55528 réponses à ce sujet

[BleedingUranium]

niravital wrote...

niravital wrote...

This just occurred to me.

In the final conversation with TIM and Anderson, there's this:

TIM: "If we can control it, why shouldn't it be ours?"
Shep: "Because... we're not ready"

Then, with the catalyst, when he talks about why he failed before with synthesis:
"Because the organics were not ready... ... ... You, are ready".

So now that the catalyst said it, Shep is convinced... how convenient.





PS: When he said "We have tried... a similar solution in the past", could he be referring to Saren?
Any way it seems to be very speculative

Also, from the final TIM Anderson dialogue:
Shep: "If we destroy the Reapers, this ends today! But if you can't control them..."
TIM: "But I can!"
Shep: "Are you willing to bet humanity's existence on it?"

>>Later>>

Shep: "So... the Illusive man was right after all..."
Catalyst: "Yes, but he could never have taken control..."
Shep: "But I can?"
Catalyst: "You will die. you will control us, but yada yada yada..."

Again, this Shep is easily convinced... Maybe he just wants to die...

EDIT: ninja'd by my own post 

Ninception

[comrade gando]

Ahha i knew it, multiplayer stuff. Well nothing to see there, maybe some more bull**** PR about NOT fixing the ending, nothing I should be interested in.

[paxxton]

[Arl Raylen]

niravital wrote...

niravital wrote...

This just occurred to me.

In the final conversation with TIM and Anderson, there's this:

TIM: "If we can control it, why shouldn't it be ours?"
Shep: "Because... we're not ready"

Then, with the catalyst, when he talks about why he failed before with synthesis:
"Because the organics were not ready... ... ... You, are ready".

So now that the catalyst said it, Shep is convinced... how convenient.





PS: When he said "We have tried... a similar solution in the past", could he be referring to Saren?
Any way it seems to be very speculative

Also, from the final TIM Anderson dialogue:
Shep: "If we destroy the Reapers, this ends today! But if you can't control them..."
TIM: "But I can!"
Shep: "Are you willing to bet humanity's existence on it?"

>>Later>>

Shep: "So... the Illusive man was right after all..."
Catalyst: "Yes, but he could never have taken control..."
Shep: "But I can?"
Catalyst: "You will die. you will control us, but yada yada yada..."

Again, this Shep is easily convinced... Maybe he just wants to die...

EDIT: ninja'd by my own post 

Artistic vision Shepard lost his brain when he reached the Citadel.

[Arl Raylen]

paxxton wrote...

THAT'S NOT TRUE!!!

[Arian Dynas]

Carlthestrange wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Something tells me Carl there is the sort who HAS to have the last word.

I admitted i'm wrong, is that a problem?

I knew he couldn't do it.

[Destructorlio]

Is anyone in this thread going to SDCC- we need an agent to ask Bioware about IT:

1) Was it ever intended by the developers, even as an interpretation?
2) What was with all of the clues in the game that we uncovered in this forum, were they there intentionally? Particularly the infrasound and the gun switch and the treeflections
3) Was any thought given to furthering this interpretation in the EC?
4) Was the Shepard lives ending supposed to be in London?
5) Will there be an ME4?

[agmrpink]

paxxton wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

This may be old hat, but I haven't had a chance to post until now, so forgive my tardiness.

With respect to Infiltrator Glyph, would EDI have been able to detect some fishy goings on from his end? I'd like to think so, since she seemed to be aware of everything else aboard the Normandy.

That leads me to assume that:
a) He's a friendly
Super, ridiculously, unbelievably sneaky
c) EDI's a devilbot

Bump for peace-time disccussion

Also, I saw a comic in which the Shadow Broker talked to Harbinger. That connection might have resulted in him being indoctrinated and modifying Glyph.

@Pax, I think this is what you were thinking about. The old SB was in cahoots with the Collectors looking for Shepard's body. Look's like Harbinger's bug-toy to me.

[SubAstris]

Destructorlio wrote...

Is anyone in this thread going to SDCC- we need an agent to ask Bioware about IT:

1) Was it ever intended by the developers, even as an interpretation?
2) What was with all of the clues in the game that we uncovered in this forum, were they there intentionally? Particularly the infrasound and the gun switch and the treeflections
3) Was any thought given to furthering this interpretation in the EC?
4) Was the Shepard lives ending supposed to be in London?
5) Will there be an ME4?

I doubt you will get any definitive answers on this, except for maybe 4. What would that mean for IT if BW said it was on the Citadel?

[paxxton]

agmrpink wrote...

paxxton wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

agmrpink wrote...

This may be old hat, but I haven't had a chance to post until now, so forgive my tardiness.

With respect to Infiltrator Glyph, would EDI have been able to detect some fishy goings on from his end? I'd like to think so, since she seemed to be aware of everything else aboard the Normandy.

That leads me to assume that:
a) He's a friendly
Super, ridiculously, unbelievably sneaky
c) EDI's a devilbot

Bump for peace-time disccussion

Also, I saw a comic in which the Shadow Broker talked to Harbinger. That connection might have resulted in him being indoctrinated and modifying Glyph.

@Pax, I think this is what you were thinking about. The old SB was in cahoots with the Collectors looking for Shepard's body. Look's like Harbinger's bug-toy to me.

Yes, Harby communicated through the Collector General. But we can assume that making deals with such a shady company like the Collectors and then not fulfilling his part of the agreement left the SB in a dangerous position.

[smokingotter1]

SubAstris wrote...

Destructorlio wrote...

Is anyone in this thread going to SDCC- we need an agent to ask Bioware about IT:

1) Was it ever intended by the developers, even as an interpretation?
2) What was with all of the clues in the game that we uncovered in this forum, were they there intentionally? Particularly the infrasound and the gun switch and the treeflections
3) Was any thought given to furthering this interpretation in the EC?
4) Was the Shepard lives ending supposed to be in London?
5) Will there be an ME4?

I doubt you will get any definitive answers on this, except for maybe 4. What would that mean for IT if BW said it was on the Citadel?

I agree. You ask these questions and you're going to get an epic amount of hems and haws and "we leave that to the fans to interpret". Better to ask them questions that only involve a yes or no answer IMO like #4.

[FreddyCast]

Can someone give me a quick list of all the new possible evidences for the IT found in the Extended Cut so far?

[niravital]

Wait... how does Shep's organic energy... is turning organics to be partly synthetic?

because of his synthetic implants? then it's just another thing centered about Shepard himself.
It's not about organics making a choice or evolution, it's just Shepard.
Just convince Shepard, to agree with us.

[byne]

TSA_383 wrote...

byne wrote...

Its way too damned hot here.

Feels like 105°F? Ugh.

Anyhow, have I missed anything interesting?

Wanna swap?

Hell yes I do!

I love cold and dreary, and despise hot and sunny.

[Vaya]

So one of the earlier arguements about the ending was that the catalyst and his ideas were dropped on the players out of the blue in the last 10 minutes of the game. The counter was that they weren't because those were introduced throughout the game. Javik is if anything the biggest vehicle for those ideas.

Javik is very well written, interesting and well developed. He's also the biggest anus of an unlikeable jerk I've met who's not a direct antagonist.

So, why, as a writer, would you want to present your ideas through a character that you've conditioned your players to disagree with?

[SubAstris]

FreddyCast wrote...

Can someone give me a quick list of all the new possible evidences for the IT found in the Extended Cut so far?

Yeah...











There you go.

[niravital]

Arl Raylen wrote...
Artistic vision Shepard lost his brain when he reached the Citadel.

Yes, BW integrity is Shepard not having one...

[Big_Boss9]

SubAstris wrote...

Destructorlio wrote...

Is anyone in this thread going to SDCC- we need an agent to ask Bioware about IT:

1) Was it ever intended by the developers, even as an interpretation?
2) What was with all of the clues in the game that we uncovered in this forum, were they there intentionally? Particularly the infrasound and the gun switch and the treeflections
3) Was any thought given to furthering this interpretation in the EC?
4) Was the Shepard lives ending supposed to be in London?
5) Will there be an ME4?

I doubt you will get any definitive answers on this, except for maybe 4. What would that mean for IT if BW said it was on the Citadel?

Would be worth a try at the very least. I noticed that Hudson and Walters won't be present (at the big panel, not sure about the rest of the weekend). Is that unusual or do they typically avoid these things? 

[smokingotter1]

FreddyCast wrote...

Can someone give me a quick list of all the new possible evidences for the IT found in the Extended Cut so far?

Edit: deleted, image pic upload fail

Modifié par smokingotter1, 06 juillet 2012 - 12:06 .

[BleedingUranium]

FreddyCast wrote...

Can someone give me a quick list of all the new possible evidences for the IT found in the Extended Cut so far?

Seven come to mind, though I know there are more.


-The entire Normandy pickup scene is absolutely ridiculous for a lot of reasons

-They kept the galaxy scene showing the beam starting in the Viper Nebula, where Rho, the start of Shep's indoc was, and the relay there doesn't exist anymore

-In the added scene with the two soliders, in Control and Synthesis they fail against the husks, but in Destroy they do way better (as in, Destroy is better)

-Coats is the dead soldier the Keeper takes the helmet off of, but this is both impossible, and can only be seen in fly cam. At the same time, they also put Coats in the first slide of the slideshow, and in Synthesis.

-In the Destroy ending, your LI doesn't actually put your name on the wall (goes with breath scene)

-The Catalyst's new dialogue is just as suspicious as the original

-The Catalyst yells "SO BE IT" in a Reaper voice if you choose Reject

-Also important is that I don't think we lost a single piece of IT evidence in EC

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 06 juillet 2012 - 12:14 .

[SubAstris]

Vaya wrote...

So one of the earlier arguements about the ending was that the catalyst and his ideas were dropped on the players out of the blue in the last 10 minutes of the game. The counter was that they weren't because those were introduced throughout the game. Javik is if anything the biggest vehicle for those ideas.

Javik is very well written, interesting and well developed. He's also the biggest anus of an unlikeable jerk I've met who's not a direct antagonist.

So, why, as a writer, would you want to present your ideas through a character that you've conditioned your players to disagree with?

Because they have set him as a Prothean who happens to know very much. Just because he's a jackass doesn't make him wrong. In fact you could argue that BW was trying add a bit of faux-complexity, Javik being the guy that everyone hates but is ultimately always right

[byne]

SubAstris wrote...

FreddyCast wrote...

Can someone give me a quick list of all the new possible evidences for the IT found in the Extended Cut so far?

Yeah...


There you go.

I'm sure literalists can be trusted on this issue!

[paxxton]

BleedingUranium wrote...

FreddyCast wrote...

Can someone give me a quick list of all the new possible evidences for the IT found in the Extended Cut so far?

Five come to mind, though I know there are more.

-The entire Normandy pickup scene is absolutely ridiculous for a lot of reasons
-They kept the galaxy scene showing the beam starting in the Viper Nebula, where Rho, the start of Shep's indoc was, and the relay there doesn't exist anymore
-In the added scene with the two soliders, in Control and Synthesis they fail against the husks, but in Destroy they do way better (as in, Destroy is better)
-Coats is the dead soldier the Keeper takes the helmet off of, but this is both impossible, and can only be seen in fly cam. At the same time, they also put Coats in the first slide of the slideshow, and in Synthesis.
-In the Destroy ending, your LI doesn't actually put your name on the wall (goes with breath scene)
-Also important is that I don't think we lost a single piece of IT evidence in EC

What about the Catalyst's voice anomaly and twinkling?

[niravital]

smokingotter1 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Destructorlio wrote...

Is anyone in this thread going to SDCC- we need an agent to ask Bioware about IT:

1) Was it ever intended by the developers, even as an interpretation?
2) What was with all of the clues in the game that we uncovered in this forum, were they there intentionally? Particularly the infrasound and the gun switch and the treeflections
3) Was any thought given to furthering this interpretation in the EC?
4) Was the Shepard lives ending supposed to be in London?
5) Will there be an ME4?

I doubt you will get any definitive answers on this, except for maybe 4. What would that mean for IT if BW said it was on the Citadel?

I agree. You ask these questions and you're going to get an epic amount of hems and haws and "we leave that to the fans to interpret". Better to ask them questions that only involve a yes or no answer IMO like #4.

I don't think they should be asked about IT or the endings at all...
Because if they planned it, they wouldn't comment.
When they'll want to tell us, they will*.




(*and-it-will-be-through-DLC-and-it-will-be-epic!)

[SubAstris]

Big_Boss9 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Destructorlio wrote...

Is anyone in this thread going to SDCC- we need an agent to ask Bioware about IT:

1) Was it ever intended by the developers, even as an interpretation?
2) What was with all of the clues in the game that we uncovered in this forum, were they there intentionally? Particularly the infrasound and the gun switch and the treeflections
3) Was any thought given to furthering this interpretation in the EC?
4) Was the Shepard lives ending supposed to be in London?
5) Will there be an ME4?

I doubt you will get any definitive answers on this, except for maybe 4. What would that mean for IT if BW said it was on the Citadel?

Would be worth a try at the very least. I noticed that Hudson and Walters won't be present (at the big panel, not sure about the rest of the weekend). Is that unusual or do they typically avoid these things? 

I'm not really the sort of person you want to be talking to be about that sort of thing, however I know that the last time they did do a big conference neither were there. Better to try and corner just one of the developers with very specific questions