57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Golferguy758]

nyrocron wrote...

On the "rushed ending" argument, a quote by the creator of the final hours app taken from the AMA on reddit:

Nope, I didn't get any sense that they wanted to delay the game launch past March. You have to understand that something like the ending is written months and months before the game is completed....there is so much testing that has to go on.

quoting cause I like that quote. A lot.

[greywardencommander]

Sareth Cousland wrote...

Turbotanden wrote...

Sareth Cousland wrote...

Back on topic, here's one more thing to support the IT: there was no boss fight. Sure, there's no need for a boss fight in every game, but we have Saren in ME1 (immediately after the fight, the game is over), the human reaper in ME2 (meh, but still the game was over almost immediately after that fight), and for the last 15 minutes of a game that is also aimed at action gamers (ME3), there is only dialogue. Guys, that IS the boss fight - the first mental end-battle in videogame history. Shepard vs. Harbinger.

At least I hope it is.

I think that (if IT is true) is the best boss fight ever in a video game. God damn I still get angry at myself from time to time for not listening to the part of me saying "things here don't add up, something is wrong!" and not choosing the Destroy ending the first time.

My excuse is the outcry over the ending. I took everything starchild said at face value and just thought "ow... bad writing indeed". I chose between control and destroy, and as I did not want to destroy the geth and thought it would be more merciful to control the reapers, who were still alive, than to destroy them, I chose the control option. But I never considered that there may be an unreliable conversation partner (starchild) speaking with my Shepard. In Dragon Age: Origins, I quickly learned that nothing is as it seems, but the ME universe was quite straightforward so far, so I was not too suspicious. Still, the fact that Anderson stood for destroy, TIM for control, and the harmless-looking guilt-complex kid was the avatar of the catalyst should have raised suspicions. Interesting that they didn't, I can't quite explain why.

read my signature thread about the psychology of why we shouldn't trust him purely based on the endings presented (not even taking into account the fact he says he controls the reapers who you've been fighting since day one thus could be spealing bs and clearly is because you survive not that the latter proves IT just a point I like to emphasise)

[Hunter_Wolf]

Sareth Cousland wrote...

TIM for control, and the harmless-looking guilt-complex kid was the avatar of the catalyst should have raised suspicions. Interesting that they didn't, I can't quite explain why.

Oh no, it did. And it still does. It's a major proponent to the theory as a whole, kind of the spark that got people searching for clues.

[Apollo-XL5]

Hers something to think about

Has anyone noticed that once aboard the citadel, the locations and layout make no sense. I mean when you enter the chasym(the area with the bridge, with the section that looks like it is from the shadow brokers ship). IT looks like it goes round in a complete circle like the presidium. But once you enter the control room overlooking the wards it isnt.

PLus it appears that the control room is in the presidium tower, but when the platform takes shepard up, he suddenly finds himself on the back of the citadel where the cruciblr docked. IF the locations were as they should be, then shep would been taken by the to the top of the tower where soverign parked his ass in ME1.

So it must be a dream becuase the layout of the citadel lookd like something you would see in inception.

Indoc theory strengthed

[Kelwing]

Doubtful Thessia would get hit as hard as Earth(human race to be harvested) or Palaven(biggest military in galaxy) but the Asari in the own right would be a force to be reckoned with on the ground. Plus being hit later, I give them more of a chance over Humans and Turians when it comes to loss of life.

[zakaryzb]

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

MarkasLin wrote...

The asari did not have the Prothean Cipher that Shepard has. The VI only appeared because it thought Shepard was a prothean.

It also could have had something to do with the Prothean who may or may not have been standing next to him. 

What? no one payed for that DLC... ok maybe I did... don't judge me.

You also get Javik free with the CE

Yeah, that's how I got him.  No way I was passing up a bunch of extra weapons and some new outfits for my squad.  Oh, and there was the whole "exclusive character and mission" stuff.  Turns out it wasn't that exclusive.  I just finished ME3 BTW and I chose Destroy, of course. That stuff about how you can hear Mark Meer and Jennifer Hale's voices synced with Star-Brat is true.  Also, that stuff about Shepard moving faster in the Destroy scene is also true.  We all knew that one, but I thought I should put it out there. 

But we also see Shepard SPRINTING towards the beam if you choose the "Synthesis" ending...

[greywardencommander]

Golferguy758 wrote...

nyrocron wrote...

On the "rushed ending" argument, a quote by the creator of the final hours app taken from the AMA on reddit:

Nope, I didn't get any sense that they wanted to delay the game launch past March. You have to understand that something like the ending is written months and months before the game is completed....there is so much testing that has to go on.

quoting cause I like that quote. A lot.

I like that too - indoctrination/hallucination theory is real because it wouldn't have been removed re. indoctrination because of gameplay mechanic otherwise if they edited everything over the outcry on the 'leaked scripts' and the fact there's no difference so if they 'rushed and changed the endings' it would still all be there and they'd still want him indoctrinated (or to fight it at least)...

they wanted the outcry they wanted the attention, they wanted everyone to see the ending and think about it until a reveal because it being in the real world makes sense as a powerful plot twist,

you are Shepard, you see and hear everything he does if Shepard doesn't  realise you're being indoctrinated and influenced you don't see it. Not until the end when he's supposed too (regardless of subtle hints) the final hurdle, fall or jump over it and beat the Reapers
Thus for the twist to have ANY meaning, you need to be indoctrinated too...

what if the 'delay' was to line up with a Pax reveal for more impact? What if the 'delay' was because they wanted to work out the PR aspect and the magnitude of 'tricking' the player?

Modifié par greywardencommander, 26 mars 2012 - 09:55 .

[Dwailing]

zakaryzb wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

MarkasLin wrote...

The asari did not have the Prothean Cipher that Shepard has. The VI only appeared because it thought Shepard was a prothean.

It also could have had something to do with the Prothean who may or may not have been standing next to him. 

What? no one payed for that DLC... ok maybe I did... don't judge me.

You also get Javik free with the CE

Yeah, that's how I got him.  No way I was passing up a bunch of extra weapons and some new outfits for my squad.  Oh, and there was the whole "exclusive character and mission" stuff.  Turns out it wasn't that exclusive.  I just finished ME3 BTW and I chose Destroy, of course. That stuff about how you can hear Mark Meer and Jennifer Hale's voices synced with Star-Brat is true.  Also, that stuff about Shepard moving faster in the Destroy scene is also true.  We all knew that one, but I thought I should put it out there. 

But we also see Shepard SPRINTING towards the beam if you choose the "Synthesis" ending...

That is true.  Wasnt' there a counter argument to that that I just can't remember right now?

[Hunter_Wolf]

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

Hers something to think about

Has anyone noticed that once aboard the citadel, the locations and layout make no sense. I mean when you enter the chasym(the area with the bridge, with the section that looks like it is from the shadow brokers ship). IT looks like it goes round in a complete circle like the presidium. But once you enter the control room overlooking the wards it isnt.

PLus it appears that the control room is in the presidium tower, but when the platform takes shepard up, he suddenly finds himself on the back of the citadel where the cruciblr docked. IF the locations were as they should be, then shep would been taken by the to the top of the tower where soverign parked his ass in ME1.

So it must be a dream becuase the layout of the citadel lookd like something you would see in inception.

Indoc theory strengthed

Well the location of that portion of the Citadel, while not necessarily proving or denying the possibility, is just a different part of it. Regardless if it's real or not, I always thought it was an inverted portion. That you're outside the Citadel's Council Tower since it's base pretty much starts some hundred feet beneath you and continues out opposite of the direction you float up to. 


But that whole place was odd, suddenly they got floating platforms?

[Baal Sagoth]

Another thing that favors IDT is IDT itself.

I mean the fact that we were able to pull it off. It wasn't possible with ME1 or ME2. If you want to end something in definite way you just simply do it. What is the purpose of obvious clues like Paragon/Renegade color swich?

I also refuse to believe in "lazy writing" argument. It is hard to believe that writers who wrote such touching stories (Quarian/Geth plot, Krogan plot), who paid so much attention to details (mentiond Mordin's gun) and holo-kid voice (they recorded 3 different actors just for this relatively short scene, it was a lot easier to record only kid's voice and remaster it for spooky effect), wrote such plot-hole crap.

And if someone says "they run out of time" wasn't it better to just let Shep get to console, fire up Crucible, destroy Reapers and Mass Relays (Lots of speculation for everyone still)? Yes fans still would be upset (where are my different endings?) but it would be easier for BW to come down and said: "It was misunderstanding. Whole ME3 is ending of trilogy. You get main plots resolved (Krogans, Geth - true), it was your personal story - true etc. as we promised."

And I'm sure that fans would be less enraged/angry in that situation than what we currently got (1 ending with 3 colors). If they run out of time/budget and they knew that they wont be able to deliver promised multi endings they must have know it will has consequences. So why not  try to minimalize them?

If You look closely EA/BW has done nothing to calm down fanbase. Only vague PR talk statements and that verid message: "Play the game, see how it is. Let more people finish the game then we will talk about endings". Why? For what reason? To avoid spoilers? Heck, endings are discussed everwhere. I'm afraid to open the fridge 'cause there may be some endings rant inside;). Why they care so much to let people finish the game, discuss, speculate?

[njfluffy19]

Hunter_Wolf wrote...

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

Hers something to think about

Has anyone noticed that once aboard the citadel, the locations and layout make no sense. I mean when you enter the chasym(the area with the bridge, with the section that looks like it is from the shadow brokers ship). IT looks like it goes round in a complete circle like the presidium. But once you enter the control room overlooking the wards it isnt.

PLus it appears that the control room is in the presidium tower, but when the platform takes shepard up, he suddenly finds himself on the back of the citadel where the cruciblr docked. IF the locations were as they should be, then shep would been taken by the to the top of the tower where soverign parked his ass in ME1.

So it must be a dream becuase the layout of the citadel lookd like something you would see in inception.

Indoc theory strengthed

Well the location of that portion of the Citadel, while not necessarily proving or denying the possibility, is just a different part of it. Regardless if it's real or not, I always thought it was an inverted portion. That you're outside the Citadel's Council Tower since it's base pretty much starts some hundred feet beneath you and continues out opposite of the direction you float up to. 


But that whole place was odd, suddenly they got floating platforms?

Who knows? Not like it isn't possible. Saren flew around on a hoverboard.

Modifié par njfluffy19, 26 mars 2012 - 09:56 .

[greywardencommander]

Dwailing wrote...

zakaryzb wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

MarkasLin wrote...

The asari did not have the Prothean Cipher that Shepard has. The VI only appeared because it thought Shepard was a prothean.

It also could have had something to do with the Prothean who may or may not have been standing next to him. 

What? no one payed for that DLC... ok maybe I did... don't judge me.

You also get Javik free with the CE

Yeah, that's how I got him.  No way I was passing up a bunch of extra weapons and some new outfits for my squad.  Oh, and there was the whole "exclusive character and mission" stuff.  Turns out it wasn't that exclusive.  I just finished ME3 BTW and I chose Destroy, of course. That stuff about how you can hear Mark Meer and Jennifer Hale's voices synced with Star-Brat is true.  Also, that stuff about Shepard moving faster in the Destroy scene is also true.  We all knew that one, but I thought I should put it out there. 

But we also see Shepard SPRINTING towards the beam if you choose the "Synthesis" ending...

That is true.  Wasnt' there a counter argument to that that I just can't remember right now?

he shouldn't move freely in any of them, he becomes resistant, back straight defiant in destroy, in synthesis he is embracing the idea by sprinting and DIVING into the new world, in control he well he basically electrecutes himself, he freely kils himself in those two because he embraces the indoctrination thus his merge with the Reapers. In the destroy he is defiant, he embraces the fact he will die (like HP) but will end the threat once and for all for them all to make their own destiny, Organics AND synthetics because he knows he's lying and trying to trick you into saving the Reapers even if he thinks it's real.

He does in all of them so in any case he shouldn't move feely it's the MANNER that's important.

Modifié par greywardencommander, 26 mars 2012 - 10:00 .

[waldstr18]

by the way, your theory implies that bioware intended to sell us a not finished game and to make us pay for the ending via dlc?

and you are ok with that? so actually what you are saying is, the indoctrination plot is so ingenious that you are willing to buy dlc to actually finish the game?

i think you are the ones who are indoctrinated.

oh, and its also quite offensive to bioware in my opinion, since you are accusing them of being greedy and willing to take advantage of their fans. just a thought though.

[Golferguy758]

Baal Sagoth wrote...

Another thing that favors IDT is IDT itself.

I mean the fact that we were able to pull it off. It wasn't possible with ME1 or ME2. If you want to end something in definite way you just simply do it. What is the purpose of obvious clues like Paragon/Renegade color swich?

I also refuse to believe in "lazy writing" argument. It is hard to believe that writers who wrote such touching stories (Quarian/Geth plot, Krogan plot), who paid so much attention to details (mentiond Mordin's gun) and holo-kid voice (they recorded 3 different actors just for this relatively short scene, it was a lot easier to record only kid's voice and remaster it for spooky effect), wrote such plot-hole crap.

And if someone says "they run out of time" wasn't it better to just let Shep get to console, fire up Crucible, destroy Reapers and Mass Relays (Lots of speculation for everyone still)? Yes fans still would be upset (where are my different endings?) but it would be easier for BW to come down and said: "It was misunderstanding. Whole ME3 is ending of trilogy. You get main plots resolved (Krogans, Geth - true), it was your personal story - true etc. as we promised."

And I'm sure that fans would be less enraged/angry in that situation than what we currently got (1 ending with 3 colors). If they run out of time/budget and they knew that they wont be able to deliver promised multi endings they must have know it will has consequences. So why not  try to minimalize them?

If You look closely EA/BW has done nothing to calm down fanbase. Only vague PR talk statements and that verid message: "Play the game, see how it is. Let more people finish the game then we will talk about endings". Why? For what reason? To avoid spoilers? Heck, endings are discussed everwhere. I'm afraid to open the fridge 'cause there may be some endings rant inside;). Why they care so much to let people finish the game, discuss, speculate?

I actualyl found an ending rant going through my trash this morning. Jerk tore up the bag and spilled everything =/

[greywardencommander]

waldstr18 wrote...

by the way, your theory implies that bioware intended to sell us a not finished game and to make us pay for the ending via dlc?

and you are ok with that? so actually what you are saying is, the indoctrination plot is so ingenious that you are willing to buy dlc to actually finish the game?

i think you are the ones who are indoctrinated.

oh, and its also quite offensive to bioware in my opinion, since you are accusing them of being greedy and willing to take advantage of their fans. just a thought though.

our theory (if it's deliberate) is it's accounted for in the budget of the game thus is released for free either through massive updates and patches or free DLC (like beyond the sky)

Even if it's not free Bioware and EA were accused of greed long before, Bioware are sellouts etc after ME2 has been spouted long before ME3 so that point is moot really.

Modifié par greywardencommander, 26 mars 2012 - 10:03 .

[Golferguy758]

waldstr18 wrote...

by the way, your theory implies that bioware intended to sell us a not finished game and to make us pay for the ending via dlc?

and you are ok with that? so actually what you are saying is, the indoctrination plot is so ingenious that you are willing to buy dlc to actually finish the game?

i think you are the ones who are indoctrinated.

oh, and its also quite offensive to bioware in my opinion, since you are accusing them of being greedy and willing to take advantage of their fans. just a thought though.

>implying the ending would cost money. You don't know that it will or won't. Or even if the theory is true or not

[Tiax Rules All]

waldstr18 wrote...

by the way, your theory implies that bioware intended to sell us a not finished game and to make us pay for the ending via dlc?

and you are ok with that? so actually what you are saying is, the indoctrination plot is so ingenious that you are willing to buy dlc to actually finish the game?

i think you are the ones who are indoctrinated.

oh, and its also quite offensive to bioware in my opinion, since you are accusing them of being greedy and willing to take advantage of their fans. just a thought though.

pff whatever. this "point" comes up all the time and has very little to do with IDT.

anyways people here have accused them of greed LONG before this game was released. why so diff now? So yes i do believe they would do this. The "evil" or "greed" in it is an opinion.

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 26 mars 2012 - 10:03 .

[Hunter_Wolf]

Baal Sagoth wrote...

Another thing that favors IDT is IDT itself.

I still don't understand how some people actually hate Indoctrination and believe it's not a legitimate plot device. I think it works perfectly and if this is theory is true, Bioware is in the process of concluding a great-telling of a story.

I mean the fact that we were able to pull it off. It wasn't possible with ME1 or ME2. If you want to end something in definite way you just simply do it. What is the purpose of obvious clues like Paragon/Renegade color swich?

I agree. I always wondered the strengths of indoctrination how it could sway a character where Shepard, who still only human but a lucky man who gets the job done when it's expected of him, manages to resist. So in ME1 and ME2, we never got to look at Indoctrination from Shepard's point of view when enduring it's affects - up until The Arrival where Shepard literally passes out. 

Not to mention Indoctrination has always been a theme in Mass Effect, it's been the Reaper's most powerful weapon as Vigil states it itself that Reapers are not indestructible. Which we goto prove in ME1 by defeating Sovereign. In my opinion, there's no better way to conclude the saga than to give Shepard a true trial that puts him through the same hardship that Saren and now TIM have been through. 


And then there's Miranda's father who claims he figured out a weakness. Well, what is it? I always thought it was a matter of organic minds, when subjected to it little by little, become immune - slowly growing to adapt and resist it's affects. Now so far nothing has proven resistant and even Shepard with his dreams gets affected by it. Saren also said that it becomes stronger with the more force the Reaper exerts. So what is the weakness and how can it lead to their defeat?

[Hunter_Wolf]

waldstr18 wrote...

by the way, your theory implies that bioware intended to sell us a not finished game and to make us pay for the ending via dlc?

Unfortunately this is the industry for you. Valde did it with Half Life 2 and shortly a while ago Ubisoft has also tried with Assassin's Creed 2. That's business for you, the unfortunate outcome but that's seemingly the undeniable direction it may have been heading in.

waldstr18 wrote...
oh, and its also quite offensive to bioware in my opinion, since you are accusing them of being greedy and willing to take advantage of their fans. just a thought though.

 

Well that is the unfortunate fact of life in the business industry of gaming. Nobody is perfect. So yes, that is exactly what will be said if IT is proven real. 

IMO, and in all honesty, paying for additional content is alright as long as it's done right. If it's crappy and limited then I can understand - if it weren't for ME2's finished status I felt the Arrival was actually quite terrible.

Modifié par Hunter_Wolf, 26 mars 2012 - 10:09 .

[N7xELITE]

Dwailing wrote...

N7xELITE wrote...

 THE REAPERS WON.





http://ts1.mm.bing.n...d09374 NOOOOOOO

Wouldn't it be cool if there was a Renegade interupt to Sparta kick Star-Brat off the side of the Citadel?  I would have taken that in a heartbeat. 

Same here 

[Baal Sagoth]

It is something different to cut out squadmate, tell that he wasn't made during development process and sell him. Yea it is greedy but people may move along with that.

But cutting ending and trying to sell it is something different. I don't think that even EA or Acti could go for that.

I wont buy any ending DLC (even if it is IDT one). I refuse to approve cutting game to pieces and selling them separatedly.

[greywardencommander]

Hunter_Wolf wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

by the way, your theory implies that bioware intended to sell us a not finished game and to make us pay for the ending via dlc?

Unfortunately this is the industry for you. Valde did it with Half Life 2 and shortly a while ago Ubisoft has also tried with Assassin's Creed 2. That's business for you, the unfortunate outcome but that's seemingly the undeniable direction it may have been heading in.

Bioware did it themselves with Awakening an expansion after the game but DA2 took it into account.
Bioware also did it already with Arrival, it's retconned anyway (it happened) regardless of Shepard was or wasn't there
Assassins Creed Brotherhood & Revelations are expansions of AC2 (it was meant to be a trilogy and still is really) because they say 'it's not AC3' for both and both are excellent well polished games in their own right both story and mechanics wise.

[greywardencommander]

Hunter_Wolf wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

by the way, your theory implies that bioware intended to sell us a not finished game and to make us pay for the ending via dlc?

Unfortunately this is the industry for you. Valde did it with Half Life 2 and shortly a while ago Ubisoft has also tried with Assassin's Creed 2. That's business for you, the unfortunate outcome but that's seemingly the undeniable direction it may have been heading in.

Bioware did it themselves with Awakening an expansion after the game but DA2 took it into account.
Bioware also did it already with Arrival, it's retconned anyway (it happened) regardless of Shepard was or wasn't there
Assassins Creed Brotherhood & Revelations are expansions of AC2 (it was meant to be a trilogy and still is really) because they say 'it's not AC3' for both and both are excellent well polished games in their own right both story and mechanics wise.

[Hunter_Wolf]

Baal Sagoth wrote...
But cutting ending and trying to sell it is something different. I don't think that even EA or Acti could go for that.

Well unfortunately, that's the reality. Publishers are in this for the money. And in the industry, time costs money. So if ME3 took another six months to complete fully, it would of cost loads of millions of dollars to do it. And I would entirely support that direction, I believe in quality > quantity. But that's portraying said companies in a light that they just aren't. 

The truth is, they exist because you pay them money. It's the circle of life for the gaming industry.

Modifié par Hunter_Wolf, 26 mars 2012 - 10:14 .

[greywardencommander]

Baal Sagoth wrote...

It is something different to cut out squadmate, tell that he wasn't made during development process and sell him. Yea it is greedy but people may move along with that.

But cutting ending and trying to sell it is something different. I don't think that even EA or Acti could go for that.

I wont buy any ending DLC (even if it is IDT one). I refuse to approve cutting game to pieces and selling them separatedly.

who says anything about 'buy' ME1 had free DLC