505 réponses à ce sujet

[dunre646]

dreman9999 wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

Grimgaww wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

United_Strafes wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

the IT gets a bad rap because people don't understand it. maybe it's the name that confuses some people.

No it gets a bad rap because it doesn't exist, they've said it, it's not going to change, the endings are what they are, get over it.

maybe, but the IT fixes a lot of the potholes the ending creates

+ making lots of others ....

namely?

The entire ending.

that it was shipped without it's real ending?

[dreman9999]

dunre646 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

Grimgaww wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

United_Strafes wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

the IT gets a bad rap because people don't understand it. maybe it's the name that confuses some people.

No it gets a bad rap because it doesn't exist, they've said it, it's not going to change, the endings are what they are, get over it.

maybe, but the IT fixes a lot of the potholes the ending creates

+ making lots of others ....

namely?

The entire ending.

that it was shipped without it's real ending?

What's ec?

[Cirreus]

TSA_383 wrote...

IT is not a fan creation, the evidence is right there in the game's own files and in the themes of the damn story...
Besides, what is actually said in the final hours app is that they had a control-mechanic that would alter the player's actual controls, but that they couldn't find an easy way to implement it alongside dialogue so that game mechanic was scrapped. Note, the game mechanic, not the concept.

Not going to go into too much here, but if you think Bioware couldn't come up with this you're not too familiar with some of their older titles:
http://social.biowar.../index/10973597

IT is completely a fan base creation (with good reason as you & I mentioned). I'm not saying it's without reason. I'm saying it's too damn good to come from Bioware "as is" or "as intended". If that was the case, why hasn't anyone responsed from Bioware confirmed the intention of it ? I call it the "Nintendo Effect". Nintendo thinks it's rolling bank because of great hardware & software, when they are really in the "Nostalgia Business". Walters & Casey are like Nintendo. They think they had this great idea & maybe using past references (internal from Bioware & external books, movies , games as they've stated serveral times in the Final Hours app), but I believe it's complete blundering & dumb luck they tripped over something.

And Bioware's virtual communitication black out on the endings means 3. things. <_<

1. It's false as we interpert it as fans (current flavors of IT) & some ego's got stomped on, jimmies russled.

2. We're so off track becasue it's nothing even close to the "high brow" intentions, it can't be fathomed by the brass as an examplation (IT that is).
 
3. Bad Editing, which means for what ever reason (time constraints, bad writing, reasons 1 & 2) we will not know until the ExCut comes out.

So for the time being it's false (even if it's implied, we got what the starbrat said & that's it)

[Grimgaww]

dunre646 wrote...

Grimgaww wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

United_Strafes wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

the IT gets a bad rap because people don't understand it. maybe it's the name that confuses some people.

No it gets a bad rap because it doesn't exist, they've said it, it's not going to change, the endings are what they are, get over it.

maybe, but the IT fixes a lot of the potholes the ending creates

+ making lots of others ....

namely?

You really asking this ???

[dreman9999]

Cirreus wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

IT is not a fan creation, the evidence is right there in the game's own files and in the themes of the damn story...
Besides, what is actually said in the final hours app is that they had a control-mechanic that would alter the player's actual controls, but that they couldn't find an easy way to implement it alongside dialogue so that game mechanic was scrapped. Note, the game mechanic, not the concept.

Not going to go into too much here, but if you think Bioware couldn't come up with this you're not too familiar with some of their older titles:
http://social.biowar.../index/10973597

IT is completely a fan base creation (with good reason as you & I mentioned). I'm not saying it's without reason. I'm saying it's too damn good to come from Bioware "as is" or "as intended". If that was the case, why hasn't anyone responsed from Bioware confirmed the intention of it ? I call it the "Nintendo Effect". Nintendo thinks it's rolling bank because of great hardware & software, when they are really in the "Nostalgia Business". Walters & Casey are like Nintendo. They think they had this great idea & maybe using past references (internal from Bioware & external books, movies , games as they've stated serveral times in the Final Hours app), but I believe it's complete blundering & dumb luck they tripped over something.

And Bioware's virtual communitication black out on the endings means 3. things. <_<

1. It's false as we interpert it as fans (current flavors of IT) & some ego's got stomped on, jimmies russled.

2. We're so off track becasue it's nothing even close to the "high brow" intentions, it can't be fathomed by the brass as an examplation (IT that is).
 
3. Bad Editing, which means for what ever reason (time constraints, bad writing, reasons 1 & 2) we will not know until the ExCut comes out.

So for the time being it's false (even if it's implied, we got what the starbrat said & that's it)

Why has any one yet tell me the reason why TIM is controling Shepard?

[Cirreus]

dreman9999 wrote...
Why has any one yet tell me the reason why TIM is controling Shepard?

Speculation aside (sorry can't help myself), from a narrative/logical assumption (that is nowhere explained in-game), TIM is using new "tech" (derived from Reaper/Prothean/Cerberus research & [specifically] Sanctuary's test trials) that is used for Indoctrination. So one could assume that TIM's new toys/skills from Sanctuary not only work on Reapers, but also work as Sovereign does (in close proximity as does with other Reapers).

It's a guess, but it works like an anti-missile system. It fires another missile at the enemy missile. Fight fire with fire is TIM's plan.

Modifié par Cirreus, 13 mai 2012 - 06:14 .

[dreman9999]

Cirreus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Why has any one yet tell me the reason why TIM is controling Shepard?

Speculation aside (sorry can't help myself), from a narrative/logical assumption (that is nowhere explained in-game), TIM is using new "tech" (derived from Reaper/Prothean/Cerberus research & [specifically] Sanctuary's test trials) that is used for Indoctrination. So one could assume that TIM's new toys/skills from Sanctuary not only work on Reapers, but also work as Sovereign does (in close proximity as does with other Reapers).

It's a guess, but it works like an anti-missile system. It fires another missile at the enemy missile. Fight fire with fire is TIM's plan.

Why has anyone yet tell me the reason why TIM is controling Shepard? 

[Cirreus]

dreman9999 wrote...

Cirreus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Why has any one yet tell me the reason why TIM is controling Shepard?

Speculation aside (sorry can't help myself), from a narrative/logical assumption (that is nowhere explained in-game), TIM is using new "tech" (derived from Reaper/Prothean/Cerberus research & [specifically] Sanctuary's test trials) that is used for Indoctrination. So one could assume that TIM's new toys/skills from Sanctuary not only work on Reapers, but also work as Sovereign does (in close proximity as does with other Reapers).

It's a guess, but it works like an anti-missile system. It fires another missile at the enemy missile. Fight fire with fire is TIM's plan.

Why has anyone yet tell me the reason why TIM is controling Shepard? 

Are you being facetious ? I can't tell. Alot of stuff was cut from the game at the last second. Those files don't mean anything. There is truck loads of Anderson's line in-game prior to Shepard pushing a button to fire the Crucible (with what appears dialog wise, no Starbrat). Also TIM was supposed to be another Saran type boss, so when the artist & writers went back to the drawing board (from the universe art book) they wanted a more indoctrinated TIM look. And specifically his weapons are that of "persuasion". You didn't mention any flavor of "IT" that revolves around Shepard being under TIM's indoctrination.

[dunre646]

Grimgaww wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

Grimgaww wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

United_Strafes wrote...

dunre646 wrote...

the IT gets a bad rap because people don't understand it. maybe it's the name that confuses some people.

No it gets a bad rap because it doesn't exist, they've said it, it's not going to change, the endings are what they are, get over it.

maybe, but the IT fixes a lot of the potholes the ending creates

+ making lots of others ....

namely?

You really asking this ???

amount of current ending plot holes > amount of IT plot holes

[dreman9999]

Cirreus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Cirreus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Why has any one yet tell me the reason why TIM is controling Shepard?

Speculation aside (sorry can't help myself), from a narrative/logical assumption (that is nowhere explained in-game), TIM is using new "tech" (derived from Reaper/Prothean/Cerberus research & [specifically] Sanctuary's test trials) that is used for Indoctrination. So one could assume that TIM's new toys/skills from Sanctuary not only work on Reapers, but also work as Sovereign does (in close proximity as does with other Reapers).

It's a guess, but it works like an anti-missile system. It fires another missile at the enemy missile. Fight fire with fire is TIM's plan.

Why has anyone yet tell me the reason why TIM is controling Shepard? 

Are you being facetious ? I can't tell. Alot of stuff was cut from the game at the last second. Those files don't mean anything. There is truck loads of Anderson's line in-game prior to Shepard pushing a button to fire the Crucible (with what appears dialog wise, no Starbrat). Also TIM was supposed to be another Saran type boss, so when the artist & writers went back to the drawing board (from the universe art book) they wanted a more indoctrinated TIM look. And specifically his weapons are that of "persuasion". You didn't mention any flavor of "IT" that revolves around Shepard being under TIM's indoctrination.

No...It was clearly used....There is not biotic power code of the scene. And TIM did implant himself with tech that is usesindoctriantions and that tech can control husk......So why is it not indoctrination when even the game says so?

[TSA_383]

Cirreus wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

IT is not a fan creation, the evidence is right there in the game's own files and in the themes of the damn story...
Besides, what is actually said in the final hours app is that they had a control-mechanic that would alter the player's actual controls, but that they couldn't find an easy way to implement it alongside dialogue so that game mechanic was scrapped. Note, the game mechanic, not the concept.

Not going to go into too much here, but if you think Bioware couldn't come up with this you're not too familiar with some of their older titles:
http://social.biowar.../index/10973597

IT is completely a fan base creation (with good reason as you & I mentioned). I'm not saying it's without reason. I'm saying it's too damn good to come from Bioware "as is" or "as intended". If that was the case, why hasn't anyone responsed from Bioware confirmed the intention of it ?

Because that's the whole POINT!

Let's think about it from a business perspective:

Regular dev cycle:
-Game goes on sale
-Amazing sales for 3 months
-Trails off

ME3 (IT) dev cycle:
-Game goes on sale
-Makes $200m+ (and counting)
-Produce surprise ending
-Release surprise ending as sales trail off
-Game suddenly back in the news, new game sales, new DLC sales.
-Game makes extra tens of millions of dollars, and gets bioware massive rep for successfully indoctrinating their fans.

But yeah, asking why bioware wouldn't give away any info on the EC, is like asking why james cameron won't be leaking the last 5 minutes of his next movie the month before it hits cinemas. Not good for business, and it ruins the surprise.

[dunre646]

TSA_383 wrote...

Cirreus wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

IT is not a fan creation, the evidence is right there in the game's own files and in the themes of the damn story...
Besides, what is actually said in the final hours app is that they had a control-mechanic that would alter the player's actual controls, but that they couldn't find an easy way to implement it alongside dialogue so that game mechanic was scrapped. Note, the game mechanic, not the concept.

Not going to go into too much here, but if you think Bioware couldn't come up with this you're not too familiar with some of their older titles:
http://social.biowar.../index/10973597

IT is completely a fan base creation (with good reason as you & I mentioned). I'm not saying it's without reason. I'm saying it's too damn good to come from Bioware "as is" or "as intended". If that was the case, why hasn't anyone responsed from Bioware confirmed the intention of it ?

Because that's the whole POINT!

Let's think about it from a business perspective:

Regular dev cycle:
-Game goes on sale
-Amazing sales for 3 months
-Trails off

ME3 (IT) dev cycle:
-Game goes on sale
-Makes $200m+ (and counting)
-Produce surprise ending
-Release surprise ending as sales trail off
-Game suddenly back in the news, new game sales, new DLC sales.
-Game makes extra tens of millions of dollars, and gets bioware massive rep for successfully indoctrinating their fans.

But yeah, asking why bioware wouldn't give away any info on the EC, is like asking why james cameron won't be leaking the last 5 minutes of his next movie the month before it hits cinemas. Not good for business, and it ruins the surprise.

that is taking a pretty big risk

[xsdob]

Yes but no matter what, all of them call for screwing over other players who didn't pick destroy.

Argue all you want putting a trick question in your game and having only 1 option be the way out is bull****, and it really is an example of removing choice from players.

[dreman9999]

dunre646 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Cirreus wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

IT is not a fan creation, the evidence is right there in the game's own files and in the themes of the damn story...
Besides, what is actually said in the final hours app is that they had a control-mechanic that would alter the player's actual controls, but that they couldn't find an easy way to implement it alongside dialogue so that game mechanic was scrapped. Note, the game mechanic, not the concept.

Not going to go into too much here, but if you think Bioware couldn't come up with this you're not too familiar with some of their older titles:
http://social.biowar.../index/10973597

IT is completely a fan base creation (with good reason as you & I mentioned). I'm not saying it's without reason. I'm saying it's too damn good to come from Bioware "as is" or "as intended". If that was the case, why hasn't anyone responsed from Bioware confirmed the intention of it ?

Because that's the whole POINT!

Let's think about it from a business perspective:

Regular dev cycle:
-Game goes on sale
-Amazing sales for 3 months
-Trails off

ME3 (IT) dev cycle:
-Game goes on sale
-Makes $200m+ (and counting)
-Produce surprise ending
-Release surprise ending as sales trail off
-Game suddenly back in the news, new game sales, new DLC sales.
-Game makes extra tens of millions of dollars, and gets bioware massive rep for successfully indoctrinating their fans.

But yeah, asking why bioware wouldn't give away any info on the EC, is like asking why james cameron won't be leaking the last 5 minutes of his next movie the month before it hits cinemas. Not good for business, and it ruins the surprise.

that is taking a pretty big risk

What doyou call what going on right now?

[dreman9999]

xsdob wrote...

Yes but no matter what, all of them call for screwing over other players who didn't pick destroy.

Argue all you want putting a trick question in your game and having only 1 option be the way out is bull****, and it really is an example of removing choice from players.

Why would picking an option that benifits the reapers be a good choice?

[xsdob]

dreman9999 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Yes but no matter what, all of them call for screwing over other players who didn't pick destroy.

Argue all you want putting a trick question in your game and having only 1 option be the way out is bull****, and it really is an example of removing choice from players.

Why would picking an option that benifits the reapers be a good choice?

Because I don't belive it does benefit them. I belive shepard uses their power as a force for good, keeping them shut down until they are truly needed and than returning to dark space without harvesting any life in the galaxy anymore.

I do not belive it is a trick, nor a test, nor a gotch question. It was simply an option that I took because I believe power to be neutral and that the weilder is the one who is tested by giving them the means to be judged or held accountable by no one. I also believe my paragon shepard is good enough and strong enough to resist the eurge to use that power irresponisbly because of the moral code I stuck to of killing no one, always trying to find another way, and giving everyone equal treatment and always giving them a chance and the benefit of the doubt.

[Cirreus]

dreman9999 wrote...

No...It was clearly used....There is not biotic power code of the scene. And TIM did implant himself with tech that is usesindoctriantions and that tech can control husk......So why is it not indoctrination when even the game says so?

It's not specifically said that's why. If the ExCut comes out & it's all indoctrination, I'll be doing high-fives & cracking beer cans. But it also has to be giving serious thought, that was we saw, no matter the original intentions (Dark Engery, Indoctrination Theory ...), is exactly what we saw. ME1/2 basically didn't matter & starbrat runs the reaper recruitment center (with 3 flavors of icecream to choose from, first come first serve).

If the ExCut comes out & reinforces the "starbrat" read Shepard's mind & made itself into a memory of a kid he saw back on earth, what then ? At the moment, that's concrete in what was experienced in-game. Man do I want to be believe anything IT related, but I don't trust Casey & Mac. They are not geniuses & no way EA would have risked something like this without everybody knowing about it ahead of time.

Nothing can be pinned or hinged on a single fact with Mass Effect 3. It's such a cluster f.uck, from start to finish, marketing & transmedia (twitter/comics/books/anime), I can't trust anything related to the story anymore. It's ExCut or bust at the moment.

Modifié par Cirreus, 13 mai 2012 - 06:57 .

[dreman9999]

Cirreus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No...It was clearly used....There is not biotic power code of the scene. And TIM did implant himself with tech that is usesindoctriantions and that tech can control husk......So why is it not indoctrination when even the game says so?

It's not specifically said that's why. If the ExCut comes out & it's all indoctrination, I'll be doing high-fives & cracking beer cans. But it also has to be giving serious thought, that was we saw, no matter the original intentions (Dark Engery, Indoctrination Theory ...), is exactly what we saw. ME1/2 basically didn't matter & starbrat runs the reaper recruitment center (with 3 flavors of icecream to choose from, first come first serve).

If the ExCut comes out & reinforces the "starbrat" read Shepard's mind & made itself into a memory of a kid he saw back on earth, what then ? At the moment, that's concrete in what was experienced in-game. Man do I want to be believe anything IT related, but I don't trust Casey & Mac. They are not geniuses & no way EA would have risked something like this without everybody knowing about it ahead of time.

Nothing can be pinned or hinged on a single fact with Mass Effect 3. It's such a cluster f.uck, from start to finish, marketing & transmedia (twitter/comics/books/anime), I can't trust anything related to the story anymore. It's ExCut or bust at the moment.

So no one sees that indoctrination is happening to Shepard even if we take the plot as it is?

Modifié par dreman9999, 13 mai 2012 - 07:01 .

[Tom Lehrer]

People have spent years and countless hours playing Mass Effect and because of all this time spent playing some people would rather believe that BioWare are gods then acknowledge that they screwed the pooch. In their minds to acknowledge the endings as real would mean they wasted all this time playing and becoming attached to ME. It is for lack of a better term denial.

[araisikewai]

Another 3 new hints:
- When Star-Child show up in the intro, it's always accompanied by Beware/Caution/Danger sign right next to him
- Oily Shadows show up in Citadel ONLY when TIM tried to impose his will upon Shepard OR Anderson, Oily Shadow ALWAYS happens in dream sequence, which basically means that dream sequence IS a mean of will imposition
-  Catalyst Chamber is basically in the form of Giant Dialogue Wheel if you see it from the top
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11979022
Which means Shepard wasn't only inside ME the Game, he was actually inside A GAME MECHANIC...! A deeper level than the game itself. Like a dream in a dream Inception style. Telling you to just WAKE UP!!!

Modifié par araisikewai, 13 mai 2012 - 07:23 .

[Gorkan86]

araisikewai wrote...
-  Catalyst Chamber is basically in the form of Giant Dialogue Wheel if you see it from the top
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11979022
Which means Shepard wasn't only inside ME the Game, he was actually inside A GAME MECHANIC...! A deeper level than the game itself. Like a dream in a dream Inception style. Telling you to just WAKE UP!!!

Once again proves that the renegade wins and paragon loses.

[Drake-Shepard]

dreman9999 wrote...

 Most peopel miss this due to the fact that one of the three are the most popular commented on.
Let's go over all 3.

1. Dream theory. This is the most popular one that everyone know. It the one that stated everything is an indoctriantion dream...This one stands ou by having Shepard still on earth.

2. Hallucination Theory. This is the second more know theory. It's one where Shepard is awake but is theoried that every thing he sees before him is an illusion or soon end up being in his head only. This one can have Shepard on the citadel but has the entire converstion with TIM and Anderson an illusion of indoctrination as well as the Star child.

3. Inflence theory. This is the one that has everything as real but it one that the reaper are trying to subminally influence Shepards choices with indoctrination and warping his perpective. This is inflence by the idea how reaper are more convincing with indoctrination. This also can murge with Hallucination theory as well with the star child or have the scene that happen be real in away.(Meaning the star child can be an illusion but Shepard is at that place.)

All these version at the  point of star child  has varied directions of results of theries of the end.
Being:
The war is not over yet. And based on the choice Shepard makes he may or may not beat indoctination

It's a selecting of whether Sharperd activated the crucble or not. In reality.

It's a choice of ending the reapers  or letting them use the crucible as they see fit.("You let them implant you? Are you insane! " Shepard...ME1)

They are all tricks to get you to kill yourself.

Reguardless of what theory is used, Shepard is in the process of indoctriation till he makes a choice.
With that, it still means we don't know whats the results of the end reguardless.
Cheers.

EXACTLY. thank you

people don't understand it and try to explain it and people who don;t understand it try to debunk it. It's annoying.

on my first playthrough while playing i thought number 2 was going on but couldn't put my finger on it. Then thought number 1 after watching AVOCYS...but now its more likely number 3 to me.

2 and 3 are quite rubbish though (3 being worse) because it means you are actually on your feet after the beam and travel into the beam. And you do accomplish something which leaves little room for the EC to expand upon.

The 4th theory and the saddest one is...that half the indoc clues are remnants of the old indoc ending they were actually changed last minute. All the indoc clues...random child, oily shadows etc etc cannot be an accident

Modifié par Drake-Shepard, 13 mai 2012 - 11:24 .

[araisikewai]

I think the most of the problem that most if not all player who rejects IT is because they've chosen what the IT enthusiasts called as the 'wrong' choice, and trying their best to defend their choice, whether it be the 'paragon' control, or the middle-ground synthesis. From their point of view, it's already baffling to have 3 unreasonable choice, and taking 2 out of the equation will end up in this is no longer a Mass Effect game. It's like forcing 1 correct answer down your throat.
Fact is it doesn't even matter. Both choice can still have a proper continuation. Even in IT.
After all, it's been stated multiple times already that ME3 is the end of Shepard's Arc. Whatever you've chosen, we'll no longer take command of Shepard anymore. Even Destroy option most probably would not have saved him.

Even if IT was true, what's the consequence?

Choosing the control/synthesis, ends up in Shepard being a Reaper Agent. All's a lie, the war still continue.
Choosing destroy is the right choice? I don't think so. Realizing the danger of facing Indoctrination and ends up betraying everyone, Shepard might resign/facing arrest/being demoted, in essence taken out of the front line. But the war still continue.

This ending in essence was all just a setup to tie up Shepard's storyline into 1 single canon, so that the new Mass Effect game (whenever that might arrive) can start their story in a clean slate, most probably change the Protagonist altogether. This is the reason why BW mums about the IT. Because the consequence of IT is... Shepard might end up as the Main Antagonist instead.

When THAT game arrive and you're facing your, no OUR Shepard but on the other side of the barrel, what would you say? What would you think...? Mind Blown Yet...?

Modifié par araisikewai, 13 mai 2012 - 01:12 .

[Tom Lehrer]

araisikewai wrote...

I think the most of the problem that most if not all player who rejects IT is because they've chosen what the IT enthusiasts called as the 'wrong' choice, and trying their best to defend their choice, whether it be the 'paragon' control, or the middle-ground synthesis. From their point of view, it's already baffling to have 3 unreasonable choice, and taking 2 out of the equation will end up in this is no longer a Mass Effect game. It's like forcing 1 correct answer down your throat.
Fact is it doesn't even matter. Both choice can still have a proper continuation. Even in IT.
After all, it's been stated multiple times already that ME3 is the end of Shepard's Arc. Whatever you've chosen, we'll no longer take command of Shepard anymore. Even Destroy option most probably would not have saved him.

Even if IT was true, what's the consequence?

Choosing the control/synthesis, ends up in Shepard being a Reaper Agent. All's a lie, the war still continue.
Choosing destroy is the right choice? I don't think so. Realizing the danger of facing Indoctrination and ends up betraying everyone, Shepard might resign/facing arrest/being demoted, in essence taken out of the front line. But the war still continue.

This ending in essence was all just a setup to tie up Shepard's storyline into 1 single canon, so that the new Mass Effect game (whenever that might arrive) can start their story in a clean slate, most probably change the Protagonist altogether. This is the reason why BW mums about the IT. Because the consequence of IT is... Shepard might end up as the Main Antagonist instead.

When THAT game arrive and you're facing your, no OUR Shepard but on the other side of the barrel, what would you say? What would you think...? Mind Blown Yet...?

People reject IT because its nonsense. If you have been reading these forums you would see most people are in favor of destroy even without IT.

If you play multi-player you get a split second breath but then what? What is the next step in the game? Is Sheaprd just going to hit the "LULZ I win button" and kill the Reapers? If Shepard is still on Earth wont Harby just kill him since the Reapers destroy what they cant use?

The Reapers are winning any way. Sword and Hammer are getting wiped out even before the final run. What room is there for a next game since all hope as been lost and the Crucible failed? Will it be the story of a hero fighting to the death with honor because I played that game already, its called Halo Reach and Im not keen on playing a Mass Effect copy.

Modifié par Tom Lehrer, 13 mai 2012 - 01:25 .

[dreman9999]

Tom Lehrer wrote...

araisikewai wrote...

I think the most of the problem that most if not all player who rejects IT is because they've chosen what the IT enthusiasts called as the 'wrong' choice, and trying their best to defend their choice, whether it be the 'paragon' control, or the middle-ground synthesis. From their point of view, it's already baffling to have 3 unreasonable choice, and taking 2 out of the equation will end up in this is no longer a Mass Effect game. It's like forcing 1 correct answer down your throat.
Fact is it doesn't even matter. Both choice can still have a proper continuation. Even in IT.
After all, it's been stated multiple times already that ME3 is the end of Shepard's Arc. Whatever you've chosen, we'll no longer take command of Shepard anymore. Even Destroy option most probably would not have saved him.

Even if IT was true, what's the consequence?

Choosing the control/synthesis, ends up in Shepard being a Reaper Agent. All's a lie, the war still continue.
Choosing destroy is the right choice? I don't think so. Realizing the danger of facing Indoctrination and ends up betraying everyone, Shepard might resign/facing arrest/being demoted, in essence taken out of the front line. But the war still continue.

This ending in essence was all just a setup to tie up Shepard's storyline into 1 single canon, so that the new Mass Effect game (whenever that might arrive) can start their story in a clean slate, most probably change the Protagonist altogether. This is the reason why BW mums about the IT. Because the consequence of IT is... Shepard might end up as the Main Antagonist instead.

When THAT game arrive and you're facing your, no OUR Shepard but on the other side of the barrel, what would you say? What would you think...? Mind Blown Yet...?

People reject IT because its nonsense. If you have been reading these forums you would see most people are in favor of destroy even without IT.

If you play multi-player you get a split second breath but then what? What is the next step in the game? Is Sheaprd just going to hit the "LULZ I win button" and kill the Reapers? If Shepard is still on Earth wont Harby just kill him since the Reapers destroy what they cant use?

The Reapers are winning any way. Sword and Hammer are getting wiped out even before the final run. What room is there for a next game since all hope as been lost and the Crucible failed? Will it be the story of a hero fighting to the death with honor because I played that game already, its called Halo Reach and Im not keen on playing a Mass Effect copy.

Before you say it's nonsense...Can you at lease say it's posible?