80611 réponses à ce sujet

[AresKeith]

In that thread about Spec Ops: The Line, it really is a good game

[DoomsdayDevice]

Everybody here should watch David Lynch's Mulholland Drive. Seriously. I know Bill Casey will agree.

Does anyone have the link for magnetite's control video?

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 16 novembre 2012 - 02:52 .

[demersel]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Everybody here should watch David Lynch's Mulholland Drive. Seriously. I know Bill Casey will agree.

Does anyone have the link for magnetite's control video?

Doomsday, have you seen a movie called Repo Men? 

[DoomsdayDevice]

demersel wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Everybody here should watch David Lynch's Mulholland Drive. Seriously. I know Bill Casey will agree.

Does anyone have the link for magnetite's control video?

Doomsday, have you seen a movie called Repo Men? 

Yes! It was great! Very much like IT!

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 16 novembre 2012 - 03:00 .

[demersel]

@Doomsday - Indeed - especially the part where it gets more and more silly and absurd towards the end, and how it is an essential part of the story.

[Restrider]

AresKeith wrote...

In that thread about Spec Ops: The Line, it really is a good game

I agree on the fact that your actions determine the outcome and not only your dialogue choices.
This is something BW could've implemented in the trilogy. Here some examples:
- Virmire, if you are fast enough, you can save both squadmates, if you are too slow, you lose both
- Citadel, if you are fast enough, you can save the Ascension with moderate losses for the Alliance fleet, if you are too slow, the Reapers invade (this suggests that ME1 had something like a hidden EMS already, which should've been hidden in ME3 as well)
- in ME2 I have not that many to add, Samara's loyalty mission had the option to "exchange" Samara; Maelon's data has effects, as does the decision Wrex/Wreav; Tali's trial has also more effects you might imagine, as does the Heretics decision
- I won't start with ME3 that could fill a whole thread

I guess the biggest problem of the ME trilogy is that the story (especially the main story arch) was not fleshed out from the beginning or that open story archs were not really used in ME2. Of course such a huge story needs convergence points, but especially in the main decisions, those convergence points were handled rather poorly (Council decision for example). I wouldn't discount BW though, the Genophage arch for example is a really good example of what BW is capable of. If the main arch was as fleshed out as the Genophage arch, I think there would be way less complaints.

[demersel]

Have any of you played S.T.A.L.K.E.R. ? Despite being a shooter, it had almost exactly same ending as ME3 - and it had a concept similiar to IT. and IT even had it's own crucible!

Modifié par demersel, 16 novembre 2012 - 03:06 .

[dreamgazer]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Everybody here should watch David Lynch's Mulholland Drive. Seriously. I know Bill Casey will agree.

I used Mulholland Drive as an example/exercise earlier in the theory's life cycle, as a way of bringing the interpretation to a more fundamental level and less about analyzing every single glitch and asset as "evidence".  Even suggested that the thread construct a "list of clues" similar to what's included in the Mulholland Drive DVD in the states, as if BioWare were printing out a simplified guide of sorts to be included in a collector's edition of the game---mostly just to get the think-tank centered back on themes and observable elements. 

[AresKeith]

Thats what me and a handful of people has been really saying the past 8 months, BW didn't really flesh out the main story arc that much for ME3, which could be because strict deadline and not enough resources from EA

[Davik Kang]

 

DoomsdayDevice wrote...
The genius ending alone should make ME3 GOTY.

It takes gaming to a whole new level. Screw the fact that the journal isn't working properly. The ending is a revolution in gaming.

Of course I am one of the few who feels that way, even in here.

dreamgazer wrote...
I somewhat agree with your sentiment and perspective, but not in the ending's execution---unless it was BioWare's intention to scramble and divide their fan-base and leave it in disarray. 

I agree with DD, principally because a vote for ME3 is really a vote for the whole trilogy.  Similar to what DD says, I think the ending is a milestone in videgaming history.  It is a truly brilliant way to tie the whole series together, using the 'choice' mechanic as a final boss, simultaneously playing mind games with the audience, and giving them a chance to express themselves in terms of what they've learned in the series and what they consider the key values of the story, Shepard and themselves to be.

The ending makes the whole trilogy a deeply personal journey for each player.  Imo it is a genuinely incredible achievement, and retrospectively makes the ME trilogy one of the most important achievements in gaming so far.  I am 100% convinced that ME3 should win GOTY for that reason.  I just hope those deciding at least see this argument, even if ultimately they don't agree with it.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 16 novembre 2012 - 03:19 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

dreamgazer wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Everybody here should watch David Lynch's Mulholland Drive. Seriously. I know Bill Casey will agree.

I used Mulholland Drive as an example/exercise earlier in the theory's life cycle, as a way of bringing the interpretation to a more fundamental level and less about analyzing every single glitch and asset as "evidence".  Even suggested that the thread construct a "list of clues" similar to what's included in the Mulholland Drive DVD in the states, as if BioWare were printing out a simplified guide of sorts to be included in a collector's edition of the game---mostly just to get the think-tank centered back on themes and observable elements. 

I like it.

You know what's funny? My friend (a doctor in biology - molecular genetics, no less) saw Mulholland Drive twice, and he's absolutely convinced there is no logic to the story at all. Whenever I bring up David Lynch, he gets all annoyed, saying that all his movies are just random messed up story elements that are just thrown together to look interesting and make it seem like there is some kind of deeper meaning, while in fact, there is no meaning at all. He's abolutely convinced of that. He says it's deliberate bad writing, and that anyone who finds any kind of meaning to his movies is completely delusional.

Really reminds me of how some people interpret the ME3 ending.

So, recently, I explained to him in detail what Mulholland Drive was about and he just sat there blinking. Like "how did you ever figure that out?".

Which goes to show that even if you have an IQ of 160, there will still be things you will not understand, because there are simply different types of intelligence.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 16 novembre 2012 - 03:24 .

[masster blaster]

It's a test you at the end. The brat is a reaper yes, so what do Reapers want. Control, and Synthesis, and what do they don't want Destroy. Honest it's not that hard, the only problem is your talking to the Leader of the Reapers right. If I remember from the art of war. In order to gain the enemys trust, you must show them the up most respect and slowly turn them to your side.

Um the brat is being so nice to Shepard, but not for Destroy. Like TIM said

Destroying them gains us nothing.

Um actually TIM is right. Destroying the Reapers gains us nothing, Yet the brats okay with dying.

I am sorry did the brat counter dict TIM because TIM says Destroying the Reapers gains us nothing, but the brat says other wise. Why doesn't Destroying the Reapers gains us nothing.

Did TIM have to make a choice to, as well as saren?

I mean what's the final push for someone to get fully Indoctrinated first. I know when the Reapers sense the person that is Indoctrinated oubting there own morals. The Reapers make their Indoctrinated pawns get the implants, so they can strengthen the bond between The Reaper

[Davik Kang]

I like how David Lynch can make ostensibly simple things deeply unsettling and uncomfortable. He can bring out a kind of terror in the viewer (in me anyway) but not in a horror-movie kind of way. There's definitely a morbid, death-fear kind of thing going on, but it's something unique, something different, When I was young stuff like Twin Peaks genuinely freaked me out, but it still drew me in to watch more, I and I haven't seen anything comparable in making me feel like that.

It is interesting how the Lynch fans like ME as well, though I did think they toned down the unsettling elements a lot compared to Lynch. But maybe it's something to do with... sort of being comfortable with being made to feel uncomfortable... or something

[ThomasakaDes_]

At 5 am today I completed the game on Insanity.
I have extended cut, Leviathan and all other dlcs installed.

I had heard that if you choose destroy and have had EDI with you through the whole London part, she'll come out of the Normandy in the paradise cutscene.
That didn't happen, Liara(romance) and Javik walked out.

But Shepard still took a breath in the LONDON rubble.
If everything after getting hit by the beam was real, Shepard wouldn't have taken a breath. It's not possible.
She would've burned to death in the decent to Earth. And even if she had survived that, the impact with the Earth would have made her go "SPLATT"
Physics is a ****
-

Now I wonder how the ending is if I choose Synthesis.
Starchild says it's the ideal choice or something, maybe it's just Bioware hinting that they'll choose that choice as the cannon thing for ME4.
Thus why they can say that Shepard won't be the MC.
Makes me sad.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Synthesis canon? I don't believe it for a second. Not even destroy will be canonized. The Reapers are still out there.

[Davik Kang]

Restrider wrote...
I agree on the fact that your actions determine the outcome and not only your dialogue choices. 
This is something BW could've implemented in the trilogy. Here some examples:
- Virmire, if you are fast enough, you can save both squadmates, if you are too slow, you lose both
- Citadel, if you are fast enough, you can save the Ascension with moderate losses for the Alliance fleet, if you are too slow, the Reapers invade (this suggests that ME1 had something like a hidden EMS already, which should've been hidden in ME3 as well)
- in ME2 I have not that many to add, Samara's loyalty mission had the option to "exchange" Samara; Maelon's data has effects, as does the decision Wrex/Wreav; Tali's trial has also more effects you might imagine, as does the Heretics decision
- I won't start with ME3 that could fill a whole thread

I guess the biggest problem of the ME trilogy is that the story (especially the main story arch) was not fleshed out from the beginning or that open story archs were not really used in ME2. Of course such a huge story needs convergence points, but especially in the main decisions, those convergence points were handled rather poorly (Council decision for example). I wouldn't discount BW though, the Genophage arch for example is a really good example of what BW is capable of. If the main arch was as fleshed out as the Genophage arch, I think there would be way less complaints.

I think maybe you expect a little too much from the series.  ME3 wasn't perfect, sure, but few games are.  Remember how much dialogue alone they recorded that was specific to particular choices you made throughout your game.  Imagine how much more dialgue they'd need to write, not to mention interaction between characters, if both VS could survive or if the effects of the Citadel battle could be wildly different.

Imagine the programming required just to make each choice fit together and activate properly in the sequels.

And as for the ME1 ideas - I just don't think ME was ever supposed to be skill-based.  It's story-based all the way.  In ME2 your crew dies simply if you delay going to rescue them before the final mission.  Not on whether you could complete mission A or B within the speedrun time.

I think a lot of the things you are asking for are metagame-based, which is natural for a player who is obsessive over the game; but for most players, the important journey is the first one.  People were upset with the Rachni Queen choice effect on ME3, but it was a crucial mission and it just wouldn't have worked for them to omit or rework entire missions to reflect various choices in previous games.  If they had done so, the game itself would be much smaller for each player (because they would've had to sacrifice stuff elsewhere to implement all these alternatives) and most likely much more buggy too.

I just don't think a lot of people's expectations for what ME3 could have been are even remotely realistic.

[ThomasakaDes_]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Synthesis canon? I don't believe it for a second. Not even destroy will be canonized. The Reapers are still out there.

I still belive in IT of course.
But why didn't EDI come out of the Normandy? Did she die? :/
I didn't test it before installing the extended cut.

Actually, Shepard can have dreamt EDI away, since she would of course have been thinking that EDI was dead.

And the reason why Garrus doesn't come out(had him with me too) is becaus Shepard knows that he was hurt very badly.

Modifié par ThomasakaDes_, 16 novembre 2012 - 03:47 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

If EDI came out of the Normandy, it would instantly give away the "catalyst" was lying.

Also, I think the EDI thing is an unsubstantiated rumour. It's all hear say, and I've never seen evidence for the claim.

[Dwailing]

You know, I've been thinking about the endings (I do that in case you all haven't noticed by now. ), and I've reached a conclusion.  If I could accept that synthetics will always destroy organics, then I would be able to wholeheartedly embrace the endings.  However, I cannot bring myself to believe that, because I've seen so much IN GAME that suggests that this isn't the case.  EDI, Legion, and the geth/quarian peace are all the evidence I need that, at least in this cycle, we've found a way for this conflict to not occur.  

Also, I just had a thought about something the Brat says.  After completing Leviathan, when you talk to Brat, he says that the reason he harvested the Leviathans is that they didn't realize that they, organics, were part of the problem.  Now, at first, this just seems like typical Insane Troll (Brat) Logic.  However, I think we've discussed before that the reason the geth attacked the quarians is that the quarians attacked first.  Maybe Brat is hinting at this, but not outright saying it, because, despite grasping that organics are responsible in some way, he's still limited by the arrogance of his creators.

Modifié par Dwailing, 16 novembre 2012 - 03:55 .

[Davik Kang]

Dwailing wrote...

You know, I've been thinking about the endings (I do that in case you all haven't noticed by now. ), and I've reached a conclusion.  If I could accept that synthetics will always destroy organics, then I would be able to wholeheartedly embrace the endings.  However, I cannot bring myself to believe that, because I've seen so much IN GAME that suggests that this isn't the case.  EDI, Legion, and the geth/quarian peace are all the evidence I need that, at least in this cycle, we've found a way for this conflict to not occur.  

Also, I just had a thought about something the Brat says.  After completing Leviathan, when you talk to Brat, he says that the reason he harvested the Leviathans is that they didn't realize that they, organics, were part of the problem.  Now, at first, this just seems like typical Insane Troll (Brat) Logic.  However, I think we've discussed before that the reason the geth attacked the quarians is that the quarians attacked first.  Maybe Brat is hinting at this, but not outright saying it, because, despite grasping that organics are responsible in some way, he's still limited by the arrogance of his creators.

When you pick Destroy you make the choice to give organics and synthetics a chance.  If you embraced the Kid's philosophy, you couldn't pick Destroy, because you'd doom the galaxy.

It's possible the Leviathans turned on the Synthetics first.  But the way it's described by both parties suggests otherwise.

[demersel]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Synthesis canon? I don't believe it for a second. Not even destroy will be canonized. The Reapers are still out there.

I think it is a safe bet to say that a canon choice for ME4 fill be shepard indoctrinated or dead. 

[paxxton]

demersel wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Synthesis canon? I don't believe it for a second. Not even destroy will be canonized. The Reapers are still out there.

I think it is a safe bet to say that a canon choice for ME4 fill be shepard indoctrinated or dead. 

Sadly, that would make the most sense if BioWare tries to introduce a new protagonist and continue the current story without Shepard.

[demersel]

I think there will be a system like there was in origins - we'll get the chance to generate completely different characters, from different races and they all will have unigue opening act of the game. And one of those opening acts will Shepard waking up in the rubble on earth in midst of the pointless battle. But you'll be able to acces it only if you have a save to import - no save - no Shepard in ME4.

[Dwailing]

paxxton wrote...

demersel wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Synthesis canon? I don't believe it for a second. Not even destroy will be canonized. The Reapers are still out there.

I think it is a safe bet to say that a canon choice for ME4 fill be shepard indoctrinated or dead. 

Sadly, that would make the most sense if BioWare tries to introduce a new protagonist and continue the current story without Shepard.

Still, they must have included the breath scen for SOME reason.  I don't think this is the last we'll see of Commander Shepard.  BioWare has said as much.

[Dwailing]

Davik Kang wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

You know, I've been thinking about the endings (I do that in case you all haven't noticed by now. ), and I've reached a conclusion.  If I could accept that synthetics will always destroy organics, then I would be able to wholeheartedly embrace the endings.  However, I cannot bring myself to believe that, because I've seen so much IN GAME that suggests that this isn't the case.  EDI, Legion, and the geth/quarian peace are all the evidence I need that, at least in this cycle, we've found a way for this conflict to not occur.  

Also, I just had a thought about something the Brat says.  After completing Leviathan, when you talk to Brat, he says that the reason he harvested the Leviathans is that they didn't realize that they, organics, were part of the problem.  Now, at first, this just seems like typical Insane Troll (Brat) Logic.  However, I think we've discussed before that the reason the geth attacked the quarians is that the quarians attacked first.  Maybe Brat is hinting at this, but not outright saying it, because, despite grasping that organics are responsible in some way, he's still limited by the arrogance of his creators.

When you pick Destroy you make the choice to give organics and synthetics a chance.  If you embraced the Kid's philosophy, you couldn't pick Destroy, because you'd doom the galaxy.

It's possible the Leviathans turned on the Synthetics first.  But the way it's described by both parties suggests otherwise.

On the first point, I agree.  IT or Literal, I'll always choose Destroy, because I personally find the other choices revolting, even more so than Destroy, which still doesn't sit well with me, but is better than the alternative.

On the second point, I'm not just referring to the Leviathans being turned into Reapers.  In that case, it really DOES sound like Brat turned on them.  What I'm referring to is synthetic/organic conflict in general, the conflict that the caused the creation of Brat.  See my "Just Machines" Hypothesis for more details.