57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Fledgey]

byne wrote...

MintyCool wrote...

You are all the political equivalent to the Occupy Movement. Poor unemployed liberals who feel that the world owes them something.

Unfortunately for you, the majority (Fans of the ending, the media, and Bioware) will just continue to walk on by as you beat you tin drum. lol.

Accept it.

Oh, I get it, you're either a troll or a Fox News viewer.

No wonder you liked the ending.

Can we be best friends, Byne? I think I love you.

[blooregard]

Wattoes wrote...

I just watched the "up at noon" thing on IGN with Casey Hudson.

He makes it pretty clear that all dlc they make in the future will just be "sugar on top" and they would never leave key details out of the main experience.

I hate to say it folks, but thats pretty much a nail in the coffin.

wasn't he also the one that said "there would be no unanswered questions or loose ends" and that "not everybody would get the same 'A B or C'" and then everyone gets the same  A,B,or C ending

[Candidate 88766]

Erethrian wrote...

The reapers TRY to indoctrinate Shepard's mind, they try to keep him away from the DESTROY option,

No they don't.

Its the first one they point out. The clip shows Anderson - a character you're meant to agree with - going for this option. In some cases, it is the only available option. 

[cobnut]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

prag16 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

And while these points alone aren't enough to 100% disprove the theory for some people, they are surely enough to call it into serious doubt at least.

Most of that has already been shot down in the thread.  And for whatever semi valid points exist within that list... that's still far less "problems" and "holes" than the "face value" theory causes.

So I'm told, but no-one has actually provided the counter arguments - understandable given the size of the threat though.

Lets start with a couple of them:

-Why would Bioware, a company built on making story-based games, end ME3 - the conclusion to one of their most successful and popular stories ever - on a cliffhanger simply so they could end it later with DLC? 

-Why market everything about this game as being around the concept of taking Earth back if you don't actually get to do that? If this theory is correct, the game ends before you get the chance to 'take Earth back'. 

If anyone has counter-arguments ot these, I'd like to see them. This isn't meant to be confrontational, but to me these are two of the most logical arguments against the theory.

1. Because it's one of their most successful and popular stories ever. They want people to be depressed about the endings so the real ones have a huge impact once they're out. Something like this never happened before. Besides nobody knows if they release a dlc or just a small patch. Maybe all the content is already on the disc.

2. Because you take it back. After the patch.

This is no proof for an alternate ending though. But your points aren't a proof for its non-existence either.

Modifié par cobnut, 14 mars 2012 - 04:44 .

[Noob451]

kent80082006 wrote...

Recap of star child on destroy option

You can destroy all reapers if you like
Can you imagine your life without synthetics?
Even you are partly synthetics
Including the geth

It's obvious that the star child doesn't want you to choose the destroy option
However Shpeherd will only wake up if you choose the destroy option
So if you can't explain why the star child so subtly try to interfere with Shepher's choice with those unnecessary details you have to admit there's something more to the ending

exactly what I was thinking, he says whatever he can to steer you away from destruction.

[CreepingGeth]

Regarding Casey Hudson saying they'd never leave key details out of the main experience, I have a question for those of you that didn't use Javik.

On Thessia, Javik reveals some pretty essential stuff to Liara. What happens if Javik isn't there? My friend, who doesn't have Javik, was surprised when I told him what Javik revealed. Did anyone else play it without Javik but get what he reveals some other way?

If not, then yeah, Bioware, you do leave out key details from the main experience.

[Fledgey]

Elendstourist wrote...

Wattoes wrote...

I just watched the "up at noon" thing on IGN with Casey Hudson.

He makes it pretty clear that all dlc they make in the future will just be "sugar on top" and they would never leave key details out of the main experience.

I hate to say it folks, but thats pretty much a nail in the coffin.

:-/

Who says it's dlc? The twitters have hinted that what is to come, if anything, wouldn't be dlc.

[prag16]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

redBadger14 wrote...

killnoob wrote...



Facepalm.

Right so none of the three end cut scenes are real.

Even with the destroyer option, where you actually SEE reaper destroyed.
Shepard doesn't immediately wakes up - instead he dream some more about reapers getting destroyed and how normandy crushland and joker walk out with his best buddy and watch the sunset blah blah

Enough is enough. = =

Learn to type coherent, English sentences and I may consider taking that post seriously.

While I don't want to get into an argument with you, English isn't everyone's first language. Ignoring someone's post simply because of a handful of grammar/spelling errors seems a little petty to me.

He raises a good point:

If Shepard has somehow broken free of indoctrination, why does Bioware show the player a cutscene of the Reapers being destroyed and the Normandy crashing if this isn't actually happenning and Shepard is no longer indoctrinated?

And if Shepard is indoctrinated, why do the Reapers need to show Shepard an illusion of the Reapers leaving, the Relays blowing up and the Normandy crashing? He's already under their influence - they don't need to feed him random visions.

Because the indoctrination isn't necessarily the Reapers "showing" Shepard explicit images.  The indoctrination is the EM fields and other stuff you talked about, and the EFFECT of the attempted indoctrination (via the means you listed) conjures up various things from Shepard's own subconscious, influenced by what the Reapers are trying to convince him of.  Then you'd say how did Shepard "know" about the other two choices if he didn't have the Reapers explicitly "showing" him images/things?  Easy.  TIM == blue and Saren == green.  Shepard already know about these scenarios.  This theory works whether or not vent boy was real/fake all along.

[Majusbeh]

 just wanted to add something that may be relevant.

at the very beginning of the game anderson's saying something about shepard getting a little bit "round around the edges" (fat) and touches his belly exactly were shepard is later wounded (and isn't anderson also shot were shepard is shot?).
that's maybe nothing, but it feels relevant, because afterwards shepard touches his own belly in a way...well...it's strange

http://www.youtube.c...40MFYrR0#t=509s

[Lemondish]

Candidate 88766 wrote...
1. Not including the full ending to one of, if not their most anticipated game - one that has already received massive attention - just for a little more publicity is a daft idea. 

2. Halo 3's marketing tagline was Finish the Fight, and you do indeed finish the fight - the fight against the flood and the Covenant, which is what the games were about.

1. It may be daft, but are you just saying that because its a new and untested form of interaction that you have no experience with? Hudson mentioned this EXACT type of interaction in the PC Gamer article.

2. You're assuming that what you purchased on the first day was the full game available immediately. The unique and interesting mechanic here is that you're presented with an ending, perhaps you believe it to be THE ending, and are forced to consider all options and theories before the finale is presented to you. This would be akin to watching a season finale that ends with a cliff hanger for your favourite television show. Without the wait, the meaning of the events left unanswered has no weight.

CreepingGeth wrote...

Regarding Casey Hudson saying they'd
never leave key details out of the main experience, I have a question
for those of you that didn't use Javik.

On Thessia, Javik reveals
some pretty essential stuff to Liara. What happens if Javik isn't
there? My friend, who doesn't have Javik, was surprised when I told him
what Javik revealed. Did anyone else play it without Javik but get what
he reveals some other way?

If not, then yeah, Bioware, you do leave out key details from the main experience.

What exactly is revealed? 

Your friend being surprised about the information is a little different than it being key to the story. It feels a litlte anecdotal to me.

Modifié par Lemondish, 14 mars 2012 - 04:49 .

[Action Bawstard]

MintyCool wrote...

You're the political equivalent to the Occupy Movement. Poor unemployed liberals who feel that the world owes them something.

Unfortunately for you, the majority (Fans of the ending, the media, and Bioware) will just continue to walk on by as you beat your tin drum. lol.

Accept it. Minorites always lose.

http://t.qkme.me/352z5c.jpg

[Baronesa]

byne wrote...

MintyCool wrote...

You are all the political equivalent to the Occupy Movement. Poor unemployed liberals who feel that the world owes them something.

Unfortunately for you, the majority (Fans of the ending, the media, and Bioware) will just continue to walk on by as you beat you tin drum. lol.

Accept it.

Oh, I get it, you're either a troll or a Fox News viewer.

No wonder you liked the ending.

Wow... that was awesome XD

byne for the win!

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

https://twitter.com/...967731070799872

Huh

[HairyMadDog1010]

CreepingGeth wrote...

Regarding Casey Hudson saying they'd never leave key details out of the main experience, I have a question for those of you that didn't use Javik.

On Thessia, Javik reveals some pretty essential stuff to Liara. What happens if Javik isn't there? My friend, who doesn't have Javik, was surprised when I told him what Javik revealed. Did anyone else play it without Javik but get what he reveals some other way?

If not, then yeah, Bioware, you do leave out key details from the main experience.

Yeah without Javik the game would not feel compleate.

[2_BR4ZIL_2]

Any news from official sources? ME3 should be released in japan by now.

[njfluffy19]

Majusbeh wrote...

 just wanted to add something that may be relevant.

at the very beginning of the game anderson's saying something about shepard getting a little bit "round around the edges" (fat) and touches his belly exactly were shepard is later wounded (and isn't anderson also shot were shepard is shot?).
that's maybe nothing, but it feels relevant, because afterwards shepard touches his own belly in a way...well...it's strange

http://www.youtube.c...40MFYrR0#t=509s

I think it's meant to be a joke.

Edit: And to show the player that Shepard has been out of commission since the events of Me2 and its DLC.

Modifié par njfluffy19, 14 mars 2012 - 04:48 .

[thePredator50]

https://twitter.com/...967731070799872

Come on...

[Flapperrr]

I so understand, what after interview our theory failed?

[killnoob]

You're assuming that the indoctrination is complete. If so, there'd be no purpose for presenting a series of choices. The indoctrination theory rides on the concept that this is merely an ATTEMPT, and the evidence supports it. After all, this is presented to you by a dead kid you see in your dreams...dreams you only have after being in direct contact with a Reaper. The effect is shallow, unreliable, and completely left up to the player to recognize it.
.

So explain to me:

Where does the hallucination starts and where it ends?

Does the kid exist? Or is he part of the indoctrination?

[777crowe777]

• Reason why those graphics are spitty is because its on PC.... didnt have those at all on my Xbox.
• The reason the bodies are there could be that they havent gotten sent up to be harvested yet.... you do remember thats what the damn beam was for right?
• And yes the eyes changed to mister Illusives eyes when you did either the synthesis or control choice but you dematerialize in both.... and dont wake up.... cant really hallucinate without coming out of it. If you destroy the reapers your a dang BAMF and come back to life after the Crucible explodes in space.... and thats the only time you come back to life!!!!
• Udina was being indoctrinated too... no eyes there, oh and sereign didnt, and where the heck would shepard have been indoctrinated??? Any good clues? Someone was with him all the time? 

Modifié par 777crowe777, 14 mars 2012 - 04:58 .

[Capeo]

kent80082006 wrote...

Recap of star child on destroy option

You can destroy all reapers if you like
Can you imagine your life without synthetics?
Even you are partly synthetics
Including the geth

It's obvious that the star child doesn't want you to choose the destroy option
However Shpeherd will only wake up if you choose the destroy option
So if you can't explain why the star child so subtly try to interfere with Shepher's choice with those unnecessary details you have to admit there's something more to the ending

That's because BW themselves see this as the worst outcome.  Read the script.  The whole point of the game is to bring synthetics and organics together.  BW uses the word "perfect" in regards to the Synergy ending.

[Majusbeh]

oh and it's strange how in the first dark corridor on the citadel there are cerberus units. it seems a little bit out of place, but would make sense if you read the artbook, maybe they forgot to delete all cerberus soldiers or its just not relevant

[redBadger14]

killnoob wrote...

redBadger14 wrote...

killnoob wrote...



Facepalm.

Right so none of the three end cut scenes are real.

Even with the destroyer option, where you actually SEE reaper destroyed. <---this leading into the sentence below is an incomplete sentence
Shepard doesn't immediately wakes up - instead he dream some more about reapers getting destroyed and how normandy crushland and joker walk out with his best buddy and watch the sunset blah blah

Enough is enough. = =

Learn to type coherent, English sentences and I may consider taking that post seriously.

Err what part of it wasn't coherent?

And don't you mean "coherently"??

facepalm some more.*

No, using "coherently" where I used "coherent" in that sentence would be grammatically incorrect, not to mention it would sound utterly stupid.

I bolded everything that made no sense. Destroyer is improper. That leads to an incomplete sentence. After that, you use two impropers before a plural in a row which is horrendous grammar. Dream needs to be plural in that sentence. And crushland is not a word.

Please don't try and insult my intelligence. 

Modifié par redBadger14, 14 mars 2012 - 04:50 .

[Noob451]

PKchu wrote...

https://twitter.com/...967731070799872

Huh

Chris Priestly[/b]‏ @[/s]BioEvilChris[/b][/i] Follow [/i]There are two types of people in this world. Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
[/list]

[lex0r11]

kent80082006 wrote...

Recap of star child on destroy option

You can destroy all reapers if you like
Can you imagine your life without synthetics?
Even you are partly synthetics
Including the geth

It's obvious that the star child doesn't want you to choose the destroy option
However Shpeherd will only wake up if you choose the destroy option
So if you can't explain why the star child so subtly try to interfere with Shepher's choice with those unnecessary details you have to admit there's something more to the ending

"but the reapers will be destroyed?"
"yes, but the peace won't last. soon, your children will create synthetics and then the chaos will come back."

this.
it's the only option that is presented as negative. no real manipulation other than 'positive' end results in the other two options, only a short decription.