55528 réponses à ce sujet

[ArkkAngel007]

EpyonX3 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

"When the player or if the player loses or gets killed it's too abrubt."

The game ending abruplty is certainly true. Now if Shepard loses or gets killed during any part of the game, the game loads the last checkpoint if the player chooses. I honestly don't think he knows or understands how the ending really went down in the game.

I don't think so either...he's a really busy guy to be putting in the time for the series.  Again, he was probably just paraphrasing fan reactions that he's picked up (probably sent emails/tweets about as well from fans).

[Makrys]

MaximizedAction wrote...

Makrys wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

I was JUST about to post about that. I thought it was interesting. It sounds like if you chose synthesis or control, you DID lose, ie. gave into indoctrination so the game ends. So it sounds like they're giving a little epilogue scene, or expanding on what happens if you 'lose' to indoctrination. That's what I'm thinking anyway.

Yes, my first thought was, too, "Is he talking about Control/Synthesis?"

But I guess they will have to add something to Destroy, too, or this forum goes beserk, even we won't be save here.

Um... I'll go beserk! ALL the endings as they stand now suck. Every one needs to have an additional 10 minutes. And hopefully it will include gameplay, cutscenes, and conversations.

Modifié par Makrys, 18 mai 2012 - 06:33 .

[paxxton]

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

BioWare is either extremely secretive about the EC or they really meant the current ending to be final.

Modifié par paxxton, 18 mai 2012 - 06:36 .

[Makrys]

paxxton wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

BioWare is either extremely secretive about the EC or they really meant the current ending to be final. 

They're being very secretive. That much is obvious.

[Wabajakka]

I really hope Lance wasn't misinterpreting what BW told him the end of the game was.

Because if what he's saying is true... that's huge for the IT.

Modifié par Orange Tee, 18 mai 2012 - 06:36 .

[MaximizedAction]

paxxton wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

BioWare is either extremely secretive about the EC or they really meant the current ending to be final. 

Well, the problem with the ending as it stands, with all in-game evidence strongly pointing towards hallucination, we simply don't have the closure that is needed for a proper trilogy ending; or at least, that's what was said about the game tying all arcs together.
For example: We don't know what happened to the sqad, no matter how you twist or turn it, that problem remains.

So the ME3 ending we got on the discs cannot be the ending to the trilogy. Although, there remains a conflict with that statement and Bioware's: There are no further ending DLCs planned besides the EC.
But hey, it's all a big mindgame, right?!

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 18 mai 2012 - 06:38 .

[RavenEyry]

I think his wording was a bit weird because he was trying to be helpful without saying anything he wasn't allowed to. He may well not be a gamer but I think he knows what he's talking about. Being a good actor, I doubt he just picks up a script, reads whats there, then leaves.

[Wabajakka]

RavenEyry wrote...

I think his wording was a bit weird because he was trying to be helpful without saying anything he wasn't allowed to. He may well not be a gamer but I think he knows what he's talking about. Being a good actor, I doubt he just picks up a script, reads whats there, then leaves.

This is what I'm thinking, but then again he is probably a busy guy, not to mention an older guy, so who knows, he could've just misinterpreted what BW told him the ending was.

God I hope he's saying is right, I'm really looking forward to EC now.

Modifié par Orange Tee, 18 mai 2012 - 06:40 .

[paxxton]

MaximizedAction wrote...

paxxton wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

BioWare is either extremely secretive about the EC or they really meant the current ending to be final. 

Well, the problem with the ending as it stands, with all in-game evidence strongly pointing towards hallucination, we simply don't have the closure that is needed for a proper trilogy ending; or at least, that's what was said about the game tying all arcs together.
For example: We don't know what happened to the sqad, no matter how you twist or turn it, that problem remains.

So the ME3 ending we got on the discs cannot be the ending to the trilogy. Although, there remains a conflict with that statement and Bioware's: There are no further ending DLCs planned besides the EC.
But hey, it's all a big mindgame, right?!

I sometimes worry that with hundreds of plot variables it would just be hard for them to make a satisfactory ending - technically or financially. That's why they decided on a "metaphysical" conclusion.

Modifié par paxxton, 18 mai 2012 - 06:43 .

[RavenEyry]

Orange Tee wrote...

This is what I'm thinking, but then again he is probably a busy guy, not to mention an older guy, so who knows, he could've just misinterpreted what BW told him the ending was.

God I hope he's saying is right, I'm really looking forward to EC now.

Well some people spoke to him at a convention a couple of weeks after the game release and he said similar things there. This was before EC was announced.

[MaximizedAction]

paxxton wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

paxxton wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

BioWare is either extremely secretive about the EC or they really meant the current ending to be final. 

Well, the problem with the ending as it stands, with all in-game evidence strongly pointing towards hallucination, we simply don't have the closure that is needed for a proper trilogy ending; or at least, that's what was said about the game tying all arcs together.
For example: We don't know what happened to the sqad, no matter how you twist or turn it, that problem remains.

So the ME3 ending we got on the discs cannot be the ending to the trilogy. Although, there remains a conflict with that statement and Bioware's: There are no further ending DLCs planned besides the EC.
But hey, it's all a big mindgame, right?!

I sometimes worry that with hundreds of plot variables it would just be hard for them to make a satisfactory ending - technically or financially. That's why they decided on a "metaphysical" conclusion.

To make us truly feel what Shepard goes through, at some point, the people who got Shepard to breath, will need their 'conclusion'.

As someone pointed out, we as the players don't particularly care whether about Shepard as much as about all her or his companions. So, showing that Shepard survived is not really worth a lot if we don't know what happened to more than just our last squadmates and LI, no matter how it's protrayed at the end.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 18 mai 2012 - 06:49 .

[Xavendithas]

HellishFiend wrote...

 Hey all. I've been gone for a few days so I have a lot of catching up to do. In the meantime I wanted to bring up a new topic: the Rannoch Reaper.

Has anyone noticed how the camera pulses? At first I thought it was a glitch, but it seems to be deliberate. I'm thinking it could be infrasonic noise. As we know, infrasonic noise is below the range of hearing, but can be FELT subconsciously and as a vibration. Indoctrination signals?

Also, I've noticed that the Reaper's red eye stays lit even though he is supposedly dead, AND the camera angle shows it a lot during the ensuing geth/quarian peace/war cutscenes.

Thoughts, anyone?

The derelict reaper scene in ME2 makes it seem as though the reapers have more of a passive indoctrination field that is always present. Just being in the vicinity of the reaper will have a subtle effect on the person. Do they establish in the lore anywhere if this is the case or if the reaper can boost the signal through infrasonics and the like?

[IronSabbath88]

It's good news that Lance is back at least. I wouldn't take what he said as bad for IT, or even good for IT. It just seems as though he's just saying what he thinks is the reason fans are unhappy.

[Stigweird85]

delldo wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Just to clear up something

They both graduated as medical doctors, having been married to a senior psychiatric nurse I can tell you medical doctors have a great deal of contact with psychiatric doctors, they need to especially when medically treating people with psychiatric problems, they have all the information they need to play a mind game.

Yes, but a few pages ago we were talking about Casey Hudson, not the founders of Bioware.

Casey Hudson does not have a Psychology degree, but writer Mac Walters does.

bigstig wrote...

Update Still awaiting confirmation from @MassEffect twitter feed but:

Mac Walters apparently did major in Psychology as per this tweet dated back 26th January

In case you can't follow the link, when asked: "What was your college degree(s) or first writing job. Trying to figure out how to follow my passion. Most useful skill?"

His response was

Mac Walters wrote...
Oh god... I might be a terrible example. Psychology. And #BioWare was the first to pay me to write. And... Adaptability.

So there we have it, he does have a degree in psychology.

Side note, he may regret that part about being a terrible example in the light of the anger over the conclusion of the trilogy

[ArkkAngel007]

paxxton wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

paxxton wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

BioWare is either extremely secretive about the EC or they really meant the current ending to be final. 

Well, the problem with the ending as it stands, with all in-game evidence strongly pointing towards hallucination, we simply don't have the closure that is needed for a proper trilogy ending; or at least, that's what was said about the game tying all arcs together.
For example: We don't know what happened to the sqad, no matter how you twist or turn it, that problem remains.

So the ME3 ending we got on the discs cannot be the ending to the trilogy. Although, there remains a conflict with that statement and Bioware's: There are no further ending DLCs planned besides the EC.
But hey, it's all a big mindgame, right?!

I sometimes worry that with hundreds of plot variables it would just be hard for them to make a satisfactory ending - technically or financially. That's why they decided on a "metaphysical" conclusion.

That's why many developers who have these RPG series don't usually carry through decisons.  Because at the end, there is this expectation that everything will change, not just some dialogue or minor swaps.  Which is at this point technically not feasible.  Financially it could be, but there would have to be a lot of dough being made on the side somewhere to make what would be arguably equivalent to 10 games that are each abou 40-50 hours worth of content on a single playthrough, as far as major variations are concerened.

[balance5050]

Xavendithas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

 Hey all. I've been gone for a few days so I have a lot of catching up to do. In the meantime I wanted to bring up a new topic: the Rannoch Reaper.

Has anyone noticed how the camera pulses? At first I thought it was a glitch, but it seems to be deliberate. I'm thinking it could be infrasonic noise. As we know, infrasonic noise is below the range of hearing, but can be FELT subconsciously and as a vibration. Indoctrination signals?

Also, I've noticed that the Reaper's red eye stays lit even though he is supposedly dead, AND the camera angle shows it a lot during the ensuing geth/quarian peace/war cutscenes.

Thoughts, anyone?

The derelict reaper scene in ME2 makes it seem as though the reapers have more of a passive indoctrination field that is always present. Just being in the vicinity of the reaper will have a subtle effect on the person. Do they establish in the lore anywhere if this is the case or if the reaper can boost the signal through infrasonics and the like?

Right in the codex it says rapid indoctrination is possible.

[ArkkAngel007]

Xavendithas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

 Hey all. I've been gone for a few days so I have a lot of catching up to do. In the meantime I wanted to bring up a new topic: the Rannoch Reaper.

Has anyone noticed how the camera pulses? At first I thought it was a glitch, but it seems to be deliberate. I'm thinking it could be infrasonic noise. As we know, infrasonic noise is below the range of hearing, but can be FELT subconsciously and as a vibration. Indoctrination signals?

Also, I've noticed that the Reaper's red eye stays lit even though he is supposedly dead, AND the camera angle shows it a lot during the ensuing geth/quarian peace/war cutscenes.

Thoughts, anyone?

The derelict reaper scene in ME2 makes it seem as though the reapers have more of a passive indoctrination field that is always present. Just being in the vicinity of the reaper will have a subtle effect on the person. Do they establish in the lore anywhere if this is the case or if the reaper can boost the signal through infrasonics and the like?

In the books (Retribution I believe?), they talk of increased signals and what not, though Reapers will tire over distances apparently.  Also, you could see Saren wincing and speaking on how they are too strong.  I would allow the thought to cross that Reapers can enhance their passive indoctrination to keep subjects in line if they have any resistance.

[Xavendithas]

balance5050 wrote...

Xavendithas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

 Hey all. I've been gone for a few days so I have a lot of catching up to do. In the meantime I wanted to bring up a new topic: the Rannoch Reaper.

Has anyone noticed how the camera pulses? At first I thought it was a glitch, but it seems to be deliberate. I'm thinking it could be infrasonic noise. As we know, infrasonic noise is below the range of hearing, but can be FELT subconsciously and as a vibration. Indoctrination signals?

Also, I've noticed that the Reaper's red eye stays lit even though he is supposedly dead, AND the camera angle shows it a lot during the ensuing geth/quarian peace/war cutscenes.

Thoughts, anyone?

The derelict reaper scene in ME2 makes it seem as though the reapers have more of a passive indoctrination field that is always present. Just being in the vicinity of the reaper will have a subtle effect on the person. Do they establish in the lore anywhere if this is the case or if the reaper can boost the signal through infrasonics and the like?

Right in the codex it says rapid indoctrination is possible.

Yeah, I remember that bit. I just couldn't recall if it mentions how the reaper goes about 'rapidly' indoctrinating someone.

[balance5050]

Xavendithas wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Xavendithas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

 Hey all. I've been gone for a few days so I have a lot of catching up to do. In the meantime I wanted to bring up a new topic: the Rannoch Reaper.

Has anyone noticed how the camera pulses? At first I thought it was a glitch, but it seems to be deliberate. I'm thinking it could be infrasonic noise. As we know, infrasonic noise is below the range of hearing, but can be FELT subconsciously and as a vibration. Indoctrination signals?

Also, I've noticed that the Reaper's red eye stays lit even though he is supposedly dead, AND the camera angle shows it a lot during the ensuing geth/quarian peace/war cutscenes.

Thoughts, anyone?

The derelict reaper scene in ME2 makes it seem as though the reapers have more of a passive indoctrination field that is always present. Just being in the vicinity of the reaper will have a subtle effect on the person. Do they establish in the lore anywhere if this is the case or if the reaper can boost the signal through infrasonics and the like?

Right in the codex it says rapid indoctrination is possible.

Yeah, I remember that bit. I just couldn't recall if it mentions how the reaper goes about 'rapidly' indoctrinating someone.

Stronger beams and waves, the derelict signal was only constant because the reaper was dead.

[Wabajakka]

RavenEyry wrote...

Orange Tee wrote...

This is what I'm thinking, but then again he is probably a busy guy, not to mention an older guy, so who knows, he could've just misinterpreted what BW told him the ending was.

God I hope he's saying is right, I'm really looking forward to EC now.

Well some people spoke to him at a convention a couple of weeks after the game release and he said similar things there. This was before EC was announced.

If I'm not mistaken all he said was "there are big things planned" referring to DLC for the game and what not. I don't remember those people talking about him and the ending and such. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

[ean0611]

Lance Henriksen said "when the, if the player loses", that was interesting. Why would he be talking about losing in any context, as at any other point in the game, you just reload from last save.

I have a hard time reading anything other than a couple of the choices presented were "losing" based on this.

[paxxton]

MaximizedAction wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

paxxton wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 What do you guys make of this interview that talks with Hacket's VA about the EC:

http://www.g4tv.com/...ending-content/ 

The end of the game is losing?

BioWare is either extremely secretive about the EC or they really meant the current ending to be final. 

Well, the problem with the ending as it stands, with all in-game evidence strongly pointing towards hallucination, we simply don't have the closure that is needed for a proper trilogy ending; or at least, that's what was said about the game tying all arcs together.
For example: We don't know what happened to the sqad, no matter how you twist or turn it, that problem remains.

So the ME3 ending we got on the discs cannot be the ending to the trilogy. Although, there remains a conflict with that statement and Bioware's: There are no further ending DLCs planned besides the EC.
But hey, it's all a big mindgame, right?!

I sometimes worry that with hundreds of plot variables it would just be hard for them to make a satisfactory ending - technically or financially. That's why they decided on a "metaphysical" conclusion.

To make us truly feel what Shepard goes through, at some point, the people who got Shepard to breath, will need their 'conclusion'.

As someone pointed out, we as the players don't particularly care whether about Shepard as much as about all her or his companions. So, showing that Shepard survived is not really worth a lot if we don't know what happened to more than just our last squadmates and LI, no matter how it's protrayed at the end.

Shepard's alive? How the hell...?  It doesn't mean that the EC will add anything post that. What I meant is that the number of plot variables that would go into a satisfactory ending (even based on IT) might just be too high for a 10-15 minute part of a game. So maybe, just maybe, BioWare is planning on ME4 after all. IT is a big deal so EA might want to cash on it instead of giving it away for free.

Besides, there are people who didn't get the breath scene. What about them?

Players do care what happens to Shepard. Even if only because Shepard is supposed to be the player's avatar.

Modifié par paxxton, 18 mai 2012 - 07:24 .

[RavenEyry]

Orange Tee wrote...

If I'm not mistaken all he said was "there are big things planned" referring to DLC for the game and what not. I don't remember those people talking about him and the ending and such. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

I don't remember exactly but it was similar to those early tweets about 'don't lose hope' and 'big things planned'

[MaximizedAction]

ean0611 wrote...

Lance Henriksen said "when the, if the player loses", that was interesting. Why would he be talking about losing in any context, as at any other point in the game, you just reload from last save.

I have a hard time reading anything other than a couple of the choices presented were "losing" based on this.

Me thinks he's talking about (or supposed to be talking about) Control/Synthesis. As you said, wouldn't make any sense otherwise.

[ean0611]

MaximizedAction wrote...

ean0611 wrote...

Lance Henriksen said "when the, if the player loses", that was interesting. Why would he be talking about losing in any context, as at any other point in the game, you just reload from last save.

I have a hard time reading anything other than a couple of the choices presented were "losing" based on this.

Me thinks he's talking about (or supposed to be talking about) Control/Synthesis. As you said, wouldn't make any sense otherwise.

I agree completely. I find it hilarious that this was taking as "anti-IT" in another thread. I mean, he said "you lose" and said it was different than other games. Yes, when you lose in almost any other game, you get a game over and can go back. That is the ONLY thing I can think of that fits what he says. I'm very interested to find out what else it could be.