55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Xd2delo]

Modifié par Xd2delo, 16 mai 2012 - 04:07 .

[SS2Dante]

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

Killing legion isn't really a bad thing because he attacks first.

You definately haven't understood this part of the game. Legion faces the annihilation of his entire species. He doesn't attack first.

I fully understand WHY he attacked you. I'm just saying killing him in self defense isn't an 'evil' action.

Judges rule: morally ambiguous.

[Xd2delo]

Cerberus Scientist: Third day with this headache. You'd think Chandana would have let me take a few hours off.
Goddamn!
Cerberus Researcher: What?
Cerberus Scientist:
That thing that just… gray thing! It disappeared when I looked straight
at it. Came out of the damn wall! Where we took off that panel.
Cerberus Researcher: I didn't see anything. You should lie down.


(Emphasis added. From the ME2 Missions "Reaper IFF")

Sound familiar? 

Modifié par Xd2delo, 16 mai 2012 - 04:07 .

[SS2Dante]

dreamgazer wrote...

I won't lie: I have an issue with the gun as evidence---not the implications behind each gun and whether BioWare would employ the logic in this scenario, but the fact that you have to whip out a magnifying glass and a pause button to tell that it went from Carnifex to Predator. I wish the game would have shown Shepard haphazardly dropping the Predator at the end, after focusing shots so intently on the Carnifex. In this form, if intended, it's like BioWare included a needle-in-a-haystack clue that almost all audiences would never perceive.

...but that's what creators do. I personally love the idea. I mean, do you know how many tiny hints were in Fight Club that you won't notice until like the 50th time viewing them? 

Or, for example, I wonder how many people spotted that in The Half Blood Prince you see Ravenclaws diadem. Or that in Order of the Phoenix you see the locket at the black house.

The tiny hints are what gives a twist its longevity.

[balance5050]

Yeah, the gun thing is clearly on purpose and not an accident as is evident from the game files. I still want a list of every scene that uses the carnifex and every scene that uses the predetor so we can maybe see if there is a pattern that emerges.

[paxxton]

SS2Dante wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

Killing legion isn't really a bad thing because he attacks first.

You definately haven't understood this part of the game. Legion faces the annihilation of his entire species. He doesn't attack first.

I fully understand WHY he attacked you. I'm just saying killing him in self defense isn't an 'evil' action.

Judges rule: morally ambiguous.

Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

Modifié par paxxton, 16 mai 2012 - 04:21 .

[Boradam]

ubermensch007 wrote...


One thing that I haven't seen any one mention is this.

While we don't know all the ins and outs of how Indoctrination works.For instance is it communicable.Be that as it may, this came to my mind recently. In ME3. Shiala the asari commando we either saved or killed on Feros in ME1, says that she believes that she is still indoctrinated.If she is correct -- then she gave Saren the Prothean Cipher and we all know that he became indoctrinated. What about Commander Shepard. The first human Spectre also let Shiala mind meld with him.

The two days that Shep spent unconscious surrounded by Indoctrinated Alliance agents and Object Rho may not even be a necesary catalyst for Shepard becoming indoctrinated. If Shiala is right.

Reply to a post from a few pages back: I think it's worth noting that Shiala, immediately after she gives you the Cipher, smiles quite darkly and it always made me feel uneasy. I don't trust her at all, but I let her live anyways.

[MegumiAzusa]

dreamgazer wrote...

I won't lie: I have an issue with the gun as evidence---not the implications behind each gun and whether BioWare would employ the logic in this scenario, but the fact that you have to whip out a magnifying glass and a pause button to tell that it went from Carnifex to Predator. I wish the game would have shown Shepard haphazardly dropping the Predator at the end, after focusing shots so intently on the Carnifex. In this form, if intended, it's like BioWare included a needle-in-a-haystack clue that almost all audiences would never perceive.

That would be in contradiction to making a clue subtle. The game focuses on the gun since Anderson shoves it in your face. Then at the last moment it doesn't focus on it and BAM it changes. Same when completing the Anderson/TIM conflict: the gun just disappears only to reappear for the choice.
Also there is quite some emphasis that you throw the gun away in the other endings. The point is you shouldn't notice for your first few playthroughs. It is really good scripting to focus on something and moments later make it forgotten.

[Dwailing]

SS2Dante wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I won't lie: I have an issue with the gun as evidence---not the implications behind each gun and whether BioWare would employ the logic in this scenario, but the fact that you have to whip out a magnifying glass and a pause button to tell that it went from Carnifex to Predator. I wish the game would have shown Shepard haphazardly dropping the Predator at the end, after focusing shots so intently on the Carnifex. In this form, if intended, it's like BioWare included a needle-in-a-haystack clue that almost all audiences would never perceive.

...but that's what creators do. I personally love the idea. I mean, do you know how many tiny hints were in Fight Club that you won't notice until like the 50th time viewing them? 

Or, for example, I wonder how many people spotted that in The Half Blood Prince you see Ravenclaws diadem. Or that in Order of the Phoenix you see the locket at the black house.

The tiny hints are what gives a twist its longevity.

Yup, that's very true.  Also, I've finished Batman: Arkham City's story, and between Batman's brilliant deduction at the end, and my watching the various easter eggs on YouTube, there's actually some nice hints there as to what was going to happen in Arkham City, and what might happen next.  However, I think the situation that is the best example of subtle clues comes in the Identity Theif side quest.  Follow this link for more info. 

Modifié par Dwailing, 16 mai 2012 - 04:25 .

[RavenEyry]

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

[dreamgazer]

SS2Dante wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I won't lie: I have an issue with the gun as evidence---not the implications behind each gun and whether BioWare would employ the logic in this scenario, but the fact that you have to whip out a magnifying glass and a pause button to tell that it went from Carnifex to Predator. I wish the game would have shown Shepard haphazardly dropping the Predator at the end, after focusing shots so intently on the Carnifex. In this form, if intended, it's like BioWare included a needle-in-a-haystack clue that almost all audiences would never perceive.

...but that's what creators do. I personally love the idea. I mean, do you know how many tiny hints were in Fight Club that you won't notice until like the 50th time viewing them? 

Or, for example, I wonder how many people spotted that in The Half Blood Prince you see Ravenclaws diadem. Or that in Order of the Phoenix you see the locket at the black house.

The tiny hints are what gives a twist its longevity.

True, and the same logic applies to the spliced images of Brad Pitt in Fight Club, as well a few elements of other surrealist cinema.  I guess my issue is that all those clues are able to be clearly perceived by just keeping your eyes out for it on subsequent viewing---able to perceive it as an observer of the media without enhancement tools.  You can see Pitt pop in the image during Fight Club, no matter if you're on a small or large screen, or the other easter eggs you mentioned; for this to work, you have to both stop the frame and make your vision focused and zoomed enough to see that one-second flash that reveals it's a different gun.  And then you have to use the logic that the Predator is the "get the job done" pistol and not the executioner's weapon.  That's a whole lot to process.

Don't get me wrong: I really like the idea, but it's putting effort into something that's heavily, heavily masked. 

[Boradam]

pirate1802 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...
(snip)

I've scene those photos before, but despite the apparent two-tone effect in these shots I'm not seeing the same result in my video. I'm uploading the photos for proof right now. Do you have the original video these images came from? I'm curious to compare because maybe there's more to this!

Video link was in the top of the quote. Guy is using flycam, and it definitely changes.

I get that; and I remember one of you saying the guy was using flycam before. I should have been more clear I guess, what I mean is that I would like to see the 'original' non-flycam version of that scene. As it's not clearly a predator in any of my grabs.

What I'm getting at is if he can use flycam and can also manipulate object choices (like chaning to another gun) in the game ... not saying he did, or that he's having us on, but it can be done ... get my drift?

You are ignoring my screens... and I've never edited anything in any ME games.

Ok, well now that I know your the one that's done the work, it changes everything ... I trust you enough to know you wouldn't do that. As for why I took the pictures? I didn't want to weigh in on the discussion without at least giving the theory a try, you know, to see it for myself.

So here's my questions for you:

why leave it as such a cryptic clue from an in-game cinematic standpoint?

what do you feel the carnifex/preadotr switch here really means?

The game is notorious for equiping and removing and re-equiping weapons in cinematics all the time? So why is this one an exception?

And to answer the brightness/contrast question, it was a case of a video filter being a **** to me and not turning off for screen grabs. I find it anoying too -sigh.

Its interesting because its used for cutscenes showing freedom, or events breaking Reaper control.

Freeing the Rachni and TIM shooting himself. In both those scenes Predator is used. Both of those times are someone breaking free of Reaper control.

But TIM also shoots anderson and tries to shoot you with the predator (bad action) and shep shoots TIM with the carnifax (epic good action)

Freeing the corrupt Rachni Breeder isn't neccesarily a good action, so does he use the Predator or the Carnifex to free it?

[Dwailing]

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Tali's suicide, I would always choose the Geth over the Quarians.  However, I don't have that problem since I have to ability to make peace.   You know, take a third option.

[Dwailing]

Boradam wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...
(snip)

I've scene those photos before, but despite the apparent two-tone effect in these shots I'm not seeing the same result in my video. I'm uploading the photos for proof right now. Do you have the original video these images came from? I'm curious to compare because maybe there's more to this!

Video link was in the top of the quote. Guy is using flycam, and it definitely changes.

I get that; and I remember one of you saying the guy was using flycam before. I should have been more clear I guess, what I mean is that I would like to see the 'original' non-flycam version of that scene. As it's not clearly a predator in any of my grabs.

What I'm getting at is if he can use flycam and can also manipulate object choices (like chaning to another gun) in the game ... not saying he did, or that he's having us on, but it can be done ... get my drift?

You are ignoring my screens... and I've never edited anything in any ME games.

Ok, well now that I know your the one that's done the work, it changes everything ... I trust you enough to know you wouldn't do that. As for why I took the pictures? I didn't want to weigh in on the discussion without at least giving the theory a try, you know, to see it for myself.

So here's my questions for you:

why leave it as such a cryptic clue from an in-game cinematic standpoint?

what do you feel the carnifex/preadotr switch here really means?

The game is notorious for equiping and removing and re-equiping weapons in cinematics all the time? So why is this one an exception?

And to answer the brightness/contrast question, it was a case of a video filter being a **** to me and not turning off for screen grabs. I find it anoying too -sigh.

Its interesting because its used for cutscenes showing freedom, or events breaking Reaper control.

Freeing the Rachni and TIM shooting himself. In both those scenes Predator is used. Both of those times are someone breaking free of Reaper control.

But TIM also shoots anderson and tries to shoot you with the predator (bad action) and shep shoots TIM with the carnifax (epic good action)

Freeing the corrupt Rachni Breeder isn't neccesarily a good action, so does he use the Predator or the Carnifex to free it?

I believe he uses the Predator.

[paxxton]

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Did he use a smartphone?

Modifié par paxxton, 16 mai 2012 - 04:40 .

[paxxton]

Dwailing wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Tali's suicide, I would always choose the Geth over the Quarians.  However, I don't have that problem since I have to ability to make peace.   You know, take a third option.

I forgot to do the Geth Server mission so I had to choose one of them. Though I wasn't aware at the time the quarians wouldn't back off.

Modifié par paxxton, 16 mai 2012 - 04:34 .

[Stigweird85]

Dwailing wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Tali's suicide, I would always choose the Geth over the Quarians.  However, I don't have that problem since I have to ability to make peace.   You know, take a third option.

I'm the same, the Quarians were always the agressors on the Geth, however I managed to make peace but I just can't bring myself to watch Tali's suicide, hell it was only last week I finally watched a youtube clip of Shepard killing Wrex(edit for a stupid mistake)in ME1.

I want to see everything that Bioware has been created but I just can't do it.

Modifié par bigstig, 16 mai 2012 - 04:37 .

[Dwailing]

paxxton wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Tali's suicide, I would always choose the Geth over the Quarians.  However, I don't have that problem since I have to ability to make peace.   You know, take a third option.

I forgot to do the Geth Server mission so I had to choose either.

Ah, well, make sure you do it next time, Tali's worth it. 

[Dwailing]

bigstig wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Tali's suicide, I would always choose the Geth over the Quarians.  However, I don't have that problem since I have to ability to make peace.   You know, take a third option.

I'm the same, the Quarians were always the agressors on the Geth, however I managed to make peace but I just can't bring myself to watch Tali's suicide, hell it was only last week I finally watched a youtube clip of Shepard killing Grunt in ME1.

I want to see everything that Bioware has been created but I just can't do it.

Grunt, or Wrex?   'Cause if memory serves Grunt wasn't in ME1. 

[paxxton]

Dwailing wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Tali's suicide, I would always choose the Geth over the Quarians.  However, I don't have that problem since I have to ability to make peace.   You know, take a third option.

I forgot to do the Geth Server mission so I had to choose either.

Ah, well, make sure you do it next time, Tali's worth it. 

I did it on a second playthrough.
Her face...priceless.

Modifié par paxxton, 16 mai 2012 - 04:44 .

[Stigweird85]

Dwailing wrote...

bigstig wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Tali's suicide, I would always choose the Geth over the Quarians.  However, I don't have that problem since I have to ability to make peace.   You know, take a third option.

I'm the same, the Quarians were always the agressors on the Geth, however I managed to make peace but I just can't bring myself to watch Tali's suicide, hell it was only last week I finally watched a youtube clip of Shepard killing Grunt in ME1.

I want to see everything that Bioware has been created but I just can't do it.

Grunt, or Wrex?   'Cause if memory serves Grunt wasn't in ME1. 

Crap, stupid error(guess thats what happens where you multitask and hide things from your boss at work

[MegumiAzusa]

dreamgazer wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I won't lie: I have an issue with the gun as evidence---not the implications behind each gun and whether BioWare would employ the logic in this scenario, but the fact that you have to whip out a magnifying glass and a pause button to tell that it went from Carnifex to Predator. I wish the game would have shown Shepard haphazardly dropping the Predator at the end, after focusing shots so intently on the Carnifex. In this form, if intended, it's like BioWare included a needle-in-a-haystack clue that almost all audiences would never perceive.

...but that's what creators do. I personally love the idea. I mean, do you know how many tiny hints were in Fight Club that you won't notice until like the 50th time viewing them? 

Or, for example, I wonder how many people spotted that in The Half Blood Prince you see Ravenclaws diadem. Or that in Order of the Phoenix you see the locket at the black house.

The tiny hints are what gives a twist its longevity.

True, and the same logic applies to the spliced images of Brad Pitt in Fight Club, as well a few elements of other surrealist cinema.  I guess my issue is that all those clues are able to be clearly perceived by just keeping your eyes out for it on subsequent viewing---able to perceive it as an observer of the media without enhancement tools.  You can see Pitt pop in the image during Fight Club, no matter if you're on a small or large screen, or the other easter eggs you mentioned; for this to work, you have to both stop the frame and make your vision focused and zoomed enough to see that one-second flash that reveals it's a different gun.  And then you have to use the logic that the Predator is the "get the job done" pistol and not the executioner's weapon.  That's a whole lot to process.

Don't get me wrong: I really like the idea, but it's putting effort into something that's heavily, heavily masked. 

It's way more than one second and quite noticeable if you look at the gun, even without stopping the frame.
The only thing in that scene that isn't noticeable without stopping is that the last two shots are accompanied by flashes of white just as the fades to white, but only lasting for under a half second. Compared to that the Predator change is like being slapped in the face with it.

[MegumiAzusa]

Dwailing wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

paxxton wrote...
Shepard's decision to sacrifice the geth for those crazy quarians is the first act of hostility.

It was supposed to be a difficult choice. Shepard had to make a call.

Honestly, if it wasn't for Tali's suicide, I would always choose the Geth over the Quarians.  However, I don't have that problem since I have to ability to make peace.   You know, take a third option.

There is always another way

[balance5050]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I won't lie: I have an issue with the gun as evidence---not the implications behind each gun and whether BioWare would employ the logic in this scenario, but the fact that you have to whip out a magnifying glass and a pause button to tell that it went from Carnifex to Predator. I wish the game would have shown Shepard haphazardly dropping the Predator at the end, after focusing shots so intently on the Carnifex. In this form, if intended, it's like BioWare included a needle-in-a-haystack clue that almost all audiences would never perceive.

...but that's what creators do. I personally love the idea. I mean, do you know how many tiny hints were in Fight Club that you won't notice until like the 50th time viewing them? 

Or, for example, I wonder how many people spotted that in The Half Blood Prince you see Ravenclaws diadem. Or that in Order of the Phoenix you see the locket at the black house.

The tiny hints are what gives a twist its longevity.

True, and the same logic applies to the spliced images of Brad Pitt in Fight Club, as well a few elements of other surrealist cinema.  I guess my issue is that all those clues are able to be clearly perceived by just keeping your eyes out for it on subsequent viewing---able to perceive it as an observer of the media without enhancement tools.  You can see Pitt pop in the image during Fight Club, no matter if you're on a small or large screen, or the other easter eggs you mentioned; for this to work, you have to both stop the frame and make your vision focused and zoomed enough to see that one-second flash that reveals it's a different gun.  And then you have to use the logic that the Predator is the "get the job done" pistol and not the executioner's weapon.  That's a whole lot to process.

Don't get me wrong: I really like the idea, but it's putting effort into something that's heavily, heavily masked. 

It's way more than one second and quite noticeable if you look at the gun, even without stopping the frame.
The only thing in that scene that isn't noticeable without stopping is that the last two shots are accompanied by flashes of white just as the fades to white, but only lasting for under a half second. Compared to that the Predator change is like being slapped in the face with it.

Yeah, I'm surprised it took us this long to get into the nitty gritty of the gun issue, I always knew there was something more to the gun but never noticed the change until someone pointed it out.

[MegumiAzusa]

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I won't lie: I have an issue with the gun as evidence---not the implications behind each gun and whether BioWare would employ the logic in this scenario, but the fact that you have to whip out a magnifying glass and a pause button to tell that it went from Carnifex to Predator. I wish the game would have shown Shepard haphazardly dropping the Predator at the end, after focusing shots so intently on the Carnifex. In this form, if intended, it's like BioWare included a needle-in-a-haystack clue that almost all audiences would never perceive.

...but that's what creators do. I personally love the idea. I mean, do you know how many tiny hints were in Fight Club that you won't notice until like the 50th time viewing them? 

Or, for example, I wonder how many people spotted that in The Half Blood Prince you see Ravenclaws diadem. Or that in Order of the Phoenix you see the locket at the black house.

The tiny hints are what gives a twist its longevity.

True, and the same logic applies to the spliced images of Brad Pitt in Fight Club, as well a few elements of other surrealist cinema.  I guess my issue is that all those clues are able to be clearly perceived by just keeping your eyes out for it on subsequent viewing---able to perceive it as an observer of the media without enhancement tools.  You can see Pitt pop in the image during Fight Club, no matter if you're on a small or large screen, or the other easter eggs you mentioned; for this to work, you have to both stop the frame and make your vision focused and zoomed enough to see that one-second flash that reveals it's a different gun.  And then you have to use the logic that the Predator is the "get the job done" pistol and not the executioner's weapon.  That's a whole lot to process.

Don't get me wrong: I really like the idea, but it's putting effort into something that's heavily, heavily masked. 

It's way more than one second and quite noticeable if you look at the gun, even without stopping the frame.
The only thing in that scene that isn't noticeable without stopping is that the last two shots are accompanied by flashes of white just as the fades to white, but only lasting for under a half second. Compared to that the Predator change is like being slapped in the face with it.

Yeah, I'm surprised it took us this long to get into the nitty gritty of the gun issue, I always knew there was something more to the gun but never noticed the change until someone pointed it out.

As I said in another post: it requires skill to focus on something but then shift away from it without the player noticing. And the focus on the gun was made quite clear.