80611 réponses à ce sujet

[plfranke]

SwobyJ wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...

Krimzie wrote...

Guildenstern: A man breaking his journey between one place and another at a third place of no name, character, population or significance, sees a unicorn cross his path and disappear. That in itself is startling, but there are precedents for mystical encounters of various kinds, or to be less extreme, a choice of persuasions to put it down to fancy; until—“My God,” says a second man, “I must be dreaming. I thought I saw a unicorn.” At which point, a dimension is added that makes the experience as alarming as it will ever be. A third witness, you understand, adds no further dimension but only spreads it thinner, and a fourth thinner still, and the more witnesses there are the thinner it gets and the more reasonable it becomes until it is as thin as reality, the name we give to the common experience. . . . “Look, look!” recites the crowd. “A horse with an arrow in its forehead! It must have been mistaken for a deer.”

This is just fantastic.  I could have Restrider et al bite my head off for such a suggestion, so I'll leave it vague for now, but this could explain why so many people refuse to see the final stage as a dream.

Yeah its pretty fantastic! Added to my big text file to show my boyfriend once he finishes the game

Today he really just toured the Citadel and started Leviathan (accidentally).

That story is an attempt to use a gross exaggeration to prove a point. IT is no where near as clear cut as a unicorn running by you, and you can't say that I've just had my vision clouded because I am perfectly capable of seeing the evidence that built IT.

[CmdrShep80]

I wonder if he will change any of his story after leviathan or even notice the connection that early in the game?

[byne]

leonia42 wrote...

Ginissss wrote...

masster blaster >>>>>>>>>>>>>>cmdrshep80

At least MB attempts to be relevant to the thread topic at all times.

Thats just blatantly incorrect. He talks about RvB with me all the time.

[His Name was HYR!!]

clennon8 wrote...

I chose Synthesis on my first play-through, but only by accident. I didn't really know where I was supposed to go, and I just kind of wandered ahead, and then got locked into Synthesis. I wanted Destroy. Like many, I felt like something was wrong, but I didn't really know what was going on.

This dude couldn't figure out how to Destroy the first time, but goes all elitist on non-Destroyers for not figuring out the ending is "obviously" indoctrination?

AWW HELLLL NAHHHHHH!!!!!




That is all.

[byne]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I chose Synthesis on my first play-through, but only by accident. I didn't really know where I was supposed to go, and I just kind of wandered ahead, and then got locked into Synthesis. I wanted Destroy. Like many, I felt like something was wrong, but I didn't really know what was going on.

This dude couldn't figure out how to Destroy the first time, but goes all elitist on non-Destroyers for not figuring out the ending is "obviously" indoctrination?

The quote you provided doesnt seem to back up your assertion.

[plfranke]

byne wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I chose Synthesis on my first play-through, but only by accident. I didn't really know where I was supposed to go, and I just kind of wandered ahead, and then got locked into Synthesis. I wanted Destroy. Like many, I felt like something was wrong, but I didn't really know what was going on.

This dude couldn't figure out how to Destroy the first time, but goes all elitist on non-Destroyers for not figuring out the ending is "obviously" indoctrination?

The quote you provided doesnt seem to back up your assertion.

You're not looking hard enough. I didn't see it the first time either but after a few times rereading the quote, it all made sense.

[Dwailing]

Ignore HYR. He's a Synthesizer of the worst kind. You know, the, "Kills brain cells with what he posts," kind. At least, based on what I've seen.

Edit: Please correct me if I'm wrong. If I'm going to say not nice things about a person, I want to have a good reason. If I don't have a good reason, then my posts become like the average Literalist's, and I REALLY don't want that.

Modifié par Dwailing, 09 novembre 2012 - 06:18 .

[spotlessvoid]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

I chose Synthesis on my first play-through, but only by accident. I didn't really know where I was supposed to go, and I just kind of wandered ahead, and then got locked into Synthesis. I wanted Destroy. Like many, I felt like something was wrong, but I didn't really know what was going on.

This dude couldn't figure out how to Destroy the first time, but goes all elitist on non-Destroyers for not figuring out the ending is "obviously" indoctrination?

AWW HELLLL NAHHHHHH!!!!!




That is all.

At least he only accidentally got indoctrinated.

[paxxton]

I didn't have a problem with Synthesis lockdown, cause I didn't get it.

[lex0r11]

Hm, the synthesis thread was locked down? Any insight on that?

[CmdrShep80]

Don't know if any one ever posted the strategy guide's version of how the ending goes.  It's one of those where you have to turn it upside down to avoid "spoilers."  It's a little blurry but if you zoom you can read the text. 

Couple of things -

1- I personally think the guide made a mistake because I think there is a positive paragon difference if you save Anderson versus letting him die (renegade).  But this perception has to be based on a paragon litteral perception.  (see #4)

2- notice the "QUOTES" around "saved" Anderson.

3 - notice where synthesis EMS is versus where the highest destroy EMS is.  Notice they don't mention the breath scene anywhere on this page.  However they did mention Shepard lives 4 times (see #4) (even on the flip which says they refused to post pictures to avoid spoiling the ending). 

4- I find it interesting if #1 is actually not a mistake and we base it on the IT everything is opposite therefore the renegade options are the paragon choices happens earlier than the decision chamber.  It may also happen during the interaction between Anderson and TIM too.  It's either that or the "saved" is referring to you "saved" a hallucination.  Though if that were true then why is not "saving" Anderson destroy is higher up on the EMS scale than "saving" Anderson.  Again, why is that?

5- This pic was from the guide before the EC came out.  So here's a question.  Did the makers of the guide know about EC and chose to base it only on non-EC content?  They did use the higher 5000 EMS values

6- Notice there are two choice paths to start, this is then broken down to 8 choices within the original starting two choices (thus 16 choices).  Within the 16 choices for an ending there are 4 choices that lead to Shepard living, 2 of which seem to be the "best ending" choices (we can debate on this for another 1000 pages if we have to lol).  The other 8 choices Shepard isn't mentioned

7- Last, notice that the title of the page is "Heart vs. Brain."  "Heart" is tied to the side of the page that the collector base was saved.  "Brain" is tied to the side where the collector base was destroyed.  May not mean much but given we are speculating about IT and IT is about overcoming indoctrination via your mind versus the other option, that I'll call "swayed by emotion" given heart I'll say represents that. I figured I'd put it out there
I know I said a couple but oh well I reached 7 and it's November, therefore Happy N7 Day!



EDIT - added a different #7

EDIT 2 - Did a better less blurry pic

EDIT 3 - defined my word choices better

Modifié par CmdrShep80, 09 novembre 2012 - 07:11 .

[spotlessvoid]

lex0r11 wrote...

Hm, the synthesis thread was locked down? Any insight on that?

Synthesis It's different this time thread was not locked down, it's just verrrrrry slow.

[MWMike2011]

CmdrShep80 wrote...

Don't know if any one ever posted the strategy guide's version of how the ending goes.  It's one of those where you have to turn it upside down to avoid "spoilers."  It's a little blurry but if you zoom you can read the text. 

Couple of things -

1- I personally think the guide made a mistake because I think there is a positive paragon difference if you save Anderson versus letting him die (renegade).  But this perception has to be based on a paragon litteral perception.  (see #4)

2- notice the "QUOTES" around "saved" Anderson.

3 - notice where synthesis EMS is versus where the highest destroy EMS is.  Notice they don't mention the breath scene anywhere on this page.  However they did mention Shepard lives 4 times (see #4) (even on the flip which says they refused to post pictures to avoid spoiling the ending). 

4- I find it interesting if #1 is actually not a mistake and we base it on the IT everything is opposite therefore the renegade options are the paragon choices happens earlier than the decision chamber.  It may also happen during the interaction between Anderson and TIM too.  It's either that or the "saved" is referring to you "saved" a hallucination.  Though if that were true then why is not "saving" Anderson destroy is higher up on the EMS scale than "saving" Anderson.  Again, why is that?

5- This pic was from the guide before the EC came out.  So here's a question.  Did the makers of the guide know about EC and chose to base it only on non-EC content?  They did use the higher 5000 EMS values

6- Notice there are two choice paths to start, this is then broken down to 8 choices within the original starting two choices (thus 16 choices).  Within the 16 choices for an ending there are 4 choices that lead to Shepard living, 2 of which seem to be the "best ending" choices (we can debate on this for another 1000 pages if we have to lol).  The other 8 choices Shepard isn't mentioned

7- Last, notice that the title of the page is "Heart vs. Brain."  "Heart" is tied to the side of the page that the collector base was saved.  "Brain" is tied to the side where the collector base was destroyed.  May not mean much but given we are speculating about IT and IT is about overcoming indoctrination via your mind versus the other option, that I'll call "swayed by emotion" given heart I'll say represents that. I figured I'd put it out there
I know I said a couple but oh well I reached 7 and it's November, therefore Happy N7 Day!



EDIT - added a different #7

EDIT 2 - Did a better less blurry pic

EDIT 3 - defined my word choices better

I believe that they had "saved" Anderson because he ultimately dies, regardless of whether it is a shot to the head from TIM, or from the earlier gunshot wound.

[CmdrShep80]

MWMike2011 wrote...

CmdrShep80 wrote...

*Snips my own post*

I believe that they had "saved" Anderson because he ultimately dies, regardless of whether it is a shot to the head from TIM, or from the earlier gunshot wound.

You know I thought that at first particularly when Anderson actually dies.  But then why is it that choosing to "not save" Anderson a better choice?  After joining this whole IT thread and posting for a while now, it got me thinking about this.  If you go the route that Anderson was a hallucination and the choice to kill him

There's a line in the guide that goes:

From the guide...

"You can convince TIM of his own indoctrination., after which he ends his own life (by either shooting himself or by storming directly into your line of fire).

This is actually a series of Paragon/Renagade persuasion options that get progressively harder.  To complete the final persuasion successfully, you must have used a persuasion on TIM in every one of your earlier conversations - on Mars, Thessia, in TIM's base, and the three previously in this conversation"

The thing is the guide didn't specify specifically paragon or specifically renegade.  It was grouped into one with no real preference on which is used to end the TIM/Shepard fight. 

So as the game says "So the Illusive Man was right."  So if you are indoctrinated by the final confrontation and the paragon/renegade choice is actually the opposite choice by this point in the final confontation, that would make TIM a paragon option and Anderson a Renagade option?  I'm still debating this in my head.

I'm wondering right now if each time the reaper horn is heard, the paragon/renegade option switches sides along with who of the three characters is actually the real Shepard talking.  I need to do more thinking before I can post something about that.  I'll get back to everyone later on that because if you listen to all 3 characters, you can actually pull out things Shepard would say to other characters who have been indoctrinated, you can also pull out TIM/Harbinger's lines and lies about controlling Reapers to convince Shepard that control is the answer (at this point synthesis wasn't an option on the table yet but through control you get synthesis it just wasn't emphasized).  What I'm noticing is that these two things are coming from each of the characters and it seems the longer it goes on the more mixed up it gets between the 3 characters where they each sound like the other.  But first:

I'm going on a limb with these next two paragraphs about TIM:

Paragon option:

"Have a little faith" then "and waste this opportunity, never."  shortly after TIM causes Shepard to shoot Anderson  thus the "does not save Anderson" thing.  Shortly after, "and who will you listen to Shepard? An old soldier stuck in his ways only able to see the world down the barrel of a gun (why does TIM suggest we listen to this Anderson guy?) During the next line Shepard for some reason tries to convince TIM to control the reapers, why?  That's where TIM says, "No, I'm in control.  No one is telling me what to do."  followed shortly by "Do you think power like this comes easily, there are sacrifices." the next line "I only wanted to protect humanity." and the line "You, you'd undo everything I've accomplished.  I won't let you do that."  This is where TIM goes to take the gun to kill himself.  If TIM's right, by killing/shaking off indoctrinated "Shepard," he prevents the Reapers from gaining control.  The "Because of you humanity's already undone" by Shepard and TIM saying "That's not true!" and "I tried Shepard" 

Now the Renegade option:

TIM's statements, "Because I need you to believe" then "and waste this opportunity, never."  later on, "No, I'm in control.  No one is telling me what to do."  More lines:  Do you think power like this comes easily, there are sacrifices." the next line "I only wanted to protect humanity." and the line "You, you'd undo everything I've accomplished. I won't let you do that." This is where TIM goes to take the gun to kill Anderson. "No I...I saved humanity!" Interestingly Shepard's statements here sounds strangely suspcious "You were supposed to protect us" (why is Shepard saying this if he is Shepard protecting us and who did TIM have to protect anyways?  Shepard's voice goes a little weird here) At this point TIM is spouting two things "I am the savior of humanity" then the opposite "I am the pinnacle of our species" but an action happens, he "saves" Anderson from being shot by Shepard (strangely enough) and ends up being shot himself who at the time was saying the previous two lines.

The question in both of these is are you indoctrinated or not?  Did Shepard truely win or not?  It's obvious that he did not because then the paragon/renagade choice change for the 2nd indoctrination attempt via the child but you became more subseptable to the child's indoctrination after the loss of "Anderson" and the victory against "TIM"

Could it be you get the lower EMS for the renegade option because it's easier to overcome indoctrination and don't need that much more assets versus the higher EMS for paragon because it's harder to overcome indoctrination and you need more assets to boost you there?  Either way it says Shepard lives for both options if you do the destroy afterwards?

Modifié par CmdrShep80, 09 novembre 2012 - 08:45 .

[CmdrShep80]

Think of the TIM quotes I put in the previous post as Shepard speaking them. You'll start to wonder why is TIM sounding so much like Shepard. If this is based in IT, then that means Harbinger is trying to convince you that TIM's statements in the previous post is not the way to go.

Strangly enough with the kid, Shepard goes, "So TIM was right." followed by the kid going, "Yes but he could have never taken control. Because we already controlled him." Does this mean the kid was speaking about indoctrination attempt 1 where Shepard could have never taken control because Shepard is already under the Reaper's control but not completely so that's when the kid gets forceful about the synthesis option.

Everything after starts to minimize the destroy option and emphasizes the synthesis option with no more mention of control because Shepard is already under Reaper control via indoctrination. Why else would synthesis suddenly be a new possibility? The crucible "test" created new possibilities with the linking of Shepard via indoctrination attempt 1.

The Reapers just need Shepard to make the final choice willingly toward synthesis to guarentee a thrall (just like Rana, just like Saren, and the other thralls the Reapers caught in this insidious trap). They all had to do it wilingly else they would be unusable over long periods.

[BatmanTurian]

Davik Kang wrote...

Krimzie wrote...

Guildenstern: A man breaking his journey between one place and another at a third place of no name, character, population or significance, sees a unicorn cross his path and disappear. That in itself is startling, but there are precedents for mystical encounters of various kinds, or to be less extreme, a choice of persuasions to put it down to fancy; until—“My God,” says a second man, “I must be dreaming. I thought I saw a unicorn.” At which point, a dimension is added that makes the experience as alarming as it will ever be. A third witness, you understand, adds no further dimension but only spreads it thinner, and a fourth thinner still, and the more witnesses there are the thinner it gets and the more reasonable it becomes until it is as thin as reality, the name we give to the common experience. . . . “Look, look!” recites the crowd. “A horse with an arrow in its forehead! It must have been mistaken for a deer.”

This is just fantastic.  I could have Restrider et al bite my head off for such a suggestion, so I'll leave it vague for now, but this could explain why so many people refuse to see the final stage as a dream.

That IS fantastic and I'm thinking exactly what you're thinking.

[abnocte]

Davik Kang wrote...
To add to what DD said, if they had 'explained it better', it would have been too obvious and no-one would've been indoctrinated, or very few.  It would've taken only the subtlest extra hint to ruin the whole thing.

*snip*

Ok, this is the best argument I've seen as to why everything is so shady...

I still I have my doubts thought... I should do another playthrough before reading too much about IT so I don't  run into spoilers.

Too bad I'm still at work!

[gunslinger_ruiz]

@abnocte

I've been a believer in IT since the day after I ran through all the endings, the week the game launched, and even I still have my doubts. Still, IT and it's variants remain believable for me.

But, regardless of how many facts or coincidences we find we could still be completely wrong about IT, if not marginally right. We really won't know beyond a doubt until we see it, which I don't think will be any time soon.

[Fur28]

www.ign.com/articles/2012/11/08/mass-effect-sequel-in-early-stages 

So, do you think they already decided if its going to be a sequel or prequel at this early stage?

Modifié par Fur28, 09 novembre 2012 - 11:08 .

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Fur28 wrote...

www.ign.com/articles/2012/11/08/mass-effect-sequel-in-early-stages 

So, do you think they already decided if its going to be a sequel or prequel at this early stage?

No idea, but as has been brought up repeatedly a prequel would be very hard to make interesting considering Shepard is involved in the solution of just about every major conflict in the Mass Effect universe and any prequel made we would ulimately know the outcome of and that the Reapers are looming somewhere out there.

On the other hand a Sequel would face the problem of having way to many variables and possible outcome with the current endings. They would have to headcannon something and to preserve the possibility for major conflict it almost has to be the Destroy ending. Reason obviusly beeing that your Friendly Neighborhood Reapers () would quickly settle any major conflict.

However I will say that a game set after Destroy in a devastated galaxy has potential. The war against the Reapers has brought up old secrets and the power balance has been radically shifted with the Council races in general receiving the short end of the stick while races such as the Krogan, Rachni, Geth and Quarians can (possibly) start rebuilding and expanding in earnest.

In short there is a power vacuum and alot of races who could want a piece of it all and with the war ravaged nature of the galaxy things have potential to become quite unstable which could lead to a very different game as we as a new protaganists navigate and help shape the new galaxy.

But this is just guesses and as said before both a sequeel and prequeel seem very hard to make given a litteral ending.

[Fur28]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Fur28 wrote...

www.ign.com/articles/2012/11/08/mass-effect-sequel-in-early-stages 

So, do you think they already decided if its going to be a sequel or prequel at this early stage?

No idea, but as has been brought up repeatedly a prequel would be very hard to make interesting considering Shepard is involved in the solution of just about every major conflict in the Mass Effect universe and any prequel made we would ulimately know the outcome of and that the Reapers are looming somewhere out there.

On the other hand a Sequel would face the problem of having way to many variables and possible outcome with the current endings. They would have to headcannon something and to preserve the possibility for major conflict it almost has to be the Destroy ending. Reason obviusly beeing that your Friendly Neighborhood Reapers () would quickly settle any major conflict.

However I will say that a game set after Destroy in a devastated galaxy has potential. The war against the Reapers has brought up old secrets and the power balance has been radically shifted with the Council races in general receiving the short end of the stick while races such as the Krogan, Rachni, Geth and Quarians can (possibly) start rebuilding and expanding in earnest.

In short there is a power vacuum and alot of races who could want a piece of it all and with the war ravaged nature of the galaxy things have potential to become quite unstable which could lead to a very different game as we as a new protaganists navigate and help shape the new galaxy.

But this is just guesses and as said before both a sequeel and prequeel seem very hard to make given a litteral ending.

wheter they decide to cannonize an ending, do a prequel or change the endings with IT or another DLC, i just hope they learned from the mistakes from ME3 and take their time doing the nest game

[ElSuperGecko]

demersel wrote...
Opening shots are very important in movies - the first thing you see always sets the tone and context for the entire story you're about to see. 

Lets  approach this from the end to beginning (a common technique to sort thing out in litaterature and lynguistics) -  So what is the first thing we see in ME3? The ship which turnes out to be a toy in the hands of a child on earth, which shepard observes. Weird choice for a story about the all out galaxy war against the most terrible thing in existense, don't you think? But is it relevant ot further plot, story wise and thematically? Is that particular child important? You bet.

Late to the party, but I had that thought myself.  You watch a child "playing with an Alliance ship.  The child becomes a recurring theme throughout the game - he runs through a locked door, you encounter him in the vent (WARNING!  IN YOUR HEAD!  sign right next to it), you watch him die, he haunts your dreams... and then of course, a representation of the kid is the last being you talk to in the game, and the being that offers you the final choice.

The opening scene is important.  The kid playing with the alliance ship = the Catalyst toying with Shepard.

[demersel]

Fur28, what mistakes?

[demersel]

ElSuperGecko wrote...
The opening scene is important.  The kid playing with the alliance ship = the Catalyst toying with Shepard.

My point was, that while we know how important ME3 opening is for the whole game, we should really look closely into ME2 and ME1 opening - Maybe it is not just the third part that has the underlaying story going on.