youtube.com/watch
Modifié par llbountyhunter, 01 mai 2012 - 01:48 .
You are not supposed to, it's the pattern you should be listening to not the actual sound, this is what I attempted to explain several pages back.llbountyhunter wrote...
DJBare wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
Big G13 wrote...
That and the new audio find. That was a good find.
What audio file? I don't recall an audio file, except the one from this track: www.youtube.com/watch
I do believe I was being trolled with that one, but it's hard to be certain.
I think they mean this audio www.youtube.com/watch
to be honest ididnt hear the gunshots....
True enough. But if you go with Arian Dynes version of a pro IDT cinematic I could defiantly see the use of an audio fade from that sound to gun fire as Shepard wakes up from the hallucination.llbountyhunter wrote...
DJBare wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
Big G13 wrote...
That and the new audio find. That was a good find.
What audio file? I don't recall an audio file, except the one from this track: www.youtube.com/watch
I do believe I was being trolled with that one, but it's hard to be certain.
I think they mean this audio www.youtube.com/watch
to be honest ididnt hear the gunshots.... actually they remind of lightsabres....
DJBare wrote...
You are not supposed to, it's the pattern you should be listening to not the actual sound, this is what I attempted to explain several pages back.llbountyhunter wrote...
DJBare wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
Big G13 wrote...
That and the new audio find. That was a good find.
What audio file? I don't recall an audio file, except the one from this track: www.youtube.com/watch
I do believe I was being trolled with that one, but it's hard to be certain.
I think they mean this audio www.youtube.com/watch
to be honest ididnt hear the gunshots....
If Shepard is unconscious on earth then this is a dream with outside stimuli affecting the dream, kinda like hearing a distant voice, Shepard's mind interprets the gunfire as the electrical arcs, and the echo's sound like people shouting, TIM and Anderson are illusions created by the Reapers, they are attempting to indoctrinate him while he is unconscious, the discussion between him, TIM and Anderson is Shepard trying to fight the indoctrination on a subconscious level.
All speculative at this point of course.
balance5050 wrote...
Rifneno wrote...
There's no way the Reapers are losing conventionally. No way. It would be like trying to beat a tyrannosaurus rex with your fists.
Ok ok, the chances of the reapers being beat using conventional means are extremely small, but can we agree that the chances DO EXIST on some level?
estebanus wrote...
+1
Mark Meer and Jennifer Hale are both great voice actors, but I think that Hale is just a bit better than Meer!
Hawk227 wrote...
Also, I've always found the crude errors (kaidan/ashley body piles, inverted 1m1, Anderson essentially claiming to be next to you, but not there) at the end really bizarre. This was the culmination of their precious, award winning, money-making trilogy. How do they allow so many mistakes in such a short period? To say they didn't get much of their QA department would be understatement.
Unless, it was intentional. "Look at that glaringly poorly textured pile of Ashley/Kaidan! WTF is up with Anderson, he should be right in front of me? Why is that 1m1 backwards? This whole thing is bizarre... like a dream or something"
MaximizedAction wrote...
Multiple trolling presences detected! Activating security protocols.
Aka, see ya later!
DJBare wrote...
Here is my take on it, my "speculation"; the developers state in the Final Hours app they could not take control away from the player because it caused problems with dialogue, buuuut, what if instead they knock Shepard out, see where I'm going with this?, Shepard unconsious in a pile of rubble, everthing from this point on is a dream that's being influenced by outside stimuli, the battle and most importantly the Reapers, no more control problems for the developers, everything is now taking place inside Shepards mind.Arian Dynas wrote...
Ah but the question is, what do you do when the engine limits you?
You go beyond the engine.
The guys at Bioware have already talked about how they play alot of D&D (and Pathfinder among other things) and how their campaigns inspired their worlds, now, if I was running a game featuring something like indoctrination, I know I wouldn't make it a mechanic that the player could quantify and make uninteresting.
I WOULD TRICK THE PLAYERS.
) Would you kindly repost your new version of the after endings sequence?
Modifié par BatmanTurian, 01 mai 2012 - 02:03 .
balance5050 wrote...
Ok ok, the chances of the reapers being beat using conventional means are extremely small, but can we agree that the chances DO EXIST on some level?
HellishFiend wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
Rifneno wrote...
There's no way the Reapers are losing conventionally. No way. It would be like trying to beat a tyrannosaurus rex with your fists.
Ok ok, the chances of the reapers being beat using conventional means are extremely small, but can we agree that the chances DO EXIST on some level?
I honestly dont think so. It depends on how you define the word "chance" I guess. Is the chance of victory greater than 0%? Perhaps, but it would be so small as to require calculus to formulate how small the number is, as it would approach infinity, which creates a scenario where the chance is not equal to 0 but is effectively 0. Phew, brief bit of calculus nostalgia there....
Actually I would say it is more analogous to a conventional virus or bacterial strain trying to kill a human. Sure it is going to defeat a few white blood cells here and there, but eventually the immune system is going to stamp it out, with a non-zero but effectively 0% chance of the virus/bacteria winning.
llbountyhunter wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
Actually I would say it is more analogous to a conventional virus or bacterial strain trying to kill a human. Sure it is going to defeat a few white blood cells here and there, but eventually the immune system is going to stamp it out, with a non-zero but effectively 0% chance of the virus/bacteria winning.
i think of it as more of a Tank vs infantry, as soon as the tank comes in everybody panics and scrambles- easy picking for the tank.
but if the infantry keeps their cool and focuses, they could take the tank out with minimal casualties.
this can also explain why the reapers indoctrinate people. i mean they are SOOO invincible why bother with indoctrination? because they just use it to cause fear and break the peoples will. they dont want a final confrontation.
I do, I do. but only because I can't post fast enough. It would be great if time, distance,( and lets face it) safety would allow all of us to get in a room and discuss this face to face. That would be one hell of a party.:happy:llbountyhunter wrote...
soooo, who else just sits here hitting the reload button?
Well, you're just full of all kinds of good news.Rifneno wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
Ok ok, the chances of the reapers being beat using conventional means are extremely small, but can we agree that the chances DO EXIST on some level?
I don't see how. The difference in both offensive and defensive power is simply far, far too great to overcome with conventional means. Is it possible this cycle could cost them more Reapers than any previous cycle? Absolutely. But I don't see how victory is feasible.
People often cite cases like US vs. Vietnam or USSR vs. Afghanistan as examples of how a much weaker military can overcome a far superior one. Enough that I figure I should get this one out of the way immediately. It's not applicable here. Not just because the military power difference is many times greater but because the Reapers are fully in this. The US and USSR weren't destroyed in those wars, they simply got burned enough to take their hands off the stove. They did not throw their entire military into the effort and they certainly did not use every possible means to destroy their opposition. They could have simply dropped hydrogen bombs on those countries and completely annihilated them. But destruction wasn't the goal, conquest was, and that was a much taller order. The Reapers' goal is in fact destruction. They harvest when opportune but they don't hesitate to kill millions at a time when necessary.
HellishFiend wrote...
llbountyhunter wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
Actually I would say it is more analogous to a conventional virus or bacterial strain trying to kill a human. Sure it is going to defeat a few white blood cells here and there, but eventually the immune system is going to stamp it out, with a non-zero but effectively 0% chance of the virus/bacteria winning.
i think of it as more of a Tank vs infantry, as soon as the tank comes in everybody panics and scrambles- easy picking for the tank.
but if the infantry keeps their cool and focuses, they could take the tank out with minimal casualties.
this can also explain why the reapers indoctrinate people. i mean they are SOOO invincible why bother with indoctrination? because they just use it to cause fear and break the peoples will. they dont want a final confrontation.
Your analogy is nowhere near as appropriate as mine, though. There are far too many factors involved for it to be something so simple as a tank vs infantry. Not only that, but your analogy doesnt incorporate scale like mine does.
As far as citing indoctrination as some kind of indicator that the reapers can be defeated conventionally, I dont follow the logic in that. That is basically like saying that since the Reapers use something besides conventional means, then it stands to reason that their conventional means must be inadequate to guarantee victory. You cant logically come to that conclusion based on that premise.
Big Bad wrote...
SubAstris wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
Arian Dynas wrote...
**** that noise, I'll do it right now.
Literalist MEANS you take the ending at face value. You don't like the implication that it implies, we get it. Get over it, "cult" also has a negative connotation, but the word accurately describes Christianity (formed around a charismatic leader, centering their worship primarily around him.) So get over connotations. Live up to your name and TAKE THE WORD FOR WHAT IT LITERALLY IS.
Yet the clear implication when someone uses the word "cult" is that it is a small group ( I wouldn't call 2 billion Christians worldwide small...). Cult isn't really a good word to use to describe something bid like Christianity, it can mean a group forming around the charismatic leader, BUT ALSO implies a small group). Using the word, "religion" is much more appropriate. On similar grounds I object to literalist
Ok, the conversation has probably moved on at this point, but I just wanted to say that the above statement is really silly. The word "cult" is universally used as a perjorative. It always, always, always has negative connotations surrounding. Last time I checked this word "literalist" did not have any inherent negative connotations, nor do I think people are using it as perjorative. It is a short-hand way of indicating a person's view on a particular issue (IT). Calling someone a "literalist" is a completely neutral statement.
Modifié par BatmanTurian, 01 mai 2012 - 02:27 .
llbountyhunter wrote...
i think you missed my point completly.
Rifneno wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
Ok ok, the chances of the reapers being beat using conventional means are extremely small, but can we agree that the chances DO EXIST on some level?
I don't see how. The difference in both offensive and defensive power is simply far, far too great to overcome with conventional means. Is it possible this cycle could cost them more Reapers than any previous cycle? Absolutely. But I don't see how victory is feasible.
People often cite cases like US vs. Vietnam or USSR vs. Afghanistan as examples of how a much weaker military can overcome a far superior one. Enough that I figure I should get this one out of the way immediately. It's not applicable here. Not just because the military power difference is many times greater but because the Reapers are fully in this. The US and USSR weren't destroyed in those wars, they simply got burned enough to take their hands off the stove. They did not throw their entire military into the effort and they certainly did not use every possible means to destroy their opposition. They could have simply dropped hydrogen bombs on those countries and completely annihilated them. But destruction wasn't the goal, conquest was, and that was a much taller order. The Reapers' goal is in fact destruction. They harvest when opportune but they don't hesitate to kill millions at a time when necessary.
HellishFiend wrote...
llbountyhunter wrote...
i think you missed my point completly.
No, I got your point. You're suggesting that indoctrination acts as some kind of buffer against being defeated by conventional means.
llbountyhunter wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
llbountyhunter wrote...
i think you missed my point completly.
No, I got your point. You're suggesting that indoctrination acts as some kind of buffer against being defeated by conventional means.
to an extent. it wasnt so much about my anology as the idea behind it.
i mean why do the reapers seam so powerfull? because thats how they project themselvs, they WANT you to think theres no hope, that your facing an unstoppable enemy, to cause fractures from within. and while the reapers ARE very powerfull they do have there limits. the battle of swords proves that if you remaind organised and united the possiblity of a conveional win doesnt seem so remote anymore.
to sum up: to reapers seem unstoppable only because thats what they want you to think.
HellishFiend wrote...
llbountyhunter wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
llbountyhunter wrote...
i think you missed my point completly.
No, I got your point. You're suggesting that indoctrination acts as some kind of buffer against being defeated by conventional means.
to an extent. it wasnt so much about my anology as the idea behind it.
i mean why do the reapers seam so powerfull? because thats how they project themselvs, they WANT you to think theres no hope, that your facing an unstoppable enemy, to cause fractures from within. and while the reapers ARE very powerfull they do have there limits. the battle of swords proves that if you remaind organised and united the possiblity of a conveional win doesnt seem so remote anymore.
to sum up: to reapers seem unstoppable only because thats what they want you to think.
Do they want you to think that? Absolutely. Does that mean it isnt true? Not necessarily. If you think about it, the Sword vs Reapers battle didnt prove anything we didnt already know. We already knew Reaper capital ships could be destroyed. But can their forces, as a whole, ever be defeated? No, they cant. There arent enough allied dreadnaughts in the entire galaxy to take down even a significant fraction of Reaper capital ships, and thats not even including other factors like the Destroyers, ground forces, indoctrination, etc. It's simply not possible. It's a matter of winning a battle vs winning a war.
Modifié par llbountyhunter, 01 mai 2012 - 02:44 .
Retour en haut
