1114 réponses à ce sujet

[jimjamalam22]

The main reason that i consider the IT to be possible is that a crucible is defined as a place or occasion of severe test or trial, and the breath scene at the end kind of helps this idea

however it could just be a coincidence and the trial may have just been building it/raising EMS

[Mr_Glasses]

People unwilling to destroy Geth.
You do realize you can just fix Geth or build new ones.

[WinterCrow]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Mr_Glasses wrote...

People unwilling to destroy Geth.
You do realize you can just fix Geth or build new ones.

That's like saying you can replace your dead pet with a new one. It might look the same and have the same name but it won't be your old pet.

Yes... and not exactly. Just as the catalyst is not sure about Shepard dying, I doubt he can know exactly what will happen to "all synthetic life". Something about the Geth might be saved, only maybe and with highest EMS ratings, so that the units are rebuild but their conciousness remained "alive". Only maybe, though, and it's unlikely, but I wouldn't give up all hope on that, as Shepard, if I survived.

Fuc*, Cerberus rebuilt a human being just as he used to be with only the brain being almost intact, why wouldn't the quarians be able to retrieve what's left of the Geth and prevent their ultimate destruction?

Speculation for everyone... wasn't it?

Modifié par WinterCrow, 22 mai 2012 - 10:13 .

[Obvakhi]

Mr_Glasses wrote...

People unwilling to destroy Geth.
You do realize you can just fix Geth or build new ones.

And if these new Geth want to obliterate all organic life? I mean it's not like we spent all that time trying to get the geth and quarians to stop killing each other.

Modifié par Obvakhi, 22 mai 2012 - 10:07 .

[Vigilant111]

Need to save alliance memories into 512mb USB and pump it into new geth

[Jadebaby]

Talogrungi wrote...

Straight to Destroy, didn't even blink.

The crucible was the test, and my Shepard passed.

This^

[George Costanza]

I spent some time pondering what to do. Not because it was a difficult decision on moral or ethical grounds, but because it was so poorly explained, and made hardly any sense, that I didn't know what I was supposed to do. In the end I picked 'Destroy' out of spite. **** the Reapers and **** that silly space boy. I blew that **** up real good.

[Geneaux486]

For someone boasting so much about reading comprehension, you sure blow it up when it's no longer convenient.

I don't boast about reading comprehension because it's not boast-worthy to read and comprehend a single sentence.

Everything relevant to the plot must happen during the plot, told to your caracter, aka roleplaying. Whatever is told to the player referring to him as such is not relevant to the plot. Why? Because it happens totally outside the Mass Effect universe, into the real world.

And again, this is an arbitrary bull**** rule that you're assigning yourself and I have no reason to accept it.  It is a stated, in-game fact that Shepard ended the Reaper threat. 

But the message is right, however, Shepard finished the immediate reaper threat. If you read properly, it doesn't say "forever", see? That message does not invalidate future works involving the reaper threat in any form (actual reapers, ancient reaper technology that indoctrinates another guy, whatever).

The message is right... for now. Not forever. It can be, if nobody decides to go for a reaper related plot again, it won't be if they do. I'm talking about chances here, all the time. That message is not definitive in any way.

Ending the Reaper threat means that it's ended, over, complete.  This is also confirmed by the stargazer scene, thousands of years in the future, still telling the story of how Shepard saved everyone.  Also, I've said repeatedly that it's possible that Bioware could bring the Reapers back, but that it would be a retcon.  Because that's what it would be.  As of the information in Mass Effect 3, all three choices presented by the Crucible end the Reaper threat. 

The premise of this threat is that, yes, and by supporting destroy I don't completely agree with everything OP says, do I? or must we all have the same exact opinion?

 
I explained why I found the two of you similar by citing things you've said in this thread.

The choice I made is safer than the other two, in my eyes. Note how I always said the other two options "felt wrong", not "are wrong".

that will never deny the fact that, as many have told you before, you ate the enemy's propaganda.

You're still taking your headcannon and arguing it as fact.  I'm simply calling it what it is and pointing out that there's no reason for me to accept it when the game directly contradicts it.

but letting the reapers leave surely opens a path for them to return. That is not a difficult concept to grasp.

Letting the Reapers leave, then confirming through a flashforward and a post-game message that they don't threaten the galaxy again.  Those last two bits are just as important as the first.

I don't think Shepard can control them, but maybe he does; I don't think synthesis and its magic DNA can solve all the problems and stop every war, but maybe it does.

He does control them, and synthesis does solve all the problems with synthetics and organics, as is stated in the game. 

Anyway, why the hell are we discussing IT here? Please guys, we already have the IT thread for this. Let's debate in a "if the endings turn out to be exactly what they are, no tricks ongoing" atmosphere.

I love IT, I also think it's genius, but turning every thread into an IT thread just makes us look like fanatist ****s, really.

For someone who prattles on and on about other people's lack of reading comprehension, well, read the ****ing OP.  People are discussing IT here because this is an IT thread.  As for what that makes you guys look like, most IT believers I've discussed the subject with come off as hipsters who talk down to others and think they know everything, and that's the result of nothing more than the way they choose to conduct themselves.

People unwilling to destroy Geth.
You do realize you can just fix Geth or build new ones.

 
Clearly you view the Geth as tools as opposed to thinking, feeling people.  They are still technically robots, but their brains by the final mission of ME3 are just as organic in nature as ours.  You can recreate the Geth about as easily as you can raise a child to be an exact carbon-copy of someone you know who died.  The Geth were an anomaly to the cycles, the first known synthetic race able to peacefully co-exist with organics.  The odds of that being replicated are extremely low, and statistics make it more likely that the next batch of synthetics would be as murderous as all the others. 

Modifié par Geneaux486, 22 mai 2012 - 02:05 .

[Elite Midget]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Mr_Glasses wrote...

People unwilling to destroy Geth.
You do realize you can just fix Geth or build new ones.

That's like saying you can replace your dead pet with a new one. It might look the same and have the same name but it won't be your old pet.

Indeed.  Some peopleeven pay a bundle to clone their dead pets and believe they're the same. Turns out that isn't the case and 100s of "clones"  are failures and are discarded until they end up with a clone that is similiar to the dead pet. Ergo, remaking the Geth wont make them the same as the old  Geth. Once something is gone it's gone and only something new can fill the void.

[Mobius-Silent]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Clearly you view the Geth as tools as opposed to thinking, feeling people.  They are still technically robots, but their brains by the final mission of ME3 are just as organic in nature as ours.  You can recreate the Geth about as easily as you can raise a child to be an exact carbon-copy of someone you know who died.  The Geth were an anomaly to the cycles, the first known synthetic race able to peacefully co-exist with organics.  The odds of that being replicated are extremely low, and statistics make it more likely that the next batch of synthetics would be as murderous as all the others. 

In fact, I'd say it's _more_ likely that a post-destroy AI would be murderous as they would eventually find out that even the "best" of the organic species would offer them up for sacrifice to save their own skin (And that's assuming they don't find out that other options were available but Shepard didn't take them)

The endings are horribly put together and I despise all of the options given to us but I have to agree that there are as bad as each other, none of them can be clasified as a "success" or a "failure" without artificially strict axes of measurement.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mai 2012 - 03:15 .

[WinterCrow]

@ Geneaux: it's quite tiresome to try to debate something with you. I'm done, I surrender. You don't have a clue about what a role playing game is, and you refuse to try and understand, have it your way.

As a side note, you don't even know when or where the stargazer scene takes place, so that "thousands of years after" of yours is totally made up. Again, congratulations. You are making up as many facts as all the people you despise. Great job.

I've seen you talk down to IT followers as well, I don't see how you are any better. Specially when you're just as narrow minded as the most fanatical It follower can be. You have yet another extreme oppinion, but on the opposite side. Don't be fooled, in-game evidence does not support what you claim, no more than it supports IT or whatever other theory. You lack information, you have your version of the ending and you grasp desperately at anything that can remotely prove it (like the ending message) while ignoring several other stuff.

Bear in mind that I never said you were wrong, again, but that you might be. Another not so difficult concept to grasp if you were a little open minded. You can't wait to stomp over anyone else's opinion. Pray for the ending to be as literal as you think it is, or you will have a lot of shiit to swallow.

I've tried to show you how other possibilities might exist but you refuse to even question anything. Enjoy your personal, but not necessarily real, version of the ending. I'm done with you.

Modifié par WinterCrow, 22 mai 2012 - 03:24 .

[Mobius-Silent]

WinterCrow wrote...
@ Geneaux: it's quite tiresome to try to debate something with you. I'm done, I surrender. You don't have a clue about what a role playing game is, and you refuse to try and understand, have it your way.

I know what a role playing game is, have played PnP RPG's since the 80's and CRPG's since they were called "Adventure games" and you are 100% wrong. Any information delivered to the player outside of the in-game world is expected to be 100% accurate, it's also a terrible crutch but if the game says "You win" then you (The player) have won. Everything in-game is succeptable to perspective but OOC information is effectively "Word of God"

The subset of  "Role playing" where you ignore OOC information is ONLY RELEVENT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE CHARACTER and not applicable to the players understanding of the plot/setting/game

WinterCrow wrote... 
You have yet another extreme oppinion, but on the opposite side.  

 
He really doesn't, his opinion seems pretty much "middle of the road" with a few exceptions all he's illustrating is what is actually ingame. I don't like the end (and thus disagree with his assesment that is isn't poorly written) but his arguments are pretty simple and for the most part rely on 1-hand sources, I don't see much of that from you.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mai 2012 - 04:05 .

[Geneaux486]

WinterCrow wrote...

@ Geneaux: it's quite tiresome to try to debate something with you. I'm done, I surrender.

You're continuing the debate after saying this.  That's weird. 

You don't have a clue about what a role playing game is, and you refuse to try and understand, have it your way.

You're basing this on the fact that I'm claiming that aspects of the story presented to us in the game, by the game, are aspects of the story.  Like I said, I understand role playing games just fine, I just reject your arbitrary rules about what qualifies as cannon, which you base on nothing.

As a side note, you don't even know when or where the stargazer scene takes place, so that "thousands of years after" of yours is totally made up. Again, congratulations. You are making up as many facts as all the people you despise. Great job.

One of the devs tweeted that it took place (I think) ten thousand years into the future.

I've seen you talk down to IT followers as well, I don't see how you are any better.

 If you saw me talk down to an IT follower, it's because I was more than patient with them for an extended period of time, and after being told over and over again "These hints are just so obvious, you don't understand them, the ending isn't real, your stance isn't supported by the game" even though my argument is based on what's stated in the game... well it gets annoying.  I don't really like insulting people, and it's something I try to avoid doing, but nobody's perfect.  Issue really ain't worth hurting anybody's feelings over.

Don't be fooled, in-game evidence does not support what you claim, no more than it supports IT or whatever other theory. You lack information, you have your version of the ending and you grasp desperately at anything that can remotely prove it (like the ending message) while ignoring several other stuff.

This is precisely what I'm talking about.  Literally everything you just said was wrong.  In-game evidence spells out for us that Shepard ended the Reaper threat, after showing us multiple cutscenes detailing that very thing happening.  It's not my version of the ending, it's what happened. 

You can't wait to stomp over anyone else's opinion.

Again, you caught me at the tail end of a very long discussion with what was essentially a brick wall.  You don't know what you're talking about here.  Also, you respond to my views by saying things like "You don't know what a role playing game is", "you have no reading comprehension", and of course the admittedly paraphrased but still accurate, "You actually accept that in-game statement as fact!?  That statement doesn't even support my argument, so how could it be fact!?", so don't accuse me of trying to stomp on anything.

Pray for the ending to be as literal as you think it is, or you will have a lot of shiit to swallow.

How do you figure?  I've already acknowleged that it's possible that Bioware will retcon the story someday, but even if they do, the things I've said about the ending of this game being definitive will still have been true.  You, on the other hand, have been sitting here the whole time calling me narrow-minded for not rejecting in-game facts for no other reason than because you say so.  Also I'm not as emotionally invested in being right about a video game as you seem to be.

I've tried to show you how other possibilities might exist but you refuse to even question anything. Enjoy your personal, but not necessarily real, version of the ending.

Again, it's not my personal version of the ending.  It's just the game's ending.  It's right there, spelled out for us, no matter which of the three choices we make.  That part of the story is not open to interpretation.

I'm done with you.

Then be done with me.  Don't say "I'm done" then keep talking to me.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 22 mai 2012 - 05:14 .

[Mobius-Silent]

[quote]WinterCrow wrote...
As a side note, you don't even know when or where the stargazer scene takes place, so that "thousands of years after" of yours is totally made up. Again, congratulations. You are making up as many facts as all the people you despise. Great job.[/quote]
[/quote]From the game
[quote] biod_end002_600epilogue_loc_int.end004_finale_v_d.end004_finale_v_dlg contains...
1: We see a child, maybe they look a little bit asari, a little bit human. They are looking at the stars on a planet some 10,000 years after the events of the game.
2: There is an older male here as well, the child looks to the "grandfather" and asks...
[/quote]
As extracted from the game files here

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 22 mai 2012 - 03:57 .

[Geneaux486]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

WinterCrow wrote...
As a side note, you don't even know when or where the stargazer scene takes place, so that "thousands of years after" of yours is totally made up. Again, congratulations. You are making up as many facts as all the people you despise. Great job.

From the game

biod_end002_600epilogue_loc_int.end004_finale_v_d.end004_finale_v_dlg contains...
1: We see a child, maybe they look a little bit asari, a little bit human. They are looking at the stars on a planet some 10,000 years after the events of the game.
2: There is an older male here as well, the child looks to the "grandfather" and asks...

As extracted from the game files here

Huh, I didn't even know it was actually in the game.  Thanks for sharing that, Mobius.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 22 mai 2012 - 04:01 .

[Mobius-Silent]

Another nice snippet from the scene notes but a tad off topic:

biod_end002_300timconflict_loc_int.end002_illusive_man_m_d.end002_illusive_man_m_dlg contains...
1: Shepard enters the room and sees Anderson Slumped over a console.
2: Anderson doesn't respond at first, then turns oddly, stiffly around and takes a few struggling steps toward Shepard.
3: FOVO LINES BELOW: DO NOT EDIT
4: IM uses a bit of control mojo on Shepard.. jerking Shepard's arm towards Anderson.
5: Illusive Man kills himself.
6: Walks over and speaks quietly/persuasively to Shepard

"Control Mojo" not Indoctrination.

[jsadalia]

TSA_383 wrote...



And then, if you choose to defy the wishes of being which apparently controls the reapers, you wake up! Proving that at least part of what you'd been told (you will die) is false!

You weren't told you would die, it was only implied: "even you are partly synthetic."  The "Shepard wakes up!" part of IT has always been its weakest link, because it also fits if you assume the Crucible experience is absolutely real. Synthesis kills you, Control destroys your body, Destroy is the only option with a chance for you to survive.  In fact, that might be part fo why it has the red renegade coloring--it's the most selfish option.  "Shepard wakes up in London!" would be more convincing, but the evidence for that is extremely dubious, to say the least.

Here's what I think: IT goes too far.  To assume this is an entirely virtual experience, happening in Shepard's mind, is too great a step. It does not fit with indoctrination as "a subtle whisper you can't ignore."  Indoc. is not The Matrix, and this degree of influence--an detailed interior reality created, not just hallucinations--is supported nowhere by previously established information. The sheen of weirdness could indeed be because, yes, there may be attempt at indoc. (there is more supporting although circumstantial evidence for this than I had originally thought), but it alters reality subtly, does not create a new one. A lot of it may also be a hangover from BioWare's discarded plans to involve indoc. more directly in the conclusion (as in, you wouldn't have control of your actions). But what you experience is reality, slightly distorted but reality nonetheless. Star brat is real. The choices you have are real. Their consequences are real (but poorly and incompletely portrayed, which is why we're getting EC).

Also, if IT is correct the game ends with Shepard breathing in London rubble with the Crucible unactivated and the reapers continuing their conquest of all organic life unimpeded. This would only make sense if the game were called "Mass Effect 3: Part One." As things stand, it means you lose and everybody dies. Whoopee.

Tangentially, something that bugs me is the importance ascribed to Shepard's wound where Anderson was shot, when you can clearly see Shepard holding that injury earlier:, and earlier soon after he wakes up, too.

[DiebytheSword]

I have also heard, independently from a developer, that "the Shepard" scene takes place far into the future. I don't recall the exact number of years, but it was in the thousands.

[Myskal1981]

jsadalia wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...



And then, if you choose to defy the wishes of being which apparently controls the reapers, you wake up! Proving that at least part of what you'd been told (you will die) is false!

You weren't told you would die, it was only implied: "even you are partly synthetic."  The "Shepard wakes up!" part of IT has always been its weakest link, because it also fits if you assume the Crucible experience is absolutely real. Synthesis kills you, Control destroys your body, Destroy is the only option with a chance for you to survive.  In fact, that might be part fo why it has the red renegade coloring--it's the most selfish option.  "Shepard wakes up in London!" would be more convincing, but the evidence for that is extremely dubious, to say the least.

Here's what I think: IT goes too far.  To assume this is an entirely virtual experience, happening in Shepard's mind, is too great a step. It does not fit with indoctrination as "a subtle whisper you can't ignore."  Indoc. is not The Matrix, and this degree of influence--an detailed interior reality created, not just hallucinations--is supported nowhere by previously established information. The sheen of weirdness could indeed be because, yes, there may be attempt at indoc. (there is more supporting although circumstantial evidence for this than I had originally thought), but it alters reality subtly, does not create a new one. A lot of it may also be a hangover from BioWare's discarded plans to involve indoc. more directly in the conclusion (as in, you wouldn't have control of your actions). But what you experience is reality, slightly distorted but reality nonetheless. Star brat is real. The choices you have are real. Their consequences are real (but poorly and incompletely portrayed, which is why we're getting EC).

Also, if IT is correct the game ends with Shepard breathing in London rubble with the Crucible unactivated and the reapers continuing their conquest of all organic life unimpeded. This would only make sense if the game were called "Mass Effect 3: Part One." As things stand, it means you lose and everybody dies. Whoopee.

Tangentially, something that bugs me is the importance ascribed to Shepard's wound where Anderson was shot, when you can clearly see Shepard holding that injury earlier:, and earlier soon after he wakes up, too.

I can just say: Thank You!

[Hadeedak]

Unless I'm missing something, that wound's where the main 'hurt' animation's had wounds reliably. All hunched over, cradling the lower ribcage. That's always annoyed me. PEOPLE GET HURT OTHER PLACES... Also, I've hurt myself a lot (Outdoorsy), and I've never seen anyone move like that while hurting.

[jijeebo]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Another nice snippet from the scene notes but a tad off topic:

biod_end002_300timconflict_loc_int.end002_illusive_man_m_d.end002_illusive_man_m_dlg contains...
1: Shepard enters the room and sees Anderson Slumped over a console.
2: Anderson doesn't respond at first, then turns oddly, stiffly around and takes a few struggling steps toward Shepard.
3: FOVO LINES BELOW: DO NOT EDIT
4: IM uses a bit of control mojo on Shepard.. jerking Shepard's arm towards Anderson.
5: Illusive Man kills himself.
6: Walks over and speaks quietly/persuasively to Shepard

"Control Mojo" not Indoctrination.

Oooooh, that's interesting.

Cheers for posting that lil' snippet.

[Geneaux486]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Another nice snippet from the scene notes but a tad off topic:

biod_end002_300timconflict_loc_int.end002_illusive_man_m_d.end002_illusive_man_m_dlg contains...
1: Shepard enters the room and sees Anderson Slumped over a console.
2: Anderson doesn't respond at first, then turns oddly, stiffly around and takes a few struggling steps toward Shepard.
3: FOVO LINES BELOW: DO NOT EDIT
4: IM uses a bit of control mojo on Shepard.. jerking Shepard's arm towards Anderson.
5: Illusive Man kills himself.
6: Walks over and speaks quietly/persuasively to Shepard

"Control Mojo" not Indoctrination.

"Control Mojo" is kind of an awesome way to word that.  Kudos for posting it.  As a side-note, I appreciate your backing me up like you've done, thank you.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 22 mai 2012 - 05:11 .

[balance5050]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Another nice snippet from the scene notes but a tad off topic:

biod_end002_300timconflict_loc_int.end002_illusive_man_m_d.end002_illusive_man_m_dlg contains...
1: Shepard enters the room and sees Anderson Slumped over a console.
2: Anderson doesn't respond at first, then turns oddly, stiffly around and takes a few struggling steps toward Shepard.
3: FOVO LINES BELOW: DO NOT EDIT
4: IM uses a bit of control mojo on Shepard.. jerking Shepard's arm towards Anderson.
5: Illusive Man kills himself.
6: Walks over and speaks quietly/persuasively to Shepard

"Control Mojo" not Indoctrination.

"Control Mojo" is kind of an awesome way to word that.  Kudos for posting it.  As a side-note, I appreciate your backing me up like you've done, thank you.

Unfortunately, they also refer to your squaddies as "henchemen" so I doubt "control mojo" hold any real weight, beside the effect file still says "Indoctrination effect".

[Hadeedak]

...I'm highly amused by the IT guy saying we're reading too much into what the game calls stuff.

And they've been called henchmen since game 1.