300 réponses à ce sujet

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

[TSA_383]

Dendio1 wrote...

The devs originally planned to have shepard clearly indoctrinated. The plan was scrapped because the mechanics were too difficult to pull off. The arrival dlc hints at this development. And the final hours app confirms it.

Even though they could not get the indoctrination to work, the elements of it are shown throughout the game. However its not as obvious because the logical climax was scrapped. There is no event where the game clearly reveals shepard being indoctrinated. As a result some speculate shepard's weird dreams are the result of built up stress, but I believe they were part of the original indoctrination plan. It makes more sense to devote those resources towards a big IT reveal than to make those scenes just because war is hell.

Star kid speaks oddly and motivates shepard towards control and synthesis. Starkid makes destroy out to be a bad choice. I believe these are relics of the original indoctrination plans. The whole final scene is so jarring because there is no build up to the kid appearing outside of the dream world. If the indoc plan was carried out it would be a little more expected.

Bottom line though, even without indoctrination we have enough evidence that destroy is the right choice and control/ synthesis is a red herring.

Control:
You will die. You will control us, but you will lose everything you have.

Hidden message= you will gain control, but you will lose it along with everything you have.
Net effect= disintegration and no control

Synthesis
And there will be peace?
The cycle will end, synthesis is the final evolution of life ( reapers are the final evolution of life and organic/synthetic)

Net effect= everyone is reaper like
Peace not guaranteed or even mentioned by star kid.

So, as you see, even without indoctrinations the choices still follow the same dynamic.

Not sure what you're trying to say here?
There's suggestion... and they try to trick you into making the wrong choice... but no indoctrination?
What you've suggested is indoctrination, it's all about suggestion, that's just sort of what it does

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

I'm assuming that it will "clarify" what we saw, and add "extended scenes"

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

I'm assuming that it will "clarify" what we saw, and add "extended scenes"

You assume it will support IT.

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

you keep assuming it won't. I hope it will, I believe it will, but I might be wrong. We shall see.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

I'm assuming that it will "clarify" what we saw, and add "extended scenes"

You assume it will support IT.

I'm assuming that it will "clarify" what we saw, and add "extended scenes". Which IT predicted, I'm not saying it will support IT. But that IT said this would happen.

[CavScout]

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

you keep assuming it won't. I hope it will, I believe it will, but I might be wrong. We shall see.

You confuse possible and probable.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

I'm assuming that it will "clarify" what we saw, and add "extended scenes"

You assume it will support IT.

I'm assuming that it will "clarify" what we saw, and add "extended scenes". Which IT predicted, I'm not saying it will support IT. But that IT said this would happen.

IT did no such thing...

[N7Gold]

I hope you're right about this.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

I'm assuming that it will "clarify" what we saw, and add "extended scenes"

You assume it will support IT.

I'm assuming that it will "clarify" what we saw, and add "extended scenes". Which IT predicted, I'm not saying it will support IT. But that IT said this would happen.

IT did no such thing...

Yes it did, IT has always said that it needs a DLC to wrap up the story. and that's what we're getting with the EC.

Modifié par balance5050, 12 mai 2012 - 07:41 .

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

ME3 doesn't have this and is pretty big clue that it's not using the same technique.

That's why the EC is coming out.

Again, not like the game everyone keeps point to. And you keep assuming the EC will contain IT....

you keep assuming it won't. I hope it will, I believe it will, but I might be wrong. We shall see.

You confuse possible and probable.

Nope.

[Pelle6666]

Nice! It might also have something to do with the leaked script for the original ending and that made BW make this ending so that they could expand it without changing the release date.
What I find disturbing is that BW have said that no post ending is planned which makes me a bit unsure that this theory is correct even if I would love if it was.

[Gyroscopic_Trout]

There's also the escape from Candlekeep towards the end of Baldur's Gate 1.

(Spoilers)

The player is framed for murder and taken to prison. Upon escaping it is discovered that many of the townsfolk have been replaced by doppelgangers, who, as you escape through the sewers will try to trick and/or taunt you before attacking.

When you get to the exit, you encounter your mentor, who died in the first half hour of the game. He claims that you've murdered all your friends, that they weren't doppelgangers, and you've apparently gone mad and everything else up to this point in the game has all been a dream. Then he too turns into a doppelganger.

It was a fun little bit of mind fudgery, though I'm still not sure it or NWN apply to ME3.

[hammerfan]

balance5050 wrote...

hammerfan wrote...

Zombie Chow wrote...


It was a Dungeons & Dragons fantasy RPG, where at one point you confront an advanced civilisation of psychic Mind Flayers, ruled by a giant Elder Brain.  You can choose to negotiate with it, but if you try to attack, it psychically creates an illusion that makes you think you've won the war, ended up in a small idyllic forest, with a charming hostess inviting you to a celebration (to my recollection, it's been years since I played this).  If you accept, the credits roll exactly as if you completed the game.

Not quite, if you accept you get a "game over you are now a mindflayer thrall." message.

If you attack the Elder Brain, it will suddenly trap you inside an illusion where you are waking up from a dream. If you accept it, you get the non-standard game over, that you mentioned.

Right, the non-standard game over. The OP says "the credits roll exactly as if you completed the game." which, as I said, not quite accurate.

That distinction is what I was trying to point out.

Modifié par hammerfan, 12 mai 2012 - 08:13 .

[balance5050]

hammerfan wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

hammerfan wrote...

Zombie Chow wrote...


It was a Dungeons & Dragons fantasy RPG, where at one point you confront an advanced civilisation of psychic Mind Flayers, ruled by a giant Elder Brain.  You can choose to negotiate with it, but if you try to attack, it psychically creates an illusion that makes you think you've won the war, ended up in a small idyllic forest, with a charming hostess inviting you to a celebration (to my recollection, it's been years since I played this).  If you accept, the credits roll exactly as if you completed the game.

Not quite, if you accept you get a "game over you are now a mindflayer thrall." message.

If you attack the Elder Brain, it will suddenly trap you inside an illusion where you are waking up from a dream. If you accept it, you get the non-standard game over, that you mentioned.

Right, the non-standard game over. The OP says "the credits roll exactly as if you completed the game." which, as I said, not quite accurate.

That distinction is what I was trying to point out.

To be fair the OP said his memory was fuzzy on it.

I was just elaborating on what you said.

[MaximizedAction]

Gosh, just read the OP and unfortunately didn't play NVN or DA:Om so I didn't know they've done something like this before..
Though I'm now a bit ashamed of initially having doubted Bioware's abilities, I wonder, if so many here are 'real' Bioware fans, why was the BSN flooded mostly with rage posts back in March?
DA:O doesn't seem so old that most would've forgotten it.

[unoriginalname1133]

 I hope you're right, OP. Maybe I'm just deluding myself, but I still can't see how Bioware (a by-word for quality) could have screwed up this badly with the ending. That said, they may have indeed left compelling clues, but they didn't leave proof. Setting us up for getting our minds blown or whatever is not worth what they are putting us and themselves through with all this waiting

Modifié par unoriginalname1133, 12 mai 2012 - 08:30 .

[estebanus]

Wow... This more or less just blew my mind!!!

I guess one can't say that "Bioware would never be smart enough to pull something like that off!" anymore. They've already done it once, haven't they?

This is just... I mean... wow... just. WOW.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
IT did no such thing...

Yes it did, IT has always said that it needs a DLC to wrap up the story. and that's what we're getting with the EC.

IT says there is no ending in the game as it stands, not that the current ending needs some expansion. Stop making things up.

[CavScout]

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You confuse possible and probable.

Nope.

Yes you do. You keep presuming that two unknown things are equally going to happen. They're not.

[MaximizedAction]

estebanus wrote...

Wow... This more or less just blew my mind!!!

I guess one can't say that "Bioware would never be smart enough to pull something like that off!" anymore. They've already done it once, haven't they?

This is just... I mean... wow... just. WOW.

Yeah, sooo...we now play the waiting game, huh?

[estebanus]

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You confuse possible and probable.

Nope.

Yes you do. You keep presuming that two unknown things are equally going to happen. They're not.

And you assume that they won't happen. Why are you so sure of that?

[estebanus]

MaximizedAction wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Wow... This more or less just blew my mind!!!

I guess one can't say that "Bioware would never be smart enough to pull something like that off!" anymore. They've already done it once, haven't they?

This is just... I mean... wow... just. WOW.

Yeah, sooo...we now play the waiting game, huh?

Indeed... I'm patient. If it turns out the IT is true, the wait will have been worth it.

[CavScout]

estebanus wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You confuse possible and probable.

Nope.

Yes you do. You keep presuming that two unknown things are equally going to happen. They're not.

And you assume that they won't happen. Why are you so sure of that?

Same way I am sure that there's no tea pot orbiting our nearest star. You can say there is one and I can't prove you wrong but it doesn't make our positions equally valid.

[estebanus]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
IT did no such thing...

Yes it did, IT has always said that it needs a DLC to wrap up the story. and that's what we're getting with the EC.

IT says there is no ending in the game as it stands, not that the current ending needs some expansion. Stop making things up.

The IT has always been about "extending" and "clarifying" the end. Nothing else. I don't think you understood what the theory is about. The endings are still there, and they will have real-life consequences for Shepard and the galaxy...