55528 réponses à ce sujet

[SirLugash]

@byne: Your obious choice for the ending would have been low EMS destroy, am I right ?
Getting rid of Shepard (again), EDI, the Geth and some other individuals using synthetic parts in their bodys.

€dit: Yay, page 900!

Modifié par SirLugash, 19 juin 2012 - 02:49 .

[Andromidius]

Rifneno wrote...

ZerebusPrime wrote...

I just saw Bailey get shot by Cerberus troops as I landed on the Citadel via shuttle, so let's put that idea to bed.

You saw Bailey get the obligatory shot to the shoulder that no one ever dies from in fiction while every other C-sec in the area, every single one, was outright killed. That idea is staying up late. It's earned it. Bailey surviving while everyone else was meat could be plot armor but it could also be because they didn't want to cast undue suspicion on him by having him unwounded. So they gave him a minor wound to make it look real. They told us time and again that this was an inside job. And not just on a "gave them security clearance to enter" level, but also on a "several corpses appeared to have been gunned down from behind by someone they didn't perceive as a threat in the office" level. Doesn't sound like Udina's MO. Then you're treated to video wall advertisements of "Are you right for a job in internal affairs?" while chasing after Kei Leng. Bailey links omnitools with Shepard to keep Shepard updated. Or to keep tabs on him and keep Leng informed? Oh, and remember how we all talked about gun symbolism? Bailey is using a paladin, a ridiculously expensive firearm that's only otherwise used by Henry Lawson. And again, look back at ME2. Bailey was torturing suspects, taking bribes, and Cerberus literally tells you they want to recruit him after he shows a lot of concern over anti-human racism.

Is this a very solid case like IT? No, it could very reasonably all be coincidence. But I'm sure as hell not turning my back on Bailey anytime soon.

My points exactly, only put into better words.

Bailey is an interesting character, and likeable (at least for me) in a gruff sort of way.  But he's certainly not above suspition.  Having his type of leadership in a position of (essentially) ultimate authority on Citadel Security would be dangerous even if he was completely loyal to the Council, there's a reason people play by the book.  Bailey doesn't, he gets the job done no matter the cost.  He needs supervision because otherwise he may overstep the mark and cause serious damage.

Even the act of taking Kolyat Krios under his wing could be seen as a dangerous thing - essentially pardoning a would-be assassin purely on the word of Shepard (who may actually not be a Spectre anymore, depending how you play things).

[SubAstris]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Thanks for that write up.

Also I have a question for all those Anti-IT saying the child is the face of humanity. Well taht si all well and good, but what the hell does the end of the thrid dream mean in that context?

Shepard sees himself burn alongside the child while smiling, what does that mean to the litteralists?
Shepard is afraid he is
gonna die with humanity or that he cant save them? Probably not because
then he would not be smiling.<_<
Shepard is happy to die alongside humanity? Yeah right...

Flames in dreams are generally asociated with warnings, destruction or purification, guidance.

Now what could seeing yourself on flames possibly mean in this regard? Purification? From what? Also the dreams are not shone in any positive light at all except for Shepards smile at the end. It is dark and barren.

Under such conditions flames would usualy be seen as negative, meaning destruction or warning...combine that with the fact that the flames consume Shepard and the child and the implications become clear.

Why is Shepard smiling then? That can be seen as Shepard is not aware on the counscious level of the danger he is walking into.

Also fun thing do you litteralist know the implications of a Dobbleganger in a dream, like in the third dream? A Doppleganger can be a reflection of your negative actions and is often a omen of doom, even your own death if the doppleganger i yourself.

If Bioware simply wnated to show Shepard was affected by the evnts around him, a single or three different nightmares would be more realistic, but when a person has the same nightmare 3 times there are depper underlying reasons and for a person like Shepard who has faced death on an almost daily basis, even harsh death something triggering such nightmares would be no small thing.

That dream IMO represents that even if Shepard thinks he has done enough, when he thinks everyone might be safe, the Reapers might come back and destroy everything that they have in time

[SubAstris]

byne wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Drift Avalii wrote...

@Subastris

I realise that may have been a bit unfair on you,, so let me give you a personal example of the nightmare situation. 

A year ago, my sister killed herself. Now, for someone like me with a very quiet, humble background and no really significant life events bar a brush with appendicitis, that was deeply, deeply traumatic. 

The same week when I went home to help with identification and other things, I discovered an old school friend had been killed in a car crash on the same day. 

I had nightmares for months, and periodically still have them. But I didn't have nightmares about the old school friend who I barely knew any more, I had nightmares about my sister. 

I realise this example is very far from perfect, but I hope it begins to show you why the focus of someone who is traumatised is on the impacting aspect of the trauma itself, not a by-product. In this case if the Reaper attack on Earth had been the trigger as you suggest, by rights Shep should have been having nightmares about the attack. 

I hope that helps your understanding of the point I'm making here. I'm not trying to put you down, simply explain my thoughts on why I believe Shep's dreams are not a natural response to trauma. Particularly the third dream, which is just mental.

I'm sorry for that, and undoubtedly you are right when it comes to the details of PTSD on which I am not very familiar. I am just trying to think about why BW would put the dream in. To me, who doesn't know the ins and outs of psychological damage related to trauma (and I am likely in the very large majority in this regard), Shepard's dreams are an apt of showing that the deaths of his crew members and others are affecting him. I find it more likely that BW is appealing to these people instead of being 100% correct with the scientific facts in this instance.

If they were just taking artistic license with how PTSD works, why put the asari with the correct PTSD symptoms in Huerta Memorial Hospital, clearly indicating they knew how it actually worked?

I haven't really analysed that bit in great detail, will try to look

[byne]

SirLugash wrote...

@byne: Your obious choice for the ending would have been low EMS destroy, am I right ?
Getting rid of Shepard (again), EDI, the Geth and some other individuals using synthetic parts in their bodys.

€dit: Yay, page 900!

Indeed so. But you got the description of low EMS destroy wrong. Lowest EMS destroy literally vaporizes all life on Earth (and on every other planet in the galaxy, assuming the red explosions in the other systems work the same as the explosion in Sol worked.) Not just other people with synthetic body parts.

Low EMS destroy basically works the way destroying the relays should have worked: by killing everyone in the system.

Low EMS destroy is basically wiping the galaxy entirely clean of life. Although it randomly leaves the plants on the planet the Normandy crashes on alive, so maybe it only wipes Sol clean of life. Either way, it was the obvious choice for my 'Kill the maximum amount of people' playthrough.

Modifié par byne, 19 juin 2012 - 03:00 .

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

SubAstris wrote...

That dream IMO represents that even if Shepard thinks he has done enough, when he thinks everyone might be safe, the Reapers might come back and destroy everything that they have in time

You are not even trying anymore, are you? We are only heading towards the final battle with the Reapers, no one is safe before that battle is over and Shepard knows this, there is nothing about them coming back in the future...Shepard is heaidng towards the final battle with the intention of wiping the Reapers out once and for all it is never even considered or brought up that the Reapers might retreat and come back because eveyone is focusing on the war at hand, not the war that might come.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

SubAstris wrote...

byne wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Drift Avalii wrote...

@Subastris

I realise that may have been a bit unfair on you,, so let me give you a personal example of the nightmare situation. 

A year ago, my sister killed herself. Now, for someone like me with a very quiet, humble background and no really significant life events bar a brush with appendicitis, that was deeply, deeply traumatic. 

The same week when I went home to help with identification and other things, I discovered an old school friend had been killed in a car crash on the same day. 

I had nightmares for months, and periodically still have them. But I didn't have nightmares about the old school friend who I barely knew any more, I had nightmares about my sister. 

I realise this example is very far from perfect, but I hope it begins to show you why the focus of someone who is traumatised is on the impacting aspect of the trauma itself, not a by-product. In this case if the Reaper attack on Earth had been the trigger as you suggest, by rights Shep should have been having nightmares about the attack. 

I hope that helps your understanding of the point I'm making here. I'm not trying to put you down, simply explain my thoughts on why I believe Shep's dreams are not a natural response to trauma. Particularly the third dream, which is just mental.

I'm sorry for that, and undoubtedly you are right when it comes to the details of PTSD on which I am not very familiar. I am just trying to think about why BW would put the dream in. To me, who doesn't know the ins and outs of psychological damage related to trauma (and I am likely in the very large majority in this regard), Shepard's dreams are an apt of showing that the deaths of his crew members and others are affecting him. I find it more likely that BW is appealing to these people instead of being 100% correct with the scientific facts in this instance.

If they were just taking artistic license with how PTSD works, why put the asari with the correct PTSD symptoms in Huerta Memorial Hospital, clearly indicating they knew how it actually worked?

I haven't really analysed that bit in great detail, will try to look

On the same level try looking up Kelly chambers, she also displays the correct symptoms to PTSD.

[paxxton]

Only 100 pages and a dragon will eat the world!

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juin 2012 - 03:03 .

[Jonata]

Shepard clearly sees himself as an enemy in the third dream, the one smiling with the kid is some sort of "Evil Shepard". I don't know if that means Indoctrinatio, but surely he sees himself as something dangerous.

[byne]

SubAstris wrote...

byne wrote...

If they were just taking artistic license with how PTSD works, why put the asari with the correct PTSD symptoms in Huerta Memorial Hospital, clearly indicating they knew how it actually worked?

I haven't really analysed that bit in great detail, will try to look

Here's a video of it, if you need a link.

Also: as a bonus, Hillary, the farm girl on Tiptree who wants to be a pilot that the asari is talking about? She's Joker's sister.

[paxxton]

Jonata wrote...

Shepard clearly sees himself as an enemy in the third dream, the one smiling with the kid is some sort of "Evil Shepard". I don't know if that means Indoctrinatio, but surely he sees himself as something dangerous.

If he knows that the child is a liar then yes. But if not then he sees it as a sign that he can trust that child.

[Drift Avalii]

Honestly, Kelly Chambers is maybe a better example - she has flashbacks, relives sensory memories, ruminates and exhibits avoidance. Most symptoms the Asari does not feature, for example the sensory flashbacks or emotional fragility in the form of tears, Kelly does. Equally Kelly does not exhibit hyperarousal, whereas the Asari does.

It seems to me like an attempt to give examples of as much of the spectrum of symptoms as possible.

[D.Sharrah]

First...it looks like there was some good discussion after I went to bed last night...kudos to all involved. That being said, I am not going to try to read the pages I missed to try to catch up. Which means if what I bring up again in this post has been talked to death, I do apologize, And without further ado...

Last night I very briefly mentioned something that was bothering me about one of the things from the "Final Hours" App. It was a statement that suggested that during the final hours of production Bioware made a decision to pull th plug on a game mechanic that they had been working on. Of course I am referring to the idea that they were considering IT all along and they had a game mechanic where we the players would "lose control of Shepard". The app goes onto to say that they pulled the plug on this gameplay mechanic because they (Bioware) were having trouble finding a way to implement this along with their conventional dialogue system.

It would seem on the surface that this is a rather valid observation. And is often used by Anti-IT'ers as "evidence" that IT can't be true. As many have pointed out this is quite silly in its own right, because they are misinterperting what the app says. The app says that the game mechanic was scrapped - and they take that to mean that IT was scrapped. They are extrapolating from the given data to come to a conclusion, that may very well be wrong. And no matter what we say, they don't want to admit that they might be wrong. It could be enough to stop there, but I think this deserves more attention.

Getting back to the game mechanic being scrapped statement, is this true? This point is what I brought up last night - I asked if the confrontation with TIM could be viewed as an in game example of what this mechanic would look like. And the one answer that I saw (and again I apologize if there were more answers later), was maybe. I don't remember exactly who stated it (BatmanTurian?) or what the exact words were, but it was something like, "It was supposed to be Harbinger, but maybe they changed it to TIM". Again, this could be a fair enough point to stop, but if we do then we could miss how it actually fits into how they designed that sequence and the entire game.

First of all, assuming that we are right about IT and that the TIM confrontation is an example of the mechanic in question - then that sequence is about indoctrination. And when interperting what we see from the viewpoint, then TIM is not the one exerting control - but it is the Reapers (most likely Harbinger as the culprit who is doing the indoctrinating). Following IT, then we know what we perceive as TIM's space magic control of Shep - is actually the Reapers twisting Shep's perception in their attempt to indoctrinate him.

But were still not done. The app clearly states that the mechanic was tossed out of the game because Bioware was having trouble figuring out a way to implement the mechanic without compromising the dialogue system. What if rather than tossing out the "lose control" mechanic, they changed the dialogue system so that it would fit better? I know one of the big complaints when the game came out was the rampant use of auto-dialogue. People felt that it took control away from them, didn't give them the choice that they once had (and I don't think that those feelings are wrong). But what if it was done throughout the entire game, so that when we get to this watershed moment - it didn't stick out.

I know that we have tried to interpret all the pre-release clues in different ways - and I am not sure that we have them completely nailed down yet. But is it possible that the "red herring" is the "Final Hours" app? And that we were meant to misinterpret the information presented or take it for granted that it was "truth"...all so that we were thrown off the IT trail?

Sorry for the wall of text (hope that is formatted so it is an easier read). Please read and let me know what you think.

Modifié par D.Sharrah, 19 juin 2012 - 03:26 .

[SubAstris]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

That dream IMO represents that even if Shepard thinks he has done enough, when he thinks everyone might be safe, the Reapers might come back and destroy everything that they have in time

You are not even trying anymore, are you? We are only heading towards the final battle with the Reapers, no one is safe before that battle is over and Shepard knows this, there is nothing about them coming back in the future...Shepard is heaidng towards the final battle with the intention of wiping the Reapers out once and for all it is never even considered or brought up that the Reapers might retreat and come back because eveyone is focusing on the war at hand, not the war that might come.

To be honest we don't know there will definitely be a final battle as sorts that will end the Reaper threat. Yes, we are amassing a fleet to save Earth in which we hope to save Earth and deal significant damage to Reaper forces, but I think it is obvious that that won't be the final battle. The Reapers could regain their strength and then assault Earth again

[byne]

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

That dream IMO represents that even if Shepard thinks he has done enough, when he thinks everyone might be safe, the Reapers might come back and destroy everything that they have in time

You are not even trying anymore, are you? We are only heading towards the final battle with the Reapers, no one is safe before that battle is over and Shepard knows this, there is nothing about them coming back in the future...Shepard is heaidng towards the final battle with the intention of wiping the Reapers out once and for all it is never even considered or brought up that the Reapers might retreat and come back because eveyone is focusing on the war at hand, not the war that might come.

To be honest we don't know there will definitely be a final battle as sorts that will end the Reaper threat. Yes, we are amassing a fleet to save Earth in which we hope to save Earth and deal significant damage to Reaper forces, but I think it is obvious that that won't be the final battle. The Reapers could regain their strength and then assault Earth again

Except we're planning for the Crucible to do whatever it is that it does and stop the Reapers. Everyone knows thats the last battle, one way or another.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

That dream IMO represents that even if Shepard thinks he has done enough, when he thinks everyone might be safe, the Reapers might come back and destroy everything that they have in time

You are not even trying anymore, are you? We are only heading towards the final battle with the Reapers, no one is safe before that battle is over and Shepard knows this, there is nothing about them coming back in the future...Shepard is heaidng towards the final battle with the intention of wiping the Reapers out once and for all it is never even considered or brought up that the Reapers might retreat and come back because eveyone is focusing on the war at hand, not the war that might come.

To be honest we don't know there will definitely be a final battle as sorts that will end the Reaper threat. Yes, we are amassing a fleet to save Earth in which we hope to save Earth and deal significant damage to Reaper forces, but I think it is obvious that that won't be the final battle. The Reapers could regain their strength and then assault Earth again

Lets see.

Majority of reaper forces gathered at Earth (according to Vendetta, which while we It distrust part of what it says should be perfectly fine for your Anti-IT) and we have gathered a fleet consisting of just about every single battle ready ship in the galaxy and is bringing it too Earth.

We win, majority of the Reapers are destroyed and considering their reproduction method it is safebet they wont get back to battle ready strength any time soon, we lose, no fleets left in the galaxy to oppose the reapers in any serius way.

So yes, the battle at Earth is the battle which decides the fate of the galaxy in every way.

Modifié par Raistlin Majare 1992, 19 juin 2012 - 03:16 .

[HellishFiend]

byne wrote...

Except we're planning for the Crucible to do whatever it is that it does and stop the Reapers. Everyone knows thats the last battle, one way or another.

Not necessarily... We know that ME3 is the end of Shepard's story, one way or the other. But we dont know for sure if ME3 is the end of the Reaper threat, much less that the use of the Crucible will be the final battle. 

[paxxton]

byne wrote...

Here's a video of it, if you need a link.

Also: as a bonus, Hillary, the farm girl on Tiptree who wants to be a pilot that the asari is talking about? She's Joker's sister.

I listened to that story. Horrifying. Why this mission wasn't in the game? Huh?  

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juin 2012 - 03:20 .

[D.Sharrah]

SubAstris wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

That dream IMO represents that even if Shepard thinks he has done enough, when he thinks everyone might be safe, the Reapers might come back and destroy everything that they have in time

You are not even trying anymore, are you? We are only heading towards the final battle with the Reapers, no one is safe before that battle is over and Shepard knows this, there is nothing about them coming back in the future...Shepard is heaidng towards the final battle with the intention of wiping the Reapers out once and for all it is never even considered or brought up that the Reapers might retreat and come back because eveyone is focusing on the war at hand, not the war that might come.

To be honest we don't know there will definitely be a final battle as sorts that will end the Reaper threat. Yes, we are amassing a fleet to save Earth in which we hope to save Earth and deal significant damage to Reaper forces, but I think it is obvious that that won't be the final battle. The Reapers could regain their strength and then assault Earth again

The horse is dead already...why don't you just agree to disagree.

[byne]

HellishFiend wrote...

byne wrote...

Except we're planning for the Crucible to do whatever it is that it does and stop the Reapers. Everyone knows thats the last battle, one way or another.

Not necessarily... We know that ME3 is the end of Shepard's story, one way or the other. But we dont know for sure if ME3 is the end of the Reaper threat, much less that the use of the Crucible will be the final battle. 

I was talking more from the perspective of the characters in the game, not from the perspective of the players.

[T41rdEye]

Good post D.Sharrah!

[D.Sharrah]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

Here's a video of it, if you need a link.

Also: as a bonus, Hillary, the farm girl on Tiptree who wants to be a pilot that the asari is talking about? She's Joker's sister.

I listened to that story. Horrifying. Why this mission wasn't in the game? Huh!

Not only is it horrifying, but once I connected the dots and realized that it was Joker's sister (and subsequently the rest of his family...they seem to get forgotten), those wave of emotions break on your psyche once again.  Grief for Joker, guilt b/c I didn't do anythign to stop it, anger at the Reapers, etc...

[EpyonX3]

paxxton wrote...

Only 100 pages and a dragon will eat the world!

This sounds familiar. Can't put my finger on it.

[HellishFiend]

byne wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

byne wrote...

Except we're planning for the Crucible to do whatever it is that it does and stop the Reapers. Everyone knows thats the last battle, one way or another.

Not necessarily... We know that ME3 is the end of Shepard's story, one way or the other. But we dont know for sure if ME3 is the end of the Reaper threat, much less that the use of the Crucible will be the final battle. 

I was talking more from the perspective of the characters in the game, not from the perspective of the players.

Gotcha. 

[D.Sharrah]

Me1mN0t wrote...

Good post D.Sharrah!

Thanks!  So what do you think?