225 réponses à ce sujet

[ZeCollectorDestroya]

The extended cut adds some pictures and 2 or 3 scenes. All that money raised for a slideshow.
An Indie developer could do better.
Bioware fans; I despise you.

[Geneaux486]

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

The extended cut adds some pictures and 2 or 3 scenes. All that money raised for a slideshow.
An Indie developer could do better.
Bioware fans; I despise you.

And lots of new dialogue, and additional fully animated scenes.  In other words it was exactly what Bioware said it was going to be, and we got it for free. 

[MegaSovereign]

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

The extended cut adds some pictures and 2 or 3 scenes. All that money raised for a slideshow.
An Indie developer could do better.
Bioware fans; I despise you.

I'm sure Bioware fans aren't too ****ing fond of people like you either.

[KevShep]

ZeCollectorDestroya wrote...

The extended cut adds some pictures and 2 or 3 scenes. All that money raised for a slideshow.
An Indie developer could do better.
Bioware fans; I despise you.

I know, I like the fact that they tried, but they did not try hard enough.
They needed to have long ending like "The Return of the King" movie and spend some time on every scene. Cheap is not going to cut it bioware.


ME3= Epic Fail.

[Geneaux486]

MegaSovereign wrote...
I'm sure Bioware fans aren't too ****ing fond of people like you either.

He's just upset, I think.  I'm sure he'll get over it eventually.

[comrade gando]

I'd rather have IT because the way bioware ended it is so incredibly stupid and anticlimactic that it makes me wish I never played this series to start with. it's that bad.

[KevShep]

comrade gando wrote...

I'd rather have IT because the way bioware ended it is so incredibly stupid and anticlimactic that it makes me wish I never played this series to start with. it's that bad.

Its even worse when you look at there opportunity they had with the I.T. and blew it big time.

[Geneaux486]

comrade gando wrote...

I'd rather have IT because the way bioware ended it is so incredibly stupid and anticlimactic that it makes me wish I never played this series to start with. it's that bad.

I found it to be quite good myself.

[I_eat_unicorns]

The Twilight God wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

You're contradicting yourself and you don't even know it. You say you're not an IT supporter, but the only idea where control/synthesis were indoctrination endings CAME from the IT. Saying that you don't support the IT, but believing that depending on the endings the player chooses, he/she becomes indoctrinated is supporting the IT.

I would have to believe it is all a hallucination for my views to be IT.  I don't. Now you may think my views are similar, but similar isn't the same as being identical.

Do I believe It is a valid interpretation of events? Yes. It assumes Bioware Casey Hudson is not a horrible writter and that the inconsistencies are intentional. And there is alot of evidence throughout that hints at the reapers being inside Shep's head throughout the game. But I'm not convinced that everything after that last Harbinger blast is a dream. I don't totally dismiss it either.

 

You can believe anything you want if that's how you derive entertainment, and there's nothing wrong with it. But if there can be a "truth" about the structure of a fictional work it is that that which the author intended is the actuality. ME's writers do not intend IT to be the valid end. 

They have never denied IT. They may decide to use it one day to make a ME4 with Shepard in it. Who knows.

As far as what they supposedly intended? I could care less. All I see is what they actually wrote. And what they wrote is 4 options in which 3 would only be picked by an indoctrinated person. It's the writers job to convey their intention. Not explain it over twitter. Twitter is not the game I'm playing.

You don't know what you're talking about.
Don't lie to me saying you think the three of the four endings are indoctrination without believing in the IT. You are an IT supporter if you believe three of the four endings are "indoctrination" and believe in "evidence the reapers are in his/her head" that was only pointed out from the IT. 

The fact that you say "they have never denied IT" shows how much in denial you are over the original bad writings of the endings. No writer would come out and deny a fan-fiction, you have to get over that yourself. Read my original post and watch the video, the IT would hurt the series and would be impossible to fit into the game without making the ec dlc obsolete.

Like I said before: 
You can believe anything you want if that's how you derive entertainment, and there's nothing wrong with it. But if there can be a "truth" about the structure of a fictional work it is that that which the author intended is the actuality. ME's writers do not intend IT to be the valid end.  

And how can you be open to the real meanings of the endings when you believe they are also indoctrination? Those two things aren't possible as you would have to be open with the idea that the epilogue slides and funeral scene are hallucinations, which they aren't. In fact, believing that they are hallucinations make the endings worse, as it doesn't provide closure at all. You're just pissy that you're still mad that you didn't get the endings you wanted, and you can't accept that you won't get them. At this point, that's not Bioware's fault, it's your own, and you have to get over yourself.

[The Twilight God]

Geneaux486 wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

I'd rather have IT because the way bioware ended it is so incredibly stupid and anticlimactic that it makes me wish I never played this series to start with. it's that bad.

I found it to be quite good myself.

How long have you worked for Bioware?

[I_eat_unicorns]

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

I'd rather have IT because the way bioware ended it is so incredibly stupid and anticlimactic that it makes me wish I never played this series to start with. it's that bad.

I found it to be quite good myself.

How long have you worked for Bioware?

What does that have to do with anything? He's a customer, he can enjoy it if he wants. The ec dlc DID make some players like myself content with the endings.

[The Twilight God]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

You don't know what you're talking about.
Don't lie to me saying you think the three of the four endings are indoctrination without believing in the IT.

What does it matter if you think I'm a supporter of IT or not? It changes nothing. 

And how can you be open to the real meanings of the endings when you believe they are also indoctrination? Those two things aren't possible as you would have to be open with the idea that the epilogue slides and funeral scene are hallucinations, which they aren't.

Unless, of course, they are.
 
I am constantly amazed at the debate skills on these forums. "You're wrong because I say you're wrong." Brilliant strategy. I guess you put me in my place as I am clear wrong because you say so. Bravo. Give yourself a pat on the back.

In fact, believing that they are hallucinations make the endings worse, as it doesn't provide closure at all.

 
For you it would make them worse. And that's why they exist as they do.  For you, to do anything other than allow you to leave the game satisfied, albiet indoctrinatedly so, would invalidate the options for you. If the control and synthesis ending played out like refusal nobody would pick them and therefore no player could be indoctrinated. I understand you don't like this concept, but you aren't required to like it. There is no need for hostility.

For me, as a person who would never blindly trust the Reaper King and would never bet the entire galaxy on the behest of the Reaper King (because I'mt indoctrinated, it makes nothing worst. I'm not indoctrinated so I wouldn't choose control or synthesis anyway.

You're just pissy that you're still mad that you didn't get the endings you wanted, and you can't accept that you won't get them.

You keep saying this, but how exactly does 3 out of 4 endings being conceivable chosen by an indoctrinated Shepard have anything to do with me not getting the ending I wanted? The main subject matter isn't about changing the ending or what's wrong with the endings. We are discussing the endings as is. Sure, I think anyone of us has areown idea about what should have been, but that's not what this is about. We are talking baut the current endings as they are right not. And as is, the only way to acount for Shepard's mysterious complete trust, trust enough to commit suicide at the behest of the Reaper King, is indoctrination.

If you have a better explanation I'd love to hear it.

[The Twilight God]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

What does that have to do with anything? He's a customer, he can enjoy it if he wants. The ec dlc DID make some players like myself content with the endings.

I asked him the question. Not you.

It's none of your concern "what it has to do with anything".

[comrade gando]

Geneaux486 wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

I'd rather have IT because the way bioware ended it is so incredibly stupid and anticlimactic that it makes me wish I never played this series to start with. it's that bad.

I found it to be quite good myself.

I suggest your raise your standards just a little bit lol

[Geneaux486]

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

I'd rather have IT because the way bioware ended it is so incredibly stupid and anticlimactic that it makes me wish I never played this series to start with. it's that bad.

I found it to be quite good myself.

How long have you worked for Bioware?

Never, I simply paid attention to all three games.

[wantedman dan]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

I'd rather have IT because the way bioware ended it is so incredibly stupid and anticlimactic that it makes me wish I never played this series to start with. it's that bad.

I found it to be quite good myself.

How long have you worked for Bioware?

What does that have to do with anything? He's a customer, he can enjoy it if he wants. The ec dlc DID make some players like myself content with the endings.

It's obviously intended as an insult.

[The Twilight God]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

How long have you worked for Bioware?

Never, I simply paid attention to all three games.

Then would you agree that Control and Synthesis are options that only an indoctrinated Shepard would take?

If not, why? How would you rationalize shepard trusting the Reaper King?

Because I've been paying attention too. The 3 main endings are Anderson, TIm and Saren (as much as Red, Blue and Green). To me the endings work with non-destroy choices being the result of indoctrination.

[The Twilight God]

wantedman dan wrote...

It's obviously intended as an insult.

Actually his posts in other threads seemed as if he was part of the writting team trying to explain why the story played out the way it did. Not just in terms of IT or endings, but as a whole series.

[I_eat_unicorns]

The Twilight God wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

You don't know what you're talking about.
Don't lie to me saying you think the three of the four endings are indoctrination without believing in the IT.

What does it matter if you think I'm a supporter of IT or not? It changes nothing. 

And how can you be open to the real meanings of the endings when you believe they are also indoctrination? Those two things aren't possible as you would have to be open with the idea that the epilogue slides and funeral scene are hallucinations, which they aren't.

Unless, of course, they are.
 
I am constantly amazed at the debate skills on these forums. "You're wrong because I say you're wrong." Brilliant strategy. I guess you put me in my place as I am clear wrong because you say so. Bravo. Give yourself a pat on the back.

In fact, believing that they are hallucinations make the endings worse, as it doesn't provide closure at all.

 
For you it would make them worse. And that's why they exist as they do.  For you, to do anything other than allow you to leave the game satisfied, albiet indoctrinatedly so, would invalidate the options for you. If the control and synthesis ending played out like refusal nobody would pick them and therefore no player could be indoctrinated. I understand you don't like this concept, but you aren't required to like it. There is no need for hostility.

For me, as a person who would never blindly trust the Reaper King and would never bet the entire galaxy on the behest of the Reaper King (because I'mt indoctrinated, it makes nothing worst. I'm not indoctrinated so I wouldn't choose control or synthesis anyway.

You're just pissy that you're still mad that you didn't get the endings you wanted, and you can't accept that you won't get them.

You keep saying this, but how exactly does 3 out of 4 endings being conceivable chosen by an indoctrinated Shepard have anything to do with me not getting the ending I wanted? The main subject matter isn't about changing the ending or what's wrong with the endings. We are discussing the endings as is. Sure, I think anyone of us has areown idea about what should have been, but that's not what this is about. We are talking baut the current endings as they are right not. And as is, the only way to acount for Shepard's mysterious complete trust, trust enough to commit suicide at the behest of the Reaper King, is indoctrination.

If you have a better explanation I'd love to hear it.

Way to dismiss half of my posts and my original post again. You being an IT supporter acknowledges the fact that you believe in the indoctrination endings and that you don't want to accept the real value of the endings. 

Watch the youtube video, you see how Bioware has worked to expand and clarify the original endings, why would they go back on their work to appease a over-speculated fan theory and say "lol it was all a dream?" It's easy to dismiss any ending of any work as a dream, but that's being pretty stubborn and insulting to the writer's intent of the endings. The epilouge scenes with the funeral and shepard saying he will use the reapers as a tool to keep the peace are hallucinations? The star gazer scenes where they talk of shepard as a legend and say how it all really happened is a dream as well? I fail to see how this is possible and how believing that shepard is indoctrinated leaves any player satisfied with closure. 

And I don't understand your quote "
For you it would make them worse. And that's why they exist as they do.  For you, to do anything other than allow you to leave the game satisfied, albiet indoctrinatedly so, would invalidate the options for you. If the control and synthesis ending played out like refusal nobody would pick them and therefore no player could be indoctrinated. I understand you don't like this concept, but you aren't required to like it. There is no need for hostility."

I don't get what you're saying here really. Are you saying that beliving in IT would make the endings worse for me? And if control/synthesis played out like refusal, no one would pick them beccause they would be useless?  Neither of those things are true, the endings are we got, and maybe you may be satisfied with indoctrination, but many players like myself wouldn't want to end a trilogy on a hallucination like what you believe is satisfying. 

And yes, it is trust because the crucible and catalyst stop the reapers, that's what we were fighitng the whole game about. The catalyst offers solutions for the player to choose, if he/she refuses, then the cycle continues. Bioware knew players would shoot the catalyst, so I understand how that's an insult to players, but that also shows that the crucible is the only way to win against the reapers with any of the three solutions.

You're not really reading what I'm writing. You can believe the endings were indoctrination and that's fine, but you've got to look at the bigger picture. Most players wouldn't be satisfied with a ending like the IT as it provides no closure like I mentioned in my OP. The ec dlc addressed specific concerns the community had about the endings, giving most players satisfaction with the endings and the trilogy of shepards story. A game like mass effect relies on player choice, not a roulette wheel in that, the endings shouldn't punish the players. Like I said before, not everyone who likes the ec dlc likes the catalyst's logic, but Bioware said that they won't introduce any new endings when they announced the ec dlc, so most of us just tried to make of what the ec dlc offered, and actually enjoyed the endings. 

Like I said before: "
You can believe anything you want if that's how you derive entertainment, and there's nothing wrong with it. But if there can be a "truth" about the structure of a fictional work it is that that which the author intended is the actuality. ME's writers do not intend IT to be the valid end. " 

They just don't. You see the work they've done on the ec dlc from the youtube vid in my OP, why would any writer go back on his/her work and say "lol it was all a dream"? 

And again, like I said before, you're just mad about the way the endings are and you can't accept the endings, so you would rather have them to be a dream, but really, you're just hurting yourself. If we would have gotten the ec dlc as the original endings, I doubt there would be any indoctrination theories or any large uproar about the endings. 

[Geneaux486]

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

How long have you worked for Bioware?

Never, I simply paid attention to all three games.

Then would you agree that Control and Synthesis are options that only an indoctrinated Shepard would take?

If not, why? How would you rationalize shepard trusting the Reaper King?

Because I've been paying attention too. The 3 main endings are Anderson, TIm and Saren (as much as Red, Blue and Green). To me the endings work with non-destroy choices being the result of indoctrination.

Though I doubt you will accept what I have to say, since you asked me for my opinion, I will share it.  Basically control and synthesis are not options that only an indoctrinated Shepard would take.  For one thing, each player's Shepard is different, and that extends to his or her motives, which the the games give us ample opportunity to choose and express (an example of this being when Liara asks you in LotSB what you're fighting for), so the appeal of destroy over the other two options, right off the bat, largely hinges on what the player's motivations were.  Destroy is a valid choice, it kills the Reapers and saves the galaxy.  However, the unfortunate side effect is that previous cycles never designed the Crucible to discriminate and spare other synthetic life.  This new revalation, along with the true purpose of the Reapers and the Catalyst's submission to the superiority of the Crucible, is yet another example of Shepard's preconceptions being challenged and the character (and player) having to rethink their strategy to compensate for the new information.  All I can tell you for sure beyond that is my own motivation/my character's motivation behind the choice he made.  My Shepard rejected destroy simply because, regardless of the fact that the Reapers deserve to die for what they've done, they don't deserve it at the cost of his synthetic allies, for whom he cares.  Synthesis may very well be the final stage of evolution, but if that's the case then organics should reach it on their own, in their own time, so for my Shepard, who's goal was to protect as many people as possible, the only choice before him was to take control, become the warden of the Reapers, and keep them out of the galaxy's way from that point on.

As for why my Shepard believed it would work in the first place, the simple fact is that even if you pick destroy, you're taking a leap of faith.  A necesarry leap, mind you, as not using the Crucible results in a loss.  Nothing to lose, everything to gain.  The Illusive Man was right about the Crucible being able to control the Reapers, but was wrong in that he tried to control Reaper technology directly, getting himself indoctrinated in the process.  Saren's vision of techno-organic hybrids was a lie told to him by a species that did not have the capabilities nor desire to make it a reality.  What Saren wanted was impossible.  What the Crucible could achieve was possible, and therein lies the difference.

Actually his posts in other threads seemed as if he was part of the writting team trying to explain why the story played out the way it did. Not just in terms of IT or endings, but as a whole series.

Was not my intent to give anyone this impression.  I have no more credibility than any other fan of the story, and my opinion carries no extra weight.  I simply use in-game evidence to back what I say, but I don't claim to have more knowlege about the story than anyone else, I just use the knowlege available to us fans in what I think is the best way possible.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 22 juillet 2012 - 05:50 .

[The Twilight God]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
.....

Dude, we disagree. That's all there is to it.

At this point it is becoming an argument which is pointless. I've explained my position and I get yours. What else do you want? Sorry, but I'm not going to sit here and bicker with you over the internet. If you want to discuss the topic, fine. But I will not argue with you anymore. I didn't even bother to read past your first sentence.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 22 juillet 2012 - 05:53 .

[I_eat_unicorns]

The Twilight God wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

How long have you worked for Bioware?

Never, I simply paid attention to all three games.

Then would you agree that Control and Synthesis are options that only an indoctrinated Shepard would take?

If not, why? How would you rationalize shepard trusting the Reaper King?

Because I've been paying attention too. The 3 main endings are Anderson, TIm and Saren (as much as Red, Blue and Green). To me the endings work with non-destroy choices being the result of indoctrination.

If shepard chooses control, he/she basically turns into a god that uses the reapers as a) protecting the peace of the galaxy if paragon or using the reapers as the necessary leader he/she believes the galaxy needs if renegade. I would trust the catalyst as this is a solution to ending the reaper harvestation. 

Synthesis is crap to the mass effect  lore, but it's still a choice. Everyone is combined into one green glowing thing and form a bs galactic utopia. 

And destroy is destroy. 

All of these options do the same thing: ending the reaper threat. They are solutions as the catalyst said, and they work, so you can trust the catalyst. Refusal shows how not trusting the catalyst continues the cycle, since the game was about using the crucible to end the reaper threat, and then at last minute, you don't use it. 

[I_eat_unicorns]

The Twilight God wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
.....

Dude, we disagree. That's all there is to it.

At this point it is becoming an argument which is pointless. I've explained my position and I get yours. What else do you want? Sorry, but I'm not going to sit here and bicker with you over the internet. If you want to discuss the topic, fine. But I will not argue with you anymore. I didn't even bother to read past your first sentence.

You really eat your own words too much: "
I am constantly amazed at the debate skills on these forums. "You're wrong because I say you're wrong." Brilliant strategy. I guess you put me in my place as I am clear wrong because you say so. Bravo. Give yourself a pat on the back."


And you're not even open to anything anyone writes in this thread. If you came here to argue and you can't argue back as this is a forum, why bother posting in the first place?

[MegaSovereign]

In the Control/Synthesis ending, how can Shepard be indoctrinated if he dies almost immediately after picking it? Assuming that the entire sequence wasn't a hallucination?

[dtox666]

A couple of minutes of voice-overs laid on top of screen captures? Wow, that must have taken...all afternoon.