80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Rifneno]

demersel wrote...

THat's not really a find. Just a reminder. THere is also a huge story about some artifacts that salarians confistated, and of course the war at Govurg. Multiple hints at C-sec customs breaches that lead up to cerberus coup, very extensive story about batarians, kenson and mass relays, possible hints at more thorian activity (or leviathan one) - with an organic plant based drug called the creaper, and many many more.

And one of the biggest stories, Taetrus, has amounted to nothing.  Which is why I still say that FTL hack is our best bet against the Reapers.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

LazyTechGuy wrote...

That's sorta something I've started forming in my own head. Harbinger is kinda like the real puppet master behind the curtain.

It's one of the ways I can see how the game can really end if IT is revealed: Take out Harbinger, take out the real AI, take out rudderless Reapers. There's your conventional victory.

How do you take him out? Yeah, no clue. That'd be a fun and adventurous SP DLC though.

I have said it before, but taking out Harbinger (or the AI for that matter) somehow resulting in disabling or even worse somehow freeing the rest of the Reapers (because Sovereign sounded like he was doing what he did against his will, right?) would really disappoint me.

I mean that is like the epitome of cliche story writing and utterly stupid to boot if it is Harbinger. I mean Harbinger is at Earth and if four Dreadnoughst got close enough and randomly decided that Harbinger was their target of choice then boom, bye bye Harby, bye bye Reapers. Or the shot that hit the Derelict reaper hit Harbinger by coincedence...cycle end by coincedence.

An AI located in dark space is a whole lot better as it solves the whole "random shot ending" cycle issue, but it would still be way too much of a "Reaper off" button (which Bioware denied)

The Reapers seem way too smart for putting all their eggs in one basket so to speak.

The AI/Harbinger death could still have some kind of an effect, but please oh god please let it not be a Reaper off button or control off. Let the remaining Reapers be confused, scattered, whatever, but make sure we have to hunt them down and destroy them, make sure they remain a threat even after we deal with the leader if such a thing truly exists...

[smokingotter1]

lex0r11 wrote...

Hey guys, how is everyone?

Hope everything is guud. What's new?

Disney bought Lucasarts.... that's all I got. And episode 7 is coming to us in 2015.
And the ending to Mass Effect 3 was probably indoctrination, see this is a relevant post.

Modifié par smokingotter1, 31 octobre 2012 - 07:59 .

[demersel]

spotlessvoid wrote...

demersel wrote...

so for all we know - the citdel council have themselves a reaper of their own.

There are definitely similarities, but the virtual world seems different. The Reapers are a billions of programs, where that ship seems more like a a collective of virtual individuals. The age of the ship is also only 8000 years.

Edit: Sup Lex!

The ship is estimated to be  older than at least 8000 years. 

Modifié par demersel, 31 octobre 2012 - 08:28 .

[spotlessvoid]

Okay, misread then. Doesn't change my point that I don't think it's a Reaper.

[paxxton]

I saw a pumpkin on one of the crates at the LZ in Firebase Ghost.

[401 Kill]

Happy Halloween! I hope everyone is enjoying those pumpkins!

[masster blaster]

Hey guys Halloween is here and I am AL for Halloween. President by day Vampire slayer by night. Anyways I will do the challege when I get home. Going to play some AC3 though for a little bit.

[netfischer]

How do the scenes where shepheards crew is grieving over his death fit in there? Is that also a hallucination? Shephards "hallucination" is still extremely similar to reality, why would someone  hallucinate of the aftermath of his own death? Does he hallucinate seeing these pictures in his afterlife? Is this his actual afterlife? Anyway if someone is lucid, like shephard was in the previous part of his "hallucination" he  must realize that if he is seeing something that takes place  very far away AFTER HE DIED he is dead/dreaming or hallucinating!

Or is this the only part that is not a hallucination but reality? in this case, what happened? Did joker pick up the whole crew at earth and get the F out of there? Why do they crash on this planet then, because the crash is caused by the destruction of the mass relays. The hallucination theory implies in two cases a victory of the reapers, why would the mass relays be destroyed  if the reapers were voctorius?

I really like the IT but I just dont see why BW would put these pictures in there at the end if the whole ending was meant to be a hallucination. However I´d love to hear that and why what I wrote is wrong.

[Restrider]

There is an easy explanation.
The slides, the memorial scene and the Normandy leaving that planet are all based on some kind of hope for the future. These slides are a way for Shepard (and to an extent the player) to justify his/her decision, it is a wish what should happen. If you closely examine the speeches of Hackett, EDI and Shreaper, they all are speaking of things yet to come and not of things that already happened.

And that's why the breathe scene is after the slides and the memorial scene.

Modifié par Restrider, 31 octobre 2012 - 09:52 .

[Rifneno]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

I have said it before, but taking out Harbinger (or the AI for that matter) somehow resulting in disabling or even worse somehow freeing the rest of the Reapers (because Sovereign sounded like he was doing what he did against his will, right?) would really disappoint me.

QFT.  So much truth.

[401 Kill]

netfischer wrote...

How do the scenes where shepheards crew is grieving over his death fit in there? Is that also a hallucination? Shephards "hallucination" is still extremely similar to reality, why would someone  hallucinate of the aftermath of his own death? Does he hallucinate seeing these pictures in his afterlife? Is this his actual afterlife? Anyway if someone is lucid, like shephard was in the previous part of his "hallucination" he  must realize that if he is seeing something that takes place  very far away AFTER HE DIED he is dead/dreaming or hallucinating!
Or is this the only part that is not a hallucination but reality? in this case, what happened? Did joker pick up the whole crew at earth and get the F out of there? Why do they crash on this planet then, because the crash is caused by the destruction of the mass relays. The hallucination theory implies in two cases a victory of the reapers, why would the mass relays be destroyed  if the reapers were voctorius?
I really like the IT but I just dont see why BW would put these pictures in there at the end if the whole ending was meant to be a hallucination. However I´d love to hear that and why what I wrote is wrong.

Have you ever read "An Occurance At Owl Creek Bridge"? I think it relates very nicely to the situation here.

A short summary: the main charecter Peter Farquhar is being hung for a plot to help the confederates in the Civil War. When he is hung, the rope breaks and he attempts to escape. You follow his journey back home, and when he finally gets there it fades to black. He was killed from the hanging, his escape and happy reunion with his wife never happened
. While the story progressed through his "escape", in reality, he was dead. The author was writing using the realism style of writing, and "making fun" of romanticism writing (The Heroos journey). I thought this related quite nicely to the endings, you see how they all play out, but in reality, Shepard is still in the rubble. If Shepard was actually hit by Harbingers beam, he would be dead...

Modifié par 401 Kill, 31 octobre 2012 - 10:00 .

[Rifneno]

401 Kill wrote...

netfischer wrote...

How do the scenes where shepheards crew is grieving over his death fit in there? Is that also a hallucination? Shephards "hallucination" is still extremely similar to reality, why would someone  hallucinate of the aftermath of his own death? Does he hallucinate seeing these pictures in his afterlife? Is this his actual afterlife? Anyway if someone is lucid, like shephard was in the previous part of his "hallucination" he  must realize that if he is seeing something that takes place  very far away AFTER HE DIED he is dead/dreaming or hallucinating!
Or is this the only part that is not a hallucination but reality? in this case, what happened? Did joker pick up the whole crew at earth and get the F out of there? Why do they crash on this planet then, because the crash is caused by the destruction of the mass relays. The hallucination theory implies in two cases a victory of the reapers, why would the mass relays be destroyed  if the reapers were voctorius?
I really like the IT but I just dont see why BW would put these pictures in there at the end if the whole ending was meant to be a hallucination. However I´d love to hear that and why what I wrote is wrong.

Have you ever read "An Occurance At Owl Creek Bridge"? I think it relates very nicely to the situation here.

A short summary: the main charecter Peter Farquhar is being hung for a plot to help the confederates in the Civil War. When he is hung, the rope breaks and he attempts to escape. You follow his journey back home, and when he finally gets there it fades to black. He was killed from the hanging, his escape and happy reunion with his wife never happened
. While the story progressed through his "escape", in reality, he was dead. The author was writing using the realism style of writing, and "making fun" of romanticism writing (The Heroos journey). I thought this related quite nicely to the endings, you see how they all play out, but in reality, Shepard is still in the rubble. If Shepard was actually hit by Harbingers beam, he would be dead...

Hooray for the Union!

[netfischer]

Restrider wrote...

There is an easy explanation.
The slides, the memorial scene and the Normandy leaving that planet are all based on some kind of hope for the future. These slides are a way for Shepard (and to an extent the player) to justify his/her decision, it is a wish what should happen. If you closely examine the speeches of Hackett, EDI and Shreaper, they all are speaking of things yet to come and not of things that already happened.

And that's why the breathe scene is after the slides and the memorial scene.

Kk good point, the overly sophisticated logical analysis wasnt my main critique anyay, but that there was no need to  for this sequence. I guess with the hope theme it makes quite alot of sense though, especially cause the "hope is anything we have" idea is all over the game, so I agree that it would fit in there.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

401 Kill wrote...

netfischer wrote...

How do the scenes where shepheards crew is grieving over his death fit in there? Is that also a hallucination? Shephards "hallucination" is still extremely similar to reality, why would someone  hallucinate of the aftermath of his own death? Does he hallucinate seeing these pictures in his afterlife? Is this his actual afterlife? Anyway if someone is lucid, like shephard was in the previous part of his "hallucination" he  must realize that if he is seeing something that takes place  very far away AFTER HE DIED he is dead/dreaming or hallucinating!
Or is this the only part that is not a hallucination but reality? in this case, what happened? Did joker pick up the whole crew at earth and get the F out of there? Why do they crash on this planet then, because the crash is caused by the destruction of the mass relays. The hallucination theory implies in two cases a victory of the reapers, why would the mass relays be destroyed  if the reapers were voctorius?
I really like the IT but I just dont see why BW would put these pictures in there at the end if the whole ending was meant to be a hallucination. However I´d love to hear that and why what I wrote is wrong.

Have you ever read "An Occurance At Owl Creek Bridge"? I think it relates very nicely to the situation here.

A short summary: the main charecter Peter Farquhar is being hung for a plot to help the confederates in the Civil War. When he is hung, the rope breaks and he attempts to escape. You follow his journey back home, and when he finally gets there it fades to black. He was killed from the hanging, his escape and happy reunion with his wife never happened
. While the story progressed through his "escape", in reality, he was dead. The author was writing using the realism style of writing, and "making fun" of romanticism writing (The Heroos journey). I thought this related quite nicely to the endings, you see how they all play out, but in reality, Shepard is still in the rubble. If Shepard was actually hit by Harbingers beam, he would be dead...

And if the Normandy was truly running what the hell is that planet they crash on?

I mean it is a perfectly habitable planet within easy FTL distance of Earth...you would think such a planet would be pretty significant within the Alliance.

[byne]

So, I just beat Assassin's Creed 3.

Weird ass ending. But then, I thought AC stopped making any sense the instant they started with all that first civilization crap, so I cant really say it made any less sense than the rest of the stuff.

[netfischer]

401 Kill wrote...

netfischer wrote...

How do the scenes where shepheards crew is grieving over his death fit in there? Is that also a hallucination? Shephards "hallucination" is still extremely similar to reality, why would someone  hallucinate of the aftermath of his own death? Does he hallucinate seeing these pictures in his afterlife? Is this his actual afterlife? Anyway if someone is lucid, like shephard was in the previous part of his "hallucination" he  must realize that if he is seeing something that takes place  very far away AFTER HE DIED he is dead/dreaming or hallucinating!
Or is this the only part that is not a hallucination but reality? in this case, what happened? Did joker pick up the whole crew at earth and get the F out of there? Why do they crash on this planet then, because the crash is caused by the destruction of the mass relays. The hallucination theory implies in two cases a victory of the reapers, why would the mass relays be destroyed  if the reapers were voctorius?
I really like the IT but I just dont see why BW would put these pictures in there at the end if the whole ending was meant to be a hallucination. However I´d love to hear that and why what I wrote is wrong.

Have you ever read "An Occurance At Owl Creek Bridge"? I think it relates very nicely to the situation here.

A short summary: the main charecter Peter Farquhar is being hung for a plot to help the confederates in the Civil War. When he is hung, the rope breaks and he attempts to escape. You follow his journey back home, and when he finally gets there it fades to black. He was killed from the hanging, his escape and happy reunion with his wife never happened
. While the story progressed through his "escape", in reality, he was dead. The author was writing using the realism style of writing, and "making fun" of romanticism writing (The Heroos journey). I thought this related quite nicely to the endings, you see how they all play out, but in reality, Shepard is still in the rubble. If Shepard was actually hit by Harbingers beam, he would be dead...

Interesting, thanks!

[paxxton]

byne wrote...

So, I just beat Assassin's Creed 3.

Weird ass ending. But then, I thought AC stopped making any sense the instant they started with all that first civilization crap, so I cant really say it made any less sense than the rest of the stuff.

Tell me (just without spoilers), is there that 2012 End of the World thing in AC3?

Modifié par paxxton, 31 octobre 2012 - 10:19 .

[Rifneno]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

So, I just beat Assassin's Creed 3.

Weird ass ending. But then, I thought AC stopped making any sense the instant they started with all that first civilization crap, so I cant really say it made any less sense than the rest of the stuff.

Tell me (just without spoilers), is there all that 2012 End of the World thing in AC3?

That prophecy is so stupid.  God wouldn't end the world before the IT reveal.

[byne]

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

So, I just beat Assassin's Creed 3.

Weird ass ending. But then, I thought AC stopped making any sense the instant they started with all that first civilization crap, so I cant really say it made any less sense than the rest of the stuff.

Tell me (just without spoilers), is there that 2012 End of the World thing in AC3?

Trying to avert 2012 ending the world is what the entire present day portion of the game is about.

[paxxton]

byne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

So, I just beat Assassin's Creed 3.

Weird ass ending. But then, I thought AC stopped making any sense the instant they started with all that first civilization crap, so I cant really say it made any less sense than the rest of the stuff.

Tell me (just without spoilers), is there that 2012 End of the World thing in AC3?

Trying to avert 2012 ending the world is what the entire present day portion of the game is about.

Cool.

@Rifneno: That would be unfortunate. lol

[spotlessvoid]

Netfischer

Keep in mind the EC was only released as a response to quiet fan rage. It's a low quality slide show with a brief monologue and a morsel of cutscenes. It also makes a absolutely no sense even on the surface, and has lots of symbolism, like the future tense used by the narrators,as was already pointed out.

[byne]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Netfischer

Keep in mind the EC was only released as a response to quiet fan rage. It's a low quality slide show with a brief monologue and a morsel of cutscenes. It also makes a absolutely no sense even on the surface, and has lots of symbolism, like the future tense used by the narrators,as was already pointed out.

The EC also somehow makes Shepard psychic.

Godchild is all 'If you pick this option, this will happen" and then Shepard has a perfectly accurate vision of it somehow.

[MaximizedAction]

byne wrote...

So, I just beat Assassin's Creed 3.

Weird ass ending. But then, I thought AC stopped making any sense the instant they started with all that first civilization crap, so I cant really say it made any less sense than the rest of the stuff.

Waiting for the PC version, but I didn't really mind the first civ stuff. It was presented well...which really surpised me, since one tends to think of AC games as historically-based games.

If they kept the wtf-moments suprising in a good sense (like the ending of AC2) I'm fine with it...I'm more concerned about Desmond's face (a shame what it looked like in AC:R).

[paxxton]

Do I have to play Brotherhood and Revelations to comprehend the magnitude of AC3's story?