80611 réponses à ce sujet

[NebuchadnezzaRT]

It is time for a new page, I'm tired of scrolling

Edit: HA! 

Modifié par NebuchadnezzaRT, 28 septembre 2012 - 01:41 .

[demersel]

 @NebuchadnezzaRT - MP is a simulator, and a training gound. Once you promote you send the troops to the real war, and they know what to do. Real battles - do not come in eleven waves,  only pinnacle station simulations do. ))

@all -  what mass effect really lacks is a villian.  Old school human villian. 
like this - www.youtube.com/watch

[demersel]

@Big_Boss

Yes - you can. But you can't buy ME1 on PS3 yet, and you can't buy it on origin.
The trilogy pack will change that. I don't get it, why you all seem to be entitled to more free stuff.
Some people did not buy any of the ME games because they missed ME1 or were not able to play it fot it being an X-box exclusive. News flash - world does not revolve around X-box )))
Some people have yet to play Mass Effect 1 2 and 3 and thanks to a trilogy pack - now they can.
Besides this pack is more like collector's edition. And they are limited. So now the new players will be able to have a collector's edition of a trilogy.

[401 Kill]

demersel wrote...

 @NebuchadnezzaRT - MP is a simulator, and a training gound. Once you promote you send the troops to the real war, and they know what to do. Real battles - do not come in eleven waves,  only pinnacle station simulations do. ))

I disagree. I disagree because of the weekend operations. All of our objectives are supposed to have consequensces(addressed in Hackets speech on whether or not we passed the op. And the resulting penalty for failing) Multiplayer being a simulator nullifies these operations.

[Fingertrip]

How does this song not give you emotional feeling of closure and conclussion. It's even titled "Resolution".

Amongst many other set-pieces included in the Extended Cut, they give you a more satisfying closure of an ending to the game. Not bringing up the composers work on the songs tied alongside with the ending seems downright silly.

I'd hate to get the feeling of not feeling the emotional connection anymore, let-alone get it removed from a DLC-tied ending just a kick in the nuts. I really enjoyed the work on the Extended Cut and how they improved it. They explicity said the ending wouldn't change, and it by the definition of the an Indoctrinated-estique ending, they'd completely go against their own words, and lie to their consumers on what is the most important aspect-of the trilogy.

- So I didn't improve the vast majority of what's left of the population of the galaxy with the Synthetic choice? I thought that felt like an compelling choice, despite having to sacrifice myself in order to accomplish it?

- So I didn't become the Guardian/Watcher of the universe as an embodied entity that controls the Reaper? As much as I hate to admit, it seems the Illusive Man was right, to harness the knowledge the enemy is wisdom- I just couldn't see eye to eye until the very end. Maybe if we'd talked with the The Catalyst together, rather then on my own, I could have coped with the outcome better.

- I succesfully thwarted the Reaper threat with destroying them, but at the expense of losing some of my comrades, however- they said it's even worth dying to stop them on numerous occasions. We can rebuild, and I believe that Admiral Hackett is correct in his speech towards the end. We've really accomplished something magnifence TOGETHER. We can unify the galaxy and come under the banner and overcome any obstacle that is thrown at us. Hell, I even get to imagine my own fantasty- of how my ending will be. They'll come find me, or I'll come find them, then I'll retire to X and Y and just go live off the vids.

The knowledge of if there was an ending-canon related DLC tied to what is the Indoctrination Theory is real nutball move, they'd have some severe backlash, much alike what they've recieved in the first place for having a "Poor ending". At least by now, people have accepted what was given to them, and the controversy has tuned down abit. Having it resurface and smear their reputation furthermore just seems like the most stupidest & ridicilous move, any business could do.

[401 Kill]

demersel wrote...

@Big_Boss

Yes - you can. But you can't buy ME1 on PS3 yet, and you can't buy it on origin.
The trilogy pack will change that. I don't get it, why you all seem to be entitled to more free stuff.
Some people did not buy any of the ME games because they missed ME1 or were not able to play it fot it being an X-box exclusive. News flash - world does not revolve around X-box )))
Some people have yet to play Mass Effect 1 2 and 3 and thanks to a trilogy pack - now they can.
Besides this pack is more like collector's edition. And they are limited. So now the new players will be able to have a collector's edition of a trilogy.

That's just it. It's for the new players. People who already own the games are not being targeted for this.

[demersel]

401 Kill wrote...
]I disagree. I disagree because of the weekend operations. All of our objectives are supposed to have consequensces(addressed in Hackets speech on whether or not we passed the op. And the resulting penalty for failing) Multiplayer being a simulator nullifies these operations.

So the fact that operations are fixed, does not bother you at all? 

Modifié par demersel, 28 septembre 2012 - 01:55 .

[OneWithTheAssassins]

So none of the newer ME2 dlc for the trilogy pack?
*closes eyes and pinches bridge of nose*
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh....
EA needs to just go bankrupt and sell off there assets.

[demersel]

401 Kill wrote...
That's just it. It's for the new players. People who already own the games are not being targeted for this.

And that is bad, because.....? ...?:innocent:

[Big_Boss9]

demersel wrote...

@Big_Boss

Yes - you can. But you can't buy ME1 on PS3 yet, and you can't buy it on origin.
The trilogy pack will change that. I don't get it, why you all seem to be entitled to more free stuff.
Some people did not buy any of the ME games because they missed ME1 or were not able to play it fot it being an X-box exclusive. News flash - world does not revolve around X-box )))
Some people have yet to play Mass Effect 1 2 and 3 and thanks to a trilogy pack - now they can.
Besides this pack is more like collector's edition. And they are limited. So now the new players will be able to have a collector's edition of a trilogy.

I couldn't care less about Xbox. I'm a PC gamer myself. ME1 will be available as a standalone purchase for the PS3 once the trilogy goes live for PS3 so there's no incentive there. This is a largely valueless purchase for anyone except newcomers (and again, they can purchase all three individually for less than the pack) or the extreme minority who insist on buying anything with Mass Effect's name on it.  I suspect EA pushed this out earlier than a normal trilogy release would come out to reignite interest before the holidays and the WiiU release, but good luck with that in the midst of AC3, BO2, and Halo 4 dropping within a week of one another.

Modifié par Big_Boss9, 28 septembre 2012 - 01:58 .

[401 Kill]

demersel wrote...

401 Kill wrote...
That's just it. It's for the new players. People who already own the games are not being targeted for this.

And that is bad, because.....? ...?:innocent:

It's not bad at all. It's just for new players is all.

[NebuchadnezzaRT]

demersel wrote...

 @NebuchadnezzaRT - MP is a simulator, and a training gound. Once you promote you send the troops to the real war, and they know what to do. Real battles - do not come in eleven waves,  only pinnacle station simulations do. ))

@all -  what mass effect really lacks is a villian.  Old school human villian. 
like this - www.youtube.com/watch

I see what you mean and trust me I know where you are coming from. But Pinnacle Station is a complete unknown to new players (yes I know, weak arguement but it is still true- real dodos buy the third iteration of a game without playing 1 or 2)

Yes 11 waves are unrealistic and you would think the one good thing I have seen from EA (Battlefield) would impart more realism into the MP but latched on to the Horde mode success and ran with it.

From an in-universe perspective I love your idea about it being a simulator 

But the gamer in me has trouble arguing with Operations, weekly updates, and such 

[401 Kill]

OneWithTheAssassins wrote...

So none of the newer ME2 dlc for the trilogy pack?
*closes eyes and pinches bridge of nose*
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh....
EA needs to just go bankrupt and sell off there assets.

There is no shame for EA. They ruined all NFL video games buy buying the rights to make NFL games. They are producing NASCAR games that are worse than ones made in 2003. They've ruined the Harry Potter video games. This company wants to sacrifice quality for quantity. They have no shame and deserve no respect. I have been Boycotting EA games for years (aside from BF3 and the ME series).

Modifié par 401 Kill, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:02 .

[Daryslash]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...


My theory is that paragons were more easily fooled than renegades... because of the colours, and because most renegades will go for the explosive solution anyway. Or so I suspect.

Damn right paragons were fooled more easily. I went to the blue option because I thought that was the Destroy option. LOL
At least my intention was to destroy them. :/ 

[spotlessvoid]

Davik:

This was in response to your statement that you felt indoctrination may occur, but the endings are literally happening....


"it's 100% totally, completely, undeniably impossible to create something without either knowing what you are making or following the directions of someone who does."

Someone/Something designed the crucible. You don't start with a toaster, add bits and pieces each cycle, and end up with a Space Magic Gun. That's not how things work.



"Who decided to put the 3 options there?"


If it's Reaper trap why did they include destroy?

If it's an organic invention, why was synthesis and control included?


"And if Shepard is interacting with the crucible, what exactly are the Reapers indoctrinating him to do?"

What's the point of indoctrination if Shepard all gets to use the crucible? What did it accomplish?


"And if you say the wrong choice then AGAIN..why are there wrong choices even available?"

Again,
If it's Reaper trap why did they include destroy?

If it's an organic invention, why was synthesis and control included?


"And if it's atrap and the Reapers want Shepard to choose, why stop all the previous cycles?"

If it's a Reaper trap, why hasn't the crucible been fired in a previous cycle?

"Shepard is the right guy because Harbinger can't aim and doesn't know what a double tap is?"

This cycle is special because Harbinger didn't kill Shepard while defending the only access to the Citadel all by himself, while thousands of Reapers are near by? And by the way, if starchild doesn't turn on the magic elevator, Shepard bleeds out without choosing.


Literal and IT don't mix.

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:07 .

[demersel]

Big_Boss9 wrote...

So, again, that is bad, because....? 

To release the ME1 on PS3 they need to revamp it on a new engine (which the apperently did) - a say this is grand enough on itself.   I am a PC gamer mysefl. I don't care for any of the consoles, X-box, PS3, Wii-U - what ever. For me they will forever be lame, no matter how far they come and how they change. I have all ME games on PC.
I have hard copies of collectro's editions of ME2 and ME3.   I have bought ME1 like three or four times - the first disc got scratched, then i bought another one, but gave it away to a friend, then i bough a Gold Edition (was realeased in russia - the closest thing to CE.)  - 
But if it was availible for purchase on origin on a revamped engine, as a stand alone purchase, with DLCs included - i'd buy it.    In russia pinnacle station was not availible, for example. And it game with a copiright system like discguard or something, don't remember - remember that it was a pain in the ass - and it crashed constanlty (seriously - that game was NOT stable, and still isn't)  

[demersel]

NebuchadnezzaRT wrote...
But the gamer in me has trouble arguing with Operations, weekly updates, and such 

You mean the operations that have absolutely NO effect on the out come of the war whatsoever, cause 'officially' the war won with the RGB?   Those Operations? Ok. Have fun. ) 

In MP timeline - we are already somewhere near thessia - and way past the rannoch, since the geth are playable. Why then we still have geth as the enemy faction? After rannoch geth are either no more or all them fight for you. No geth left fighting against you. No heretics, no controlled geth. 

Modifié par demersel, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:11 .

[401 Kill]

demersel wrote...

NebuchadnezzaRT wrote...
But the gamer in me has trouble arguing with Operations, weekly updates, and such 

You mean the operations that have absolutely NO effect on the out come of the war whatsoever, cause 'officially' the war won with the RGB?   Those Operations? Ok. Have fun. ) 

Its all very confusing.

Modifié par 401 Kill, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:12 .

[NebuchadnezzaRT]

demersel wrote...

NebuchadnezzaRT wrote...
But the gamer in me has trouble arguing with Operations, weekly updates, and such 

You mean the operations that have absolutely NO effect on the out come of the war whatsoever, cause 'officially' the war won with the RGB?   Those Operations? Ok. Have fun. ) 

In MP timeline - we are already somewhere near thessia - and way past the rannoch, since the geth are playable. Why then we still have geth as the enemy faction? After rannoch geth are either no more or all them fight for you. No geth left fighting against you. No heretics, no controlled geth. 

 I'm not saying your not challenging how I think, you are! 

How about the Mp being developed by another studio, it was the other Bioware studio, Montreal? Edmonton? Or do they all work together for it?

[demersel]

NebuchadnezzaRT wrote...

How about the Mp being developed by another studio, it was the other Bioware studio, Montreal? Edmonton? Or do they all work together for it?

They work together wery closely.  (and by the way the studio that runs MP, may not be even aware that it is a simulator - it really makes no difference)

Besides i can explain how MP operations and objectives may tie itno real war events while mp being a simulator - 
In it you practice the scenarios - repeat it until you are perfect in them - so the operations - the challenges is an objective that is the most needed in the real war events in any given time - and the better you do in the simulation of it - the more likely the succes rate of the real operation.  It is like an everechanging pass exam. - it changes due to real conditions of the real war. Simple as that. 

[Davik Kang]

How'd this thread get turned into the Mass Effect $60 Trilogy Box set thread?

I've read some more about various people's interpretation of the ending so I wanted to give my own so far...

Btw let me make it clear from the beginning that I think Indoctrination is blatantly intended as a possible explanation of the final scenes, even if you decide in the end that you aren't indoctrinated or are above indoctrination, and choose Synthesis or Control anyway.

I think that a lot of the events after the Harbinger blast are actually real. There seem to be too many problems if you consider the whole thing to be a hallucination. In particular, that you could then interpret that Shepard is still unconscious and the battle is still going on after the ending, which a really don't think is meant to be the case.

So, I think that, semi-consciously, Shepard does indeed struggle past some ground husks into the beam, and does find herself (/himself) on some obscure part of the Citadel. I also think that, implausible as it may seem, Anderson and TIM find themselves on the vessel too. Shepard's appalling physical (and possibly mental) condition contributes to the dream-like quality of the occurrences here. The fact that TIM can manipulate Shepard on the Citadel into shooting Anderson, amongst other things, is rather eyebrow-raising, but I think that basically, these implausible elements contribute to a more epic finale. Implausible yes, but not totally ridiculous.

Thus the final conversation with Anderson is genuine, which it does appear to be. Then, as Shepard realises she is bleeding severely, and the Alliance radios in asking her to do something to make the crucible work, she struggles forward, but collapses with the controls just out of reach.

I think the true hallucination and indoctrination attempt start here, with previous suspicious imagery being a result of Shepard's weakened condition and semi-conscious state.

As for the next scene, I think that, just as Vigil made himself understood to the ME1 characters on Ilos, I think that the Crucible has been designed such that it can be understood by a sentient being, so that it can be manipulated and activated at the right time. Here, Shepard is guided to this understanding, but simultaneously confronted by the Catalyst, on awaking. I think the Catalyst, appearing as a ghost AI of the boy plaguing her dreams, is a reaper intelligence on board the Citadel, itself being some kind of dormant Reaper. Thus, in her drained and hallucinatory state, Shepard sees this image of the Catalyst explaining the possible solutions to its galactic problem, while simultaneously coming to understand how to operate the Crucible. I think that the perception of the Catalyst actually presenting these choices is a fallacy, and a desperate last-ditch attempt by the Reapers/Catalyst to indoctrinate Shepard into believing that Control or Synthesis are better options. But he cannot avoid Shepard understanding each of the choices and how to do them, because these choices are becoming understood simply because the sentient being (Shepard) made it to the controls (before passing out and then awaking, in the hallucinatory state).

This is how I understood it when I played, with a little added thought since perusing the forums here, and I hope it's clear that I've tried to avoid any massive leaps of logic or faith here, trying to describe the situation as close to a literal interpretation as possible.

Main problem with this theory is how Shepard appears to be back on Earth after surviving, and all I can say is, we're still speculating as to exactly where Shepard wakes up. But it certainly seems peaceful, and not in the middle of a heated battle.

Anyway, I hope some of you can give your thoughts on exactly how you see the reality of the ending, and where your interpretations differ from mine.

[401 Kill]

 @Demersel- Thus the "Simulation Theory" is born.

Modifié par 401 Kill, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:24 .

[Big_Boss9]

demersel wrote...

NebuchadnezzaRT wrote...

How about the Mp being developed by another studio, it was the other Bioware studio, Montreal? Edmonton? Or do they all work together for it?

They work together wery closely.  (and by the way the studio that runs MP, may not be even aware that it is a simulator - it really makes no difference)

Besides i can explain how MP operations and objectives may tie itno real war events while mp being a simulator - 
In it you practice the scenarios - repeat it until you are perfect in them - so the operations - the challenges is an objective that is the most needed in the real war events in any given time - and the better you do in the simulation of it - the more likely the succes rate of the real operation.  It is like an everechanging pass exam. - it changes due to real conditions of the real war. Simple as that. 

I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea of MP being a simulator (although I really doubt it), but in the end, what difference does it make? Has no impact on the game proper either way other than War Assets, although the idea of these promoted squads being more worthwhile than cruisers and the like is a bit silly.

Modifié par Big_Boss9, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:28 .

[OneWithTheAssassins]

I think this video PERFECTLY describes EA...
www.youtube.com/watch

[Rifneno]

demersel wrote...

NebuchadnezzaRT wrote...

How about the Mp being developed by another studio, it was the other Bioware studio, Montreal? Edmonton? Or do they all work together for it?

They work together wery closely.  (and by the way the studio that runs MP, may not be even aware that it is a simulator - it really makes no difference)

Besides i can explain how MP operations and objectives may tie itno real war events while mp being a simulator - 
In it you practice the scenarios - repeat it until you are perfect in them - so the operations - the challenges is an objective that is the most needed in the real war events in any given time - and the better you do in the simulation of it - the more likely the succes rate of the real operation.  It is like an everechanging pass exam. - it changes due to real conditions of the real war. Simple as that. 

I can't believe people are still latching onto Hellish's attention-whoring "idea".