55528 réponses à ce sujet

[UltimateTobi]

RavenEyry wrote...

The voice change, as well as giving you a big clue to Mr. Sparkle's true identity, also shows how angry he is that you wouldn't make a choice. He's supposedly been doing this cycle for millions of years, but now he's bigging up synthesis and getting upset if you let the cycle continue.

My interpretation is Harby gets very angry that you wont play his little game.

Plus the fact that the Catalyst can read your mind (what Gamble said to answer why the Catalyst has Male- and FemShep's voices too) lets me assume, that the Catalyst is no AI, but just Harbinger playing his Indoc. mind game with you. "So be it!" seems a way to me to tell Shepard what a fool he is, not choosing anything to survive. Just refusing all what is given. But let's not forget that the endings aren't real.
Rejecting still tells me that Shepard lacks the will to proceed. Just having a big mouth. Harbinger notices that and is angry, because Shepard lost his value as a competent fighter and leader.
If he chooses Destroy, he might break the Indoc. attempt (and the nearby Indoc. beacon), but that doesn't nessecarily mean there's not another chance to Indoc.
Control/Synthesis, sure, indoctrinated. (I still was able to make out once that one grim smile of that little brat.)

Modifié par UltimateTobi, 20 juillet 2012 - 08:16 .

[Dam0299]

RavenEyry wrote...

UltimateTobi wrote...
Reject is just a big fail, and was never planned. So I don't think it counts, though the "So be it!" could be a little hint.

The voice change, as well as giving you a big clue to Mr. Sparkle's true identity, also shows how angry he is that you wouldn't make a choice. He's supposedly been doing this cycle for millions of years, but now he's bigging up synthesis and getting upset if you let the cycle continue.

My interpretation is Harby gets very angry that you wont play his little game.

Agreed. If you choose the dialogue reject ending (not shooting him) the pause before he answers in the deep harbinger-esque voice just points to it, a being that seemed pretty emotionless and cold beforehand to immediately become filled with so much rage it takes it a while to speak and even cannot keep up its charade for its voice.
My guess is that if it is Harbinger he chooses just to finish Shepard off as he/she is laying in the rubble in front of the citadel as they are now a lost cause to indoctrination.

[Arian Dynas]

RavenEyry wrote...

UltimateTobi wrote...
Reject is just a big fail, and was never planned. So I don't think it counts, though the "So be it!" could be a little hint.

The voice change, as well as giving you a big clue to Mr. Sparkle's true identity, also shows how angry he is that you wouldn't make a choice. He's supposedly been doing this cycle for millions of years, but now he's bigging up synthesis and getting upset if you let the cycle continue.

My interpretation is Harby gets very angry that you wont play his little game.

Not even that.

He's angry that he ruined the target.

Destroy is him going "Oh, well fine then. Be that way, have your little tantrum. I WILL have you, soon enough. I can be patient."

Refuse? Refuse means he's broken Shepard.

Shepard by nature is a man of action. Every option you are given, Paragon or Renegade? You still are taking an action. Only the neutral options let you opt out, they never turn out well, and they removed them in ME3. Paragon and Renegade are both still heroes, their methods and motivations vary, but they do share the same goals, Paragon is not good, merely charming and peaceable. Likewise Renegade is not evil, merely violent and direct.

Shepard always has a goal. Always. For three games it was "Destroy the Reapers and damn the consequences, this war WILL have casualties."

And now we have Shepard going "I don't want to be their killer, so I am going to let everyone die just so I don't have to do something I perceive as immoral." That's not Shepard. It might not necessarily be wrong, but it's not Shepard. Even if Destroy was the only option, Shepard would STILL take an option.

Bill Casey's sig puts it pretty well. Shepard is not a hero or a messiah. He's a soldier.

Harbinger WANTS Shepard. He wants Shepard exactly as he is. He isn't looking for "Not-Shepard" choosing Refuse, Shepard has chosen not to commit one way or another, to opt out. Refuse means he has lost his determination, his necessary drive that was an integral part of him. He lost the part of himself that Harbinger wanted. He's useless to them now. What's more, he's a frustration. Somehow, in the final moment, not only did he deny Harbinger his prize, he also denied him further methods of acquiring it.

It would be like just before crossing the finish line, watching someone not only run off with your trophy, but also break it so you couldn't posess it.

[RavenEyry]

Arian Dynas wrote...
-snip-

*Audience breaks out into applause*
That was brilliant. Bravo sir.

[UltimateTobi]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Not even that.

He's angry that he ruined the target.

Destroy is him going "Oh, well fine then. Be that way, have your little tantrum. I WILL have you, soon enough. I can be patient."

Refuse? Refuse means he's broken Shepard.

Shepard by nature is a man of action. Every option you are given, Paragon or Renegade? You still are taking an action. Only the neutral options let you opt out, they never turn out well, and they removed them in ME3. Paragon and Renegade are both still heroes, their methods and motivations vary, but they do share the same goals, Paragon is not good, merely charming and peaceable. Likewise Renegade is not evil, merely violent and direct.

Shepard always has a goal. Always. For three games it was "Destroy the Reapers and damn the consequences, this war WILL have casualties."

And now we have Shepard going "I don't want to be their killer, so I am going to let everyone die just so I don't have to do something I perceive as immoral." That's not Shepard. It might not necessarily be wrong, but it's not Shepard. Even if Destroy was the only option, Shepard would STILL take an option.

Bill Casey's sig puts it pretty well. Shepard is not a hero or a messiah. He's a soldier.

Harbinger WANTS Shepard. He wants Shepard exactly as he is. He isn't looking for "Not-Shepard" choosing Refuse, Shepard has chosen not to commit one way or another, to opt out. Refuse means he has lost his determination, his necessary drive that was an integral part of him. He lost the part of himself that Harbinger wanted. He's useless to them now. What's more, he's a frustration. Somehow, in the final moment, not only did he deny Harbinger his prize, he also denied him further methods of acquiring it.

It would be like just before crossing the finish line, watching someone not only run off with your trophy, but also break it so you couldn't posess it.

This, my kind sir, is very well explained! Good job Arian, couldn't make it better. (Just worse, LOL!)

Much appreciated.

Edit:

RavenEyry wrote...

*Audience breaks out into applause*
That was brilliant. Bravo sir.

Yes, yes. *applaude*

Modifié par UltimateTobi, 20 juillet 2012 - 08:32 .

[Arian Dynas]

Lol, I've been saying the exact same things since the EC came out.

[UltimateTobi]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Lol, I've been saying the exact same things since the EC came out.

I can't just agree more. So I welcome this being reposted/-quoted once in a while.

[RavenEyry]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Lol, I've been saying the exact same things since the EC came out.

I'm afraid I've never seen it written quite like that before. I'm glad I saw this though, it's a better speech than the one refuse!shep makes.

[RavenEyry]

UltimateTobi wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Lol, I've been saying the exact same things since the EC came out.

I can't just agree more. So I welcome this being reposted/-quoted once in a while.

I've saved it so I can quote it at anyone asking about refuse.

[UltimateTobi]

RavenEyry wrote...

I've saved it so I can quote it at anyone asking about refuse.

I can imagine it. xD
Random asker: Hey, I have a question about Refuse, if...

RavenEyry [Paragon interrupt]: Have this quote! *pastes quote*

[Arian Dynas]

Welp then, if you're starting a list, I got a few for ya;

Check my sig for various other things I have said, as well as my blog,

Check out Hellish's explanation of the Stargazer scene, really it's excellent (In fact, it's out of date, we may have to conglomerate everything we figured out about it...)

I think it was OneWithAssassins who was collecting some other good posts, I forget.

Also, if you like I could explain, among others, why I decided the Protheans are Romans, and why they are apparently the only species in the galaxy to make Homeopathy work.

[UltimateTobi]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Welp then, if you're starting a list, I got a few for ya;

Check my sig for various other things I have said, as well as my blog,

Check out Hellish's explanation of the Stargazer scene, really it's excellent (In fact, it's out of date, we may have to conglomerate everything we figured out about it...)

I think it was OneWithAssassins who was collecting some other good posts, I forget.

Also, if you like I could explain, among others, why I decided the Protheans are Romans, and why they are apparently the only species in the galaxy to make Homeopathy work.

I don't know why, but sometimes I have the feeling we lose track of all our evidences. Someone who's willingly should make a blog post with all evidences we gathered, and keep it up-to-date.
We have all here in this thread, but browsing through 2000+ pages for this might be a little bothering.

Parabolee's blog is a good one, but outdated. I haven't had a look at it for 2 weeks or so now. Don't know if it got updated.

Modifié par UltimateTobi, 20 juillet 2012 - 08:44 .

[RavenEyry]

UltimateTobi wrote...
Parabolee's blog is a good one, but outdated. I haven't had a look at it for 2 weeks or so now. Don't know if it got updated.

Doesn't appear to have more than a general overview of EC. Not properly updated yet.

[UltimateTobi]

RavenEyry wrote...

Doesn't appear to have more than a general overview of EC. Not properly updated yet.

Yeah, I had a look now. Just a general introduction to the coming evidences. There'll be more, but I think it'll take time.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

UltimateTobi wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

[...] namely TIM's suicide being nearly identical to Saren's [...] What other "I've seen this scene before" moments can we think of?

And that there's no blood at all. No Illusive Man's, nor Anderson's (if he gets shot).

As otter said once, Synthesis looks remarkably like Overlord DLC.

Kneeling before the Catalyst looks like kneeling before Object Rho.

(Just try to get the ball rolling here.)

Old stuff, but gonna continue this list.

The area with the TIM/Anderson confrontation is very similar to TIM´s room on Cronos Statiobn complete with TIM appearing behind you as you walk into it (though on Cronos he is a hologram).

The sliding panels near the chasm are identical or near identical to the storm generator panels on the Shadow Brokers ship.

The Synthesis beam looks very much like the Conduit beam.

The run to the Conduit beam is very reminisicent of the drive to the Conduit in ME1.

[Arian Dynas]

Too bad we couldn't just make a wiki. But well then we'd have to register people and **** like that, just so we didn't get some **** showing up and vandalizing the pages.

[RavenEyry]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Too bad we couldn't just make a wiki. But well then we'd have to register people and **** like that, just so we didn't get some **** showing up and vandalizing the pages.

Aren't their wikis were you can screen the applicants instead of anyone joining? (Not really what wiki means, but oh well)

[UltimateTobi]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Too bad we couldn't just make a wiki. But well then we'd have to register people and **** like that, just so we didn't get some **** showing up and vandalizing the pages.

That's quite a good idea actually. But how to create a Wiki, and we need dedicated people to keep it updated frequently.

One is sure, masster blaster shouldn't do it. A Wiki relies on grammar and objectivity. Well written Wikis are likely more to be read than something that's garbled.

So, IF we'd make a Wiki, we need to state both, the evidences and possible counter-arguments.
Objectivity grants us more sympathy.

Modifié par UltimateTobi, 20 juillet 2012 - 08:55 .

[Gwyphon]

Reason I think Shepard wakes in destroy but not rejection is that in destroy Harbingers broken Shepard at least a little. He's got a compromise, so he's beaten some of Shepards morals but hasn't indoctrinated him. So Shepard keeps him alive as there's still hope. Rejection just shows that it's not going to happen, so Harbinger just kills Shepard then and there.

[Leonia]

Maybe not a Wiki or a blog but a mini-website of sorts, like a small fan site? Wikis take a lot of time to set-up and keep running plus they require understanding of the code, it's not always as easy as it looks. But a regular resource for the ever growing theories (because there are different variations) would be nice, especially for folks who don't frequent this thread too often or are often getting behind because the thread moves too fast.

Modifié par leonia42, 20 juillet 2012 - 09:03 .

[Rosewind]

Gwyphon wrote...

Reason I think Shepard wakes in destroy but not rejection is that in destroy Harbingers broken Shepard at least a little. He's got a compromise, so he's beaten some of Shepards morals but hasn't indoctrinated him. So Shepard keeps him alive as there's still hope. Rejection just shows that it's not going to happen, so Harbinger just kills Shepard then and there.

Was talking to Azusa about that one day and he said mabye the DLC's will tie into the refusal some how by adding more resources to help them defeat the reapers evently.

[UltimateTobi]

Rosewind wrote...

Was talking to Azusa about that one day and he said mabye the DLC's will tie into the refusal some how by adding more resources to help them defeat the reapers evently.

That'd result in 2 options to break Indoc.

Edit: If they add the breath scene afterwards after the epilogue of Reject.

Modifié par UltimateTobi, 20 juillet 2012 - 09:07 .

[Rosewind]

UltimateTobi wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

Was talking to Azusa about that one day and he said mabye the DLC's will tie into the refusal some how by adding more resources to help them defeat the reapers evently.

That'd result in 2 options to break Indoc.

Is that a problem? there is already two options to be indoctrinated. But isn't refusal already  breaking it just not in the same way as destroy.

Edit: Anyway I think refusal was put in there to stop those people from ****ing that they can't refuse. Why would you refuse to destroy the reapers all at once then bascely wipe your whole cycle out because you wanted to do it the hard way. Thats obversely a man's choice they always want to do it the hard way.... lol

Modifié par Rosewind, 20 juillet 2012 - 09:13 .

[UltimateTobi]

Rosewind wrote...

Is that a problem? there is already two options to be indoctrinated. But isn't refusal already  breaking it just not in the same way as destroy.

Not quite a problem.
If they implement it, then it should match with our theory. Adding new evidences, etc.

But it'd contradict with what Arian said. It'd render it obsolete what he wrote, if Reject develops into another successful resist against Indoc.

Modifié par UltimateTobi, 20 juillet 2012 - 09:11 .

[Leonia]

There can be only one!

But truthfully what if there is more than one way to break free? Just because one has the breath scene doesn't mean the other is less viable, maybe Shepard takes longer to wake up from Refuse. Tossing ideas out there.