4520 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

Mr. Big Pimpin wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

The problem is the game gives us nothing to foreshadow it that isn't negative (i.e. everybody, EVERYBODY who has strived for control has been indoctrinated).
For this to work it needs proper foreshadowing, the ability to have Shepard express pro-control sentiments, research, etc.

I wanted a Renegade "Control" option for the geth conflict; that would've been a good example. Would probably have given us more Xen too, which is always a good thing.

Yes, that would've been good too.
As with my Destroyer example, this could be a whole path of possible smaller scale events that foreshadow (and would be required for) the control option.
Though Paragons would have the option of avoiding Geth control, of course, but still be able to apply Xen's research to the overall project.

[draken-heart]

in case anyone wants to know, my personal theory is that everything in the game can point to Shepard wrestling with self-doubt in the end-game. no IT, no reapers trying to control Shepard, no nothing.

Modifié par draken-heart, 29 mai 2012 - 05:30 .

[ghost9191]

draken-heart wrote...

in case anyone wants to know, my personal theory is that everything in the game can point to Shepard wrestling with self-doubt in the end-game. no IT, no reapers trying to control Shepard, no nothing.

was thinking along the lines of that too, like s/he is just beat by the end, doesn't have much fight left in him or her. But in destroy ending you can really see his/her resolve come back, like s/he is sure about the decision. others too maybe but when i see them i can only think of death , shepards mainly. Yeah it is a sacrifice in a way but stil seems like s/he is just giving up to me in the cutscene. and the catalysst is still iffy with that look

Modifié par ghost9191, 29 mai 2012 - 05:46 .

[draken-heart]

ghost9191 wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

in case anyone wants to know, my personal theory is that everything in the game can point to Shepard wrestling with self-doubt in the end-game. no IT, no reapers trying to control Shepard, no nothing.

was thinking along the lines of that too, like s/he is just beat by the end, doesn't have much fight left in him or her. But in destroy ending you can really see his/her resolve come back, like s/he is sure about the decision. others too maybe but when i see them i can only think of death , shepards mainly. Yeah it is a sacrifice in a way but stil seems like s/he is just giving up to me in the cutscene. and the catalysst is still iffy with that look

glad to see someone follows the self-doubt theory. 
in the theory you could say that the reapers represent the wheight of the galaxy that Shepard put on her shoulders. and that it is becoming to much to bear.

Modifié par draken-heart, 29 mai 2012 - 05:51 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Unschuld wrote...


Just when I thought the speculations on the long term implications of control/synthesis couldn't get any crazier....

You assume I think it makes sense. 

I make no illusions that the interpretation is deliberately reaching an liberal. 

I... just don't know how to approach this. If this happened in the EC, I think my hair would light on fire and then my head would explode, but not before gouging out each eye with a fork.

You think I do? 

God no, I've written a seventy page rewrite of everything after Cronos Station and I'm still not done, that's my prefered ending. 

I work with what I have within the context. If BioWare want me to choose, then I choose control, choose to imagine round the problems they place. 

No offence.

None taken, like I said, I make no illusions. 

I'd still rather take this insanity than the insanity that is the literal interpretation. 

[killage_wizard]

Taboo-XX wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Shepard does get engulfed in flames though.  I can't buy that such a well written series up to that point just throws a bone to people who want Shepard to live (and in my experience most people don't care as long as the ending fits) just to throw people a bone.  Why put effort into just making a few fans feel better?  

It's called Suspension of disbelief. He's been clarified to survive. That's all I know.

He just survives.

Period.

Lame, but I can handle one more bit of nonsense I guess...

I just can't believe after the writers did such a great job up to that point they would let themselves add something that lame.  There is no way he could have survived the citadel explosion to find himself back on earth.

[Taboo]

killage_wizard wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Shepard does get engulfed in flames though.  I can't buy that such a well written series up to that point just throws a bone to people who want Shepard to live (and in my experience most people don't care as long as the ending fits) just to throw people a bone.  Why put effort into just making a few fans feel better?  

It's called Suspension of disbelief. He's been clarified to survive. That's all I know.

He just survives.

Period.

Lame, but I can handle one more bit of nonsense I guess...

I just can't believe after the writers did such a great job up to that point they would let themselves add something that lame.  There is no way he could have survived the citadel explosion to find himself back on earth.

He's on the Citadel I believe. The arms have shields or something. I don't know.

He's alive. That's it.

[killage_wizard]

Vox Draco wrote...

It would mean, if only destroy was really right, and it was "indoctrinating" the players, that a lot of gamers (well, not that many, I guess ) were wrong, fooled, fell into a trap, and would have to acknowledge they sided with evil or felt false sympathiy for the devil...

So if it makes a few people mad they got duped then I say Bioware has a giant set of balls for doing so.  I think most, even if they chose control or synthesis, would look back and recognize the brilliance of what Bioware did...if it is IT.

[ghost9191]

killage_wizard wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Shepard does get engulfed in flames though.  I can't buy that such a well written series up to that point just throws a bone to people who want Shepard to live (and in my experience most people don't care as long as the ending fits) just to throw people a bone.  Why put effort into just making a few fans feel better?  

It's called Suspension of disbelief. He's been clarified to survive. That's all I know.

He just survives.

Period.

Lame, but I can handle one more bit of nonsense I guess...

I just can't believe after the writers did such a great job up to that point they would let themselves add something that lame.  There is no way he could have survived the citadel explosion to find himself back on earth.

watch the pax interview, a question was asked close to that, it explains it if you were unable to read the codex. I mean control kills him or her and same with sythesis, but with destroy there is just a explosion. and you can see shepard getting thrown. But with the mass effect fields active they keep in air and it might just stay floating in space.
 just watch the pax video , end of where it Q&A    they explain how ppl could survive the citidal blowing up

Modifié par ghost9191, 29 mai 2012 - 06:11 .

[draken-heart]

for those who do not understand why i think the ending is just Shepard wrestling with self-doubt it is:

1) paragon Shepard spend the good entirety of the game telling the Illusive man that controlling the reapers is impossible, yet when the choice appears at the very end, he/she just accepts the fact that he/she can control them because he/she is not indoctrinated, and that we are special? yeah right, i doubt that if the smartest human in the galaxy can fall prey to the indoctrination, that i can do better.
2)synthesis is just to hypocritical, force evolution is what the reapers are trying to do, though not in the same way.
3) Destroy, if you made peace between the Geth and the Quarians, and convinced Joker and EDI to have a relationship with each other, seems like a real jerky move.

i am sorry IT and Anti-IT folks, something is wrong her but i doubt the reapers are behind it.

remember ME1 Ghost? i remember that Shepard and crew had to wear helemets outside the Citadel tower, so unless he is not on the outside of the tower or the Citadel in general, i doubt that Shepard can survive even with Mass Effect fields up. besides even Shepard cannot Survive that explosion whatsoever.

Modifié par draken-heart, 29 mai 2012 - 06:23 .

[Taboo]

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

Problem?

[draken-heart]

Taboo-XX: i have no problem with your game choices, i saw the ending vids, and i think there is something wrong with the ending, i just do not think it is Indoctrination.

[ghost9191]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

Problem?

just throwing this out there but if you are going to destroy the geth why not use them first, then destroy them?  kinda a dick move but still

Modifié par ghost9191, 29 mai 2012 - 06:24 .

[Taboo]

ghost9191 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

Problem?

just throwing this out there but if you are going to destroy the geth why not use them first, then destroy them?  kinda a dick move but still

I have access to multiplay. I feel better about having some Krogan and Salarians having my back. And now Vorcha I guess.

[ghost9191]

Taboo-XX wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

Problem?

just throwing this out there but if you are going to destroy the geth why not use them first, then destroy them?  kinda a dick move but still

I have access to multiplay. I feel better about having some Krogan and Salarians having my back. And now Vorcha I guess.

fair enough, i mean the whole using reaper code is a bit iffy. that and i recall legion saying that the geth make their own future. kinda seemed the opposite. still made peace personally

Modifié par ghost9191, 29 mai 2012 - 06:29 .

[draken-heart]

hey Taboo, just wondering what you think of the Shepard wrestling with Self-doubt theory?

Shepard is beaten badly personally and all the losses the galactic army suffered overall, he/she must be doubting himself/herself by the end...

[Taboo]

ghost9191 wrote...


fair enough, i mean the whole using reaper code is a bit iffy. that and i recall legion saying that the geth make their own future. kinda seemed the oposite. still made peace personally

You'll here no qualms from me. I totally see your point.

Legion sort of...flip flops.

It sucks having to kill him but I really don't need True AI Geth running around.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 29 mai 2012 - 06:28 .

[Taboo]

draken-heart wrote...

hey Taboo, just wondering what you think of the Shepard wrestling with Self-doubt theory?

Shepard is beaten badly personally and all the losses the galactic army suffered overall, he/she must be doubting himself/herself by the end...

I see nothing wrong with your intepretation, in fact I like it a great deal. It doesn't have that......nonsense that invades every crevice of the IT.

Know that regardless of what Bioware says, your interpretation is never wrong. That's how art works. It's how YOU see it.

[Vox Draco]

killage_wizard wrote...

Vox Draco wrote...

It would mean, if only destroy was really right, and it was "indoctrinating" the players, that a lot of gamers (well, not that many, I guess ) were wrong, fooled, fell into a trap, and would have to acknowledge they sided with evil or felt false sympathiy for the devil...

So if it makes a few people mad they got duped then I say Bioware has a giant set of balls for doing so.  I think most, even if they chose control or synthesis, would look back and recognize the brilliance of what Bioware did...if it is IT.

Well, I agree it would be worth it, after all, when I look at "literalists" and those in favor/believers of some for mif IT, I think Bioware would be better off pleasing the latter ones...

And I think many would truly love to see Shepard really win, by stying true to herself and actually be ACTIVE in the end, besides dying and stuff, not depending on the choice they favored at first

Not  to forget all those rather neutral on the issue. They would happily play some kind of real extended DLC, no matter how, no matter what...

Yet still, it would be fun if we were all fooled in some way...just for the sake of unity again.

[frylock23]

ghost9191 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

Problem?

just throwing this out there but if you are going to destroy the geth why not use them first, then destroy them?  kinda a dick move but still

Because for some of us, it's impossible to make peace. One of my three playthroughs will never be able to make peace because I got Tali exiled in ME2. The other three managed to avoid that, so they can and generally do make peace.

[ghost9191]

frylock23 wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

Problem?

just throwing this out there but if you are going to destroy the geth why not use them first, then destroy them?  kinda a dick move but still

Because for some of us, it's impossible to make peace. One of my three playthroughs will never be able to make peace because I got Tali exiled in ME2. The other three managed to avoid that, so they can and generally do make peace.

tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk:mellow:

[frylock23]

ghost9191 wrote...

frylock23 wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The Geth are dead in my playthrough.

Problem?

just throwing this out there but if you are going to destroy the geth why not use them first, then destroy them?  kinda a dick move but still

Because for some of us, it's impossible to make peace. One of my three playthroughs will never be able to make peace because I got Tali exiled in ME2. The other three managed to avoid that, so they can and generally do make peace.

tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk:mellow:

Eh, what can I say? I didn't like ME2 enough to want to play that Shepard through again to fix that one thing. It's kind of sad because I did everything else that was required including keeping both Tali's and Legion's loyalty where I can never manage to keep both Miranda and Jack loyal.

[Seival]

The Angry One wrote...

Seival wrote...

You know, in real life (when it comes to some very important moral decisions), the paragon-people who say that they are not ready are actually the ones, who are the most ready.

I am not ready to be Empress of Earth.
Therefore, I should be Empress of Earth.

The same goes for understanding some complicated moral things. So when Paragon Shepard says that "you are trying to play with things you don't understand", she proves that she is ready to understand these things correctly. She only needs a person, who explain all these things to her... And this person is a Catalist - the "Deus Ex Machina of ME Trilogy".

See the above. Recognising your limitations does not automatically mean you can surpass them.
All paragon Shepard proves is that she does not share TIM's ambition to use the Reapers to promote humanity's interests. This does not mean Shepard is in any way ready to control the Reapers.

Yes, current Control cutscene is short and needs more details. BioWare will give them to us with EC. And as they said, the endings' concept will remain the same. Finally, even right now it's obvious that Shepard gains full control of Reapers and becomes a new Catalist in the Control Ending.

No. The EC will not fix this.
What the control ending needed was foreshadowing.
Keep in mind I'm not against control as a concept. The problem is the game gives us nothing to foreshadow it that isn't negative (i.e. everybody, EVERYBODY who has strived for control has been indoctrinated).
For this to work it needs proper foreshadowing, the ability to have Shepard express pro-control sentiments, research, etc.

Hell why not a boss battle where you use captured Cerberus tech based off the Crucible schematics to control a Destroyer and fight other Reapers. Don't pretend that wouldn't be awesome.

Again, one more confused player who shows "classic Control hate"... You remind me myself just after I completed ME3 first time. All you are saying were exactly my thoughts, while I was confused and angry. But when I calmed down and started to think with clear mind, I understood that current ME3 endings just need some time to process... That's how I left Retakers and became pro-ender.

Control Ending can't be understood correctly if you stuck to viewing it through the TIM's eyes. Shepard (and not only her) tells about the Destroy as the only option through the entire game. Everyone hate TIM and his Control mania. And that was the most clever scenario maneuver in the game...

In short - Control offered to Shepard by Catalist is not the same as control offered to Shepard by TIM. Through the entire ME3 and till the very end Shepard shows an immunity to TIM's false way. And that doesn't mean that TIM was incorrect about the Control as an option. The truth is that Control is an option, but TIM's view on this option is what was incorrect.


P.S. Please, stop taking the endings literally, and try to think what did the writer meant

Modifié par Seival, 29 mai 2012 - 09:08 .

[The Angry One]

Seival wrote...
Again, one more confused player who shows "classic Control hate"...

Yes absolutely. You know, aside from the bit where I said I didn't hate control.

You remind me myself just after I completed ME3 first time. All you are saying were exactly my thoughts, while I was confused and angry. But when I calmed down and started to think with clear mind, I understood that current ME3 endings just need some time to process... That's how I left Retakers and became pro-ender.

So what you dumbed yourself down to the ending's level? That is not a good thing.

Control Ending can't be understood correctly if you stack to viewing it throught the TIM's eyes. Shepard (and not only her) tells about the Destroy as the only option through the entire game. Everyone hate TIM and his Control mania. And that was the most clever scenario maneuver in the game...

And this is where the game fails to properly give control as a viable option.
Through who else's eyes do we view it?

In short - Control offered to Shepard by Catalist is not the same as control offered to Shepard by TIM. Through the entire ME3 and till the very end Shepard shows an immunity to TIM's false way. And that doesn't mean that TIM was incorrect about the Control as an option. The truth is that Control is an option, but TIM's view on this option is what was incorrect.

WHY is it an option? Because the Catalyst says so? That's not an answer. Even if the Catalyst was trustworthy it still wouldn't be an answer.
The narrative fails to establish control as a viable option and as something Shepard would desire. It fails to establish that Shepard is in any way ready for this. It fails to establish that Shepard would even know how to do this.
Again, for this to work it requires a proper build up. You cannot spend an entire game explaining why something is wrong then do an about face and say it's now okay because Space Hitler says so.

P.S. Please, stop taking the endings literally, and try to think what did the writer meant

I can see what Mac Walters meant. This is why I'll never purchase anything with his name on it as lead writer ever again.
Regardless, appealing to author intent is lazy. If the writer cannot make their meaning clear in the medium, then they have failed.

Modifié par The Angry One, 29 mai 2012 - 09:08 .

[Seival]

The Angry One wrote...

(1) Through who else's eyes do we view it?

(2) WHY is it an option? Because the Catalyst says so?

(1) Through your own eyes of course! That's the point... It's just like reading a complicated book. When you read it literally, you can understand nothing.

(2) Yes, because Catalist says so! Catalist could left Shepard to die. Instead it saved her life, and admitted its own mistakes. Catalist has no reasons to lie.