55528 réponses à ce sujet

[HellishFiend]

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Tully's response can easily be taken as points for IT, unless you assume that all future ME titles/content will be prior to the literal endings. There is no conceivable way to handle the divergence created by those endings unless they canonize one of them, which they already stated they are not going to do.

Well, come to think of it, they can't really canonize whether Shepard becomes indoctrinated or not.

You mean just like they couldnt canonize whether Shepard dies at the end of ME2 or not? I'm actually going to jump out of character and paraphrase Merizan here: "Well, if that's how you see it, then that's how your story ends".

That, but I was talking more like Was Shepard a colonist, or Was Shepard a spacer? Is Shepard a man or a Woman? Did Shepard save the Rachni, or wipe them out?

You cant compare the two, though. The difference in the level of divergence between those types of things, and whether or not the entire galaxy is synthesized or not, and whether the Reapers even exist or not.... it's simply too much. 

[Arian Dynas]

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Tully's response can easily be taken as points for IT, unless you assume that all future ME titles/content will be prior to the literal endings. There is no conceivable way to handle the divergence created by those endings unless they canonize one of them, which they already stated they are not going to do.

Well, come to think of it, they can't really canonize whether Shepard becomes indoctrinated or not.

You mean just like they couldnt canonize whether Shepard dies at the end of ME2 or not? I'm actually going to jump out of character and paraphrase Merizan here: "Well, if that's how you see it, then that's how your story ends".

That, but I was talking more like Was Shepard a colonist, or Was Shepard a spacer? Is Shepard a man or a Woman? Did Shepard save the Rachni, or wipe them out?

You cant compare the two, though. The difference in the level of divergence between those types of things, and whether or not the entire galaxy is synthesized or not, and whether the Reapers even exist or not.... it's simply too much. 

No I am saying THEY CAN canonize that the ending was an indoctrination induced hallucination, but they CAN'T canonize that Shepard picked Destroy.

Do you see?

[HellishFiend]

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

You cant compare the two, though. The difference in the level of divergence between those types of things, and whether or not the entire galaxy is synthesized or not, and whether the Reapers even exist or not.... it's simply too much. 

No I am saying THEY CAN canonize that the ending was an indoctrination induced hallucination, but they CAN'T canonize that Shepard picked Destroy.

Do you see?

So basically we're not really disagreeing then... I was essentially saying the divergence of literal endings cant be accommodated or canonized in any shape or form, and that isnt exclusive with what you're saying. 

[Dam0299]

masster blaster wrote...

So how do you like my new Avatar guys?

" Help the Iters. Help yourselfs."

Ill give you a hint, I always play a full paragon in all my playthroughs and I always shoot that guy.

[masster blaster]

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Tully's response can easily be taken as points for IT, unless you assume that all future ME titles/content will be prior to the literal endings. There is no conceivable way to handle the divergence created by those endings unless they canonize one of them, which they already stated they are not going to do.

Well, come to think of it, they can't really canonize whether Shepard becomes indoctrinated or not.

You mean just like they couldnt canonize whether Shepard dies at the end of ME2 or not? I'm actually going to jump out of character and paraphrase Merizan here: "Well, if that's how you see it, then that's how your story ends".

That, but I was talking more like Was Shepard a colonist, or Was Shepard a spacer? Is Shepard a man or a Woman? Did Shepard save the Rachni, or wipe them out?

You cant compare the two, though. The difference in the level of divergence between those types of things, and whether or not the entire galaxy is synthesized or not, and whether the Reapers even exist or not.... it's simply too much. 

No I am saying THEY CAN canonize that the ending was an indoctrination induced hallucination, but they CAN'T canonize that Shepard picked Destroy.

Do you see?

Then maybe they will end it with Destroy and not canon size the endings at all, but it's kind of stupid that we were actaully playing a dead hero/legend, that had no impact at all in the next few 10000 or so years. But it's Biowares game, even though I wish they will show in the game context that IT is happening, but we are ending the Shepard story, after we add the last chapter of the Commander Shepard story.

[FreddyCast]

Arian Dynas wrote...

What's this I should be commenting about?

Oh and by the way, I got a PM from TullyAckland. It's not quite the same as it would be coming from the mouth of Gamble, but...

Arian Dynas wrote...
I wanted to say; thank you. Thank you for thinking of us and at least attempting to make things better for your fans with the Extended cut. But I personally at least, am still denied closure.

Are there more secrets? Have we answered everything about the ending?

Is indoctrination theory officially off the table?

Because if that is the case, then I will be honest when I describe Synthesis and Control as hypocritical and thematically revolting, since they align so incredibly closely with the motivations of the two major VILLAINS of ME1 and ME3, while every single person on Shepard's side was firmly in the camp of Destroy.

Why go a complete 180 of the message there? It renders both Shepard and the entire story, completely pointless to be blunt.

Also, if, as I said Indoctrination is off the table, what then is the point of the dreams? The child?

Or is Indoctrination theory merely neither confirmed or denied? The Extended Cut merely intended to be what you originally wanted to have as the on disc ending, letting us fill in the blanks ourselves and draw our own conclusions from there,but at least satisfying those who didn't want to look deeper? A sort of "Was Deckard a Replicant" deal for us to speculate about?

Is there more to come? ME4? A sort of "Arrival" for ME4? An expansion pack? If that's the case, can I advise adding a "To be Continued" title card just after the breath scene? Or is it as Madeline said "That's all there is, there isn't anymore."?

We, I and many of my friends, feel like we were left unmoored, hanging, unresolved. Yes our smaller questions got answered, but some of the bigger ones are still there.

As a matter of fact, if all that was ever going to happen in the end was us getting jossed, why let us build up the anticipation at all? Why did you want speculation?Because to be honest, if there isn't ever going to be a payoff of any kind, it would be considerably less cruel to just let us down easy right now.

You don't have to answer my questions, but it would make me feel alot better if you were to. Even a "We have neither denied or confirmed Indoctrination Theory" would give me hope, or maybe you can blink a few times or something, because, it does come down to personal taste, but I just really don't like the implications of taking the endings literally.

One way or another, if you decide to indulge me or not, I'd like to know if you get this. So I'll part saying I love Mass Effect, I love your work, and I love Bioware, never stopped. I've been playing Baldur's Gate, Infinity Engine games inspired by it and a handful of others since I was 9 years old. I'll still be looking forward to the release of Dragon Age 3 as well. And well, if nothing else, the Extended Cut, if meant to be taken literally, at least made the endings bearable. If I have given offense anywhere in this little letter, I apologize, for no where was it my intent, I'd just like a little bit of closure from the men (and women) in charge.

-With breathless anticipation, Arian Dynas, Indoctrinationist

TullyAckland wrote...
I've stated many, many times (and been quoted for it) that we've neither confirmed or denied the Indoctrination Theory (and we won't).

You're asking me to announce what our plans are next and if you've followed game design for a while you'll know that's not going to happen. What I can say is that Mass Effect, in any shape or form isn't over, there's a lot more to come, you'll see that in the future.

Arian Dynas wrote...
That's all I needed. Thank you Mr.Ackland.

Though I will say, neither confirming NOR denying would make the process of making sequels rather difficult, though, I know you can't say anything about it one way or another.

But, you have told me one thing that'll shut the trolls up. Thanks.

D you have link to Tully's response?

[masster blaster]

Dam0299 wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

So how do you like my new Avatar guys?

" Help the Iters. Help yourselfs."

Ill give you a hint, I always play a full paragon in all my playthroughs and I always shoot that guy.

Shepard. i guess shoting Udina.

[Arian Dynas]

FreddyCast wrote...
Do you have link to Tully's response?

How could I? It's a private message.

Modifié par Arian Dynas, 16 juillet 2012 - 09:46 .

[masster blaster]

Freddy Tully's response is in his post.

[Arian Dynas]

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

You cant compare the two, though. The difference in the level of divergence between those types of things, and whether or not the entire galaxy is synthesized or not, and whether the Reapers even exist or not.... it's simply too much. 

No I am saying THEY CAN canonize that the ending was an indoctrination induced hallucination, but they CAN'T canonize that Shepard picked Destroy.

Do you see?

So basically we're not really disagreeing then... I was essentially saying the divergence of literal endings cant be accommodated or canonized in any shape or form, and that isnt exclusive with what you're saying. 

Exactly /Anderson

And to be honest, if they intend to make sequels, which they do by all appearances, and they say they are not canonizing one choice over another, there is only one way that choices with such world shattering consequences can be made to play nice.

By not mattering in the slightest.

[FreddyCast]

[quote]Arian Dynas wrote...

[quote]FreddyCast wrote...

*snip*
[/quote]
D you have link to Tully's response?[/quote]

How could I? It's a private message.

[/quote]
Ohhh, sorry.  Didnt notice the "PM" on your post

[lex0r11]

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Guys what I like about both Stargazer scene is that they the child always says " Tell me another story about the Shepard." and then the Stargazers say " It's getting late, but okay. ONE MORE STORY"

I take that as a hint that the Shepard story is far from over.

I really don't know what to think. There are 2 contradicting messages out there. One from BioWare that Shepard's story arc is coming to an end in Mass Effect 3. The other from Stargazer that there's going to be another story involving Shepard as the main protagonist. Personally, I think it would be incredibly unwise to end a story that earns real dollars and is by no means over for the majority of players.

I agree that abandoning Shepard's story would be unwise from a corporate standpoint. However after the reapers are done in ME3, what other BIGGER threat could possibly be faced? There obviously has to be an antagonist acting against Shepard but it would be hard to make that antagonist a small fry. From ME1 through ME3 the antagonists and the main enemy have progressively been more deadly (reapers).

To make a story about Shepard set in the future but having it be against a smaller enemy wouldn't keep this trend. At this point, if Shepard does bring down the reapers she would have all the political and military backing she needs for any mission. Making the enemy any smaller than the collectors would be almost a non-fight. However, for an enemy to be STRONGER than the reapers (lolwut?) the galaxy would need to have recovered a bit and regained their forces making the story be put a little farther in the future where Shepard is no longer in his/her prime (not that this is much of a problem). If this stronger enemy came before the galaxy has fully recovered then Bioware better have a REALLY good plan.

I would pay to see it but it wouldn't make too much sense that we haven't heard about this enemy yet.

This reminds me. Does everyone remember the actual plan to originally build the story on the whole dark energy business? I'm not 100% sure if this is accurate, but Drew Karpyshyn's (or the first idea for that matter) idea was that at the end of the trilogy, Sheaprd decides to sacrifice humanity to build another reaper from it and help to "fight" dark energy, because the reapers reveal their plans to stop dark energy. Or Shepard decides to defy them and trust in every race to find a way together without total genocide.

Dark energy might as well be a problem caused by something even greater then the reapers. There you have another antagonist. Big enough?

[masster blaster]

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

You cant compare the two, though. The difference in the level of divergence between those types of things, and whether or not the entire galaxy is synthesized or not, and whether the Reapers even exist or not.... it's simply too much. 

No I am saying THEY CAN canonize that the ending was an indoctrination induced hallucination, but they CAN'T canonize that Shepard picked Destroy.

Do you see?

So basically we're not really disagreeing then... I was essentially saying the divergence of literal endings cant be accommodated or canonized in any shape or form, and that isnt exclusive with what you're saying. 

Exactly /Anderson

And to be honest, if they intend to make sequels, which they do by all appearances, and they say they are not canonizing one choice over another, there is only one way that choices with such world shattering consequences can be made to play nice.

By not mattering in the slightest.

So it's up to Bioware now to decide where ME goes.

[Arian Dynas]

lex0r11 wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Guys what I like about both Stargazer scene is that they the child always says " Tell me another story about the Shepard." and then the Stargazers say " It's getting late, but okay. ONE MORE STORY"

I take that as a hint that the Shepard story is far from over.

I really don't know what to think. There are 2 contradicting messages out there. One from BioWare that Shepard's story arc is coming to an end in Mass Effect 3. The other from Stargazer that there's going to be another story involving Shepard as the main protagonist. Personally, I think it would be incredibly unwise to end a story that earns real dollars and is by no means over for the majority of players.

I agree that abandoning Shepard's story would be unwise from a corporate standpoint. However after the reapers are done in ME3, what other BIGGER threat could possibly be faced? There obviously has to be an antagonist acting against Shepard but it would be hard to make that antagonist a small fry. From ME1 through ME3 the antagonists and the main enemy have progressively been more deadly (reapers).

To make a story about Shepard set in the future but having it be against a smaller enemy wouldn't keep this trend. At this point, if Shepard does bring down the reapers she would have all the political and military backing she needs for any mission. Making the enemy any smaller than the collectors would be almost a non-fight. However, for an enemy to be STRONGER than the reapers (lolwut?) the galaxy would need to have recovered a bit and regained their forces making the story be put a little farther in the future where Shepard is no longer in his/her prime (not that this is much of a problem). If this stronger enemy came before the galaxy has fully recovered then Bioware better have a REALLY good plan.

I would pay to see it but it wouldn't make too much sense that we haven't heard about this enemy yet.

This reminds me. Does everyone remember the actual plan to originally build the story on the whole dark energy business? I'm not 100% sure if this is accurate, but Drew Karpyshyn's (or the first idea for that matter) idea was that at the end of the trilogy, Sheaprd decides to sacrifice humanity to build another reaper from it and help to "fight" dark energy, because the reapers reveal their plans to stop dark energy. Or Shepard decides to defy them and trust in every race to find a way together without total genocide.

Dark energy might as well be a problem caused by something even greater then the reapers. There you have another antagonist. Big enough?

I say screw Shepard at this point. His story is done. He has done what he set out to do.

With a new protagonist, not only do you have the opportunity to explore new things, set up new characters, storylines and ideas, even visit and explore a few old characters, you also don't have this expectation of a new big enemy. 

As far as I am concerned, the next enemy of ME4 is going to be ourselves. The Milky Way is a very politically unstable place right now, what with how things turned out in the war, as well as the considerable fallout ALOT of things will have.

[masster blaster]

lex0r11 wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Guys what I like about both Stargazer scene is that they the child always says " Tell me another story about the Shepard." and then the Stargazers say " It's getting late, but okay. ONE MORE STORY"

I take that as a hint that the Shepard story is far from over.

I really don't know what to think. There are 2 contradicting messages out there. One from BioWare that Shepard's story arc is coming to an end in Mass Effect 3. The other from Stargazer that there's going to be another story involving Shepard as the main protagonist. Personally, I think it would be incredibly unwise to end a story that earns real dollars and is by no means over for the majority of players.

I agree that abandoning Shepard's story would be unwise from a corporate standpoint. However after the reapers are done in ME3, what other BIGGER threat could possibly be faced? There obviously has to be an antagonist acting against Shepard but it would be hard to make that antagonist a small fry. From ME1 through ME3 the antagonists and the main enemy have progressively been more deadly (reapers).

To make a story about Shepard set in the future but having it be against a smaller enemy wouldn't keep this trend. At this point, if Shepard does bring down the reapers she would have all the political and military backing she needs for any mission. Making the enemy any smaller than the collectors would be almost a non-fight. However, for an enemy to be STRONGER than the reapers (lolwut?) the galaxy would need to have recovered a bit and regained their forces making the story be put a little farther in the future where Shepard is no longer in his/her prime (not that this is much of a problem). If this stronger enemy came before the galaxy has fully recovered then Bioware better have a REALLY good plan.

I would pay to see it but it wouldn't make too much sense that we haven't heard about this enemy yet.

This reminds me. Does everyone remember the actual plan to originally build the story on the whole dark energy business? I'm not 100% sure if this is accurate, but Drew Karpyshyn's (or the first idea for that matter) idea was that at the end of the trilogy, Sheaprd decides to sacrifice humanity to build another reaper from it and help to "fight" dark energy, because the reapers reveal their plans to stop dark energy. Or Shepard decides to defy them and trust in every race to find a way together without total genocide.

Dark energy might as well be a problem caused by something even greater then the reapers. There you have another antagonist. Big enough?

And didn't the Catalyst talk about Dark energy to Shepard?

[Chriz Tah Fah]

lex0r11 wrote...

This reminds me. Does everyone remember the actual plan to originally build the story on the whole dark energy business? I'm not 100% sure if this is accurate, but Drew Karpyshyn's (or the first idea for that matter) idea was that at the end of the trilogy, Sheaprd decides to sacrifice humanity to build another reaper from it and help to "fight" dark energy, because the reapers reveal their plans to stop dark energy. Or Shepard decides to defy them and trust in every race to find a way together without total genocide.

Dark energy might as well be a problem caused by something even greater then the reapers. There you have another antagonist. Big enough?

If the IT theory is true and Shepard does get up again it is possible that he/she would be faced with a choice once reaching the crucible. Activate it and stop the bigger threat or etc. you know what happens.

However, the literal Destroy ending destroys the reapers. What then would be strong enough to fight the "dark energy?" Bioware would have to pick a canon because "imported choices" such as the 3 colored ones would change the entire dark matter story drastically.


Still does anyone have an opinion on what I said about the Stargazer not making sense with the synthesis ending?

Modifié par Chriz Tah Fah, 16 juillet 2012 - 09:55 .

[masster blaster]

Arian Dynas wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Guys what I like about both Stargazer scene is that they the child always says " Tell me another story about the Shepard." and then the Stargazers say " It's getting late, but okay. ONE MORE STORY"

I take that as a hint that the Shepard story is far from over.

I really don't know what to think. There are 2 contradicting messages out there. One from BioWare that Shepard's story arc is coming to an end in Mass Effect 3. The other from Stargazer that there's going to be another story involving Shepard as the main protagonist. Personally, I think it would be incredibly unwise to end a story that earns real dollars and is by no means over for the majority of players.

I agree that abandoning Shepard's story would be unwise from a corporate standpoint. However after the reapers are done in ME3, what other BIGGER threat could possibly be faced? There obviously has to be an antagonist acting against Shepard but it would be hard to make that antagonist a small fry. From ME1 through ME3 the antagonists and the main enemy have progressively been more deadly (reapers).

To make a story about Shepard set in the future but having it be against a smaller enemy wouldn't keep this trend. At this point, if Shepard does bring down the reapers she would have all the political and military backing she needs for any mission. Making the enemy any smaller than the collectors would be almost a non-fight. However, for an enemy to be STRONGER than the reapers (lolwut?) the galaxy would need to have recovered a bit and regained their forces making the story be put a little farther in the future where Shepard is no longer in his/her prime (not that this is much of a problem). If this stronger enemy came before the galaxy has fully recovered then Bioware better have a REALLY good plan.

I would pay to see it but it wouldn't make too much sense that we haven't heard about this enemy yet.

This reminds me. Does everyone remember the actual plan to originally build the story on the whole dark energy business? I'm not 100% sure if this is accurate, but Drew Karpyshyn's (or the first idea for that matter) idea was that at the end of the trilogy, Sheaprd decides to sacrifice humanity to build another reaper from it and help to "fight" dark energy, because the reapers reveal their plans to stop dark energy. Or Shepard decides to defy them and trust in every race to find a way together without total genocide.

Dark energy might as well be a problem caused by something even greater then the reapers. There you have another antagonist. Big enough?

I say screw Shepard at this point. His story is done. He has done what he set out to do.

With a new protagonist, not only do you have the opportunity to explore new things, set up new characters, storylines and ideas, even visit and explore a few old characters, you also don't have this expectation of a new big enemy. 

As far as I am concerned, the next enemy of ME4 is going to be ourselves. The Milky Way is a very politically unstable place right now, what with how things turned out in the war, as well as the considerable fallout ALOT of things will have.

i don't know if you are being sarcastic, or not?

[Chriz Tah Fah]

masster blaster wrote...
i don't know if you are being sarcastic, or not?

He's not. Remember the Salarian situation? Amongst others of course.

[paxxton]

@lex0r11: Sacrifice humanity to build a Reaper? Wow. That has never been done in video games. I wonder what would be the fallout on BSN and beyond?

Modifié par paxxton, 16 juillet 2012 - 09:58 .

[paxxton]

Arian Dynas wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Guys what I like about both Stargazer scene is that they the child always says " Tell me another story about the Shepard." and then the Stargazers say " It's getting late, but okay. ONE MORE STORY"

I take that as a hint that the Shepard story is far from over.

I really don't know what to think. There are 2 contradicting messages out there. One from BioWare that Shepard's story arc is coming to an end in Mass Effect 3. The other from Stargazer that there's going to be another story involving Shepard as the main protagonist. Personally, I think it would be incredibly unwise to end a story that earns real dollars and is by no means over for the majority of players.

I agree that abandoning Shepard's story would be unwise from a corporate standpoint. However after the reapers are done in ME3, what other BIGGER threat could possibly be faced? There obviously has to be an antagonist acting against Shepard but it would be hard to make that antagonist a small fry. From ME1 through ME3 the antagonists and the main enemy have progressively been more deadly (reapers).

To make a story about Shepard set in the future but having it be against a smaller enemy wouldn't keep this trend. At this point, if Shepard does bring down the reapers she would have all the political and military backing she needs for any mission. Making the enemy any smaller than the collectors would be almost a non-fight. However, for an enemy to be STRONGER than the reapers (lolwut?) the galaxy would need to have recovered a bit and regained their forces making the story be put a little farther in the future where Shepard is no longer in his/her prime (not that this is much of a problem). If this stronger enemy came before the galaxy has fully recovered then Bioware better have a REALLY good plan.

I would pay to see it but it wouldn't make too much sense that we haven't heard about this enemy yet.

This reminds me. Does everyone remember the actual plan to originally build the story on the whole dark energy business? I'm not 100% sure if this is accurate, but Drew Karpyshyn's (or the first idea for that matter) idea was that at the end of the trilogy, Sheaprd decides to sacrifice humanity to build another reaper from it and help to "fight" dark energy, because the reapers reveal their plans to stop dark energy. Or Shepard decides to defy them and trust in every race to find a way together without total genocide.

Dark energy might as well be a problem caused by something even greater then the reapers. There you have another antagonist. Big enough?

I say screw Shepard at this point. His story is done. He has done what he set out to do.

With a new protagonist, not only do you have the opportunity to explore new things, set up new characters, storylines and ideas, even visit and explore a few old characters, you also don't have this expectation of a new big enemy. 

As far as I am concerned, the next enemy of ME4 is going to be ourselves. The Milky Way is a very politically unstable place right now, what with how things turned out in the war, as well as the considerable fallout ALOT of things will have.

I can't hear you, Arian.

[Chriz Tah Fah]

@lex0r11: honestly, if i had to choose between sacrificing all my friends, all the people I know, and everyone else who matters in the entire galaxy. I'd probably rather let the galaxy be destroyed. It's effectively the same thing but it wouldn't be me who did it. Sure, it's selfish not giving the next cycles the chance but everything that mattered to me would be gone. At that point I just wouldn't care.

[Arian Dynas]

I'm not being sarcastic.

And what's this Salarian incident you're talking about? O.o

[masster blaster]

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

@lex0r11: honestly, if i had to choose between sacrificing all my friends, all the people I know, and everyone else who matters in the entire galaxy. I'd probably rather let the galaxy be destroyed. It's effectively the same thing but it wouldn't be me who did it. Sure, it's selfish not giving the next cycles the chance but everything that mattered to me would be gone. At that point I just wouldn't care.

So would I. Epcially if the Reapers killed Shepards friends and Ship first, before we make that choice.

[Chriz Tah Fah]

Arian Dynas wrote...

I'm not being sarcastic.

And what's this Salarian incident you're talking about? O.o

If you choose to cure the genophage the Salarians just turtle up and let the most important battle in all of history run its course without this help.

[masster blaster]

Arian Dynas wrote...

I'm not being sarcastic.

And what's this Salarian incident you're talking about? O.o

I agree Shepard's story should end here in ME3, but not like this.