446 réponses à ce sujet

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Valentia X wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

There's plenty of concrete on the Citadel in the warehouse area, where you do Garrus's loyalty mission in Mass Effect 2, and getting blown into the warehouse district works just as easily as anything else. And BioWare already stated, I believe, that there are kinetic barriers that went up in the Citadel (it was something to do that went along with 'plot-relevant npcs in the Citadel are still alive). That would easily allow Shepard to survive.

And BioWare reuses assets all the time. Look at Dragon Age 2. <_<

Except the concrete cannot have been reused since the Breath scene is prerendered.

Also that warehouse was on the wards, Shepard is on the underside of the presidium tower.

Those kintetic barriers you talk about are barriers used to prevent air from escaping in case of a breach or hole. It is what keeps Shepard and co alive when Sovreigns leg pierces the Presiduim tower in ME1.

But such barriers are not present everywhere (Shepard tells his crew to suit up before heading out onto the Citadel tower and air is seen escaping the elevator as he blows it open).

Whatever the case a kinteic barrier does not stop heat and the heat from the explosion would alone vaporize Shepard.

[balance5050]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

Some of the rubble matches the facade elements of some of the London buildings as well, and you can see the shelving units from building interiors in that scene.  

Some use the Citadel can seal itself into compartments upon damage.  However, Shepard was directly next to the Crucible contact point, and would not have survived.

My question to the anti-crowd is: what the **** does it matter what other people think/believe?  It's not affecting you, or at least shouldn't be.  Disagreeing is one thing, but being hateful is just absurd and problematic.

Have you not seen the IT supporters who insult non-IT supporters?

I don't like IT, I think it's dumb, therefore, I am too stupid to understand the amazingness of the truths and facts and must have it shoved down my throat every time I say something against it, whether it's hateful or not.


Both sides are douchefaces.

The important thing is you've found a way to feel superior to both of them.

[Raiil]

balance5050 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

There's plenty of concrete on the Citadel in the warehouse area, where you do Garrus's loyalty mission in Mass Effect 2, and getting blown into the warehouse district works just as easily as anything else. And BioWare already stated, I believe, that there are kinetic barriers that went up in the Citadel (it was something to do that went along with 'plot-relevant npcs in the Citadel are still alive). That would easily allow Shepard to survive.

And BioWare reuses assets all the time. Look at Dragon Age 2. <_<

He was miles from the wing and the kinetic barriers would zap him if he did fall all the way over there.

The dragon age team is a completely different team than the ME team.

Because a giant blast couldn't blow him through walls into another part of the Citadel? Shepard survives the most ridiculous crap throughout the game, up to and including being killed in space. I don't see how being revived after dying and being 'meat and tubes' is any less plausible, but we all rolled with it.

And they re-use models in Mass Effect all the time, unless you'd like to bring proof that every turian, salarian, elcor, volus, and female human and asari body are uniquely rendered to each individual in game. Hell, they reused assets for the multiplayer DLC, and reskinned different armours and dresses with a variety of colours.

[ArkkAngel007]

Lizardviking wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...
But why was such plotholes not present on Tuchanka and Rannoch? because they ran out of time? A game is not made chronolgically.

Didn't the final hour app mention that they were struggling with making the ending as late as November?

And there is already poor writing in other areas of ME3. Such as Cerberus in the time span of 6 months becoming an empire, Shepard getting away with killing 300.0000 Batarians with no punishment.

They explained Shepard's "amnesty" of that incident.

And the Cerberus being an empire is hyperbole.  The only significant operation they launched on a large scale was the Citadel, and Shepard even says in an interview that Cerberus put their all into it and are no longer a significant threat due to the losses they sustained.  If it weren't for their subterfuge of CSEC, Cerberus wouldn't have even gotten within the arms of the Citadel.  Everything else were isolated operations. 

[Seboist]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

Some of the rubble matches the facade elements of some of the London buildings as well, and you can see the shelving units from building interiors in that scene.  

Some use the Citadel can seal itself into compartments upon damage.  However, Shepard was directly next to the Crucible contact point, and would not have survived.

My question to the anti-crowd is: what the **** does it matter what other people think/believe?  It's not affecting you, or at least shouldn't be.  Disagreeing is one thing, but being hateful is just absurd and problematic.

It's just comical watching these fanboys' grasp on reality slip further and further away. Essentially the whole premise of IT is that ME3 is a masterfully crafted piece of story telling and most people are just too dumb to grasp the brilliant subtely of Shepard being indoctrinated when anyone with sense would tell you that the endings are the end-result of an already ill-concieved crucible plot that's the cherry on the sundae of an uncohesive mess of a trilogy of semi-reboots.

It's fanboy denial of reality at it's finest and now the gaming world can say that it has the equivalent of 9/11 truther nutjobs.

[FatalX7.0]

balance5050 wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

Some of the rubble matches the facade elements of some of the London buildings as well, and you can see the shelving units from building interiors in that scene.  

Some use the Citadel can seal itself into compartments upon damage.  However, Shepard was directly next to the Crucible contact point, and would not have survived.

My question to the anti-crowd is: what the **** does it matter what other people think/believe?  It's not affecting you, or at least shouldn't be.  Disagreeing is one thing, but being hateful is just absurd and problematic.

Have you not seen the IT supporters who insult non-IT supporters?

I don't like IT, I think it's dumb, therefore, I am too stupid to understand the amazingness of the truths and facts and must have it shoved down my throat every time I say something against it, whether it's hateful or not.


Both sides are douchefaces.

The important thing is you've found a way to feel superior to both of them.

You know that I'm on a side too, right? The side that doesn't like IT, anti-IT or whatever you people have come up with.

I just insulted myself.

[BatmanTurian]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

Some of the rubble matches the facade elements of some of the London buildings as well, and you can see the shelving units from building interiors in that scene.  

Some use the Citadel can seal itself into compartments upon damage.  However, Shepard was directly next to the Crucible contact point, and would not have survived.

My question to the anti-crowd is: what the **** does it matter what other people think/believe?  It's not affecting you, or at least shouldn't be.  Disagreeing is one thing, but being hateful is just absurd and problematic.

Have you not seen the IT supporters who insult non-IT supporters?

I don't like IT, I think it's dumb, therefore, I am too stupid to understand the amazingness of the truths and facts and must have it shoved down my throat every time I say something against it, whether it's hateful or not.


Both sides are douchefaces.

agreed. The insults and general douchiness needs to stop. There is no reason to disrespect people for having an equally valid interpretation of a story. So I support the Literal interpretation and the IT interpretation as equally valid. There are just a lot of inconsistancies that make it hard to pin down one or the other.

[jla0644]

BatmanTurian wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Sigh... you said "all those suggestions, hints, and clues can just as easily lead you somewhere else other than indoctrination."  and I'm asking "WHERE ELSE?"

Guns change from scene to scene yes... but NEVER in the middle of a scene, the gun assets were specifically loaded in the files under the destroy ending. It was intentional.

Almost every part of the end is asset reuse because the environment is being reconstructed from your memories. Legion tells you why machines do this in the Geth consensus mission.

Lol really? It leads to the ending that we got, not a speulative piece of fan fiction.

So if it was intentional, what does it mean? What's the signifigance of the gun changing?

IT is a literary interpretation not fan fiction. Know the meanings of terms before you use them.

lol @ literary interpretation

Yes, I had a discussion with someone like you last night. a literary interpretation is examining a story, it's plot, characters, scenes etc. for meaning and metaphor. It's similar to how some interpret art. Fan fiction is writing stories within another person's copyrighted universe such as www.fanfiction.net. If you don't know the difference, don't use the term.

I know what the terms mean, and I chose my words deliberately. When "examining a story, it's [sic] plot, characters, scenes etc. for meaning and metaphor" gets as silly as the indoctrination theory is, I think fan fiction is a better description than literary interpretation.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

Some of the rubble matches the facade elements of some of the London buildings as well, and you can see the shelving units from building interiors in that scene.  

Some use the Citadel can seal itself into compartments upon damage.  However, Shepard was directly next to the Crucible contact point, and would not have survived.

My question to the anti-crowd is: what the **** does it matter what other people think/believe?  It's not affecting you, or at least shouldn't be.  Disagreeing is one thing, but being hateful is just absurd and problematic.

Have you not seen the IT supporters who insult non-IT supporters?

I don't like IT, I think it's dumb, therefore, I am too stupid to understand the amazingness of the truths and facts and must have it shoved down my throat every time I say something against it, whether it's hateful or not.


Both sides are douchefaces.

Yes there are idiots on both sides in this argument, I wont deny that...

Modifié par Raistlin Majare 1992, 18 mai 2012 - 05:31 .

[Tirian Thorn]

jla0644 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Sigh... you said "all those suggestions, hints, and clues can just as easily lead you somewhere else other than indoctrination."  and I'm asking "WHERE ELSE?"

Guns change from scene to scene yes... but NEVER in the middle of a scene, the gun assets were specifically loaded in the files under the destroy ending. It was intentional.

Almost every part of the end is asset reuse because the environment is being reconstructed from your memories. Legion tells you why machines do this in the Geth consensus mission.

Lol really? It leads to the ending that we got, not a speulative piece of fan fiction.

So if it was intentional, what does it mean? What's the signifigance of the gun changing?

Noo.. the hints are actually pointing away from the endings we got.... Like the kill beam starting in the viper system (The Arrival) and the asset reuse meant to remind you of other part of the game, direct contradictions by the catalyst, etc.

The Predetor is considered Shepards default pistol unless he is doing a more renegade or scumbag action. The gun changes from a carnifex, typically used by bad guys, and the it changes to the good guy predetor once for the final shot in the destroy option. 

Because that's how you choose to see it.  Fine. I don't.

I think you guys are reading way too much into things that simply don't matter. I think the endings really are as bad as they see. I think it's filled with plot holes and Bioware didn't think we would care. Why is your interpretaion more valid than mine?

You interpretation is just as valid as any other.  I just happen to believe the evidence is in favor of IT. 

Heck, right now, with how vague BW is being, the Space Hampster could be the real mastermind behind the Reapers.   

[BatmanTurian]

Seboist wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

Some of the rubble matches the facade elements of some of the London buildings as well, and you can see the shelving units from building interiors in that scene.  

Some use the Citadel can seal itself into compartments upon damage.  However, Shepard was directly next to the Crucible contact point, and would not have survived.

My question to the anti-crowd is: what the **** does it matter what other people think/believe?  It's not affecting you, or at least shouldn't be.  Disagreeing is one thing, but being hateful is just absurd and problematic.

It's just comical watching these fanboys' grasp on reality slip further and further away. Essentially the whole premise of IT is that ME3 is a masterfully crafted piece of story telling and most people are just too dumb to grasp the brilliant subtely of Shepard being indoctrinated when anyone with sense would tell you that the endings are the end-result of an already ill-concieved crucible plot that's the cherry on the sundae of an uncohesive mess of a trilogy of semi-reboots.

It's fanboy denial of reality at it's finest and now the gaming world can say that it has the equivalent of 9/11 truther nutjobs.

" hey guys, stop discussing things on a discussion forum. We're not supposed to speculate about the endings."

[GreenDragon37]

All I see is "buy our downloadable content, plx!" So, this is how ME3 ends? Not with a band, but a wimper... and a desperate cry for people to buy more DLC. Disgusting.

[FatalX7.0]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

All I see is "buy our downloadable content, plx!" So, this is how ME3 ends? Not with a band, but a wimper... and a desperate cry for people to buy more DLC. Disgusting.

EA would like 1 dollar to reload your clip in Battlefield 3.

[balance5050]

Valentia X wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

There's plenty of concrete on the Citadel in the warehouse area, where you do Garrus's loyalty mission in Mass Effect 2, and getting blown into the warehouse district works just as easily as anything else. And BioWare already stated, I believe, that there are kinetic barriers that went up in the Citadel (it was something to do that went along with 'plot-relevant npcs in the Citadel are still alive). That would easily allow Shepard to survive.

And BioWare reuses assets all the time. Look at Dragon Age 2. <_<

He was miles from the wing and the kinetic barriers would zap him if he did fall all the way over there.

The dragon age team is a completely different team than the ME team.

Because a giant blast couldn't blow him through walls into another part of the Citadel? Shepard survives the most ridiculous crap throughout the game, up to and including being killed in space. I don't see how being revived after dying and being 'meat and tubes' is any less plausible, but we all rolled with it.

And they re-use models in Mass Effect all the time, unless you'd like to bring proof that every turian, salarian, elcor, volus, and female human and asari body are uniquely rendered to each individual in game. Hell, they reused assets for the multiplayer DLC, and reskinned different armours and dresses with a variety of colours.

Through walls? Don't you remember where he was standing?

 

[BatmanTurian]

jla0644 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Sigh... you said "all those suggestions, hints, and clues can just as easily lead you somewhere else other than indoctrination."  and I'm asking "WHERE ELSE?"

Guns change from scene to scene yes... but NEVER in the middle of a scene, the gun assets were specifically loaded in the files under the destroy ending. It was intentional.

Almost every part of the end is asset reuse because the environment is being reconstructed from your memories. Legion tells you why machines do this in the Geth consensus mission.

Lol really? It leads to the ending that we got, not a speulative piece of fan fiction.

So if it was intentional, what does it mean? What's the signifigance of the gun changing?

IT is a literary interpretation not fan fiction. Know the meanings of terms before you use them.

lol @ literary interpretation

Yes, I had a discussion with someone like you last night. a literary interpretation is examining a story, it's plot, characters, scenes etc. for meaning and metaphor. It's similar to how some interpret art. Fan fiction is writing stories within another person's copyrighted universe such as www.fanfiction.net. If you don't know the difference, don't use the term.

I know what the terms mean, and I chose my words deliberately. When "examining a story, it's [sic] plot, characters, scenes etc. for meaning and metaphor" gets as silly as the indoctrination theory is, I think fan fiction is a better description than literary interpretation.

Then you are wrong, because that's exactly what Indoctrination Theory does. Fan Fiction does not even apply. You use that false term to impugn it's viability and commit a logical fallacy.

[PsyrenY]

IsaacShep wrote...


He ended the Reaper threat in every ending. He didn't "fail" any test in a dream/hallucination. It's done, already happened. He wins in every ending = every ending happened. Sorry IT

Shhh!! Wake not the dreamers

[ArkkAngel007]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

Some of the rubble matches the facade elements of some of the London buildings as well, and you can see the shelving units from building interiors in that scene.  

Some use the Citadel can seal itself into compartments upon damage.  However, Shepard was directly next to the Crucible contact point, and would not have survived.

My question to the anti-crowd is: what the **** does it matter what other people think/believe?  It's not affecting you, or at least shouldn't be.  Disagreeing is one thing, but being hateful is just absurd and problematic.

Have you not seen the IT supporters who insult non-IT supporters?

I don't like IT, I think it's dumb, therefore, I am too stupid to understand the amazingness of the truths and facts and must have it shoved down my throat every time I say something against it, whether it's hateful or not.


Both sides are douchefaces.

That's a very small portion in comparison however, and most tend to be retalitory or are jerk reactions because of the constant heat.   The majority keep to themselves or try to lend a discussion to it rather than being "OMG LOOK WHAT I FOUND, IT IS THE TRUTHSSSS" (Yes, we've all seen those threads *shudders*).

I don't agree with the nutters, but it isn't an excuse to go around being an ***hole like a lot of people on here are.

[balance5050]

jla0644 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Sigh... you said "all those suggestions, hints, and clues can just as easily lead you somewhere else other than indoctrination."  and I'm asking "WHERE ELSE?"

Guns change from scene to scene yes... but NEVER in the middle of a scene, the gun assets were specifically loaded in the files under the destroy ending. It was intentional.

Almost every part of the end is asset reuse because the environment is being reconstructed from your memories. Legion tells you why machines do this in the Geth consensus mission.

Lol really? It leads to the ending that we got, not a speulative piece of fan fiction.

So if it was intentional, what does it mean? What's the signifigance of the gun changing?

IT is a literary interpretation not fan fiction. Know the meanings of terms before you use them.

lol @ literary interpretation

Yes, I had a discussion with someone like you last night. a literary interpretation is examining a story, it's plot, characters, scenes etc. for meaning and metaphor. It's similar to how some interpret art. Fan fiction is writing stories within another person's copyrighted universe such as www.fanfiction.net. If you don't know the difference, don't use the term.

I know what the terms mean, and I chose my words deliberately. When "examining a story, it's [sic] plot, characters, scenes etc. for meaning and metaphor" gets as silly as the indoctrination theory is, I think fan fiction is a better description than literary interpretation.

Then you are purposefully being ignorant to the meaning of those words.

[Seboist]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...
But why was such plotholes not present on Tuchanka and Rannoch? because they ran out of time? A game is not made chronolgically.

Didn't the final hour app mention that they were struggling with making the ending as late as November?

And there is already poor writing in other areas of ME3. Such as Cerberus in the time span of 6 months becoming an empire, Shepard getting away with killing 300.0000 Batarians with no punishment.

They explained Shepard's "amnesty" of that incident.

And the Cerberus being an empire is hyperbole.  The only significant operation they launched on a large scale was the Citadel, and Shepard even says in an interview that Cerberus put their all into it and are no longer a significant threat due to the losses they sustained.  If it weren't for their subterfuge of CSEC, Cerberus wouldn't have even gotten within the arms of the Citadel.  Everything else were isolated operations.

You wish it was a hyberbole fanboy. A small organization of 150 that was financially setback by Lazarus/SR-2 and severely crippled in Retribution coming out with fleets of battlecruisers, mechs, gunships and supersoldiers that's capable on launching attacks all over the galaxy and even raiding the freaking Salarian homeworld while the most important VIPs are present is by definition a galactic power.

The whole citadel "coup" was completely moronic and nonsensical. Cerberus is capable of taking on several hundred thousand c-sec personnel that are mostly Turian and not to mention there's a whole citadel defense force in orbit around the damn station.

This is not taking into account that the whole objective of the "coup" is also completely moronic. Cerberus and Udina expect the citadel races to just lockstep behind them because they took out the council? Just freaking.... LOL.

And you people wonder why others don't take the notion that the only thing wrong about this game is the endings seriously.

[llbountyhunter]

Valentia X wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

There's plenty of concrete on the Citadel in the warehouse area, where you do Garrus's loyalty mission in Mass Effect 2, and getting blown into the warehouse district works just as easily as anything else. And BioWare already stated, I believe, that there are kinetic barriers that went up in the Citadel (it was something to do that went along with 'plot-relevant npcs in the Citadel are still alive). That would easily allow Shepard to survive.

And BioWare reuses assets all the time. Look at Dragon Age 2. <_<

He was miles from the wing and the kinetic barriers would zap him if he did fall all the way over there.

The dragon age team is a completely different team than the ME team.

Because a giant blast couldn't blow him through walls into another part of the Citadel? Shepard survives the most ridiculous crap throughout the game, up to and including being killed in space. I don't see how being revived after dying and being 'meat and tubes' is any less plausible, but we all rolled with it.

And they re-use models in Mass Effect all the time, unless you'd like to bring proof that every turian, salarian, elcor, volus, and female human and asari body are uniquely rendered to each individual in game. Hell, they reused assets for the multiplayer DLC, and reskinned different armours and dresses with a variety of colours.

shepard died in me2.... the revival was plausible because he had his full armor, helmet, and kinetic barriers. not to mention that the planet he landed on was both lighter and had a thinner atmosphere than earth. the revival itself is not so far fetched considering the advances in science today, however his body needed to be intact for it to work (thanks to his armor)

in me3 shepard has no armor, no helmet, no barriers. he must first suvive a medium explosion around the size of a grenade, then a much lager nuke-sized explosion.... THEN a re-entry on a larger planet WITHOUT shields or a helmet.



so no, I dont think shepard has survived anything quite like it before.

[jla0644]

llbountyhunter wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Sigh... you said "all those suggestions, hints, and clues can just as easily lead you somewhere else other than indoctrination."  and I'm asking "WHERE ELSE?"

Guns change from scene to scene yes... but NEVER in the middle of a scene, the gun assets were specifically loaded in the files under the destroy ending. It was intentional.

Almost every part of the end is asset reuse because the environment is being reconstructed from your memories. Legion tells you why machines do this in the Geth consensus mission.

Lol really? It leads to the ending that we got, not a speulative piece of fan fiction.

So if it was intentional, what does it mean? What's the signifigance of the gun changing?

Noo.. the hints are actually pointing away from the endings we got.... Like the kill beam starting in the viper system (The Arrival) and the asset reuse meant to remind you of other part of the game, direct contradictions by the catalyst, etc.

The Predetor is considered Shepards default pistol unless he is doing a more renegade or scumbag action. The gun changes from a carnifex, typically used by bad guys, and the it changes to the good guy predetor once for the final shot in the destroy option. 

Because that's how you choose to see it.  Fine. I don't.

I think you guys are reading way too much into things that simply don't matter. I think the endings really are as bad as they see. I think it's filled with plot holes and Bioware didn't think we would care. Why is your interpretaion more valid than mine?

much better.

and were not saying IT is true- just that its a plausible theory. the evidence favors IT.

Yes, many of you are are saying that.

And no, it does not. You think it does, and that's fine. But you thinking that doesn't make it true. I have no problem with you guys believing whatever you want. I suspect that many of you will continue to believe it even when the EC comes out and shows nothing to support your theory. But quit telling me that your theory is the only way to explain things, that the evidence is overwhelming and cannot be disputed, because it's not.

[Raiil]

Red, green, yellow doesn't exactly explain anything. Shepard could ported up into the Citadel in what looked like the Presidium or thereabouts, made his way to the Illusive Man, and then got eaten by the Elevator Boss and burped to a new area in the Citadel. Or is the assumption that the elevator takes you directly into the Catalyst proper? If that's the case, then I missed something, because God Child is obviously a projection of some sort and doesn't have to be in the physical Catalyst unless there is a parameter I missed.

[Raiil]

llbountyhunter wrote...


shepard died in me2.... the revival was plausible because he had his full armor, helmet, and kinetic barriers. not to mention that the planet he landed on was both lighter and had a thinner atmosphere than earth. the revival itself is not so far fetched considering the advances in science today, however his body needed to be intact for it to work (thanks to his armor)

in me3 shepard has no armor, no helmet, no barriers. he must first suvive a medium explosion around the size of a grenade, then a much lager nuke-sized explosion.... THEN a re-entry on a larger planet WITHOUT shields or a helmet.



so no, I dont think shepard has survived anything quite like it before.

And the problem with your statement- again- is that he's on Earth.

[BatmanTurian]

Valentia X wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Why does Shepard have to be back in London?

The rubble sourounding Shepard in the breath scene following Destroy is quite clearly concrete a material which is almost completely absent on the Citadel. But if that is not enough the lines ins aid concrete has been directly compared with concrete from london and they match perfectly.

Also if Shepard was still on the Citadel following the explosion there he would mos likely be breathing vacuum.

There's plenty of concrete on the Citadel in the warehouse area, where you do Garrus's loyalty mission in Mass Effect 2, and getting blown into the warehouse district works just as easily as anything else. And BioWare already stated, I believe, that there are kinetic barriers that went up in the Citadel (it was something to do that went along with 'plot-relevant npcs in the Citadel are still alive). That would easily allow Shepard to survive.

And BioWare reuses assets all the time. Look at Dragon Age 2. <_<

He was miles from the wing and the kinetic barriers would zap him if he did fall all the way over there.

The dragon age team is a completely different team than the ME team.

Because a giant blast couldn't blow him through walls into another part of the Citadel? Shepard survives the most ridiculous crap throughout the game, up to and including being killed in space. I don't see how being revived after dying and being 'meat and tubes' is any less plausible, but we all rolled with it.

And they re-use models in Mass Effect all the time, unless you'd like to bring proof that every turian, salarian, elcor, volus, and female human and asari body are uniquely rendered to each individual in game. Hell, they reused assets for the multiplayer DLC, and reskinned different armours and dresses with a variety of colours.

, no a giant blast megatons in magnitude would not blast Shepard through walls, it would incinerate and vaporize him. Also, Shepard did not survive being killed in space. That's why he had to be brought back to life by the Lazerus Project. That's just rediculous. The whole premise of ME2's beginning is that we owe something to the Illusive man for bringing Shepard back to life and it took two years, implants, and the very best scientists to do so and Shepard was the only subject.

So no, Shepard did not survive re-entry. Shepard was decapitated and all that was left was his torso, limbs, and head flung everywhere, his brain intact only because of his helmet.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 18 mai 2012 - 05:39 .

[llbountyhunter]

Seboist wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...
But why was such plotholes not present on Tuchanka and Rannoch? because they ran out of time? A game is not made chronolgically.

Didn't the final hour app mention that they were struggling with making the ending as late as November?

And there is already poor writing in other areas of ME3. Such as Cerberus in the time span of 6 months becoming an empire, Shepard getting away with killing 300.0000 Batarians with no punishment.

They explained Shepard's "amnesty" of that incident.

And the Cerberus being an empire is hyperbole.  The only significant operation they launched on a large scale was the Citadel, and Shepard even says in an interview that Cerberus put their all into it and are no longer a significant threat due to the losses they sustained.  If it weren't for their subterfuge of CSEC, Cerberus wouldn't have even gotten within the arms of the Citadel.  Everything else were isolated operations.

You wish it was a hyberbole fanboy. A small organization of 150 that was financially setback by Lazarus/SR-2 and severely crippled in Retribution coming out with fleets of battlecruisers, mechs, gunships and supersoldiers that's capable on launching attacks all over the galaxy and even raiding the freaking Salarian homeworld while the most important VIPs are present is by definition a galactic power.

The whole citadel "coup" was completely moronic and nonsensical. Cerberus is capable of taking on several hundred thousand c-sec personnel that are mostly Turian and not to mention there's a whole citadel defense force in orbit around the damn station.

This is not taking into account that the whole objective of the "coup" is also completely moronic. Cerberus and Udina expect the citadel races to just lockstep behind them because they took out the council? Just freaking.... LOL.

And you people wonder why others don't take the notion that the only thing wrong about this game is the endings seriously.

actually the real reason for taking the citadel was never answered. 

probably in the ending?