80611 réponses à ce sujet

[byne]

So, without spoilers, I'll say the Halo 4 story was just ok.

I thought the ending sucked pretty hard until I realized this is just part one of the new trilogy.

It still sucked after I realized that, just not as much.

[smokingotter1]

byne wrote...

So, without spoilers, I'll say the Halo 4 story was just ok.

I thought the ending sucked pretty hard until I realized this is just part one of the new trilogy.

It still sucked after I realized that, just not as much.

Most important question ever: how much speculations at the end?

[byne]

smokingotter1 wrote...

byne wrote...

So, without spoilers, I'll say the Halo 4 story was just ok.

I thought the ending sucked pretty hard until I realized this is just part one of the new trilogy.

It still sucked after I realized that, just not as much.

Most important question ever: how much speculations at the end?

Not many, really.

[BatmanTurian]

byne wrote...

smokingotter1 wrote...

byne wrote...

So, without spoilers, I'll say the Halo 4 story was just ok.

I thought the ending sucked pretty hard until I realized this is just part one of the new trilogy.

It still sucked after I realized that, just not as much.

Most important question ever: how much speculations at the end?

Not many, really.

Halo is fairly straight-forward.

[Arian Dynas]

It's kind of what made expectations low. >.>

[byne]

Who voiced Didact? I think BleedingUranium said it was Harby's VA, and I'm inclined to believe that, since his taunting of me felt totally natural. Like it'd happened before.

[Leonia]

Xilizhra wrote...

You do realize you're still taking a path laid out for you in Destroy, yes?

To be fair to all the Xil-opposers out there, this is a good point. The Crucible is still needed to be given the option of Destroy. You can't dstroy the Crucible if it isn't around, though you probably wouldn't know you could destroy it without the Starchild saying it's a viable option. So you spend all these resources building something only to destroy it in the end. Seems like a lot of wasted resources. While I agree that using a device you know nothing about is a terrible, terrible idea.. no other alternative was ever presented in the narrative. This is why I think Paragon Shepards tend to doubt their ability to succeed, they aren't about to trust something like the Crucible blindly but there's no other deus ex machina available. The path of Destroy is still the one we should take but if we don't have the means to achieve it (like, say the ending was a dream/hallucination and the Crucible's destruction hasn't happened or actually does nothing against the Reapers), then we're back to square one.

[BatmanTurian]

leonia42 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

You do realize you're still taking a path laid out for you in Destroy, yes?

To be fair to all the Xil-opposers out there, this is a good point. The Crucible is still needed to be given the option of Destroy. You can't dstroy the Crucible if it isn't around, though you probably wouldn't know you could destroy it without the Starchild saying it's a viable option. So you spend all these resources building something only to destroy it in the end. Seems like a lot of wasted resources. While I agree that using a device you know nothing about is a terrible, terrible idea.. no other alternative was ever presented in the narrative. This is why I think Paragon Shepards tend to doubt their ability to succeed, they aren't about to trust something like the Crucible blindly but there's no other deus ex machina available. The path of Destroy is still the one we should take but if we don't have the means to achieve it (like, say the ending was a dream/hallucination and the Crucible's destruction hasn't happened or actually does nothing against the Reapers), then we're back to square one.

Uh, no, cuz we didn't actually use the crucible. It was some kind of dream world created by Starbinger.

[Leonia]

Right, but without talking to Starchild you wouldn't know Destroy was an option at all. Dream or no. So jumping down Xil's throat for being anti-destroy is overlooking the fact that you NEED the Crucible to present the option. I don't think she is saying we shouldn't destroy the Reapers (though that may be her actual view that others are inferring in her posts instead of reading what was actually said).

The "path of Destroy" is only given when the Crucible is docked with the Citadel. Whether that actually happened or not is open to debate, of couse. The goal of destroying the Reapers and the actual physical path/method that leads to that are not necessarily the same and when someone says "Destroy" they actually mean the Crucible path and not the idea of  "we should be destroying in the Reapers" as in lower-case Destroy.

Modifié par leonia42, 07 novembre 2012 - 03:19 .

[BatmanTurian]

leonia42 wrote...

Right, but without talking to Starchild you wouldn't know Destroy was an option at all. Dream or no. So jumping down Xil's throat for being anti-destroy is overlooking the fact that you NEED the Crucible to present the option. I don't think she is saying we shouldn't destroy the Reapers (though that may be her actual view that others are inferring in her posts instead of reading what was actually said).

The "path of Destroy" is only given when the Crucible is docked with the Citadel. Whether that actually happened or not is open to debate, of couse. The goal of destroying the Reapers and the actual physical path/method that leads to that are not necessarily the same and when someone says "Destroy" they actually mean the Crucible path and not the idea of  "we should be destroying in the Reapers" as in lower-case Destroy.

No, you would know it was for destroy because that's what Hackett says it does and that's what the instructions said it did. You start wading into Xil-logic and you're going to go full goof. Besides, they hammered it into us that conventional victory (in this cycle) is impossible.

EDIT: oh and that is her actual view, that we shouldn't destroy the Reapers. They are innocent and we shouldn't kill the geth or EDI even though Starbinger does it and if it's a dream they don't die anyway.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 07 novembre 2012 - 03:24 .

[Gwyphon]

As above, you were told that the function of the crucible is to destroy the reapers and the goal of the entire series is to destroy the reapers. I think the endings would be ridiculous to the player (and thus Shepard) in and out of the me universe if there was no destroy option.

When you look at how indoctrination is defined by the codex, it's clear that the reapers don't force you to obey them but instead change your beliefs to match theirs. Without a destroy option they're forcing you to submit to them, where as if there's a destroy option and you don't pick it you have successfully been convinced to betray your previous beliefs.

Edit: changed "the goal of the entire series is to destroy the series." to "the goal of the entire series is to destroy the reapers." Haha fun times.

Modifié par Gwyphon, 07 novembre 2012 - 04:04 .

[BatmanTurian]

Gwyphon wrote...

As above, you were told that the function of the crucible is to destroy the reapers and the goal of the entire series is to destroy the series. I think the endings would be ridiculous to the player (and thus Shepard) in and out of the me universe if there was no destroy option.

When you look at how indoctrination is defined by the codex, it's clear that the reapers don't force you to obey them but instead change your beliefs to match theirs. Without a destroy option they're forcing you to submit to them where as if there's a destroy option and you don't pick it you have successfully been convinced to betray your previous beliefs.

They rewire your brain, but there is always the choice to resist that. It's just really hard because they are manipulative Magnificent Bastards.

[BatmanTurian]

magnetite wrote...

Something I was thinking about earlier. If they do actually come out with some sort of "IT reveal DLC", I think that may actually create more drama, because some might say that you are pigeon holed into one ending.

Not sure if they should just leave it up to interpretation like it is now. Probably for the best.

Those people would just have to get over themselves. Clearly there are good and right choices in ME2 that lead to your crew living through the suicide mission. This is no different. You make a bad choice, it's your own damn fault.

[prettz]

hi again all. have not been around because of moving residency twice  but with some spare time I made another vid. nothing to do with IT this time sorry, just a experiment of story telling.

[masster blaster]

Byne ya Halo 4 is short. It felt like Halo was for MP only rather than the story line. It's okay not epic as I thought. Just like AC3 it's okay but not epic.

[BatmanTurian]

magnetite wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Those people would just have to get over themselves.

I don't know, it's been over 8 months. They haven't stopped yet.

The writers could care less. They will write what they think is right. Their art will speak for itself. Sometimes art is meant to provoke and make people's world turn upside down as they reconsider issues and morality.

[BatmanTurian]

masster blaster wrote...

Byne ya Halo 4 is short. It felt like Halo was for MP only rather than the story line. It's okay not epic as I thought. Just like AC3 it's okay but not epic.

Has it occurred to you guys that they might release DLC to continue the story?

[clennon8]

BatmanTurian wrote...

magnetite wrote...

Something I was thinking about earlier. If they do actually come out with some sort of "IT reveal DLC", I think that may actually create more drama, because some might say that you are pigeon holed into one ending.

Not sure if they should just leave it up to interpretation like it is now. Probably for the best.

Those people would just have to get over themselves. Clearly there are good and right choices in ME2 that lead to your crew living through the suicide mission. This is no different. You make a bad choice, it's your own damn fault.

I actually agree with this.  The ending was a pop quiz to see if you were paying attention.  If you failed, you deserve an F.

[masster blaster]

Well IT wasn't Bioware's first idea. It was Dark Matter, but they droped it and went with IT. Yet problems with the systems of players loosing Control of Shepard stop them, and then about 3 months later we get ME3. Three months Bioware hadd to go back and fix all of ME3 if they didn't inteand IT. If you look at the EC it took three months to create just that. I don't think Bioware had the time to change all of ME3 which was Shepard starting to get the Indoctrinated signs.

So they either took things out here and their and just reused tons of work from ME1, and 2 and created some lines for the brat and boom endings we get.

Or they droped the loosing Shepard part and went with a dream Indoctrination instead/ hallucination?


Oh and hey Pretzz and Arian good to see you all again. How has it been?

[BatmanTurian]

clennon8 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

magnetite wrote...

Something I was thinking about earlier. If they do actually come out with some sort of "IT reveal DLC", I think that may actually create more drama, because some might say that you are pigeon holed into one ending.

Not sure if they should just leave it up to interpretation like it is now. Probably for the best.

Those people would just have to get over themselves. Clearly there are good and right choices in ME2 that lead to your crew living through the suicide mission. This is no different. You make a bad choice, it's your own damn fault.

I actually agree with this.  The ending was a pop quiz to see if you were paying attention.  If you failed, you deserve an F.

I just don't buy into Xil's view of the game where every choice should be the right choice. What point is there for choice if one or more of the choices isn't a bad choice? That makes the choice an illusion. It makes it pointless. It means your choice doesn't matter.

[masster blaster]

BT ya but 8 missions for Halo didn't even take me 5 hours to beat it. They were short missions but that's it. And no I don't see a dlc wise for Halo AC yes but Halo no.

[Leonia]

The illusion of choice would fit nicely with "it was just a dream". The real choices will kick in later, maybe.

[CmdrShep80]

magnetite wrote...

CmdrShep80 wrote...

^ did everyone forget that the station undergoes regular changes to its layouts?

Must have forgot about that or not thought about it at the time.

This is also why I think the Citadel is the key to the whole story and
why I am really interested in seeing what CmdrShep, Magnetite and others
come up with regarding the Keepers and Citadel.

According to Vigil in Mass Effect 1, he states that the Citadel is a trap. It's actually a inactive mass relay.

Shepard says something similar during the ending (non-persuasion option on the right side of the dialog wheel) aboutt the relays being a trap.

I keep mentioning the inactive mass relay.  The citadel also is the mass relay leading to dark space supposively where the Reapers are from.  The thing is in ME 2 we're lead to believe that the Omega 4 relay led to the base with the Reapers and we destroyed said base.  However, because the Protheans from Illos (AFTER the Reapers left the galaxy) screwed the Reaper communication signal with the Keepers and the Citadel, the Reapers had to travel via normal FTL from dark space to well, the Bacterian homeworld. 

This says something.  There's another mass relay at the Bactarian homeworld that leads out toward the direction where the Reapers came from.  Also, the Illos Protheans' goal was to buy the next cycle enough time to find a real solution to destroying the Reapers...looks like we failed them horribly so far

Speaking of the Illos Protheans screwing the Reaper signal, it could be the very reason the Keepers are mute.  We don't actually know the purpose of the backpacks they have nor who put it on them (Reapers or Illos Protheans) because we can't investigate them without the Keepers kamakazing themselves

EDIT - Just realized that I'm on top

Modifié par CmdrShep80, 07 novembre 2012 - 05:33 .