55528 réponses à ce sujet

[UrgedDuke]

SubAstris wrote...

UrgedDuke wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

I don't understand literalists at all...

They obviously are not happy with the endings.

We go through and come up with this theory, this amazing, wonderful theory that will make everyone happy...

We are insane cultists...

Would they prefer the endings we have at face value or an ending that is true to Bioware and to the series?

It's almost like they are dismissing this out of spite as they want something to hate. God, pessimists are lame.

literalists are like the 2012 doomsday theorists, they like to hate and tell you "I told you so" but in the end we all lose

Da f***?

I admit it's not a good analogy but you don't need to " DA f***" me

[BansheeOwnage]

insomniak9 wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Lurker here.

Random YouTube tangents led me to this clip, and it got me wondering.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqrK0WYH6xE#t=1m41s

I've heard literalists use the conversation on Thessia with the VI, Vendetta, as "proof" that the whole Citadel and Starbaby scene was real. From an ITer's perspective, who are the "masters" referred to in charge of the cycle?

Maybe it's a Reaper-hacked VI, perhaps?

What do y'all think?

Honestly, no.

But I did notice something. I don't think it adds much, but see what you think.

On Thessia, the VI is very happy to share information with you. Look it up on youtube. Then cerberus arrives, indoctrinated presence detected, and "activating security protocols".

In Chronos station, the VI asks you something like: "You are attempting to recover me from indoctrinated forces?" then Shep says "Yes. I need to know what the catalyst is".

The very next thing the VI says, instead of being compliant like last time, is "Security protocol have been overriden, I will comply". Then it talks to you

Now, I could explain it a number of different ways, but see if you all think it's significant. Shep's just had his third and final dream before Chronos.

Exactly. I also wondered why it said that. Reason being, TIM has already overridden the protocol... it knows Shep is indoctrinated, but complies regardless. 

Or it doesn't know because it sucks.

Modifié par BansheeOwnage, 02 juillet 2012 - 11:20 .

[Salient Archer]

As no one actually answered any of this last night, here it is again...

Salient Archer wrote...

Hey everyone, I'm still feeling pretty meh about the whole EC. It actually hasn't addressed my greatest issue with the ending; Shepard's breath scene. This scene is still utterly ****ing with my mind and it's now more savage than ever.

Not only does the existence of this scene defy the laws of physics, thermodynamics, biology, kinetics and basic reality, but it's still not established where Shepard actually is. The only realistic answer is that the ending was a Hallucination or some events took place off camera that aren't accounted for... So if someone can give me a believable answer that doesn't require an off camera explanation but also includes all the previously mentioned fundamentals, I'd be incredibly surprised.

and some additonal context...

Salient Archer wrote...

1) It clearly is Shepard [in the breath scene] Considering it is clearly Female when you're Femshep and Male when it's Maleshep. So the idea of it not being Shepard is just silly and makes little to absoloutly no sense.

2) We have no reason to trust the Catalyst: Considering we have all the in-game evidence we need provided in these quotes alone. Which proves he either contradicts himself (hence fallible), lying (deceitful) a rogue AI that turned on his own creators (insane, fallible, a lier and terrifying) or doesn't exist (a deception).

3) All empirical evidence proves that the breath scene and the devastation of the citadel can't both exist in the same reality, so one of them has to be fake. 

Considering the breath scene seems far more rooted in reality than the events that unfold involving the citadel, I'm far more inclined to believe that it all took place in Shepard's head. This is not only thematical to the series but we've already experienced Shepard having dreams/hallucinations and interacting in virtual realitys. Not only this but we (the player) have been in control of Shepard during these alternate reality events.

Modifié par Salient Archer, 02 juillet 2012 - 11:24 .

[jgibson14352]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

insomniak9 wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Lurker here.

Random YouTube tangents led me to this clip, and it got me wondering.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqrK0WYH6xE#t=1m41s

I've heard literalists use the conversation on Thessia with the VI, Vendetta, as "proof" that the whole Citadel and Starbaby scene was real. From an ITer's perspective, who are the "masters" referred to in charge of the cycle?

Maybe it's a Reaper-hacked VI, perhaps?

What do y'all think?

Honestly, no.

But I did notice something. I don't think it adds much, but see what you think.

On Thessia, the VI is very happy to share information with you. Look it up on youtube. Then cerberus arrives, indoctrinated presence detected, and "activating security protocols".

In Chronos station, the VI asks you something like: "You are attempting to recover me from indoctrinated forces?" then Shep says "Yes. I need to know what the catalyst is".

The very next thing the VI says, instead of being compliant like last time, is "Security protocol have been overriden, I will comply". Then it talks to you

Now, I could explain it a number of different ways, but see if you all think it's significant. Shep's just had his third and final dream before Chronos.

Exactly. I also wondered why it said that. Reason being, TIM has already overridden the protocol... it knows Shep is indoctrinated, but complies regardless. 

Or it doesn't know because it sucks. *pic*

it was theorized before that the prothean VIs can only detect indoctrination after it has taken a significant toll, not while its in the early stages.

[Turbo_J]

SubAstris wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Lurker here.

Random YouTube tangents led me to this clip, and it got me wondering.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqrK0WYH6xE#t=1m41s

I've heard literalists use the conversation on Thessia with the VI, Vendetta, as "proof" that the whole Citadel and Starbaby scene was real. From an ITer's perspective, who are the "masters" referred to in charge of the cycle?

Maybe it's a Reaper-hacked VI, perhaps?

What do y'all think?

Yeah, I was arguing how this really puts a spanner in IT because it is so close foreshadowing. I think most ITers before thought it would all be explained in the EC, but it wasn't. Question is, why not?

Any ITers want to explain this at all?

It's another misinformation bread crumb like the beings of light. I once explained the pattern of the cycle as a perpetuation on implications and inferences passed on by way of incorrect assumptions or conclusions by previous cycles and in compounds. Its equatable to the minor alterations of Geth low level programing. Everything derived from the original equation becomes flawed. It becomes an organic algorithm perpetuated cycle after cycle; the equation, immense, unknowable.

[agmrpink]

Turbo_J wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Lurker here.

Random YouTube tangents led me to this clip, and it got me wondering.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqrK0WYH6xE#t=1m41s

I've heard literalists use the conversation on Thessia with the VI, Vendetta, as "proof" that the whole Citadel and Starbaby scene was real. From an ITer's perspective, who are the "masters" referred to in charge of the cycle?

Maybe it's a Reaper-hacked VI, perhaps?

What do y'all think?

Honestly, no.

But I did notice something. I don't think it adds much, but see what you think.

On Thessia, the VI is very happy to share information with you. Look it up on youtube. Then cerberus arrives, indoctrinated presence detected, and "activating security protocols".

In Chronos station, the VI asks you something like: "You are attempting to recover me from indoctrinated forces?" then Shep says "Yes. I need to know what the catalyst is".

The very next thing the VI says, instead of being compliant like last time, is "Security protocol have been overriden, I will comply". Then it talks to you

Now, I could explain it a number of different ways, but see if you all think it's significant. Shep's just had his third and final dream before Chronos.

So basically its making it clear that it'll help you now based on its security being compromised, even though it didn't mention the security beforehand and was willing to help?

Well, it could merely be informing Shepard that it had been compromised so he/she knows 'indoctrinated forces' already have the information it has.  Or it was holding back beforehand and merely giving false information.

Strange how originally it was saying it would interface with the Catalyst and Crucible to join them together, but never mentioned it after its security is removed and its spilling the beans.

Exactly. It's been hacked and nothing it says can be trusted.

"

Whoa, if you back up to 0:20 in the Vendetta vid, he indicates a Reaper precesence, but complies when Shepard demands answers. Security measures being overridden are never mentioned in this instance. Vendetta then re-detects an indoctrinated presence once Kai Leng arrives.

[SubAstris]

UrgedDuke wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

UrgedDuke wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

I don't understand literalists at all...

They obviously are not happy with the endings.

We go through and come up with this theory, this amazing, wonderful theory that will make everyone happy...

We are insane cultists...

Would they prefer the endings we have at face value or an ending that is true to Bioware and to the series?

It's almost like they are dismissing this out of spite as they want something to hate. God, pessimists are lame.

literalists are like the 2012 doomsday theorists, they like to hate and tell you "I told you so" but in the end we all lose

Da f***?

I admit it's not a good analogy but you don't need to " DA f***" me

Sorry

[SubAstris]

agmrpink wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Lurker here.

Random YouTube tangents led me to this clip, and it got me wondering.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqrK0WYH6xE#t=1m41s

I've heard literalists use the conversation on Thessia with the VI, Vendetta, as "proof" that the whole Citadel and Starbaby scene was real. From an ITer's perspective, who are the "masters" referred to in charge of the cycle?

Maybe it's a Reaper-hacked VI, perhaps?

What do y'all think?

Honestly, no.

But I did notice something. I don't think it adds much, but see what you think.

On Thessia, the VI is very happy to share information with you. Look it up on youtube. Then cerberus arrives, indoctrinated presence detected, and "activating security protocols".

In Chronos station, the VI asks you something like: "You are attempting to recover me from indoctrinated forces?" then Shep says "Yes. I need to know what the catalyst is".

The very next thing the VI says, instead of being compliant like last time, is "Security protocol have been overriden, I will comply". Then it talks to you

Now, I could explain it a number of different ways, but see if you all think it's significant. Shep's just had his third and final dream before Chronos.

So basically its making it clear that it'll help you now based on its security being compromised, even though it didn't mention the security beforehand and was willing to help?

Well, it could merely be informing Shepard that it had been compromised so he/she knows 'indoctrinated forces' already have the information it has.  Or it was holding back beforehand and merely giving false information.

Strange how originally it was saying it would interface with the Catalyst and Crucible to join them together, but never mentioned it after its security is removed and its spilling the beans.

Exactly. It's been hacked and nothing it says can be trusted.

"

Whoa, if you back up to 0:20 in the Vendetta vid, he indicates a Reaper precesence, but complies when Shepard demands answers. Security measures being overridden are never mentioned in this instance. Vendetta then re-detects an indoctrinated presence once Kai Leng arrives.

At the first indication, Vendetta is recognising a general Reaper presence and so immediate action doesn't need to be taken. However when Kai Leng comes on the scene it needs to because he is standing right there

[DJBare]

SubAstris wrote...
It depends, some are indeed happy.

You assume that everyone will instantly fall in love with IT. I think it is quite a clever idea just not BW's original plan and I think that is shown in the whole game. It is not a matter of preference but what BW actually intended. People who don't like IT aren't pessimists, they are just skeptical of IT as an explanation of events

I don't understand why folk say this, it was their original plan, but they say they had to drop it due to engine limitations, so the idea was theirs, whether they are going to pick it up again is open for debate, but there is no denying they planned it originally.

[jgibson14352]

agmrpink wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Lurker here.

Random YouTube tangents led me to this clip, and it got me wondering.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqrK0WYH6xE#t=1m41s

I've heard literalists use the conversation on Thessia with the VI, Vendetta, as "proof" that the whole Citadel and Starbaby scene was real. From an ITer's perspective, who are the "masters" referred to in charge of the cycle?

Maybe it's a Reaper-hacked VI, perhaps?

What do y'all think?

Honestly, no.

But I did notice something. I don't think it adds much, but see what you think.

On Thessia, the VI is very happy to share information with you. Look it up on youtube. Then cerberus arrives, indoctrinated presence detected, and "activating security protocols".

In Chronos station, the VI asks you something like: "You are attempting to recover me from indoctrinated forces?" then Shep says "Yes. I need to know what the catalyst is".

The very next thing the VI says, instead of being compliant like last time, is "Security protocol have been overriden, I will comply". Then it talks to you

Now, I could explain it a number of different ways, but see if you all think it's significant. Shep's just had his third and final dream before Chronos.

So basically its making it clear that it'll help you now based on its security being compromised, even though it didn't mention the security beforehand and was willing to help?

Well, it could merely be informing Shepard that it had been compromised so he/she knows 'indoctrinated forces' already have the information it has.  Or it was holding back beforehand and merely giving false information.

Strange how originally it was saying it would interface with the Catalyst and Crucible to join them together, but never mentioned it after its security is removed and its spilling the beans.

Exactly. It's been hacked and nothing it says can be trusted.

"

Whoa, if you back up to 0:20 in the Vendetta vid, he indicates a Reaper precesence, but complies when Shepard demands answers. Security measures being overridden are never mentioned in this instance. Vendetta then re-detects an indoctrinated presence once Kai Leng arrives.

vendetta simply notes that this cycle has reached its extinction terminus, and confirms it by observing the reaper forces destroying Thessia. nothing regarding indoctrination is mentioned unitl Kai Leng appears

[BansheeOwnage]

jgibson14352 wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

insomniak9 wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Lurker here.

Random YouTube tangents led me to this clip, and it got me wondering.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqrK0WYH6xE#t=1m41s

I've heard literalists use the conversation on Thessia with the VI, Vendetta, as "proof" that the whole Citadel and Starbaby scene was real. From an ITer's perspective, who are the "masters" referred to in charge of the cycle?

Maybe it's a Reaper-hacked VI, perhaps?

What do y'all think?

Honestly, no.

But I did notice something. I don't think it adds much, but see what you think.

On Thessia, the VI is very happy to share information with you. Look it up on youtube. Then cerberus arrives, indoctrinated presence detected, and "activating security protocols".

In Chronos station, the VI asks you something like: "You are attempting to recover me from indoctrinated forces?" then Shep says "Yes. I need to know what the catalyst is".

The very next thing the VI says, instead of being compliant like last time, is "Security protocol have been overriden, I will comply". Then it talks to you

Now, I could explain it a number of different ways, but see if you all think it's significant. Shep's just had his third and final dream before Chronos.

Exactly. I also wondered why it said that. Reason being, TIM has already overridden the protocol... it knows Shep is indoctrinated, but complies regardless. 

Or it doesn't know because it sucks. *pic*

it was theorized before that the prothean VIs can only detect indoctrination after it has taken a significant toll, not while its in the early stages.

Yeah but it doesn't mean the meme is untrue and it's still an awesome meme.

[SubAstris]

Turbo_J wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Lurker here.

Random YouTube tangents led me to this clip, and it got me wondering.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqrK0WYH6xE#t=1m41s

I've heard literalists use the conversation on Thessia with the VI, Vendetta, as "proof" that the whole Citadel and Starbaby scene was real. From an ITer's perspective, who are the "masters" referred to in charge of the cycle?

Maybe it's a Reaper-hacked VI, perhaps?

What do y'all think?

Yeah, I was arguing how this really puts a spanner in IT because it is so close foreshadowing. I think most ITers before thought it would all be explained in the EC, but it wasn't. Question is, why not?

Any ITers want to explain this at all?

It's another misinformation bread crumb like the beings of light. I once explained the pattern of the cycle as a perpetuation on implications and inferences passed on by way of incorrect assumptions or conclusions by previous cycles and in compounds. Its equatable to the minor alterations of Geth low level programing. Everything derived from the original equation becomes flawed. It becomes an organic algorithm perpetuated cycle after cycle; the equation, immense, unknowable.

The "being of light" theory is slightly different, one of the main reasons is that it hinges entirely on a data entry, probably written by someone who has little interaction to the main writers, for a remote planet that 99% of people are going to miss or forget by ME3. However this is shown very clearly, it is unavoidable. If you are right, you have to ask yourself why BW didn't explain that in great detail and gave strong evidence to believe in a "master" for the Reapers, which we clearly get in the form of the Catalyst

[MegumiAzusa]

Legendary repost of attentionseekmanship

MegumiAzusa wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

Anyone else freaked out by how Starbingers voice changes when you choose rejection. I watched it while talking to some one and I wasn't paying attention and was like OMFG Was that harbinger!!!

Nope. It was Shepard. Mark Meer voiced that line. 

Doesn't matter who voiced it but It sounded like a reaper and not alitte boy.

It wasn't Harbinger's voice but it was Reaper-like.

Maybe if it really was Meer it could be because it's his imagination which caused it (and if they did a Hale Reaper voice it would be too noticeable) but yeah it sounds exactly like the first word when choosing Control where Shep at first has the 100% Reaper voice which gets toned down more and more.

Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 02 juillet 2012 - 11:32 .

[SubAstris]

DJBare wrote...

SubAstris wrote...
It depends, some are indeed happy.

You assume that everyone will instantly fall in love with IT. I think it is quite a clever idea just not BW's original plan and I think that is shown in the whole game. It is not a matter of preference but what BW actually intended. People who don't like IT aren't pessimists, they are just skeptical of IT as an explanation of events

I don't understand why folk say this, it was their original plan, but they say they had to drop it due to engine limitations, so the idea was theirs, whether they are going to pick it up again is open for debate, but there is no denying they planned it originally.

What I mean by original intention is the "BW's intention for the ending as of the date ME3 came out"

[RampantAndroid]

agmrpink wrote...

Whoa, if you back up to 0:20 in the Vendetta vid, he indicates a Reaper precesence, but complies when Shepard demands answers. Security measures being overridden are never mentioned in this instance. Vendetta then re-detects an indoctrinated presence once Kai Leng arrives.

Simple answer is that reaper != indoctrinated. It was noting reapers had arrived from dark space, and so it was too late. It then detects Leng.

As for IT, I doubt it to be true. Were you indoctrinated, you'd not be put into a dream, but rather be forced to do things to hurt humanity. But how does the catalyst know about the kid?

[RampantAndroid]

SubAstris wrote...

DJBare wrote...

SubAstris wrote...
It depends, some are indeed happy.

You assume that everyone will instantly fall in love with IT. I think it is quite a clever idea just not BW's original plan and I think that is shown in the whole game. It is not a matter of preference but what BW actually intended. People who don't like IT aren't pessimists, they are just skeptical of IT as an explanation of events

I don't understand why folk say this, it was their original plan, but they say they had to drop it due to engine limitations, so the idea was theirs, whether they are going to pick it up again is open for debate, but there is no denying they planned it originally.

What I mean by original intention is the "BW's intention for the ending as of the date ME3 came out"

Wait, they planned on IT originally? Documentation?

[SubAstris]

RampantAndroid wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

DJBare wrote...

SubAstris wrote...
It depends, some are indeed happy.

You assume that everyone will instantly fall in love with IT. I think it is quite a clever idea just not BW's original plan and I think that is shown in the whole game. It is not a matter of preference but what BW actually intended. People who don't like IT aren't pessimists, they are just skeptical of IT as an explanation of events

I don't understand why folk say this, it was their original plan, but they say they had to drop it due to engine limitations, so the idea was theirs, whether they are going to pick it up again is open for debate, but there is no denying they planned it originally.

What I mean by original intention is the "BW's intention for the ending as of the date ME3 came out"

Wait, they planned on IT originally? Documentation?

Oh hell no...

[Vaya]

Salient Archer wrote...

As no one actually answered any of this last night, here it is again...

Salient Archer wrote...

Hey everyone, I'm still feeling pretty meh about the whole EC. It actually hasn't addressed my greatest issue with the ending; Shepard's breath scene. This scene is still utterly ****ing with my mind and it's now more savage than ever.

Not only does the existence of this scene defy the laws of physics, thermodynamics, biology, kinetics and basic reality, but it's still not established where Shepard actually is. The only realistic answer is that the ending was a Hallucination or some events took place off camera that aren't accounted for... So if someone can give me a believable answer that doesn't require an off camera explanation but also includes all the previously mentioned fundamentals, I'd be incredibly surprised.

and some additonal context...

Salient Archer wrote...

1) It clearly is Shepard [in the breath scene] Considering it is clearly Female when you're Femshep and Male when it's Maleshep. So the idea of it not being Shepard is just silly and makes little to absoloutly no sense.

2) We have no reason to trust the Catalyst: Considering we have all the in-game evidence we need provided in these quotes alone. Which proves he either contradicts himself (hence fallible), lying (deceitful) a rogue AI that turned on his own creators (insane, fallible, a lier and terrifying) or doesn't exist (a deception).

3) All empirical evidence proves that the breath scene and the devastation of the citadel can't both exist in the same reality, so one of them has to be fake. 

Considering the breath scene seems far more rooted in reality than the events that unfold involving the citadel, I'm far more inclined to believe that it all took place in Shepard's head. This is not only thematical to the series but we've already experienced Shepard having dreams/hallucinations and interacting in virtual realitys. Not only this but we (the player) have been in control of Shepard during these alternate reality events.

I am inclined to think that Shepard is actually staggering around doing SOMETHING while the citadel scenes are running, so she really does shoot some object that explodes in her face. Whatever you do in synthesis and control seem to more or less just kill you (run over by a train in control, jumping into a recycling vat in synthesis, just guesses).

[gunslinger_ruiz]

RampantAndroid wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

Whoa, if you back up to 0:20 in the Vendetta vid, he indicates a Reaper precesence, but complies when Shepard demands answers. Security measures being overridden are never mentioned in this instance. Vendetta then re-detects an indoctrinated presence once Kai Leng arrives.

Simple answer is that reaper != indoctrinated. It was noting reapers had arrived from dark space, and so it was too late. It then detects Leng.

As for IT, I doubt it to be true. Were you indoctrinated, you'd not be put into a dream, but rather be forced to do things to hurt humanity. But how does the catalyst know about the kid?

To clarify, there's several different variations of Indoctrination Theory. The one that makes the most sense, in my opinion, states that the entire ending sequence (from Harbinger's attack to the credits) is a hallucination representational of an Indoctrination attempt. Shepard would not be indoctrinated at this point, but may be after one of the 4 "decisions" we make at the end, with further variations we can only guess at. This would be a unique situation for indoctrination due in large part to Shepard's immense willpower, he/she was able to resist direct indoctrination before during the events of the Arrival DLC.

[gunslinger_ruiz]

RampantAndroid wrote...

Wait, they planned on IT originally? Documentation?

Somewhat taken out of context. Don't have the exact quote but according to the Final Hours App Bioware had planned on having Shepard Indoctrinated, the player would lose control of Shepard, but the mechanic wasn't working correctly with the system so they took it out. Not sure if they only took out the mechanic, the idea, or the entire sequence at this point.
[speculations]But with so many thing pointing toward an Indoctrination attempt of Shepard, it's not too far a leap to think they only took out the gameplay mechanic but left the Indoctrination elements in. [/speculations]

Modifié par gunslinger_ruiz, 02 juillet 2012 - 11:45 .

[asdfsdadfs]

They'd been experimenting with a gameplay segment in which the player would suddenly lose control of Shepard, and watch him make choices as an indoctrinated individual would. This was scrapped for gameplay reasons....after all, no one likes suddenly having control yanked from their fingers. The idea of indoctrination, however, never left. At least, that's what we believe. In response to your other question, people only do those unspeakable crimes against humanity (/alienity) when they've succumbed to the indoctrination. If Shepard chooses Control or Synthesis, we can assume that he then wakes up and orders hammer to do something incredibly stupid. In destroy, we get a truly conscious shepard in the form of the breathing scene, lying in the London rubble.

[Salient Archer]

Vaya wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

As no one actually answered any of this last night, here it is again...

Salient Archer wrote...

Hey everyone, I'm still feeling pretty meh about the whole EC. It actually hasn't addressed my greatest issue with the ending; Shepard's breath scene. This scene is still utterly ****ing with my mind and it's now more savage than ever.

Not only does the existence of this scene defy the laws of physics, thermodynamics, biology, kinetics and basic reality, but it's still not established where Shepard actually is. The only realistic answer is that the ending was a Hallucination or some events took place off camera that aren't accounted for... So if someone can give me a believable answer that doesn't require an off camera explanation but also includes all the previously mentioned fundamentals, I'd be incredibly surprised.

and some additonal context...

Salient Archer wrote...

1) It clearly is Shepard [in the breath scene] Considering it is clearly Female when you're Femshep and Male when it's Maleshep. So the idea of it not being Shepard is just silly and makes little to absoloutly no sense.

2) We have no reason to trust the Catalyst: Considering we have all the in-game evidence we need provided in these quotes alone. Which proves he either contradicts himself (hence fallible), lying (deceitful) a rogue AI that turned on his own creators (insane, fallible, a lier and terrifying) or doesn't exist (a deception).

3) All empirical evidence proves that the breath scene and the devastation of the citadel can't both exist in the same reality, so one of them has to be fake. 

Considering the breath scene seems far more rooted in reality than the events that unfold involving the citadel, I'm far more inclined to believe that it all took place in Shepard's head. This is not only thematical to the series but we've already experienced Shepard having dreams/hallucinations and interacting in virtual realitys. Not only this but we (the player) have been in control of Shepard during these alternate reality events.

I am inclined to think that Shepard is actually staggering around doing SOMETHING while the citadel scenes are running, so she really does shoot some object that explodes in her face. Whatever you do in synthesis and control seem to more or less just kill you (run over by a train in control, jumping into a recycling vat in synthesis, just guesses).

So more a hallucination opposed to a dream?

[Turbo_J]

SubAstris wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

It's another misinformation bread crumb like the beings of light. I once explained the pattern of the cycle as a perpetuation on implications and inferences passed on by way of incorrect assumptions or conclusions by previous cycles and in compounds. Its equatable to the minor alterations of Geth low level programing. Everything derived from the original equation becomes flawed. It becomes an organic algorithm perpetuated cycle after cycle; the equation, immense, unknowable.

The "being of light" theory is slightly different, one of the main reasons is that it hinges entirely on a data entry, probably written by someone who has little interaction to the main writers, for a remote planet that 99% of people are going to miss or forget by ME3. However this is shown very clearly, it is unavoidable. If you are right, you have to ask yourself why BW didn't explain that in great detail and gave strong evidence to believe in a "master" for the Reapers, which we clearly get in the form of the Catalyst

The warnings of accepting something like this exist within the lore of the Reapers themselves. 'Viewing the Reapers with superstitious awe' - ''god like'. Legion warns that they are mundane in form, but advance and 'gained perspective' on why organics would imbue them with such qualities. These are thematic warnings buried in the dialog and lore.

Getting to the point, knowing what we know, why on earth would we want to trust a Reaper; known capable of messing with people minds to make them think they are god like, or anything, especially some AI taking on the form of a child it's supposed creations just killed months earlier, that claims to be the 'master of the cycle'.

[Arian Dynas]

Sareth Cousland wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

For example, I would say the kid in the dreams is symbolic of everyone Shepard has lost.

And that would be correct. It resembles all he could not save. That's why the Catalyst assumes this form - to exploit Shepard's feeling of guilt.

If you peel back only the one onion layer you chose to peel back, you would ignore that the dreams are portrayed as an integral element of ME3. Thus, the kid - and through it, Shepard's guilt and desire to save the innocent - becomes an integral element of ME3. There is relevance in the form the Catalyst chooses.  One step further. The Catalyst offers three options:
1. Galaxy saved, become the reaper commander and protect the galaxy
2. Galaxy saved, sacrifice yourself to augment the whole galaxy and achieve universal peace
3. Galaxy saved, destroy the geth and your crewmate EDI to achieve the goal you have been fighting for since ME1, but at a terrible cost.
It essentially says "you have won, now you can choose how you want your victory . If you decide not to destroy us, you will be rewarded with a much better ending to your tale. Aren't you tired of all that death? Would it not be preferable to achieve a victory where you don't have to sacrifice anyone else, as already so many have died?"

And note that all three of them require Shepard to die. 

Martyr complex much there John?

Perhaps Shepard perceives himself as a bit of a Christ figure, a literal Shepherd.

Either that or he's guilty and self-sacrificing.

[Arian Dynas]

Eryri wrote...

Tirian Thorn wrote...

Dwailing wrote...


Well, it may not be unusual, but Javik's line about how Shepard will have to make more hard choices before the night is over kind of made me think about how Destroy is the hard choice of the three.  You know, since it seems to have the worst consequences (Although arguably, that role might be taken by Refusal now, but still.).

Refusal is a choice of sorts, but not a "hard choice" from Javik's perspective - IMO. 

Javik - I think - given the same situation would be destroy and damn the consequences. 

Giving choices like this is pretty standard in my experience when one party wants someone to agree with them. 

Present a horrible, unthinkable or drastic change and have everyone gasp and complain.  Then introduce a "less bad" option (the option you want someone to agree with.)  Guess which one people will usually pick.  They will pick the option that impacts the fewest people - but may not actually be the best option. 

http://theriskyshift...pelled-to-html/

This is similar to other moral discussions I've seen.  A classic example is that a super-intelligent alien culture comes to Earth and offers to make every single man, woman and child happy, disease free, etc.  And all that has to happen is for one child to be tortured. 

Most people will object to this - even damning the entire world to a worse fate than make this choice. 

The Reapers aren't quite going that far, but if you pick destroy, Starbrat tells you that you will be destroying the Geth and EDI.  If you pick Control/Synthesis - only Shepard has to "die." 

That's quite intriguing. I wonder if this is Mac Walter's psychology training coming into play?

Well, this sort of study IS among the things you have to look at in a psych course.