55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Silhouett3]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

To sum it up: it's not debunked.

Go all the way:

IT is still the only way the ending makes sense, as the ending is essentially the same:)

[Big_Boss9]

llbountyhunter wrote...

Capeo wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

Capeo wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

No EC is true, IT hinges on biware not changing the endings.

What hes saying is that the ending is left unclear, just like bioware said it would be.... but that maybe things would be clarified in a future game.

That's some serious mental gymnastics right there.  The endings aren't unclear.  They happened exactly as shown and nothing shown supports IT at all.

Mental gymnastics? im telling you what bioware said...

The EC FAQ calls this the "definitive endings" and that there will be nothing more after this.  When did they say anything about future games besides Casey saying anything further in ME universe would have to take place prior to the ME trilogy?  I see nothing unclear in these endings.  Horrible plotting, yes, but nothing unclear.

And bioware said they left it ambigious. It can be both.

As for another game, itll be nice, but its not necesaary, they could just choose to not answer and leave it like inception.... (was he dreaming?)

Of course it would be necessary (if IT were true). One of the primary goals of the franchise is to defeat the Reapers and, if 1) IT is true and 2) there are no future games coming, that means that goal will be left unfinished forever. All to support a fan theory? Come on.

[lex0r11]

llbountyhunter wrote...

I thought liara did put up theplate for destroy?

No.

She looks at it for awhile and then looks up at the wall again without putting it there.
THen the breath scene.

[Candidate 88766]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

The "defeat the reapers for real" - is implied in "IT" - to take place in future content.

What do you mean 'future content'?

If there was to be future content with the IT being confirmed, the EC would've been it. Why wouldn't it have been?

Its been months since release. If there was to be future content confirming the IT, it would've happened by now. 


What you're saying is they've spend months on the EC simply to explain some of the plotholes in what, if the IT i true, is a dream sequence, when instead they could've made this 'future content' you think is coming.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 26 juin 2012 - 05:02 .

[nullobject]

llbountyhunter wrote...

And bioware said they left it ambigious. It can be both.

As for another game, itll be nice, but its not necesaary, they could just choose to not answer and leave it like inception.... (was he dreaming?)

... and like others in this thread, you've retreated from "IT is the actual true explanation that Bioware intended, and soon they'll release the real ending explaining this, which they have been working on for some time", to "IT is my personal headcanon which is not completely contradicted by the endings as given".

Isn't that a bit of a drastic step down?

[masster blaster]

Thank you Bioware and well just thanks for fixing the EC on the PC.

[llbountyhunter]

nullobject wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

And bioware said they left it ambigious. It can be both.

As for another game, itll be nice, but its not necesaary, they could just choose to not answer and leave it like inception.... (was he dreaming?)

... and like others in this thread, you've retreated from "IT is the actual true explanation that Bioware intended, and soon they'll release the real ending explaining this, which they have been working on for some time", to "IT is my personal headcanon which is not completely contradicted by the endings as given".

Isn't that a bit of a drastic step down?

I've retreated from, it is there personal plan, but they didnt want to anger the literalists. 

So no.

Although they probably left it ambigious either way with both sides equally valid, a making both sides step down a bit.

Modifié par llbountyhunter, 26 juin 2012 - 05:06 .

[llbountyhunter]

Big_Boss9 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

Capeo wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

Capeo wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

No EC is true, IT hinges on biware not changing the endings.

What hes saying is that the ending is left unclear, just like bioware said it would be.... but that maybe things would be clarified in a future game.

That's some serious mental gymnastics right there.  The endings aren't unclear.  They happened exactly as shown and nothing shown supports IT at all.

Mental gymnastics? im telling you what bioware said...

The EC FAQ calls this the "definitive endings" and that there will be nothing more after this.  When did they say anything about future games besides Casey saying anything further in ME universe would have to take place prior to the ME trilogy?  I see nothing unclear in these endings.  Horrible plotting, yes, but nothing unclear.

And bioware said they left it ambigious. It can be both.

As for another game, itll be nice, but its not necesaary, they could just choose to not answer and leave it like inception.... (was he dreaming?)

Of course it would be necessary (if IT were true). One of the primary goals of the franchise is to defeat the Reapers and, if 1) IT is true and 2) there are no future games coming, that means that goal will be left unfinished forever. All to support a fan theory? Come on.

You can stil defeat the reapers... look at the links in my sig.

They choices may really happen. Its a mental battle. No a simple "it was all a dream" cop out.

[nullobject]

llbountyhunter wrote...

nullobject wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

And bioware said they left it ambigious. It can be both.

As for another game, itll be nice, but its not necesaary, they could just choose to not answer and leave it like inception.... (was he dreaming?)

... and like others in this thread, you've retreated from "IT is the actual true explanation that Bioware intended, and soon they'll release the real ending explaining this, which they have been working on for some time", to "IT is my personal headcanon which is not completely contradicted by the endings as given".

Isn't that a bit of a drastic step down?

I've retreated from, it is there personal plan, but they didnt want to anger the literalists. 

So no.

THEY DIDN'T WANT TO ANGER THE LITERALISTS?????

You think the endings were so well-loved by the fans that they decided to keep them, when they had originally planned to reveal that they were "just a dream"?

[MegaSovereign]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

The "defeat the reapers for real" - is implied in "IT" - to take place in future content.

What do you mean 'future content'?

If there was to be future content with the IT being confirmed, the EC would've been it. Why wouldn't it have been?

Its been months since release. If there was to be future content confirming the IT, it would've happened by now. 


What you're saying is they've spend months on the EC simply to explain some of the plotholes in what, if the IT i true, is a dream sequence, when instead they could've made this 'future content' you think is coming.

This times 9000.

It really can't be clearer than this.

[Candidate 88766]

llbountyhunter wrote...

And bioware said they left it ambigious. It can be both.

As for another game, itll be nice, but its not necesaary, they could just choose to not answer and leave it like inception.... (was he dreaming?)

The problem is that, in Inception, its satisfying.

If its not a dream, then Cobb managed to escape and find his children again.

If it is a dream, then Cobb has finally realised it doesn't matter - a dream can be your reality, a concept which he disagreed with at the start of the story but finally came to accept. 




If the ME3 endings are real, the Reapers have been defeated and the story has come to a close.

If the ME3 endings aren't real, then the Reapers are still on Earth and the plot is not finished.

Not really as satisfying.

[lex0r11]

Did you guys already talk about the added refusal path?

[v0rt3x22]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

The "defeat the reapers for real" - is implied in "IT" - to take place in future content.

What do you mean 'future content'?

If there was to be future content with the IT being confirmed, the EC would've been it. Why wouldn't it have been?

Its been months since release. If there was to be future content confirming the IT, it would've happened by now. 


What you're saying is they've spend months on the EC simply to explain some of the plotholes in what, if the IT i true, is a dream sequence, when instead they could've made this 'future content' you think is coming.

No it wouldn't have been because EC was never actually planned from the beginning.
EC is only the result of mass fan disappointment of the endings.

Future content does not automatically assume DLC - but perhaps ME4 - and they would not announce ME4, 3 months after ME3.

[masster blaster]

lex0r11 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

I thought liara did put up theplate for destroy?

No.

She looks at it for awhile and then looks up at the wall again without putting it there.
THen the breath scene.

But lexO101 let's be honest not once did they mention Shepard being alive in the epilogue so there's one that support's IT and Also if you look at Control andSynthesis it's jsut to good to be true and everyone in Synthesis sounds greatfull to work with the Reapers which were just killing all of our loveones and familys like 2 seconds ago and now want to be our friend really.

Also in Control Shepard is starting to think like a Reaper and yes i know he, or she is but at  the last few seconds of the epilogue I know Shepard like the Bioware and ws acting like a Dictator.

[v0rt3x22]

lex0r11 wrote...

Did you guys already talk about the added refusal path?

yes

[Candidate 88766]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

The "defeat the reapers for real" - is implied in "IT" - to take place in future content.

What do you mean 'future content'?

If there was to be future content with the IT being confirmed, the EC would've been it. Why wouldn't it have been?

Its been months since release. If there was to be future content confirming the IT, it would've happened by now. 


What you're saying is they've spend months on the EC simply to explain some of the plotholes in what, if the IT i true, is a dream sequence, when instead they could've made this 'future content' you think is coming.

No it wouldn't have been because EC was never actually planned from the beginning.
EC is only the result of mass fan disappointment of the endings.

Future content does not automatically assume DLC - but perhaps ME4 - and they would not announce ME4, 3 months after ME3.

So you think they won't resolve the ending of ME3 until ME4?

Does that not seem like pretty awful storytelling to you?


Just stop and think about it - if they'd planned a 'real' ending, why wouldn't they have released it by now. It would put an end to all this bad press and fan backlash?

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 26 juin 2012 - 05:08 .

[nullobject]

lex0r11 wrote...

Did you guys already talk about the added refusal path?

Yes, dedicated ITers thought that the fact that Godchild speaks in a Reaperish voice was strong confirmation of IT.

The fact that the rest of the EC is about retconning the plotholes that led people to resort to IT in the first place was ignored.

[llbountyhunter]

nullobject wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

nullobject wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

And bioware said they left it ambigious. It can be both.

As for another game, itll be nice, but its not necesaary, they could just choose to not answer and leave it like inception.... (was he dreaming?)

... and like others in this thread, you've retreated from "IT is the actual true explanation that Bioware intended, and soon they'll release the real ending explaining this, which they have been working on for some time", to "IT is my personal headcanon which is not completely contradicted by the endings as given".

Isn't that a bit of a drastic step down?

I've retreated from, it is there personal plan, but they didnt want to anger the literalists. 

So no.

THEY DIDN'T WANT TO ANGER THE LITERALISTS?????

You think the endings were so well-loved by the fans that they decided to keep them, when they had originally planned to reveal that they were "just a dream"?

Edited my post. But  yeah,alot of people wanted the endings changed but hated IT.

[byne]

lex0r11 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...


You dont need to adapt IT. It still fits.


I found it especially odd that the breath scene was still at the end... even after they finished regrouping all the repairs... if taken literally that would mean shepard was resting either on earth or the citadel for a couple years...

You shouldn't see it chronological or in real time.
And the breath scene is the biggest cliffhanger, it has to be at the end. Just like Liara not putting up the plate but just holding it. Shepard is MIA.

Having the breath scene at the end still leaves the entire thing ambiguous as to whether it happened or not. They also didnt clarify where the breath scene took place.

Overall, I'd say the EC raised more questions than it answered.

The biggest one I have is why the Normandy, which we know to have been participating in the battle with Sword fleet, was able to be there instantly when Shepard called for evac, and why Harby just stared at it instead of shooting it down.

Also why they removed the part of the scene where the Normandy's engines fall off when outrunning the blast. Now the Normandy has literally no reason to have crashed on that planet.

Also, when Liara was about to put Shep's name up next to Anderson's, how exactly does she know Anderson is dead but not think Shep died with him? The only person who knew Anderson died was Shepard.

Plus, did EDI not get destroyed? She wasnt on the memorial wall. Dont say AIs dont get on, because Legion got on.

Last point for now, before I go download and play Dawnguard:

Godchild: We tried synthesis before, but it always failed, because it cannot be forced. Now please force synthesis on the galaxy. I'm sure it will work this time.

Oh, Godchild, you are eternally cursed to never make sense, arent you?

[v0rt3x22]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

The "defeat the reapers for real" - is implied in "IT" - to take place in future content.

What do you mean 'future content'?

If there was to be future content with the IT being confirmed, the EC would've been it. Why wouldn't it have been?

Its been months since release. If there was to be future content confirming the IT, it would've happened by now. 


What you're saying is they've spend months on the EC simply to explain some of the plotholes in what, if the IT i true, is a dream sequence, when instead they could've made this 'future content' you think is coming.

No it wouldn't have been because EC was never actually planned from the beginning.
EC is only the result of mass fan disappointment of the endings.

Future content does not automatically assume DLC - but perhaps ME4 - and they would not announce ME4, 3 months after ME3.

So you think they won't resolve the ending of ME3 until ME4?

Does that not seem like pretty awful storytelling to you?

No it doesn't sound like awful storytelling to me - and honestly I don't know what's going to happen.

[LeVaughnX]

Given the "new and improved (lul)" ending to Mass Effect 3 I'm going to say that the Indoctrination Theory is true - and Bioware is just pissed off we know.

Clearly the little boy is a ****ing Reaper I mean listen to how pissed he gets during the "Freedom" choice.

Also the Ending didn't sum up anything - it was nothing but filler. How did Anderson beat Shepard in there? How did TIM get in? How did Hackett know Shepard was alive? How did their radios work? How come no one gave a **** to look for Shepards body after the explosions? How come no one came to find Shepard after the citidel and what not blew up?

Tons of un-answered questions, tons of bull****, bye Bioware. Until you separate from EA and make the real ending I'm done.

[llbountyhunter]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

And bioware said they left it ambigious. It can be both.

As for another game, itll be nice, but its not necesaary, they could just choose to not answer and leave it like inception.... (was he dreaming?)

The problem is that, in Inception, its satisfying.

If its not a dream, then Cobb managed to escape and find his children again.

If it is a dream, then Cobb has finally realised it doesn't matter - a dream can be your reality, a concept which he disagreed with at the start of the story but finally came to accept. 




If the ME3 endings are real, the Reapers have been defeated and the story has come to a close.

If the ME3 endings aren't real, then the Reapers are still on Earth and the plot is not finished.

Not really as satisfying.

look ive already explained this im my thread.

IT itself canbe a way to defeat the reapers.

[nullobject]

v0rt3x22 wrote...


No it wouldn't have been because EC was never actually planned from the beginning.
EC is only the result of mass fan disappointment of the endings.

Wouldn't the "real, true" endings help address the mass fan dissappointment of the endings?

What possible reason do they have to spend effort refining insignificant parts of a dream sequence (which plenty of fans still hate - check the forum), when they could be working on the much better "rea"l ending?

[lex0r11]

masster blaster wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

I thought liara did put up theplate for destroy?

No.

She looks at it for awhile and then looks up at the wall again without putting it there.
THen the breath scene.

But lexO101 let's be honest not once did they mention Shepard being alive in the epilogue so there's one that support's IT and Also if you look at Control andSynthesis it's jsut to good to be true and everyone in Synthesis sounds greatfull to work with the Reapers which were just killing all of our loveones and familys like 2 seconds ago and now want to be our friend really.

Also in Control Shepard is starting to think like a Reaper and yes i know he, or she is but at  the last few seconds of the epilogue I know Shepard like the Bioware and ws acting like a Dictator.

Of course they don't say if Shepard is alive or not. That wouldn't be a cliffhanger then.

The breath scene would be useless. And not putting it up mean missing in action and not dead. They want to look for Shepard.

[SneakyDuc]

lex0r11 wrote...

They went with a refusal path and didn't go a step further?

Make it possible to win WITHOUT the crucible with enough EMS after you refuse.

I don't understand.

Because you can't win without the crucible. The reapers and the greatest power in the universe a cycle would have to be completely devoted to war to have any chance and still it proably wouldn't work.