80611 réponses à ce sujet

[NebuchadnezzaRT]

starlitegirlx wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...
Something I've come to realize is the the difference between people who either support IT or don't (excluding people who don't understand IT) has almost everything to do with confidence in Bioware's writing and intentions, rather than IT itself.

Which side is which? For example, i still have confidence in Bioware's storytelling ability so which side am I closer to?

IT is confidence in BW's storytelling. Literalists almost always say it's bad writing.

Which is an insult to Bioware. 

[masster blaster]

You know looking at the Conduit on Earth something just hit me. The three large structers out side of the beam, look like Reaper Capital ships. It's a trap. You see when the Shepard,Anderson,Coats, and your two squad mates are stubbaling around when the transportaion they are in get's taken out. That's where it starts. The WNM, and IT start.

The screen goes pitch black right, yet Harbinger just randomly drops from the sky and is guarding the beam. Harbinger is in Shepard mind right now, and Harbinger is shooting Shepard's willpower in his/her mind. The soldiers are Shepard's minor willpower, and your squadmates are the core. If yyou notice when they get hurt, Shepard panics because Harbinger struck a nerve of Shepard's willpower.

Hence your guns are gone because your mind is forgeting that your fighting to get to the beam. Now if you have low ems your Shepard's willpower is weak, and Harbinger doesn't care if he breaks Shepard at all. He may get mad in refuse but he doesn't give a care about Shepard's willpower squad mates.


Now when Shepard get's knocked out. He/she actually lost 1/2 of his/her willpower. Hence Shepard is messed up. The soldiers you see lying dead is Shepard's willpower gone. The coundit is the gate way to Shepard mind. Also when you see Harbinger leave, he actualy is getting ready to fully enter Shepard's mind for real.

Now as Shepard get's up he is fighting the already Indoctrinated part of his/her mind. The three Husk, and Maruader.

After Shepard wins, Shepard opens the gate way to part of his mind. His/her memorys. When you arrive on the Citadel and see the dead bodys, this is the corrupted part of Shepard's mind, and all the bodys are Shepard's willpower. Everything you see looks so familiar to you because Harbinger created all of this for Shepard.

Now when you find Anderson, here is the moment of truth.
Anderson is Shepard's Last line of defence. TIM is the already corrupted part of Shepard. Now when all is done, you make peace with your self Anderson. He can't go on but he is always with Shepard.

Yet when Anderson dies Shepard will power breaks, and starts to bleed out. Okay when Shepard opens the Citadel he is opening his/her mind for the Reapers. The crucible is the Reapers mind on Shepard. The Citadel is Shepard's brain. Now this is where Harbinger comes in again. After readying and preparing for everything Shepard will ask, he takes the form of a child.

Now when Shepard picks Destroy, his willpower comes back. Everyshot he/she takes a part of him/her comes back. The gun is Shepard's willpower, and it's Destroying the Reapers hold on Shepard.

That's why the brat goes bye bye because it leaves/ is forced out of Shepard mind. Now as we see everyone fighting we begain to see Shepard's mind fighting the good fight. Yet when we get to the two soldiers.

The person on the ground is Shepard, and the guy that is helping the soldier up is us. That picture with Shepard, and the other person reaching down to help Shepard makes sense.

That is why if you have low ems your Shepard's sybolic helment is shown. Yes it's in high ems, or is it. I mean for Destroy. Anyways if you pick Control the Reaper gain a huge foothold on Shepard. The people/ Shepard's willpower is not effected, yet it is.

When the soldiers get overuned by husk in Control, the wave passes over them, and the Reaper troops stop attack. That's because the Reapers don't need to continue to Indoctrinated Shepard because they have him.

Now in Synthesis Shepard is giving up the fight/surrenders to the Reapers. Also soldiers are loosing, and nowone is cheering.

Now the galaxy is Shepard's body, and the relays are Shepard's lymthatic system, or lyimdic system. Destroy kicks the Reapers out of his/her head. Control it does, but the Reaper secretly have Shepard under their thumb. Synthesis Shepard is forever theirs.

And last the Normandy/ the crew is Shepard's last uninfected part of his/her mind. Hence they are running from the Indcotrination beam in Synthesis, and Control.

Yet for Destroy they are running because of what the Catalyst said about it, and if your ems isn't high enough to get the breath scene, well...the fight was to much and Shepard died.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

starlitegirlx wrote...
IT is confidence in BW's storytelling. Literalists almost always say it's bad writing.

BleedingUranium wrote...
That would put you closer to the IT side. There are a lot of people who think along the lines of "Well, IT is a cool idea, but Bioware didn't plan it/couldn't write something like that/you're giving them to much credit."
Could someone bring up that list of plost twists and such that Bioware has done over the years? I know there are a lot.

Oh ok.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

SwobyJ wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...
IT is confidence in BW's storytelling. Literalists almost always say it's bad writing.

BleedingUranium wrote...
That would put you closer to the IT side. There are a lot of people who think along the lines of "Well, IT is a cool idea, but Bioware didn't plan it/couldn't write something like that/you're giving them to much credit."
Could someone bring up that list of plost twists and such that Bioware has done over the years? I know there are a lot.

Oh ok.

One can have confidence in Bioware's writing and thus be closer to the 'IT side', even if they don't assume IT is happening.
Just as one can have lack of confidence in Bioware's writing and thus be closer to the 'literalist' side, even if they prefer to headcanon IT happening.

So yeah, I'd put you as an IT sympathizer but not as an actual ITer.


One of my best friends just saw the ending several months ago and instantly got into 'bad writing' mode. It's just a bad ending to him and now Bioware sucks. Doesn't even matter if IT is true by this point.

That's a good summation of my position right now, though future DLC may sway me more towards support. For now, I view all endings, including theories, as valid interpretations for an amazing story.

Modifié par LDS Darth Revan, 30 octobre 2012 - 06:22 .

[masster blaster]

Also speaking about the tubes in ME2. When we blow up the tubes in ME2 that Connected the human Reaper. We thought we killed it, yet we didn't. Get it Shepard isn't dead, and nor is the Reapers, nor is EDI, and nor is the Geth. It's simply. We think we won, but in truth we didn't. Not yet at least.

[BleedingUranium]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...
IT is confidence in BW's storytelling. Literalists almost always say it's bad writing.

BleedingUranium wrote...
That would put you closer to the IT side. There are a lot of people who think along the lines of "Well, IT is a cool idea, but Bioware didn't plan it/couldn't write something like that/you're giving them to much credit."
Could someone bring up that list of plost twists and such that Bioware has done over the years? I know there are a lot.

Oh ok.

One can have confidence in Bioware's writing and thus be closer to the 'IT side', even if they don't assume IT is happening.
Just as one can have lack of confidence in Bioware's writing and thus be closer to the 'literalist' side, even if they prefer to headcanon IT happening.

So yeah, I'd put you as an IT sympathizer but not as an actual ITer.


One of my best friends just saw the ending several months ago and instantly got into 'bad writing' mode. It's just a bad ending to him and now Bioware sucks. Doesn't even matter if IT is true by this point.

That's a good summation of my position right now, though future DLC may sway me more towards support. For now, I view all endings, including theories, as valid interpretations for an amazing story.

You get today's "Most Levelheaded Person On BSN" award

[Simon_Says]

About that PTSD discussion a while back. Well, of course it isn't PTSD. I always said it was survivor's guilt.

Anyway it got me thinking. There's a third pscyhologically broken character in the series: Han Olar. The volus in Peak 15. His mail from ME2.

Han Olar wrote...

From: Olar, Han

Shepard,

They say you're alive. That you cheated death. That sending you this isn't just a pointless exercise as part of my therapy. They say a lot of things.

I'm still alive. She still isn't. I hear you killed Benezia. Nicely done. Another woman I helped kill, if my information did any good.

They want me to thank you. The rachni would have killed us all had you not shown up.

It would have been right.

Why me and not her? Why did you show up then and not before?

They think that they can fix me.

But maybe you're not really back. Maybe I died. Maybe I didn't close that door in time. Maybe I held it open to give her a chance, and the rachni ripped my suit open, and I died of exposure there on Peak 15. Maybe I'm a martyr, and this is an ugly hallucination before a glorious afterlife.

But if I'm not, then thank you.

-Han Olar

Modifié par Simon_Says, 30 octobre 2012 - 06:32 .

[BleedingUranium]

Simon_Says wrote...

About that PTSD discussion a while back. Well, of course it isn't PTSD. I always said it was survivor's guilt.

Anyway it got me thinking. There's a third pscyhologically broken character in the series: Han Olar. The volus in Peak 15. His mail from ME2.

Han Olar wrote...

From: Olar, Han

Shepard,

They say you're alive. That you cheated death. That sending you this isn't just a pointless exercise as part of my therapy. They say a lot of things.

I'm still alive. She still isn't. I hear you killed Benezia. Nicely done. Another woman I helped kill, if my information did any good.

They want me to thank you. The rachni would have killed us all had you not shown up.

It would have been right.

Why me and not her? Why did you show up then and not before?

They think that they can fix me.

But maybe you're not really back. Maybe I died. Maybe I didn't close that door in time. Maybe I held it open to give her a chance, and the rachni ripped my suit open, and I died of exposure there on Peak 15. Maybe I'm a martyr, and this is an ugly hallucination before a glorious afterlife.

But if I'm not, then thank you.

-Han Olar

"Han Olar wrote..."

But yeah, that is very interesting.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

BleedingUranium wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...
IT is confidence in BW's storytelling. Literalists almost always say it's bad writing.

BleedingUranium wrote...
That would put you closer to the IT side. There are a lot of people who think along the lines of "Well, IT is a cool idea, but Bioware didn't plan it/couldn't write something like that/you're giving them to much credit."
Could someone bring up that list of plost twists and such that Bioware has done over the years? I know there are a lot.

Oh ok.

One can have confidence in Bioware's writing and thus be closer to the 'IT side', even if they don't assume IT is happening.
Just as one can have lack of confidence in Bioware's writing and thus be closer to the 'literalist' side, even if they prefer to headcanon IT happening.

So yeah, I'd put you as an IT sympathizer but not as an actual ITer.


One of my best friends just saw the ending several months ago and instantly got into 'bad writing' mode. It's just a bad ending to him and now Bioware sucks. Doesn't even matter if IT is true by this point.

That's a good summation of my position right now, though future DLC may sway me more towards support. For now, I view all endings, including theories, as valid interpretations for an amazing story.

You get today's "Most Levelheaded Person On BSN" award

Hooray!

Modifié par LDS Darth Revan, 30 octobre 2012 - 06:45 .

[Revan87]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...
IT is confidence in BW's storytelling. Literalists almost always say it's bad writing.

BleedingUranium wrote...
That would put you closer to the IT side. There are a lot of people who think along the lines of "Well, IT is a cool idea, but Bioware didn't plan it/couldn't write something like that/you're giving them to much credit."
Could someone bring up that list of plost twists and such that Bioware has done over the years? I know there are a lot.

Oh ok.

Well, I don't know all of them, but here you go:

SPOILERS!!

Neverwinter Nights: Hordes of the Undark: Pretty much the same as IT. Dreamlike situation. You either give up -->credits or continue fighting.
Jade Empire: Your mentor is the bad guy and kills you at the end.
Knights of the Old Republic: You're Darth Revan
Mass Effect: The Citadel is a giant trap; Sovereign is a Reaper
Mass Effect 2: Harbinger controls the Collectors; Collectors are Protheans; Geth and Heretics
Mass Effect 3: The Citadel is the Catalyst...;???
Dragon Age Origins: A Warden needs to die, to kill the Archdemon (or sleep with Morrigan...)
Baldurs Gate: You're the son of (I don't know his name anymore) But I don't really know about Baldurs Gate 1/2, since I haven't played them. (But I will soon
Dragon Age 2: Anders is crazy, blows up the church

So yeah, every BioWare game has it's little Secret.
SPOILERS!!

[Eryri]

Revan87 wrote...

Well, I don't know all of them, but here you go:

SPOILERS!!

Neverwinter Nights: Hordes of the Undark: Pretty much the same as IT. Dreamlike situation. You either give up -->credits or continue fighting.
Jade Empire: Your mentor is the bad guy and kills you at the end.
Knights of the Old Republic: You're Darth Revan
Mass Effect: The Citadel is a giant trap; Sovereign is a Reaper
Mass Effect 2: Harbinger controls the Collectors; Collectors are Protheans; Geth and Heretics
Mass Effect 3: The Citadel is the Catalyst...;???
Dragon Age Origins: A Warden needs to die, to kill the Archdemon (or sleep with Morrigan...)
Baldurs Gate: You're the son of (I don't know his name anymore) But I don't really know about Baldurs Gate 1/2, since I haven't played them. (But I will soon
Dragon Age 2: Anders is crazy, blows up the church

So yeah, every BioWare game has it's little Secret.
SPOILERS!!

MORE SPOILERS
You're the child of Bhaal, the God of Murder in BG. Not played BG1, but BG2 and its expansion are fantastic. Irenicus is a terrifically callous villain with excellent voice work from David Warner. Plenty of twists and turns in that plot.

Modifié par Eryri, 30 octobre 2012 - 07:16 .

[BleedingUranium]

Revan87 wrote...

Well, I don't know all of them, but here you go:

SPOILERS!!

Neverwinter Nights: Hordes of the Undark: Pretty much the same as IT. Dreamlike situation. You either give up -->credits or continue fighting.
Jade Empire: Your mentor is the bad guy and kills you at the end.
Knights of the Old Republic: You're Darth Revan
Mass Effect: The Citadel is a giant trap; Sovereign is a Reaper
Mass Effect 2: Harbinger controls the Collectors; Collectors are Protheans; Geth and Heretics
Mass Effect 3: The Citadel is the Catalyst...;???
Dragon Age Origins: A Warden needs to die, to kill the Archdemon (or sleep with Morrigan...)
Baldurs Gate: You're the son of (I don't know his name anymore) But I don't really know about Baldurs Gate 1/2, since I haven't played them. (But I will soon
Dragon Age 2: Anders is crazy, blows up the church

So yeah, every BioWare game has it's little Secret.
SPOILERS!!

I've never player any Bioware games other than Mass Effect 1/2/3, and before I played the ME3 Demo in February I didn't know enough about the series to write even a paragraph about it. But with a record like this it seems very unlikely IT is not what's happening.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Dont forget the biggest one in ME2: Reapers are made from the liquified bodies of each cycles races.

But yeah the Neverwinter Night, Jade Empire and KOTOR plot twists are the biggest ones in this regard.

[Simon_Says]

Relevent.

[spotlessvoid]

You have to wonder how many people who say they are against IT would change their minds if there was a well done reveal that also spelled it out for them. I think that a lot of the disdain is about the fact that we are speculating about something they find awful (or great) as much or more than the actual idea of IT being true

[Eryri]

spotlessvoid wrote...

You have to wonder how many people who say they are against IT would change their minds if there was a well done reveal that also spelled it out for them. I think that a lot of the disdain is about the fact that we are speculating about something they find awful (or great) as much or more than the actual idea of IT being true

This is what mystifies me about the embittered bad-writing crowd (of which I used to be one). IT could lead to a fantastic ending that could be brain-meltingly fun to play. Anyone who wouldn't have a huge sh*t eating grin on their face after killing Harbinger and being reunited with the crew is frankly dead inside. Yet they'd rather continue hating on the game than support a way to improve it.

The only people who would be unhappy would be the people who genuinely liked control and synthesis.

EDIT: removed my snarky comment about control and synthesis supporters - I regretted sounding like a pompous jerk.

Modifié par Eryri, 30 octobre 2012 - 08:03 .

[spotlessvoid]

So starlite and I were playing MP last night and the guy we were playing with was thoughtful, intelligent and seemed like a really nice person. He said he chose synthesis every play through. He seemed pretty unaware though of the foreshadowing and thematic elements despite seeming quite astute. Which got me thinking.
We really need to present our case (DD's quotes are a fantastic start) for this separately than IT. Don't get me wrong, as Simon and Doomsday pointed out to me months ago, the themes and actual hallucination are the bedrock of IT. But the themes stand on their own as nearly irrefutable. I think people would be more receptive to the thematic aspect if we also presented it independent of IT as reference for others

[BleedingUranium]

spotlessvoid wrote...

So starlite and I were playing MP last night and the guy we were playing with was thoughtful, intelligent and seemed like a really nice person. He said he chose synthesis every play through. He seemed pretty unaware though of the foreshadowing and thematic elements despite seeming quite astute. Which got me thinking.
We really need to present our case (DD's quotes are a fantastic start) for this separately than IT. Don't get me wrong, as Simon and Doomsday pointed out to me months ago, the themes and actual hallucination are the bedrock of IT. But the themes stand on their own as nearly irrefutable. I think people would be more receptive to the thematic aspect if we also presented it independent of IT as reference for others

Right, there are three main things (maybe more?) that are all seperate but related.

-The themes throughout the series
-Bioware's history of twists and story writing ability
-Was the ending a hallucination?


Without the first, IT could not exist. Without the second, IT could not exist. Without understanding the first, one can't understand the meaning of the end. Without accepting the second, one can't accept that IT could be true.

Those are also the two things people have trouble with. Those two have to be accepted before moving on to IT itself.

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 30 octobre 2012 - 08:02 .

[Davik Kang]

Eryri wrote...
The only people who would still complain would be the people who genuinely liked control and synthesis. But I think half of the total global population of them would come around when offered blue babies, and the other 36 would winge for a week on the BSN then quietly buy it anyway.

This isn't quite true.  Some people like the ending without taking it literally, but they don't need to be full-blown IT supporters.  Personally I would be really disappointed if they gave us a kill Harbinger conventioanl victory post-ending DLC mission.

IT as presented in this thread doesn't cover all the players who think indoctrination's involved.  If you see the ending as a hallucination rather than a dream, you can achieve victory in that final scene.  And it doesn't need to be choosing Control or Synthesis.  I think these are bad choices which result from a succesful indoctrination attempt, but I still think the indoctrination attempt does happen.

For me and a number of others, making conventional victory DLC would be a fairly lame way to end the series.  It would diminish the threat we were up against, and leave the story with a bland aftertaste imo.

I understanf the reasons why many in this thread want IT confirmation and a final battle DLC, but it's not only Control and Synthesis supporters who'd be disappointed with this.  For me the whole trilogy was leading up to that final decision, and especially the ME3 choices - not just mission choices, but the smaller 'support A or B' dialogue parts too - were preparing you for the final decision if you were paying attention.

Creating this new ending would spoil the game for a great number of people.  As it stands I can see why Bioware are pleased with the way the game turned out.  Maybe they were naive to think everybody would like it, but the game as it is presents some really interesting questions about all of the themes presented in the games.

In short - I thought the Kid was trying to indoctrinate me and I picked Destroy, but part of the quality of the game for me was that I'll never truly know if any of my choices were the 'right' choices.  The DLC you guys want would ruin that element of the game.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 30 octobre 2012 - 07:59 .

[Hrothdane]

I think one of the strongest pieces of evidence is the fact that after a five minute conversation, the player suddenly goes from opposing the Reapers to willingly commiting suicide to help their leader with his goals.

[Eryri]

Davik Kang wrote...

This isn't quite true.  Some people like the ending without taking it literally, but they don't need to be full-blown IT supporters.  Personally I would be really disappointed if they gave us a kill Harbinger conventioanl victory post-ending DLC mission.

I agree with the first part - hence why I edited my rather unpleasantly sneering comment.

However we'll have to agree to disagree about the second, as I'm afraid I'm an unsophisticated type who loves happy (or at least hopeful) endings and wants to see a crew and LI reunion. We don't even have to annihilate the Reapers, just drive them away from Earth.

[spotlessvoid]

Well Davik, can't please everyone, but dlc is always optional. I totally understand your point though.

[Davik Kang]

Eryri wrote...
I agree with the first part - hence why I edited my rather unpleasantly sneering comment.

However we'll have to agree to disagree about the second, as I'm afraid I'm an unsophisticated type who loves happy (or at least hopeful) endings and wants to see a crew and LI reunion. We don't even have to annihilate the Reapers, just drive them away from Earth.

I missed the comment - lucky for me I guess.  

And I know lots of people want the IT reveal - and you don't need to be unsophisticated to want that (I know you were joking, but still, I'm not saying I've got better taste or something).  I was just making the point that the desired DLC isn't simply a case of promoting IT and Destroy at the expense of the other endings.  It would change the game fundamentally, and the change would upset more than just a few angry literalists.