55528 réponses à ce sujet

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I don't think it was forced. I didn't feel good seeing that child whom Shepard just failed to help being killed by a Reaper.

The fact that you agreed with his emotional display makes you biased, though. What if someone feels unaffected by it for whatever reason? They would feel their avatar is not being true to their perspective. 

And someone who was unaffected is biased the other way around?

You're just furthering my point instead of yours. Think about it a bit more. The point is not for people to be non-biased, its that they are likely to be biased one way or the other, and up until this point we have always had the ability to exhibit that bias through Shepard's reaction to any given situation. 

[paxxton]

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Microsoft's E3 conference is over. Up next is EA's.  With Mass Effect 3 EC.

Didn't some one post a pic of their twitter saying that they will defiantly not be anything about it at EC

You can always wish.

lol you didn't see the twitter did you? said something about "we will definitely not be discussing extended cut , no preview no trailer nothing" or something like, getting it of the top of my head here.

Well. I didn't. Have a link?

[Rosewind]

MaximizedAction wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

nm, balance5050 cleared that up.

Sorry, didn't mean to interject....

all for one, one for all.
This is why this thread is so awesome. We discuss and everybody is free and welcome to contribute.

And there is cookies

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I don't think it was forced. I didn't feel good seeing that child whom Shepard just failed to help being killed by a Reaper.

The fact that you agreed with his emotional display makes you biased, though. What if someone feels unaffected by it for whatever reason? They would feel their avatar is not being true to their perspective. 

And someone who was unaffected is biased the other way around?

You're just furthering my point instead of yours. Think about it a bit more. The point is not for people to be non-biased, its that they are likely to be biased one way or the other, and up until this point we have always had the ability to exhibit that bias through Shepard's reaction to any given situation. 

If I  understand you correctly, you say that Shepard's reaction should always be a direct or indirect consequence of the player's dialogue decisions.

Modifié par paxxton, 04 juin 2012 - 06:24 .

[Rosewind]

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Microsoft's E3 conference is over. Up next is EA's.  With Mass Effect 3 EC.

Didn't some one post a pic of their twitter saying that they will defiantly not be anything about it at EC

You can always wish.

lol you didn't see the twitter did you? said something about "we will definitely not be discussing extended cut , no preview no trailer nothing" or something like, getting it of the top of my head here.

Well. I didn't. Have a link?

umm a few 20 pages back? lol Was on here and was on my Saturday. also can anyone link me that survey they where doing on who believes in IT and how doesn't the official one they where doing?

[paxxton]

Rosewind wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

nm, balance5050 cleared that up.

Sorry, didn't mean to interject....

all for one, one for all.
This is why this thread is so awesome. We discuss and everybody is free and welcome to contribute.

And there is cookies

I'm still waiting for cookies people owe me.

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

If I  understand you correctly, you say that Shepard's reaction should always be a direct or indirect consequence of the player's dialogue decisions.

Yes, that's my point. Has it not always been so up until then? In 1 and 2, almost every single time Shepard is required to display a reaction of some kind, the camera points at him/her with a blank expression on their face, and then when you pick your option, his face animates in the manner you've chosen. 

It's just another one of those things that is either a part of IT, or due to time constraints. 

Modifié par HellishFiend, 04 juin 2012 - 06:26 .

[estebanus]

I haven't seen DjBare for a while...

[paxxton]

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Microsoft's E3 conference is over. Up next is EA's.  With Mass Effect 3 EC.

Didn't some one post a pic of their twitter saying that they will defiantly not be anything about it at EC

You can always wish.

lol you didn't see the twitter did you? said something about "we will definitely not be discussing extended cut , no preview no trailer nothing" or something like, getting it of the top of my head here.

Well. I didn't. Have a link?

umm a few 20 pages back? lol Was on here and was on my Saturday. also can anyone link me that survey they where doing on who believes in IT and how doesn't the official one they where doing?

That Chris Priestly's tweet. Yeah, I saw it. But maybe, just maybe it was a joke.

[EpyonX3]

paxxton wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

You know what is interesting about Reaper indoctrination. Reaper artifacts are merely needed to start the indoctrination. To inject foreign ideas. Then as time passes it becomes a feedback loop. The more you think about it, the more you accept it. It's like a mental bug crawling in your mind. Shepard didn't have to be constantly in the presence of Reaper tech to get fully indoctrinated.

You know, I wouldn't have a problem with that if we saw this slow and gradual acceptance of reaper philosophy throughout the series, or at least ME3. We don't see any of this until you get to the very last scene of the game. This is why I believe that if IT is true, they did it very, very poorly.

You mean there should have been some explicit mention that it works that way. I dunno, maybe there was. Like Rana telling Shepard that the influence started to have an effect on the staff on Virmire. She didn't seem to be fully indoctrinated then, yet her indoctrination progressed throughout the series until she was put in jail and committed suicide. It's doubtful shehad any contact with Reaper tech after Virmire because she would be too afraid to get involve in Reaper-related research (I think so).

I have my own theory with Rana, but that's another discussion.

What I mean is that if Shepard's thought processes are being altered slowly, we should at least be able to notice them, not by glitches but by conversations in the context of the game. For example, Every response, renegade or paragon, that Shepard has is againsts the reapers when talking to TIM. Some of the negativity is aimed toward TIM as well.

Had we had a middle option that investigated the possibilities or had some sort of "what if" response, I'd be inclined to believe in IT. But we don't. The only times we have a possibility of Shepard changing his mind is in the very last scene, depending on you EMS of course. Could the catalyst be indoctrination Shepard at the very end? Sure but, then we have to consider that everything we knew about indoctrination was wrong, since Shepard heard no whispers, had not headaches, felt no paranoia when interacting with the catalyst or didn't embrace the catalyst's ideas of continuing the cycle.

[HellishFiend]

estebanus wrote...

I haven't seen DjBare for a while...

He's only been gone for a day. Two if you count today. He is sort of like me in the regard that he gets impatient and frustrated when the thread gets derailed by off-topic jive. Maybe he needed a break. 

[estebanus]

HellishFiend wrote...

estebanus wrote...

I haven't seen DjBare for a while...

He's only been gone for a day. Two if you count today. He is sort of like me in the regard that he gets impatient and frustrated when the thread gets derailed by off-topic jive. Maybe he needed a break. 

I guess so...

[MaximizedAction]

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Microsoft's E3 conference is over. Up next is EA's.  With Mass Effect 3 EC.

Didn't some one post a pic of their twitter saying that they will defiantly not be anything about it at EC

You can always wish.

lol you didn't see the twitter did you? said something about "we will definitely not be discussing extended cut , no preview no trailer nothing" or something like, getting it of the top of my head here.

Well. I didn't. Have a link?

umm a few 20 pages back? lol Was on here and was on my Saturday. also can anyone link me that survey they where doing on who believes in IT and how doesn't the official one they where doing?

That Chris Priestly's tweet. Yeah, I saw it. But maybe, just maybe it was a joke.

The tweet and the recent lockdown massages on threads about the E3 and EC only mention the EC. I expect that EA/Bioware might still talk about other SP DLC, if at all about ME3.

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

If I  understand you correctly, you say that Shepard's reaction should always be a direct or indirect consequence of the player's dialogue decisions.

Yes, that's my point. Has it not always been so up until then? In 1 and 2, almost every single time Shepard is required to display a reaction of some kind, the camera points at him/her with a blank expression on their face, and then when you pick your option, his face animates in the manner you've chosen. 

It's just another one of those things that is either a part of IT, or due to time constraints. 

Hmm, by doing this the game conveys precisely the emotions the developers want it to.

Modifié par paxxton, 04 juin 2012 - 06:33 .

[HellishFiend]

MaximizedAction wrote...

The tweet and the recent lockdown massages on threads about the E3 and EC only mention the EC. I expect that EA/Bioware might still talk about other SP DLC, if at all about ME3.

I'd hate to be a Bioware rep at E3 this year. Not only will they be inundated with questions about the ending in general (questions they cant answer, no less), but they will also have to answer questions about the latest patch and why it seems to have broken more things than it fixed, and why over half the fixes in the patch notes arent actually included in the patch. 

[estebanus]

MaximizedAction wrote...


The tweet and the recent lockdown massages on threads about the E3 and EC only mention the EC. I expect that EA/Bioware might still talk about other SP DLC, if at all about ME3.

They probably won't be mentioning any SP DLC, since they said that the development of all other DLCs was postponed so that they could concentrate on the EC.

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

If I  understand you correctly, you say that Shepard's reaction should always be a direct or indirect consequence of the player's dialogue decisions.

Yes, that's my point. Has it not always been so up until then? In 1 and 2, almost every single time Shepard is required to display a reaction of some kind, the camera points at him/her with a blank expression on their face, and then when you pick your option, his face animates in the manner you've chosen. 

It's just another one of those things that is either a part of IT, or due to time constraints. 

Hmm, by doing this the game conveys precisely the emotions the developers want it to.

That goes without saying. But its still a drastic change from how the series has functioned up until this point. So again, it's either part of IT, or due to time constraints. It's up to the individual to decide which to believe. 

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

If I  understand you correctly, you say that Shepard's reaction should always be a direct or indirect consequence of the player's dialogue decisions.

Yes, that's my point. Has it not always been so up until then? In 1 and 2, almost every single time Shepard is required to display a reaction of some kind, the camera points at him/her with a blank expression on their face, and then when you pick your option, his face animates in the manner you've chosen. 

It's just another one of those things that is either a part of IT, or due to time constraints. 

Hmm, by doing this the game conveys precisely the emotions the developers want it to.

That goes without saying. But its still a drastic change from how the series has functioned up until this point. So again, it's either part of IT, or due to time constraints. It's up to the individual to decide which to believe. 

But it might be a dead end cause the game was designed to be more movie-like. This might be the reason of that change in comparison to the previous games. BioWare went forward with design that utilizes modern technology.

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...


But it might be a dead end cause the game was designed to be more movie-like. This might be the reason of that change in comparison to the previous games. BioWare went forward with design that utilizes modern technology.

I ask that you keep an open mind and remember how strongly Bioware emphasized that they want us to feel what Shepard is feeling. To feel things from his perspective. Thus it becomes plausible that by forcing Shepard to display a certain emotion or reaction, Bioware could possibly be trying to imply that Shepard himself is being forced to display those emotions/reactions by indoctrination, and us along with him. 

[paxxton]

MaximizedAction wrote...

The tweet and the recent lockdown massages on threads about the E3 and EC only mention the EC. I expect that EA/Bioware might still talk about other SP DLC, if at all about ME3.

LOL.

Modifié par paxxton, 04 juin 2012 - 06:39 .

[Rosewind]

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Microsoft's E3 conference is over. Up next is EA's.  With Mass Effect 3 EC.

Didn't some one post a pic of their twitter saying that they will defiantly not be anything about it at EC

You can always wish.

lol you didn't see the twitter did you? said something about "we will definitely not be discussing extended cut , no preview no trailer nothing" or something like, getting it of the top of my head here.

Well. I didn't. Have a link?

umm a few 20 pages back? lol Was on here and was on my Saturday. also can anyone link me that survey they where doing on who believes in IT and how doesn't the official one they where doing?

That Chris Priestly's tweet. Yeah, I saw it. But maybe, just maybe it was a joke.

Son;t know he seemed pretty annoyed and certain...

[MaximizedAction]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...


But it might be a dead end cause the game was designed to be more movie-like. This might be the reason of that change in comparison to the previous games. BioWare went forward with design that utilizes modern technology.

I ask that you keep an open mind and remember how strongly Bioware emphasized that they want us to feel what Shepard is feeling. To feel things from his perspective. Thus it becomes plausible that by forcing Shepard to display a certain emotion or reaction, Bioware could possibly be trying to imply that Shepard himself is being forced to display those emotions/reactions by indoctrination, and us along with him. 

I give that last part a big thumb up!

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...


But it might be a dead end cause the game was designed to be more movie-like. This might be the reason of that change in comparison to the previous games. BioWare went forward with design that utilizes modern technology.

I ask that you keep an open mind and remember how strongly Bioware emphasized that they want us to feel what Shepard is feeling. To feel things from his perspective. Thus it becomes plausible that by forcing Shepard to display a certain emotion or reaction, Bioware could possibly be trying to imply that Shepard himself is being forced to display those emotions/reactions by indoctrination, and us along with him. 

You mean after 2 immersive games players become connected to Shepard mentally and there is an emotional feedback. It's like you anticipate that Shepard expresses your emotions. But the side effect is that you start to express Shepard's emotions if he shows them (even if you didn't tell him to do so). It's as if you were identifying yourself as Shepard (at least subconsciously).

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...


But it might be a dead end cause the game was designed to be more movie-like. This might be the reason of that change in comparison to the previous games. BioWare went forward with design that utilizes modern technology.

I ask that you keep an open mind and remember how strongly Bioware emphasized that they want us to feel what Shepard is feeling. To feel things from his perspective. Thus it becomes plausible that by forcing Shepard to display a certain emotion or reaction, Bioware could possibly be trying to imply that Shepard himself is being forced to display those emotions/reactions by indoctrination, and us along with him. 

You mean after 2 immersive games players become connected to Shepard mentally and there is an emotional feedback. It's like you anticipate that Shepard expresses your emotions. But the side effect is that you start to express Shepard's emotions if he shows them (even if you didn't tell him to do so). It's as if you were identifying yourself as Shepard (at least subconsciously).

Yeah, that is essentially what I'm saying. And it may have been what Bioware was counting on. After two games of having complete and utter control over Shepard's every emotional display, we become accustomed to feeling what he feels (since we already felt that way anyway). If that same effect carries over to part 3, where we are forced into certain emotions, if we continue to feel the emotions that Shepard displays, it serves the purpose of IT quite effectively. 

[Starbuck8]

EpyonX3 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

You know what is interesting about Reaper indoctrination. Reaper artifacts are merely needed to start the indoctrination. To inject foreign ideas. Then as time passes it becomes a feedback loop. The more you think about it, the more you accept it. It's like a mental bug crawling in your mind. Shepard didn't have to be constantly in the presence of Reaper tech to get fully indoctrinated.

You know, I wouldn't have a problem with that if we saw this slow and gradual acceptance of reaper philosophy throughout the series, or at least ME3. We don't see any of this until you get to the very last scene of the game. This is why I believe that if IT is true, they did it very, very poorly.

You mean there should have been some explicit mention that it works that way. I dunno, maybe there was. Like Rana telling Shepard that the influence started to have an effect on the staff on Virmire. She didn't seem to be fully indoctrinated then, yet her indoctrination progressed throughout the series until she was put in jail and committed suicide. It's doubtful shehad any contact with Reaper tech after Virmire because she would be too afraid to get involve in Reaper-related research (I think so).

I have my own theory with Rana, but that's another discussion.

What I mean is that if Shepard's thought processes are being altered slowly, we should at least be able to notice them, not by glitches but by conversations in the context of the game. For example, Every response, renegade or paragon, that Shepard has is againsts the reapers when talking to TIM. Some of the negativity is aimed toward TIM as well.

Had we had a middle option that investigated the possibilities or had some sort of "what if" response, I'd be inclined to believe in IT. But we don't. The only times we have a possibility of Shepard changing his mind is in the very last scene, depending on you EMS of course. Could the catalyst be indoctrination Shepard at the very end? Sure but, then we have to consider that everything we knew about indoctrination was wrong, since Shepard heard no whispers, had not headaches, felt no paranoia when interacting with the catalyst or didn't embrace the catalyst's ideas of continuing the cycle.

Well if they started injecting dialogue that started agreeing with TIM or Saren or the Reapers, it would be too obvious for the player! One of the reasons they had to be so subtle in order to accomplish indoctrination of Shepard, BioWare has to actually indoctrinate the player, or as someone just said we would have called BS a long time ago. And (assuming IT is true) BW succeeded immensely in indoctrinating the player. After giving us 3 games where the sole goal is to destroy the reapers, after battling Saren, TIM, and indoctrinted agents, how many people got to the very end actually chose synthesis or control and did not choose to annihilate the reapers??