292 réponses à ce sujet

[CronoDragoon]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...
I don't think it's all that improbable. The Reapers wage war through atrition; cycles usually die out slowly and that would provide plenty of time to hide the schematics.

Moreover, it isn't necessarily the case that each cycle found the schematics close to the Reapers arriving. Some may have found it far earlier, but were unable to discern a purpose until later.

The second part, sure.

The first, well, when indoctrinated agents tend to shoot to holes in security, it seems highly unlikely it would've made it that far. Especially funny since they knew the Protheans had the plans (Was the whole reason why they didn't finish it, besides the whole Citadel bit) and yet didn't... ugh.

Who knew the Protheans had the plans? The Reapers didn't. The Catalyst tells you he thought they wiped out the idea a few cycles previous. Also, ask any celeb whose had nude photos leaked how difficult it can be to completely erase data. 

[Ticonderoga117]

CronoDragoon wrote...
Who knew the Protheans had the plans? The Reapers didn't. The Catalyst tells you he thought they wiped out the idea a few cycles previous. Also, ask any celeb whose had nude photos leaked how difficult it can be to completely erase data. 

But they did... because indoctrinated agents knew about it and stopped them from building it. Reapers know what the indocrinated know. So... yeah.

Plus, I'm sure the Reapers are a wee bit better at erasing data than celebrities.

[RenegonSQ]

OP, you sound bitter. I'm guessing you chose something other than destroy?

My Shep lived, you mad. Destroy wins again.

[Terraforming2154]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...


It would go a long way, but mainly just the fact that the Collector Base decision does nada and the Cruicible is still there is agrivating, but not as much.

Well, I think the Collector Base thing is indicative of a larger problem that runs throughout ME3 of the marginalization of decisions in the previous games. So i don't feel that's ill will towards the endings specifically.

I am definitely in the minority when I say this, but I love the Crucible. The idea that each cycle contributed some part in the blueprint of the Crucible, such that the Crucible can be interpreted as an avatar of vengeance of EVERY cycle the way Javik is for his, resonates strongly with me. Using the Crucible successfully against the Reapers is thus symbolically a victory earned not only by Shepard's cycle but by all cycles. None of those cycles died in vain.

So yeah, love the idea behind the Crucible. To me, it's ever more satisfying than conventional victory. The idea, you now. Not necessarily the ways BioWare chose to make the Crucible actually work.

I do agree that the concept of the Crucible is interesting, and if handled better, could have been pretty great.
I do like the thought of the Reapers being taken down by a machine that was built upon by all the races that were enslaved or turned. There would be some great justice in that.

I just wish the writing for the Crucible plot had been handled better and I wish that the Catalyst had been something, or someone, else.

[CronoDragoon]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

But they did... because indoctrinated agents knew about it and stopped them from building it. Reapers know what the indocrinated know. So... yeah.

No, you're conflating two different things Javik said. Indoctrinated agents destroyed the Protheans' plan with the status pods, but they didn't finish the Crucible because, as Javik said, they ran out of time. The Catalyst and Reapers never knew the Protheans had the plans.

[Ticonderoga117]

CronoDragoon wrote...
No, you're conflating two different things Javik said. Indoctrinated agents destroyed the Protheans' plan with the status pods, but they didn't finish the Crucible because, as Javik said, they ran out of time. The Catalyst and Reapers never knew the Protheans had the plans.

Actually it was Vendetta who said as much.

Basically he says that a splinter group hounded thier progress on the Cruicible, following a similiar reasoning as TIM. They then found out that those seperatists where indoctrinated.

[CronoDragoon]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...
No, you're conflating two different things Javik said. Indoctrinated agents destroyed the Protheans' plan with the status pods, but they didn't finish the Crucible because, as Javik said, they ran out of time. The Catalyst and Reapers never knew the Protheans had the plans.

Actually it was Vendetta who said as much.

Basically he says that a splinter group hounded thier progress on the Cruicible, following a similiar reasoning as TIM. They then found out that those seperatists where indoctrinated.

Well, in order to reconcile that with what the Catalyst tells us, we have to assume that the agents while indoctrinated never informed the Reapers of the Crucible.

...Or more likely, plot hole.

Edit: I just rewatched the Catalyst dialogue. He says they "noted" the concept several cycles ago, but then in response to why they didn't destroy it, says they believed it eradicated. So I was actually wrong here, and it seems they believed they destroyed the plans in the Prothean cycle.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 16 juillet 2012 - 06:27 .

[Ticonderoga117]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Well, in order to reconcile that
with what the Catalyst tells us, we have to assume that the agents while
indoctrinated never informed the Reapers of the Crucible.

...Or more likely, plot hole.

Edit:
I just rewatched the Catalyst dialogue. He says they "noted" the
concept several cycles ago, but then in response to why they didn't
destroy it, says they believed it eradicated. So I was actually wrong
here, and it seems they believed they destroyed the plans in the
Prothean cycle.

But I believe in the context he means they thought it eradicated several cycles ago, not the last cycle.

Modifié par Ticonderoga117, 16 juillet 2012 - 06:29 .

[Icesong]

Nothing's said here that changes my mind about the breath scene. Still think it's awful, terribly awful, but it was ambiguous to begin with and this just states that's what they wanted. To end a story left wondering whether you live or die. So great! So brave, too, their reasoning. And even if you enjoy the ambiguity for your headcanoning, it's an obvious launchpad for future meddling which is certain to happen. You're naive if you think this is really the last we'll see of Shepard in some form or another.

But authorial intent isn't canon; just authorial proclamation. Even if intent were canon the intent is clear that ambiguity was the goal, not death. Even though death might have been the original intent.

Modifié par Icesong, 16 juillet 2012 - 06:59 .

[wright1978]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

Ambiguous means it is up to the player to decide.

That's also why they didn't show the futures of the Normandy crew. Because they want to leave it up to the player.

However they did clarify and expand the Normandy crash sequence. Why is that ok and yet clarifying the Shep lives sequence bad?

[bas_kon]

That just doesn't make sense, the last gasp of a dying person is letting the air out as their counciousness fades for good, not vigorously breathing in as if waking up after passing out or dreaming.
IMO, the answers in the OP are not that clear and I think the devs are just annoyed that after the EC people still wants more and let everyone believe what they want.

Plus, the memorial scene in which the LI doesn't put the plaque on the wall only plays in that case, in all the others (including Destroy with crew surviving and shepard dying) the LI leaves his plaque on the wall. It's silly to make all those animations if it doesn't mean anything when they could have put the same scene and then the gasp.
But in the end everyone will believe what they want, to me Shepard is definitely "alive to fight another day" as his flag says.

Modifié par bas_kon, 16 juillet 2012 - 03:57 .

[TuringPoint]

Jade8aby88 wrote...
 5:48
Ley said "We did make it ambiguous on purpose..." 

Since when has art required the absolute elimination of ambiguity to be "proper" art?

Have you ever read a book?  Books make use of the reader's imagination, and the careful ambiguity of words.  Implications and depth can be there where the reader doesn't expect it, even where the author didn't expect it.  

In music the composer and the performer both create an impression for the audience, and the audience can walk away with another impression entirely.  That's why it is art; it is a creative art form.  

Art is not "going down a checklist of what a mob of fans want."  To go for this is the destruction of art.

Bioware did what they're supposed to do.  Give it a rest.

Modifié par Alocormin, 16 juillet 2012 - 04:05 .

[string3r]

But I cannot except that.

[tyrvas]

I shall quote myself...

tyrvas wrote...

hey someone tried killing my hero once but somehow my hero got resurrected...

I picked Destroy with high EMS, Liara, Miranda and the rest survived,
loads of scientists also joined, and most if not all survived so...

...who says my hero can't be resurrected again?

[Mcfly616]

This again?

Modifié par Mcfly616, 16 juillet 2012 - 04:19 .

[Jadebaby]

RenegonSQ wrote...

OP, you sound bitter. I'm guessing you chose something other than destroy?

My Shep lived, you mad. Destroy wins again.

just called it how I see it. They started off killing Shep in every ending, only adding the breath scene because otherwise is would be "too bleak." But it could only be implied as to actually show the reunion would break the type of ending they were going for. Death, destruction, loss.

Shep's dead, the breath scene is an easter egg. Not canon.

[DistantUtopia]

The Angry One wrote...

You honestly think they care? They have their money, they have enough people buying their games from their new CoD crowd target audience. They're no longer in it for the sake of the games or the fans.

Fixed it for ya

[DistantUtopia]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

RenegonSQ wrote...

OP, you sound bitter. I'm guessing you chose something other than destroy?

My Shep lived, you mad. Destroy wins again.

just called it how I see it. They started off killing Shep in every ending, only adding the breath scene because otherwise is would be "too bleak." But it could only be implied as to actually show the reunion would break the type of ending they were going for. Death, destruction, loss.

Shep's dead, the breath scene is an easter egg. Not canon.

As I've been saying before, the canon ending of ME3 is "Shepard Dies, Cycle over.".  No further exposition required, really. The whole Control/Synthesis/Destroy is just different flavors of the same thing.

[Iakus]

Alocormin wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...
 5:48
Ley said "We did make it ambiguous on purpose..." 

Since when has art required the absolute elimination of ambiguity to be "proper" art?

It doesn't.  But clarity does in order to be "clear".  So does closure, or the matter is not closed.

If this is supposed to be the "Shepard lives" ending, then it needs to be as clear and unambiguous as Shepard dissolving in the space magic is a "Shepard dies" end.

[SpamBot2000]

Alocormin wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...
 5:48
Ley said "We did make it ambiguous on purpose..." 

Since when has art required the absolute elimination of ambiguity to be "proper" art?

Have you ever read a book?  Books make use of the reader's imagination, and the careful ambiguity of words.  Implications and depth can be there where the reader doesn't expect it, even where the author didn't expect it.  

In music the composer and the performer both create an impression for the audience, and the audience can walk away with another impression entirely.  That's why it is art; it is a creative art form.  

Art is not "going down a checklist of what a mob of fans want."  To go for this is the destruction of art.

Bioware did what they're supposed to do.  Give it a rest.

Art again, huh? And here I thought I was engaging in an escapist fantasy. Still, I like a bit of art now and then. Which is why I don't take kindly to people using "art" as an excuse to half-ass their own damn stories. It's that kind of jackassery that gives art a bad name. 

Artistic integrity is the last refuge of the scoundrel.

[Podge 90]

It's the "it would have been too bleak" comment that rustles my jimmies. So we were never meant to win? Not even in one of the "sixteen" (....) different endings?

[DistantUtopia]

Podge 90 wrote...

It's the "it would have been too bleak" comment that rustles my jimmies. So we were never meant to win? Not even in one of the "sixteen" (....) different endings?

I think that just about nails my personal belief of the endings; Shepard would have died in all 16 of them.

[Iakus]

Podge 90 wrote...

It's the "it would have been too bleak" comment that rustles my jimmies. So we were never meant to win? Not even in one of the "sixteen" (....) different endings?

Nope.  Shepard was always meant to die on the CItadel.  War Assets don't matter.  EMS doesn't matter.  Who or if you romanced anyone didn't matter.  Chocies, save in the broadest possible terms, don't matter.  Shepard was well and truly frakked, screw player agency.

[Jadebaby]

Pretty much what iakus said^

Although just totally ignore the "16 different endings" crap. That was IGN, not BioWare.

And they say that IGN is unbiased to BioWare. lol!

[Jadebaby]

Mcfly616 wrote...

This again?

Shepard was persistent, so are we.