Aller au contenu

Photo

IT: If true, you have to admit, it's definitely very creative and clever.


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
286 réponses à ce sujet

#126
balance5050

balance5050
  • Members
  • 5 245 messages

simfamSP wrote...

This is what I predict:

If the IT is true, then BioWare will have another ****storm on their hands. People will activley claim that BioWare are lazy and took the idea away from fans.


Uhm, the IT'ers won't say that, the only people that will are the people that won't like I.T.

And, you know, indoctrination was in the game since day one (ME1) so you can't REALLY say they stole it from the fans.

#127
Kunari801

Kunari801
  • Members
  • 3 581 messages

Master Che wrote...

Kunari801 wrote...
For IT to be true, then that means ME3 was shipped incomplete.   The ending animations, IMHO, counter the IT with all three colors are basically the same.  If "Destroy" is the way out from indoctrination, then it should be a vastly different ending. 

If they use IT in the EC I won't mind as long as they do a good job.  If they do, that means the war is still going on, so I'd love a ME4 where Shepard fights off indoctrination and we then finish the war by more conventional means. 


I think we're still in the ending sequence when the credits roll.

YES, it means we got an incomplete game (more on that later).  I think the full weight of our choice (hopefully choices) were to play out in the DLC.  If you picked destroy, what Shepard set out to do back when you first picked up ME back in November of 2007 (ok, I picked it up in 2010, but you get my point), AND you had a high enough EMS you got a tease: SHEPARD TAKING A HALF BREATH IN.  If you didn't, then you just didn't get the teaser.  Which leads me to believe that the ACTUAL best ending may not require as many EMS points to see Shepard breathing (which is effectively just an easter egg reward for staying true and diligent). 

About the DLC:

I've maintained that the intent was to release portions of the extended cut over the DLC cycle for the single player mode.  You'd get another piece of the ending with each piece of DLC you bought.  It backfired, people got pissed so to quiet the vocal discontent they decided to push all other DLC aside and make one ending DLC for free.


If your theory is true, it backfired because the stock "ending" "cliff-hanger" or whatever you want to call it was terrible.   

Before launch they said there woudln't be post-game-ending DLC, they'd all be before the end. I know, I know, they said allot of things prior to release.  

#128
balance5050

balance5050
  • Members
  • 5 245 messages
I like IT, most talked about video game ending in history, all they wanted was speculations so it was a success.

#129
NM_Che56

NM_Che56
  • Members
  • 6 739 messages

Kunari801 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Kunari801 wrote...
For IT to be true, then that means ME3 was shipped incomplete.   The ending animations, IMHO, counter the IT with all three colors are basically the same.  If "Destroy" is the way out from indoctrination, then it should be a vastly different ending. 

If they use IT in the EC I won't mind as long as they do a good job.  If they do, that means the war is still going on, so I'd love a ME4 where Shepard fights off indoctrination and we then finish the war by more conventional means. 


I think we're still in the ending sequence when the credits roll.

YES, it means we got an incomplete game (more on that later).  I think the full weight of our choice (hopefully choices) were to play out in the DLC.  If you picked destroy, what Shepard set out to do back when you first picked up ME back in November of 2007 (ok, I picked it up in 2010, but you get my point), AND you had a high enough EMS you got a tease: SHEPARD TAKING A HALF BREATH IN.  If you didn't, then you just didn't get the teaser.  Which leads me to believe that the ACTUAL best ending may not require as many EMS points to see Shepard breathing (which is effectively just an easter egg reward for staying true and diligent). 

About the DLC:

I've maintained that the intent was to release portions of the extended cut over the DLC cycle for the single player mode.  You'd get another piece of the ending with each piece of DLC you bought.  It backfired, people got pissed so to quiet the vocal discontent they decided to push all other DLC aside and make one ending DLC for free.


If your theory is true, it backfired because the stock "ending" "cliff-hanger" or whatever you want to call it was terrible.   

Before launch they said there woudln't be post-game-ending DLC, they'd all be before the end. I know, I know, they said allot of things prior to release.  



1) There's theory and then there's execution.
2) ...the end isn't on the disc, so this is technically still valid. right? LOL.  So, in ME chronology, there will be no DLC that takes place AFTER the Extended Cut; i.e. the end.

#130
dreman9999

dreman9999
  • Members
  • 19 067 messages

Kunari801 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Kunari801 wrote...
For IT to be true, then that means ME3 was shipped incomplete.   The ending animations, IMHO, counter the IT with all three colors are basically the same.  If "Destroy" is the way out from indoctrination, then it should be a vastly different ending. 

If they use IT in the EC I won't mind as long as they do a good job.  If they do, that means the war is still going on, so I'd love a ME4 where Shepard fights off indoctrination and we then finish the war by more conventional means. 


I think we're still in the ending sequence when the credits roll.

YES, it means we got an incomplete game (more on that later).  I think the full weight of our choice (hopefully choices) were to play out in the DLC.  If you picked destroy, what Shepard set out to do back when you first picked up ME back in November of 2007 (ok, I picked it up in 2010, but you get my point), AND you had a high enough EMS you got a tease: SHEPARD TAKING A HALF BREATH IN.  If you didn't, then you just didn't get the teaser.  Which leads me to believe that the ACTUAL best ending may not require as many EMS points to see Shepard breathing (which is effectively just an easter egg reward for staying true and diligent). 

About the DLC:

I've maintained that the intent was to release portions of the extended cut over the DLC cycle for the single player mode.  You'd get another piece of the ending with each piece of DLC you bought.  It backfired, people got pissed so to quiet the vocal discontent they decided to push all other DLC aside and make one ending DLC for free.


If your theory is true, it backfired because the stock "ending" "cliff-hanger" or whatever you want to call it was terrible.   

Before launch they said there woudln't be post-game-ending DLC, they'd all be before the end. I know, I know, they said allot of things prior to release.  


News flash...They are making this dlc call extended cut.....

#131
eddieoctane

eddieoctane
  • Members
  • 4 134 messages

simfamSP wrote...

This is what I predict:

If the IT is true, then BioWare will have another ****storm on their hands. People will activley claim that BioWare are lazy and took the idea away from fans.


You post it on the forums and it belongs to them. Read the ToS.

If BioWare could prove that some variant of IT was their intent, it is damn clever on their part, though it was handled very poorly. If they can't prove it, some people will complain, but most will probably be happy to have some replay value back in the game. The amount of complaints will be proportional to the cost to download it. Future DLC profits will be inversely proportional to the cost of said ending DLC.

#132
draken-heart

draken-heart
  • Members
  • 4 009 messages
If it is IT and Shepard has a LI, why not use a VI that looks like them to try to convince you to side with the reapers. just saying if i was a reapers doing this to Shepard, i would use someone Shepard cares about, not some child.

still not taking a side on the IT/anti-IT debate

#133
eddieoctane

eddieoctane
  • Members
  • 4 134 messages

draken-heart wrote...

If it is IT and Shepard has a LI, why not use a VI that looks like them to try to convince you to side with the reapers. just saying if i was a reapers doing this to Shepard, i would use someone Shepard cares about, not some child.

still not taking a side on the IT/anti-IT debate


I think someone at BioWare cares more about the unnamed child than any player ever could, so they decided to try to force us to.

#134
kobayashi-maru

kobayashi-maru
  • Members
  • 1 115 messages
IT theory is dead the end won't change and from what little info is revealed it will be cinematics only. Jessica Merizan tweeted about EC saying it will not change or add anything just show you what you had to infer previously.

#135
H2Ape

H2Ape
  • Members
  • 138 messages
It wouldn't be clever to leave us with an unfinished game. Vendetta not pointing that out on Thessia would be a kind of large plot hole.

#136
balance5050

balance5050
  • Members
  • 5 245 messages

kobayashi-maru wrote...

IT theory is dead the end won't change and from what little info is revealed it will be cinematics only. Jessica Merizan tweeted about EC saying it will not change or add anything just show you what you had to infer previously.


LOL at folks who take what she says as gospel. She said, "
@[/s]ben_bronson[/b] no we're just showing you what you had to infer previously. Not a change or an addition. Just more to visually process. "

So that's why the voice actors have been in the studio recently huh? For "visuals"?

#137
jijeebo

jijeebo
  • Members
  • 2 034 messages
IT is indeed creative and sort of clever in places... That's why it has no place in the ME3 endings.

#138
Tom Lehrer

Tom Lehrer
  • Members
  • 1 589 messages

NoSpin wrote...

And just like that change of codex entry, Bioware can say the indoc process started elsewhere. The point of Arrival (according to IT) was that was meant to be the start. If you didn't buy it then the start is another less obvious place, but that was the "point" of Arrival.

Speculation.


The point of Arrival was to slow the Reapers down.

Go back to ME1 and you will learn there is no such thing as 'just a little indoctrinated' or breaking free of it and still being alive. Every example of an indoctrinated person had to be killed or killed themselves.

#139
draken-heart

draken-heart
  • Members
  • 4 009 messages
also, could be Bioware's way of saying "you romanced someone on the ship? you ain't seeing them ever again. Romanced someone not on the Ship? you most likely won't see them again."

#140
kobayashi-maru

kobayashi-maru
  • Members
  • 1 115 messages

balance5050 wrote...

kobayashi-maru wrote...

IT theory is dead the end won't change and from what little info is revealed it will be cinematics only. Jessica Merizan tweeted about EC saying it will not change or add anything just show you what you had to infer previously.


LOL at folks who take what she says as gospel. She said, "
@[/s]ben_bronson[/b] no we're just showing you what you had to infer previously. Not a change or an addition. Just more to visually process. "

So that's why the voice actors have been in the studio recently huh? For "visuals"?


Cinematics would need the voice actors. I don't take what she says as gospel but as :wizard:.

My own personal theory is that the EC will be less about the ending than people would like and more about seeing your assets and crew in action during the final battle with very little after the fact. That's what I meant - and honestly I deleted 3 paragraphs of rating about fans being called dumb because we need ending explained while citadel deaths and relay destruction original consequences get retconned all over the place while being told nothing is being changed.

#141
eddieoctane

eddieoctane
  • Members
  • 4 134 messages

Tom Lehrer wrote...

NoSpin wrote...

And just like that change of codex entry, Bioware can say the indoc process started elsewhere. The point of Arrival (according to IT) was that was meant to be the start. If you didn't buy it then the start is another less obvious place, but that was the "point" of Arrival.

Speculation.


The point of Arrival was to slow the Reapers down.

Go back to ME1 and you will learn there is no such thing as 'just a little indoctrinated' or breaking free of it and still being alive. Every example of an indoctrinated person had to be killed or killed themselves.


If that was true, it's only a matter of time before the squad you took to the derelict Reaper succumbs to indoctrination. Since Garrus and Grunt seemed just fine, I'll argue that there is an exposure threshold that must be passed before someone has any effect from indoctrination. Since every case of indoctrination is different, it's fair to assume that the exposure threshold is also unique to the individual. Shepard is undoubtedly the most exceptional individual in the galaxy. (S)He could arguably have the highest exposure treshold and thus require an active attempt by Harbinger to break. Depending on your actions, the Reapers might fail to push Shep over that edge.

#142
balance5050

balance5050
  • Members
  • 5 245 messages

kobayashi-maru wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

kobayashi-maru wrote...

IT theory is dead the end won't change and from what little info is revealed it will be cinematics only. Jessica Merizan tweeted about EC saying it will not change or add anything just show you what you had to infer previously.


LOL at folks who take what she says as gospel. She said, "
@[/s]ben_bronson[/b] no we're just showing you what you had to infer previously. Not a change or an addition. Just more to visually process. "

So that's why the voice actors have been in the studio recently huh? For "visuals"?


Cinematics would need the voice actors. I don't take what she says as gospel but as :wizard:.

My own personal theory is that the EC will be less about the ending than people would like and more about seeing your assets and crew in action during the final battle with very little after the fact. That's what I meant - and honestly I deleted 3 paragraphs of rating about fans being called dumb because we need ending explained while citadel deaths and relay destruction original consequences get retconned all over the place while being told nothing is being changed.




Cinematics would be an addition.

#143
kobayashi-maru

kobayashi-maru
  • Members
  • 1 115 messages

balance5050 wrote...

kobayashi-maru wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

kobayashi-maru wrote...

IT theory is dead the end won't change and from what little info is revealed it will be cinematics only. Jessica Merizan tweeted about EC saying it will not change or add anything just show you what you had to infer previously.


LOL at folks who take what she says as gospel. She said, "
@[/s]ben_bronson[/b] no we're just showing you what you had to infer previously. Not a change or an addition. Just more to visually process. "

So that's why the voice actors have been in the studio recently huh? For "visuals"?


Cinematics would need the voice actors. I don't take what she says as gospel but as :wizard:.

My own personal theory is that the EC will be less about the ending than people would like and more about seeing your assets and crew in action during the final battle with very little after the fact. That's what I meant - and honestly I deleted 3 paragraphs of rating about fans being called dumb because we need ending explained while citadel deaths and relay destruction original consequences get retconned all over the place while being told nothing is being changed.




Cinematics would be an addition.


:) You win. But it isn't an addition, you read it, it is in fact just more to visually process. Just as I'm not fat, my body is just more to visually process than a thin person.

Modifié par kobayashi-maru, 09 mai 2012 - 07:29 .


#144
balance5050

balance5050
  • Members
  • 5 245 messages

kobayashi-maru wrote...


:) You win.


I hope that we can all win by getting something decent out of the EC.

#145
An English Gamer

An English Gamer
  • Members
  • 955 messages
 If it's true and they don't screw up again then the endings become fantastic. A few will whine and accuse them of laziness but those few will just need to shut up. I want to believe it simply because that if it is true then the ending is one of the best story-wise I've ever experienced, probably.

#146
dreman9999

dreman9999
  • Members
  • 19 067 messages

Kunari801 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
It's doesn't matter if Arrival is optional. The artifact on arrival is not the only reaper tech Shepard has been near by. If you don't play arriaval, then their is the other reaper tech Shepard has been near by since Eden prime in ME1 that starts the process.


You mean the dragon's teeth? The Reaper device that specifically requires the impaling of an organic to indoctrinate it?

They can also indoctrinate by just being...AKA  planet husk 1 in ME1. Not only that but hisk give out indoctrination waves. Then there is Sovergin  being in the area. And the their is everything else in ME1 and ME2 that can get the ball rolling. Point being, that's 3 year wurth of being near indoctrinating reaper tech.


Again, these people were studying the Reaper tech. Aka prolonged exposure. And there's no evidence that they indoctrinated by just being there. All you know is there are Dragon's Teeth, and husks. Sovereign was no where near Shepard, and likely didn't even know he was there. There's nothing else in ME1 and only the minuest point in ME2 that actually makes sense.

http://masseffect.wi...ing_Survey_Team:whistle:
Also, it been long time priven that reaper tech indcotrianate by just being...
http://masseffect.wi..._Abandoned_Mine 
http://masseffect.wi..._Hanar_Diplomat 


There are some counters:  All the parts of Soverign would have crashed all over the Citadel in ME1, yet no one got indoctrinated.  I know it's clamed that most of Soverign disapeard maybe by the Keepers, etc.  

I don't believe in the IT, but I do think it's an interesting theory.   The ending cinematics wouldn't be so similar if IT was real, or all three options are part of the IT with no-way out. 

We don't know if the parts did or did not cause indoctrination. We don't know any detals on who found them and there fate. So we can't say. 

#147
Tritium315

Tritium315
  • Members
  • 1 081 messages
If IT was true and they released it with the game then it would have been amazing. Kind of like a post credits scene where if you picked destroy you get to play through the real ending (whatever that is). Personally I would have considered this to be an incredible ending (provided what happened after waking up wasn't awful in its own right).

However, releasing IT 2 months after the game came out is beyond idiotic. This way, even if Bioware did plan it all along, no one will believe it was the original intention. By delaying the released of the real ending, if IT is true, Bioware managed to turn something great into something that feels like a cop out.

#148
Yaos

Yaos
  • Members
  • 473 messages
NO.
Just, no.
It wouldn't be creative nor clever.

1) incomplete game
2) invalidated closure scenes (anderson and TIM) (how stupid would it have been to see them again after such a scene.)
3) It reduces the already silly number of Starkid choices from 3 to 1.
4) It'd make any 66% people that chose the blue or green ending loose their shepard's story because "they didn't figure it out". Mass Effect is not about these kind of devices
5) "Gotya! All a dream!" scenes are not creative. They're cheap.

#149
IS1296

IS1296
  • Members
  • 239 messages
it's too late to call it clever or creative

#150
shepskisaac

shepskisaac
  • Members
  • 16 374 messages
Perhaps. But if it's true, it means the trilogy had 1 single ending and only 1 actual choice.