312 réponses à ce sujet

[Erield]

I fully accept your analysis of the endings as presented; well thought-out and intelligently argued on your part. I reject that this inevitably means that Bioware probably was going for IT all along. The whole "proud" argument you spend 2 minutes on is...weak. So, god damned weak. What if they had said something along the lines of, "We fully support the work our team did!" You would have used that statement to further your belief in IT as well. All it's saying is that Bioware isn't going to be firing anyone over the ending controversy--that's it.

Also, I skipped large parts of the video (jumping ahead minutes at a time) because it seemed largely unnecessary. You may try playing around with an edited format that goes with what you have at the beginning (the characters that support each option) and then straight into analysis of what each of the endings means. I would also suggest removing the two minutes trying to prove that it's all connected to IT--ironically, that bit at the end you have feels very out of place, suffers from a change in perceived focus, and isn't widely supported throughout the preceding video (unless maybe I just missed that in my skipping).

[nhcre8tv1]

I enjoyed the video, and I understand what the ending is supposed to mean now, if that's what it was, but my take on it is in the comment I posted on the video. Still don't like it. I liked and favorited, though. Awesome Mind ****!

Modifié par nhcre8tv1, 02 mai 2012 - 09:47 .

[DJBare]

Watched the entire video, but I cannot imagine some will, it starts off going against the ideas others have, they will immediately stop the video with fingers in ears going *la la la, cannot hear you*; though for some they just plain don't have the time to watch the entire thing.

I enjoyed it, but I also have to admit bias because I also see destroy as the only option, now all that's needed is those who disagree and turned off the video to also admit "bias".

Modifié par DJBare, 02 mai 2012 - 10:10 .

[Grudge_NL]

A very, very interesting interpretation on the Endings, and deffinitely deserves more views.

I just don't understand why they show 'Destroy' as Red at the end of ME3. Ofcourse, it's Bioware's last attempt to mindF*ck.

If the cutscenes at the end of the Three given choices, actually would've shown the real consequences, WAY more people would've been satisfied. Let's hope the EC will achieve that goal.

[DJBare]

Grudge_NL wrote...

A very, very interesting interpretation on the Endings, and deffinitely deserves more views.

I just don't understand why they show 'Destroy' as Red at the end of ME3. Ofcourse, it's Bioware's last attempt to mindF*ck.

What I find more strange is folk letting color bias their view, in my first play through it was not the color of destroy that went through my mind, it was the possible destruction of EDI and the geth, I foolishly went for synthesis without thinking it through because that allowed all to live, control was not an option because my Shepard never agreed with TIM's ideals.

I'm being honest, the colors meant nothing to me, it was not until I saw people discussing the implication of colors on these boards that I thought about it, but even with that knowledge I would still now choose destroy, at least for my paragon Shepard, my renegade would probably still go for control being the jackass he is.

[pro5]

DinoSteve wrote...

op can you just post a conclusion?

I could, but I'd rather not.

The thing is, anything I say on this forum is just me saying something on this forum. The video is 40+ min long for exactly the very reason that I try to confirm every statement I make and answer every question I ask with a direct quote from the game.

[pro5]

Bill Casey wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

op can you just post a conclusion?

Your allies tell you to destroy the reapers...
You enemies promote the other two options...

This correctly sums up the first part of the video, which is later used to build upon in the second part.

[ArcanistLibram]

I like it, but I'm going to disagree with the last bit. It's just more likely that Bioware simply didn't think the consequences of the ending through rather than deliberately plan to trick their audience.

[Mims]

I think the "allies side with destroy" and "enemies promote the other two" is a really key thing to consider.

Even if you like the endings, bioware could have...framed that better. Its no surprise why they don't sit well with people.

[pro5]

Erield wrote...

I fully accept your analysis of the endings as presented; well thought-out and intelligently argued on your part. I reject that this inevitably means that Bioware probably was going for IT all along. The whole "proud" argument you spend 2 minutes on is...weak. So, god damned weak.  

I would also suggest removing the two minutes trying to prove that it's all connected to IT--ironically, that bit at the end you have feels very out of place, suffers from a change in perceived focus, and isn't widely supported throughout the preceding video (unless maybe I just missed that in my skipping).

Me trying to prove (or rather, point out) anything in the video ends when you see the "So there it is, this is my interpretation..." line. Everything after that is basically my message to Bioware.

I actually never referred to the Indoctrination Theory in the entire video.  I don't believe it's possible to "prove" or "disprove" IT at this point in history due to the very nature of that theory. Only EC will [hopefully] dot the i. The word "indoctrinate" was used in the end in relation to the PLAYER, not Shepard. You can't really argue with the fact that  many players HAVE been "indoctrinated", I'm showing you proof of that right there and then.

The only point of dispute is whether Bioware intended this, and therefore my message to them is two-fold: if they did, and if they didn't.

I'd like to believe they did, because... "Hope sustains organics in periods of difficulty... We admire the concept."

Modifié par pro5, 02 mai 2012 - 04:58 .

[pro5]

New revised edit of the video - easier to read, and some improvements in presentation (Sovereign theme FTW).

The link in the original post updated.

Modifié par pro5, 02 mai 2012 - 10:26 .

[Wabajakka]

Used your video to help support my thread I linked you to earlier. Really good video.

Hope that's cool with you.

[pro5]

Orange Tee wrote...

Used your video to help support my thread I linked you to earlier. Really good video.

Hope that's cool with you.

Sure, be my guest.

I've bookmarked your thread for later reading, it appears very well laid out.

[Verit]

I haven't watched the entire video, but it seems quite similar to a (much shorter) video I was compiling explaining why none of the choices fit Shepard. I totally agree that Destroy is the only choice for a Paragon Shepard, but the problem is that if it does in fact destroy all synthetic life including EDI and the geth (and I really do think that was Bioware's intention, seeing how EDI really doesn't exit the Normandy in Destroy), then even that ending doesn't fit Shepard. The only thing I'm hoping for in the EC is for Bioware to "clarify" that the Destroy ending didn't kill the geth and EDI. Otherwise all three choices have Shepard betraying either allies or him/herself.

[pro5]

bump

[pro5]

Just ~500 views so far.. Talking about how a poorly chosen title can doom a thread.

Let's try something suggesting the endings might be not bad, I bet that will attract some stir. 

Modifié par pro5, 03 mai 2012 - 11:35 .

[MattFini]

Good video ... spells out, quite perfectly, the issues with Control and Synthesis.

I should note I don't like Destroy either, but it's the only option that exists for me.

If the 'EC' is going to clarify this, that's totally cool with me, and it will make the ending a little better. However, I still find it to be an anticlimactic finish to an epic trilogy.

[pro5]

bumpety-bump  

[pro5]

Last bump today before heading off to sleep.

[pro5]

pro5 wrote...

bump

[balmyrian]

Went up there to do a job, that's to destroy the Reapers.

In my ME1 opening scene, Udina and Anderson talk about how my Shepard will do the job at any cost. That's the mindset I got into Mass Effect with, that's the one I got out of Mass Effect with.

I like that the ending allowed me to be consistent with my line of thought as a soldier in the game and even tested my resolve about it: get the job done, no second guesses. Will you or will you not?

Other people have surely played Shepard wishing there were other ways through the Reaper issue. And if Bioware wants to do right, they will never canonize either of the endings, so that those who went a certain way throughout the entire series do not feel screwed.

And that's in my opinion what the "Created new possibilities" line means.


The video proves over again that the ending is of some quality, except executed in such a nasty way that the quality is ruined completely, unless you can pick it apart and look at the small pieces.

[brickheart]

This video was basically my line of reasoning at the end of ME3. I was hoping to destroy the Reapers and I did. Becoming a Reaper seemed so silly to me, but I really like your line about the audience being "indoctrinated." I am pretty sure that is how the ending was supposed to feel. To me, the ending is still rushed because nothing is explained, but I still stand by my decision to destroy the Reapers.

Now I guess we wait for Bioware to give us more hints in the EC.

[Siran]

Great compilation, thx for the work and putting it all together! That's why the Reapers bite it in my first two playthroughs and will in every one that follows it.

Modifié par Siran, 04 mai 2012 - 06:58 .

[PsyrenY]

DJBare wrote...

I enjoyed it, but I also have to admit bias because I also see destroy as the only option, now all that's needed is those who disagree and turned off the video to also admit "bias".

Of course I'm biased against logical fallacies. 

I don't need a full 40 minutes to identify them either.

[Dendio1]

Thank you OP. Thank you so much for posting this. You just proved that an indoctrination did happen. Even if its unintended, it happened. Parts of the indoctrination theory is correct and parts arent...I love this video. It all makes sense now...


We all picked up on the more obvious inconsistancies...but this video pulls it all together and uses actual in game dialogue that we all reference, but cant be bothered to pull up. Synthesis to a machine is a reaper. Control is a *gift* that legion was talking about..the ones that steer civilizations along the reaper path. Destroy is the only one that ever made sense and EDI consistantly lets you know of her willingness to sacrifice for the greater good.

Indoctrination theory, the arguements pointing out the star kids lies, the oddness of human kid in the beginning, the space magic...its all coming together

Modifié par Dendio1, 04 mai 2012 - 07:57 .