80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Dwailing]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

Ithurael wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Actaully why are we still speculating. People said that the reason we speculated was to wait for the EC, but we are still here, and people are still speculating. Why would Bioware tell us, and others to still speculate, if the endings are as they are?

Oh it because they don't want hurt the ITers, or make them lash out at them. Really that's what people say. I mean come on Bioware could have denied it the momunte if it was born if they didn't intend IT.

Yes their are other theorys, but most of them are not really about the endings, more like making fun of them. Yes Intoxination is a theorys, but I haven't seen that thread for 3 months. Yet here we IT are still kicking.

Not to burst your bubble too much but Merizan did state that if your version of IT requires more content - that is not the interpretation of bioware. Now, with this new annoucement - that the trilogy is over and no shep in ME4 - it seems bioware has a very clear intent for how the ME trilogy ended as well as shepards story and where they want to take the sequel.

IT is an interpretation. If you are happy with it great. but no one has the authority to say "Your interpretation is wrong!" that would be silly.

There is, however, a difference between the fans interpretation and the intent/interpretation bioware has.

Ha. All of Leviathan was IT content, as far as I'm concerned at least.

^ So much this.

They included a mind control scene that exactly mirrors the beginning of the decision chamber scene, then went on to explain that Leviathans can read your mind, fabricate illusions from your memories, and the Reapers have perfected this technique.

They couldn't have thrown a bigger bone to IT, short of simply coming out and confirming that the ending was an illusion.

My doubts about Bioware's intent are non-existent since Leviathan came out.

^This.

Leviathan is easily one of the most important pieces of evidence for IT.  Additionally, I should point out that I think BioWare actually HAS confirmed, in their own, indirect way, that the ending sequence is some kind of illusion.  Think about it.  During the one online interview, Priestly said that there are elements of the final sequence that come from Shepard's memories.  Now, a few weeks later, Leviathan comes out, with this line, "Your memories give shape to our words (At least, I'm pretty sure that's the line.)."  Yeah. 

Modifié par Dwailing, 19 octobre 2012 - 05:34 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

spotlessvoid wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The problem with the ending is it's too vague. Is it all an indoctrination attempt? An overlay on the Citadel? An overlay on Earth? Only some of it a hallucination? Is it literal? Is it literal but the consequences in the slide show false? That is way too much ambiguity.

That's not like Inception/Total Recall/Bladerunner because those are meant to be a choice between two scenarios. The Mass Effect endings are really up for debate on almost everything.

If they never give any answers, it's going to feel like they just threw a little bit of everything in and they don't actually have the scenarios thought out. Which is a total cop out. If the majority of your fan base thinks it's so convoluted that they find it impossible to conceive it has deeper meaning, and the rest can't even fully agree on what that deeper meaning truly is...you've failed at storytelling. This isn't just a work of art, it's also very much a commercial product. A relatively expensive one too.

If the fans defending the deeper meaning ending mostly think additional content is needed, then it's probably needed. The indoctrination/hallucination elements are there, but it's inconclusive exactly what it means and what actually transpires.

The people looking the hardest at everything are fairly uniformly asking for elaboration. That really says a lot

What should BW do to make it less ambiguous while not saying "yep it's that"? I mean just the similarities of "Breathe." and "Wake up." are like slapping in your face but most people don't even want to see it as such.

I don't get that. Exactly why can't it be more obvious?
Are there strong similarities in Leviathan? Yes. Are they undeniably linked? No. They also "confirmed" the catalyst. Our explanation for that is good, but it's not in game. Now if Omega has a scene like that, I'll call it a pattern instead of a possible coincidence.

Again, literal got a whole dlc expanding on it. That's being prescriptive. They got their closure. I don't understand this mentality that IT only deserves a wink that could be just an eye twitch. How bout a damn high five! If we aren't getting closure or elaboration then I think a blatant shout out isn't unreasonable. If it really was their vision then why do we only get scraps? I know not everyone agrees, and that's fine.

Beyond all of that though, I think there is one thing you have to be delusional to rationalize as acceptable:

If there truly is no IT DLC then Mike Gamble refusing to respond to his own community managers denial of IT DLC is simply put : cruel. A lot of you think it's not needed. A lot think it is. That's debatable. Allowing false hope to drag out a year is despicable. That isn't debatable.

Read my post right above yours.

[spotlessvoid]

Lol I did read it. Read the one below it haha. Look we can disagree on that. I don't really see how you can disagree with the last part

[Xilizhra]

During the one online interview, Priestly said that there are elements of the final sequence that come from Shepard's memories.

Like... the Catalyst's hologram that was blatantly obviously so even from a literalist perspective? And the flashbacks?

[Restrider]

Xilizhra wrote...

During the one online interview, Priestly said that there are elements of the final sequence that come from Shepard's memories.

Like... the Catalyst's hologram that was blatantly obviously so even from a literalist perspective? And the flashbacks?

As literalist you cannot deny that the Guardian is in Shepard's head (-> uses form of some random kid that probalby died on Earth).
We know for a fact that the Guardian is aligned to the Reapers (-> the Guardian itself states that).
As literalist you cannot deny that Reapers use mind control tricks also known as indoctrination.
It has been confirmed by Priestly that in the final sequence are parts that are not to be taken literally.

Now conclude whatever you want from the FACTS listed above.
A 100% literal point of view is asinine.
The only question now is when/where do the non-literal parts take place, how is the outcome of the different choices and how does the story conclude.

[MegumiAzusa]

spotlessvoid wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The problem with the ending is it's too vague. Is it all an indoctrination attempt? An overlay on the Citadel? An overlay on Earth? Only some of it a hallucination? Is it literal? Is it literal but the consequences in the slide show false? That is way too much ambiguity.

That's not like Inception/Total Recall/Bladerunner because those are meant to be a choice between two scenarios. The Mass Effect endings are really up for debate on almost everything.

If they never give any answers, it's going to feel like they just threw a little bit of everything in and they don't actually have the scenarios thought out. Which is a total cop out. If the majority of your fan base thinks it's so convoluted that they find it impossible to conceive it has deeper meaning, and the rest can't even fully agree on what that deeper meaning truly is...you've failed at storytelling. This isn't just a work of art, it's also very much a commercial product. A relatively expensive one too.

If the fans defending the deeper meaning ending mostly think additional content is needed, then it's probably needed. The indoctrination/hallucination elements are there, but it's inconclusive exactly what it means and what actually transpires.

The people looking the hardest at everything are fairly uniformly asking for elaboration. That really says a lot

What should BW do to make it less ambiguous while not saying "yep it's that"? I mean just the similarities of "Breathe." and "Wake up." are like slapping in your face but most people don't even want to see it as such.

I don't get that. Exactly why can't it be more obvious?
Are there strong similarities in Leviathan? Yes. Are they undeniably linked? No. They also "confirmed" the catalyst. Our explanation for that is good, but it's not in game. Now if Omega has a scene like that, I'll call it a pattern instead of a possible coincidence.

Again, literal got a whole dlc expanding on it. That's being prescriptive. They got their closure. I don't understand this mentality that IT only deserves a wink that could be just an eye twitch. How bout a damn high five! If we aren't getting closure or elaboration then I think a blatant shout out isn't unreasonable. If it really was their vision then why do we only get scraps? I know not everyone agrees, and that's fine.

Beyond all of that though, I think there is one thing you have to be delusional to rationalize as acceptable:

If there truly is no IT DLC then Mike Gamble refusing to respond to his own community managers denial of IT DLC is simply put : cruel. A lot of you think it's not needed. A lot think it is. That's debatable. Allowing false hope to drag out a year is despicable. That isn't debatable.

I don't find it despicable, it's intentional that it's ambiguous. Showing Shepard is really controlled would actually kill the ending for me as it's too easy. That certain amount of doubt is what makes it much more interesting.

[BatmanTurian]

Xilizhra wrote...

During the one online interview, Priestly said that there are elements of the final sequence that come from Shepard's memories.

Like... the Catalyst's hologram that was blatantly obviously so even from a literalist perspective? And the flashbacks?

Yes, ONLY the catalyst. Come on....

[Restrider]

I have to give Xilizhra some credit though!
Apart from her sometimes peculiar interpretations and assertions (at least it's in my view) she stays usually friendly and it - at least for me - is always a pleasure to read the discussions she is a major part of.
Of course this applies to many others on this thread aswell, but I'd like to address her specifically since she is getting a lot of negativity in this thread.

[CmdrShep80]

Hi everyone. Apparently I'm missing 30 pages of info lol. Did you all happen to discuss the news about ME4?

[Restrider]

I would also like to point out that my new avatar is awesome.

[Restrider]

CmdrShep80 wrote...

Hi everyone. Apparently I'm missing 30 pages of info lol. Did you all happen to discuss the news about ME4?

A few pages back, but I think it'll be featured again soon in a larger discussion in this thread.
My personal take on it is twofold:
If they keep the endings like they are and do not really resolve it I would be disappointed. I would still think that IT is what really happened, but I would lose respect for BW to let this story somehow unfinished (lack of closure etc.).
If they manage to wrap it up with the upcoming DLCs, I would be interested to explore the MEU in another installment, even if it is not with Shepard.
I can see that a fresh start with new characters is needed, since the others - though grown close to our hearts - have reached a point were further development seems kind of impossible (still the closure is needed).
I will reserve my judgement to this announcement for now, until the DLC cycle is over.

[masster blaster]

I think the Breath seen is ment to be taken literaly. Shepard wakes up after all, but from what. Dream, or the explosion of Harbinger beam, or the Citadel/crucible explosion?

[spotlessvoid]

@Megumi

I didn't say being vague about the endings was despicable. I said Bioware allowing people to hope for IT DLC if it's never coming is despicable.

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 19 octobre 2012 - 06:05 .

[BatmanTurian]

CmdrShep80 wrote...

Hi everyone. Apparently I'm missing 30 pages of info lol. Did you all happen to discuss the news about ME4?

no, not really.

[Xilizhra]

Restrider wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

During the one online interview, Priestly said that there are elements of the final sequence that come from Shepard's memories.

Like... the Catalyst's hologram that was blatantly obviously so even from a literalist perspective? And the flashbacks?

As literalist you cannot deny that the Guardian is in Shepard's head (-> uses form of some random kid that probalby died on Earth).
We know for a fact that the Guardian is aligned to the Reapers (-> the Guardian itself states that).
As literalist you cannot deny that Reapers use mind control tricks also known as indoctrination.
It has been confirmed by Priestly that in the final sequence are parts that are not to be taken literally.

Now conclude whatever you want from the FACTS listed above.
A 100% literal point of view is asinine.
The only question now is when/where do the non-literal parts take place, how is the outcome of the different choices and how does the story conclude.

In all likelihood, indoctrination strong enough to induce hallucinations like that would fry Shepard's brain rather fast, and offer no chance of resistance in any scenario. Even if Shepard shoots the tube for an instant, she'll still be indoctrinated and will likely never wake up on her own.

[demersel]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Lakeshow1986 wrote...

The final piece of DLC will hopefully conclude Shepard's story better than the end of ME3. I like the ending basically because of IT but if the last thing we see/hear of shepard is in some unknown location ontop of rubble without so much as an explaination I won't be impressed.

I mean, Bioware can do what they want, and i will buy their next game regardless of the outcome of ME3 and it's DLC but the ending was anything BUT a conclusion.

Good thing most people here didn't witness the "epic conclusion" that was Command and Conquer 4 xD

I was one of those people. And you know what? I liked it. 

It's multiplayer was WAY UNDERRRATED. 

Modifié par demersel, 19 octobre 2012 - 06:08 .

[masster blaster]

Or maybe it's the Catalyst/ the brat. I mean the AI, not it's taking on the form of the child, but Harbinger. Harbinger perfected Indoctrinaion, but Harbinger is the brat. The brat wanted a body, as any Synthetic would want. The brat could have feard that he could get easily Destroyed, so he uploaded it's mind into Harbinger.

[CmdrShep80]

Restrider wrote...

CmdrShep80 wrote...

Hi everyone. Apparently I'm missing 30 pages of info lol. Did you all happen to discuss the news about ME4?

A few pages back, but I think it'll be featured again soon in a larger discussion in this thread.
My personal take on it is twofold:
If they keep the endings like they are and do not really resolve it I would be disappointed. I would still think that IT is what really happened, but I would lose respect for BW to let this story somehow unfinished (lack of closure etc.).
If they manage to wrap it up with the upcoming DLCs, I would be interested to explore the MEU in another installment, even if it is not with Shepard.
I can see that a fresh start with new characters is needed, since the others - though grown close to our hearts - have reached a point were further development seems kind of impossible (still the closure is needed).
I will reserve my judgement to this announcement for now, until the DLC cycle is over.

thanks!  I'll try to hunt it down. 

[BansheeOwnage]

Xilizhra wrote...

Restrider wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

During the one online interview, Priestly said that there are elements of the final sequence that come from Shepard's memories.

Like... the Catalyst's hologram that was blatantly obviously so even from a literalist perspective? And the flashbacks?

As literalist you cannot deny that the Guardian is in Shepard's head (-> uses form of some random kid that probalby died on Earth).
We know for a fact that the Guardian is aligned to the Reapers (-> the Guardian itself states that).
As literalist you cannot deny that Reapers use mind control tricks also known as indoctrination.
It has been confirmed by Priestly that in the final sequence are parts that are not to be taken literally.

Now conclude whatever you want from the FACTS listed above.
A 100% literal point of view is asinine.
The only question now is when/where do the non-literal parts take place, how is the outcome of the different choices and how does the story conclude.

In all likelihood, indoctrination strong enough to induce hallucinations like that would fry Shepard's brain rather fast, and offer no chance of resistance in any scenario. Even if Shepard shoots the tube for an instant, she'll still be indoctrinated and will likely never wake up on her own.

What the? So you're saying you can't win at the end? That doesn't even make sense because why would the reapers bother indoctrinating Shepard if they would die? Pointless?

[BansheeOwnage]

Xilizhra wrote...

During the one online interview, Priestly said that there are elements of the final sequence that come from Shepard's memories.

Like... the Catalyst's hologram that was blatantly obviously so even from a literalist perspective? And the flashbacks?

What do you mean? There are flashforwards, but which "flashbacks" are you talking about?

[masster blaster]

Xil, yet Shepard does wake up. Haven't you look at the breath scene Shepard wakes up.

[Xilizhra]

What the? So you're saying you can't win at the end? That doesn't even make sense because why would the reapers bother indoctrinating Shepard if they would die? Pointless?

Indeed. If IT is true, you can't win in the end. When Shepard wakes up, it's as a slave of the Reapers. We've never seen anyone indoctrinated to that level, if at all, break free.

[ZerebusPrime]

I don't think there's any chance of getting a conclusive answer about the ME3's ending until a few months after the Wii U release of the game. If they spoil it now, they could spoil that release. The infuriating truth that I see is that we have to sit patiently until at least the end of Q1 2013 for something that may or may not be coming. It's like waiting at a restaurant all night for a date that's not going to show but who keeps sending you txt messages hinting that they MIGHT be on their way.

[BatmanTurian]

Xilizhra wrote...

What the? So you're saying you can't win at the end? That doesn't even make sense because why would the reapers bother indoctrinating Shepard if they would die? Pointless?

Indeed. If IT is true, you can't win in the end. When Shepard wakes up, it's as a slave of the Reapers. We've never seen anyone indoctrinated to that level, if at all, break free.

And we've never seen anyone who chose control or synthesis not be indoctrinated. I can play this game all day.

[Codename_Code]

Xilizhra wrote...

What the? So you're saying you can't win at the end? That doesn't even make sense because why would the reapers bother indoctrinating Shepard if they would die? Pointless?

Indeed. If IT is true, you can't win in the end. When Shepard wakes up, it's as a slave of the Reapers. We've never seen anyone indoctrinated to that level, if at all, break free.

this was the part where the player would lost control of an indoctrinated shepard, followed by a fight with a monstrous illusive man, cutted because too videogamey / not enough time to make it / fake confusing ending more avant gard / lets keep this for dlc.

Modifié par Codename_Code, 19 octobre 2012 - 06:19 .