55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Dwailing]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...
So... what you're saying is... literalists are never  a good thing?

Actually, literalism isn't HORRIBLE.  Some things are meant to be taken at face-value.  The Halo story is meant to be taken literally.  The Uncharted story is meant to be taken literally.  The Bible and the Mass Effect 3 endings?  DEFINITELY NOT.

It depends on the story. If the author makes it obvious that we're supposed to make up our own interpretation, then no, it shouldn't be taken seriously.

Bioware tells us the work should speak for itself and we should speculate. Then people say " no, everything should be taken absolutely literally. " These people did not pay attention to The Matrix.
Our minds are easily fooled.

Oh man I love that movie.  Have you heard the theory that Zion is just another layer of the Matrix?

Modifié par Dwailing, 07 juillet 2012 - 11:27 .

[BatmanTurian]

Dwailing wrote...
And you felt compelled to come into the IT THREAD and tell us to stop doing something we really enjoy... why?

let it go. never worth it.

[BatmanTurian]

Dwailing wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...
So... what you're saying is... literalists are never  a good thing?

Actually, literalism isn't HORRIBLE.  Some things are meant to be taken at face-value.  The Halo story is meant to be taken literally.  The Uncharted story is meant to be taken literally.  The Bible and the Mass Effect 3 endings?  DEFINITELY NOT.

It depends on the story. If the author makes it obvious that we're supposed to make up our own interpretation, then no, it shouldn't be taken seriously.

Bioware tells us the work should speak for itself and we should speculate. Then people say " no, everything should be taken absolutely literally. " These people did not pay attention to The Matrix.
Our minds are easily fooled.

Oh man I love that movie.  Have you heard the theory that Zion is just another layer of the Matrix?

Yeah, and that makes the movies even more horrific on an Inception scale.

[Dwailing]

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

Uh, SPACE MAGIC!!!! :wizard::wizard:  To be serious, in Destroy at least, I would ASSUME that, in a literal interpretation of the endings, EDI's death led to some kind of feedback loop (Or some other problem.) that caused the Normandy's engines to fail.

With regards to the other endings, I have no frakking clue.

Modifié par Dwailing, 07 juillet 2012 - 11:29 .

[estebanus]

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

You actually see the Normandy escaping the destroy wave, so I think that they discharged their Eezo core or that they decided to land on the planet to be perfectly safe from the wave.

[comrade gando]

it seems bioware went out of their way to make the endings look like "yup this is the end, now shut up and swallow" (jk lol), but they also went out of their way to add in other strangeness that shouldn't be happening normally. my guess is to give an indicator that something isn't right but then they go and try to end the game on a cliffhanger again and it's like make up your mind bioware!

[BatmanTurian]

Dwailing wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

Uh, SPACE MAGIC!!!! :wizard::wizard:  To be serious, in Destroy at least, I would ASSUME that, in a literal interpretation of the endings, EDI's death led to some kind of feedback loop (Or some other problem.) that caused the Normandy's engines to fail.

EDI probably never actually died. Eva Core's body was probably destroyed, but I think EDI survived in her quantum blue box. As for the geth, we never actually see them die or dead in the epilogue.

[Offender_Mullet]

Dwailing wrote...

Offender_Mullet wrote...

People are still clinging onto hope about the IT 'eh? Yikes.

To quote Dr. Jones: "Indiana.......let it go."

And you felt compelled to come into the IT THREAD and tell us to stop doing something we really enjoy... why?

Even after the extended cut comes out, people are still holding onto this theory. I find it baffling and somewhat humorous. How many more clues do you need to make you realize it's just not there????? Denial is never a good thing.

[BatmanTurian]

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

You actually see the Normandy escaping the destroy wave, so I think that they discharged their Eezo core or that they decided to land on the planet to be perfectly safe from the wave.

That seems plausible, but aren't you supposed to drop the core in a gas giant or something?

[Andromidius]

Offender_Mullet wrote...

People are still clinging onto hope about the IT 'eh? Yikes.

To quote Dr. Jones: "Indiana.......let it go."

Thanks for your imput.  We'll add it to the pile and get back to you as quickly as possible.

[BatmanTurian]

comrade gando wrote...

it seems bioware went out of their way to make the endings look like "yup this is the end, now shut up and swallow" (jk lol), but they also went out of their way to add in other strangeness that shouldn't be happening normally. my guess is to give an indicator that something isn't right but then they go and try to end the game on a cliffhanger again and it's like make up your mind bioware!

They wanted to satisfy everyone and satisfied noone. Just like McDonalds.

[Dwailing]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

Uh, SPACE MAGIC!!!! :wizard::wizard:  To be serious, in Destroy at least, I would ASSUME that, in a literal interpretation of the endings, EDI's death led to some kind of feedback loop (Or some other problem.) that caused the Normandy's engines to fail.

EDI probably never actually died. Eva Core's body was probably destroyed, but I think EDI survived in her quantum blue box. As for the geth, we never actually see them die or dead in the epilogue.

True.  The only hint that we have that the Geth didn't make it is that the panel showing them working with the Quarians isn't present, and that could just be an attempt to misdirect us.  Same with how we never actually SEE EDI die apart from her body not being present at the memorial scene.

Modifié par Dwailing, 07 juillet 2012 - 11:34 .

[MaximizedAction]

Ok, lemme sum up what the EC endings content that we already had pre-EC looks like now:

High enough EMS:
(All choices)
- Relays don't 'explode';
- the Normandy escapes the beam without damage;
- "An End Once..." ends on the new, in consonance, i.e. in chord with the rest of the song.

Low EMS:
(All available choices)
- Relays 'explode';
- Normandy catches fire;
- "An End Once..." ends on the old, dissonance, cliffhanger-y way;

So what strikes me, is that one can sum up this part of the EC as content that was literally missing in the original game: content for high EMS playthroughs. What we got initially was basically low EMS endings.

They must've run out of time and decided to release the more 'demoralizing' version of the endings to get people talking, I guess. Otherwise, I can't think of how they might come up with such extreme additions in the EC. It's bizarre to me.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 07 juillet 2012 - 11:36 .

[byne]

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

You actually see the Normandy escaping the destroy wave, so I think that they discharged their Eezo core or that they decided to land on the planet to be perfectly safe from the wave.

That doesnt really explain the damage to the Normandy's exterior, or the fact that they've literally landed ON the planet, and arent just hovering above it like they do everywhere else they land.

[D.Sharrah]

If we were to measure epicness by the amount of vagueness...then ME 3 endings would be unbelievably epic...

[Edorian27]

 

There's no joining(NO, not that kind of joining. Stop snickering.) ceremony either. 

Whoot? I thought watching the whole IT:Documentary vid on Youtube was a joining ritual   

Modifié par Edorian27, 07 juillet 2012 - 11:42 .

[estebanus]

BatmanTurian wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

You actually see the Normandy escaping the destroy wave, so I think that they discharged their Eezo core or that they decided to land on the planet to be perfectly safe from the wave.

That seems plausible, but aren't you supposed to drop the core in a gas giant or something?

Maybe they did, but Bioware didn't feel the need to show us it? Although then the question remains how they landed on the planet... 

I'm going with my theory that they landed there to be sure that the crucible's energy wave wouldn't launch them out of their mass relay travel. 

[SubAstris]

comrade gando wrote...

it seems bioware went out of their way to make the endings look like "yup this is the end, now shut up and swallow" (jk lol), but they also went out of their way to add in other strangeness that shouldn't be happening normally. my guess is to give an indicator that something isn't right but then they go and try to end the game on a cliffhanger again and it's like make up your mind bioware!

I bet that if you looked at any ending in as much detail as this one has you would find a whole host of strange goings-on

[Nightingale]

Dwailing wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

Uh, SPACE MAGIC!!!! :wizard::wizard:  To be serious, in Destroy at least, I would ASSUME that, in a literal interpretation of the endings, EDI's death led to some kind of feedback loop (Or some other problem.) that caused the Normandy's engines to fail.

EDI probably never actually died. Eva Core's body was probably destroyed, but I think EDI survived in her quantum blue box. As for the geth, we never actually see them die or dead in the epilogue.

True.  The only hint that we have that the Geth didn't make it is that the panel showing them working with the Quarians isn't present, and that could just be an attempt to misdirect us.  Same with how we never actually SEE EDI die apart from her body not being present at the memorial scene.

I've always said I thought it was only the Reaper code that was destroyed. They may not be the same, but they could both survive without it.

[BatmanTurian]

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

You actually see the Normandy escaping the destroy wave, so I think that they discharged their Eezo core or that they decided to land on the planet to be perfectly safe from the wave.

That doesnt really explain the damage to the Normandy's exterior, or the fact that they've literally landed ON the planet, and arent just hovering above it like they do everywhere else they land.

if they have no Eezo core, then they can't reduce their mass and hover.

[estebanus]

Dwailing wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

Uh, SPACE MAGIC!!!! :wizard::wizard:  To be serious, in Destroy at least, I would ASSUME that, in a literal interpretation of the endings, EDI's death led to some kind of feedback loop (Or some other problem.) that caused the Normandy's engines to fail.

EDI probably never actually died. Eva Core's body was probably destroyed, but I think EDI survived in her quantum blue box. As for the geth, we never actually see them die or dead in the epilogue.

True.  The only hint that we have that the Geth didn't make it is that the panel showing them working with the Quarians isn't present, and that could just be an attempt to misdirect us.  Same with how we never actually SEE EDI die apart from her body not being present at the memorial scene.

You do know that her name is on the memorial wall, right?

[byne]

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

byne wrote...

estebanus wrote...

So how about them endings, huh?

I still wanna know why the Normandy crashes on the planet in the EC endings. They removed the part showing the Normandy's engines falling off, so the Normandy really has no reason to have crashed.

Actually, I didn't think of that. That is kind of confusing when you think about it.

You actually see the Normandy escaping the destroy wave, so I think that they discharged their Eezo core or that they decided to land on the planet to be perfectly safe from the wave.

That seems plausible, but aren't you supposed to drop the core in a gas giant or something?

Maybe they did, but Bioware didn't feel the need to show us it? Although then the question remains how they landed on the planet... 

I'm going with my theory that they landed there to be sure that the crucible's energy wave wouldn't launch them out of their mass relay travel. 

So why actually touch down on the planet? Why send Jeff 'Glass Bones' Moreau out first? Why leave the Normandy at all?

[BatmanTurian]

SubAstris wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

it seems bioware went out of their way to make the endings look like "yup this is the end, now shut up and swallow" (jk lol), but they also went out of their way to add in other strangeness that shouldn't be happening normally. my guess is to give an indicator that something isn't right but then they go and try to end the game on a cliffhanger again and it's like make up your mind bioware!

I bet that if you looked at any ending in as much detail as this one has you would find a whole host of strange goings-on

Yes, but not every ending has an author telling you to make up your own mind about it.

[D.Sharrah]

Offender_Mullet wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Offender_Mullet wrote...

People are still clinging onto hope about the IT 'eh? Yikes.

To quote Dr. Jones: "Indiana.......let it go."

And you felt compelled to come into the IT THREAD and tell us to stop doing something we really enjoy... why?

Even after the extended cut comes out, people are still holding onto this theory. I find it baffling and somewhat humorous. How many more clues do you need to make you realize it's just not there????? Denial is never a good thing.

Exactly what clues are you referring to?  I'm sure if you would like we can point you in the right direction to have a look at all of the clues that still suggest IT is possible...

[Either.Ardrey]

BatmanTurian wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

it seems bioware went out of their way to make the endings look like "yup this is the end, now shut up and swallow" (jk lol), but they also went out of their way to add in other strangeness that shouldn't be happening normally. my guess is to give an indicator that something isn't right but then they go and try to end the game on a cliffhanger again and it's like make up your mind bioware!

I bet that if you looked at any ending in as much detail as this one has you would find a whole host of strange goings-on

Yes, but not every ending has an author telling you to make up your own mind about it.

We also didn't have to go too far to find the first pieces.