57139 réponses à ce sujet

[aslivewire]

I'm not really sure which side of the argument the 1m1 shot is supposed to support? Because it seems that all it does is point out those structures would be found where they were found...?

Unless I'm missing where that me1 shot is from.

[Avadan232]

beank wrote...

4. TIM: Controlling Shepard is not that much of a stretch, with all the tech that Shepard has in him. Just
because TIM didn't want to control Shepard's mind, doesn't mean that he wouldn't need some kind of fail safe if Shepard pointed a gun at his face.
Also a pet peeve of mine, Why assume that “because the Bad Man does it” it must be bad and “because
the Good Man Does it” it must be good?

 You do bring up many interesting points however I would like to go ahead and argue against them
 
For first part of Number 4  you state that just because TIM didn't plant the mind control chip while rebuilding Shepard doesn't mean that he didn't put in a fail safe in-case Shepard betrayed him.  I would like to bring up the following points
 
  - Miranda ends up betraying TIM, if anyone would know of such a thing she would because she was the head of the Lazarus Project, she would have told Shepard
  - Along with the fact that if such a failsafe exists that Shepard would have numerous checkups between me2 and me3
 -If he could control shepard i have a feeling that he would of used it to control Shepard to make sure he got the collectors base. (or maybe not he did need shepard in me3 to get ahold of the prothean VI)


And i would also would like to talk about the last statement . While I agree with this myself it might not  be correct in this sitsuation IF we are assuming the IDT  then Anderson is the part of Shepard that is resisting the control of the reapers. So if we apply this to the scene of him destorying the reapers it shows what Shepard orginally came here to do... destroy the reapers. However this scene is shown in red and is down played as the worst action possible by TIM/Child , While it is the opposite for the destroy option.

(if i misinterpreted anything let me know, it happens)

Modifié par Avadan232, 23 mars 2012 - 04:44 .

[Denvian]

aslivewire wrote...

I'm not really sure which side of the argument the 1m1 shot is supposed to support? Because it seems that all it does is point out those structures would be found where they were found...?

Unless I'm missing where that me1 shot is from.

It is not from the citadel.  It is from a human structure in Mass Effect 1

[greywardencommander]

Martukis wrote...

I am unsure if it is related, but if you ask Hackett "Why me?" He explains that Shepard seems to be an almost hypnotic leader, uniting people and within weeks inspiring and convincing them to follow him/her into hell (or a Collector base near the accretion disk). TIM also exhibits this a bit at the Citidel (or perhaps in the dream) and I think with Kai Leng to some extent. It is discussed that reapers have a sort of signal-based command system, and that TIM was looking into manipulating this to turn reaper ground forces against each other. I wonder if the slower, more preserving indoctrination discussed in the codec - the one that enables much more cognitive ability - might also enable a certain amount of command ability.

an interesting idea actually and something I hadn't thought of.
I get really tired of this 'that's not how indoctrination works' rubbish citing all these things and it's like well in the codex itself and in game references it's implied that slower indoctrination, subtler indoctrination (or subliminal) is also used by them, we don't know what happens inside their head all we've seen is
They start to become influenced -> their beliefs change to align with the Reapers or at least not destroying them (Saren) -> full out control (husks)

I posted a while back that there's various stages of indoctrination all based on the games, books and codex,
the beginnings (some visions, whispers, increased depression etc) -> illusion stage (where we've reached) -> Conversion Stage -> Thrall (Husks) - useless

We argue he's between illusion & conversion (where his beliefs change), choosing destroy throws off the indoctrination completely proving he can't be controlled and choosing the other two leads to indoctrination, there's still a chance to do a Saren and resist enough to do the right thing in the latter two but ultimately your Shepard is doomed to die

[greywardencommander]

Denvian wrote...

aslivewire wrote...

I'm not really sure which side of the argument the 1m1 shot is supposed to support? Because it seems that all it does is point out those structures would be found where they were found...?

Unless I'm missing where that me1 shot is from.

It is not from the citadel.  It is from a human structure in Mass Effect 1

yes but you see it again in the end area

[Ukomba]

Anyone else have the crucible destroyed game over message?

[Denvian]

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

aslivewire wrote...

I'm not really sure which side of the argument the 1m1 shot is supposed to support? Because it seems that all it does is point out those structures would be found where they were found...?

Unless I'm missing where that me1 shot is from.

It is not from the citadel.  It is from a human structure in Mass Effect 1

yes but you see it again in the end area

Do you mean the end area of Mass effect 1 or 3?

[Denvian]

Ukomba wrote...

Anyone else have the crucible destroyed game over message?

Uh no... can that happen?

[greywardencommander]

Denvian wrote...

Here is a question... We have heard quite a bit about people being upset about the ending and wanting it changed... but do any of these people believe IT and and still hate the ending?

For the most part the only people who are in the "take back the ending" camp seem to be people who do not think IT is what is going on but I could be wrong

we still think the endings suck the point of IDT is that the endings are a hallucination and the mind throwin off indoctrination. We argue that the 'real endings' are still to come where you wake up after being hit by Harbinger's beam. We are 'retaking Mass Effect' in the sense if intended this is genius but we still need the endings, if it wasn't intended using this means making the endings better without sacrificing anything by just using DLC picking up where you get hit by the beam

[greywardencommander]

Denvian wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

aslivewire wrote...

I'm not really sure which side of the argument the 1m1 shot is supposed to support? Because it seems that all it does is point out those structures would be found where they were found...?

Unless I'm missing where that me1 shot is from.

It is not from the citadel.  It is from a human structure in Mass Effect 1

yes but you see it again in the end area

Do you mean the end area of Mass effect 1 or 3?

Mass Effect 3, I'm pretty sure you see it in the cutscene of starchild I have an xbox though so can't post screenshot

Modifié par greywardencommander, 23 mars 2012 - 04:44 .

[Scoob]

http://geek.pikimal....t-name-release/

More people need to read this!

[Denvian]

Scoob wrote...

http://geek.pikimal....t-name-release/

More people need to read this!

Bioware already made a statement that it was fake

[Ukomba]

Denvian wrote...

Ukomba wrote...

Anyone else have the crucible destroyed game over message?

Uh no... can that happen?

You can sit there forever if you want, but if you start down a path then try to turn back the Crucible gets destroyed.

[Denvian]

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

aslivewire wrote...

I'm not really sure which side of the argument the 1m1 shot is supposed to support? Because it seems that all it does is point out those structures would be found where they were found...?

Unless I'm missing where that me1 shot is from.

It is not from the citadel.  It is from a human structure in Mass Effect 1

yes but you see it again in the end area

Do you mean the end area of Mass effect 1 or 3?

Mass Effect 3, I'm pretty sure you see it in the cutscene of starchild I have an xbox though so can't post screenshot

Well yeah that is our point.  It was in a Human structure not the citadel in Mass Effect 1 and is never seen on the Citadel in Mass Effect 3 except at the end which is a hallunincation that takes bits and parts from settings shepard has been to during the course of the three games.

Savy?

[greywardencommander]

Scoob wrote...

http://geek.pikimal....t-name-release/

More people need to read this!

imitator/hacker same thing in my book. I'm not sure anyone would post it if they worked at Bioware on Mass Effect if people KNEW it was them in the community. They'd always get found out sooner or later.
If anything you'd be more likely to set up an account and post it under a new name where noone knows who it is because it's a different name.
I'm not saying that's the case here I'm just saying lets not read too much into it.

[greywardencommander]

Denvian wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

aslivewire wrote...

I'm not really sure which side of the argument the 1m1 shot is supposed to support? Because it seems that all it does is point out those structures would be found where they were found...?

Unless I'm missing where that me1 shot is from.

It is not from the citadel.  It is from a human structure in Mass Effect 1

yes but you see it again in the end area

Do you mean the end area of Mass effect 1 or 3?

Mass Effect 3, I'm pretty sure you see it in the cutscene of starchild I have an xbox though so can't post screenshot

Well yeah that is our point.  It was in a Human structure not the citadel in Mass Effect 1 and is never seen on the Citadel in Mass Effect 3 except at the end which is a hallunincation that takes bits and parts from settings shepard has been to during the course of the three games.

Savy?

sorry I assumed you were claiming that it wasn't in the citadel end and that the image was from ME1 as well. I'm losing track of who supports what (it's 5am)

[Denvian]

Ukomba wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Ukomba wrote...

Anyone else have the crucible destroyed game over message?

Uh no... can that happen?

You can sit there forever if you want, but if you start down a path then try to turn back the Crucible gets destroyed.

Oh... I see.  No I have never tried that.  

[aslivewire]

Denvian wrote...

aslivewire wrote...

I'm not really sure which side of the argument the 1m1 shot is supposed to support? Because it seems that all it does is point out those structures would be found where they were found...?

Unless I'm missing where that me1 shot is from.

It is not from the citadel.  It is from a human structure in Mass Effect 1

OH! Okay thank you, I misread where that structure was from.

At some point you have to go 'okay designers, there is no way that these textures which haven't been used in five years are the easiest way to reuse textures in your game'. At some point, it's darn eerie.

[Denvian]

greywardencommander wrote...

sorry I assumed you were claiming that it wasn't in the citadel end and that the image was from ME1 as well. I'm losing track of who supports what (it's 5am)

No worries... no friendly fire here.

[greywardencommander]

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Here is a question... We have heard quite a bit about people being upset about the ending and wanting it changed... but do any of these people believe IT and and still hate the ending?

For the most part the only people who are in the "take back the ending" camp seem to be people who do not think IT is what is going on but I could be wrong

we still think the endings suck the point of IDT is that the endings are a hallucination and the mind throwin off indoctrination. We argue that the 'real endings' are still to come where you wake up after being hit by Harbinger's beam. We are 'retaking Mass Effect' in the sense if intended this is genius but we still need the endings, if it wasn't intended using this means making the endings better without sacrificing anything by just using DLC picking up where you get hit by the beam

In case you didn't see my reply in all that image and 'fake or not fake weekes post' stuff Denvian also in any case here's my DLC idea using IDT and giving us all the variety we want http://social.biowar.../index/10350970 

Modifié par greywardencommander, 23 mars 2012 - 04:53 .

[liggy002]

We already know that it was some sort of energy that was behind the Reapers. We saw that in Mass Effect 2 with the Husks that were spawning from it and the people it indoctrinated to turn into husks. The energy was in the Direlect Reaper core, it seems to me that it was part of its power. So yes, maybe there is something else behind the Reapers, but that doesn't necessarily mean that what we saw after Shepard was knocked out by the beam was true. It could have been Harbinger and this "energy" messing with his head. The energy did take the form of the kid after all to remind him of lost hope and weaken Shepard's resolve.

Modifié par liggy002, 23 mars 2012 - 04:55 .

[beank]

Avadan232 wrote...
 
  - Miranda ends up betraying TIM, if anyone would know of such a thing she would have told Shepard as she was the head of the Lazarus Project

I could see TIM keeping an Ace like this from Miranda. They have disenting opinions on how to treat Shepard. She wanted to control them from the start, TIM did not. Instead of revealing that something is indeed there and risk ruining the resurected Shepard, he puts the Ace up his sleeve till he is holding all the cards.

But I agree that if she knew of anything it would have been revealed.

Avadan232 wrote...
- Along with the fact that if such a failsafe exists that Shepard would have numerous checkups between me2 and me3

I was talking about a fail safe for TIM. If Shepard is ready to pull a trigger and kill TIM, he could override.
I should have made that a little clearer...

Avadan232 wrote...
 -If he could control shepard i have a feeling that he would of used it to control Shepard to make sure he got the collectors base. (or maybe not he did need shepard in me3 to get ahold of the prothean VI)

I agree with this one, but again.... TIM wants total control. Throing away a Queen is a bad move unless it puts the King in Check.

TIM wanted the Base, but would he be willing to take total control of Shepard to get it?

Avadan232 wrote...
And i would also would like to talk about the last statement . While I agree with this myself it might not  be correct in this sitsuation IF we are assuming the IT  then Anderson is the part of Shepard that is resisting the control of the reapers. So if we apply this to the scene of him destorying the reapers it shows what Shepard orginally came here to do... destroy the reapers. However this scene is shown in red and is down played as the worst action possible by TIM/Child , While it is the opposite for the destroy option.

This makes sense. I can agree with this.

[Denvian]

greywardencommander wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Here is a question... We have heard quite a bit about people being upset about the ending and wanting it changed... but do any of these people believe IT and and still hate the ending?

For the most part the only people who are in the "take back the ending" camp seem to be people who do not think IT is what is going on but I could be wrong

we still think the endings suck the point of IDT is that the endings are a hallucination and the mind throwin off indoctrination. We argue that the 'real endings' are still to come where you wake up after being hit by Harbinger's beam. We are 'retaking Mass Effect' in the sense if intended this is genius but we still need the endings, if it wasn't intended using this means making the endings better without sacrificing anything by just using DLC picking up where you get hit by the beam

In case you didn't see my reply in all that image and 'fake or not fake weekes post' stuff Denvian also in any case here's my DLC idea using IDT and giving us all the variety we want http://social.biowar.../index/10350970 

Oy vey! so much reading to be informed... it makes my back hurt

Modifié par Denvian, 23 mars 2012 - 04:56 .

[Denvian]

greywardencommander wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Here is a question... We have heard quite a bit about people being upset about the ending and wanting it changed... but do any of these people believe IT and and still hate the ending?

For the most part the only people who are in the "take back the ending" camp seem to be people who do not think IT is what is going on but I could be wrong

we still think the endings suck the point of IDT is that the endings are a hallucination and the mind throwin off indoctrination. We argue that the 'real endings' are still to come where you wake up after being hit by Harbinger's beam. We are 'retaking Mass Effect' in the sense if intended this is genius but we still need the endings, if it wasn't intended using this means making the endings better without sacrificing anything by just using DLC picking up where you get hit by the beam

Yeah I can see that.  Of course I had always believed that the ending was coming... of course I can see how you would be upset if you had to pay for a DLC... even if you consider the ending a stroke of genius.

Modifié par Denvian, 23 mars 2012 - 05:01 .

[beank]

Denvian wrote...
Oy vey! so much reading to be informed... it makes my back hurt

I know what you mean.... I have about 10 Youtube videos, 4 articles, and 2 other forums of information im trying absorb....

Im also only on pg20 of this topic....