187 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkDragon777]

Akka le Vil wrote...

That's still a pretty retarded scenario.
Why would the Reaper need to genocide societies to find a solution ? Why couldn't just they culture-build themselve through DNA samples and analysis ? Why do they need to harvest people and not just grow a brain in a jar ?
I mean, seriously, we're talking about super-advanced aliens that can't manage such a simple thing ?

(and WTF about "running out of time", they spent millions years doing nothing in the void of space and they suddendly are pressed by time ?)

 1. Because many species wouldn't cooperate with what they deemed to be a threat in the first place
 2. ?
 3. I don't think a sentient starship could grow a brain in a jar - sorry.  And is not like they know what the exact combination of DNA is neede to counter the Dark Energy....
 4. Well - the dark energy is spreading quickly - and it takes time for species to evolve and form a galactic civilization.....

Modifié par DarkDragon777, 24 mars 2012 - 08:59 .

[xsdob]

Neither, stick with the reapers wanting to make sure that one society does not conquer and stagnated the other like the protheans did, or that species who have developed faster than others don't destroy the natural order of things, like the salarians and krogans.

Make them the care takers of the galaxy, making sure that the forces that govern the natural world can still be applied to the galactic community.

[ItsFreakinJesus]

Indoctrination Theory. Have Shepard fight off Indoctrination and lead to the real endings.

The whole "Dark Energy" thing should've just been used to explain the Reapers harvesting stars to either power themselves or to create Mass Relay power sources so they can have more Relays in more systems.

[Wingnight]

Easily the Dark energy ending.
But if Bioware don't want to change the ending, they could "expand" it with the Indoctrination theory, and I would be okay with that.

In a perfect world, Bioware would implement the Indoctrination theory(Which is not an ending, actually), and use the Dark energy ending as the "actual" ending.

[OdanUrr]

Wingnight wrote...

Easily the Dark energy ending.
But if Bioware don't want to change the ending, they could "expand" it with the Indoctrination theory, and I would be okay with that.

In a perfect world, Bioware would implement the Indoctrination theory(Which is not an ending, actually), and use the Dark energy ending as the "actual" ending.

That would be just wrong in so many levels. It would be so contrived beyond the point of credulity. They give us an ending that's not the real one, just one that you imagined (for X reason), so that if you do wake up (1 in 9 chances of that according to IT), you get a different ending that will probably amount to a binary choice anyway. Where does the circle end?

[Anareth]

I liked better in ME2 when they harvested organics to evolve and reproduce, no further explanation necessary

[Ulicus]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Ulicus wrote...

They probably would have. But not nearly as much as they have for the explanation they went with.

Nearly as much I think.  I think it was a very much damned if they do damned if the don't situation for them.

In which case they should have gone with no explanation. Better to be damned without introducing gaping holes that essentially ruin the Reapers and, by extension, the overaching narrative of the entire trilogy.

At least IMO.

Modifié par Ulicus, 24 mars 2012 - 09:48 .

[twaninator]

I actually thought the dark energy ending sounded like a really cool idea when I read it. Of course there are many 'how' and 'why' questions that would have needed to be addressed, but the final choice seems rather compelling.

[UrgentArchengel]

The one where we don't end up in a dark age.

[SovereignWillReturn]

Dark Energy.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

evil-pineapples wrote...

Dark energy ending can be found here: http://xbox360.ign.c.../1221492p1.html

Frankly, indoc theory is a sad attempt to polish a turd. If true, it offers even less closure than the current ending, which is a feat. It would feel like another stupid "twist" ending just for the sake of it.

The dark energy ending is more consistent with the feel of Mass Effect (especially when it comes to the final choice, a true Paragon/Renegade option) as well as more satisfying on an intellectual and emotional level.

The URl does not link to anything about dark enery. Does anyone ahve alink to something that discusses that ending?

The article linked does, however, have dissenting second opinions by IGN staff, which is nice to see.

[Akka le Vil]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

 1. Because many species wouldn't cooperate with what they deemed to be a threat in the first place

WTH do they need cooperation to begin with ?
Just send some probes to take some DNA sample. You don't need a war nor liquefy entire people for that.

3. I don't think a sentient starship could grow a brain in a jar - sorry.  And is not like they know what the exact combination of DNA is neede to counter the Dark Energy....

What, DNA culture too complex for a civilization that is supposed to be thousand of years ahead than ours ? I'm sorry ?

ItsFreakinJesus wrote...

The
whole "Dark Energy" thing should've just been used to explain the
Reapers harvesting stars to either power themselves or to create Mass
Relay power sources so they can have more Relays in more
systems.

Well, in fact I thought that the Dark Energy thing was going to be the breakthrough necessary to make a weapon to fight the Reapers. It would have been unoriginal, but at least grounded in the game with a bit of foreshadowing and certainly much less stupid and cliché than the miracle-weapon-from-a-hat that we got.

In this scenario, I thought that the Reapers would simply have been programmed IA with a flaw in their fundamental routine - like the Third Law of the Robotic that would have had a loophole allowing for it to bypass the two others. Would have prefered this to the two other stupid possibilities.

[Radwar]

Indoc theory. I want to continue the fight & know what happends when Shepard wakes up after defeating indoctrination and then of course, seeing the real ending.

[Archer]

Neither.
I love logging in daily and seeing another 20 threads that start with the words Indoc theory

Can we go for a new theory just to break it up?

Here's mine.

All of Mass Effect was a drunken tale told by Varric to Hawke one night in the hanged man. But the twist is, Varric doesnt realise that he himself is a fictional character in a story being told by a purple pig man who lives on the darkside of the moon, to an orange girafe monster thats made of lego.

Any Good?

[Lookout1390]

Indoctrination theory

There is already so much in the game that supports this, and it really doesn't sound all that far-fetched.

For awhile there, I thought bioware was on the edge of the biggest mind-blowing story twist of the century.

But it appears they think the current ending is good enough.

[evil-pineapples]

Shinian2 wrote...

evil-pineapples wrote...

Dark energy ending can be found here: http://xbox360.ign.c.../1221492p1.html

Frankly, indoc theory is a sad attempt to polish a turd. If true, it offers even less closure than the current ending, which is a feat. It would feel like another stupid "twist" ending just for the sake of it.

The dark energy ending is more consistent with the feel of Mass Effect (especially when it comes to the final choice, a true Paragon/Renegade option) as well as more satisfying on an intellectual and emotional level.

The URl does not link to anything about dark enery. Does anyone ahve alink to something that discusses that ending?

The article linked does, however, have dissenting second opinions by IGN staff, which is nice to see.

Sorry. I was reading two articles and I copypasta'd the wrong one. Here: http://www.strategyi...ffect-3-endings

[Seanze329]

I think the iondoctrination would be better. However it would only be good it if they release dlc to finish the fight against the reapers and either fail or succeed and such. With a proper epilogue to show what happens to the characters and see the effect of the battle. I also think it would be interesting to see what happens if you get indoctrinated.

[Heimdall]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Well, in fact I thought that the Dark Energy thing was going to be the breakthrough necessary to make a weapon to fight the Reapers.

Well, funny you should say that.  The codex says something about the Crucible utilizing dark energy for some purpose...

[Red Viking]

After thinking about it, I don't think the Dark Energy plot is necessarily better just because BioWare went with something else. If it was the rampant use of the galaxy's technology that was causing the decay and the Reapers' entire motivation was to stop it, why leave the technology intact for every cycle to use? Why not just tell the races that using this stuff was causing the premature death of the entire galaxy?

Granted, there's alot of the original plot we don't know, but those are two big plotholes I can think of.

Modifié par Red Viking, 25 mars 2012 - 01:14 .

[tyranolol]

I think the indoctrination theory is the clue of the ending and, i think too, they are going to make the same thing of Prince of Persia... an open ending and if you want the true ending you must pay 10$ on DLC. Thanks EA!

[Lee T]

The dark energy was supposed to be the real ending, but as I understand ME3 doesn't build on the foreshadowing included in ME1 and ME2 making it moot (it could have been an interesting ending should ME3 had been built to lead to that point).

The IT isn't an ending, it's just a way to cleverly invalidate the current post beam scene and open to another ending currently left to our imaginations (and as I believe it will not be followed by Bioware, will be left to our imaginations).

[Bubalo]

 I think dark energy had more potential, I made a thread discussing my thoughts a few days ago.
If you're interested here it is, kinda long - social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10339309

[Oldbones2]

Either would have been fine if Bioware would have planned them from the start.

As it stands I guess Indoctrination would fit better now.

I still don't believe in it though.

[DoomMech]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Dark Energy but it needed to be made a more imediate and recognisable threat to work.

I agree. What Bioware could have done is start out with news segments of weird stuff happening: stars imploding for no reason, whole planets disappearing off the face of the galaxy, black holes popping into existance and then vanishing in the span of a day, etc. 

Then you start experiencing this for yourself, maybe sudden devastation of a planet full of Cerberus dudes who's asses you were in the process of kicking brought on by the sun exploding.

You know, like a side plot that gradually fuses with the main plot and synergises (see what I did there?) toward the end.

[DoomMech]

Oldbones2 wrote...

Either would have been fine if Bioware would have planned them from the start.

As it stands I guess Indoctrination would fit better now.

I still don't believe in it though.

I think Bioware had a contingency for both. I is equally possible to have either, because the concept of indoctrination has been around since Mass Effect Uno, and dark energy was referenced in Dos several times. In other words, FORESHADOWING!!!!1

I guess when it came time to decide which was going to be the epic conclusion, the writing team flipped a coin and it landed on it's side.<_<