80611 réponses à ce sujet

[IronSabbath88]

Andromidius wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...

Interesting thread here if you want to hear player's psychological reasoning (and attachment) to certain endings:

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/14907076/1#14907076

Ignore the insane, that's my best advice.

When you seriously consider it wise to listen to your confessed arch-enemy and ignore everything your trusted friends and allies have been telling you for appoximately 100 hours of gametime, then you're insane.

No other word for it, insane.

INSANE.

Couldn't have put it better myself, if BioWare truly goes with the literal interpretation then they pretty much negated everything that was learned in ME and ME2.

[401 Kill]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

Again, I had some interesting thoughts while playing multiplayer (What is it about the multiplayer that brings me to think more than I usually do? xD)

Anyway, I was thinking that maybe BioWare did truly intend to end Shepard's saga after all the singleplayer DLC was released. Think about it, why release story driven content before the final mission if Shepard's mission is technically already over in the first place? Sure the argument has been stated that if the ending was better people would buy the DLC right away, but I don't think BW may see it like that.

It's like releasing a movie, having it end, then re-releasing the movie with more parts thrown in the middle. It makes no sense.

Thats why the ME2 DLC are cool, you can beat the main storyline, and then complete each DLC, saving Arrival for last.

[IronSabbath88]

401 Kill wrote...

IronSabbath88 wrote...

Again, I had some interesting thoughts while playing multiplayer (What is it about the multiplayer that brings me to think more than I usually do? xD)

Anyway, I was thinking that maybe BioWare did truly intend to end Shepard's saga after all the singleplayer DLC was released. Think about it, why release story driven content before the final mission if Shepard's mission is technically already over in the first place? Sure the argument has been stated that if the ending was better people would buy the DLC right away, but I don't think BW may see it like that.

It's like releasing a movie, having it end, then re-releasing the movie with more parts thrown in the middle. It makes no sense.

Thats why the ME2 DLC are cool, you can beat the main storyline, and then complete each DLC, saving Arrival for last.

And by all accounts, Arrival SHOULD be played last, it's pretty much a direct lead in to the events of ME3. 

I realize all games do this nowadays, finish up the main story then release more stuff later on, but for the end of a trilogy... I dunno. It makes sense for them to complete the whole story first before releasing an expansion of some sort.

Which by the way, is just what it says it will be, an expansion. Not messing with the current endings more, an expansion on the endgame. BioWare can say they "ended the endings", sure, because they did. They explained what was going on and even left in stuff that was pointed out by IT that was said to be suspect (such as the whole Anderson debacle and TIM STILL not bleeding after a gunshot to the head, Shepard's very suspect camera pan to the very same spot Anderson was shot, etc.) it's all still there, they could have easily removed or rectified it, but they didn't.

But an expansion isn't adding onto the endings, it's giving you events that happen after. Case in point, Awakening. It's happened before, it' may happen again.

Modifié par IronSabbath88, 17 novembre 2012 - 07:35 .

[MaximizedAction]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...

Interesting thread here if you want to hear player's psychological reasoning (and attachment) to certain endings:

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/14907076/1#14907076

Ignore the insane, that's my best advice.

When you seriously consider it wise to listen to your confessed arch-enemy and ignore everything your trusted friends and allies have been telling you for appoximately 100 hours of gametime, then you're insane.

No other word for it, insane.

INSANE.

Couldn't have put it better myself, if BioWare truly goes with the literal interpretation then they pretty much negated everything that was learned in ME and ME2.

They negate everything you learned from every western fiction story you've ever read or watched or heard. Especially the Refuse ending.

Btw, I've been asking myself the question how Neo could trust the Architect, which I somehow accepted, while I was having trust issues (silly me) about the Guardian.
For one....the Architect had the decency to present itself in a rather natural form which helps reduce the suspicion without forcing it away, like what the Guardian did, appearing as a child, the adult equivalent of inviting a kid into a window-less van with 'Icecream' sprayed on it.

On the other hand, this helps -- or should help -- the player deduce suspicion and questioning. I think it's maybe easier if the player has the ability to question athorities and not believe everything someone in a 'higher' position than you tells you right from the spot. Which is natural...has to do with evolution and survival. But sadly, others might use that against you. So it's even better to question things, especially as an adult.
In ME3 terms: no matter how often you're punched into trusting the Guardian...you should take into account that maybe you shouldn't.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 17 novembre 2012 - 07:57 .

[Dwailing]

You know, while you all were talking about the Keepers, I had a thought. If the Citadel DLC involves the Keepers, maybe we'll be reprogramming them so they'll do... something that changes the way the endings play out.

Edited to remove Department of Redundancy Department.

Modifié par Dwailing, 17 novembre 2012 - 08:08 .

[MaximizedAction]

Dwailing wrote...

You know, I was thinking about something earlier, and I had a thought. If the Citadel DLC involves the Keepers, maybe we'll be reprogramming them so they'll do... something that changes the way the endings play out.

I know what you mean.
I'm wondering about that Citadel DLC, too: If we are somehow supposed to find out something special about the Citadel...some truth...then how does this interact with what happens to the Citadel in the final missions.
If it does...then yeah, it might alter something about the endings.

I keep dreaming that this is the DLC it might start happening....

[Dwailing]

Huh, I just had ANOTHER thought. What if there aren't Collectors in Omega because the files were already added in the 1.04 patch?

[MWMike2011]

Dwailing wrote...

Huh, I just had ANOTHER thought. What if there aren't Collectors in Omega because the files were already added in the 1.04 patch?

When was this patch released? I know mine is going to need several patches. I haven't played since Leviathan came out... Course, Skyrim is going to be even worse. i haven't played since after the first or second patch, and probably won't until the GOTY edition comes out. I refuse to spend THAT much money for DLC packs...

[byne]

starlitegirlx wrote...

Interesting thread here if you want to hear player's psychological reasoning (and attachment) to certain endings:

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/14907076/1#14907076

I like how Seival's new avatar is God!Shep synthesized.

Because when you accept space magic as being legit, logic can go **** itself and you can mix and match endings to your heart's content.

[Andromidius]

MaximizedAction wrote...

Btw, I've been asking myself the question how Neo could trust the Architect, which I somehow accepted, while I was having trust issues (silly me) about the Guardian.

I think its mostly because the Machines in The Matrix aren't portrayed as being manipulative or deceptive.  They are very obvious once the veil of the Matrix itself has been removed, and don't try to trick anyone into going back.

They bribe and offer real choices (admitting openly its just as fake as what they had before), or they try to kill you.  No tricky.  The Architect has legitimate reasons to talk to Neo, he's got a problem that won't go away.  The Catalyst has no reason to talk to Shepard, and his 'problem' doesn't seem to bother him that much.

Not to mention he appears as a conceitful old man, not an innocent little boy.

[MaximizedAction]

Andromidius wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

Btw, I've been asking myself the question how Neo could trust the Architect, which I somehow accepted, while I was having trust issues (silly me) about the Guardian.

I think its mostly because the Machines in The Matrix aren't portrayed as being manipulative or deceptive.  They are very obvious once the veil of the Matrix itself has been removed, and don't try to trick anyone into going back.

They bribe and offer real choices (admitting openly its just as fake as what they had before), or they try to kill you.  No tricky.  The Architect has legitimate reasons to talk to Neo, he's got a problem that won't go away.  The Catalyst has no reason to talk to Shepard, and his 'problem' doesn't seem to bother him that much.

Not to mention he appears as a conceitful old man, not an innocent little boy.

Good analysis. Thanks!

[IronSabbath88]

byne wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...

Interesting thread here if you want to hear player's psychological reasoning (and attachment) to certain endings:

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/14907076/1#14907076

I like how Seival's new avatar is God!Shep synthesized.

Because when you accept space magic as being legit, logic can go **** itself and you can mix and match endings to your heart's content.

I honestly don't know how someone can support those ideas and really take them seriously... I mean what the hell, Anderson basically says outright "there's always another way" when TIM is all about Control. So is Anderson wrong in this case? 

Good god the amount of making the bad guys look good is just astounding in these endings. And WHY? It absolutely makes no sense to me at all. Why keep around something that has killed people's families and taken people's minds, driving them insane? The inhabitants of the galaxy are completley okay with having reapers around to help rebuild? Or being part Reaper?

Just... LOL.

[Andromidius]

starlitegirlx wrote...
I'm saying they are clinging to their psychological justifications.

Much like Saren.  "By allying us to the Reapers, I have saved more lives then have ever existed!"

Didn't turn out well for him.

[MaximizedAction]

Andromidius wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...
I'm saying they are clinging to their psychological justifications.

Much like Saren.  "By allying us to the Reapers, I have saved more lives then have ever existed!"

Didn't turn out well for him.

Hm...never read that line properly. He must mean future generations...otherwise that's just lolwut.

[IronSabbath88]

I've been thinking all of us should put together some sort of video montage of anti-Synthesis and anti-Control quotes from all 3 games. I would, but I'm not so skilled in the video making department. I think it's a worthy idea though. Just to show how contrived and silly the ideas are to others in the universe who are suddenly "okay" with it.

[Andromidius]

MaximizedAction wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...
I'm saying they are clinging to their psychological justifications.

Much like Saren.  "By allying us to the Reapers, I have saved more lives then have ever existed!"

Didn't turn out well for him.

Hm...never read that line properly. He must mean future generations...otherwise that's just lolwut.

Probably.  But it can also hint at the lie the Reapers told him - that fighting the Reapers is fighting against all those who came before and are now preserved inside the Reapers.    That killing them not only means war, disease and famine can continue to kill future generations.

He's deluded into thinking he'll bring everyone back.

[GenHav0c]

No its not a hallucination.

Why do I say that, this is not a soap opra on at 1pm in its 67th seasion.

The voices and dreams he has are simple stree combined with Shell shock. If you let Legion die in ME 2 you can hear him say "Shepard- Commander" if he dosent you dont hear that. I also noticed Kadin saying to go save Ash from the nuke.

Most importantly the Protien VIs can detect indoctrination. SInce he has the dreams before finding the one on Thesia and it dosnt freak out we know hes not indoctrinated.


All that being said remember, this is ME 3 you pick how the game ends, if you want to say your guy is indoctrinated then use that for picking Controle, Synthises or the not doing anying option. Remember its all our game and each of us makes it our own.

....but for when Shepard comes back in the Mass Effect after Bio does there side story game to bring in more lore, the only way you could play it would be to fess up and say Shepards not indoctrinated.

[Andromidius]

GenHav0c wrote...

No its not a hallucination.

Why do I say that, this is not a soap opra on at 1pm in its 67th seasion.

Your powers of deduction amaze me.

No really.  You're a genius.  Utterly incredible.  Here we were, thousands of pages of discussion, and here you come and solve it all for us!  Thank you!

Modifié par Andromidius, 17 novembre 2012 - 09:57 .