55528 réponses à ce sujet

[paxxton]

MaximizedAction wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Apparently, BioWare decided that the Prothean VI is kidnapped on Thessia instead of Javik.

Javik is not as essential to the main storyline as some think. His remarks are interesting, even amusing, but he still just talks about analogies in his cycle. His remarks on Asari beliefs are nothing more than clarifications.

It would be nice if we had some way of knowing whether or not Bioware intended for Javik to be canon, similar to how Arrival was confirmed as canon through the new comic. I'm doubtful as to whether or not we'll ever get that, though. 

Still, did any of us ever come up with anything Javik-related as evidence for IT? I cant recall anything. 

If IT's true, his remarks give you an interesting moral perspective. All ME games had characters that you could chose to take as examples for your decisions. Wrex and Garrus had something for Renegades, Liara and Tali for Paragons. Javik keeps telling you what he did to indoctrinated friends, traitors, etc. It would be only natural, if at some point you were in his shoes.

paxxton wrote...

Javik says that his crew was indoctrinated. He might allude to the Normandy's crew being under influence.

[Bill Casey]

DJBare wrote...

See my latest post above.

It does have an effect on the real world...
Shepard is the most influential person in the galaxy...
His mind is invaluable...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 19 mai 2012 - 07:42 .

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

All official content is canon. I don't understand why people keep on insisting otherwise.

I'm not insisting otherwise, I've just never heard that, actually. 

I didn't hear that either. But I've read it.
I just don't get the whole point why wouldn't it be canon if it was made by the creators of Mass Effect.

The only reason why I dont assume anything is canon (unless confirmed in canon materials like the books/comics), is because things can play out so differently in the games. For example, the books go out of their way to not mention things that would canonize any one version of a player choice in ME1 or 2, such as the council surviving or dying, Udina or Anderson becoming councilor, which of Shepard's squadmates survive the suicide mission, etc. So we are left to keep those things to our "personal canon".

So thats why I'm saying, I dont know if Javik is one of those "personal canon" things or if Bioware meant for him to be official canon. 

[MaximizedAction]

DJBare wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

DJBare wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
The whole game is the ending. All character arcs get closure, the genophage cured if you want to, the quarian geth conflict ends one way or another.
This is what people don't get and confirmed by BW employees.

Accept that we do not have the whole game literally speaking, there are other story arcs to this game in the form of DLC, taking back Omega for example, anyone who did not get "From ashes" did not have the full game, they admit in the Final hours app it was pulled from the main game, TIM was supposed to kidnap Javik on Thessia to obtain the information he wanted.
Whether we like it or not, we did not get the "whole" game.

That was my initial thought when I re-read all interviews with Bioware after having finished the game. Didn't consider it as a serious possibility, though.

They cut Javik in the main game because he didn't fit the rest of the game, so what? They used the VI in his place. I can't see why this makes the game incomplete.
Also even if IT is true, the decisions you did until the point you start to loose touch with reality give closure so they do matter. They said not every end is a good ending. Yes, vaporizing everyone on Earth or having Shep indoctrinated is certainly not a good ending, but what leads to these endings are your choices. If your choices wouldn't matter there would be only one outcome. If it's your choice to skip ftl to the ending and loose it's still your choice.

I'm not sure you got my point, sure choices regarding the genophage and the quarian/geth conflict do matter, but it's the ending where choices no longer matter if I.T is true, there might be only one consequence, whether Shepard lives or dies, if Shepard's will is strong then s/he survives her injuries, if not then s/he dies in the rubble on earth, that's the point I'm making, everything after London is purely inside Shepard's own mind, so any choice only matters in regard to Shepard's will to live, but no affect on the real world, in other words, the reapers are still reaping no matter which choice Shepard makes.

That's right, everything after the moment X, presumably in London, nothing matters on the scale it was presented, only your stand with respect to the Reapers changes.
We don't know whether Shepard died if we didn't see the breath scene. But that's not important.

[Bill Casey]

Should a Reaper subvert a well-placed political or military leader, the resulting chaos can bring down nations

[HellishFiend]

MaximizedAction wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Apparently, BioWare decided that the Prothean VI is kidnapped on Thessia instead of Javik.

Javik is not as essential to the main storyline as some think. His remarks are interesting, even amusing, but he still just talks about analogies in his cycle. His remarks on Asari beliefs are nothing more than clarifications.

It would be nice if we had some way of knowing whether or not Bioware intended for Javik to be canon, similar to how Arrival was confirmed as canon through the new comic. I'm doubtful as to whether or not we'll ever get that, though. 

Still, did any of us ever come up with anything Javik-related as evidence for IT? I cant recall anything. 

If IT's true, his remarks give you an interesting moral perspective. All ME games had characters that you could chose to take as examples for your decisions. Wrex and Garrus had something for Renegades, Liara and Tali for Paragons. Javik keeps telling you what he did to indoctrinated friends, traitors, etc. It would be only natural, if at some point you were in his shoes.

That is all true. He does point out some things that led us to conclude that other things could be taken as IT evidence. Only thing is that I dont think we can take his subjective opinions as evidence. 

[MegumiAzusa]

MaximizedAction wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

DJBare wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
The whole game is the ending. All character arcs get closure, the genophage cured if you want to, the quarian geth conflict ends one way or another.
This is what people don't get and confirmed by BW employees.

Accept that we do not have the whole game literally speaking, there are other story arcs to this game in the form of DLC, taking back Omega for example, anyone who did not get "From ashes" did not have the full game, they admit in the Final hours app it was pulled from the main game, TIM was supposed to kidnap Javik on Thessia to obtain the information he wanted.
Whether we like it or not, we did not get the "whole" game.

That was my initial thought when I re-read all interviews with Bioware after having finished the game. Didn't consider it as a serious possibility, though.

They cut Javik in the main game because he didn't fit the rest of the game, so what? They used the VI in his place. I can't see why this makes the game incomplete.
Also even if IT is true, the decisions you did until the point you start to loose touch with reality give closure so they do matter. They said not every end is a good ending. Yes, vaporizing everyone on Earth or having Shep indoctrinated is certainly not a good ending, but what leads to these endings are your choices. If your choices wouldn't matter there would be only one outcome. If it's your choice to skip ftl to the ending and loose it's still your choice.

I didn't mean that Javik with my comment. I was surprised how well he fitted to the Thessia mission, besides Liara. It almost seemed as if you HAD to take Javik with you on that mission. But the From Ashed situation was never a problem to me.

And, indeed, after a more in depth analysis of the game, your end choices do matter, there are more than just one ending, even more than 3 endings. But that is only after you start looking very sharply into the details. It's not something you notice right away, it's not intuitive. It's not like in ME2 where you DO notice when a character died. You DO notice that you rescued your crew from the Collectors. You also know, when you sacrificed the council in ME1.
All these endings are clearly different and don't need very much indepth analysis to tell them apart.

This is not the case with ME3. And the motivation for me to doubt the completeness of the game, are the interviews because for some reason, Casey, Mac, Mike, etc. chose words that on a first look just seem to contradict what I experienced in my endings.

Why would Casey say that it's more than just A, B, C endings, when at first sight it is? It only makes sense, if you take that as a hint to look more closely into the endings. And that some did.

And while doing so, funny things like the Indoctrination Theory popped up, and once you've seen it, it cannot be unseen.

So you don't notice when Geth or Quarians get extinct? You don't notice that you just cured the genophage or killed Mordin? These two alone are singular examples of choices bigger than anything you've got in ME2.

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

All official content is canon. I don't understand why people keep on insisting otherwise.

I'm not insisting otherwise, I've just never heard that, actually. 

I didn't hear that either. But I've read it.
I just don't get the whole point why wouldn't it be canon if it was made by the creators of Mass Effect.

The only reason why I dont assume anything is canon (unless confirmed in canon materials like the books/comics), is because things can play out so differently in the games. For example, the books go out of their way to not mention things that would canonize any one version of a player choice in ME1 or 2, such as the council surviving or dying, Udina or Anderson becoming councilor, which of Shepard's squadmates survive the suicide mission, etc. So we are left to keep those things to our "personal canon".

So thats why I'm saying, I dont know if Javik is one of those "personal canon" things or if Bioware meant for him to be official canon. 

I get it - you mean the canon is the single correct way to go. That reminded me why it's hard to discuss Mass Effect. For each and every player there are some differences of varying degree in their experience with the game. Some players heard characters say one thing, others heard different things. Like the Catalyst who changes his speech according to what you did throughout the game.

[MaximizedAction]

HellishFiend wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

And, indeed, after a more in depth analysis of the game, your end choices do matter, there are more than just one ending, even more than 3 endings. But that is only after you start looking very sharply into the details. It's not something you notice right away, it's not intuitive. It's not like in ME2 where you DO notice when a character died. You DO notice that you rescued your crew from the Collectors. You also know, when you sacrificed the council in ME1.
All these endings are clearly different and don't need very much indepth analysis to tell them apart.

This is not the case with ME3. And the motivation for me to doubt the completeness of the game, are the interviews because for some reason, Casey, Mac, Mike, etc. chose words that on a first look just seem to contradict what I experienced in my endings.

Why would Casey say that it's more than just A, B, C endings, when at first sight it is? It only makes sense, if you take that as a hint to look more closely into the endings. And that some did.

And while doing so, funny things like the Indoctrination Theory popped up, and once you've seen it, it cannot be unseen.

Now that you mention it, I think that if ME2 had been the final game in the series, fans would have found that ending unsatisfactory as well. The main reason ME2's ending was so popular was because of the epicness of the suicide mission, combined with the suspenseful buildup of the impending Reaper arrival in ME3. 

But, replace the Collectors with the Reapers themselves, and suddenly ME2's ending would become nearly identical to ME3's. You finish the suicide mission, have a short convo with TIM, and get no closure other than seeing the members of your squad that survived. 

Sounds kind of like ME3's ending, doesnt it?

It does, plus the cliffhanger ending. That might've been the reason for fans to somehow come up with ME4 with Shepard, which, of course, will not happen. Casey said that Shepard's story comes to an end with the trilogy.

Maybe we this WAS the ending for ME3 but not the ending for the Mass Effect trilogy.

[RavenEyry]

HellishFiend wrote...

The only reason why I dont assume anything is canon (unless confirmed in canon materials like the books/comics), is because things can play out so differently in the games. For example, the books go out of their way to not mention things that would canonize any one version of a player choice in ME1 or 2, such as the council surviving or dying, Udina or Anderson becoming councilor, which of Shepard's squadmates survive the suicide mission, etc. So we are left to keep those things to our "personal canon".

So thats why I'm saying, I dont know if Javik is one of those "personal canon" things or if Bioware meant for him to be official canon. 

Any individual choices don't have a canon result, but I think all DLC officially happens, just the details have no canon.

[HellishFiend]

RavenEyry wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

The only reason why I dont assume anything is canon (unless confirmed in canon materials like the books/comics), is because things can play out so differently in the games. For example, the books go out of their way to not mention things that would canonize any one version of a player choice in ME1 or 2, such as the council surviving or dying, Udina or Anderson becoming councilor, which of Shepard's squadmates survive the suicide mission, etc. So we are left to keep those things to our "personal canon".

So thats why I'm saying, I dont know if Javik is one of those "personal canon" things or if Bioware meant for him to be official canon. 

Any individual choices don't have a canon result, but I think all DLC officially happens, just the details have no canon.

That makes sense, I just wish we knew for sure. 

[paxxton]

RavenEyry wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

The only reason why I dont assume anything is canon (unless confirmed in canon materials like the books/comics), is because things can play out so differently in the games. For example, the books go out of their way to not mention things that would canonize any one version of a player choice in ME1 or 2, such as the council surviving or dying, Udina or Anderson becoming councilor, which of Shepard's squadmates survive the suicide mission, etc. So we are left to keep those things to our "personal canon".

So thats why I'm saying, I dont know if Javik is one of those "personal canon" things or if Bioware meant for him to be official canon. 

Any individual choices don't have a canon result, but I think all DLC officially happens, just the details have no canon.

Exactly what I wanted to say next.  There is no ME canon in a traditional sense because different situations can play out differently. The collective effort of the players is what distills the "canon".

Modifié par paxxton, 19 mai 2012 - 07:58 .

[MaximizedAction]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

DJBare wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
The whole game is the ending. All character arcs get closure, the genophage cured if you want to, the quarian geth conflict ends one way or another.
This is what people don't get and confirmed by BW employees.

Accept that we do not have the whole game literally speaking, there are other story arcs to this game in the form of DLC, taking back Omega for example, anyone who did not get "From ashes" did not have the full game, they admit in the Final hours app it was pulled from the main game, TIM was supposed to kidnap Javik on Thessia to obtain the information he wanted.
Whether we like it or not, we did not get the "whole" game.

That was my initial thought when I re-read all interviews with Bioware after having finished the game. Didn't consider it as a serious possibility, though.

They cut Javik in the main game because he didn't fit the rest of the game, so what? They used the VI in his place. I can't see why this makes the game incomplete.
Also even if IT is true, the decisions you did until the point you start to loose touch with reality give closure so they do matter. They said not every end is a good ending. Yes, vaporizing everyone on Earth or having Shep indoctrinated is certainly not a good ending, but what leads to these endings are your choices. If your choices wouldn't matter there would be only one outcome. If it's your choice to skip ftl to the ending and loose it's still your choice.

I didn't mean that Javik with my comment. I was surprised how well he fitted to the Thessia mission, besides Liara. It almost seemed as if you HAD to take Javik with you on that mission. But the From Ashed situation was never a problem to me.

And, indeed, after a more in depth analysis of the game, your end choices do matter, there are more than just one ending, even more than 3 endings. But that is only after you start looking very sharply into the details. It's not something you notice right away, it's not intuitive. It's not like in ME2 where you DO notice when a character died. You DO notice that you rescued your crew from the Collectors. You also know, when you sacrificed the council in ME1.
All these endings are clearly different and don't need very much indepth analysis to tell them apart.

This is not the case with ME3. And the motivation for me to doubt the completeness of the game, are the interviews because for some reason, Casey, Mac, Mike, etc. chose words that on a first look just seem to contradict what I experienced in my endings.

Why would Casey say that it's more than just A, B, C endings, when at first sight it is? It only makes sense, if you take that as a hint to look more closely into the endings. And that some did.

And while doing so, funny things like the Indoctrination Theory popped up, and once you've seen it, it cannot be unseen.

So you don't notice when Geth or Quarians get extinct? You don't notice that you just cured the genophage or killed Mordin? These two alone are singular examples of choices bigger than anything you've got in ME2.

Of course I did, what i meant was everything after your RGB choice. But ok, you want to define all of ME3 as an ending.
Ok, fine with me, did the same at some point.
In that case, there are way more endings than fit into a normal spreadsheet, and Casey's statements about the endings having much more sophistication to it or Mike's, how the endings are such that they can't even be counted in the classical sense.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 19 mai 2012 - 07:55 .

[DJBare]

MaximizedAction wrote...


Maybe this WAS the ending for ME3 but not the ending for the Mass Effect trilogy.

There ya go, the "trilogy" is not complete, I like to think of the next bit as "ME3 part 2 of Shepard's story".
My opinion with nothing to back it up of course.

Modifié par DJBare, 19 mai 2012 - 07:56 .

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

I get it - you mean the canon is the single correct way to go. That reminded me why it's hard to discuss Mass Effect. For each and every player there are some differences of varying degree in their experience with the game. Some players heard characters say one thing, others heard different things. Like the Catalyst who changes his speech according to what you did throughout the game.

Very true.  Since there is a lot of "personal canon" in the ME games, most of the discussion tends to be about the overall things happening behind the scenes (is TIM indoctrinated, is Shepard being indoctrinated, etc), rather than opinions about occurrences in the game. 

[TJBartlemus]

I posted this in a discussion and then on my own thread earlier and I want your take on this.

Here is my take on it, which is up for debate, but the catalyst is effectively the leader of the reapers or at least part of them (he admits this by saying "I know you've thought about destroying us.") and when he is talking to Shepard he takes on the form of the child that has been haunting him. The only way to take that form is to have taken it from shepards head. So even if the theory isn't true (which I believe it is) the reapers were in shepards head. No doubt. Also what I found weird was that there was no final boss at the end of Mass Effect 3 like the end of the first 2. Why would they change now? My idea is that they haven't released the full game,and they have been working on this dlc or at least planning it for longer than they have said. A few extra scenes and more explanation wouldn't take 2 months and counting.

[MegumiAzusa]

MaximizedAction wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

DJBare wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
The whole game is the ending. All character arcs get closure, the genophage cured if you want to, the quarian geth conflict ends one way or another.
This is what people don't get and confirmed by BW employees.

Accept that we do not have the whole game literally speaking, there are other story arcs to this game in the form of DLC, taking back Omega for example, anyone who did not get "From ashes" did not have the full game, they admit in the Final hours app it was pulled from the main game, TIM was supposed to kidnap Javik on Thessia to obtain the information he wanted.
Whether we like it or not, we did not get the "whole" game.

That was my initial thought when I re-read all interviews with Bioware after having finished the game. Didn't consider it as a serious possibility, though.

They cut Javik in the main game because he didn't fit the rest of the game, so what? They used the VI in his place. I can't see why this makes the game incomplete.
Also even if IT is true, the decisions you did until the point you start to loose touch with reality give closure so they do matter. They said not every end is a good ending. Yes, vaporizing everyone on Earth or having Shep indoctrinated is certainly not a good ending, but what leads to these endings are your choices. If your choices wouldn't matter there would be only one outcome. If it's your choice to skip ftl to the ending and loose it's still your choice.

I didn't mean that Javik with my comment. I was surprised how well he fitted to the Thessia mission, besides Liara. It almost seemed as if you HAD to take Javik with you on that mission. But the From Ashed situation was never a problem to me.

And, indeed, after a more in depth analysis of the game, your end choices do matter, there are more than just one ending, even more than 3 endings. But that is only after you start looking very sharply into the details. It's not something you notice right away, it's not intuitive. It's not like in ME2 where you DO notice when a character died. You DO notice that you rescued your crew from the Collectors. You also know, when you sacrificed the council in ME1.
All these endings are clearly different and don't need very much indepth analysis to tell them apart.

This is not the case with ME3. And the motivation for me to doubt the completeness of the game, are the interviews because for some reason, Casey, Mac, Mike, etc. chose words that on a first look just seem to contradict what I experienced in my endings.

Why would Casey say that it's more than just A, B, C endings, when at first sight it is? It only makes sense, if you take that as a hint to look more closely into the endings. And that some did.

And while doing so, funny things like the Indoctrination Theory popped up, and once you've seen it, it cannot be unseen.

So you don't notice when Geth or Quarians get extinct? You don't notice that you just cured the genophage or killed Mordin? These two alone are singular examples of choices bigger than anything you've got in ME2.

Of course I did, what i meant was everything after your RGB choice. But ok, you want to define all of ME3 as an ending.
Ok, fine with me, did the same at some point.
In that case, there are way more endings than fit into a normal spreadsheet, and Casey's statements about the endings having much more sophistication to it or Mike's, how the endings are such, that they can't even be counted in the classical sense.

Correct. What ME3 specifically does different is that it doesn't wait to wrap up everything in the last x minutes, and people aren't accustomed to that. Let's say maybe with enough EMS you have indeed enough firepower to beat the Reapers once and for all, you don't see that immediately but it is implied by how the endings themselves differ. Add to that that killing off Quarians for example is final, you can't get them back regardless of what you do later. Lets say you make two playthroughs that are completely the same but one time you side with Quarians and one time you side with Geth. Everything up to that point is the same, everything after that point might seem the same on first glance, but it is in fact completely different.
Compare that to ME2 when you arrive at Tuchanka. Either you see Wrex as a well renowned leader, working towards a brighter future for all Krogans with a huge amount of supporter or you see Wreav, struggling to stay in control, blind for anything new and only aim to get more power. It may seem to be a small different at the time, but in the long run it's huge.
Compared to that the decision to either let Ash or Kaidan die is completely irrelevant.

Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 19 mai 2012 - 08:04 .

[HellishFiend]

DJBare wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...


Maybe this WAS the ending for ME3 but not the ending for the Mass Effect trilogy.

There ya go, the "trilogy" is not complete, I like to think of the next bit as "ME3 part 2 of Shepard's story".
My opinion with nothing to back it up of course.

I actually wouldnt be surprised if Bioware is struggling with the decision of where to take the ME franchise next. Since we know they dont want to canonize anything that was player choice, how can they best create new content and story arcs in the same ME universe without involving scenarios that would be TOO divergent based on choices in the original trilogy?

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I get it - you mean the canon is the single correct way to go. That reminded me why it's hard to discuss Mass Effect. For each and every player there are some differences of varying degree in their experience with the game. Some players heard characters say one thing, others heard different things. Like the Catalyst who changes his speech according to what you did throughout the game.

Very true.  Since there is a lot of "personal canon" in the ME games, most of the discussion tends to be about the overall things happening behind the scenes (is TIM indoctrinated, is Shepard being indoctrinated, etc), rather than opinions about occurrences in the game. 

But if you want to discuss whether TIM was indoctrinated or not, you necessarily have to base your opinion on "personal canon" (the things you encountered during the game). Now, if many "personal canons" clash on this forum, BioWare gets a much needed insight into players' reaction to their product.

[Arian Dynas]

Salient Archer wrote...

If we were to consider that ME:Cerberus was an idea the reapers gave Jack Harper [as Cerberus only came to exist after he had contact with the Arch Monolith] what are some of the parallels and motifs we can draw from the name?

Well the most popular beliefs say that Cerberus was the three headed guardian of the underworld, He is the son of Echidna [who was half woman, half serpent/demon] and Typhon [a fire breathing giant even the Gods feared].

Each one of his heads representing either birth, life and death or the past, present and future. Hmm, what else in the mass effect trilogy also represents the idea of things that are related but with distinct differences or stages.

Obviously the imagery of three is rich with ME:Cerberus, considering their logo is made up of three unique parts, the illusive man has three brightly coloured orbs in his eyes [although these eyes were created by contact with the Reaper artefact] and even the Cerberus Skunkworks emblem from ME has the three motif going for it.

In Greek mythology, It is said that Cerberus only feasted on the flesh of the living and hence only the undead could enter the underworld but yet none of them could leave.

Hercules final mission was to trap Cerberus as punishment for killing his own children [he was driven mad by Hera at the time] to successfully take down Cerberus he had to be initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries so he could learn how to navigate in and out of the underworld untouched.

By the way Elusinian evolved into the word elusive "difficult to catch".

Once Herc meet up with Hades he was told he could have Cerberus but only if he could take the beast down without weapons, Hercules suceded. Hercules {with Cerberus on his back} travelled back to the mortal realm and presented Cerberus to King Eurystheus, the king not expecting Hercules to be capable of the task was so terrified of Hercules and the beast that he asked Hercules to return it to the underworld and in some versions this act also cleansed Hecules of any remnants of his madness.

Anyway, just some food for thought and hopefully debate.

Would like to point out, the name Cerberus came from TIM's Manifesto, in which he called for "A cerberus to watch from the Charon relay" hence he was invoking the symbolism of Charon and Pluto and greek myth.

[MaximizedAction]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Correct. What ME3 specifically does different is that it doesn't wait to wrap up everything in the last x minutes, and people aren't accustomed to that. Let's say maybe with enough EMS you have indeed enough firepower to beat the Reapers once and for all, you don't see that immediately but it is implied by how the endings themselves differ. Add to that that killing off Quarians for example is final, you can't get them back regardless of what you do later. Lets say you make two playthroughs that are completely the same but one time you side with Quarians and one time you side with Geth. Everything up to that point is the same, everything after that point might seem the same on first glance, but it is in fact completely different.
Compare that to ME2 when you arrive at Tuchanka. Either you see Wrex as a well renowned leader, working towards a brighter future for all Krogans with a huge amount of supporter or you see Wreav, struggling to stay in control, blind for anything new and only aim to get more power. It may seem to be a small different at the time, but in the long run it's huge.
Compared to that the decision to either let Ash or Kaidan die is completely irrelevant.

You're right, compared to the Geth vs Quarians choice, the VS situation -- up to this point -- doesn't have such a global impact, maybe except for your Shep's lovelife, hehe.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 19 mai 2012 - 08:12 .

[DJBare]

TJBartlemus wrote...

I posted this in a discussion and then on my own thread earlier and I want your take on this.

Here is my take on it, which is up for debate, but the catalyst is effectively the leader of the reapers or at least part of them (he admits this by saying "I know you've thought about destroying us.") and when he is talking to Shepard he takes on the form of the child that has been haunting him. The only way to take that form is to have taken it from shepards head. So even if the theory isn't true (which I believe it is) the reapers were in shepards head. No doubt. Also what I found weird was that there was no final boss at the end of Mass Effect 3 like the end of the first 2. Why would they change now? My idea is that they haven't released the full game,and they have been working on this dlc or at least planning it for longer than they have said. A few extra scenes and more explanation wouldn't take 2 months and counting.

That reminds of the scene where you see the child entering a security locked door, then the building is all but destroyed, that blast was huge and an air duct is the last place you want to be, the concussion wave and heat would have been forced through the air ducts before the glass blew out reducing the pressure.

[Bill Casey]

HellishFiend wrote...

Still, did any of us ever come up with anything Javik-related as evidence for IT? I cant recall anything.

[MegumiAzusa]

DJBare wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

I posted this in a discussion and then on my own thread earlier and I want your take on this.

Here is my take on it, which is up for debate, but the catalyst is effectively the leader of the reapers or at least part of them (he admits this by saying "I know you've thought about destroying us.") and when he is talking to Shepard he takes on the form of the child that has been haunting him. The only way to take that form is to have taken it from shepards head. So even if the theory isn't true (which I believe it is) the reapers were in shepards head. No doubt. Also what I found weird was that there was no final boss at the end of Mass Effect 3 like the end of the first 2. Why would they change now? My idea is that they haven't released the full game,and they have been working on this dlc or at least planning it for longer than they have said. A few extra scenes and more explanation wouldn't take 2 months and counting.

That reminds of the scene where you see the child entering a security locked door, then the building is all but destroyed, that blast was huge and an air duct is the last place you want to be, the concussion wave and heat would have been forced through the air ducts before the glass blew out reducing the pressure.

You also see a computer on the desk, plants in their vases standing as nothing has happened etc.

[MaximizedAction]

DJBare wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

I posted this in a discussion and then on my own thread earlier and I want your take on this.

Here is my take on it, which is up for debate, but the catalyst is effectively the leader of the reapers or at least part of them (he admits this by saying "I know you've thought about destroying us.") and when he is talking to Shepard he takes on the form of the child that has been haunting him. The only way to take that form is to have taken it from shepards head. So even if the theory isn't true (which I believe it is) the reapers were in shepards head. No doubt. Also what I found weird was that there was no final boss at the end of Mass Effect 3 like the end of the first 2. Why would they change now? My idea is that they haven't released the full game,and they have been working on this dlc or at least planning it for longer than they have said. A few extra scenes and more explanation wouldn't take 2 months and counting.

That reminds of the scene where you see the child entering a security locked door, then the building is all but destroyed, that blast was huge and an air duct is the last place you want to be, the concussion wave and heat would have been forced through the air ducts before the glass blew out reducing the pressure.

Ok, at least from after the Reaper lazWOOOr, the kid isn't real anymore, since someone suddenly disappearing after you look in away and then back again is a thing used in movies.
Also, if a young kid tells you "you can't help me", you know that thing ain't a kid.