57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Fingertrip]

The Rachni Queen would like to have a word with you.

As well as the novels, no? I swear there's a reference to Reaper growl when resisting it.

Oh it's SubAstris, nevermind.

[Lokanaiya]

@Subastris
So why don't the Reapers (and squadmates) actually, you know, APPEAR? As in, where we can see them, or just flashes of them? And don't forget Reaper noises are loudest close to the boy in the second dream.

[DirtyPhoenix]

A question: In the Rachni queen mission escape, when Grunt tells Shepard to go, does Shepard put his hand on Grunt's cheek or shoulder? In my first and second playthrough it really look like cheek, in the third it looks like shoulder :S

[estebanus]

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Quick youtube video showing all the sounds from the dream sequences - skip to ~30 seconds from the end for one very interesting one in particular from the final dream:
"biod_nor_110tour.wwise_norhub_dreams.env_nor_dream_3_reaper_noises"

So now we even have confirmed Reaper noises in the dreams (not that i ever doubted that after I took of the music during the second dream sequence)

Are people still gonna claim there is no Indoctrination going on in regards to those dreams?

Just because there are Reaper noises doesn't mean there is an indoctrination attempt. The dreams reflect what Shepard has lost and how he has lost it, so it is no surprise that the Reapers make an appearance as they are the cause of all this, along with deceased squadmates

Really, Subastris? Is that the best you can do?

Try again.

[SubAstris]

maxloef wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Quick youtube video showing all the sounds from the dream sequences - skip to ~30 seconds from the end for one very interesting one in particular from the final dream:
"biod_nor_110tour.wwise_norhub_dreams.env_nor_dream_3_reaper_noises"

So now we even have confirmed Reaper noises in the dreams (not that i ever doubted that after I took of the music during the second dream sequence)

Are people still gonna claim there is no Indoctrination going on in regards to those dreams?

Just because there are Reaper noises doesn't mean there is an indoctrination attempt. The dreams reflect what Shepard has lost and how he has lost it, so it is no surprise that the Reapers make an appearance as they are the cause of all this, along with deceased squadmates

except if you listen and read indoctrination descriptions and add 2 and 2

But there exists a perfectly reasonable explanation of events without referring at all to IT

[SubAstris]

estebanus wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Quick youtube video showing all the sounds from the dream sequences - skip to ~30 seconds from the end for one very interesting one in particular from the final dream:
"biod_nor_110tour.wwise_norhub_dreams.env_nor_dream_3_reaper_noises"

So now we even have confirmed Reaper noises in the dreams (not that i ever doubted that after I took of the music during the second dream sequence)

Are people still gonna claim there is no Indoctrination going on in regards to those dreams?

Just because there are Reaper noises doesn't mean there is an indoctrination attempt. The dreams reflect what Shepard has lost and how he has lost it, so it is no surprise that the Reapers make an appearance as they are the cause of all this, along with deceased squadmates

Really, Subastris? Is that the best you can do?

Try again.

And your refutation?

[estebanus]

SubAstris wrote...

maxloef wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Quick youtube video showing all the sounds from the dream sequences - skip to ~30 seconds from the end for one very interesting one in particular from the final dream:
"biod_nor_110tour.wwise_norhub_dreams.env_nor_dream_3_reaper_noises"

So now we even have confirmed Reaper noises in the dreams (not that i ever doubted that after I took of the music during the second dream sequence)

Are people still gonna claim there is no Indoctrination going on in regards to those dreams?

Just because there are Reaper noises doesn't mean there is an indoctrination attempt. The dreams reflect what Shepard has lost and how he has lost it, so it is no surprise that the Reapers make an appearance as they are the cause of all this, along with deceased squadmates

except if you listen and read indoctrination descriptions and add 2 and 2

But there exists a perfectly reasonable explanation of events without referring at all to IT

And that is?

[MaximizedAction]

Fingertrip wrote...

The Rachni Queen would like to have a word with you.

As well as the novels, no? I swear there's a reference to Reaper growl when resisting it.

Oh it's SubAstris, nevermind.

Nah, his arguments are fine! Logically, every indoctrination attempt incorparates Reaper growls but the opposite's not true, i.e. not every Reaper growls means indoctrination....
...well, ok, it's likely for the Reapers to do that, but that's it.

The point of the dreams just relies solely on indoc.
I mean, otherwise they would be just a dramatic tool but then also a huge waste of resources for BW. If it were not for the oily shadows and other oddities in the dreams that Shepard's mind alone wouldn't have had created, deducing indoc. from it would not be so easy, anymore.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 08 mai 2012 - 03:51 .

[SubAstris]

Lokanaiya wrote...

@Subastris
So why don't the Reapers (and squadmates) actually, you know, APPEAR? As in, where we can see them, or just flashes of them? And don't forget Reaper noises are loudest close to the boy in the second dream.

I can't comment on creative decisions, if BW wanted to do it that way they could. It is much simpler to have people doing voice-over work than creating animation to go with the character(s) as well. The Reaper noises are nearest to the boy, not because he is a Reaper (post hoc fallacy), but that the tension in that section is building, and Reaper noise provides that ominous air

[SubAstris]

estebanus wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

maxloef wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Quick youtube video showing all the sounds from the dream sequences - skip to ~30 seconds from the end for one very interesting one in particular from the final dream:
"biod_nor_110tour.wwise_norhub_dreams.env_nor_dream_3_reaper_noises"

So now we even have confirmed Reaper noises in the dreams (not that i ever doubted that after I took of the music during the second dream sequence)

Are people still gonna claim there is no Indoctrination going on in regards to those dreams?

Just because there are Reaper noises doesn't mean there is an indoctrination attempt. The dreams reflect what Shepard has lost and how he has lost it, so it is no surprise that the Reapers make an appearance as they are the cause of all this, along with deceased squadmates

except if you listen and read indoctrination descriptions and add 2 and 2

But there exists a perfectly reasonable explanation of events without referring at all to IT

And that is?

Why don't you have a look at my previous comments

[estebanus]

SubAstris wrote...

estebanus wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

maxloef wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Quick youtube video showing all the sounds from the dream sequences - skip to ~30 seconds from the end for one very interesting one in particular from the final dream:
"biod_nor_110tour.wwise_norhub_dreams.env_nor_dream_3_reaper_noises"

So now we even have confirmed Reaper noises in the dreams (not that i ever doubted that after I took of the music during the second dream sequence)

Are people still gonna claim there is no Indoctrination going on in regards to those dreams?

Just because there are Reaper noises doesn't mean there is an indoctrination attempt. The dreams reflect what Shepard has lost and how he has lost it, so it is no surprise that the Reapers make an appearance as they are the cause of all this, along with deceased squadmates

except if you listen and read indoctrination descriptions and add 2 and 2

But there exists a perfectly reasonable explanation of events without referring at all to IT

And that is?

Why don't you have a look at my previous comments

I did, and saying that it is not meaningful in the least is not a very solid argument, IMO. You say that the reapers are there because they are the cause of Shepard's anguish. Bioware could easily have put in Harbinger, if that really were the case. His presence in the dreams would make it a bit more ominous, no? I mean, Harbinger is more or less the face for the reapers, right?.
Why then only put random reaper growls in?

[MJF JD]

what would you all say the odds are of hearing something by the end of E3, even if its not at E3. I feel like I have been indoctrinated by this process!

[estebanus]

MJF JD wrote...

what would you all say the odds are of hearing something by the end of E3, even if its not at E3. I feel like I have been indoctrinated by this process!

NO. That would be a total stupid decision by Bioware, if it really were only cutscenes and epilogues. However, if it were a full-blown expansion pack, I might understand it...

[MaximizedAction]

MJF JD wrote...

what would you all say the odds are of hearing something by the end of E3, even if its not at E3. I feel like I have been indoctrinated by this process!

Do you mean the Expo? It seems likely that until the end of the E3 we'll know more about BW's plans for ME3.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 08 mai 2012 - 04:04 .

[dreamgazer]

I don't know if it will help anything, or if I'm reposting a version of something people have already posted, but I took this shot that kinda encapsulates the game's concrete idea of "rebar".

[Earthborn_Shepard]

Well I have to defend SubAstris here, it indeed would be reasonable enough to hear the Reapers in the dreams without the IDT.

[SubAstris]

estebanus wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

estebanus wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

maxloef wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Quick youtube video showing all the sounds from the dream sequences - skip to ~30 seconds from the end for one very interesting one in particular from the final dream:
"biod_nor_110tour.wwise_norhub_dreams.env_nor_dream_3_reaper_noises"

So now we even have confirmed Reaper noises in the dreams (not that i ever doubted that after I took of the music during the second dream sequence)

Are people still gonna claim there is no Indoctrination going on in regards to those dreams?

Just because there are Reaper noises doesn't mean there is an indoctrination attempt. The dreams reflect what Shepard has lost and how he has lost it, so it is no surprise that the Reapers make an appearance as they are the cause of all this, along with deceased squadmates

except if you listen and read indoctrination descriptions and add 2 and 2

But there exists a perfectly reasonable explanation of events without referring at all to IT

And that is?

Why don't you have a look at my previous comments

I did, and saying that it is not meaningful in the least is not a very solid argument, IMO. You say that the reapers are there because they are the cause of Shepard's anguish. Bioware could easily have put in Harbinger, if that really were the case. His presence in the dreams would make it a bit more ominous, no? I mean, Harbinger is more or less the face for the reapers, right?.
Why then only put random reaper growls in?

I never said it was meaningless, you are putting things into my mouth. Again I am not commenting on BW's design decisions. They could have put in a wide number of things associated with the Reapers, however a sound deeply connected to them is suffice and easiest. Harbinger is just one of the Reapers, other Reapers have killed many millions on other worlds and his squadmates. From my perspective, having a sound which identifiies with all Reapers is more apt for Shepard, the selfless hero thinking of others, rather than just Harbinger (although that can be debated).

Modifié par SubAstris, 08 mai 2012 - 04:11 .

[MaximizedAction]

dreamgazer wrote...

I don't know if it will help anything, or if I'm reposting a version of something people have already posted, but I took this shot that kinda encapsulates the game's concrete idea of "rebar".

Nice shot!
The things in the breath scene on the close ups seem to be more smooth, but the surface structure still seems similar.

Man, if someone could figure out what this shiny object near the mako(?) was in the breath scene is...A UT-47, something from the Condiut?

[Tirian Thorn]

To everyone (but especially to the PRO-ITier's)

No single piece of evidence presented conclusively proves IT.  Period. 

The sounds, the trees, the music, the dialogue, etc - none of those findings by themselves are enough proof.  Argue all you like, but that's the fact. 

The strength of the theory is that there are so many things that point towards indoctrination.  And that there are so many anamolies that are - in my opinion - best explained by indoctrination. 

These individual pieces of evidence taken together is what unifies the theory and makes it more believable. 

But seriously, arguing over tree shapes and sounds found in a dream is ridiculous. 

Is it odd?  Yes. 
Does it fit with IT?  Yes. 
Could is just be a dream?  Yes. 

That's the problem with dreams - they are more open to interpretation than ANYTHING else because the normal rules are suspended, discarded or applied on a whim.  Dreams in entertainment are often used to foreshadow events, show guilt or motivations. 

Don't get hung up on the little things.  I really doubt if IT is true that Bioware is going to point to the dreams and say "did you notice the sounds?"  Or point to the tree shapes on the citadel and say "did you notice the trees?" 

They are going to point to the following:   (again, just my opinion) 

1) Control & Synthesis were ideas put forth by indoctrinated antagonists. (TIM & Saren) Why would you believe they were ever right?


2) Anderson gets shot, while Shepard is the one clutching and grabbing his side


3) Harbinger can easily target others and instantly vaporizes them, but the blast hits in front of Shepard – which only wounds, instead of killing.


4) The Reapers has said time and time again that their purpose is unfathomable to organics. They said they have no beginning and no end. Yet the Star Kid sums up their purpose simply and says it’s his plan, making the reapers part of his plan. Plus the idiocy of the plan. We don’t want organics whipped out by synthetics, so we’re going to use synthetics to kill you, but not all of you. Why not just kill the other synthetics instead?


5) TIM is able to control both Shepard and Anderson? How? The reapers have never shown that kind of influence over someone who wasn’t indoctrinated. How could TIM use reaper-tech better than the reapers?


6) The Star-Kid says the Citadel is part of it. Well, if that’s the case, then how were the Protheans able to sabotage the Citadel so the reapers couldn’t jump directly there from Dark Space. The Star-Kid should have been able to correct for that which totally invalidates ME1.


7) When Shepard chooses Control or Synthesis his/her eyes change to become like TIM’s.

Modifié par Tirian Thorn, 08 mai 2012 - 04:15 .

[estebanus]

SubAstris wrote...

estebanus wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

estebanus wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

maxloef wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Quick youtube video showing all the sounds from the dream sequences - skip to ~30 seconds from the end for one very interesting one in particular from the final dream:
"biod_nor_110tour.wwise_norhub_dreams.env_nor_dream_3_reaper_noises"

So now we even have confirmed Reaper noises in the dreams (not that i ever doubted that after I took of the music during the second dream sequence)

Are people still gonna claim there is no Indoctrination going on in regards to those dreams?

Just because there are Reaper noises doesn't mean there is an indoctrination attempt. The dreams reflect what Shepard has lost and how he has lost it, so it is no surprise that the Reapers make an appearance as they are the cause of all this, along with deceased squadmates

except if you listen and read indoctrination descriptions and add 2 and 2

But there exists a perfectly reasonable explanation of events without referring at all to IT

And that is?

Why don't you have a look at my previous comments

I did, and saying that it is not meaningful in the least is not a very solid argument, IMO. You say that the reapers are there because they are the cause of Shepard's anguish. Bioware could easily have put in Harbinger, if that really were the case. His presence in the dreams would make it a bit more ominous, no? I mean, Harbinger is more or less the face for the reapers, right?.
Why then only put random reaper growls in?

I never said it was meaningless, you are putting things into my mouth. Again I am not commenting on BW's design decisions. They could have put in a wide number of things associated with the Reapers, however a sound deeply connected to them is suffice and easiest. Harbinger is just one of the Reapers, other Reapers have killed many millions on other worlds and his squadmates. From my perspective, having a sound which identifiies with all Reapers is more apt for Shepard, the selfless hero thinking of others, rather than just Harbinger (although that can be debated).

Ok, I'm sorry for jumping at you like that. It seems I misunderstood your post. Nevertheless, it is still a interesting find, and I'm sure that it can be debated about.

[estebanus]

Well, I guess I'll be gone for a while. I have to frive my sister to the nearest military base, so I'll be off for a bit. See you all later!

[MaximizedAction]

Tirian Thorn wrote...

To everyone (but especially to the PRO-ITier's)

No single piece of evidence presented conclusively proves IT.  Period. 

The sounds, the trees, the music, the dialogue, etc - none of those findings by themselves are enough proof.  Argue all you like, but that's the fact. 

The strength of the theory is that there are so many things that point towards indoctrination.  And that there are so many anamolies that are - in my opinion - best explained by indoctrination. 

These individual pieces of evidence taken together is what unifies the theory and makes it more believable. 

But seriously, arguing over tree shapes and sounds found in a dream is ridiculous. 

Is it odd?  Yes. 
Does it fit with IT?  Yes. 
Could is just be a dream?  Yes. 

That's the problem with dreams - they are more open to interpretation than ANYTHING else because the normal rules are suspended, discarded or applied on a whim.  Dreams in entertainment are often used to foreshadow events, show guilt or motivations. 
[...]

To be kept in mind by every reasonable pro-ITer.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 08 mai 2012 - 04:19 .

[SubAstris]

Tirian Thorn wrote...

To everyone (but especially to the PRO-ITier's)

No single piece of evidence presented conclusively proves IT.  Period. 

The sounds, the trees, the music, the dialogue, etc - none of those findings by themselves are enough proof.  Argue all you like, but that's the fact. 

The strength of the theory is that there are so many things that point towards indoctrination.  And that there are so many anamolies that are - in my opinion - best explained by indoctrination. 

These individual pieces of evidence taken together is what unifies the theory and makes it more believable. 

But seriously, arguing over tree shapes and sounds found in a dream is ridiculous. 

Is it odd?  Yes. 
Does it fit with IT?  Yes. 
Could is just be a dream?  Yes. 

That's the problem with dreams - they are more open to interpretation than ANYTHING else because the normal rules are suspended, discarded or applied on a whim.  Dreams in entertainment are often used to foreshadow events, show guilt or motivations. 

Don't get hung up on the little things.  I really doubt if IT is true that Bioware is going to point to the dreams and say "did you notice the sounds?"  Or point to the tree shapes on the citadel and say "did you notice the trees?" 

They are going to point to the following:   (again, just my opinion) 

1) Control & Synthesis were ideas put forth by indoctrinated antagonists. (TIM & Saren) Why would you believe they were ever right?


2) Anderson gets shot, while Shepard is the one clutching and grabbing his side


3) Harbinger can easily target others and instantly vaporizes them, but the blast hits in front of Shepard – which only wounds, instead of killing.


4) The Reapers has said time and time again that their purpose is unfathomable to organics. They said they have no beginning and no end. Yet the Star Kid sums up their purpose simply and says it’s his plan, making the reapers part of his plan. Plus the idiocy of the plan. We don’t want organics whipped out by synthetics, so we’re going to use synthetics to kill you, but not all of you. Why not just kill the other synthetics instead?


5) TIM is able to control both Shepard and Anderson? How? The reapers have never shown that kind of influence over someone who wasn’t indoctrinated. How could TIM use reaper-tech better than the reapers?


6) The Star-Kid says the Citadel is part of it. Well, if that’s the case, then how were the Protheans able to sabotage the Citadel so the reapers couldn’t jump directly there from Dark Space. The Star-Kid should have been able to correct for that which totally invalidates ME1.


7) When Shepard chooses Control or Synthesis his/her eyes change to become like TIM’s.

1) I'll just answer the first one. You have to remember that there is a profound difference between events pre and post-Catalyst. Before control is offered as an option controlling the Reapers is not possible without the very real possibility of being controlled by them (as what happened to the Illusive Man). However, by the end, you can actually control the Reapers without any real risk of side-effects (as has been established by the narrative) and so it becomes a much better solution to the problem.

[Thorn Harvestar]

 My personal biggest red flags that make me lean towards IT:

• Why do they only show Shepard profusely bleeding from the side after he shoots Anderson in the same location? That's a lot of blood to have not been noticable before the TIM showdown...
• Why does the Catalyst appear as a figure obviously taken from Shepard's subconscious?
• Why does Shepard have to disintegrate in order to achieve Control or Synthesis? The Catalyst said that Synthesis required him (Reapers) as well. I didn't see him jumping in the beam.
• Why do Shepard's eyes turn to the signature Husk design if you pick Control or Synthesis?
• Why do Shepard's eyes stay normal if you pick Destroy?
• Why show Shepard barely alive in rubble with no context of his condition/location, unless more was planned?

[Tirian Thorn]

SubAstris wrote...

Tirian Thorn wrote...

*snip

They are going to point to the following:   (again, just my opinion) 

1) Control & Synthesis were ideas put forth by indoctrinated antagonists. (TIM & Saren) Why would you believe they were ever right?

*snip

 

1) I'll just answer the first one. You have to remember that there is a profound difference between events pre and post-Catalyst. Before control is offered as an option controlling the Reapers is not possible without the very real possibility of being controlled by them (as what happened to the Illusive Man). However, by the end, you can actually control the Reapers without any real risk of side-effects (as has been established by the narrative) and so it becomes a much better solution to the problem.

The star kid is an agent of the reapers or controls the reapers. It is still apart of "that system."  There's no way I would trust the star kid.  (my choice.)