80611 réponses à ce sujet

[BatmanTurian]

ajk_Jack wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Like I said, I'm a writer, so the wording hit me hard like a bad note in a song would hit a musician's ears. Not saying I'm special or anything, but I think that's why I caught it.

Most certainly.
I'm a big writer/noticer-of-small-details as well, and, as I said, if I had understood IT at the time I played the EC, it probably would of stood out more. It seems obvious in retrospect, but how many people really catch on with a literal mindset? It's just another, juicy little detail for us ITers.

yup. good to meet another fellow writer.

[BatmanTurian]

Skillz1986 wrote...

@spotless

Too little, too late

Btw it's always great to have a fresh IT member in here. Always gets speculations rolling again.
And batman, great observation concerning the tense used in the ending, never struck me as important.

In retrospect, it seems extremely important IMO.

[Restrider]

Why am I still here?

[ShepnTali]

ajk_Jack wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Like I said, I'm a writer, so the wording hit me hard like a bad note in a song would hit a musician's ears. Not saying I'm special or anything, but I think that's why I caught it.

Most certainly.
I'm a big writer/noticer-of-small-details as well, and, as I said, if I had understood IT at the time I played the EC, it probably would of stood out more. It seems obvious in retrospect, but how many people really catch on with a literal mindset? It's just another, juicy little detail for us ITers.

Further, defeated, a term I believe Hackett uses, doesn't mean destroyed. We don't know for fact all reapers are destroyed.

[Skillz1986]

@batman

Of course it does, didn't mean to imply the opposite.

[Skillz1986]

@ restrider
YOU CAN'T RESIST

[ajk_Jack]

Skillz1986 wrote...


Btw it's always great to have a fresh IT member in here. Always gets speculations rolling again.

I'm assuming I'm this fresh IT member you speak of? I've lurked around here quite a bit over the last few months, posted here and there.  Glad you guys accept me. Cheers to the friendliest thread on BSN!

Modifié par ajk_Jack, 05 octobre 2012 - 11:12 .

[BatmanTurian]

Skillz1986 wrote...

@batman

Of course it does, didn't mean to imply the opposite.

I know I'm just stating my opinion, not critisizing your wording.

[BatmanTurian]

ajk_Jack wrote...

Skillz1986 wrote...


Btw it's always great to have a fresh IT member in here. Always gets speculations rolling again.

I'm assuming I'm this fresh IT member you speak of? I've lurked around here quite a bit over the last few months, posted here and there.  Glad you guys accept me. Cheers to the friendliest thread on BSN!

We try. It's a jungle of trolls out there.

[BatmanTurian]

ShepnTali wrote...

ajk_Jack wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Like I said, I'm a writer, so the wording hit me hard like a bad note in a song would hit a musician's ears. Not saying I'm special or anything, but I think that's why I caught it.

Most certainly.
I'm a big writer/noticer-of-small-details as well, and, as I said, if I had understood IT at the time I played the EC, it probably would of stood out more. It seems obvious in retrospect, but how many people really catch on with a literal mindset? It's just another, juicy little detail for us ITers.

Further, defeated, a term I believe Hackett uses, doesn't mean destroyed. We don't know for fact all reapers are destroyed.

Good catch.

[ajk_Jack]

BatmanTurian wrote...

ajk_Jack wrote...

Skillz1986 wrote...


Btw it's always great to have a fresh IT member in here. Always gets speculations rolling again.

I'm assuming I'm this fresh IT member you speak of? I've lurked around here quite a bit over the last few months, posted here and there.  Glad you guys accept me. Cheers to the friendliest thread on BSN!

We try. It's a jungle of trolls out there.

Can't argue with that.

Modifié par ajk_Jack, 05 octobre 2012 - 11:16 .

[ajk_Jack]

Well, I'm heading out. There's an Operation that needs my participation.

[spotlessvoid]

Shameless repost is shameless

spotlessvoid wrote...

Series of posts in another thread. Nobody had a response. Lol

Final Hours clearly stated that Bioware hadtrouble implementing a game mechanic where the player loses control of Shepard along side the dialogue wheel. What that proves that indoctrination was where Bioware intended the narrative to go. Bioware wouldn't just drop that and change the whole story. Instead, they implemented it in stunning meta fashion.
Extended cut was acrappy slide show that makes a mockery of everything mass effect. It was a bone thrown to everyone raging over the ending because they didn't get what Bioware was going for. A short voice over and some still pictures are nothing but a,way to quite things down enough to let their dlc plan be put into effect. Extended Cut was a huge joke


Control: Shepard is in charge of the entire Reaper armada. Nobody can challenge him. No conflict can exist in any large enough sense to make a sequel

Synthesis: The entire galaxy and Reaper armada are working as one. No potential conflict, no potential sequel.

Destroy: Possible, but the Reapers are gone. Leviathan wouldbe only enemy possible. Completely anti climatic since the Leviathan only have a fraction of Reaper numbers.

Bioware will have to spit in everyone's face who doesn't choose their given ending canon to make a sequel. It would literally be like your choice didn't happen

The only possibility is IT where choosing destroy breaks the indoctrination attempt. This would mean your final choice DOES matter, but only Sheps who break indoctrination can get up/have their assets/squad help to activate the crucible.

Personally like the idea that the crucible only brings down the Reapers shields allowing the galactic fleet to drive the Reapers out of Sol system. Thus, taking Earth back, and setting up perfectly for future content

[Arashi08]

So they are in fact making an ME4 then?
I'm a bit sad, I didn't really want there to be an ME4; I wanted it to be a trilogy and not succumb to the "if it makes money make more sequels" formula, since games, movies, TV shows etc that usually do that usually have lower quality work. That was all before I saw ME3s endings of course, so now I have no idea what to expect.

[BatmanTurian]

Arashi08 wrote...

So they are in fact making an ME4 then?
I'm a bit sad, I didn't really want there to be an ME4; I wanted it to be a trilogy and not succumb to the "if it makes money make more sequels" formula, since games, movies, TV shows etc that usually do that usually have lower quality work. That was all before I saw ME3s endings of course, so now I have no idea what to expect.

Not me. I want more ME. They have an awesome galaxy to play around in with a lot of potential.

[BatmanTurian]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Shameless repost is shameless

spotlessvoid wrote...

Series of posts in another thread. Nobody had a response. Lol

Final Hours clearly stated that Bioware hadtrouble implementing a game mechanic where the player loses control of Shepard along side the dialogue wheel. What that proves that indoctrination was where Bioware intended the narrative to go. Bioware wouldn't just drop that and change the whole story. Instead, they implemented it in stunning meta fashion.
Extended cut was acrappy slide show that makes a mockery of everything mass effect. It was a bone thrown to everyone raging over the ending because they didn't get what Bioware was going for. A short voice over and some still pictures are nothing but a,way to quite things down enough to let their dlc plan be put into effect. Extended Cut was a huge joke


Control: Shepard is in charge of the entire Reaper armada. Nobody can challenge him. No conflict can exist in any large enough sense to make a sequel

Synthesis: The entire galaxy and Reaper armada are working as one. No potential conflict, no potential sequel.

Destroy: Possible, but the Reapers are gone. Leviathan wouldbe only enemy possible. Completely anti climatic since the Leviathan only have a fraction of Reaper numbers.

Bioware will have to spit in everyone's face who doesn't choose their given ending canon to make a sequel. It would literally be like your choice didn't happen

The only possibility is IT where choosing destroy breaks the indoctrination attempt. This would mean your final choice DOES matter, but only Sheps who break indoctrination can get up/have their assets/squad help to activate the crucible.

Personally like the idea that the crucible only brings down the Reapers shields allowing the galactic fleet to drive the Reapers out of Sol system. Thus, taking Earth back, and setting up perfectly for future content

Yeah, I read that and I completely agree.

[Skillz1986]

@spot
Some great statements right there.
The idea of the crucible dropping the reaper's shields came up in the original IT thread at some point and i was a big supporter. It was somehow dropped pretty quick though, i guess our bad tempered badger (rifneno) didn't like it all too much (it's all friendly badger ) among others.

Anyways i'm off to bed, gotta work in the morning. That's right no weekend for me.

Good night to all of you.

[spotlessvoid]

Arashi08 wrote...

So they are in fact making an ME4 then?
I'm a bit sad, I didn't really want there to be an ME4; I wanted it to be a trilogy and not succumb to the "if it makes money make more sequels" formula, since games, movies, TV shows etc that usually do that usually have lower quality work. That was all before I saw ME3s endings of course, so now I have no idea what to expect.

If Bioware pulls off IT I'd give them direct access to my bank account

[Dwailing]

I'm thinking about the Crucible Drops the Reaper's Shields Hypothesis, and it's just struck me that they might have foreshadowed that. In the Codex entry "Reaper Capabilities" (I believe that's what it's called), it mentions specifically that the reason the Reapers are so hard to kill is because of how thick their kinetic barriers are, not because of how thick their armor is. This could be seen as foreshadowing that the key to beating the Reapers is to bring down their shields, which could be what the Crucible does.

[munnellyladt]

Yeah I don't like "if it makes more money make more sequels"thing either,but did they confirm if it was a sequel or a prequel?
Because I would have no intrest in playing a prequel in the mass effect universe,and with the endings as they are,it would be impossible for bioware to make the game as a sequel.
It would be like 3 different games.

[CmdrShep80]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Arashi08 wrote...

So they are in fact making an ME4 then?
I'm a bit sad, I didn't really want there to be an ME4; I wanted it to be a trilogy and not succumb to the "if it makes money make more sequels" formula, since games, movies, TV shows etc that usually do that usually have lower quality work. That was all before I saw ME3s endings of course, so now I have no idea what to expect.

If Bioware pulls off IT I'd give them direct access to my bank account

ya but they did say way back in ME 1 that this would be a trilogy. So is having ME 3 part 1 and 2 still considered a trilogy?

[BatmanTurian]

munnellyladt wrote...

Yeah I don't like "if it makes more money make more sequels"thing either,but did they confirm if it was a sequel or a prequel?
Because I would have no intrest in playing a prequel in the mass effect universe,and with the endings as they are,it would be impossible for bioware to make the game as a sequel.
It would be like 3 different games.

They haven't confirmed prequel or sequel. But logically, a sequel ( or a story set within the timeline of ME3) would sell better because a prequel would be Mass Effect: Titanic. We'll already know how it ends.

[BleedingUranium]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Series of posts in another thread. Nobody had a response. Lol

Final Hours clearly stated that Bioware hadtrouble implementing a game mechanic where the player loses control of Shepard along side the dialogue wheel. What that proves that indoctrination was where Bioware intended the narrative to go. Bioware wouldn't just drop that and change the whole story. Instead, they implemented it in stunning meta fashion.
Extended cut was acrappy slide show that makes a mockery of everything mass effect. It was a bone thrown to everyone raging over the ending because they didn't get what Bioware was going for. A short voice over and some still pictures are nothing but a,way to quite things down enough to let their dlc plan be put into effect. Extended Cut was a huge joke


Control: Shepard is in charge of the entire Reaper armada. Nobody can challenge him. No conflict can exist in any large enough sense to make a sequel

Synthesis: The entire galaxy and Reaper armada are working as one. No potential conflict, no potential sequel.

Destroy: Possible, but the Reapers are gone. Leviathan wouldbe only enemy possible. Completely anti climatic since the Leviathan only have a fraction of Reaper numbers.

Bioware will have to spit in everyone's face who doesn't choose their given ending canon to make a sequel. It would literally be like your choice didn't happen

The only possibility is IT where choosing destroy breaks the indoctrination attempt. This would mean your final choice DOES matter, but only Sheps who break indoctrination can get up/have their assets/squad help to activate the crucible.

Personally like the idea that the crucible only brings down the Reapers shields allowing the galactic fleet to drive the Reapers out of Sol system. Thus, taking Earth back, and setting up perfectly for future content

I completely agree, and in hindsight, the excessive marketing focus on "Taking Back Earth" would make a lot of sense in this context. Especially since Earth was never important at all before ME3. In fact, only one possible Shepard was born/lived here, and (s)he hated it

[BleedingUranium]

CmdrShep80 wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Arashi08 wrote...

So they are in fact making an ME4 then?
I'm a bit sad, I didn't really want there to be an ME4; I wanted it to be a trilogy and not succumb to the "if it makes money make more sequels" formula, since games, movies, TV shows etc that usually do that usually have lower quality work. That was all before I saw ME3s endings of course, so now I have no idea what to expect.

If Bioware pulls off IT I'd give them direct access to my bank account

ya but they did say way back in ME 1 that this would be a trilogy. So is having ME 3 part 1 and 2 still considered a trilogy?

Technically, yes. And we all know how companies are with marketing wordings. It would also fit with the "ME3 is the end of Shepard's story" statements.

[munnellyladt]

BatmanTurian wrote...

munnellyladt wrote...

Yeah I don't like "if it makes more money make more sequels"thing either,but did they confirm if it was a sequel or a prequel?
Because I would have no intrest in playing a prequel in the mass effect universe,and with the endings as they are,it would be impossible for bioware to make the game as a sequel.
It would be like 3 different games.

They haven't confirmed prequel or sequel. But logically, a sequel ( or a story set within the timeline of ME3) would sell better because a prequel would be Mass Effect: Titanic. We'll already know how it ends.

But seriously,how the hell can they pull it off if the endings are remaining the same.
There's so much to account for in a sequel unless there is only one ending or two endings that are simular.