80611 réponses à ce sujet

[MegumiAzusa]

demersel wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
So Refuse is like sacrificing yourself, like Saren and TIM did? I could get behind that, though it doesn't explain the different Stargazer scene.

No Refuse is not sacrificing yourself, like Saren - it is going flatline while you are in a coma. 

Both control and Synthesis migh lead to sacrififcing yourself like Saren did though.

You should read Retribution. The Reapers wouldn't let that happen.

[FFZero]

I go offline for a few days and you guys make up nearly 50 odd pages, what's going on here?

Also just adding a little bit to the refuse talk going on, The different stargazer scene could simply be Shepards final thoughts/hopes that the next cycle is better prepared and succeeds where they failed since they've given up.

Also in other news my ME3 is finally fixed, it's only taken EA 3 weeks <_<

Never, ever, ever use their online support if something goes wrong with your game, call them. Much faster.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

demersel wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
So Refuse is like sacrificing yourself, like Saren and TIM did? I could get behind that, though it doesn't explain the different Stargazer scene.

No Refuse is not sacrificing yourself, like Saren - it is going flatline while you are in a coma. 

Both control and Synthesis migh lead to sacrififcing yourself like Saren did though. 

Yeah, that is one of the things I have always advertised in IT, not letting the choice beeing set in stone. Certain choices, High EMS, a Love Interest or a combiantion might all allow a Control / Synthesis chooser to fight back in Saren's way or even break free for a short time (in extreme cases).

I have allready presented the Rachni Queen idea.

My main gripe is that even if you have the necesary prequsites to get a second chance under Control /Synthesis it wont be easy or without sacrifice. You are going to lose something in breaking free, wether it be your own life, your love interest or something else like the Rahcni Queen in my old idea. There is a price for making the wrong choice, but preparation can minimize that price from the entire Galaxy falling with you to some serious personal blows to you or others.

[Andromidius]

ElSuperGecko wrote...
Lots of awesome things

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

demersel wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
So Refuse is like sacrificing yourself, like Saren and TIM did? I could get behind that, though it doesn't explain the different Stargazer scene.

No Refuse is not sacrificing yourself, like Saren - it is going flatline while you are in a coma. 

Both control and Synthesis migh lead to sacrififcing yourself like Saren did though.

You should read Retribution. The Reapers wouldn't let that happen.

The Reapers dont have a choice if they dont have full control of Shepard yet, which is one of the main points. What we see is the breaking point, the moment as Shepard is sliding down the slope before he jumps completely of it.

Also for all of Sovereign's hold on Saren he coukdnt stop him from pulling the trigger on himself. The Reapers are powerful and they can get inside your head, but Saren showed us a powerful mind can break free even after beeing implanted, even if only for a short time.

Modifié par Raistlin Majare 1992, 06 décembre 2012 - 07:13 .

[demersel]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
oh ok, not used to this yet. I just thought it seemed similar, since both Saren and TIm killed themselves as a final act of defiance against indoctrination/Reapers, and Refuse is Shepard's last act of defiance against Catalyst.

We actually only know that saren did it. 

And he did it After accepting the reaper's point of view. Same will happen with Control and Synthesis Shepards.

We didn't actually see TIM die. - we only dreamed of killing him off - either the way Saren shot himself, or the way Udina was shot during the coup. 

[Arashi08]

What I believe is Megumi's point:

MegumiAzusa wrote...

In short: the ending does only distinguish between you used the Crucible or you opted out and even disregards EMS.
The task: create a plausible theory why this is what's happening in the context of IT.

Discuss away!
 Bah! d

Modifié par Arashi08, 06 décembre 2012 - 07:12 .

[Hanako Ikezawa]

demersel wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
oh ok, not used to this yet. I just thought it seemed similar, since both Saren and TIm killed themselves as a final act of defiance against indoctrination/Reapers, and Refuse is Shepard's last act of defiance against Catalyst.

We actually only know that saren did it. 

And he did it After accepting the reaper's point of view. Same will happen with Control and Synthesis Shepards.

We didn't actually see TIM die. - we only dreamed of killing him off - either the way Saren shot himself, or the way Udina was shot during the coup. 

Right, forgot TIM wasn't real in this, but just Shepard's indoctrinated half.

[Arashi08]

Sounds like it could be the disregard of EMS that is the problem not necessarily the Stargazer scene.

[demersel]

MegumiAzusa wrote...
You should read Retribution. The Reapers wouldn't let that happen.

You know what?  I fine with having played Mass Effect 1 and it says it can happen. It says so twice. 

[ElSuperGecko]

Andromidius wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...
Lots of awesome things

LOL thanks - I did manage to royally bugger up the quotations though! 

[Andromidius]

demersel wrote...

We didn't actually see TIM die. - we only dreamed of killing him off - either the way Saren shot himself, or the way Udina was shot during the coup. 

The situation is similar too.

Hmmm.  Essentially fighting over a control panel, with a helpless unarmed person at stake.

Though not exactly the same.  Lots of differences, obviously.  But similar.  Ish.  If only Udina had a Predator and Shepard had the Scumbag Carnifex...

[Andromidius]

demersel wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
You should read Retribution. The Reapers wouldn't let that happen.

You know what?  I fine with having played Mass Effect 1 and it says it can happen. It says so twice. 

Considering Saren is implanted and can still kill himself...  Yeah, demersel is right.

[MegumiAzusa]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

In short: the ending does only distinguish between you used the Crucible or you opted out and even disregards EMS.
The task: create a plausible theory why this is what's happening in the context of IT.

Ah...... the old Stargazer scene debate again.  You know my stance on that particular scene, I think it has little relevance to the overall game, being an element that's present entirely outside the story.  But in the interest of goodwill and debate (and getting the thread back on topic), let's chat.

There's two ways you can look at the Stargazer scene - from an in-game perspective, and from an out-of-game perspective.

In game: 

You're right; there's a difference if you fire the Crucible (make a decision) and if you don't (refuse).  The scene plays out similarly... but slight changes to the dialogue and different voices. So:  why the change?

The obvious answer is that Bioware wanted to make it clear that it's a different cycle entirely that's discussing the actions of the Shepard.  In refuse, we failed.  The Reapers won, the harvest was completed, but thanks to our efforts and (more specifically) Liara's time capsules, the next cycle succeeded.

Conversely, in firing the Crucible, the same voice discusses the same story in each ending.  Regardless of decision, regardless of EMS.  This would suggest that whatever we choose, we succeed, or we fail, and the future pans out exactly the same way (YOU DEVELOP ALONG THE LINES WE DESIRE).

Does that mean that if we fire the Crucible, whatever path we choose, we ultimately win or lose?  No, because the differences are present elsewhere in the endings.  EMS has a clear impact in Destroy, Paragon/Renegade in Control, and then you've got the Shepard breathes scene.

Context is key - and we have very little context for the Stargazer scene - we don't know when it happens (other than an unspecified time in the future, since the details have been lost in time), where it happens (other than it's not Earth, hence the multiple moons), or even who and what these people are discussing the Shepard.

Maybe the future is predetermined.  Ripples in a pond.  The further you get from the time of Shepard's actions, the less significant and obvious the impact they will have had.  The people who survive in a high (or low) EMS destroy scenario will be more immediately affected by the impact of the final decision than those hanging around in 50,000 years time, 100,000 years time, 500,000 year time (which is another reason of course why we cannot accept the Catalysts assertations of a bigger picture - because ultimately we're fighting for our own survival, not some ifbutmaybe in the far flung future).

So to sum up, the changes to the Stargazer scene are intriguing, and they open up a lot of questions, but do they immediately affect our decision?  Do they give us any indication of what will happen to the people who are currently depending on us?  No - they tell us little more than whatever we do, somewhere down the line, our name will be remembered.

Out of game:

Oh boy, you're probably not going to like this one.

The simple fact of the matter is that "Refuse" was never an option Bioware intended to implement in the game.  It was added with the EC due to the fan's backlash and incredulity that the option to oppose the Catalyst and the suggestions offered wasn't even present (and of course, that's right - indoctrination aside, how could it possibly be that Shepard wouldn't call out the Catalyst's assertations?)

Refuse is an appeasement.  Fan service - unless you take the route of the Puzzle Theory.

When then are the Stargazer scenes different this time around?  Again, Bioware wanted to make it clear that there were object differences between Refusal and activating the Crucible.  They wanted to make it clear that it is not the survivors of this cycle that are speaking of the Shepard.  They did that with the changes in dialogue - and as for changes in the voice cast, maybe they were simply unable to procure Buzz Aldrin's services again.

At the same time, although they were provciding additional conxtext and closure in the EC for each ending, they didn't want to change their original plan of having the original endings open to interpretation.  So the original endings get the same (speculative) Stargazer scene, the Refuse endings gets one that is clearly different and clearly set in another cycle.  That doesn't mean the Stargazer scene isn't also set in another cycle - just that the Refuse scene is more clearly so.

So either way, how does this all affect IT?  I'm of the opinion that it's imposssible to say.  The Stargazer scene is what it is; there's differences between activating the crucible and not, sure - but they're hardly quantifiable in any real manner.  We simply don't know enough about the circumstances of the Stargazer scene to judge.  You feel differently - can you explain why?

You ignoring the simple things:
If you have the result x in case 1, x in case 2, and y in case 3 while x != y you can say case 1 and case 2 are equal. This equality means that no matter what you do in the long run the same result occurs. Applied to the ending that means it doesn't matter if Shepard lives or dies. What matters is that she really activated the Crucible in order to achieve x. You don't need to know when etc it's playing. If you say "this cycle dies in Synthesis and x is placed in another cycle" you also have to say that any choice of destroy has the continuation of the cycle as a result. If the scene wouldn't give any ingame message and is only supposed to be counted as a message to the player the new opt out scene shouldn't be there, but it is, and makes it clear how it looks like what happens if the Crucible is not activated.

Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 06 décembre 2012 - 07:21 .

[demersel]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

demersel wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
In short: the ending does only distinguish between you used the Crucible or you opted out and even disregards EMS.
The task: create a plausible theory why this is what's happening in the context of IT.

Simple -
Shepard has not done something crucial yet, and he does it regardless of whether or not he is indoctrinated or not - the very fact that he is alive allows for this thing to happen. 

In refuse shepard is braindead - and can't trigger the event.

So an indoctrinated Shepard isn't being stopped from doing what could destroy the Reapers? Didn't I say something about plausible?

Destroy is Shepard trying to fight

Which was not the point.

If your point was the bolded part - i adressed it, it fits perfectly, you just waved it off with "Naah, that's not it". 
You allude to something in retribution - i directly quote you the game. 
You still say i miss the point - I say screw you, you're dumb.
I advise you to leave this thread. 

Modifié par demersel, 06 décembre 2012 - 07:24 .

[Zardoc]

So, any actual evidence to support IT yet?

[MegumiAzusa]

Andromidius wrote...

demersel wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
You should read Retribution. The Reapers wouldn't let that happen.

You know what?  I fine with having played Mass Effect 1 and it says it can happen. It says so twice.

Considering Saren is implanted and can still kill himself...  Yeah, demersel is right.

Considering Grayson couldn't disagrees. He was still needed. TIM... outlived his use maybe?

[Andromidius]

Zardoc wrote...

So, any actual evidence to support IT yet?

Plenty.  But if you're asking for proof, then no.  But then there's no proof either way so that's unsuprising.

[FFZero]

Andromidius wrote...

demersel wrote...

We didn't actually see TIM die. - we only dreamed of killing him off - either the way Saren shot himself, or the way Udina was shot during the coup. 

The situation is similar too.

Hmmm.  Essentially fighting over a control panel, with a helpless unarmed person at stake.

Though not exactly the same.  Lots of differences, obviously.  But similar.  Ish.  If only Udina had a Predator and Shepard had the Scumbag Carnifex...

Well somebody in that scene has the Carnifex...

[Andromidius]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

demersel wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
You should read Retribution. The Reapers wouldn't let that happen.

You know what?  I fine with having played Mass Effect 1 and it says it can happen. It says so twice.

Considering Saren is implanted and can still kill himself...  Yeah, demersel is right.

Considering Grayson couldn't disagrees. He was still needed. TIM... outlived his use maybe?

Jesus...

All that says is that Saren and Grayson were different.  Saren COULD and Grayson COULDN'T.  Simple logic.  Use it.

Because by your 'logic' Saren had outgrown his usefulness too.  You know, right before Sovereign directly controls his corpse to kill Shepard, ends up losing and getting feedback and thus being destroyed and ruining the entire invasion plan.

Yep.  Totally.

Modifié par Andromidius, 06 décembre 2012 - 07:23 .

[Arashi08]

demersel wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

demersel wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
In short: the ending does only distinguish between you used the Crucible or you opted out and even disregards EMS.
The task: create a plausible theory why this is what's happening in the context of IT.

Simple -
Shepard has not done something crucial yet, and he does it regardless of whether or not he is indoctrinated or not - the very fact that he is alive allows for this thing to happen. 

In refuse shepard is braindead - and can't trigger the event.

So an indoctrinated Shepard isn't being stopped from doing what could destroy the Reapers? Didn't I say something about plausible?

Destroy is Shepard trying to fight

Which was not the point.

If your point was the bolded part - i adressed it, it fits perfectly, you just waved it off with "Naah, that's not it". 
You allude to something in retribution - i directly quote you the game. 
I still say i miss the point - I say screw you, you're dumb.
I advise you to leave this thread. 

aaaaaaaand we're back to this again...*sigh*

[demersel]

Andromidius wrote...

demersel wrote...

We didn't actually see TIM die. - we only dreamed of killing him off - either the way Saren shot himself, or the way Udina was shot during the coup. 

The situation is similar too.

Hmmm.  Essentially fighting over a control panel, with a helpless unarmed person at stake.

Though not exactly the same.  Lots of differences, obviously.  But similar.  Ish.  If only Udina had a Predator and Shepard had the Scumbag Carnifex...

Wait, i thought that was exaclty how it happened! I shot udina with my trusty carnifex (if i don't do it - Ashley does it with a carnifex. I don't know about Kaidan, but he's gay, so it would not be politically correct to give him a scumbag carnifex. Gays are incapable of evil and wrong-doing and are always correct.)

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Andromidius wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

demersel wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...
You should read Retribution. The Reapers wouldn't let that happen.

You know what?  I fine with having played Mass Effect 1 and it says it can happen. It says so twice.

Considering Saren is implanted and can still kill himself...  Yeah, demersel is right.

Considering Grayson couldn't disagrees. He was still needed. TIM... outlived his use maybe?

Jesus...

All that says is that Saren and Grayson were different.  Saren COULD and Grayson COULDN'T.  Simple logic.  Use it.

Drugs are bad. They stop you from killing yourself if you're being controlled by Reapers.

[hukbum]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

hukbum wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Which is absolutely not the point.

How about you make your point.
Create a wall of text instead of all these "not the point" answers.

This is no discussion, it's riddle my point.

My point is clearly stated in a concise form some posts ago. No need to make a wall of text because the point is simple to understand but as it seems just ignored in favor to strengthen their own beliefs. Also I wrote the wall of text some weeks ago and people didn't like it either.

If your point is short and simple, write it down again.

And if this is about "EC disproved everything" it's just a diffrent point of view. For me (and I'm talking only about myself) EC felt like "throwing a bone".
So I have a completly diffrent point of view and IT is still possible. I don't know what BW is up to, nobody in this forum knows that. Bad writing, Literal, Puzzle, IT, at the moment everything is possible.

And if you think EC was the end of the line, you have no reason to think about IT anymore. And also you have no real reason to come here and tell people that it's not true or something, because people here see things diffrent.
It's no religon where someone needs to convert someone to something.
It's an interpretation of a game-ending.

[Restrider]

hukbum wrote...

Oh, time for the next 50 pages of sandbox-fighting?

Kindergarten Ahoy!