[quote]EHondaMashButton wrote...
After you beat the game, there's a cutscene suggesting Shepard's story isn't over, and a popup for DLC
telling you the story's not over. And the devs/PR people were all over twitter talking about how theres more to come, big reveletions in store, etc.
before the IT video was even made. [/quote]
Of course "there's more to come"! DLC's of ME3 are scheduled to be produced for a whole year, and of course they will remind you of this fact! The granddaddy never tells you that the "Shepard's story isn't over", what he is asked by the kid is to be told
more stories. granddaddy agrees. Perhaps he's about to tell us about Shep's story when he went to Omega. Etc. It's a general reminder that more content will arrive.
Again, you are overreaching.
[quote]Extra content? Are you referring to the Arrival? Cause I never had that one. The kid surviving the building explosion, the weird nightmares, the weird anderson/illusive man sequence where he somehow controls anderson and controls
you to shoot anderson, the catalyst being the kid, and the fact that he goes from talking about the reapers as things that work for him to saying "We" this and "We" that, and the fact that I remember Control didn't work for TiM or the Protheans separatists and Synthesis didn't work for Saren, was enough to make me question his solution. And that's without any IT video or DLC.[/quote]
Wowowowow. Easy there champ. One thing at a time. So let's clear the air here, because you list so many things that they probably appear to you they have this strange sheer force of numbers. However, when you look at each one of those things, they are based on weak stuff.
For one, the "kid surviving the building explosion" is overreaching. The kid is running away from the husks. He hides himself inside the building and most likely goes directly to the vents. When we reach the building we do realise that the vents are not destroyed. To say that his survival is a hint of some kind of supernatural (indoctrination or etc) event is, again, overreaching. So first one scratched.
For two, weird nightmares are common in humans. Dunno if you are not one of them. And if you happen to kill Eve, or Mordin or Tali, they do speak to you about what they had in mind when you left them dying (or killed them!). This is clearly not indoctrination. It's a symptom of wearing out. It's a symptom of humanity. Scratch two.
For three, it's the illusive man who controls you. He has been tampering with all these crazy techs and has learned new stuff. So he likes to show off. When he is dead, there are no more signs of tampering Shepard. This particular detail is well contained and sufficiently explained. Again, you overreach. Scratch three.
For four, the "catalyst being the kid" is much probably the catalyst being able to speak directly to Shepard's mind, and his subconscious reads it as "the kid". Like in the movie Contact. A way to get Shepard's sympathy. However, there can be other possibilities here. Some have found references of "light beings" who are adamant to protect the galaxy against "synthetics" in ME1 codex from some hidden planet.
HOWEVER, it is patently clear that he is the Catalyst and he is speaking for those who created the Reapers. This is not inconsistent. It's poorly presented and exposed, but it's not inconsistent at all.
For five, Shepard is told that TIM cannot control the reapers because he is already controlled by them. Seems sufficiently well explained. It's silly, but at least consistent. Saren did not want to control the Reapers, you are dreaming here. Saren only wanted to show Sovvy how "useful" organics could be to the Reapers, hoping to be spared in the process (and perhaps sparing other organics too). This has nothing to do with the Synthesis option. Scratch five.
See? Just a bunch of cards aligned like a castle. You thought you had a castle, but someone opened the window and the breeze showed you otherwise.
[quote]Finished or not has no bearing on the developer's intention. EA decided this game was coming out on March 6. Bioware is EA. EA is Bioware. The ending they had at the end of Dec is the ending they were shipping.
What you're doing is not providing evidence against IT, you're dismissing the notion that there are parts of the ending that are more than coincidence. You're lumping shaky anecdotes for IT with solid questions that deserve explanation. And worse, you're putting words in peoples mouths.[/quote]
The problem here is that you deny that the fact that the ending was shipped as is is evidence for my case, when it clearly is. This is blindness. And no, I'm not "putting words", these things are said again and again as if no other explanation could ever be found, when it's so simple that you just have to think two or three seconds.
[quote]I never said said his eyes become huskified. I said he gets TiM eyes. Its deliberate. And its a bit weird no? And I asked for your explanation. You still haven't given one as far as I can tell. All you do is repeat it back to us. So I guess its just a big coincidence, and some dude in the art dept decided it would be cool to create extra work for himself while they were rushing this ending, to create a transition from blue electricity filling brown eyes to perfectly clear TiM eyes that you only notice if you're looking closely.
I never said it was IT. I
asked you what it was, if not IT. Coincidence doesn't cut it.[/quote]
I did explain. It's part of the process of Controlling the reapers. No one needs to say this, the ending itself shows you this. You see too many things where there are none.
[quote]Perfect gods of writing? Where did I writh that or even imply it? This is like having a discussion through telephone tag. You're jumping all over the place. Bioware's writing is NOT bad. Cliche/sappy maybe, but it isn't bad.[/quote]
Of course it is. Just look at the whole Mass Effect 2 plot. What the hell was that all about? I mean, I *know* what it was all about, but it was meh. The game was awesome. Perhaps my favorite. But those Collectors? And T800 at the end? And Harby lines? Come on.
[quote]Mmmkay so they use cliche's all throughout 95% of the game, and steal the ending of Deus Ex. Yet its an illogical leap that they'd steal concepts from the Matrix/Inception/Manchurian Candidate. In a game where half of the baddies MO is indoctrination, and your very first encounter with them is through an indoctrinated Spectre. The guy you replaced. And presumably the guy you worked for in the last game and fight against this game. Yes, it is completely unforseen that they might go after Shepard himself. He/She isn't a valuable asset at all.<_<[/quote]
NO IT WOULDN'T have been a leap, if that was what was SHOWN to us. However, it was NOT. All of those examples, the Matrix, Inception, Manchurian, clearly show the spectator the wall of reality being shattered. Not in Mass Effect 3! The fact that these movies went for that theme is not evidence that Mass Effect did! It is, at most, that such a theme *could have been* put inside ME3. However, it's simply not there. You won't find any ending that will leave this "point" completely unreferenced in it, and somehow that was "what happened after all". This you won't find any examples. And that's perfectly obvious.
[quote]The finale can be canon as is and still be IT or some other non-literal interpretation. "Deep Breath" and "The Stargazer" already tell you the ending isn't 100% what it seems and there's more to come. Or at possibly, "there is no canon, and there are alternate endings to this story." Thats the whole point of "lots of speculation". [/quote]
Sure. I can live with that. However, this falls way short of saying that BioWare will actually release IT ending because that was their plan all along. That further point is what is BS.
[quote]Apparently it doesn't because here we are. If you write a story with subtle clues, then never do the big reveal, those clues become just weird, tidbits. If you lopped of the endings of Vanilla Sky, The Sixth Sense, or Repo Men, we'd be arguing the same points. Some say it was nonsensical rubbish. Others would say its leading somewhere but got cut off somewhere along the way.[/quote]
ROFL. Yeah, let's assume that ME3 is unfinished. Then we can conclude that it *is* unfinished!! I mean, how can I refute this logic? Yes, if you cut off the endings of films, they end up being rubbish. But if the ending of ME3 is rubbish, it does not logically follow that its ending was "cut off". Learn the rules of logic.
[quote]Last time they did something like this, it was at the beginning of tyhe game, and there was a half hour of explanation on how they brought you back. This time half your suit is already burned off, you were just told the weapon was specifically engineered to destroy your kind, and it leaves the question of whether you're still in space, and if not, how you survived re-entry.
There's surviving big explosions and theres surviving explosions visible from space. All jokes aside, nobody is this bad a writer. I could write a more sensical sequence of events than that.[/quote]
You underestimate the power of stupidity too much. Or, alternatively, you cast some writings as being "too stupid" too easily. Shepard could survive the blast. In the final cutscenes, we see that the red ball is either utterly destructive (too low EMS), somewhat destructive (and the soldiers do not wave), little destructive (the soldiers glee) to the organics. Then, we have the ultimate EMS ending, where Shepard wasn't even killed. Now technically, this depends a lot about what kind of "blast" are we talking about, since we do not know the physics involved, it's rather silly to just say that Shepard couldn't have survived it. But what was "it"?
Even if a biggass explosion, there were people who survived nuclear bombs within a few meters of ground zero. Very lucky? Well, so was Shepard in the beggining of ME2.
[quote]You're very good at skipping 5 steps ahead and rebutting a point nobody made. Its not about the RGB at that point, you're lying on the ground somewhere. Why would a perfectly healthy squadmate (evidenced by stepping off the normandy without a scratch), leave the area when harbinger clearly flies off, leaving the beam unprotected? If they assumed you dead, and this is the key to the survival of the galaxy,
they go to the beam. Not back to the Normandy. Not getting outdone by a 60 year old man. Javik ain't leavin. Liara at least scoops up your dead body so she can creepily reanimate you again. The writers who've molded these characters would be like hey, Joker is no coward, this ending is BS.[/quote]
It's worse than that. The scenes where your squadmates were KIA was cut off, but that was clearly the objective. Perhaps they saw the inconsistency of having them KIA and then they show off in the Normandy. Perhaps they never realised of the mistake. I think it's much more probable that this was an oversight. Too much variables and perhaps they were unfortunate not ever to notice this inconsistency. It happens.
[quote]Okay we're finally getting somewhere. You've actually stated your argument, I think. That the ending just sucks. Thats fine. bioware isn't perfect. They're capable of writing a terrible ending. But they would NOT write an ending that completely unravels the relationships and character traits of the characters they've established. At least not the plot-armor important ones (sorry Jacobmancers). [/quote]
The normandy part is yet to be explained. There's a huge hole there that needs filling. There's nothing that hints that this "hole" is "indoctrination filled", since that would create a whole new batch of inconsistencies. For instance, if this blue-red-green choice is within Shep's mind, why is the Normandy fleeing from the rainbowball? Makes no sense. If it was all inside Shep's mind, then the Normandy shouldn't be fleeing from something that is happening in someone's head.
[quote]A literal interpretation doesn't allow for LOTS OF SPECULATION, which is what they wanted. On some level, its purposefully unclear by design. Whether or not you accept that is on you.[/quote]
Of course it does. Did the relays just blow up every system in the galaxy? Did the relays explode in the blue ending? They do not seem to. What happens to the fleet? Did the fleet survive? How will the Rachni survive now? The Krogan? How will Omega live now without any mercenaries? How is Earth going to be rebuilt? How are your comrades dealing with the situation? Were all of them in the Normandy? Or were some left back at Earth?
And so on. LOTS OF SPECULATION.
[quote]I'll clarify. Whether or not you take the events of the finale at face value, the game just "ended." We didn't get a "resolution." [/quote]
That goes without saying. That's the whole issue of the nerdrage for the past weeks.
Retour en haut
