55528 réponses à ce sujet

[comrade gando]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Meaning each individual has to come to their own interpretation. I see nothing about that that discredits or discounts IT.

Which is complete garbage, essentially its like "make up your own ending" so this game can have infinite endings right?! Right?! No it doesnt work that way bioware, you have to show people not tell them.

[TJBartlemus]

Sup? Have I missed anything important? I know I just got here in time for a troll, but that's another matter.

[v0rt3x22]

TJBartlemus wrote...

Sup? Have I missed anything important? I know I just got here in time for a troll, but that's another matter.

http://social.biowar...x/13242318&lf=8 

[Applepie_Svk]

What if indoctrination itself was an attempt to stop Crucible from firing?
It was something which was haunting me since original ending...

Stargazer scene ?

Why we have for original endings same Stargazer scene and for EC - refusal new one ?

I think that only real outcome was that the Crucible destroyed Reapers no matter what Catalyst promised, and Stargazer scene was the only one true, old man mentioned that some of details were lost with the time - but they knew about Shepard defeating the Reaper threat - once and for all.

Stopping the Reaper threat is realy unclear message, it could mean killing the reapers or it endings by Catalyst realy happened... but than again if Reapers survived with Control and Synthesis why we have recieved ending - with old man and children on unkown planet speaking about Shepard´s story ?
With each ending we have recieved different reality so even children and oldman should be different, atleast from point of meta-gaming but Bioware add only one change with refusal... why ?

Let me explain:

Let´s say that everything what happened after Harbringer´s hit was indoctrination but with certain levels of reality:
Halucination - Beam Run to TIM´s converastion
(Shepard standing near the console fighting with indoctrination - same as tried Anderson - etc it was deffense mechanism or warning against indoctrination, Shepard hurt him/herself with gunshot into own belly)

VIVID DREAM - CATALYST CHAMBER (Let´s say that what happened to Anderson was symbolic of what will happen to Shepard if he try to choose - to touch console, he/she would be dreaming behind Console unable to use control panel)

Ask why?
Citadel and Relay network are Reaper technology, it was what said Sovereign and it was their desire for civilizations to walk in their path, than they came and harvest civilizations for wisdom and strenght.

Reapers at start of each cycle close Relay Network it simply destroyed any kind of attempt to plant Crucible - It could took months even years to get near the Citadel and yet Reapers could moved Citadel somewhere else, without working Relay Network you simply cannot plant Crucible.

So Reapers have never face to Crucible until their agents said them there is threat, despite that Crucible could exist countless times before it was never planted because Reapers were fully aware of any attemp.

Same as with our cycle, Cerberus moved Citadel to Earth and warn Reapers about Crucible.


Why Reapers didn´t attack the Citadel as first and close Relay network ?

Well Protheans damaged signal which Reapers transmitted to Keepers, and they cannot simply use signal again for starting of cycle. It was reason why Sovereign was planning retaking the Citadel in Mass Effect 1 and it was reason why Cerberus tried to capture Citadel in Mass Effect 3 - to move Citadel somewhere near the Reapers.

Why they didn´t attack ?

They were affraid that most important things in their society can be destroyed by battle - we don´t understand true nature of Relay technology despite that our sciencist studied that few centuries or millenias. It was reason why Reapers used again indoctrinated agents for gaining access to Citadel and move it to Earth.

If we are taking the Citadel as the central of Relay Network, than with destroying such a building we could also lost whole Relay Network.

Vendetta

Let´s say that Catalyst was Citadel whole time as said Vendetta...

Catalyst - indoctrination:

Catalyst himself claimed as boss of Reapers but he cannot control them and force them to stop, it was up to Shepard.
It was realy interesting by my opinion was Shepard standing in front of console looking straight on display but he thought that he is speaking with Catalyst on top of the Citadel.
Catalyst simply cannot stop the Crucible because he was only in Shepard´s head - it was symbolism - You can ... Yes you can ... But I cannot ...

Everything or most of what said Catalyst was just a Shepard´s assumptions, part of indoctrination what was saying Catalyst aka Indoctrination, why would Reapers care about conflict betwen Synthetics and Organics, when the Reapers preffering the meaning WE ARE ORDER - YOU ARE CHAOS.... Or Javik - SYNTHETICS PRESSENT ORDER - WE ORGANICS REPRESENT CHAOS, WE ARE USELESS TO THEM.
Because it´s true, Reapers are nothing more than high advanced AI which found a way to gain knowlendge of organic mind itno their fancy hardwares.

As Indoctrination as Catalyst is last attempt for Reapers to stop Crucible from firing, yet it will fire and Reapers wil die.

Crucible :

The only explanation from mouth of Catalyst which I have realy believed is Crucible, Catalyst is trying to hide something with lying about nature and origin of Crucible. It was probably creators of Reapers which created this weapon or even blueprint but it was too late for deploying it and than after first war Reapers create own original pattern which should guard their own priorities against repeated use, which served well until our cycle.

PRE - EC:

When was Shepard standing in front of citadel control panel he thought that he is somewhere elsewhere - with Catalyst on the Citadel, Catalyst was trying to Shepard decieve into way of Reapers :

Whole Catalyst explanation was just a full of lies which should Shepard decieve into preserving of Reapers and become their thrall which would try to stop the Crucible from firing.

Exactly something very similliar has happend to Saren, after what he spoke with Shepard and blew his head off, he being transformed into husk and tried to stop Shepard from openning the Citadel.

- Green - Reapers alive (prosperity)- Blue - Reapers alive (prosperity)- Red - Reapers dead (misery)
If Shepard pick blue and green he become fully indoctrinated and tried to stop Crucible from fire, but it was too late and Crucible fire one way or another.With control and synthesis should change future for utopia almost, but we have after 3 endings 1 same ou Stargazer scene ?

Only with destroy is Shepard alive... why ? Because he ressisted to indoctrination and refused to save Reapers.
Last 5 minutes with Catalyst in room wasn´t about synthetics vs organics but it was about stopping the Crucible from firing...With Catalyst it was either end of Shepard or his survival, galaxy won no matter which ending Shepard picked - but choice was about last Reaper try to save themselves. and it failed.

That´s interesting part : Each Stargrazer scene is with same kid and oldman, saying exactly same story - why ? They should be in different realities ? And again ending message was unclear - it was just end of Reaper threat.

Why if you picked green and blue, Reapers failed in stoping of Crucible from firing ?

Reapers never before faced to this technology, simply because they never allow to organics plant Crucible into Citadel, cycle always start and end with closing the relay network and without working network everyone was locked up in own system. Even if someone would managed to built the Crucible they have no idea where was the Citadel and even if they knew they woulnd´t have enough time to move there.


Extended CUT: You asking how exactly it can proves IT ?

With adding refusal - it makes even more sense.
Each of Catalyst choices is violation of what Shepard fight against since saw first time Sovereign and now he should bound everyone, merge whole life or betray allies?

Just speculation: Crucible is already conected with Citadel and charging for fire, Catalyst is trying to decieve Shepard but indoctrination took a time and it´s reason why Reapers failed even in old endings, so Shepard simply refused solution and stop Crucible ASAP from firing - Reapers won and proceed in plan...

It was one simple single emotion - honor - which achieved what Reapers wants, Shepard has stop the Crucible from firing and cycle continues - He exactly want to provoke one of these emotions - honor, anger, desperation, refusal - which would lead to refuse of using the Crucible ....

After that, SO BE IT,cycle continues - this is simple crying like - YEAH WE DID IT, WE CAN GO BACK AND PLAY WITH OUR TOYS!


And there is that moment, next Stargazer scene is utterly different from others - it leads to new reality with woman and children speaking about Shepard.
Next information what someone mentioned on twitter was: That next cycle used Crucible and destroyed Reaper threat - because Reapers was sleeping in dark space and none was trying to indoctrinate these which use the Crucible.

Simply said there is only two endings - for cycle:

presserve Reapers and stop Crucible - refusal
destroy Reapers and stop cylce - Catalyst

and 3 endings for Shepard:

- become fully indoctrinated and try to save Reapers
- let Crucible fire and maybe survive or die
- refuse to use Crucible and die together with cycle

They claimed that this is end of Shepard story but no the end of Mass Effect also said that there is no cannon ending, but they didn´t burst IT. Question remains same - why they would do that ?

Endings are totally different and yet they are very simmiliar, in fact there is only two endings -
Shepard end Reaper threat
Shepard refused to use Crucible and let Reapers proceed in their cycle.



http://social.biowar...0929/1#13251449  - thread

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 20 juillet 2012 - 10:38 .

[Chriz Tah Fah]

 I don't know if anyone else sees it this way but Priestly saying IT is a valid POSSIBILITY not "interpretation." To me this basically means that there will be a canon ending. Saying "interpretation" to me means that what we have right now is the end and that what we think happened would be out interpretation. By saying that it is a valid possibility it means to me that they are making/adding more to the ending with the possibility of having the IT in mind.

[Arian Dynas]

comrade gando wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Meaning each individual has to come to their own interpretation. I see nothing about that that discredits or discounts IT.

Which is complete garbage, essentially its like "make up your own ending" so this game can have infinite endings right?! Right?! No it doesnt work that way bioware, you have to show people not tell them.

No, it means "Think about it a while and decide for yourself what happened. We'll tell you later if you're right or not."

[v0rt3x22]

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

 I don't know if anyone else sees it this way but Priestly saying IT is a valid POSSIBILITY not "interpretation." To me this basically means that there will be a canon ending. Saying "interpretation" to me means that what we have right now is the end and that what we think happened would be out interpretation. By saying that it is a valid possibility it means to me that they are making/adding more to the ending with the possibility of having the IT in mind.

The way he said it was indeed very interesting.

[Sero303]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Wow IT still has supporters.

I still believe in IT

[byne]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

 I don't know if anyone else sees it this way but Priestly saying IT is a valid POSSIBILITY not "interpretation." To me this basically means that there will be a canon ending. Saying "interpretation" to me means that what we have right now is the end and that what we think happened would be out interpretation. By saying that it is a valid possibility it means to me that they are making/adding more to the ending with the possibility of having the IT in mind.

The way he said it was indeed very interesting.

Chris was also the one who made the IT poll on the HTL forums.

I'm starting to wonder if he either:

A) Personally believes in IT

or

 Knows something we dont relating to IT

[v0rt3x22]

byne wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

 I don't know if anyone else sees it this way but Priestly saying IT is a valid POSSIBILITY not "interpretation." To me this basically means that there will be a canon ending. Saying "interpretation" to me means that what we have right now is the end and that what we think happened would be out interpretation. By saying that it is a valid possibility it means to me that they are making/adding more to the ending with the possibility of having the IT in mind.

The way he said it was indeed very interesting.

Chris was also the one who made the IT poll on the HTL forums.

I'm starting to wonder if he either:

A) Personally believes in IT

or

 Knows something we dont relating to IT

same...its the only reason I still believe in IT.
I think they have a huge card up their sleeves - and it would be awesome! <3:wub:

[v0rt3x22]

+ in a way (if you look at the results of that poll that was ran on HTL - it would be foolish not to pursue it.

[paxxton]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

+ in a way (if you look at the results of that poll that was ran on HTL - it would be foolish not to pursue it.

And this one. If you haven't checked it for a bit you might be surprised by the current results.
Should Mass Effect 4 continue Shepard's story?

Modifié par paxxton, 20 juillet 2012 - 10:50 .

[Sero303]

Would anyone here buy ME-4 if the announced that the game would open with confirming IDT, and that everything that happened after Shepard was hit with the harbinger red beam of death was all in shepards head...

[MaximizedAction]

byne wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

 I don't know if anyone else sees it this way but Priestly saying IT is a valid POSSIBILITY not "interpretation." To me this basically means that there will be a canon ending. Saying "interpretation" to me means that what we have right now is the end and that what we think happened would be out interpretation. By saying that it is a valid possibility it means to me that they are making/adding more to the ending with the possibility of having the IT in mind.

The way he said it was indeed very interesting.

Chris was also the one who made the IT poll on the HTL forums.

I'm starting to wonder if he either:

A) Personally believes in IT

or

 Knows something we dont relating to IT

Both are problematic, as he has to A) stay objective as the community manager he is and follow Bioware's previous habit of not planning on commenting on IT.

[v0rt3x22]

paxxton wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

+ in a way (if you look at the results of that poll that was ran on HTL - it would be foolish not to pursue it.

And this one. If you haven't checked it for a bit you might be surprised by the current results.
Should Mass Effect 4 continue Shepard's story?

Or my own polls: 

http://social.biowar...57/polls/35866/ 

http://social.biowar...57/polls/35619/ 

[Dwailing]

byne wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

 I don't know if anyone else sees it this way but Priestly saying IT is a valid POSSIBILITY not "interpretation." To me this basically means that there will be a canon ending. Saying "interpretation" to me means that what we have right now is the end and that what we think happened would be out interpretation. By saying that it is a valid possibility it means to me that they are making/adding more to the ending with the possibility of having the IT in mind.

The way he said it was indeed very interesting.

Chris was also the one who made the IT poll on the HTL forums.

I'm starting to wonder if he either:

A) Personally believes in IT

or

 Knows something we dont relating to IT

I'm inclined to think both.  Considering that he has access to the SP DLC before it's released but after it's finished, if HE'S in such a good mood about it, and based on his posts, it seems like he IS in a good mood, then I get the feeling that WE should be in good moods and high spirits as well.  Also, that could explain why he didn't answer any of the big questions we asked in the live chat.  He's so happy about it that if he tried to answer, he might not be able to resist letting something slip!  OK, that's probably not likely, but it COULD explain it.

Perhaps a more rational explanation would be that the only way he COULD remain impartial, or at least SEEM to be remaining impartial, would be to avoid answering any potentially compromising questions.  If he did, he could let something slip accidentally.

Modifié par Dwailing, 20 juillet 2012 - 10:57 .

[byne]

paxxton wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

+ in a way (if you look at the results of that poll that was ran on HTL - it would be foolish not to pursue it.

And this one. If you haven't checked it for a bit you might be surprised by the current results.
Should Mass Effect 4 continue Shepard's story?

Paxxton, I finally voted in your poll. You can stop plugging it relentlessly now. 

[TJBartlemus]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Sup? Have I missed anything important? I know I just got here in time for a troll, but that's another matter.

http://social.biowar...x/13242318&lf=8 

Nice. 

[v0rt3x22]

TJBartlemus wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Sup? Have I missed anything important? I know I just got here in time for a troll, but that's another matter.

http://social.biowar...x/13242318&lf=8 

Nice. 

I like how that thread achieved the opposite of what it wanted to 

But I also find it interesting that Priestly encourages people not to discuss IT if they dont believe in it. 

Modifié par v0rt3x22, 20 juillet 2012 - 11:00 .

[Dwailing]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Sup? Have I missed anything important? I know I just got here in time for a troll, but that's another matter.

http://social.biowar...x/13242318&lf=8 

Nice. 

I like how that thread achieved the opposite of what it wanted to 

But I also find it interesting that Priestly encourages people not to discuss IT if they dont believe in it. 

I can see how that may turn into a sh*tstorm if they confirm it - down the line.

At this point, I don't CARE if it's a ****storm.  I just want IT confirmed.  *Zaeed voice*  Let the BSN BURN!  IT gets confirmed, whatever the cost!

[SinZinDetta]

I just still do not get the tree branches from the dream poking out the ground after he wakes up for the Harbinger hit. That would sense IT to me, why would they make a point to include the dreams then something from the dreams and put them to that point.

Also I would love that second from the bottom google app to be updated with the new EC.

[paxxton]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

+ in a way (if you look at the results of that poll that was ran on HTL - it would be foolish not to pursue it.

And this one. If you haven't checked it for a bit you might be surprised by the current results.
Should Mass Effect 4 continue Shepard's story?

Paxxton, I finally voted in your poll. You can stop plugging it relentlessly now. 

Thanks! That's a victory in itself.  I bet you voted "YES"  so I just leave the link in the upper-left corner of my sig so that it doesn't clutter the main space.

[TSA_383]

Been chatting with Andromidus, just had this thought I wanted to share regarding the cut ME2 derelict reaper dialog and possible post-breath-scene outcome:


*BIG SPOILER WARNING FOR LEVIATHAN*

there was originally going to be a line from an indoctrinated person on board, who was essentially a husk.

The reaper had been drifting for 37 million years, "the voices" had gone, and it was talking about calling out and being alone. I think it ended with the line "Join us, and you shall never be alone".

It suggested that the reapers had no use for that derelict reaper and had cut off control.

Here's my theory:

Harbinger controls the reapers (In Leviathan, the Catalyst confirms that Harbinger is the first successful reaper, with leviathan being the very first), and as a result of breaking free of indoctrination you may weaken Harbinger, and since Harbinger appears to be able to control the reapers, perhaps destroying it will end the war.

This has precedent in Mass Effect from Sovereign/Saren in ME1.

[TJBartlemus]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

Sup? Have I missed anything important? I know I just got here in time for a troll, but that's another matter.

http://social.biowar...x/13242318&lf=8 

Nice. 

I like how that thread achieved the opposite of what it wanted to 

But I also find it interesting that Priestly encourages people not to discuss IT if they dont believe in it. 

I personnally like Chris. He has always supported us fans. What's wierd is that he claims that he responds to fans PMs. So I sent him my Waking Nightmare theory...then not too soon after there was a large amount of views on them and I have yet to get a response. I would be satisfied with a cool idea, or it's possible or something, maybe even a flat out thing saying I'm wrong, but alas I have yet to get an answer. 

[Dwailing]

TSA_383 wrote...

Been chatting with Andromidus, just had this thought I wanted to share regarding the cut ME2 derelict reaper dialog and possible post-breath-scene outcome:


*BIG SPOILER WARNING FOR LEVIATHAN*

there was originally going to be a line from an indoctrinated person on board, who was essentially a husk.

The reaper had been drifting for 37 million years, "the voices" had gone, and it was talking about calling out and being alone. I think it ended with the line "Join us, and you shall never be alone".

It suggested that the reapers had no use for that derelict reaper and had cut off control.

Here's my theory:

Harbinger controls the reapers (In Leviathan, the Catalyst confirms that Harbinger is the first successful reaper, with leviathan being the very first), and as a result of breaking free of indoctrination you may weaken Harbinger, and since Harbinger appears to be able to control the reapers, perhaps destroying it will end the war.

This has precedent in Mass Effect from Sovereign/Saren in ME1.

If you kill Harbinger, I would rather have the Reapers get there shields knocked out so we can finish blasting the living **** out of them.  Yes, I'm a Paragon, and yes, I REALLY want to be able to finish the Reapers once and for all.  I don't WANT them to be redeemable.  I want then the be complete monsters that deserve nothing more than being blasted into pieces so small, they make their nanites look big.