55528 réponses à ce sujet

[FellishBeast]

Rifneno wrote...

FellishBeast wrote...

Oh, but Tolkien never wrote that, which was my point. :happy:

Perhaps I don't get the concept, but it just seems like one of those things you could do in reality but you just don't do in a story.

Oh snap.  I have to make sure to wash my feet before sticking them in my mouth like that.  Never had the patience for the actual books.  I've read some 1000 page monstrosities but not the style of Tolkien's.  LOTR was...  I forget the word, but the writing style was more about showcasing the fantasy world of Middle Earth and the epic fantasy plot took a backseat to hobbit songs and ****.  Not my cup of tea.

I did a write-up on it once or twice.  Reader's digest version is that all the FTL systems in use are Reaper tech.  Reapers designed FTL hardware/software so it could be easily replicated by virtually impossible to reverse engineer.  So every ship is using stuff that's hardwired by the Reapers with safety protocols so that they can't ram something at FTL.  If there's anything in the flight path, it won't use FTL.  But some turian terrorist group did once hack the system and used a ship as a bomb on a turian colony.  It was a story on Cerberus Daily News back in the day.  We just need to find out how they did it.  The damage from a ship hitting at FTL is just... well, you know what an asteroid strike does.  Now imagine if the ship was hitting with thousands of times the velocity of an asteroid.  Yeah.  Now factor in that since even Reapers can't track targets at FTL, they can't defend themselves with their barriers like they could against a regular mass accelerator round.
And technically, you don't even have to sacrifice anyone.  You could just load a VI onto it like they did with Arrival's asteroid.

Okay, that makes a lot more sense. It's actually kind of cool that BioWare wrote themselves an excuse to dismiss that as an option, as well. Though it does seem silly that if a few Turians could do it, the combined minds of the galaxy couldn't. But stranger things have happened.

I think a line has to be drawn. If we started ramming ships into Reapers I think it could lead to things getting ridiculous, but that's just my take on it.

[MaximizedAction]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Well, here's my opinion on how "Refuse" works (also, can we finally decide on a name? Is it Refuse or Reject?)

Arian Dynas wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

I'm currently in the camp that says "Destroy is Shepard sticking to his guns and choosing to slog on with what was his original motive from the beginning, since he has the stones to keep fighting, even if he has to sacrifice some things."

Rejection, well that's Shepard trying to play Captain Kirk, choosing not to stick to what he has been going for since the beginning since something unappealing was tacked on, but not completely breaking and going over to Control and remaining canny enough not to be tricked by Synthesis, basically demanding a third option, only to discover there isn't one.

In "Reject" Shepard is canny and wise enough not to fall for indoctrination, but not determined enough to break free, and so Harbinger kills him.

I support this fully, especially when the camera pans away from Shep standing in the Reject ending, it seems very... lonely? Abandoned? Kind just stuck in limbo as it were.

To me Reject is to Destroy what the standard Paragon option is to the Charm option. You're going make the same point, but much less convincing or awesomely, and it doesn't really work.

This remains my personal take on the subject of "Refuse"

Why not use BioWares name for it: Opt Out.
But I disagree with "but not determined enough to break free" her statements suggest otherwise.

I agree. Shepard seemed determined enough, as usual, to me. For players who know Shepard from before ME3, it should be obvious that this is all 100% Shepard, it even reminded me of his speech to Harbinger in Arrival. It had the same confidence.

And that means game over?

This only adds to the twistedness in the ending. Free will leading to game over, red=Paragon/blue=Renegade, the breath scene...

[v0rt3x22]

Any news in here?

This thread is slowly becoming as big as the entire ME3 Story Forum alone

[Arian Dynas]

MaximizedAction wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Well, here's my opinion on how "Refuse" works (also, can we finally decide on a name? Is it Refuse or Reject?)

Arian Dynas wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

I'm currently in the camp that says "Destroy is Shepard sticking to his guns and choosing to slog on with what was his original motive from the beginning, since he has the stones to keep fighting, even if he has to sacrifice some things."

Rejection, well that's Shepard trying to play Captain Kirk, choosing not to stick to what he has been going for since the beginning since something unappealing was tacked on, but not completely breaking and going over to Control and remaining canny enough not to be tricked by Synthesis, basically demanding a third option, only to discover there isn't one.

In "Reject" Shepard is canny and wise enough not to fall for indoctrination, but not determined enough to break free, and so Harbinger kills him.

I support this fully, especially when the camera pans away from Shep standing in the Reject ending, it seems very... lonely? Abandoned? Kind just stuck in limbo as it were.

To me Reject is to Destroy what the standard Paragon option is to the Charm option. You're going make the same point, but much less convincing or awesomely, and it doesn't really work.

This remains my personal take on the subject of "Refuse"

Why not use BioWares name for it: Opt Out.
But I disagree with "but not determined enough to break free" her statements suggest otherwise.

I agree. Shepard seemed determined enough, as usual, to me. For players who know Shepard from before ME3, it should be obvious that this is all 100% Shepard, it even reminded me of his speech to Harbinger in Arrival. It had the same confidence.

And that means game over?

This only adds to the twistedness in the ending. Free will leading to game over, red=Paragon/blue=Renegade, the breath scene...

The logic behind it being that Harbinger decides "Welp, pretty speech, shooting at me, Shepard hasn't changed a bit. There's no breaking him without rendering him useless *squish*"

In Destroy it's more like "good... good, he's going for the bait.. and, wait. No, is he? No he can't possibly be that stupid there's no way he'd go for... aw ****."

[gunslinger_ruiz]

Did someone confirm that the "mechanical" gasp from Shepard when waking up in the dark corridor was his/her cybernetics? Thought I saw something about that but can't really remember.

Anyway, though it was odd they added that sort of sound in for his/her gasp anyway, and not have it change at all how Shepard gasps in Destroy survive. Not sure why they added the music of the Shepard Alive scene either, harder to identify background sounds...unless they didn't want them identified, otherwise it's the same scene so far as I can see.

[MaximizedAction]

Arian Dynas wrote...
The logic behind it being that Harbinger decides "Welp, pretty speech, shooting at me, Shepard hasn't changed a bit. There's no breaking him without rendering him useless *squish*"

In Destroy it's more like "good... good, he's going for the bait.. and, wait. No, is he? No he can't possibly be that stupid there's no way he'd go for... aw ****."

Something like that...

But in my world of thought, the ending has Shepard clearly indoctrinated, in both literal and IT interpretation.

"Whaaat?", you ask?

The difference in the literal one is, that there you decide to not doubt the Catalyst, thus accepting his explaination of everything. And that explaination makes indoctrination a somewhat 'necessary' means to achieve the absolutely important goal of maintaning the cycle. If I trust the Catalyst, then 'indoctrination' is what 'outsiders' call it if someone is 'helping' the reapers, like Shepard and Saren. Hence, indoctrination is not a bad thing anymore and it doesn't matter if you're being indoc. or not...it's all for the greater good of saving organics and synthetics from eachother by reaperising them.

Again, this is if you only use the Catalyst's logic, or trust him, believe him, etc.

In IT, you're being indoc, and this is where you obviously don't trust the Catalyst.

Or this is my interpretation of the ending...to me it all depends on your standpoint to the Catalyst.

In this thread, of course, that standpoint is clear.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 29 juin 2012 - 10:39 .

[Starbuck8]

gunslinger_ruiz wrote...

Did someone confirm that the "mechanical" gasp from Shepard when waking up in the dark corridor was his/her cybernetics? Thought I saw something about that but can't really remember.

Anyway, though it was odd they added that sort of sound in for his/her gasp anyway, and not have it change at all how Shepard gasps in Destroy survive. Not sure why they added the music of the Shepard Alive scene either, harder to identify background sounds...unless they didn't want them identified, otherwise it's the same scene so far as I can see.

I don't think anything has been confirmed about that mechanical sound. Just speculation. Someone did mention you see smoke coming off Shep. I think that's new, but can be attributed to being burned by lasers or from the beam up. Odd stuff.

[MaximizedAction]

Starbuck8 wrote...

gunslinger_ruiz wrote...

Did someone confirm that the "mechanical" gasp from Shepard when waking up in the dark corridor was his/her cybernetics? Thought I saw something about that but can't really remember.

Anyway, though it was odd they added that sort of sound in for his/her gasp anyway, and not have it change at all how Shepard gasps in Destroy survive. Not sure why they added the music of the Shepard Alive scene either, harder to identify background sounds...unless they didn't want them identified, otherwise it's the same scene so far as I can see.

I don't think anything has been confirmed about that mechanical sound. Just speculation. Someone did mention you see smoke coming off Shep. I think that's new, but can be attributed to being burned by lasers or from the beam up. Odd stuff.

Or that's supposed to be an effect similar to the one from the original Stargate movie, when they went trough the gate.

[Arian Dynas]

Basically in my opinon it's that in choosing Destroy, yes Shepard is expressing the same sentiment in Reject, but this is Shepard with convictions, he WILL destroy the Reapers, no matter if the cost is high, since all involved already told him they would happily sacrifice themselves if it meant the end of the Reapers,

In Reject, he's looking at his long time goal and doesn't like it now, it has a consequence he is not happy with, he will win this war on his own terms, or not at all, in Reject, Shepard is trying to play Kirk, looking for that third option, and ends up discovering, sometimes there is no third option.

That and also, Destroy is STILL only attractive if you find the destruction of all Synthetic life attractive, or if you choose to believe the starchild is lying to you. it is entirely unappealing otherwise, and as far as Shepard knows, there is nothing he could not do with Destroy that he can't do equally as efficiently (and guarantee his survival in some form, unlike Destroy, which he, and we both believe would kill him, just like EDI and the Geth) with Control, by ordering the Reapers to fly into the sun or something.

Reject still requires him to believe what he is being told, that the Red tube really can wipe out synthetic life by being shot, that the Starchild genuinely believes his own logic, even if Shepard does not.

[MegumiAzusa]

Arian Dynas wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Well, here's my opinion on how "Refuse" works (also, can we finally decide on a name? Is it Refuse or Reject?)

Arian Dynas wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

I'm currently in the camp that says "Destroy is Shepard sticking to his guns and choosing to slog on with what was his original motive from the beginning, since he has the stones to keep fighting, even if he has to sacrifice some things."

Rejection, well that's Shepard trying to play Captain Kirk, choosing not to stick to what he has been going for since the beginning since something unappealing was tacked on, but not completely breaking and going over to Control and remaining canny enough not to be tricked by Synthesis, basically demanding a third option, only to discover there isn't one.

In "Reject" Shepard is canny and wise enough not to fall for indoctrination, but not determined enough to break free, and so Harbinger kills him.

I support this fully, especially when the camera pans away from Shep standing in the Reject ending, it seems very... lonely? Abandoned? Kind just stuck in limbo as it were.

To me Reject is to Destroy what the standard Paragon option is to the Charm option. You're going make the same point, but much less convincing or awesomely, and it doesn't really work.

This remains my personal take on the subject of "Refuse"

Why not use BioWares name for it: Opt Out.
But I disagree with "but not determined enough to break free" her statements suggest otherwise.

I agree. Shepard seemed determined enough, as usual, to me. For players who know Shepard from before ME3, it should be obvious that this is all 100% Shepard, it even reminded me of his speech to Harbinger in Arrival. It had the same confidence.

And that means game over?

This only adds to the twistedness in the ending. Free will leading to game over, red=Paragon/blue=Renegade, the breath scene...

The logic behind it being that Harbinger decides "Welp, pretty speech, shooting at me, Shepard hasn't changed a bit. There's no breaking him without rendering him useless *squish*"

In Destroy it's more like "good... good, he's going for the bait.. and, wait. No, is he? No he can't possibly be that stupid there's no way he'd go for... aw ****."

That is some serious grasping at straws. In refusing these choices Shepard refuses the premise the Catalyst gives her, thus refusing indoctrination. Also it is the only ending where she explicitly states that she opposes it, does everything to stop it, and will be free. Choosing destroy is still going along with what the Catalyst is telling you to do.

[Starbuck8]

MaximizedAction wrote...

Starbuck8 wrote...

gunslinger_ruiz wrote...

Did someone confirm that the "mechanical" gasp from Shepard when waking up in the dark corridor was his/her cybernetics? Thought I saw something about that but can't really remember.

Anyway, though it was odd they added that sort of sound in for his/her gasp anyway, and not have it change at all how Shepard gasps in Destroy survive. Not sure why they added the music of the Shepard Alive scene either, harder to identify background sounds...unless they didn't want them identified, otherwise it's the same scene so far as I can see.

I don't think anything has been confirmed about that mechanical sound. Just speculation. Someone did mention you see smoke coming off Shep. I think that's new, but can be attributed to being burned by lasers or from the beam up. Odd stuff.

Or that's supposed to be an effect similar to the one from the original Stargate movie, when they went trough the gate.

Oh yeah, that effect I think they kept in the pilot of the series but took out? haha. Anyway yeah, would make sense especially since they chose to now show Shepard being spit out of the teleporter thing.

[TSA_383]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

That is some serious grasping at straws. In refusing these choices Shepard refuses the premise the Catalyst gives her, thus refusing indoctrination. Also it is the only ending where she explicitly states that she opposes it, does everything to stop it, and will be free. Choosing destroy is still going along with what the Catalyst is telling you to do.

There's also the tried and tested Mass Effect formula of "Epic Shep Speech = Victory" to which this is probably the sole exception in the entire trilogy (or is it?)...


Personally, the line from the catalyst of "your crucible device is almost complete seems to hint that we've not seen the last of it yet.

Frankly I wish they'd just get on with it and wrap up the story properly. The EC flatly failed in many of its ambitions there...

[MaximizedAction]

TSA_383 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

That is some serious grasping at straws. In refusing these choices Shepard refuses the premise the Catalyst gives her, thus refusing indoctrination. Also it is the only ending where she explicitly states that she opposes it, does everything to stop it, and will be free. Choosing destroy is still going along with what the Catalyst is telling you to do.

There's also the tried and tested Mass Effect formula of "Epic Shep Speech = Victory" to which this is probably the sole exception in the entire trilogy (or is it?)...


Personally, the line from the catalyst of "your crucible device is almost complete seems to hint that we've not seen the last of it yet.

Frankly I wish they'd just get on with it and wrap up the story properly. The EC flatly failed in many of its ambitions there...

I agree, it didn't  wrap it up as promised , at least not if you have at least a little eye for detail. To much stuff added that remains odd and not properly explained for an definitive ending.

[gunslinger_ruiz]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Basically in my opinon it's that in choosing Destroy, yes Shepard is expressing the same sentiment in Reject, but this is Shepard with convictions, he WILL destroy the Reapers, no matter if the cost is high, since all involved already told him they would happily sacrifice themselves if it meant the end of the Reapers,

In Reject, he's looking at his long time goal and doesn't like it now, it has a consequence he is not happy with, he will win this war on his own terms, or not at all, in Reject, Shepard is trying to play Kirk, looking for that third option, and ends up discovering, sometimes there is no third option.

That and also, Destroy is STILL only attractive if you find the destruction of all Synthetic life attractive, or if you choose to believe the starchild is lying to you. it is entirely unappealing otherwise, and as far as Shepard knows, there is nothing he could not do with Destroy that he can't do equally as efficiently (and guarantee his survival in some form, unlike Destroy, which he, and we both believe would kill him, just like EDI and the Geth) with Control, by ordering the Reapers to fly into the sun or something.

Reject still requires him to believe what he is being told, that the Red tube really can wipe out synthetic life by being shot, that the Starchild genuinely believes his own logic, even if Shepard does not.

I approve.

But can only wonder when we'll see the rest in game/see the speculation solved.

[Starbuck8]

TSA_383 wrote...

Personally, the line from the catalyst of "your crucible device is almost complete seems to hint that we've not seen the last of it yet.

Frankly I wish they'd just get on with it and wrap up the story properly. The EC flatly failed in many of its ambitions there...

On that, I remember him saying "your crucible is mostly intact" and I thought maybe he is referring to your EMS (because lower EMS destroys most technology and such). Wondering if it changes with lower EMS.

[Arian Dynas]

TSA_383 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

That is some serious grasping at straws. In refusing these choices Shepard refuses the premise the Catalyst gives her, thus refusing indoctrination. Also it is the only ending where she explicitly states that she opposes it, does everything to stop it, and will be free. Choosing destroy is still going along with what the Catalyst is telling you to do.

There's also the tried and tested Mass Effect formula of "Epic Shep Speech = Victory" to which this is probably the sole exception in the entire trilogy (or is it?)...


Personally, the line from the catalyst of "your crucible device is almost complete seems to hint that we've not seen the last of it yet.

Frankly I wish they'd just get on with it and wrap up the story properly. The EC flatly failed in many of its ambitions there...

I am thinking more and more that the EC never was intended to wrap up the story properly at all.

Perhaps the PM will explain;

It breaks my heart to know that ACAVYOS has given up.

To be honest, when I see people give up it makes me wonder why I still cling to IDT, like I'm beginning to look more and more like a moon landing conspiracy theorist.

But part of me knows "Something is not what it seems here, and they have been discouraged by the loss of the EC. Just imagine like if the EC was the on disc ending and they had never mentioned anything." Which considering the EC was unplanned, a band-aid meant to satisfy the fans and now that the ending matches up to what is in the prima guide, that's not such an unreasonable stretch.

And that gives me hope. 

[gunslinger_ruiz]

Was going to go to bed early but figured, hell let's make some new screenshot posts. So here's a few things I found interesting:

Renegade cybernetics show through the Synth and Control "TIM" eyes, also "cables" details still present:




Note the double image effect is just a video/lighting effect presence in the Synth ending (and not Shepard growing extra eyes).


This looks like an asari


A still from the Synthesis ending, thought it was an interesting and...impossible looking structure. I like it, but I mean is it a building or a ship or Shepards imagination gone wild?

PS, STILL can't figure out if Starbringer is smirking or just tilting his head in amusement:

[Arian Dynas]

Proof then, once and for all that indoctrinated eyes are distinct from the Renegade implants.

[Starbuck8]

Oh yeah, I noticed the red showing when watching a renegade control vid. And yeah, Arian, I think you're right. And I was really wondering about that ship thing, wth?

[Domanese]

TSA_383 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

That is some serious grasping at straws. In refusing these choices Shepard refuses the premise the Catalyst gives her, thus refusing indoctrination. Also it is the only ending where she explicitly states that she opposes it, does everything to stop it, and will be free. Choosing destroy is still going along with what the Catalyst is telling you to do.

There's also the tried and tested Mass Effect formula of "Epic Shep Speech = Victory" to which this is probably the sole exception in the entire trilogy (or is it?)...


Personally, the line from the catalyst of "your crucible device is almost complete seems to hint that we've not seen the last of it yet.

Frankly I wish they'd just get on with it and wrap up the story properly. The EC flatly failed in many of its ambitions there...

What if some of the DLC is what does complete the crucible? Im pretty confident the extended cut variations involve it based on what was found in the scripts. Then something else happens like the original crucible's purpose or destroy becomes a much more viable option and thus switches places with control as far as color scheme? (Yeah im thinking from a literal standpoint for now but again its sheer speculating... which we seem to do lots of!)

PS - And we still have no freaking clue why the Legend save even exists. Whats the point in it!?

Modifié par Domanese, 29 juin 2012 - 11:14 .

[Rodia Driftwood]

The "Refusal ending" shows a Starchild go from little kid to pissed-off Harbinger. I'm only speculating, but it was weird how he drastically changes after you refuse the options HE gives you.

[gunslinger_ruiz]

Going to cut myself off at 15 views of the new Shepard's Breath vid (that music can be a little jarring at max volume) and get to bed. Looks like they lifted some of the fog from the original vid, or maybe I'm just seeing things, either way same details + music.

Both are on SkyDrive, links above if anyone wants to see. Think you might need some plugins though. Brightened the new vid too incase yur wondering.

[Starbuck8]

gunslinger_ruiz wrote...

Going to cut myself off at 15 views of the new Shepard's Breath vid (that music can be a little jarring at max volume) and get to bed. Looks like they lifted some of the fog from the original vid, or maybe I'm just seeing things, either way same details + music.

Both are on SkyDrive, links above if anyone wants to see. Think you might need some plugins though. Brightened the new vid too incase yur wondering.

I heard the breath scene was not changed, same file, but I wouldn't be able to confirm that. Anyway, night!

[Joedogg9999]

Has anyone pointed out that the stargazer scene is a stolen art image from a metal band? The art was used on their song on youtube uploaded before me3 cameout. The song is titled "starchild" and the lyrics are about indoctrination.

[MegumiAzusa]

gunslinger_ruiz wrote...


A still from the Synthesis ending, thought it was an interesting and...impossible looking structure. I like it, but I mean is it a building or a ship or Shepards imagination gone wild?

It's called Future City.