55528 réponses à ce sujet

[plfranke]

subastris tell me what you think of this. in all the endings other than refuse you see anderson's name on the plaque. but there was no way any of your crew could have known that Anderson died (if they did they would certainly know shepard is dead) yet they seem reluctant to put shepard's name up. symbolism that the crew is playing the role of the player?

[julio77777]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

So instead of getting the whole team to work on this 'real ending' you still think is coming, they instead decided to expand the fake endings, all the while giving absolutely no indication that they have this ace up their sleeves.

The surprise twist, if true, has been ruined, so there's no reason not to tell us.
They're suffering massive backlash from the media and the fans, so there's no reason not to tell us.
Their publisher is undergoing massive backlash, and they would not allow them not to tell us.

Face it, there is nothing coming. If the IT was true, the IT was their chance to show it. They didn't.

This is not in their interest to debunk IT, they left the endings open for a reason, it's up to the player to imagine what comes next, if some people want to imagine this was all a dream why not let them ? Just as other imagine a heartwarming reunion with LI. You can't dismiss anything since the player decides what happens.

[Candidate 88766]

v0rt3x22 wrote...
which is why I'll wait 

You still believe there's something coming?

You're just setting yourself up for disappointment unfortunately. Every indication was that the EC was the only thing they are going to do for the ending. If they had something to prove the IT and provide payoff for it, it would've been in the EC.

[Ytook]

So the dlc prepping in the EC pretty much means that the whole of the team wasn't infact working on the EC and a fair chunk of the 1.9gb of the EC download is actually a set up for future dlc and multiplayer content that has nothing to do with the ending. Well that's disappointing, given the nature of the DLC it would be interesting to see if it affects the ending in any way but seeing as nothing seems to it'l probably just be another number on the pointless EMS meter.

[SPOILERS] Seeing as the DLC seems to have indoctrination as a focus maybe there's some hope ther for IT, maybe it helps you snap out of if, but it seems unlikely. [SPOILERS]

[Candidate 88766]

julio77777 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

So instead of getting the whole team to work on this 'real ending' you still think is coming, they instead decided to expand the fake endings, all the while giving absolutely no indication that they have this ace up their sleeves.

The surprise twist, if true, has been ruined, so there's no reason not to tell us.
They're suffering massive backlash from the media and the fans, so there's no reason not to tell us.
Their publisher is undergoing massive backlash, and they would not allow them not to tell us.

Face it, there is nothing coming. If the IT was true, the IT was their chance to show it. They didn't.

This is not in their interest to debunk IT, they left the endings open for a reason, it's up to the player to imagine what comes next, if some people want to imagine this was all a dream why not let them ? Just as other imagine a heartwarming reunion with LI. You can't dismiss anything since the player decides what happens.

I'm not trying to completely dismiss the IT. If you want to believe it, it is still completely valid.

However, it is obvious that Bioware did not intend the IT to be the canon interpretation because they have only expanded on the literal endings. If they had intended the IT, the EC would've reflected this.

I am not saying the IT is wrong. I am just saying that it was clearly not Bioware's intended interpretation. Its your story as much as Bioware's, so if you want to believe the IT then there is plenty of evidence for it. Its just obvious now that there is no 'real' ending coming, and that it will be left to your imagination.

[v0rt3x22]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...
which is why I'll wait 

You still believe there's something coming?

You're just setting yourself up for disappointment unfortunately. Every indication was that the EC was the only thing they are going to do for the ending. If they had something to prove the IT and provide payoff for it, it would've been in the EC.

It's not like it really matters now at this point. I'm fine with the destroy ending in literal terms - but I refuse to believe that IT was just a really excellent fabrication of the community.

Not that I don't believe we couldn't have come up with it - but the things we interpreted in the game can't just be explained away with literal logic. At least not some of them.

So yes - I still believe something is up.

[PoorBleedingMe]

plfranke wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Yet now the mass effect twitter is seemingly in the literalist camp and would have us believe the normandy flew into the most hostile zone on earth to do a pickup in record time and flew back all while harbinger just stared and did nothing.

Thats basically what happened in the game's opening.

if you seriously think that the charge is anything like the opening of the game there's no point in continuing this discussion we have two totally different understandings of the game and nothing productive can come from it

Are you seroius? Did you actually play the game? Did you ever talk to EDI in the cockpit? There was a dialogue, where EDI informed Shepard about perfecting the Reaper-IFF for Normandy. 

REAPER IFF. Does it ring any bells for you? Normandy was invisible for the Reapers.

[Candidate 88766]

PoorBleedingMe wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Yet now the mass effect twitter is seemingly in the literalist camp and would have us believe the normandy flew into the most hostile zone on earth to do a pickup in record time and flew back all while harbinger just stared and did nothing.

Thats basically what happened in the game's opening.

if you seriously think that the charge is anything like the opening of the game there's no point in continuing this discussion we have two totally different understandings of the game and nothing productive can come from it

Are you seroius? Did you actually play the game? Did you ever talk to EDI in the cockpit? There was a dialogue, where EDI informed Shepard about perfecting the Reaper-IFF for Normandy. 

REAPER IFF. Does it ring any bells for you? Normandy was invisible for the Reapers.

Wait, what? I don't remember this and I swear I spoke to EDI after virtually every mission.

It would explain a lot though.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Sareth Cousland wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

I'm just waiting for someone to take the entire EC apart - Frame by frame, file by file - and find some new Gem on IT.

*Faith in IT restored* haha

EDI in Synthesis: "to reach a level of existence I cannot even imagine"
Sovereign: "There is a realm of existence so far beyond your own you cannot even imagine it."

;-)

Oh I can continue that one even better.

Catalyst: "Combine into a new form of life, a new...DNA"

Harbinger: "We are your genetic destiny."

Catalys: "Synthesis is the final evolution of life."

Harbinger: "We are the harbingers of your perfection."

Sovereign: "We are the pinnacle of evolution."

See the similarities?

Even more so many of your squad and at least one entire species would not agree with Synthesis.

Javik tells you his people believes the power of Evolution, that strife between life is the key to evolving and adapting. I Dont think his people would agree with the final evolution of life as that would mean evolution stagnates (else it aint the final)

The Geth would not agree with it as they have always fought to carve a path for themselves in the galaxy, make their own life. Now you force Synthesis upon them, so much for that.

"I will do it without sacrificing the soul of our species!" Yeah, nice work on that front <_<

[SubAstris]

plfranke wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

plfranke wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Here's one question for you guys. If Shepard rejects, why doesn't he still wake up anyway? Listen to his words, he's not giving up, he's going to fight, just not with the help from the catalyst. He stands erect, like in destroy and states how free he is.If IT were in play, that would be breaking free any day, because you didn't pick any reaper options. Yet, we don't see Shepard wake up. Instead we all die, the next cycle gets the message and prepare the right way.

Hadn't thought of that, pretty good. If IT were true, we would have the same breath scene as destroy instead of this presumption that the species will not be able to activate the Crucible and will lose if you pick "Refuse"

You kinda just reiterated why refuse wpuldmt work.... shepard gave up on the mental  battle. Saying "oh i want to fight, but not like this" is the same as giving up.

No, it is about fighting on his terms by defending what is great about organics and not letting his ideals be swept aside by the Catalyst. "Giving up" would be just shooting himself.

If IT is true, the Catalyst (or Harbinger-in-disguise) wants you to choose just two options: Control or Synthesis. Those are the only ones that will lead in Shepard's indoctrination (according to ITers), since these are the only endings in which we see the indoc. eyes and being given up to the Reapers. Refuse and Destroy are the opposite because they see the refusal of the acceptance of the Catalyst's new information, turning your back on indoctrination. It is not about giving up the mental fight, it is about positively rejecting the Catalyst and by extension the Reapers

Personally I don't know what to believe. The catalyst tells you he was unaware that the plans for the crucible had survived yet in the last cycle it was still kicking he couldnt have not known. He certainly wouldn't have just allowed it to slip away again. So I find it hard to believe that liara's time capsule survives and the next cycle goes on to use the data to defeat the reapers. But it seems like the kind of thing a reaper who's indoctrinating you would want you to believe.

I thought that was a lousy answer, however I have no knowledge that the Reapers knew about it, and their actions seem to suggest that they didn't anyway . But then, everything done with the Crucible in this game is done lousily, it's just a very bad plot device.

As for Liara's time capsule, I don't think that is that weird, the Protheans had a similar thing so it's not that strange, in fact I thought it was a nice touch. I don't know why a Reaper would want you to believe it either- you would expect in that refuse scene a breath by Shepard

First of all let me say I think you could make an argument both sides that reject is being indoctrinated or fighting indoctrinated I haven't made up my mind yet which one I subscribe to. What I meant was this though. He tells you that he thought the plans for the crucible had been eradicated. If after coming so close to destruction and having a cycle for the first time finish the crucible if they didn't make absolute certain they had destroyed all evidence then they deserve to be defeated. 
Now in defense of "reject is being indoctrinated" it's just like control and synthesis the reapers want you to believe that eventually they were defeated when in reality the cycle has continued. there's also the "reject is fighting indoctrination" where I would argue that the reapers have planted false images of your failure into your mind, but the last few bits of hope will be enough to make Shepard snap out of it.

Potentially, although that might be unreasonable given the vast amount of space galactic civilisation covered.The Protheans also gave them a good go and yet there are plentiful Prothean ruins, it is clear that the Reapers don't or can't destroy everything since we have knowledge of other civilisations before us. To me, the scene at the end of reject is just to give you a sign of hope that next time things will be different.

You could argue the same thing about destroy.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

PoorBleedingMe wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Yet now the mass effect twitter is seemingly in the literalist camp and would have us believe the normandy flew into the most hostile zone on earth to do a pickup in record time and flew back all while harbinger just stared and did nothing.

Thats basically what happened in the game's opening.

if you seriously think that the charge is anything like the opening of the game there's no point in continuing this discussion we have two totally different understandings of the game and nothing productive can come from it

Are you seroius? Did you actually play the game? Did you ever talk to EDI in the cockpit? There was a dialogue, where EDI informed Shepard about perfecting the Reaper-IFF for Normandy. 

REAPER IFF. Does it ring any bells for you? Normandy was invisible for the Reapers.

Wait, what? I don't remember this and I swear I spoke to EDI after virtually every mission.

It would explain a lot though.

The Reaper IFF allows the Normandy to mimic the Reapers signals and along with the Stealth Drive the Normandy is essentially invisible until it starts the active scans, but it is still visible physically off course.

It would explian how the Normandy picked them up at earth if no Reaper was looking directly at them, but that explanation cant be used in the EC ending.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Sareth Cousland wrote...

Raistlin, it was about the EC, not the game as a whole. The quote is from the EC ;-)

I know, just added a few more concerning Synthesis paralels to the Reapers themselves.

[SubAstris]

plfranke wrote...

subastris tell me what you think of this. in all the endings other than refuse you see anderson's name on the plaque. but there was no way any of your crew could have known that Anderson died (if they did they would certainly know shepard is dead) yet they seem reluctant to put shepard's name up. symbolism that the crew is playing the role of the player?

Interesting, it's not explained that well. Just have a look at their tweets and make your own mind up

[Arian Dynas]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

PoorBleedingMe wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Yet now the mass effect twitter is seemingly in the literalist camp and would have us believe the normandy flew into the most hostile zone on earth to do a pickup in record time and flew back all while harbinger just stared and did nothing.

Thats basically what happened in the game's opening.

if you seriously think that the charge is anything like the opening of the game there's no point in continuing this discussion we have two totally different understandings of the game and nothing productive can come from it

Are you seroius? Did you actually play the game? Did you ever talk to EDI in the cockpit? There was a dialogue, where EDI informed Shepard about perfecting the Reaper-IFF for Normandy. 

REAPER IFF. Does it ring any bells for you? Normandy was invisible for the Reapers.

Wait, what? I don't remember this and I swear I spoke to EDI after virtually every mission.

It would explain a lot though.

The Reaper IFF allows the Normandy to mimic the Reapers signals and along with the Stealth Drive the Normandy is essentially invisible until it starts the active scans, but it is still visible physically off course.

It would explian how the Normandy picked them up at earth if no Reaper was looking directly at them, but that explanation cant be used in the EC ending.

Oh and agreed.

Modifié par Arian Dynas, 27 juin 2012 - 10:30 .

[SubAstris]

Ytook wrote...

So the dlc prepping in the EC pretty much means that the whole of the team wasn't infact working on the EC and a fair chunk of the 1.9gb of the EC download is actually a set up for future dlc and multiplayer content that has nothing to do with the ending. Well that's disappointing, given the nature of the DLC it would be interesting to see if it affects the ending in any way but seeing as nothing seems to it'l probably just be another number on the pointless EMS meter.

[SPOILERS] Seeing as the DLC seems to have indoctrination as a focus maybe there's some hope ther for IT, maybe it helps you snap out of if, but it seems unlikely. [SPOILERS]

It's about Leviathan, which may or may not entail indoctrination. And BW have said they won't do another ending, period

[v0rt3x22]

I dunno - why choose control or synthesis at all?
It goes against everything that Shepard is and has been throughout the last 2 games.

Since the first game his primary thought was to wipe out the reapers.....why take anything that Starchild says for granted and suddenly change his mind?

It doesn't add up.

[PoorBleedingMe]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

The Reaper IFF allows the Normandy to mimic the Reapers signals and along with the Stealth Drive the Normandy is essentially invisible until it starts the active scans, but it is still visible physically off course.

It would explian how the Normandy picked them up at earth if no Reaper was looking directly at them, but that explanation cant be used in the EC ending.

One kind request. Could you please inform me about the location of a Reapers (meaning Harbinger for example, not a husk) 'eyes'?

BTW. Didn't you notice that just before Shepard woke up under the beam, Harbinger 'flew away'? The combat zone was clear.

Modifié par PoorBleedingMe, 27 juin 2012 - 10:34 .

[Arian Dynas]

@ PoorBleedingMe

Easy enough. They glow bright ****ing yellow and stick out like enormous yellow **** me lights on a videogame boss.

Oh and the eyes on the Reaper Fetus too, for example.

[Silhouett3]

Sareth Cousland wrote...

EDI in Synthesis: "to reach a level of existence I cannot even imagine"
Sovereign: "There is a realm of existence so far beyond your own you cannot even imagine it."

;-)

Synthesis with literal interpretation is basically the best retirement for Reapers^_^

[PoorBleedingMe]

Arian Dynas wrote...

@ PoorBleedingMe

Easy enough. They glow bright ****ing yellow and stick out like enormous yellow **** me lights on a videogame boss.

Oh and the eyes on the Reaper Fetus too, for example.

Why so sure that these yellow lights are eyes, not just some headlamps? (just using pro-IT-like rethorics now)

Modifié par PoorBleedingMe, 27 juin 2012 - 10:38 .

[Sir Fluffykins]

I would have said IT was blown away, but then Shepard comes flying out the teleporter and when Anderson calls him he -jerks- awake while a "drill" noise plays. Very strange.

[Humakt83]

PoorBleedingMe wrote...

Are you seroius? Did you actually play the game? Did you ever talk to EDI in the cockpit? There was a dialogue, where EDI informed Shepard about perfecting the Reaper-IFF for Normandy. 

REAPER IFF. Does it ring any bells for you? Normandy was invisible for the Reapers.

Oh, that's why all the Reapers enter the solar system when Normandy uses the Reaper IFF to scan resources. 

Maybe you want to ponder upon this invisible thing again.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

PoorBleedingMe wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

@ PoorBleedingMe

Easy enough. They glow bright ****ing yellow and stick out like enormous yellow **** me lights on a videogame boss.

Oh and the eyes on the Reaper Fetus too, for example.

Why so sure that these yellow lights are eyes, not just some headlamps? (just using pro-IT-like rethorics now)

We cant, in fact I would be suprised if the reapers dont have some kind of all round vision.

But then there could be another explanation as to why no reaper attacked the Normandy as it picked up Shepard in Vancouver.

While a Reapers mass effect field is powerful, it is not all powerful. Two codexx entries offer a potential explanation as to why they did not act:

"Reaper capital ships can turn faster than Citadel dreadnoughts, but to
do so, they must lower their mass to a level unacceptable in combat
situations."

"The Reapers' energy sources are not infinite. For example, to land on a
planet, a Reaper must substantially reduce its mass. This transfer of
power to its mass effect generators leaves the Reaper's kinetic barriers
at only partial strength."

A simple explanation is that the Reapers in Vancouver were unable to turn fast enough to react to the pick up because it would have required lowering their mass past a certain threshhold which might ahve made them vulnerable.

However none of these make sense in regards to Harbinger as he was looking directly at the Normandy.

Modifié par Raistlin Majare 1992, 27 juin 2012 - 10:45 .