55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Xavendithas]

Big G13 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Big G13 wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...

I was wondering. I am currently replaying ME1, and I am on Feros. Is it possible that the Thorian has something to do with the Reapers? Considering they are both very old and both indoctrinate. It would be interesting if the Thorian species was one of the inspirations for the Reapers.

I don't think so. The Thorian is over 50k years old but the Reapers are 10s of millions. BUT, it does remind me of something I thought interesting. In ME3 the citizens of Feros were affective fighters because of past Thorian indoctrination and were resistant to Reaper indoctrination because of Thorian spores still being in there system. Is physiological indoctrination more powerful than psychological indoctrination? OR is it a case of indoctrination of any kind, once broken, giving the formerly indoctrinated subject an immunity to future indoctrination attempts of any kind? As usual, I have few answers and lots of questions.

I think physiological is more potent because it is self-reinforcing. Reapertech, Thorian spores, whatever, either way it's constantly there to reinforce the indoctrination so that you don't start questioning your masters once someone with enough charisma points out that you're acting like a maniac.

So, what is the thread consensus, does Reaper indoc. start out as psychological and reinforce itself with implants later on, or is it completely dependent on, at least, physical proximity to Reaper tech? I've been in this thread since near the beginning and still don't have my head wrapped around it.

As is mentioned in the video logs on the derelict reaper in ME2, it's a dead reaper that still manages to emit some sort of indoctrination field. It seems to me that just being around anything reaperish is enough to do it over time, but they have ways of speeding the process up and bending it towards a specific goal as needed.

I don't know if that makes sense.

[Bill Casey]

I think it becomes insanely brilliant if they are metaphorical representations of Shepard's mind and the Reaper influence...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 22 mai 2012 - 04:29 .

[Big Bad]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Regarding the ending:
What's the consensus on whether TIM is Shepards mental projection or the Reapers influence?

My thought is that TIM is Shepard's mental projection of the Reaper's indoctrinating influence.  So both. 

[liggy002]

Makrys wrote...

Not sure if this has been mentioned at all, but even if so, its worth throwin out there again for anyone who hasn't seen it. A couple tweets were discovered a while back that were pretty revealing... then were later deleted. Intriguing? Here they are:

First one - @masseffect @PatrickWeekes did you feel pressured to change the ending, Isn't it important to stick to your guns on some things?

@satootaku We never said we were changing it We have ALWAYS had big plans for ME3. It isn't a response-It's been in the works

Second - @masseffect Whats with the ending? It was confusing and very dreamlike was it supposed to be like that?
Mass Effect Mass Effect ‏ @masseffect

@kaladur The ending was as we intended, so yes?


I didn't post the link because it just goes to a discussion board where the quotes are simply posted. But I would like to give a shout out to Mr. Bill Casey who posted the link a few days ago on another thread which is where I found it. Always on top of your evidence, Mr. Casey.

So... what do you guys think of that? Seems pretty revealing to me. And Priestly's response was laughable. Just a pure cover up, nothing more.

I'm super excited about it Mak.  I think we can look forward to great things this coming Summer.

[BatmanTurian]

UFGSpot wrote...

dmay7 wrote...

Forgot to add this.

This has also been puzzling me. When Shepard is taken from the control room to wherever the Starchild is, he is on top of the Citadel. The Power Conduit for Destroy and Control Panel for Control are placed ON THE CITADEL, not the crucible. If the Reapers did build the Citadel, why would they put these two highly dangerous things on there that would basically destroy them? And why, in the thousands of years the Asari and Salarians were on the Citadel, did know one ever find and wonder what the hell these things are.

I'll tell you why. Symbolism. Manifestations in Sheperds mind, symbolizing his fight from Indoctrination.

ALSO, I was reading a ME3 guide in Walmart today, and for the End spoilers part, it says that Sheperd doesn't control the Reapers, he BECOMES a Reaper. Thought that was interesting...

Let's pretend for a moment it isn't a dream. (I am an IT supporter so just bear with me)

The Crucible is aptly named. It's designed to interface with the Citadel on a level that implies coordination. If the ending is "real" as it stands, it's almost like it was a test created by the Reapers to signify a civilization was ready (passing through a Crucible) to make an assesment on the future.

It's also clear (again assuming it's real) that Synthesis is supposed to be the "good" option. Peace and love, if you ignore all that stuff about denying everyone the right to self determine but we won't get into all that.

So my question is....if the crucible was the key to synthesis, and the crucible is a reaper based design, and if the synthesis was gonna be decided for everyone by 1 person and it's what the reapers wanted....why didn't they just do it themselves? Why all the run around? Why not modify the citadel after the first cycle or whenever and just make it happen? It makes no sense at all. NOTHING about the ending as it stands makes any dang sense, and it drives me nuts.

That's why you either become a bioware-hating nihilist or an optimistic proponent of I.T.

[Icinix]

DJBare wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Regarding the ending:
What's the consensus on whether TIM is Shepards mental projection or the Reapers influence?

I'll say it's reaper influence, but Shepard is still the one to create the image, if the reapers were that much in control then they'd make TIM look more appealing not like a half husk.

I like the idea that because Shepard is knocked out or whatever, his subconcious is dreaming a counter to it. Where as if he was fully conscious, the Reapers would have an easier time swaying his conscious. In a dream state though, Shepards subconcious is swaying the vision as a defensive measure. Kind of like inceptions dream turning against the invader.

[Arian Dynas]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Makrys wrote...

dmay7 wrote...

Forgot to add this.

This has also been puzzling me. When Shepard is taken from the control room to wherever the Starchild is, he is on top of the Citadel. The Power Conduit for Destroy and Control Panel for Control are placed ON THE CITADEL, not the crucible. If the Reapers did build the Citadel, why would they put these two highly dangerous things on there that would basically destroy them? And why, in the thousands of years the Asari and Salarians were on the Citadel, did know one ever find and wonder what the hell these things are.

I'll tell you why. Symbolism. Manifestations in Sheperds mind, symbolizing his fight from Indoctrination.

ALSO, I was reading a ME3 guide in Walmart today, and for the End spoilers part, it says that Sheperd doesn't control the Reapers, he BECOMES a Reaper. Thought that was interesting...

Yes, in the CE guide, it clearly outlines the choices. Control is labeled as 'become a Reaper'. Should be pretty obvious to everyone... don't choose control.

My theory is, Control is the ReapersWin scenario that Bioware hinted they would put in the game ( I mean why would our choice matter if there wasn't one where you could screw up?), Synthesis is indoctrinated but able to snap out of it, Destroy is what we have said it is.

I disagree completely.

Control is giving in, it's becoming a Reaper thrall "You will lose your body and everything you have" you're letting yourself become a puppet (if it helps, remember, Reaper groundforces are colloquially referred to the mytonym of "Reapers" even though they are all just Husks rather than actual Reapers)

Synthesis is coming around to their point of veiw, beleiving what they beleive and allowing yourself to be converted, a willing agent like Saren, hence why Saren served them directly, because he had been forced to beleive as they do, while TIM serves them indirectly, he reisists all he likes but he still serves them for the most part.

[Arian Dynas]

Big G13 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Big G13 wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...

I was wondering. I am currently replaying ME1, and I am on Feros. Is it possible that the Thorian has something to do with the Reapers? Considering they are both very old and both indoctrinate. It would be interesting if the Thorian species was one of the inspirations for the Reapers.

I don't think so. The Thorian is over 50k years old but the Reapers are 10s of millions. BUT, it does remind me of something I thought interesting. In ME3 the citizens of Feros were affective fighters because of past Thorian indoctrination and were resistant to Reaper indoctrination because of Thorian spores still being in there system. Is physiological indoctrination more powerful than psychological indoctrination? OR is it a case of indoctrination of any kind, once broken, giving the formerly indoctrinated subject an immunity to future indoctrination attempts of any kind? As usual, I have few answers and lots of questions.

I think physiological is more potent because it is self-reinforcing. Reapertech, Thorian spores, whatever, either way it's constantly there to reinforce the indoctrination so that you don't start questioning your masters once someone with enough charisma points out that you're acting like a maniac.

So, what is the thread consensus, does Reaper indoc. start out as psychological and reinforce itself with implants later on, or is it completely dependent on, at least, physical proximity to Reaper tech? I've been in this thread since near the beginning and still don't have my head wrapped around it.

Both.

Some can be forced by the integration of things, such as Grayson, others are psychologically condition and can be reinforced with implants, quickly indoctrinated subjects basically have their minds wiped, so they're little more than puppets.

[dmay7]

UFGSpot wrote...

dmay7 wrote...

Forgot to add this.

This has also been puzzling me. When Shepard is taken from the control room to wherever the Starchild is, he is on top of the Citadel. The Power Conduit for Destroy and Control Panel for Control are placed ON THE CITADEL, not the crucible. If the Reapers did build the Citadel, why would they put these two highly dangerous things on there that would basically destroy them? And why, in the thousands of years the Asari and Salarians were on the Citadel, did know one ever find and wonder what the hell these things are.

I'll tell you why. Symbolism. Manifestations in Sheperds mind, symbolizing his fight from Indoctrination.

ALSO, I was reading a ME3 guide in Walmart today, and for the End spoilers part, it says that Sheperd doesn't control the Reapers, he BECOMES a Reaper. Thought that was interesting...

Let's pretend for a moment it isn't a dream. (I am an IT supporter so just bear with me)

The Crucible is aptly named. It's designed to interface with the Citadel on a level that implies coordination. If the ending is "real" as it stands, it's almost like it was a test created by the Reapers to signify a civilization was ready (passing through a Crucible) to make an assesment on the future.

It's also clear (again assuming it's real) that Synthesis is supposed to be the "good" option. Peace and love, if you ignore all that stuff about denying everyone the right to self determine but we won't get into all that.

So my question is....if the crucible was the key to synthesis, and the crucible is a reaper based design, and if the synthesis was gonna be decided for everyone by 1 person and it's what the reapers wanted....why didn't they just do it themselves? Why all the run around? Why not modify the citadel after the first cycle or whenever and just make it happen? It makes no sense at all. NOTHING about the ending as it stands makes any dang sense, and it drives me nuts.

You make good points, I still just don't get that if this is supposed to be real, that no one in ME1 or ME2 even threw in a single line of dialouge referencing the power conduit and control panel. No sense can be made.

Apparently the original ending was supposed to be that the Reapers weren't the true enemy; Dark Energy was, and that it was becoming more dangerous with the Dark Energy sun that Tali was studying (another plot point never explained). Apparently the Reapers were trying to save civilazation by Harvesting the humans and creating a human Reaper, because Humans are the most flexible in changing environments. Sheperd was to be given two choices: Allow the Reapers to create a human Reaper by continue to abduct human colonies, or destroy the Reapers, and hope the the current civilizations can find a way to end the Dark Energy threat.

HEard that Bioware changed that ending to this ending when the script was leaked. Idk if this is the case, but I would have liked that ending, because at least those choices would have had ramifications A LOT graver than the ones were given.

[Makrys]

liggy002 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Not sure if this has been mentioned at all, but even if so, its worth throwin out there again for anyone who hasn't seen it. A couple tweets were discovered a while back that were pretty revealing... then were later deleted. Intriguing? Here they are:

First one - @masseffect @PatrickWeekes did you feel pressured to change the ending, Isn't it important to stick to your guns on some things?

@satootaku We never said we were changing it We have ALWAYS had big plans for ME3. It isn't a response-It's been in the works

Second - @masseffect Whats with the ending? It was confusing and very dreamlike was it supposed to be like that?
Mass Effect Mass Effect ‏ @masseffect

@kaladur The ending was as we intended, so yes?


I didn't post the link because it just goes to a discussion board where the quotes are simply posted. But I would like to give a shout out to Mr. Bill Casey who posted the link a few days ago on another thread which is where I found it. Always on top of your evidence, Mr. Casey.

So... what do you guys think of that? Seems pretty revealing to me. And Priestly's response was laughable. Just a pure cover up, nothing more.

I'm super excited about it Mak.  I think we can look forward to great things this coming Summer.

Hopefully so. And you were just about the only one who noticed my comment. I'm not taking part in the current conversation so that's probably why it got passed by. But I think its some pretty compelling proof that this was all planned. And the endings were most definitely meant to later be clarified. 

[Arian Dynas]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Regarding the ending:
What's the consensus on whether TIM is Shepards mental projection or the Reapers influence?

Both.

The indoctrinated part of Shepard's psyche, created by the Reapers and acting in their interests, but for the most part, subconciously, otherwise the Guardian would know why Shepard is "there".

[Arian Dynas]

BatmanTurian wrote...

UFGSpot wrote...

dmay7 wrote...

Forgot to add this.

This has also been puzzling me. When Shepard is taken from the control room to wherever the Starchild is, he is on top of the Citadel. The Power Conduit for Destroy and Control Panel for Control are placed ON THE CITADEL, not the crucible. If the Reapers did build the Citadel, why would they put these two highly dangerous things on there that would basically destroy them? And why, in the thousands of years the Asari and Salarians were on the Citadel, did know one ever find and wonder what the hell these things are.

I'll tell you why. Symbolism. Manifestations in Sheperds mind, symbolizing his fight from Indoctrination.

ALSO, I was reading a ME3 guide in Walmart today, and for the End spoilers part, it says that Sheperd doesn't control the Reapers, he BECOMES a Reaper. Thought that was interesting...

Let's pretend for a moment it isn't a dream. (I am an IT supporter so just bear with me)

The Crucible is aptly named. It's designed to interface with the Citadel on a level that implies coordination. If the ending is "real" as it stands, it's almost like it was a test created by the Reapers to signify a civilization was ready (passing through a Crucible) to make an assesment on the future.

It's also clear (again assuming it's real) that Synthesis is supposed to be the "good" option. Peace and love, if you ignore all that stuff about denying everyone the right to self determine but we won't get into all that.

So my question is....if the crucible was the key to synthesis, and the crucible is a reaper based design, and if the synthesis was gonna be decided for everyone by 1 person and it's what the reapers wanted....why didn't they just do it themselves? Why all the run around? Why not modify the citadel after the first cycle or whenever and just make it happen? It makes no sense at all. NOTHING about the ending as it stands makes any dang sense, and it drives me nuts.

That's why you either become a bioware-hating nihilist or an optimistic proponent of I.T.

Given the choice, I'd rather be an optimist. I've spent too many years of my life wallowing and stewing already.

[Bill Casey]

I actually believe Shepard would be more vulnerable while unconscious...

The limbic system processes information metaphorically by using familiar imagery...
It's active during dream states...

Reapers target the limbic system...

[Icinix]

Makrys wrote...

liggy002 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Not sure if this has been mentioned at all, but even if so, its worth throwin out there again for anyone who hasn't seen it. A couple tweets were discovered a while back that were pretty revealing... then were later deleted. Intriguing? Here they are:

First one - @masseffect @PatrickWeekes did you feel pressured to change the ending, Isn't it important to stick to your guns on some things?

@satootaku We never said we were changing it We have ALWAYS had big plans for ME3. It isn't a response-It's been in the works

Second - @masseffect Whats with the ending? It was confusing and very dreamlike was it supposed to be like that?
Mass Effect Mass Effect ‏ @masseffect

@kaladur The ending was as we intended, so yes?


I didn't post the link because it just goes to a discussion board where the quotes are simply posted. But I would like to give a shout out to Mr. Bill Casey who posted the link a few days ago on another thread which is where I found it. Always on top of your evidence, Mr. Casey.

So... what do you guys think of that? Seems pretty revealing to me. And Priestly's response was laughable. Just a pure cover up, nothing more.

I'm super excited about it Mak.  I think we can look forward to great things this coming Summer.

Hopefully so. And you were just about the only one who noticed my comment. I'm not taking part in the current conversation so that's probably why it got passed by. But I think its some pretty compelling proof that this was all planned. And the endings were most definitely meant to later be clarified. 

I remember these comments, there was also one by Mike that said something along the lines they had always intended ending DLC, but needed to change their time line or something.

I think its pretty fair to say these can be taken there was always more to come regarding the ending of ME3.

[Big G13]

Icinix wrote...

Big G13 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Big G13 wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...

I was wondering. I am currently replaying ME1, and I am on Feros. Is it possible that the Thorian has something to do with the Reapers? Considering they are both very old and both indoctrinate. It would be interesting if the Thorian species was one of the inspirations for the Reapers.

I don't think so. The Thorian is over 50k years old but the Reapers are 10s of millions. BUT, it does remind me of something I thought interesting. In ME3 the citizens of Feros were affective fighters because of past Thorian indoctrination and were resistant to Reaper indoctrination because of Thorian spores still being in there system. Is physiological indoctrination more powerful than psychological indoctrination? OR is it a case of indoctrination of any kind, once broken, giving the formerly indoctrinated subject an immunity to future indoctrination attempts of any kind? As usual, I have few answers and lots of questions.

I think physiological is more potent because it is self-reinforcing. Reapertech, Thorian spores, whatever, either way it's constantly there to reinforce the indoctrination so that you don't start questioning your masters once someone with enough charisma points out that you're acting like a maniac.

So, what is the thread consensus, does Reaper indoc. start out as psychological and reinforce itself with implants later on, or is it completely dependent on, at least, physical proximity to Reaper tech? I've been in this thread since near the beginning and still don't have my head wrapped around it.

Psychological I do believe - with implants coming later.

The exception is Paul Grayson, because he was still outright injected with the nanites or whatever - even still, he put up one hell of a fight against that direct attempt for a hell of a long time.

o.k. thanks, and also to BatmanTurian. That's the way I've always seen it but this talk of the Thorian made me rethink for a minute. I still think this link to the Thorian and resisting Reaper indoc. is interesting and possibly important but it really opens up a whole new can of speculation. 

[spotlessvoid]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Not sure if this has been mentioned at all, but even if so, its worth throwin out there again for anyone who hasn't seen it. A couple tweets were discovered a while back that were pretty revealing... then were later deleted. Intriguing? Here they are:

First one - @masseffect @PatrickWeekes did you feel pressured to change the ending, Isn't it important to stick to your guns on some things?

@satootaku We never said we were changing it We have ALWAYS had big plans for ME3. It isn't a response-It's been in the works

Second - @masseffect Whats with the ending? It was confusing and very dreamlike was it supposed to be like that?
Mass Effect Mass Effect ‏ @masseffect

@kaladur The ending was as we intended, so yes?
I didn't post the link because it just goes to a discussion board where the quotes are simply posted. But I would like to give a shout out to Mr. Bill Casey who posted the link a few days ago on another thread which is where I found it. Always on top of your evidence, Mr. Casey.

So... what do you guys think of that? Seems pretty revealing to me. And Priestly's response was laughable. Just a pure cover up, nothing more.

I don't know, on one hand it sounds like double-speak, but on the other I don't want to get all excited over his vague wording.

Nothing short of a yes it was indoctrination would be definitive. Still, the specific response to the phrase confusing and dreamlike is interesting in that he actually gave a conditional yes.

Also, Arians suggested timeline is very plausible. Big things for ME3 all along? If they were lying they'd get blasted for it when nothing big comes out. The backlash has calmed in it's ferocity and it's no longer making headlines in the non gaming press...why set yourself up for absolute fail?

[Icinix]

Bill Casey wrote...

I actually believe Shepard would be more vulnerable while unconscious...

The limbic system processes information metaphorically by using familiar imagery...
It's active during dream states...

Reapers target the limbic system...

More vunerable, definitely, but as an outside player watching it unfold...it would be chaotic, disconnected and be less sensical.

[Bill Casey]

It would be... surreal...

[Icinix]

Bill Casey wrote...

It would be... surreal...

THAT was the word I was after!

[blooregard]

Kinda off topic but here it goes. We know TIM came into contact with some crazy Reaper artifact that turned everyone into husks upon touch but how do we know it was just that one that did it.

Remember Aquiteus (excuse spelling) and the Reaper artifact there? there were no dragons teeth but there were still alot of husks.the artifact on Aquiteus seems to be the same thing as object Rho except nobody seemed to have touched Rho.

Would it be safe to assume that most if not all Reaper artifacts have the ability to change anything that touches it into a husk?

[BatmanTurian]

Arian Dynas wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Makrys wrote...

dmay7 wrote...

Forgot to add this.

This has also been puzzling me. When Shepard is taken from the control room to wherever the Starchild is, he is on top of the Citadel. The Power Conduit for Destroy and Control Panel for Control are placed ON THE CITADEL, not the crucible. If the Reapers did build the Citadel, why would they put these two highly dangerous things on there that would basically destroy them? And why, in the thousands of years the Asari and Salarians were on the Citadel, did know one ever find and wonder what the hell these things are.

I'll tell you why. Symbolism. Manifestations in Sheperds mind, symbolizing his fight from Indoctrination.

ALSO, I was reading a ME3 guide in Walmart today, and for the End spoilers part, it says that Sheperd doesn't control the Reapers, he BECOMES a Reaper. Thought that was interesting...

Yes, in the CE guide, it clearly outlines the choices. Control is labeled as 'become a Reaper'. Should be pretty obvious to everyone... don't choose control.

My theory is, Control is the ReapersWin scenario that Bioware hinted they would put in the game ( I mean why would our choice matter if there wasn't one where you could screw up?), Synthesis is indoctrinated but able to snap out of it, Destroy is what we have said it is.

I disagree completely.

Control is giving in, it's becoming a Reaper thrall "You will lose your body and everything you have" you're letting yourself become a puppet (if it helps, remember, Reaper groundforces are colloquially referred to the mytonym of "Reapers" even though they are all just Husks rather than actual Reapers)

Synthesis is coming around to their point of veiw, beleiving what they beleive and allowing yourself to be converted, a willing agent like Saren, hence why Saren served them directly, because he had been forced to beleive as they do, while TIM serves them indirectly, he reisists all he likes but he still serves them for the most part.

That's basically what I just said. Saren could resist, so I could see Shepard resisting too, at least for a little while. But it would either be going out in a blaze of glory, killing himself, or acting like Saren, battling your friends while talking the whole time and trying to get them to come around to your point of view. Of course, at that point it might be auto-dialogue but I could see a way they could do it with player choice.

[Xavendithas]

Bill Casey wrote...

I actually believe Shepard would be more vulnerable while unconscious...

The limbic system processes information metaphorically by using familiar imagery...
It's active during dream states...

Reapers target the limbic system...

I would tend to agree with you, except for all the discussion on the last couple pages has got me thinking now. There could really be a connection to the Cipher that Shep received from the Thorian and his ability to passively resist indoctrination.

Another thing I started to think about, due to the thread ****ing about how everyone has to see Liara as a final 'vision' is something I brought up a couple of days ago that I think could have merit. Apparently no matter what ending you choose, nor the choices throughout the game leading up to it have a difference, you always see Liara smiling at you in the cutscene.

I'll throw it out there again just for sh**s and giggles, but what if the scene where Liara shares that vision with Shep before the push to the beam is her installing some sort of failsafe in Shepards head. It's known that Benezia was able to break free of indoctrination, however briefly...Liara could have figured out how she did it and thought Shep might need it.

Just some food for thought.

Modifié par Xavendithas, 22 mai 2012 - 04:43 .

[Makrys]

"The Reapers resulting control of the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestions." From the ME3 codex on Indoctrination: 

Does anyone find this interesting? In the end, when the godchild is explaining the choices... Shepard seems awful 'susceptible' to its 'suggestions', as he basically has no counter for any of the child's logic. It is obvious Shepard is not Shepard in this scene, and that something clearly is wrong with his mental state. He would be challenging this kids logic up and down the pathway all day long, normally. But, if the IT is true, this would make sense. Shepard is 'susceptible to its suggestions', meaning that there's a good chance he won't argue against what the Reapers (or godchild) tells him.

Also, "A Reaper's 'suggestions' can manipulate victims into betraying friends". Sound like Shepard shooting Anderson? IMO, it does.

Pretty neat if you ask me.

Modifié par Makrys, 22 mai 2012 - 04:46 .

[JasonSic]

Icinix wrote...

Makrys wrote...

liggy002 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Not sure if this has been mentioned at all, but even if so, its worth throwin out there again for anyone who hasn't seen it. A couple tweets were discovered a while back that were pretty revealing... then were later deleted. Intriguing? Here they are:

First one - @masseffect @PatrickWeekes did you feel pressured to change the ending, Isn't it important to stick to your guns on some things?

@satootaku We never said we were changing it We have ALWAYS had big plans for ME3. It isn't a response-It's been in the works

Second - @masseffect Whats with the ending? It was confusing and very dreamlike was it supposed to be like that?
Mass Effect Mass Effect ‏ @masseffect

@kaladur The ending was as we intended, so yes?


I didn't post the link because it just goes to a discussion board where the quotes are simply posted. But I would like to give a shout out to Mr. Bill Casey who posted the link a few days ago on another thread which is where I found it. Always on top of your evidence, Mr. Casey.

So... what do you guys think of that? Seems pretty revealing to me. And Priestly's response was laughable. Just a pure cover up, nothing more.

I'm super excited about it Mak.  I think we can look forward to great things this coming Summer.

Hopefully so. And you were just about the only one who noticed my comment. I'm not taking part in the current conversation so that's probably why it got passed by. But I think its some pretty compelling proof that this was all planned. And the endings were most definitely meant to later be clarified. 

I remember these comments, there was also one by Mike that said something along the lines they had always intended ending DLC, but needed to change their time line or something.

I think its pretty fair to say these can be taken there was always more to come regarding the ending of ME3.

The fact that the comments were deleted is what really gets me excited.

[Destructorlio]

Lion Martinez wrote...

Wow, some great theorizing going on in this thread. I'm really enjoying it, it intrigues me. Keep it up

Glad you're enjoying it! But really, all the good stuff got discovered in the first (now locked) thread.

So...

[looks down, draws a circle with big toe]

You've clearly noticed that a lot of us believe in IT. So I was wondering... if you've got the time... what do you say to... telling us if we're on the right track or not?

No pressure! I know you're probably under an NDA or something. But, y'know, if we're really just barking up the wrong tree, it would save us all a lot of time and heartache to know now.

You don't have to say it out loud! Tell you what, if IT is sort of the right direction, just nod your head slightly. If IT is totally not the case and the literalists have it, just... gently shake your head.

Still nothing, huh? Okay, if that's the way you wanna be. How about... if IT is true, say nothing. Like, don't respond to this message. We'll get the picture.

Thanks!

[shuffles off]