57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Earthborn_Shepard]

Jessica Merizan is constantly hinting at how "The GARDIAN might not be truthful" yes, actual quote.

[Elscotto1989]

blueboxblues wrote...

kyg_20X6 wrote...

Just realised something. Hackett communicates with Shepard on the Citadel. "Shepard... Commander... it's not working, it must be something on your end". But to all intents and purposes the Alliance should assume he's dead, right? Early on the British guy says no one survived. According to the theory, both parts are part of the hallucination but they contradict eachother. Some evidence for it all being a hallucination that is changing to keep up the ruse (and the pressure)?

This bothered me too...also that Coates said over the comm to someone else that everyone was dead; Anderson and Shepard should have heard that and spoken up, since they were using the comm to talk to one another after reaching the Conduit. Strange, strange, strange.

PLOTHOLES!, getcha tasty plotholes here!! i agree something is up with everything that happens after harby drops the nukevision on sheps posse.

[VanDex]

Ona Demonie wrote...

Some times I feel like this thread is an American English class where Mass Effect 3 was our assigned book we all had to read and the teacher (BioWare) told us to discuss the "symbolism and why the events happened" in the book. Some say "Because the writer wanted to have the character do that" while others are taking points from the book and supporting why its more than "just cause".

Haha, exactly. The current underwhelming endings are also wide open for interpretation (English major here).

[Elscotto1989]

OverdrivenI wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Evan Hardy ‏ @PaceBreaker23
@JessicaMerizan The Guardian's logic sounds like BS to me, can you clarify plz?

Jessica Merizan Jessica Merizan ‏ @JessicaMerizan
@PaceBreaker23 people on the forums are doing it FAR better than I ever could have: http://social.biowar...-9727423-1.html

did... did she just confirm our theory??

Sounds like she believes it. Or just giving us false hope in order to pacify us!

Regardless, I just finished all 3 games. The part that takes the cake, in ME2 loading screen it says something like 'Your decisions in ME2 will heavily influence the outcome of ME3' <_<

what you mean you didnt get the "defining" ending we were promised? huh me either...

[Descedent]

VanDex wrote...

Ona Demonie wrote...

Some times I feel like this thread is an American English class where Mass Effect 3 was our assigned book we all had to read and the teacher (BioWare) told us to discuss the "symbolism and why the events happened" in the book. Some say "Because the writer wanted to have the character do that" while others are taking points from the book and supporting why its more than "just cause".

 (English major here).

you poor soul

[Martukis]

blueboxblues wrote...

kyg_20X6 wrote...

Just realised something. Hackett communicates with Shepard on the Citadel. "Shepard... Commander... it's not working, it must be something on your end". But to all intents and purposes the Alliance should assume he's dead, right? Early on the British guy says no one survived. According to the theory, both parts are part of the hallucination but they contradict eachother. Some evidence for it all being a hallucination that is changing to keep up the ruse (and the pressure)?

This bothered me too...also that Coates said over the comm to someone else that everyone was dead; Anderson and Shepard should have heard that and spoken up, since they were using the comm to talk to one another after reaching the Conduit. Strange, strange, strange.

 Coates says the Alliance forces were decimated. This means one of every ten was killed. It has been misused frequently in recent media to mean significant/overwhelming losses, but I am unsure of it's usage here.

[blueboxblues]

Elscotto1989 wrote...

blueboxblues wrote...

kyg_20X6 wrote...

Just realised something. Hackett communicates with Shepard on the Citadel. "Shepard... Commander... it's not working, it must be something on your end". But to all intents and purposes the Alliance should assume he's dead, right? Early on the British guy says no one survived. According to the theory, both parts are part of the hallucination but they contradict eachother. Some evidence for it all being a hallucination that is changing to keep up the ruse (and the pressure)?

This bothered me too...also that Coates said over the comm to someone else that everyone was dead; Anderson and Shepard should have heard that and spoken up, since they were using the comm to talk to one another after reaching the Conduit. Strange, strange, strange.

PLOTHOLES!, getcha tasty plotholes here!! i agree something is up with everything that happens after harby drops the nukevision on sheps posse.

OM NOM NOM. Tastes like ice cream Reapers!

[MRedfield]

I still love this theory and believe it to be correct, but the recent information about how they intended the ending to be exactly how it was...ugh. I'm just losing interest in even making up my own ending.

[Ona Demonie]

MJF JD wrote...

kyg_20X6 wrote...

Just realised something. Hackett communicates with Shepard on the Citadel. "Shepard... Commander... it's not working, it must be something on your end". But to all intents and purposes the Alliance should assume he's dead, right? Early on the British guy says no one survived. According to the theory, both parts are part of the hallucination but they contradict eachother. Some evidence for it all being a hallucination that is changing to keep up the ruse (and the pressure)?

well to be fair, the citadel opened so Hackett had to assume that someone did indeed make it. 

Yeah, but how did he know it was Shepard? Hell, it could have been a random soldier that made it in.

[kyg_20X6]

MJF JD wrote...


well to be fair, the citadel opened so Hackett had to assume that someone did indeed make it. 

It could have been anyone. It could have been Anderson. He doesn't ask. There is no question. He knows it's Shepard. That is strange.

[kent80082006]

blueboxblues wrote...

kyg_20X6 wrote...

Just realised something. Hackett communicates with Shepard on the Citadel. "Shepard... Commander... it's not working, it must be something on your end". But to all intents and purposes the Alliance should assume he's dead, right? Early on the British guy says no one survived. According to the theory, both parts are part of the hallucination but they contradict eachother. Some evidence for it all being a hallucination that is changing to keep up the ruse (and the pressure)?

This bothered me too...also that Coates said over the comm to someone else that everyone was dead; Anderson and Shepard should have heard that and spoken up, since they were using the comm to talk to one another after reaching the Conduit. Strange, strange, strange.

Don't you think they'd monitor the vital signals of their soldiers or anything?

[hansvanboxem]

"INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING
EXPERIENCE THE BEGINNING, MIDDLE, AND END OF AN EMOTIONAL STORY UNLIKE ANY OTHER, WHERE THE DECISIONS YOU MAKE COMPLETELY SHAPE YOUR EXPERIENCE AND OUTCOME." This is exactly what the main site says. Completely shaping outcome, Ha!

[MJF JD]

kyg_20X6 wrote...

MJF JD wrote...


well to be fair, the citadel opened so Hackett had to assume that someone did indeed make it. 

It could have been anyone. It could have been Anderson. He doesn't ask. There is no question. He knows it's Shepard. That is strange.

it is strange.  Just pointing out that Hackett was safe in assuming that someone made it to the citadel.  Not dispelling any of our theory.  

[OverdrivenI]

Martukis wrote...

 Coates says the Alliance forces were decimated. This means one of every ten was killed. It has been misused frequently in recent media to mean significant/overwhelming losses, but I am unsure of it's usage here.

Actually you missed the important part:

Random Woman: Did we get anyone to the beacon?
Coates: Negative. Our entire force was decimated.

 

I think that's pretty certain they mean everyones dead.

Modifié par OverdrivenI, 16 mars 2012 - 01:25 .

[tanuki]

MJF JD wrote...

kyg_20X6 wrote...

Just realised something. Hackett communicates with Shepard on the Citadel. "Shepard... Commander... it's not working, it must be something on your end". But to all intents and purposes the Alliance should assume he's dead, right? Early on the British guy says no one survived. According to the theory, both parts are part of the hallucination but they contradict eachother. Some evidence for it all being a hallucination that is changing to keep up the ruse (and the pressure)?

well to be fair, the citadel opened so Hackett had to assume that someone did indeed make it. 

But he couldn't know that was Shepard who did it.

[VanDex]

Current endings seem to be a very awkward way of distributing future DLC content. I already mentioned the fact that it's pretty weird to include some stuff into the plot when you know how it all ends anyway. Then there's the silly situation with the galaxy being full of reapers (by the post-finale cerberus base save basically the whole map is covered in those red figures) and you sort of sauntering leisurely to do some sidequests they may present in DLC packs.

Also, those endings are pretty much the same as the ones that leaked, right? Why would they be so rushed and full of plotholes and stuff that doesn't add up then?

[windermeer]

OverdrivenI wrote...

Martukis wrote...

 Coates says the Alliance forces were decimated. This means one of every ten was killed. It has been misused frequently in recent media to mean significant/overwhelming losses, but I am unsure of it's usage here.

Actually you missed the important part:

Random Woman: Did we get anyone to the beacon?
Coates: Negative. Our entire force was decimated.

 

I think that's pretty certain they mean everyones dead.

In the german version they are saying that all troops are dead.

[lex0r11]

once again raising morale.

[Earthborn_Shepard]

Now, the Mike Gamble tweet + Jessica Merizan's HAVE convinced me 100% that SOMETHING is there. Just don't know what.

[kyg_20X6]

Another thing would the clarity of the comms. How many times does Shepard lose comms throughout the game. Yet he's near the conduit (which disrupted the signal to lock onto the prior reaper with the rockets) and he's just been blasted with a reaper laser and all his armor is destroyed. Yet his comms are great (although he conveniently doesn't use it 'til Anderson talks to him). The only time it disrupts is conveniently on the Citadel when 'Anderson' is trying to explain how he's proceeding through the area. Then the Hackett contacting him.

All very sus.

[Martukis]

OverdrivenI wrote...

Martukis wrote...

 Coates says the Alliance forces were decimated. This means one of every ten was killed. It has been misused frequently in recent media to mean significant/overwhelming losses, but I am unsure of it's usage here.

Actually you missed the important part:

Random Woman: Did we get anyone to the beacon?
Coates: Negative. Our entire force was decimated.

 

I think that's pretty certain they mean everyones dead.

  Yeah, I suppose so

Modifié par Martukis, 16 mars 2012 - 01:31 .

[dfstone]

Anderson kinda gave it away for me. How did he get on the Citadel. He wasn't behind you when you ran to the beacon. He's the last voice you hear before getting hit by Harbinger's beam and then suddenly he's on the Citadel with you.

[Earthborn_Shepard]

kyg_20X6 wrote...

Another thing would the clarity of the comms. How many times does Shepard lose comms throughout the game. Yet he's near the conduit (which disrupted the signal to lock onto the prior reaper with the rockets) and he's just been blasted with a reaper laser and all his armor is destroyed. Yet his comms are great (although he conveniently doesn't use it 'til Anderson talks to him). The only time it disrupts is conveniently on the Citadel when 'Anderson' is trying to explain how he's proceeding through the area. Then the Hackett contacting him.

All very sus.

Yeah! I always wondered why suddenly the comm to Anderson breaks up, especially since they are supposed to be a few metres from each other

[MissOuJ]

Martukis wrote...

 Coates says the Alliance forces were decimated. This means one of every ten was killed. It has been misused frequently in recent media to mean significant/overwhelming losses, but I am unsure of it's usage here.

That's the old usage of the word, which dates back to the punishment method used in the Roman army. It's modern meaning is pretty much synonym for annihilate or destroy.

EDIT 'd like whoa

Modifié par MissOuJ, 16 mars 2012 - 01:33 .

[Ona Demonie]

VanDex wrote...

Current endings seem to be a very awkward way of distributing future DLC content. I already mentioned the fact that it's pretty weird to include some stuff into the plot when you know how it all ends anyway. Then there's the silly situation with the galaxy being full of reapers (by the post-finale cerberus base save basically the whole map is covered in those red figures) and you sort of sauntering leisurely to do some sidequests they may present in DLC packs.

Also, those endings are pretty much the same as the ones that leaked, right? Why would they be so rushed and full of plotholes and stuff that doesn't add up then?

There was slight variation. I'm getting conflicting reports.

Shepard would be in the rubble, but Anderson would pull him out. THEN they would go into the Conduit.

Then there was supposed to be an ending where your LI pulls you out of the rubble, hugs you, and Anderson gives you what happened (Reapers lose, how many people died, Earth saved, etc).