242 réponses à ce sujet

[balance5050]

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

It's head canon, you may think you flew them into the sun, other people rebuild the relays, some want to police the galaxy. It just doesn't ACTUALLY show any of that.

It DOES however, show that you wake up back on Earth if you have high EMS and choose destroy.

That argument can apply to everything. Theoretically, canon stops at the end of ME3, and nothing happens after that. We can only go off what the game tells us. The game tells us we can control the Reapers. That means I can throw them into a sun, that means I can rule the galaxy with them.

Perhaps Shepard dies straight after that breath.

Perhaps control allows you to control the Reapers.

I really hate having this vague ending. It literally makes it impossible to debate these things because NOTHING is concrete. We can only spring from what is shown.

Actually some things are concrete.... the rubble around Shepard when you get the Shepard alive scene, this scene requires more EMS then the other endings, making it the hardest to attain.

Modifié par balance5050, 26 mai 2012 - 05:38 .

[davishepard]

balance5050 wrote...

Good for you? I don't think any man should be in charge of that kind of power.

What about wipeing billions of people (from many species in many ways), destroying the only specimen of a extinct race (by the time), brainwashing or killing a bunch of Geth, you name, Shepard can do every kind of atrocity and get the weight of the Galaxy worst decisions on his shoulders, but can't possibly control the Reapers for the greater good?

I say there's no one besides Shepard in the whole Galaxy that should be in charge of that kind of power.

[Micah3sixty]

dreamgazer wrote...

Micah3sixty wrote...

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

I can't believe this thread is for real...

Me neither.  IT has nearly become a religion to itself, with only faith as a means to believe in it.

And people wonder where the anger comes from. 

Good point!  It's too painful for them to accept the facts that disprove their belief, which invokes cognitive dissonance, and in turn creates defensive anger.  

[Jamie9]

balance5050 wrote...

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.1909/ 

Ah. It's in the majority. Therefore it is not based upon faith. Never mind.

Do note that I voted yes in that thread. I don't believe BioWare intended IT. But it would be a better ending than what we have now. So I voted yes. Looking through the comments, many people agree with my sentiment.

[davishepard]

balance5050 wrote...

davishepard wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

It's head canon, you may think you flew them into the sun, other people rebuild the relays, some want to police the galaxy. It just doesn't ACTUALLY show any of that.

It DOES however, show that you wake up back on Earth if you have high EMS and choose destroy.

This only points out the fact that Shepard doesn't have a body to wake up back by choosing Control or Synthesis, by obvious reasons.

No, it was meant for much more than that sir.

 

Please, make a red circle where it  can be read "dream sequence" or "indocrination".
Thanks.

Modifié par davishepard, 26 mai 2012 - 05:41 .

[balance5050]

davishepard wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Good for you? I don't think any man should be in charge of that kind of power.

What about wipeing billions of people (from many species in many ways), destroying the only specimen of a extinct race (by the time), brainwashing or killing a bunch of Geth, you name, Shepard can do every kind of atrocity and get the weight of the Galaxy worst decisions on his shoulders, but can't possibly control the Reapers for the greater good?

I say there's no one besides Shepard in the whole Galaxy that should be in charge of that kind of power.

What the hell? How the f*** did you kill billions of people? That's the reapers' job buddy!!

[Jamie9]

balance5050 wrote...

Actually some things are concrete.... the rubble around Shepard when you get the Shepard alive scene, this scene requires more EMS then the other endings, making it the hardest to attain.

I have to compliment you on the pun.

We don't know if the rubble is on the Citadel or the Earth though. More speculations. Hardest to attain does not equal best moral decision. It means you get to live, at the cost of all AI.

[dreman9999]

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.1909/ 

Ah. It's in the majority. Therefore it is not based upon faith. Never mind.

Do note that I voted yes in that thread. I don't believe BioWare intended IT. But it would be a better ending than what we have now. So I voted yes. Looking through the comments, many people agree with my sentiment.

Did you miss the fact a BW emloyee is asking the question?

[Micah3sixty]

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.1909/ 

Ah. It's in the majority. Therefore it is not based upon faith. Never mind.

Do note that I voted yes in that thread. I don't believe BioWare intended IT. But it would be a better ending than what we have now. So I voted yes. Looking through the comments, many people agree with my sentiment.

Maybe the majority of that site, which has the sole purpose of a retcon of the ending cause they failed to grasp what was presented and didn't like any of the results, not that I blame them.  We were given a mostly ambiguous display that only differed in explosion color and reaper reaction.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Shepard Wins wrote...


I'm not trying to promote "avoid Reaper tech at all times" attitude.Thing is, it's dangerous and has to be handled with caution.

1) Ah yes, but Sovereign was dead when it was salvaged. Dead, as in DESTROYed. See how that works?
2) It was a Prothean designed Mass Relay, Relay technology doesn't indoctrinate so it was safer
3) - the IFF was a necessary evil there, you're confusing the end with the means;
4) EDI isn't defined by the fact that she was created using Reaper Tech; the game is kinda vague on that one
5) Whoa, have you paid attention to Arrival? Stopping the Reapers (the Project) was about sending an asteroid into a Relay, and Object Rho would have stopped that from happening, had it not been for Shepard's intervention. So no, Object Rho is not good.

1.) Derelict Reaper from ME2 was dead too. It's no less a risk.

2.) We used their technology against them. Creating a mass-relay modeled after their creation, rewriting the keepers, foiling their back-door trap which was the Citadel.

3.) Sometimes the ends do justify the means. In the IFF's case that can be said confidently and unequivocally.

4.) No Reaper-tech, no EDI. No EDI, ME2 and ME3 = problematic, maybe impossible.

5.) Yes, and the Project never takes place if not for the discovery of Object Rho. The loss of an Alliance team is nothing compared to the Reapers entering and spreading throughout the galaxy quickly through the Alpha Relay.

[davishepard]

balance5050 wrote...

What the hell? How the f*** did you kill billions of people? That's the reapers' job buddy!!

It was a example. As you know, you kill a lot of enemies in the three games. "People". Add to it the people that can die because of you choices - the 17 million Quarians, to mention an example - and you will reach a high number of kills, even higher if you count all the souls that a full Renegade can send to hell.

Modifié par davishepard, 26 mai 2012 - 05:44 .

[Soultaker08]

balance5050 wrote...

Micah3sixty wrote...

AlexiusDAlex wrote...

I can't believe this thread is for real...

Me neither.  IT has nearly become a religion to itself, with only faith as a means to believe in it.

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.1909/ 

[Shepard Wins]

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Actually some things are concrete.... the rubble around Shepard when you get the Shepard alive scene, this scene requires more EMS then the other endings, making it the hardest to attain.

I have to compliment you on the pun.

We don't know if the rubble is on the Citadel or the Earth though. More speculations. Hardest to attain does not equal best moral decision. It means you get to live, at the cost of all AI.

If you believe the Catalyst... who also said you'd die as well. You don't.

[balance5050]

davishepard wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

davishepard wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

It's head canon, you may think you flew them into the sun, other people rebuild the relays, some want to police the galaxy. It just doesn't ACTUALLY show any of that.

It DOES however, show that you wake up back on Earth if you have high EMS and choose destroy.

This only points out the fact that Shepard doesn't have a body to wake up back by choosing Control or Synthesis, by obvious reasons.

No, it was meant for much more than that sir.

 

Please, make a red circle where I can read "dream sequence" or "indocrination".
Thanks.

Sigh.... never said it did, just saying that this scene has more implications than you were inclined to think.

However, "the end of the first matrix" is quite telling no? The whole "dying, and then waking up again, able to see through the facade of the matrix" (just replace matrix with indoctrination)

 

Modifié par balance5050, 26 mai 2012 - 05:48 .

[dreman9999]

Micah3sixty wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.1909/ 

Ah. It's in the majority. Therefore it is not based upon faith. Never mind.

Do note that I voted yes in that thread. I don't believe BioWare intended IT. But it would be a better ending than what we have now. So I voted yes. Looking through the comments, many people agree with my sentiment.

Maybe the majority of that site, which has the sole purpose of a retcon of the ending cause they failed to grasp what was presented and didn't like any of the results, not that I blame them.  We were given a mostly ambiguous display that only differed in explosion color and reaper reaction.

Did you miss the fact a BW emloyee is asking the question?
And IT  does not retcon the ending.

[Micah3sixty]

dreman9999 wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.1909/ 

Ah. It's in the majority. Therefore it is not based upon faith. Never mind.

Do note that I voted yes in that thread. I don't believe BioWare intended IT. But it would be a better ending than what we have now. So I voted yes. Looking through the comments, many people agree with my sentiment.

Did you miss the fact a BW emloyee is asking the question?

What difference does that make?  The fact Chris asked the question leads me to believe IT is not in the official cannon anyways and he's just curious as to how many HTL-ers seem to think IT is a better ending than clarifying the ending we got.  

[Helios969]

Good for you? I don't think any man should be in charge of that kind of power. [/quote]


That's your take on it but I view power as a neutral force in the galaxy, it's all up to the weilder to determine how it's used. A good man uses his power only when needed, a bad one uses it only when he wants something.

That's my outlook on it, it doesn't corrupt but shows how people actually are when the fear of societal stigma and retribution is removed.

Also a lot of the fiction I like already has people with vast power using it for the sake of others and doing so out of choice, it's not something that I'd go, "This is stupid becuase he didn't turn evil with his powers".


Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Modifié par Helios969, 26 mai 2012 - 05:48 .

[balance5050]

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Actually some things are concrete.... the rubble around Shepard when you get the Shepard alive scene, this scene requires more EMS then the other endings, making it the hardest to attain.

I have to compliment you on the pun.

We don't know if the rubble is on the Citadel or the Earth though. More speculations. Hardest to attain does not equal best moral decision. It means you get to live, at the cost of all AI.

He says that, but he also said that I waz going to die as well. I think the Geth and Edi are just fine and that I was being lied to by a reaper.

[davishepard]

balance5050 wrote...

Sigh.... never said it did, just saying that this scene has more implications than you were inclined to think.

However, "the end of the first matrix is quite telling no? The whole "dying, and then waking up again, able to see through the facade of the matrix" (just replace matrix with indoctrination)

 

Of course the scene has more implications. Or there wouldn't be a reson for the Extended Cut.

You're speculating as you wish that would mean. It's not written indocrination, isn't implied indocrination.

[Micah3sixty]

Shepard Wins wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Actually some things are concrete.... the rubble around Shepard when you get the Shepard alive scene, this scene requires more EMS then the other endings, making it the hardest to attain.

I have to compliment you on the pun.

We don't know if the rubble is on the Citadel or the Earth though. More speculations. Hardest to attain does not equal best moral decision. It means you get to live, at the cost of all AI.

If you believe the Catalyst... who also said you'd die as well. You don't.

The Catalyst never said you would die if you chose Destroy.  He may have implied that since Shepard is also part synthetic, but he didn't outright say that, so surviving Destroy does not mean he lied.

[Shepard Wins]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Shepard Wins wrote...


I'm not trying to promote "avoid Reaper tech at all times" attitude.Thing is, it's dangerous and has to be handled with caution.

1) Ah yes, but Sovereign was dead when it was salvaged. Dead, as in DESTROYed. See how that works?
2) It was a Prothean designed Mass Relay, Relay technology doesn't indoctrinate so it was safer
3) - the IFF was a necessary evil there, you're confusing the end with the means;
4) EDI isn't defined by the fact that she was created using Reaper Tech; the game is kinda vague on that one
5) Whoa, have you paid attention to Arrival? Stopping the Reapers (the Project) was about sending an asteroid into a Relay, and Object Rho would have stopped that from happening, had it not been for Shepard's intervention. So no, Object Rho is not good.

1.) Derelict Reaper from ME2 was dead too. It's no less a risk.

2.) We used their technology against them. Creating a mass-relay modeled after their creation, rewriting the keepers, foiling their back-door trap which was the Citadel.

3.) Sometimes the ends do justify the means. In the IFF's case that can be said confidently and unequivocally.

4.) No Reaper-tech, no EDI. No EDI, ME2 and ME3 = problematic, maybe impossible.

5.) Yes, and the Project never takes place if not for the discovery of Object Rho. The loss of an Alliance team is nothing compared to the Reapers entering and spreading throughout the galaxy quickly through the Alpha Relay.

1) Sovereign was in pieces, scattered all over the place - Derelict Reaper was very much intact, with active Mass Effect fields and somesuch. So I'd say Derelict Reaper was much more dangerous
2) agreed
3) agreed, but the IFF in itself was simply a necessary evil to achieve a greater good
4) not necessarily, we don't know if EDI wouldn't have been built without it, there were many AIs without Reaper Tech in them
5) Object Rho in itself was dangerous and almost brought about failure of the Project

[balance5050]

davishepard wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Sigh.... never said it did, just saying that this scene has more implications than you were inclined to think.

However, "the end of the first matrix is quite telling no? The whole "dying, and then waking up again, able to see through the facade of the matrix" (just replace matrix with indoctrination)

 

Of course the scene has more implications. Or there wouldn't be a reson for the Extended Cut.

You're speculating as you wish that would mean. It's not written indocrination, isn't implied indocrination.

? that is the end of the first matrix though.... and it IS similar. Ok ok.... just thought I would give you something to ponder.

[davishepard]

Micah3sixty wrote...

The Catalyst never said you would die if you chose Destroy.  He may have implied that since Shepard is also part synthetic, but he didn't outright say that, so surviving Destroy does not mean he lied.

And I thought it was obvious that the Catalyst was speculating by saying "Even you is part synthetic". Because he couldn't know if Shepard would die or not, he wasn't a god that knows everything. 

Guess that is a lesson that Bioware should learn and implement in EC the things obvious even MOAR obvious. ^^

[dreman9999]

Micah3sixty wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.1909/ 

Ah. It's in the majority. Therefore it is not based upon faith. Never mind.

Do note that I voted yes in that thread. I don't believe BioWare intended IT. But it would be a better ending than what we have now. So I voted yes. Looking through the comments, many people agree with my sentiment.

Did you miss the fact a BW emloyee is asking the question?

What difference does that make?  The fact Chris asked the question leads me to believe IT is not in the official cannon anyways and he's just curious as to how many HTL-ers seem to think IT is a better ending than clarifying the ending we got.  

It makes all the difference in the world. Why would a bw emplyee ask a question about something that would fix the ending on a site fill with people angry about the end?

[teh DRUMPf!!]

dreman9999 wrote...

Please, nothing can be said what would happen if we never used the tech...We would of advance beyond earth to the other planets in the system. In the lore, before we used the tech we were already planning on flying to alpha centrati and canceled it because we found other  planets mor conveniant. My poin tis the reaper would have never found us.

Sure it can, it just requires outside thinking (which tends to scare most people, hence the aversion to Control/Synthesis).

The Reapers would still have been out there. And, they knew about humanity/Earth, the Catalyst even mentions that they were spared in the last cycle as they needed time to advance.

And, advancing to other planets in Sol... yeah, that's not useless at all. You want to live on Venus? Mercury? Uranus? Neptune? Oh yeah, Mars sure looks like such a wonderful place to live too.

So in the end, we continue to rot on Earth.