55528 réponses à ce sujet

[EpyonX3]

Rosewind wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

When there was a possibility of losing him along with other humans, they destroyed him. The reaper's behavior is set up this way to introduce the motivation for Shepard. And to setup the dreams.

I wonder if Harby has nightmares about all the Destroyers he couldnt save.

They're basically the Reaper version of children, all small and vulnerable to dreadnoughts...

With the wispers of fallen companions lol

lol could you imagine Harbinger in a dream floating around and yo hear a destroyer saying "It is not a thing......you can comprehend"

But this does remind me of one thing. When reapers do die, are they really gone forever? Or are there platforms just dead?

The reason I ask is because the Scientist on the derelict reaper says, "Even a dead God can dream." I always thought that meant that a reaper's body can still send out indoctrination signals although there's no clear message or instruction.

[EpyonX3]

Corik wrote...

Just found something interesting. Possibly it's nothing, but... well, it's all about speculation.

I just had the first dream. At first, rieperbieber was laughing, then I approached him and suddenly a very bright white light appeared, and a "reaper red" light just after it over the boy, with also a reaper sound. The boy flees and the dream continues, but this time the boy was crying.

I've come to think that the bright white light (which started behind Shepard) may be his unconscious "discovering" the reaper illusion, that would be why suddenly and centered around the boy a red light followed by reaper sounds appear (and why the boy is scared by the bright light, not by the red light).

As I said... just speculating about the meaning of the dream.

I think that was just Shepard's mind recreating the events of what happened on earth. Interesting though.

[byne]

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

When there was a possibility of losing him along with other humans, they destroyed him. The reaper's behavior is set up this way to introduce the motivation for Shepard. And to setup the dreams.

I wonder if Harby has nightmares about all the Destroyers he couldnt save.

They're basically the Reaper version of children, all small and vulnerable to dreadnoughts...

Probably not. "The dead are useless."

Also, even though military personel are dieing too, I doubt Shepard would feel as bad for them as an innocent civillian. All soldiers understand what they are in for and what the risks are. Their purpose is to protect the lives of those who can't fight.

Liara reminds him of this after the first dream.

Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

[Meatus]

I have no idea where it was in this thread, or else I'd cite it, but I remember someone mentioning that during Priority: Earth, the camera does this odd, shaky movement. Well, this might not be significant, but I'm playing ME1 right now, and I'm in one of the Cerberus research facilities, and the camera's doing the same thing. I've never experienced this anywhere else in the last like 6 playthroughs or so that I've had on ME1.

If I weren't playing on console, I'd show you guys a video of it, but I hope someone remembers what I'm talking about. I just thought it was kind of interesting, given the Cerberus connection, which we knew almost nothing about in ME1. Might just be a glitch, though.

[EpyonX3]

byne wrote...


Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

Your point is valid. However, wouldn't that work against Literal and IT? How would the Reapers hold leverage over Shepard if he didn't care about the kid to begin with?

Could the child be the only thing Renegade Shepard actually cared about? I doubt it, so the reaper's guilt trip would have failed.

[byne]

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...


Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

Your point is valid. However, wouldn't that work against Literal and IT? How would the Reapers hold leverage over Shepard if he didn't care about the kid to begin with?

Could the child be the only thing Renegade Shepard actually cared about? I doubt it, so the reaper's guilt trip would have failed.

Right, and thats why I chose destroy and wasnt indoctrinated

[EpyonX3]

Meatus wrote...

I have no idea where it was in this thread, or else I'd cite it, but I remember someone mentioning that during Priority: Earth, the camera does this odd, shaky movement. Well, this might not be significant, but I'm playing ME1 right now, and I'm in one of the Cerberus research facilities, and the camera's doing the same thing. I've never experienced this anywhere else in the last like 6 playthroughs or so that I've had on ME1.

If I weren't playing on console, I'd show you guys a video of it, but I hope someone remembers what I'm talking about. I just thought it was kind of interesting, given the Cerberus connection, which we knew almost nothing about in ME1. Might just be a glitch, though.

Nice catch. Looks like the shakey camera thing is a function from the very first ME. It's pretty odd that it would be there with no explanation though, but now we can assume it's related to cerberus.

[EpyonX3]

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...


Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

Your point is valid. However, wouldn't that work against Literal and IT? How would the Reapers hold leverage over Shepard if he didn't care about the kid to begin with?

Could the child be the only thing Renegade Shepard actually cared about? I doubt it, so the reaper's guilt trip would have failed.

Right, and thats why I chose destroy and wasnt indoctrinated

hmmm...

yeah but what about the paragon's who also picked destroy?

[byne]

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...


Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

Your point is valid. However, wouldn't that work against Literal and IT? How would the Reapers hold leverage over Shepard if he didn't care about the kid to begin with?

Could the child be the only thing Renegade Shepard actually cared about? I doubt it, so the reaper's guilt trip would have failed.

Right, and thats why I chose destroy and wasnt indoctrinated

hmmm...

yeah but what about the paragon's who also picked destroy?

I'm paragon, I just dont care about that child.

I offered him help and he refused it, then ran away. It isnt my fault he died.

[llbountyhunter]

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...


Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

Your point is valid. However, wouldn't that work against Literal and IT? How would the Reapers hold leverage over Shepard if he didn't care about the kid to begin with?

Could the child be the only thing Renegade Shepard actually cared about? I doubt it, so the reaper's guilt trip would have failed.

Right, and thats why I chose destroy and wasnt indoctrinated

hmmm...

yeah but what about the paragon's who also picked destroy?

its very dificult to feel sorry for the starbrat at the choices point.

[paxxton]

Did you know that on one of the datapads in a room near Benezia's place on Noveria there's info on colonists going missing? An indirect reference to the Collectors?

Modifié par paxxton, 29 mai 2012 - 04:42 .

[HellishFiend]

prettz wrote...

ok hears somthing to speculate.
as we know we see the kid playing at the beginning of ME3. hear is picture from Shepard room


now after the reapers arrive an you gain control of Shepard for the first time you can see the same place but the garden no longer exists, it's just gone


hears me looking at it in normal game play


and flycam back where Shepard room was looking down.


really now, how did I miss this all this time?
now I need some sleep so have fun speculating .

Wow, nice find! It's certainly possible that its a clue. There is also the unfortunate chance that they ran out of room for loading textures into memory and had to cut something. Hmmm, I wonder which is the case?

[byne]

paxxton wrote...

Did you know that on one of the datapads in a room near Benezia's place on Noveria there's info on colonists going missing? An indirect reference to the Collectors?

Pretty sure thats just the missing survey team mission.

[EpyonX3]

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...


Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

Your point is valid. However, wouldn't that work against Literal and IT? How would the Reapers hold leverage over Shepard if he didn't care about the kid to begin with?

Could the child be the only thing Renegade Shepard actually cared about? I doubt it, so the reaper's guilt trip would have failed.

Right, and thats why I chose destroy and wasnt indoctrinated

hmmm...

yeah but what about the paragon's who also picked destroy?

I'm paragon, I just dont care about that child.

I offered him help and he refused it, then ran away. It isnt my fault he died.

You monster.......

[EpyonX3]

llbountyhunter wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...


Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

Your point is valid. However, wouldn't that work against Literal and IT? How would the Reapers hold leverage over Shepard if he didn't care about the kid to begin with?

Could the child be the only thing Renegade Shepard actually cared about? I doubt it, so the reaper's guilt trip would have failed.

Right, and thats why I chose destroy and wasnt indoctrinated

hmmm...

yeah but what about the paragon's who also picked destroy?

its very dificult to feel sorry for the starbrat at the choices point.

If someone made their choice based on the appearance on the Catalyst, then I don't know what to say.

[Corik]

HellishFiend wrote...

prettz wrote...

ok hears somthing to speculate.
as we know we see the kid playing at the beginning of ME3. hear is picture from Shepard room


now after the reapers arrive an you gain control of Shepard for the first time you can see the same place but the garden no longer exists, it's just gone


hears me looking at it in normal game play


and flycam back where Shepard room was looking down.


really now, how did I miss this all this time?
now I need some sleep so have fun speculating .

Wow, nice find! It's certainly possible that its a clue. There is also the unfortunate chance that they ran out of room for loading textures into memory and had to cut something. Hmmm, I wonder which is the case?

I can imagine the situation at Bioware's offices.

-Dev. A: Oh ****, we have run out of space... we need to cut something.
-Dev. B: Oh, ok, don't worry. Take out the roof from the building where the child was playing. That would make the fans freak out.

Seriously. That's obviously deliberate. They took out the roof for some reason. Maybe they wanted us to keep speculating about he child being real all the time or just an illusion except the first time.

[llbountyhunter]

alright, who else think the reaper motives should remain clouded in mystery?

I personally think it should remain at "we are beyond your comprehension" , it makes the reapers appear more menacing, and the victory becomes that much sweeter.

otherwise bioware will explain the reaper motives and..

just like that, the magic is gone. /Edi.

[MaximizedAction]

Corik wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

prettz wrote...

ok hears somthing to speculate.
as we know we see the kid playing at the beginning of ME3. hear is picture from Shepard room


now after the reapers arrive an you gain control of Shepard for the first time you can see the same place but the garden no longer exists, it's just gone


hears me looking at it in normal game play


and flycam back where Shepard room was looking down.


really now, how did I miss this all this time?
now I need some sleep so have fun speculating .

Wow, nice find! It's certainly possible that its a clue. There is also the unfortunate chance that they ran out of room for loading textures into memory and had to cut something. Hmmm, I wonder which is the case?

I can imagine the situation at Bioware's offices.

-Dev. A: Oh ****, we have run out of space... we need to cut something.
-Dev. B: Oh, ok, don't worry. Take out the roof from the building where the child was playing. That would make the fans freak out.

Seriously. That's obviously deliberate. They took out the roof for some reason. Maybe they wanted us to keep speculating about he child being real all the time or just an illusion except the first time.

Hehe, this discussion reminds me of my late pre-Indoctrinationist days. Not yet fully believing in an intentional placing and still being cautios.

It somehow seems odd to remove that. But on the other hand, there isn't much else engine intensive going on. On the third hand, however, why remove that one particular thing, the scene of the first in-game shot of the game?

[paxxton]

llbountyhunter wrote...

alright, who else think the reaper motives should remain clouded in mystery?

I personally think it should remain at "we are beyond your comprehension" , it makes the reapers appear more menacing, and the victory becomes that much sweeter.

otherwise bioware will explain the reaper motives and..

just like that, the magic is gone. /Edi.

Not necessarily. If they go for something twistedly evil, unforeseen, never done before then why not tell the players the Reapers' motives.
 
If they can't do it right, they shouldn't reveal them.

Modifié par paxxton, 29 mai 2012 - 04:54 .

[MaximizedAction]

llbountyhunter wrote...

alright, who else think the reaper motives should remain clouded in mystery?

I personally think it should remain at "we are beyond your comprehension" , it makes the reapers appear more menacing, and the victory becomes that much sweeter.

otherwise bioware will explain the reaper motives and..

just like that, the magic is gone. /Edi.

I agree, that was the same reason for Peter Jackson not to show Sauron in LOTR, even though Barad-Dur had an extra balcony designed at the top of it.

[HellishFiend]

byne wrote...

Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

Ostensibly it would be because since we dont have a precedent for Shepard's reaction towards kids (as there arent any others in the trilogy), we are left to assume that is a weak spot for him. That is a poor justification though, and I would be more inclined to believe that the lack of kids up until vent boy was actually intentionally leading up to this. 

[paxxton]

MaximizedAction wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

alright, who else think the reaper motives should remain clouded in mystery?

I personally think it should remain at "we are beyond your comprehension" , it makes the reapers appear more menacing, and the victory becomes that much sweeter.

otherwise bioware will explain the reaper motives and..

just like that, the magic is gone. /Edi.

I agree, that was the same reason for Peter Jackson not to show Sauron in LOTR, even though Barad-Dur had an extra balcony designed at the top of it.

Wasn't Sauron in the first movie selling apples?

Modifié par paxxton, 29 mai 2012 - 04:58 .

[HellishFiend]

Corik wrote...


I can imagine the situation at Bioware's offices.

-Dev. A: Oh ****, we have run out of space... we need to cut something.
-Dev. B: Oh, ok, don't worry. Take out the roof from the building where the child was playing. That would make the fans freak out.

Seriously. That's obviously deliberate. They took out the roof for some reason. Maybe they wanted us to keep speculating about he child being real all the time or just an illusion except the first time.

I hope you're right. It's really a well-executed clue, if true. 

[llbountyhunter]

EpyonX3 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...


Why a single child dying would set Shepard off, I dont really understand.

I specifically tried to make a Shepard that would lose the most people throughout the entire series.

Colonist/Sole Survivor background, killed Wrex, lost Kirrahe, sacrificed the Council, lost the entire crew to the Collectors, and only Mordin and Legion survived the Suicide mission, destroyed the genophage data so that Eve would die, shot Ash during the coup, and with all those deaths, I only care about some child I've never met before.

Forget losing basically everyone who has ever been important to me, that child died!

I really dont like that kid. Even when he's just a kid and not a godchild I still hate him.

Your point is valid. However, wouldn't that work against Literal and IT? How would the Reapers hold leverage over Shepard if he didn't care about the kid to begin with?

Could the child be the only thing Renegade Shepard actually cared about? I doubt it, so the reaper's guilt trip would have failed.

Right, and thats why I chose destroy and wasnt indoctrinated

hmmm...

yeah but what about the paragon's who also picked destroy?

its very dificult to feel sorry for the starbrat at the choices point.

If someone made their choice based on the appearance on the Catalyst, then I don't know what to say.

well, the fact that the kid looked like catalyst means that this is clearly an attempt to stire up emotions, remember what bioware said, (parafrasing) "the kid will be the sole icon of the loss of lives on earth".

so if you dont think the catalists apperance was meant to influence you in some way... then I dont know what to say.

[EpyonX3]

llbountyhunter wrote...

alright, who else think the reaper motives should remain clouded in mystery?

I personally think it should remain at "we are beyond your comprehension" , it makes the reapers appear more menacing, and the victory becomes that much sweeter.

otherwise bioware will explain the reaper motives and..

just like that, the magic is gone. /Edi.

I agree. But I also feel that if they were going to, they would have went with something else, like dark energy, maybe using us as batteries like Joker suggested or they need enough of us to produce more of them or newer versions of themselves.