55528 réponses à ce sujet

[JestersShade]

First, I became an IT-er when I discovered the theory (which was great!) and I'm not one any more with the EC.
Not that I'm satisfied with any of the endings but I wouldn't understand a company working 3 months on a free DLC just to extend a "dream" sequence.
(especially with the new "reject" choice).

But concerning the respect of the "ME main themes", I do not agree, and that's precisely why I don't like any of the endings.
From what point, in the ME universe, the organics/synthetics "chaos" became so important ?
I would have find it nice (actually, I did) playing Deus Ex HR, or a spin-of in the ME universe playing a Quarian who was raised in a war with the Geth, but during the 3 games, the only "chaos" I had with synthetics ware the Geth in the first game, that happened to be heretics taking the reapers for Gods!
Even more in "my" story where I put an end to the Quarian/Geth war to hear few hours later "created always rebel against their creators" : WTF ???
And this, after playing a whole mission learning how their war started and how the Geth had always been ONLY defending themselves, but NEVER rebelling!

Honestly, I found the EC to be far better than the original endings (but with new space magic like the Normandy coming down, or the mass relays supposedly repaired by people who don't know how they work!, ...) but I really feel disappointed 'cause no possible endings match with what I felt of the universe when I first arrived at the final choice.

So my final conclusion about BW is ... poor "ending writers" : they were really good until the final point, managing to make me feel a whole range of feelings, from funny moments to very emotional ones (especially in the 3rd game) but leaving me with a bitter feeling, wondering if I'll replay the game(s) one day and that's really a shame.

A true disappointment that leaves me very sad ...

Good bye IT-er, it's been really nice reading your posts, and good bye Bioware, who couldn't stand the delays and wrote the endings in 10 minutes (I'm surprised we didn't end up with a princess on a pink pony to kill the reapers...)

[v0rt3x22]

Something else I just figured -

If you lose the war on the fact that you refuse what Starchild tells you - doesn't that confirm (knowing that Starchild is most likely controlled by the reapers) - that the Crucible is also a Reaper device?

Thus - probably a trap?

[The Eruptionist]

Zanza86 wrote...

The Eruptionist wrote...

The Catalyst provides you with information that lacks any kind of evidence. Prove to me that synthetics will always kill organics. Prove to me that you aren't trying to indoctrinate or trick me. Prove to me at least one of your claims.

Since he does not provide evidence I have no reason to trust him. You don't go up to some one claiming that the you have the power to fly and expect them to believe you without proof do you? Especially if you have proven to be a genocidal maniac that takes sadism through torture and manipulation to unprecedented levels as the Catalyst aka Reaper King has done.

Choosing refusal doesn't even address the issue as I expected it wouldn't. Shepard refuses on some strange moral grounds instead of calling the Catalyst's bluff regarding its lack of logic and lack of application of the scientific method.

You make demands of the Catalyst like you think he is human and living in today's society. You are not above the Catalyst, it tells you what you need to hear. If you choose to refuse its logic well, you see what happens now so kudos to you for sticking to your guns I hope it was worth it. An entity that has witnessed Organics and Synthetics at war with each other for countless cycles would have a better comprehension of that is to pass than you I'm afraid.

If the Catalyst wants me to chose one of the options it has presented me with then it should give me a reason to do so. It has not done this. I can't make a decision when it is based on unexplained assumptions no matter who they're coming from. How can you even consider any of the options without the appropriate context?

I'm not claiming I'm above the Catalyst. It is claiming it is above me by not explaining itself. Sure, it can just walk away if it wants (which it does) but really that seems more like lazy writing by Bioware.

You assume the Catalyst has knowledge about synthetic and organic conflict. Again there is no proof that it does. You are taking the word of the Reaper King without evidence.

[Simocrates]

llbountyhunter wrote...

Zanza86 wrote...

The Eruptionist wrote...

The Catalyst provides you with information that lacks any kind of evidence. Prove to me that synthetics will always kill organics. Prove to me that you aren't trying to indoctrinate or trick me. Prove to me at least one of your claims.

Since he does not provide evidence I have no reason to trust him. You don't go up to some one claiming that the you have the power to fly and expect them to believe you without proof do you? Especially if you have proven to be a genocidal maniac that takes sadism through torture and manipulation to unprecedented levels as the Catalyst aka Reaper King has done.

Choosing refusal doesn't even address the issue as I expected it wouldn't. Shepard refuses on some strange moral grounds instead of calling the Catalyst's bluff regarding its lack of logic and lack of application of the scientific method.

You make demands of the Catalyst like you think he is human and living in today's society. You are not above the Catalyst, it tells you what you need to hear. If you choose to refuse its logic well, you see what happens now so kudos to you for sticking to your guns I hope it was worth it. An entity that has witnessed Organics and Synthetics at war with each other for countless cycles would have a better comprehension of that is to pass than you I'm afraid.

the problem is, is that the catalyst has no logic.

I believe the Catalyst mentioned its purpose for creation and after witnessing countless ceasefires and agreements being always eventually breaking between synthetics and organics it had to come up with a new solution. Merging both organics and synthetics into one being, it sounds like a feasible. When you think about it Synthesis is just a more evolved method that was not available during the original cycle.

[Dalako]

 People are still holding on to IT? I guess the religious concept of ''faith'' applies to videogame storylines as well.

I read some people say and have the feeling some think that Bioware couldn't have screwed up. A lesson to be learnt here (and this doesn't just apply to fiction but real life as well): anyone, no matter how good a track record, can screw up. Badly. You can be surprised. But you can't convert that surprise into denial. That's delusional.

So I hope that throws out the ''couldn't have screwed up'' fallacy out the window. Bad writing is bad writing, it's not a cover-up for something deep and intellectual.

[The Eruptionist]

[/quote]

Well it is good thing EDI and the Geth support his logic then right...oh wait.

Also you are forgetting that the catalyst actually wants Shepard to make a chocie if taken litterally. He has every reason to explain this as detailed as possible if it can sway Shepard to Control or Synthesis. But he dosent.

You are trusting a Reaper without proof.

[/quote]



Thank you, sir/ ma'am. My point exactly

Modifié par The Eruptionist, 27 juin 2012 - 01:05 .

[SubAstris]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

*SIGH* Honestly, I hoped for IT to be revealed in the EC and was a bit disappointed when it wasn't. The extended ending seems even more literal than the original one. Actually, the breath scene after Destroy serves the exact same role as the transcendence scene in Control (Shepard lives on). Maybe we should take BioWare's words more seriously and don't read between lines too much. *SIGH*

Negative, there can be no stepping back, no retreat, no stepping forward and no attacking reaper forces.

But really how can I look at this ending litterally with the enormous plotholes and problems with the ending which Bioware had 3.5 months to fix, but dident do.

Even more so they themselves said EC would not confirm or deny IT, so until someone can disprove it in its entirety I am sticking with IT. Better than having to believe in two endings which go against everything we have seen and been told over the cause of 3 games.

How would anyone ever be able to disprove IT in its entirety? What sort of evidence would an ITer look for?

[EpyonX3]

Lat2oo5 wrote...

My LI was Miranda, and I got a static picture of her looking at skyline, very melancholic, but my crew placed the plaquet even when my Shepard was still alive.

I haven't tried anyone else but my LI was liara and since she's bonded to Shepard, she didn't place his name on the board and smiled. She knew he was alive. I don't know if anyone else does the same.

[paxxton]

Lord Luc1fer wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

We see Shepard die for sure only in Synthesis and low-EMS Destroy. In every other he lives on in some way:

Control - trascends into a being of light (the only ending in which he speaks for himself!)
high-EMS Destroy - the breath scene
Rejection - stands still while the screen fades out to black

I disagree with Control. Shepard, the one we've been playing as dies. A new AI construct is created based on everything that Shepard was. The man talking to us is not Shepard.

I just watched the control ending on youtube and I found it realllyyy unpleasant. It was well done and had a good message, the change to shepard was just too unnerving. It left a bad taste in the mouth which I think was intentional, it's by far for me the saddest ending to see what sheaprd has to give

This ending ensures survival of organics, ends the war and empowers organics by giving them the technology and resources to build a better future (not destroying what they have already achieved and starting all over again like in Destroy). Shepard loses his body but his mind serves as a basis for the new Shepard. The new Catalyst doesn't want to harvest organic civilizations but commands the Reapers to help them rebuild after the war. How can you not see the potential in this solution? And it's not that organics have to do what Shepard wants. He says that many have their own voice. (that leaves the possibility of future organics vs synthetics war still open which is exactly what the old Catalyst told Shepard would always happen (even before the Reapers were created it was so)).

Modifié par paxxton, 27 juin 2012 - 01:08 .

[v0rt3x22]

meh. I'm having discussions with myself...

[Doom972]

Lord Luc1fer wrote...

Is it me having been looking wrong, or did anybody else see if marauder shields had lost his shields in the EC? I'm pretty sure I saw that and it made me LOL so hard.

No, he still had his shields. He lived as Marauder Shields and died as Marauder Health.

[Lat2oo5]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Something else I just figured -

If you lose the war on the fact that you refuse what Starchild tells you - doesn't that confirm (knowing that Starchild is most likely controlled by the reapers) - that the Crucible is also a Reaper device?

Thus - probably a trap?

I have always thought that. The crucible is a reaper invention, to give us something to fight for and, in the end, trying to fool us, so for that I cant see destroy option like the good one.

[Jusseb]

Well i played the EC and finished it about a few hours ago. I must say they did give some of us more closure, that was the intention of this DLC. We were the ones that thought there would be more behind it, so i think in that way it is an dissapointment.

The ending were still a bit vague, but better than de original.

I still don't understand why the breath scene is still there. That whole Citadel thing blow up and Shepard shouldn't be alive in the destroy ending, Particularly that scene ****s us all up. At the base of that scene, they owe us an explanation.

[KarlPilks]

It's funny because of all the things surrounding the Ending people bring up (closure, space kid, plot holes, breath scene) the thing that sticks out the most for me is him collapsing onto that platform and it floating up into the air. For some reason that just took me out of the entire experience and made it feel to unbelievable. Really? He just happens to collapse on the platform that will take him up to meet the Star God? What if he had of collapsed a few feet to the right or left? He would have missed the platform? I can live with him meeting this sentient Catalyst (although I like how it calls itself the Catalyst as well to assure us), but really? The only way up to his 'home' by the 3 choice machine is with that one magic elevator?

I'm sure for most people it's a minor gripe or a non issue, but for me that's the part that sticks out as terrible.

Modifié par KarlPilks, 27 juin 2012 - 01:12 .

[Simocrates]

The Eruptionist wrote...

Zanza86 wrote...

The Eruptionist wrote...

The Catalyst provides you with information that lacks any kind of evidence. Prove to me that synthetics will always kill organics. Prove to me that you aren't trying to indoctrinate or trick me. Prove to me at least one of your claims.

Since he does not provide evidence I have no reason to trust him. You don't go up to some one claiming that the you have the power to fly and expect them to believe you without proof do you? Especially if you have proven to be a genocidal maniac that takes sadism through torture and manipulation to unprecedented levels as the Catalyst aka Reaper King has done.

Choosing refusal doesn't even address the issue as I expected it wouldn't. Shepard refuses on some strange moral grounds instead of calling the Catalyst's bluff regarding its lack of logic and lack of application of the scientific method.

You make demands of the Catalyst like you think he is human and living in today's society. You are not above the Catalyst, it tells you what you need to hear. If you choose to refuse its logic well, you see what happens now so kudos to you for sticking to your guns I hope it was worth it. An entity that has witnessed Organics and Synthetics at war with each other for countless cycles would have a better comprehension of that is to pass than you I'm afraid.

If the Catalyst wants me to chose one of the options it has presented me with then it should give me a reason to do so. It has not done this. I can't make a decision when it is based on unexplained assumptions no matter who they're coming from. How can you even consider any of the options without the appropriate context?

I'm not claiming I'm above the Catalyst. It is claiming it is above me by not explaining itself. Sure, it can just walk away if it wants (which it does) but really that seems more like lazy writing by Bioware.

You assume the Catalyst has knowledge about synthetic and organic conflict. Again there is no proof that it does. You are taking the word of the Reaper King without evidence.

The Catalyst doesn't have to tell you anything, you are portraying an inflated sense of entitlement, don't do that. The only reason the Catalyst even gives you these options is because it wants to find a new solution to the conflict. I assume it has knowledge about synthetic and organic conflict because it was created for the very purpose of  overseeing it and developing a soultion for it. Shoving feathers up your butt doesn't make you a chicken and when something is shaped like a bucket and painted red it usually is a red bucket.

[Daryslash]

Zanza86 wrote...

Daryslash wrote...

And how come I never get to see Joker mourning the loss of EDI, or the Geth dying for that matter?
This ending still has so much loose ends...

I think you are being a little pedantic there.

Daryslash wrote...

The whole Anderson and Illusive Man scene is there, too... The same nonsense about Anderson getting to the control panel ahead of Shepard even though there is only way to it, and Illusive Man appearing out of nowhere. And then there is the clues that this is happening in Shepard's mind (like the wound on Shepard), that make no literal sense at all.

sigh2

The more I think about these endings, the more bad I feel.

If you recall Anderson said he entered after you and was ported to a different section. He wasn't injured so he would naturally move faster, also over the com he mentions the walls and surroundings changing. This could easily imply that the passage he used closed behind him and had now opened for you. TIM appears behind you and again the shifting rooms and platforms can accomodate this theory. As for the wound that is still a bit odd but I can confidently state that I don't believe IT is the case anymore. It was a good theory until BioWare filled in gaps.

Maybe... but no, just no. The passage closing (more like disappearing completely) behind Anderson would imply he is already near the console, and he mentions the console only a while after. The timing of the things he says just doesn't make it seem likely. Also, the place would have to change A LOT to make it look like that, and we don't see anything happening or any clue of that except what Anderson says. And it seems like he was talking about the mechanisms changing in the chasm, not anything else.
The placing of the passage Shepard takes is too convenient in the center of everything, even facing the control panel. It as this passage is the main entrance to the control room. If so, why would Anderson appear elsewhete, and why would BioWare make Anderson take an alternate, even hidden, route and make it disappear right after? Why exactly would they make the place shift so that the route Anderson take COMPLETELY disappears? It's really unnecessary to do that.

Yeah, the Illusive Man comes behind Shepard... which means what? He was hiding behind a rock the entire time waiting for Shepard and the Alliance to come, and sat there while Harbinger shot the ass out of everything that moved near the beam? And then after Harbinger leaves, he walks to the beam, without no one ever noticing it?
Nah...

I understand what you're trying to say, but it just doesnt feel that way.

As for the wound scene... while it may not imply the confrotation happened in Shepard's mind, it doesn't imply anything else and that's the problem. Why is this scene there?

"I think you are being a little pedantic there."

I don't think so. I think it would be really nice to see how that choice of yours affected the story. Which by the way was the purpose of the DLC.

For me, it didn't provide the closure I expected.
I expected more than the images they showed with Zaeed and the others.
Dragon Age: Origins used slides as well to show you how your choices affected everything, but they used short texts, which provided the details I wanted.

Modifié par Daryslash, 27 juin 2012 - 01:16 .

[NoSpin]

SubAstris wrote...


How would anyone ever be able to disprove IT in its entirety? What sort of evidence would an ITer look for?

Mac and Casey come out and say that IT, while clever, was never intended (or more likely removed earlier in development). Boom. Done. They could also explain why starkid goes all reaper on us in "reject" too.

[SubAstris]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Something else I just figured -

If you lose the war on the fact that you refuse what Starchild tells you - doesn't that confirm (knowing that Starchild is most likely controlled by the reapers) - that the Crucible is also a Reaper device?

Thus - probably a trap?

No, because according to IT we don't know what happened with the Crucible

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

*SIGH* Honestly, I hoped for IT to be revealed in the EC and was a bit disappointed when it wasn't. The extended ending seems even more literal than the original one. Actually, the breath scene after Destroy serves the exact same role as the transcendence scene in Control (Shepard lives on). Maybe we should take BioWare's words more seriously and don't read between lines too much. *SIGH*

Negative, there can be no stepping back, no retreat, no stepping forward and no attacking reaper forces.

But really how can I look at this ending litterally with the enormous plotholes and problems with the ending which Bioware had 3.5 months to fix, but dident do.

Even more so they themselves said EC would not confirm or deny IT, so until someone can disprove it in its entirety I am sticking with IT. Better than having to believe in two endings which go against everything we have seen and been told over the cause of 3 games.

How would anyone ever be able to disprove IT in its entirety? What sort of evidence would an ITer look for?

If there was no evidence supproting it. If there was no mindcontrol ability in the series which is known to cause a wide variety of side effects many of which Shepard suffers throughout the cause of the game. If there was no giant plotholes which can be filled in so easily by IT or if said plotholes had other explanations. If there was no massively strange and ridicoulous sequences in the ending with no or few precedenst in the entire series leading up to that point.

If Bioware had not themsleves said that they would neither confirm of deny IT. Then I would consider this a delusion.

But the fact that we have not only strange happenings suggesting that not all is as it seems alongside a means that can cuase these strange quibs, a means which ahs been a major plotpoint trhoughout all 3 games, means I cannot help but feel there is more than meets the eye. 

They had three months to fix all those strange things, but just about the obnly thing they fixed was telpeorting squadmates...

Modifié par Raistlin Majare 1992, 27 juin 2012 - 01:13 .

[Simocrates]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Zanza86 wrote...

The only question I have left that boggles my mind is the point of grampa and the boy.

So Shepard surviving an explosion several km in diameter while at groun zero and the following orbital reentry is completely logical <_<

Well there s no evidence that he was blasted back to Earth so that statement is a little redundant however I will entertain your arrogance. You make assumptions in a Sci Fi Videogame, you make assumptions that some things can be done while others can not. If wishes were fishes mate we'd be living in an ocean just as if we could all ignore cutscenes and draw our own conclusions then we could have whatever ending we wanted.

Modifié par Zanza86, 27 juin 2012 - 01:15 .

[Tirian Thorn]

Literalist Interpretation
I think the endings were improved considerably when viewed literally. There was more explanation regarding both the crucible and catalyst. Starbinger explained its origins and the reaper origins a bit further just enough to make it “feel” more complete. After destroy, I was sad that EDI and the geth were destroyed and the memorial for Shepard was emotional as well. 

I’m glad synthesis was changed a bit because creating a new DNA was nonsense (space magic) but the idea of an ascension for synthetics – allowing them to fully understand organics and organics being perfected by synthetics makes a lot more sense than the previous explanation. 

 
Indoctrination Theory
I still believe the theory is possible. Bioware did not change enough to discount the theory and they have not released a statement discounting IDT at all. 

But all the key elements of IDT are alive and well in EC and I believe BW still wants the debate to continue. 


The Future

I’m curious to see what they will do next. I hope that future DLC will be devoted to a side quest for the single-player game rather than more maps, weapons and classes for multiplayer. MP is fun, but I play that primarily to increase my readiness. 

I would love to have a DLC that allows you to allocate the war assets – similar to the end game of ME2 where you pick squad members for various tasks. 

Two of my favorite strategy games are Star Wars: Rebellion and Sins of Solar Empire. Space battles are a lot of fun.   

[SubAstris]

NoSpin wrote...

SubAstris wrote...


How would anyone ever be able to disprove IT in its entirety? What sort of evidence would an ITer look for?

Mac and Casey come out and say that IT, while clever, was never intended (or more likely removed earlier in development). Boom. Done. They could also explain why starkid goes all reaper on us in "reject" too.

I think even then a good number of hardcore ITers would reject that given some of their remarks. Especially after the message at the end, "Shepard has defeated the Reapers, become a legend, we at BW would like to thank you". This is a personal message to the player him/herself stating very clearly that the Reaper threat has been ended.

[v0rt3x22]

Something else I'm wondering -

If you reject Starchild - why would it get angry with you and why would the reapers attack?

It's like you're forced to act on what Starchild feeds you.......that reason alone makes it very hard to trust.

[Nemesis1812]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Something else I just figured -

If you lose the war on the fact that you refuse what Starchild tells you - doesn't that confirm (knowing that Starchild is most likely controlled by the reapers) - that the Crucible is also a Reaper device?

Thus - probably a trap?

When you put it that way it does seem like the little freak is hell bent on you firing the crucible:huh:

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Zanza86 wrote...

Well there s no evidence that he was blasted back to Earth so that statement is a little redundant however I will entertain your arrogant statement. You make assumptions in a Sci Fi Videogame, you make assumptions that some things can be done while others can not. If wishes were fishes mate we'd be living in an ocean just as if we could all ignore cutscenes and draw our own conclusions then we could have whatever ending we wanted.

So you are falling back to the old "Bioware was lazy?"

Not that i expected anything else, no litteralist has even come close to explaining that massive plot hole in any way.

Shepard could simply not have survived. First we have a wave of energy powerful enough to move Reapers in space around it. Beeing at point blank of that is gonna knock you around like a ragdoll.

Then the explosion hits and based on its size...well lets just say Shepard would have been reduced to parcticles. you would not even find any ash.

Both of these hit while Shepard has no shields and a burned out armor...and no helmet

Oh and please indulge me as to where the concrete in the breath scene comes from if Shepard is still on the Citadel. Everyone knows large amounts of concrete is such a fantastic material for constructing your space station.

Also if he is still on the Citadel he is gonna have a breathing problem without that helmet of his. I doubt the barriers or thier power soruce survived the explosion.