80611 réponses à ce sujet

[His Name was HYR!!]

Xilizhra = glutton for punishment.

[V-rcingetorix]

lol. I don't particularly want one "better" ending, I want an ending that has similar meaning to the previous two games, all the DLC's and side missions.

Honestly, the only thing I dislike about ME3 is how the ending blindsided me. 5 years, over a two dozen playthroughs, a fantastically satisfying 30+ hour buildup aaaaannnnddd (WHAM!), ReapersaredeadsoisShepard. The end.

EDIT: spelling. I can never spell everything right the first time through...

Modifié par V-rcingetorix, 14 octobre 2012 - 04:53 .

[spotlessvoid]

VR...

Yeah, I think most of us felt betrayed. I haven't lost faith in Bioware yet

[masster blaster]

What just happened?

[Fur28]

magnetite wrote...

V-rcingetorix wrote...

lol. I don't particularly want one "better" ending, I want an ending that has similar meaning to the previous two games, all the DLC's and side missions.

Honestly, the only thing I dislike about ME3 is how the ending blindsided me. 5 years, over a two dozen playthroughs, a fantastically satisfying 30+ hour buildup aaaaannnnddd (WHAM!), ReapersaredeadsoisShepard. The end.

EDIT: spelling. I can never spell everything right the first time through...

The choices you did in previous games did not affect their endings (eg. ME1 choices did not affect ME2's ending. ME1+ME2 choices did not affect ME3's ending). However, certain parts of the game, the dialogue was different. I remember on my full playthrough, Conrad mentioned something about Asari writings (a side mission from ME1 that I did). I did not get this line on my other playthroughs which didn't complete every single mission. 

then that means that the ending not taking in count or decisions was because mac walters didnt want to aknowledge them?
because i remember that other writers did the middle segment of the game, and in all that segment i saw little lines mentioning decisions about most of the decisions i made in the previous games.

[masster blaster]

So TIM is Indoctrinated. Ya that's great, and star brat it still star brat. So what is the whole deal with them. Clearly the brat is trying to push TIM aside, so that Shepard can be his favorite. I mean when TIM dies you would think now is a good time to assume direct control over TIM. Shepard can't move as fast, and the Reapers can stop Shepard now. Also I find it funnt that so many dead bodys, are already on the Citadel with no Reaper soldiers takeing the bodys to make the new Reaper.

I mean they just can't leave the bodys there, and just do nothing with them. Yes Keepers are in the scene, yet they are not taking the bodys anywhere. Actually there is no place to take the bodys for the ascention. What I mean is there is only one way out, and yes dead bodys everwhere, but build a conduit to take you to the control panel? Makes no sense.

Also isn't funny that Harbinger never leaves human soldiers alive, and if you have low EMS, then how the hell does your squad apper right in front of you. When you wake up from Harbingers beam. Makes no sense because we all saw our squad mates get the death by Harbinger beam, and they went bye bye. That's is if you have low ems.

Actually I wish I could do an ME3 playthrough of low EMS. I want to see if there are more clues/ hints.

[masster blaster]

Also TSA if you are here, or anybody, then what was the files, where you found the files about TIM, and Anderson being the speakers, and Shepard is the listener?

[Ghrelt]

Okay, this might be the wrong place to ask this question but I know you guys have dissected this series upside-down and backwards, so you might have some pretty good insight.

Were we ever told why exactly Cerberus tried to sabotage the alliance between the Krogans and Turians? Also, James mentions that on Fehl Prime the colony was betrayed by a Cerberus agent who was working *with* the Collectors. Is it mentioned anywhere else that there could be a connection between the Collectors and Cerberus?

I only bring this up because I'm hoping they deliberately left this unanswered with the intention of tying it all together better with the Omega DLC.

[masster blaster]

Well I guess goodnight then.

[masster blaster]

Elly, I don't know. I am in no shape to chat with you because I can barly keep my eyes open, but other than Harbinger Controling the Collectors, and Cerberus working with the Reapers. That's about it. However Omega could show Cerberus creating cloned Collectors, one Omega.

[Restrider]

Peace Blade wrote...

Alright guys, two things:

I've noticed in mkII there was a mention of a ''bug'' at startup, sometimes when your comp is slow you see a video of a dark planet with fires. Someone said it was Palaven, but i screenshotted it and zoomed, and guess what.... its Earth!

you can check it out yourself
http://imageshack.us...mageresized.png

One of possible explanations to this is that Shepard is still on Earth, and war is not yet over.

Another thing, not sure if anyone noticed.... on a terminal in spectre office it says how galactic economy can only sustain war for a year before collapsing... funny how thats how long bioware plans to release dlc's for the game.....

That picture looks like something from the cutscene, where the fleets arrive in the Sol system. (BTW: I always get nerd-chills during that scene).

And the bolded part is ... interesting.

Edit: Polls! 1 and 2 !

Modifié par Restrider, 14 octobre 2012 - 10:41 .

[KyreneZA]

Peace Blade wrote...

Alright guys, two things:

I've noticed in mkII there was a mention of a ''bug'' at startup, sometimes when your comp is slow you see a video of a dark planet with fires. Someone said it was Palaven, but i screenshotted it and zoomed, and guess what.... its Earth!

you can check it out yourself
http://imageshack.us...mageresized.png

One of possible explanations to this is that Shepard is still on Earth, and war is not yet over.

Another thing, not sure if anyone noticed.... on a terminal in spectre office it says how galactic economy can only sustain war for a year before collapsing... funny how thats how long bioware plans to release dlc's for the game.....

When does that screen show up?

Also, bolded: so even if we win, we lose?

[Leonia]

So I noticed that the challenge banner for defeating Reapers is a picture of Harbinger in Sovereign-red imposed on the Citadel hallway (the one with all the dead bodies). Proof of IT?

[KyreneZA]

Regarding the Final Hours app: is there a YT somewhere of the part where the dropping of indoctrinated Shepard in game was discussed? I'd love to read/see that.
***
Some speculations I'd like confirmation of:

- Harbinger is the first Reaper based in looks and seemingly in morality/character on the Leviathans.
- The Intelligence was created by the Leviathans and may/may not co-/inhabit Harbinger.
- Leviathans is not the name they have for themselves.
- The Guardian may/may not be Harbinger/another Reaper/an un-/shackled AI on the Citadel.
- The Catalyst may/may not be Harbinger/the Intelligence/the Guardian/Shepard/an un-/shackled AI on the Citadel.
- Reapers are independent in thought, but united in goal under the Child.
- The Child may/may not be Harbinger/the Intelligence/the Guardian/an un-/shackled AI on the Citadel/the Citadel.
- The Crucible may/may not be a Reaper trap/designed by the Leviathans/work as intended.
- The beam is to...?

[Lyria]

protognosis wrote...

So Ive been thinking, a dangerous act I'm sure, about the floating city at the end of control. What is it? I think it's a warning. You notice through the ending how EDIs voice over talks about how they are all connected and at the end we see a floating vessel. Could it be a neo-rEAper? A platform like a giant Geth. Makes me want to stick with Destroy more. Has there been much discussion.on it?

[Kurrabin]

SwobyJ wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

" That's exactly what's happened for every other decision in the game."

Huh????????


Your decisions in game can cost lives! And not just the suicide mission. Wrex, Mordin, etc. Were there two happy decisions on Virmire?

Both decisions on Virmire are equally valid. The suicide mission doesn't have "choices" so much as tactics, and is solely a mechanical affair. Which outcome is better for the genophage cure is also subjective, except arguably in terms of war assets, and even a loss of assets here can be made up for in other areas with no noticeable difference.

Wahh. Why wont a 6 month old thread with hundreds of members and thousands of pages compromise with me!?

You know, it's not good for your mind to stay in an echo chamber getting only variations on your own opinions bounced back to you.

Oh my god I will just stop bothering even reading your posts from now on. The irony of the things you say is hilarious.

Technically he is right on the tactical level. If Wrex is killed, hic brother takes his place (and basically nobody kill Wrex). The choice of VS is superficial (no game changing effect), so is your LI (of course this is personal, but the game stays the same). Geth heretics, rachni queen, thorian, etc have only minor effects. You still play the same game, more or less.

A significant change would be having an entire different level, or large differences in available teammates. I think DA:O does this to a level, or a better example would be the witcher 2.

[Skillz1986]

You just have to love how the first verese of linkn parks "burning it down" fits me3.

[ajk_Jack]

Kyrene wrote...

Peace Blade wrote...

Alright guys, two things:

I've noticed in mkII there was a mention of a ''bug'' at startup, sometimes when your comp is slow you see a video of a dark planet with fires. Someone said it was Palaven, but i screenshotted it and zoomed, and guess what.... its Earth!

you can check it out yourself
http://imageshack.us...mageresized.png

One of possible explanations to this is that Shepard is still on Earth, and war is not yet over.

Another thing, not sure if anyone noticed.... on a terminal in spectre office it says how galactic economy can only sustain war for a year before collapsing... funny how thats how long bioware plans to release dlc's for the game.....

When does that screen show up?

Also, bolded: so even if we win, we lose?

I have the PS3 version of the game, and that picture always shows up when I start up the game for about 10 seconds or so.

And yes, that bolded statement could very likely coincide with BioWare's DLC plans...extend the war to a year's worth of time, put the war effort to its final gasping breaths, and you have an interesting scenario for a possible 'after breath scene' DLC. Or not. Who knows?

[Home run MF]

leonia42 wrote...

So I noticed that the challenge banner for defeating Reapers is a picture of Harbinger in Sovereign-red imposed on the Citadel hallway (the one with all the dead bodies). Proof of IT?

Picture for the ones that don't play MP

[V-rcingetorix]

magnetite wrote...

V-rcingetorix wrote...

lol. I don't particularly want one "better" ending, I want an ending that has similar meaning to the previous two games, all the DLC's and side missions.

Honestly, the only thing I dislike about ME3 is how the ending blindsided me. 5 years, over a two dozen playthroughs, a fantastically satisfying 30+ hour buildup aaaaannnnddd (WHAM!), ReapersaredeadsoisShepard. The end.

EDIT: spelling. I can never spell everything right the first time through...

The choices you did in previous games did not affect their endings (eg. ME1 choices did not affect ME2's ending. ME1+ME2 choices did not affect ME3's ending). However, certain parts of the game, the dialogue was different. I remember on my full playthrough, Conrad mentioned something about Asari writings (a side mission from ME1 that I did). I did not get this line on my other playthroughs which didn't complete every single mission. 

Close, but no Kewpie doll

If you save the Council in ME1, you have an easier time gaining trust ine ME2 and ME3. If you save the Feros Colony in ME1, you get a little sidequest in ME2, and some EMS points in ME3.

If you do the sidequests in ME2, you get some EMS boost in ME3; so you're right there. Save/destroy the C Base, it makes little difference to the ME3 ending.

What I had meant though was that the decicions made during ME2 effected your ending (loyal squad=victory/life). Same for ME1, although to not so great an extent.

Why did this change for ME3? Practically nothing I did effected the ending; I might as well have ignored the Krogan/Turians, Quarian/Geth issues, walked up to the Intelligence and chose my flavor. I could get the EMS rating from multiplayer and whatever I did in ME1/ME2, and not do anything, and still have the same ending.

That's what bugs me. I do a perfect playthrough (perfectionist that I am), annnnnd (WHAM!). Suicide, Suicide and Suicide.

Makes me think maybe the Indoctrinated People were the Programmers.

[Restrider]

Nothing is better than moving to the private sector, working for Core-Hislop-Aerospace and have a new ship :>

[cavs25]

Home run MF wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

So I noticed that the challenge banner for defeating Reapers is a picture of Harbinger in Sovereign-red imposed on the Citadel hallway (the one with all the dead bodies). Proof of IT?

Picture for the ones that don't play MP

Thats just proof that Bioware loves messing with the IT population..

[ealeander]

OK, after vigilantly remaining spoiler-free for months, I just finished my *first* playthrough of ME3 last night and decided to see what other people thought this morning and found this theory mostly agreed with how I perceived the ending.

Three things to note:

1) I have only experienced the ending via the extended cut
2) I played through the Leviathan DLC first
3) I very much enjoyed the ending aside from the corny post-credits scene

In regards to (3), from what I can tell, this was largely a result of (1) and (2) since (1) meant the aftermath was not that ambiguous and (2) meant that the final conversation with the Catalyst did not seem like a jarring info-dump. Rather, it seemed like the natural conclusion to the Leviathan-based context in which I played most of the campaign.

Now, with that said, I assumed early on that I would be given a final choice between destroy/control and made up my mind early in the game that destroy was the only logical conclusion as it was the only way I could be sure that Shepard truly defeated the Reapers. So when I encountered the final sequence, I immediately assumed the Catalyst was trying to deceive Shepard into accepting indoctrination. The final confirming clues for me were:

1) The Catalyst appeared as the child at the beginning who, to me, represented the fact that Shepard can't save everyone. When the child is encountered in the vent after the Reaper attack, it represents the threat of Shepard being lured down a semi-literal "rabbit hole" in a futile attempt to save the child rather than making the hard decision to leave someone behind so she could escape Earth and save the galaxy. The subsequent dreams represented Shepard contending with this guilt, and the final appearance of the child as the manifestation of the Catalyst was an attempt, by the Reapers, to play on Shepard's guilt and attempt to convince her that she could save everyone by not destroying the Reapers. After reading this thread, I can see how some would see the early encounters with the child and the dreams as earlier indoctrination attempts, and while that seems possible, I can go either way. To me, what the child symbolizes works for the story regardless of whether or not the earlier encounter was a Reaper indoctrination attempt.

2) This idea of the central moral conflict being Shepard's inability to save everyone is reinforced in three ways. First, Saren's indoctrination was based on his notion that he could save everyone by joining the Reapers, but it was made clear in the first game that this was a false choice. Second, the first game reinforced that there isn't always an obvious "Paragon" choice by forcing Shepard to sacrifice either Kaidan or Ashley. Third, in the final conversations with your squadmates (most notably Javik), it is made clear that Shepard still has one more difficult decision to make, implying that victory will demand Shepard make one more Kaidan/Ashley style decision.

3) As I interpreted it, there were actually two forms of indoctrination that Shepard is presented with. The first is "willing indoctrination" of the sort represented by Saren and the so-called "synthesis" option in which Shepard submits to willing integration with synthetic life. The second is "delusional indoctrination" of the sort represented by the Illusive Man and the so-called "control" option in which Shepard believes she is controlling the Reapers (but, in fact, I believe would merely be turned into the "essence" of a new Shepard-reaper under the Catalyst's control). Interestingly, the "I Refuse These Choices" represents the "bad" good ending, as Shepard resists indoctrination but succumbs to a final failure of nerve and leadership as she proves unable to make that final, difficult decision. Either way, it serves the Reapers' purposes.

4) Thus, "destroy" represents overcoming the last attempt at indoctrination in which Shepard recognizes that a final, ugly Kaidan/Ashley-style decision is necessary to put an end to the Reaper threat.

5) At the same time, the "reversal" of the paragon/renegade alignment (i.e.,the Catalyst presents the Illusive Man as the Paragon and Anderson as the Renegade) was not simply a deceptive reversal of the "true" options but a further indication that there was no easy, Paragon out just as there was no way to "Paragon" the survival of both Kaidan and Ashley. While the Catalyst was obviously trying to urge Shepard away from "destroy," "destroy" itself wasn't really a true Paragon option but an affirmation that, sometimes, there are no easy decisions.

And a few more notes about how I interpreted things:

a) Since I played Leviathan before the ending, I had already come to understand that the Reapers were designed to preserve the dynamism of organic evolution within a stable system rather than allowing organics to be wiped out or replaced by the ultimate stagnation of pure, synthetic "order." Early on, given what we knew from the end of ME2, it seemed obvious to me that the Reapers themselves "evolved" as machines by absorbing the unpredictable essence of new organic species into themselves. So, with that and what I thought about Saren in mind, the "synthesis" option just seemed like an obvious attempt to get Shepard to fulfill the Reapers' true goal: to integrate organic life into itself to further the stable progression of life (in the ultimate form of the Reapers themselves).

Though I'm not sure whether I accept the "it's all a hallucination" theory, I am intrigued by how others have noted the parallels between the "synthesis beam" and the "teleportation beam" in London. While I didn't make that connection at the time, it could further reinforce the notion that "synthesis" represented "willing indoctrination" as Shepard walks into the "teleportation beam" to join the Reapers on the Citadel and be integrated with them while "control" leaves Shepard a deluded lunatic grabbing rubble on Earth and "destroy", obviously, leads to Shepard "waking up" (though I initially interpreted this as Shepard in the ruins of the Citadel, not London).

Anyway, I'm sure all of this has already been said before, but I enjoyed the game immensely and was pleased with the ending and thought I'd share my thoughts on how I experienced it.

Last Disclaimer: I'm not saying the above is the perfect right absolute truth, but the great thing about roleplaying games is how they let us inhabit the protagonist and shape our own narrative as we play. The above is my true Mass Effect 3, an exploration of a great leader tormented by her inability to save everyone and ultimately faced with the temptation of a false escape from that horrible responsibility, and I loved it... your story is your own and I'm not trying to say it's the "wrong" way to experience the game.

Modifié par ealeander, 14 octobre 2012 - 03:21 .