55528 réponses à ce sujet

[llbountyhunter]

llbountyhunter wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Indoc theory is more or less debunked. The only way it could be true is with ANOTHER ending DLC or ME4. But that is unlikely. Although, to be fair it is the easiest way for ME4 to work,.

Even though they added more evidence to support IT? And bioware themselves said the EC doesn't disprove it?

[HellishFiend]

StElmo wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Indoc theory is more or less debunked.

No proof, no debunk.

Do you believe in the invisible flying spaghetti monster? You have no proof he does not exist.

See my point?

Watch out folks, StElmo is versed in the use of Strawman. 

[Turbo_J]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Indoc theory is more or less debunked.

No proof, no debunk.

Yeah, I'm sure the Normandy crew thought that too as they all waved at Harbinger during the time out at the beam run.

I was hoping for a dialog wheel with Harbi there. I really wanted to test my skyllian 5 skills against him during the 5 minute break.

[EpyonX3]

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Video Game Development

Now I know EC is more like a huge patch but the development cycle must have been similar when creating EC. Add to the fact that MS is known for taking more time then usual to approve patches. F1 2010 took a good week to be released on the 360 after the patch was submitted on top of having a 2 GB download limit.

Oh God, please tell me you did not just cite a wikipedia article as an element of proof that the EC justifies 3 months and 2 gigs. 

Yes. Because it explains the process of video game development. They started EC from scratch. It was not planned. Therefore, they had to go through the processes of stating a new development cycle, even if it's just for EC.

[dreamgazer]

StElmo wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Indoc theory is more or less debunked.

No proof, no debunk.

Do you believe in the invisible flying spaghetti monster? You have no proof he does not exist.

See my point?

Oh, good.  You're turning discussion of a piece of fiction and its devices into a religious debate.

Move on.

[OdanUrr]

llbountyhunter wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Indoc theory is more or less debunked. The only way it could be true is with ANOTHER ending DLC or ME4. But that is unlikely. Although, to be fair it is the easiest way for ME4 to work,.

Even though they added more evidence to support IT? And bioware themselves said the EC doesn't disprove it?

Forgive me but I no longer understand. I thought the idea behind IT was that the original endings we got didn't really happen anywhere but in Shepard's mind and that Bioware would release further content showing this to be true and expanding on the final battle. Since they've done neither and have indicated they have no plans for further endings, isn't that the end of it? I mean, sure, it can remain a possible interpretation in which Shepard would apparently lose, but that's a bit depressing, isn't it?

[llbountyhunter]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

 I know right? The EC cutscene are probably 300mb at the most ... Im dumbfounded on where exactly those 1.7gigs are....

They are 1.3GB out of 2.3GB (extracted)

Are there perhaps scene not found in EC? Because that seems lIke alot.

I've downloaded entire movies with a good resolition at .5 gigs 

[HellishFiend]

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Video Game Development

Now I know EC is more like a huge patch but the development cycle must have been similar when creating EC. Add to the fact that MS is known for taking more time then usual to approve patches. F1 2010 took a good week to be released on the 360 after the patch was submitted on top of having a 2 GB download limit.

Oh God, please tell me you did not just cite a wikipedia article as an element of proof that the EC justifies 3 months and 2 gigs. 

Yes. Because it explains the process of video game development. They started EC from scratch. It was not planned. Therefore, they had to go through the processes of stating a new development cycle, even if it's just for EC.

Well now you're just being patronizing so I think we need to disengage from this line of discussion. 

[Andromidius]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Link? And I don't think LotSB has more content. Two levels perhaps but not many, if any, prerenderd scenes and slideshows.

Liara's apartment, office building, city (chase scene), hotel, Shadow Broker's ship (interior and exterior).

That's a lot of level design.

[TJBartlemus]

TJBartlemus wrote...

Sup guys? So what have I missed? Has anyone picked apart the dlc to find out all they have put in it? There's something there...we just have to find it. If there's something to find that unlocks in the future that might be worthy to look out for. Also could someone explain the .7 gigs in London? The only thing different I could find was the beam run.

[EpyonX3]

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Video Game Development

Now I know EC is more like a huge patch but the development cycle must have been similar when creating EC. Add to the fact that MS is known for taking more time then usual to approve patches. F1 2010 took a good week to be released on the 360 after the patch was submitted on top of having a 2 GB download limit.

Oh God, please tell me you did not just cite a wikipedia article as an element of proof that the EC justifies 3 months and 2 gigs. 

Yes. Because it explains the process of video game development. They started EC from scratch. It was not planned. Therefore, they had to go through the processes of stating a new development cycle, even if it's just for EC.

Well now you're just being patronizing so I think we need to disengage from this line of discussion. 

Not my intention. But aksed you to prove how it wouldn't have taken 3 months but you flipped the question to me.

[D.Sharrah]

Gwyphon wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Lair of the Shadow Broker was planned before launch of ME2. EC was not.

Can you prove the bolded satetement?  I would think that MIke Gamble tweet right after release would it least point to the possibility that it is not true.  If someone has the link to this that would be great...I do not.

[llbountyhunter]

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Indoc theory is more or less debunked. The only way it could be true is with ANOTHER ending DLC or ME4. But that is unlikely. Although, to be fair it is the easiest way for ME4 to work,.

Even though they added more evidence to support IT? And bioware themselves said the EC doesn't disprove it?

Forgive me but I no longer understand. I thought the idea behind IT was that the original endings we got didn't really happen anywhere but in Shepard's mind and that Bioware would release further content showing this to be true and expanding on the final battle. Since they've done neither and have indicated they have no plans for further endings, isn't that the end of it? I mean, sure, it can remain a possible interpretation in which Shepard would apparently lose, but that's a bit depressing, isn't it?

Yeah, but I honestly find the literal ending more depressing and nonsensical.

And I still think they meant it to be inception like.

[HellishFiend]

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...


Video Game Development

Now I know EC is more like a huge patch but the development cycle must have been similar when creating EC. Add to the fact that MS is known for taking more time then usual to approve patches. F1 2010 took a good week to be released on the 360 after the patch was submitted on top of having a 2 GB download limit.

Oh God, please tell me you did not just cite a wikipedia article as an element of proof that the EC justifies 3 months and 2 gigs. 

Yes. Because it explains the process of video game development. They started EC from scratch. It was not planned. Therefore, they had to go through the processes of stating a new development cycle, even if it's just for EC.

Well now you're just being patronizing so I think we need to disengage from this line of discussion. 

Not my intention. But aksed you to prove how it wouldn't have taken 3 months but you flipped the question to me.

You're not proving anything by implying that I need to be more educated on the process of game development to participate in this discussion. 

[Turbo_J]

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

StElmo wrote...

Indoc theory is more or less debunked. The only way it could be true is with ANOTHER ending DLC or ME4. But that is unlikely. Although, to be fair it is the easiest way for ME4 to work,.

Even though they added more evidence to support IT? And bioware themselves said the EC doesn't disprove it?

Forgive me but I no longer understand. I thought the idea behind IT was that the original endings we got didn't really happen anywhere but in Shepard's mind and that Bioware would release further content showing this to be true and expanding on the final battle. Since they've done neither and have indicated they have no plans for further endings, isn't that the end of it? I mean, sure, it can remain a possible interpretation in which Shepard would apparently lose, but that's a bit depressing, isn't it?

"I sense doubt in you, Commander. The Reapers are winning."

[llbountyhunter]

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Link? And I don't think LotSB has more content. Two levels perhaps but not many, if any, prerenderd scenes and slideshows.

Liara's apartment, office building, city (chase scene), hotel, Shadow Broker's ship (interior and exterior).

That's a lot of level design.

It was like a hour and a half of gameplay.

[EpyonX3]

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Link? And I don't think LotSB has more content. Two levels perhaps but not many, if any, prerenderd scenes and slideshows.

Liara's apartment, office building, city (chase scene), hotel, Shadow Broker's ship (interior and exterior).

That's a lot of level design.

Sure and it'snot my intention to say that it didn't take time. But levels are not as space and time consuming as prerendered cinimatics. There's motion capture, level deisgn, sound design, recordings, rendering, implementation and then testing.

[dreamgazer]

OdanUrr wrote...

Forgive me but I no longer understand. I thought the idea behind IT was that the original endings we got didn't really happen anywhere but in Shepard's mind and that Bioware would release further content showing this to be true and expanding on the final battle. Since they've done neither and have indicated they have no plans for further endings, isn't that the end of it? I mean, sure, it can remain a possible interpretation in which Shepard would apparently lose, but that's a bit depressing, isn't it?

As long as the catalyst takes on a visage pulled from Shepard's mind, the dreams (and other devices) have indoctrination symptom overtones, indoctrination is mentioned profusely in the narrative, and the control and synthesis endings have questionable moral roots as presented in the game, the interpretation could persist in one form or another.

[OdanUrr]

D.Sharrah wrote...

Gwyphon wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Lair of the Shadow Broker was planned before launch of ME2. EC was not.

Can you prove the bolded satetement?  I would think that MIke Gamble tweet right after release would it least point to the possibility that it is not true.  If someone has the link to this that would be great...I do not.

If EC had been planned, it would have been released sooner and it would've flowed better. The devs have stated many times that they did not anticipate the fans' reaction and developed the EC as a result of it. I believe Ray Muzyka in his statement said something similar.

By the by, Gamble's tweet probably referred to all of the SP DLC in development, which actually sounds pretty intriguing.

[llbountyhunter]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Link? And I don't think LotSB has more content. Two levels perhaps but not many, if any, prerenderd scenes and slideshows.

Liara's apartment, office building, city (chase scene), hotel, Shadow Broker's ship (interior and exterior).

That's a lot of level design.

Sure and it'snot my intention to say that it didn't take time. But levels are not as space and time consuming as prerendered cinimatics. There's motion capture, level deisgn, sound design, recordings, rendering, implementation and then testing.

EC still consisted primarily of slideshows

[D.Sharrah]

Since this has only recieved one comment so far...

D.Sharrah wrote...

"Jartar is noted for the discovery of the "Leviathan of Dis," the apparent corpse of a genetically engineered living starship. The Leviathan was found in the bottom of a crater by a batarian survey team, and estimated to be nearly a billion years old. It "disappeared" after a visit to the system by a batarian dreadnought twenty years ago.
Since then, the batarians have steadfastly denied that the Leviathan existed at all – and all the more vociferously when shown recordings of the corpse made by salarian researchers."

"...the Hegemony sent teams of scientists to study the Leviathan of Dis. The Leviathan turned out to be an inactive Reaper and the entire batarian science team was subsequently indoctrinated."

Given the above statements (taken from the codex, planet description and game play) along with the information regarding the "Leviathan DLC" that was included in the EC, I think it is safe to assume that this is fairly significant item to explore/discuss.

First. given this statement from the Catalyst in the EC:

http://www.youtube.c...inEJIejw0w#t=0s

We know that the Catalyst was created as an AI designed to resolve conflict b/w organics and synthetics.  And with this statement:

http://www.youtube.c...nEJIejw0w#t=67s

We know that the Catalyst created the first Reaper from its creators.  Several interesting things here:

1.  The catalyst forced this "evolution" on its creators.
2.  The first example of the "created rebelling against its creators".
3.  The Reapers are created in the "image" of the Catalyst's creators.

The next few points are things that we might be able to assume but not necessarily confirm (given the information that we currently have):

1.  This forced evolution, could be the first example of "Control" - notice that this would suggest that the concept is synthetic in origin.  Make what assumptions of that you will.
2.  The first Reaper (being the first after all) may not have the same level of technological advancement as the majority of Reapers that we see in game (to this point).

And now we get into wild speculation.  I remember from the old forums that the Leviathan of Dis was a hot topic.  Many of us believed that it could be a Reaper (some theorized that it could be Sovereign - a theory that at this point I think can be officially be put to bed).  But the opposition argued that this statement from the planet description, "
...corpse of a genetically engineered living starship...", suggested that it was too "organic" to be a Reaper and therefore likely to be an easter egg.  But given the new information (being discussed here), we know that the Leviathan was in fact a Reaper.  It begs the question, why create a description that causes confusion?  Perhaps, we were supposed to question whether or not it was a Reaper...perhaps, knowing for certain that it was a Reaper would give too much away?

Given the above statements (specifically point 2 of the assumptions), I propose this new theory.  The Leviathan of Dis is the first Reaper created by the Catalyst from its creators.  And considering what we know from the information that is included in the EC about the Leviathan (being a "rogue" Reaper for those that have not seen the information), I think that this fits quite well.  The bigger question then becomes just how dis-satisfied with its creation (the Catalyst) is the Leviathan (after all it did fail in its initial task - given the "necessity" to create the Reapers; and then it forced this "solution via evolution" on them)?  And what implications this has on the ending?

[llbountyhunter]

OdanUrr wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Gwyphon wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...
Prove it.

Lair of the Shadow Broker took less time and has more content.

Next.

Lair of the Shadow Broker was planned before launch of ME2. EC was not.

Can you prove the bolded satetement?  I would think that MIke Gamble tweet right after release would it least point to the possibility that it is not true.  If someone has the link to this that would be great...I do not.

If EC had been planned, it would have been released sooner and it would've flowed better. The devs have stated many times that they did not anticipate the fans' reaction and developed the EC as a result of it. I believe Ray Muzyka in his statement said something similar.

By the by, Gamble's tweet probably referred to all of the SP DLC in development, which actually sounds pretty intriguing.

Weekes also tweeted that EC wasn't a response.

But Jessica's always contradicting herself on twitter, so you might want to take it with a grain of salt.

[EpyonX3]

HellishFiend wrote...

You're not proving anything by implying that I need to be more educated on the process of game development to participate in this discussion. 

Well that is what is required to make something like EC. If you don't understand why EC took so long, then perhaps you need to review the process. Making something like EC isn't as simple as you think. Three months is actually a short time to release something like this. You can even notice that some Quality Control was skipped a bit when you look at the low ems destroy scene. They forgot to remove the crucible firing sound trigger at the time it should have without EC.

I'm not trying to insult you or your intelligence. But you asked me for proof of why it took so long and I'm providing it. It's up to you if you want to accept it or not.