55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Simon_Says]

SubAstris wrote...

No, ice cold fact. Have you been listening to anything BW have said regarding the endings in the past few months?

• "We will not be changing the endings."
• "We will not be adding any new endings."
• Endings are changed.
• Reject was added.

Seems legit.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

MetioricTest wrote...

But this is what you're doing. You're ignoring our view basically, calling it wrong.

You're half right. I am calling it wrong.

Stargazer blatantly proves either that the end bit isn't a hallucination or it doesn't matter whether or not Shepard gets indoctrinated.

There's no point debating with you as I needed to say the same thing 6 times before you paid attention.

Would be better if you only said it once and then said something else.

We're not blindly ignoring things,

Kinda are

we've said that the stargazer scenes do not prove IT, nor do they disprove it. I don't undertstand what your problem is, mate.

Actually you said that it is a completely different scene in a different place implanted by Bioware to keep IT a hidden gem... With no explanation for it.

And I've never said it does or doesn't disprove IT. I'm saying it disproves the Catalyst bit is a hallunciation.

4 choices, 2 different futures.

Why does Synthesis Indoctrination and waking up and overcoming Indoctrination lead to the same future? But Reject indoctrination does not?

"They're trying not to prove IT!" is just a dissmissal. And an embarrasing one

And you seem to forget that reject leading to Indoctrination is only an interpretation. Depending on who you ask it is also a "break free" choice and others even say it is between the two as Shepard sees through the Indoctrination but dosent have the willpower to break free either.

The last one would fit quite well with what we see in the Stargazer scene. Without Shepard the cycle lost, but neither was Shepard indoctrinated and turned against his allies resulting in a long bitter fight which left more time to leave info for the next cycle and weaken the Reapers.

Modifié par Raistlin Majare 1992, 19 juillet 2012 - 03:10 .

[paxxton]

Flog61 wrote...

UltimateTobi wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

And once again this is the danger of IT relying so heavily on possible future content to validate its existence.

Because there will be no future content on the ending again!

I think that future DLC will at least add to the endings. Otherwhise there'd be no point in making further DLCs. If it'd just result in War Assets, I don't think anybody would be interested. Nearly all have at least 3100 EMS to see the "best" endings.
So, the DLCs MUST add to the endings, in one way or another.

Well we already know that the leviathan dlc adds questions for Mr Sparkles, so the edning can definately be added on to

After all, you can play DLCs for the sake of playing them.

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juillet 2012 - 03:13 .

[Chriz Tah Fah]

The argument is that a disconnected future event proves that a previous event happened because the future event said that there was an ending even though in the future event it was stated that there were things missing between where we left off to where it actually ended.

If I told you that the allies won World War 2 you wouldn't argue. But, if I brought a specific untrue event that led to the allies winning then you would obviously disagree with me. It is never explicitly stated by the Stargazer that these events led to the galaxy beating the reapers. We just hear that these events happened and that the reapers were defeated.

[RavenEyry]

Remember when quoting Bioware (for or against) that they have a history of lying about ME3. And that the majority of quotes are from Priestly and Merizan who seem to know little more than we do.

[SubAstris]

Simon_Says wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

No, ice cold fact. Have you been listening to anything BW have said regarding the endings in the past few months?

• "We will not be changing the endings."
• "We will not be adding any new endings."
• Endings are changed.
• Reject was added.

Seems legit.

But the changes were largely cosmetic. If the endings were scrapped, the Catalyst removed etc, then you might have a point, but they weren't. The EC just added a few new additions, that's all. The fundamentals of the ending were exactly the same before and after

[paxxton]

Actually, it'd make sense if the Community Managers (who communicate a lot with outsiders) didn't know the true answer. That way they can't reveal it inadvertently.

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juillet 2012 - 03:15 .

[RavenEyry]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...
Depending on who you ask

As I said on the last page, we aren't a hive mind. Simon Says just gave a very good description of how reject and stargazer fits with IT which is completely different from my interpretation.

[CoolioThane]

MetioricTest wrote...

But this is what you're doing. You're ignoring our view basically, calling it wrong.

You're half right. I am calling it wrong.

Stargazer blatantly proves either that the end bit isn't a hallucination or it doesn't matter whether or not Shepard gets indoctrinated.

There's no point debating with you as I needed to say the same thing 6 times before you paid attention.

Would be better if you only said it once and then said something else.

We're not blindly ignoring things,

Kinda are

we've said that the stargazer scenes do not prove IT, nor do they disprove it. I don't undertstand what your problem is, mate.

Actually you said that it is a completely different scene in a different place implanted by Bioware to keep IT a hidden gem... With no explanation for it.

And I've never said it does or doesn't disprove IT. I'm saying it disproves the Catalyst bit is a hallunciation.

4 choices, 2 different futures.

Why does Synthesis Indoctrination and waking up and overcoming Indoctrination lead to the same future? But Reject indoctrination does not?

"They're trying not to prove IT!" is just a dissmissal. And an embarrasing one

Well it is a different scene...it's different, so...hmmm

"Catalyst bit being a hallucination disproven" - kinda what IT is about...

Techincally the Synthesis and Control and Destroy would all be different futures as well. Unless they all lead to the same future...but how? If IT was true it is likely?

as Simon said...reject could mean this cycle loses by trying to battle conventionally, that's another view.

Excuse me, AGAIN, if they had have shown the same scene IT is instantly true. I don't get how saying that is embarrassing. So, this new stargazer scene occurs. Interesting scene. Why, it could mean we lose, or it takes place anytime in the future. This is all speculation, which is what we've been doing for months.

We don't know synth + destroy (indoc + wake up) lead to the exact same future. Same scene, but outside that scene things could be vastly different.

"nu uh you are" Is pretty lame. I'm not blindly ignoring anything. I'm listening, weighing up and having an opinion. **** sake.

I'd prefer to say things once but you don't want to ****ing listen when I say it for **** sake. Jesus christ.

You're calling IT wrong? Okay, why here then? 

[MetioricTest]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

And you seem to forget that reject leading to Indoctrination is only an interpretation. Depending on who you ask it is also a "break free" choice and others even say it is between the two as Shepard sees through the Indoctrination but dosent have the willpower to break free either.

The last one would fit quite well with what we see in the Stargazer scene. Without Shepard the cycle lost, but neither was Shepard indoctrinated and turned against his allies resulting in a long bitter fight which left more time to leave info for the next cycle and weaken the Reapers.

I haven't heard anything about that because you don't see Shepard "wake up."

But even if accept it that way, it still kills the end as a hallunciation. Why does Reject non indoctrinated Shepard and Destruction non indoctrinated futures lead to different futures?

And why is the the Non indoctrinated Destruction future the same as the Indoctrinated Synthesis one? That just makes the whole severity of Shepard being indoctrinated meaningless.

No matter how you look at it Stargazer destroys the concept of the choice being a halluncination.

[SubAstris]

RavenEyry wrote...

Remember when quoting Bioware (for or against) that they have a history of lying about ME3. And that the majority of quotes are from Priestly and Merizan who seem to know little more than we do.

Most of the broken promises were made during the development stage, where for a variety of reasons, lack of time, resources etc, they couldn't do all they wanted. After the game came out, their record has been much better partly because those factors don't play such a big part anymore

[Simon_Says]

Meteoric, I know in hte flood of posts it can be hard to catch every voice in the discussion. I made a response. I think it answers your question quite plainly..

[paxxton]

@MetrioricTest: I told you already that the Stargazer scene wasn't meant to be part of the story, or even the ME Universe. It's a ME-themed message from BioWare to the player.

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juillet 2012 - 03:18 .

[CoolioThane]

SubAstris wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

No, ice cold fact. Have you been listening to anything BW have said regarding the endings in the past few months?

• "We will not be changing the endings."
• "We will not be adding any new endings."
• Endings are changed.
• Reject was added.

Seems legit.

But the changes were largely cosmetic. If the endings were scrapped, the Catalyst removed etc, then you might have a point, but they weren't. The EC just added a few new additions, that's all. The fundamentals of the ending were exactly the same before and after

You're changing things to suit you. They did go back on what they say. "Mostly cosmetic" is bull****

They retconned the destruction of relays - pretty major

THEY ADDED A NEW ****ING ENDING

[EpyonX3]

Simon_Says wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

No, ice cold fact. Have you been listening to anything BW have said regarding the endings in the past few months?

• "We will not be changing the endings."
• "We will not be adding any new endings."
• Endings are changed.
• Reject was added.

Seems legit.

They added an ending where the reapers win this cycle only to cater to vocal portion of the fan base that don't like or trust the Catalyst.

Other than that, they kept their word. The endings didn't change, they still have the same effects they did before. It's just clearer what the aftermath was based on your choice.

[Rosewind]

lex0r11 wrote...

Please, to every new and old acquaintances, not everything posted by people in here represents to 100% the concepts and scenarios discussed in here for over 4000+ pages.

Also remember there is no absolute "way" it went down. Anyone who claims otherwise is hopefully talking for themselves. The same applies to "opinions" as the IT being abso****inglutley correct. Or 100% planned. These are again opinions, please mark them as such.

Just inb4 the usual, unnecessary flaming over absolutes begins again.

I'm am not aiming this directly at specific users who may or may not be already here.

I second this!!!!

[CoolioThane]

Flog61 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

UltimateTobi wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Yes, he shouldn't have said that. He overreacted and offended a lot of people. Besides, this is simply not true.

Well yes, maybe. But beside that, he's just human, like we. And we often get tempered too. Just look at Coolio.

His documentary will be blowing, I bet my ass.

Hey!  I have had to repeat things many times. It gets frustrating xD

Coolio, why isn't your profile pic of thane with hiss shades on?

The Dragon Age character creator ting won't work for me 

[Lokanaiya]

Can we stop feeding the trolls? It's obvious that MetioricTest isn't going to listen, and we all know how things end up when we argue with Subastris.

[lex0r11]

And I saw the new ending thing pop up, think about this:

Post ending DLC is not necessary for any "scenarios" some people suggested. Any DLC set before the ending can add to the new fourth one, and is as such not a post ending DLC. First PR talk from BioWare => DLC can add/edit endgame anyway.

And no, they did not change the ending, they just added a fourth path. So technically, they can add as much as they want. The ending(s) as a whole were edited but not changed, because none of them is canon and absolute, unless they have to find one for a next game. Second PR talk from BioWare => adding paths, keeping other endings too, no change technically.

[Gwyphon]

MetioricTest wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

And you seem to forget that reject leading to Indoctrination is only an interpretation. Depending on who you ask it is also a "break free" choice and others even say it is between the two as Shepard sees through the Indoctrination but dosent have the willpower to break free either.

The last one would fit quite well with what we see in the Stargazer scene. Without Shepard the cycle lost, but neither was Shepard indoctrinated and turned against his allies resulting in a long bitter fight which left more time to leave info for the next cycle and weaken the Reapers.

I haven't heard anything about that because you don't see Shepard "wake up."

But even if accept it that way, it still kills the end as a hallunciation. Why does Reject non indoctrinated Shepard and Destruction non indoctrinated futures lead to different futures?

And why is the the Non indoctrinated Destruction future the same as the Indoctrinated Synthesis one? That just makes the whole severity of Shepard being indoctrinated meaningless.

No matter how you look at it Stargazer destroys the concept of the choice being a halluncination.

Again, your opinion and interpretation. As for why dose destroy shepard wake up and reject does not? Probably the same reason the starchild loses his innocent front in reject but maintains it for destroy.

[paxxton]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

No, ice cold fact. Have you been listening to anything BW have said regarding the endings in the past few months?

• "We will not be changing the endings."
• "We will not be adding any new endings."
• Endings are changed.
• Reject was added.

Seems legit.

They added an ending where the reapers win this cycle only to cater to vocal portion of the fan base that don't like or trust the Catalyst.

Other than that, they kept their word. The endings didn't change, they still have the same effects they did before. It's just clearer what the aftermath was based on your choice.

But still they've changed the ending as a whole.

[RavenEyry]

CoolioThane wrote...
Techincally the Synthesis and Control and Destroy would all be different futures as well. Unless they all lead to the same future...but how? If IT was true it is likely?

Three different choices lead to the same scene at face value? Fine. Three different choices lead to the same scene in IT? Madness!

[paxxton]

Lokanaiya wrote...

Can we stop feeding the trolls? It's obvious that MetioricTest isn't going to listen, and we all know how things end up when we argue with Subastris.

Really, we should thank MetrioricTest. Thanks to his posts page 2000 is within our reach in no time.