Ce sujet est ferméMaximizedAction wrote...
Restrider wrote...
Check two posts above the picture...
What did you expect? Asari playing beach volleyball?
I was assuming this was all a joke until I remembered what the Internet is.
Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark III!
Débuté par
byne
, juil. 30 2012 07:09
#45251
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 10:55
Rifneno
-
- Members
- 12 076 messages
I was assuming this was all a joke until I remembered what the Internet is.
Retour en haut
#45252
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 10:59
Restrider
-
- Members
- 1 986 messages
No...?MaximizedAction wrote...
Restrider wrote...
Check two posts above the picture...
What did you expect? Asari playing beach volleyball?
I am disturbed by the amount of lorebreaking...
Why do Turians, Quarians, Drell and Salarians all have human genitalia? And intercourse between Quarians and other species in an unsterilized environment is kind of seldom and risky.
What they did with the Hanar/Asari stuff though was actually really disturbing.
Though I enjoyed the advertisements and the omnitool upgrades. I think they mentioned a movie about Councilor Tevos, just saying.
All in all I have to say that I can appreciate the art in an aesthetic fashion.
#45253
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:06
Raistlin Majare 1992
-
- Members
- 2 101 messages
abnocte wrote...
masster blaster wrote...
One thing that makes no sense is that the stargazer at the end in Control is like the Reapers are gone. Like they all died in a sense. That goes with Synthesis EDI talks about transending mortality to imortality. And why is it that the place isn't green shouldn't the place the trees all be green?
Yet for Destroy is makes sense.
My personal imput is that the Stargazer male version is ment for Destroy, and not Syntheisis and Control. It's more like a clue that " wait why is it that this Stargazer scene looks just likethe Synthesis, and Control one?" It's like Bioware was showing us that hey look guys the Reapers are dead in this future. I wonder how did it happen? Oh wait Destroy seems possible, yet could it be that maybe Destroy wakes your Shepard up and you can finish the fight?
If the IT its correct, the Crucible never got used. The fleets defeated the Reapers the "hard way" regardless of what choice did you pick. That's why the stargazer scene is exactly the same for all options.
Well, thats what I like to think.
We cant beat them "the hard way" at least not in the direct battle at Earth, it is just not feasible
We have at absolute max (as in pre war numbers) around 200 Dreadnoughts. It takes 3 Dreadnought to down 1 Sovereign class Reaper. There is roughly 150-200 (at least) Sovereign class Reapers at earth (I counted them using a paticular wide pic from the Earth battle cinematic).
Off course this does not count smaller vessels, but the reapers also have Destroyers and Oculus drones, probably matching us in that regard.
In short we are severily outgunned in the heavy gun department and think of it this way if we thought we could win conventionally would we bet everything on the Crucible?
#45255
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:10
paxxton
-
- Members
- 8 445 messages
If someone wants to go that far back in time in search of lies, here you go:
EDIT: So back then Mass Effect was called "a little game?"
EDIT: So back then Mass Effect was called "a little game?"
Modifié par paxxton, 10 novembre 2012 - 11:13 .
#45256
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:13
masster blaster
-
- Members
- 7 278 messages
Oh hey I forgot doesn't the Citadel have it's own defence system like Omega, what if you add the Crucible to the Citadel, and with the combination of their weapons/fire power we beat the Reapers.
Think about this Javil missiels are inside the Crucible and are in every Alliance fleet. Now the codex says the even the strogest shields/ barriers can't with stand repeated hits. So combind with the Crucibles Javilns, and the Citadel guns we should weaken the Reapers just one after another.
Think about this Javil missiels are inside the Crucible and are in every Alliance fleet. Now the codex says the even the strogest shields/ barriers can't with stand repeated hits. So combind with the Crucibles Javilns, and the Citadel guns we should weaken the Reapers just one after another.
#45257
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:14
Restrider
-
- Members
- 1 986 messages
Shameless Bioware-esque promotion:
I revamped the Character Thread. Results are presented visually and I am trying to get in to multidimensional characterization!
I revamped the Character Thread. Results are presented visually and I am trying to get in to multidimensional characterization!
#45258
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:16
Canis_Major
-
- Members
- 100 messages
I have a question: what's indoctrination theory about?
#45260
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:21
Rifneno
-
- Members
- 12 076 messages
One of the writers said once that the Reapers rarely lose even one capital ship in a cycle. The Leviathan of Dis was dated at nearly a billion years. That's 20,000 cycles of 50,000 years each. If we assume that the Reapers lose one capital ship every other cycle and that the cycles have only been going for a billion years, both of which are "best case scenario" for us, we're still looking at an astounding 10,000 capital ships galaxy-wide.
We're not winning this battle conventionally.
We're not winning this battle conventionally.
#45261
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:22
CmdrShep80
-
- Members
- 1 900 messages
Wow...it's amazing how many people don't realize that Shepard is alive it at least 4 ending choices
destroy collector base don't save Anderson pick destroy
destroy collector base save Anderson pick destroy
save collector base don't save Anderson pick destroy
save collector base save Anderson pick destroy
destroy collector base don't save Anderson pick destroy
destroy collector base save Anderson pick destroy
save collector base don't save Anderson pick destroy
save collector base save Anderson pick destroy
#45262
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:23
Restrider
-
- Members
- 1 986 messages
One mad idea as a final twist how a conventional victory is possible:
How do Reapers wage war?
Usually they sucker-punch the Citadel, close down the Relay Network and leave the civilizations of the cycle isolated and in utter confusion. Then they harvest system by system. I would assume they do it only a few system at a time, but with overwhelming force.
Furthermore they rely heavily on psychological warfare (Turians and Taetus for example) and - their trademark - indoctrination/huskification.
So, we can agree on the fact that their main advantage is surprise. In this cycle, the civilizations know about the menace and the sucker-punch attack on the Citadel does not work (due to the Protheans on Ilos).
But why does everyone assume that their deceptive tactics end there?
Of course, we still have indoctrination and huskification (a powerful tool as much in physical and psychological warfare).
But why does everyone assume that the numbers of the Reapers are accurate?
Okay, I guess this is a fools errand since there would've been a lot of recon missions during the invasion to get an idea about the opponent's forces.
And the strength of the Reaper vessels have been demonstrated in the end of ME1 and the beginning of the invasion.
The only thing, my thought process could lead to is that the Crucible is a trap, but we covered that a few times.
Off-topic: I wonder if there is a Fornax Krogan Edition somewhere....
How do Reapers wage war?
Usually they sucker-punch the Citadel, close down the Relay Network and leave the civilizations of the cycle isolated and in utter confusion. Then they harvest system by system. I would assume they do it only a few system at a time, but with overwhelming force.
Furthermore they rely heavily on psychological warfare (Turians and Taetus for example) and - their trademark - indoctrination/huskification.
So, we can agree on the fact that their main advantage is surprise. In this cycle, the civilizations know about the menace and the sucker-punch attack on the Citadel does not work (due to the Protheans on Ilos).
But why does everyone assume that their deceptive tactics end there?
Of course, we still have indoctrination and huskification (a powerful tool as much in physical and psychological warfare).
But why does everyone assume that the numbers of the Reapers are accurate?
Okay, I guess this is a fools errand since there would've been a lot of recon missions during the invasion to get an idea about the opponent's forces.
And the strength of the Reaper vessels have been demonstrated in the end of ME1 and the beginning of the invasion.
The only thing, my thought process could lead to is that the Crucible is a trap, but we covered that a few times.
Off-topic: I wonder if there is a Fornax Krogan Edition somewhere....
#45264
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:28
Arashi08
-
- Members
- 612 messages
I've been thinking about the endings a bit more and have been wondering about their purpose and why they were presented to us in such an enigmatic manner. It got me thinking about how we as a culture view stories and how we determine how plots unfold based on both are ability to compose and enjoy stories.
Oftentimes we get a clear understanding of who the antagonist and protagonist in a story is because the story defines them as such. Typically both the reader as well as the characters in the story define who is who based on their actions and the character's perspectives and system of morality. When you look at it this way it does seem like a subjective viewpoint; from the point fo view of the the characters, the antagonist is seen as such based on his or her actions, but more often than not, the antagonist feels that their actions are justifyed in some way, either out of fulfillment of their own selfish desires, or their desire to help others in a kinf od "ends justify the means." kind of way.
However, in an interactive medium like video games, there is room for other possibilities, much in the same way a choose-your-own-adventure book let's you interact with the story, a video game gives you even more freedom as you are not necessarily limited by narration. A video game could in theory allow you to decide who will be the protagonist and antagonist based on how the characters see your actions. You can see that alot in games like DA:O, where your companions can see you as a villain, no better than the darkspawn, rather than a hero based on your actions, even though you "evil" character as the same goal as a "good" character. Of course, I think that despite your action you will always be considered the protagonist of the story, but that's because the story in DA:O is central and what you do and what your goal is becomes the primary focus.
What this has to do with the ME3 endings, I feel, may well go back to what a well told story is supposed to do; help you look at things from a different perspective and examine yourself. Or more simply, to teach you a life lesson. Imo this is what a story must do if it can be considered a story well told. And if you think about it these endings may well be attempting to do this. This could work with or without IT but I think IT or something similar would be better because it wil provide a real conclusion to the story and give players a sense of consequence because we can see how our choice affected Shepard as well as the galaxy.
The more I think about these enigmatic endings that don't seem to have any character support at that exact moment and kind of force you to remember what characters throughout the series said about choices like these, while at the same time putting Shepard and by extension the player in this vacuum situation could possibly be seen as an examination of the player's soul. The endings could be a way for the player to examine their convictions and beliefs and put it to the test here in this final room where your actions will affect everything. at this moment you have to examine yourself and what you've learned over the course of three games and see which choice you will make based on your interactions with the various races and their plights. the choice you make determines what kind of person your Shepard is, and possibly who you as a player are.
None of these choices are ideal and you will be forced to deal with some form of loss either of yourself or of others. The game is essentially asking you things like: "Are you the kind of person who would sacrifice of yourself to save others? And if you are, do you know what kind of consequences that will bring?" And "Are you the kind of person who would sacrifice others to secure peace? And if you are do you know if that will truly endthe threat?"
What is the right choice? Perhaps it is a matter of perspective. Or perhaps there is a correct choice but you may not see it depending on your view of the world. You have to look at yourself and ask what is right because you don't have anyone else here to tell you what they think, unlike the last two games. Here you are on your own, with only memories and your own sense of morality to guide you.
Imo the endings could also be about a psychological battle where you struggle with yourself and your own sense of morality and whether the guideline of your life that you spent years creating is actually correct for you. The sci-fi story unfolds on the surface, but it represents your own struggle with life and it's objective, amoral nature. What's truly right and what's truly wrong? it it better to enslave and preserve or destroy and liberate? Is surrender truly preferrable to extinction or is life truly worth living without freedom? These could be questions the endings force you to ask yourself, or maybe they only reinforce your convictions. IT adds another layer to this because it may well bring it into perspective for Shepard and the player. Shepard beciming indoctrinated or not could again force players to reexamine themselves because their decision may turn out to be the wrong one because they didn't think it through enough, or didn't pay enough attention to the events unfolding around them to see the truth.
I guess only time will tell whether my guess is correct or not, but if this is similar to what BioWare intended then the endings may well bring a new perspective to how we view stories (or perhaps restore them) as well as how we view out own convictions and judgments of right and wrong.
...Or i could just be overthinking it waaaaaaaaaaaay too much lol
.
Oftentimes we get a clear understanding of who the antagonist and protagonist in a story is because the story defines them as such. Typically both the reader as well as the characters in the story define who is who based on their actions and the character's perspectives and system of morality. When you look at it this way it does seem like a subjective viewpoint; from the point fo view of the the characters, the antagonist is seen as such based on his or her actions, but more often than not, the antagonist feels that their actions are justifyed in some way, either out of fulfillment of their own selfish desires, or their desire to help others in a kinf od "ends justify the means." kind of way.
However, in an interactive medium like video games, there is room for other possibilities, much in the same way a choose-your-own-adventure book let's you interact with the story, a video game gives you even more freedom as you are not necessarily limited by narration. A video game could in theory allow you to decide who will be the protagonist and antagonist based on how the characters see your actions. You can see that alot in games like DA:O, where your companions can see you as a villain, no better than the darkspawn, rather than a hero based on your actions, even though you "evil" character as the same goal as a "good" character. Of course, I think that despite your action you will always be considered the protagonist of the story, but that's because the story in DA:O is central and what you do and what your goal is becomes the primary focus.
What this has to do with the ME3 endings, I feel, may well go back to what a well told story is supposed to do; help you look at things from a different perspective and examine yourself. Or more simply, to teach you a life lesson. Imo this is what a story must do if it can be considered a story well told. And if you think about it these endings may well be attempting to do this. This could work with or without IT but I think IT or something similar would be better because it wil provide a real conclusion to the story and give players a sense of consequence because we can see how our choice affected Shepard as well as the galaxy.
The more I think about these enigmatic endings that don't seem to have any character support at that exact moment and kind of force you to remember what characters throughout the series said about choices like these, while at the same time putting Shepard and by extension the player in this vacuum situation could possibly be seen as an examination of the player's soul. The endings could be a way for the player to examine their convictions and beliefs and put it to the test here in this final room where your actions will affect everything. at this moment you have to examine yourself and what you've learned over the course of three games and see which choice you will make based on your interactions with the various races and their plights. the choice you make determines what kind of person your Shepard is, and possibly who you as a player are.
None of these choices are ideal and you will be forced to deal with some form of loss either of yourself or of others. The game is essentially asking you things like: "Are you the kind of person who would sacrifice of yourself to save others? And if you are, do you know what kind of consequences that will bring?" And "Are you the kind of person who would sacrifice others to secure peace? And if you are do you know if that will truly endthe threat?"
What is the right choice? Perhaps it is a matter of perspective. Or perhaps there is a correct choice but you may not see it depending on your view of the world. You have to look at yourself and ask what is right because you don't have anyone else here to tell you what they think, unlike the last two games. Here you are on your own, with only memories and your own sense of morality to guide you.
Imo the endings could also be about a psychological battle where you struggle with yourself and your own sense of morality and whether the guideline of your life that you spent years creating is actually correct for you. The sci-fi story unfolds on the surface, but it represents your own struggle with life and it's objective, amoral nature. What's truly right and what's truly wrong? it it better to enslave and preserve or destroy and liberate? Is surrender truly preferrable to extinction or is life truly worth living without freedom? These could be questions the endings force you to ask yourself, or maybe they only reinforce your convictions. IT adds another layer to this because it may well bring it into perspective for Shepard and the player. Shepard beciming indoctrinated or not could again force players to reexamine themselves because their decision may turn out to be the wrong one because they didn't think it through enough, or didn't pay enough attention to the events unfolding around them to see the truth.
I guess only time will tell whether my guess is correct or not, but if this is similar to what BioWare intended then the endings may well bring a new perspective to how we view stories (or perhaps restore them) as well as how we view out own convictions and judgments of right and wrong.
...Or i could just be overthinking it waaaaaaaaaaaay too much lol
.
#45265
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:28
Restrider
-
- Members
- 1 986 messages
It's actually not that funny when you understand every word and the subtitles don't matchCmdrShep80 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
This.Canis_Major wrote...
I have a question: what's indoctrination theory about?
lol that was interesting to watch. When you're done canis watch the first vid in my signature
.Always have to mute...
#45266
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:29
CmdrShep80
-
- Members
- 1 900 messages
I have a hard time believing both the crucible and the citadel are a trap. Though when you look at it as let's leave the galaxy to spend all their resources on defeating us by giving them a dud bomb to build it would help the reapers divert the galaxy's attention away from the true objective too.
Guess we'll have to wait and see if omega is also a past crucible from the last cycle
Guess we'll have to wait and see if omega is also a past crucible from the last cycle
#45267
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:30
masster blaster
-
- Members
- 7 278 messages
Restrider I am to younv to look at it and thank god. I bought it for my Shepard in ME2 not knowing what it was until I looked it up.
Poor Shepard had to read it, and I would have love to see your LI say
" What the hell is that."
Shepard: It's a sport magazine.
Poor Shepard had to read it, and I would have love to see your LI say
" What the hell is that."
Shepard: It's a sport magazine.
#45268
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:33
paxxton
-
- Members
- 8 445 messages
Also, don't forget to watch Part 2.CmdrShep80 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
This.Canis_Major wrote...
I have a question: what's indoctrination theory about?
lol that was interesting to watch. When you're done canis watch the first vid in my signature
Seriously though, check out the videos in OP's post on page 1.
#45269
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:33
masster blaster
-
- Members
- 7 278 messages
Canis, um so your a Dog Major? Sorry I don't mean to insult you but Canis in Latin is dog.
Also check front page IT is all there. I mean what it it.
Also check front page IT is all there. I mean what it it.
#45270
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:35
Restrider
-
- Members
- 1 986 messages
@Arashi08
Well said. The Crucible (=test) is for us (the player). If you think about the endings, you will learn a lot about yourself and what you think is truly important. If you were "indoctrinated", how do you react? Do you see the patterns, when shown to you? Do you accept your mistake and change your mind? Or are you going to stick with your beliefs?
Well said. The Crucible (=test) is for us (the player). If you think about the endings, you will learn a lot about yourself and what you think is truly important. If you were "indoctrinated", how do you react? Do you see the patterns, when shown to you? Do you accept your mistake and change your mind? Or are you going to stick with your beliefs?
#45271
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:36
paxxton
-
- Members
- 8 445 messages
I guess that diminishes the "laughabilty." Anyway, I meant no offense.Restrider wrote...
It's actually not that funny when you understand every word and the subtitles don't matchCmdrShep80 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
This.Canis_Major wrote...
I have a question: what's indoctrination theory about?
lol that was interesting to watch. When you're done canis watch the first vid in my signature
Always have to mute...
Modifié par paxxton, 10 novembre 2012 - 11:37 .
#45272
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:47
Restrider
-
- Members
- 1 986 messages
Why should I've taken onepaxxton wrote...
I guess that diminishes the "laughabilty." Anyway, I meant no offense.Restrider wrote...
It's actually not that funny when you understand every word and the subtitles don't matchCmdrShep80 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
This.Canis_Major wrote...
I have a question: what's indoctrination theory about?
lol that was interesting to watch. When you're done canis watch the first vid in my signature
Always have to mute...
?
#45273
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:49
Andromidius
-
- Members
- 2 997 messages
I'm not even going to go into the whole 'conventional victory' debate again...
...really. I'm not. I really don't want to point out any obvious paralells from history, or codex sections that show how unconventional the war is...
...really.
...ggg...
...really. I'm not. I really don't want to point out any obvious paralells from history, or codex sections that show how unconventional the war is...
...really.
...ggg...
#45274
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:51
paxxton
-
- Members
- 8 445 messages
Dunno. Just in case.Restrider wrote...
Why should I've taken onepaxxton wrote...
I guess that diminishes the "laughabilty." Anyway, I meant no offense.Restrider wrote...
It's actually not that funny when you understand every word and the subtitles don't matchCmdrShep80 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
This.Canis_Major wrote...
I have a question: what's indoctrination theory about?
lol that was interesting to watch. When you're done canis watch the first vid in my signature
Always have to mute...
#45275
Posté 10 novembre 2012 - 11:56
Rifneno
-
- Members
- 12 076 messages
Andromidius wrote...
I'm not even going to go into the whole 'conventional victory' debate again...
...really. I'm not. I really don't want to point out any obvious paralells from history, or codex sections that show how unconventional the war is...
...really.
...ggg...
and I'm not going to assume you're just the eight billionth person going to use the tired, old, tired, old, tired, old, tired, old USSR/Afghanistan or USA/Vietnam comparison again.
... Really, I'm not...
Okay, yes I am.
