80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Eryri]

dorktainian wrote...

Lots of people saying they are.... but actually they dont need to change the ending do they?  only change the context of the ending.

I was thinking how they could do this... and then it struck me...

It really is simple.  change the POV.  have some DLC content - playable as one of the side characters..ie: garrus.  All they need to do is change the perception of what is going on (if IT is confirmed) or give more information on the lie that is the crudible.

That could be an interesting way of doing it.

By the way, was "Crudible" deliberate, or an incredibly appropriate Freudian slip? 

[BansheeOwnage]

Natabre wrote...

Wow, I just read one of the links, Parabolee's Blog. I know I'm way behind on this, just finally got into ME and I gotta say that my mind's really BLOWN! Now I realize why this is extremely popular topic to debate and that people want answers for the ending, I don't even know what to think about ending anymore, lol. Impressive job with IT! Hope Bioware will clarify on the ending...if it ever comes.

(Sorry to butt in!)

Welcome to The Thread™!  Always nice to see new people here, especially ones who are open-minded enough to even read the stuff on the first page. Trust me, you have no idea how many try to judge the theory without the proper research, so for that I thank you, and I too hope our questions will eventually be answered. Hear about the new DLC?

[BansheeOwnage]

byne wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

And I agree. What I meant was:
Watching this discussion where paxx is taking the standpoint of the forgiving one, who thinks that someone can redeem themselves no matter who, or what they used to be, or how many they killed.
Then there's byne, stating that "they deserve to die".

It's like where different countries have different policies with death sentences. If you really had the chance and time to ponder about the Reapers as a nation what would you do? Of course a time of war isn't that moment in time and neither is this thread. But still...

I only say that because its true.

And for the record, I'm against the death penalty.

Isn't that a bit hypocritical? Wow! The thread is moving at FTL!

[dorktainian]

Eryri wrote...

dorktainian wrote...

Lots of people saying they are.... but actually they dont need to change the ending do they?  only change the context of the ending.

I was thinking how they could do this... and then it struck me...

It really is simple.  change the POV.  have some DLC content - playable as one of the side characters..ie: garrus.  All they need to do is change the perception of what is going on (if IT is confirmed) or give more information on the lie that is the crudible.

That could be an interesting way of doing it.

By the way, was "Crudible" deliberate, or an incredibly appropriate Freudian slip? 

both.... i could call it worse but i wont.  

[byne]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

byne wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

And I agree. What I meant was:
Watching this discussion where paxx is taking the standpoint of the forgiving one, who thinks that someone can redeem themselves no matter who, or what they used to be, or how many they killed.
Then there's byne, stating that "they deserve to die".

It's like where different countries have different policies with death sentences. If you really had the chance and time to ponder about the Reapers as a nation what would you do? Of course a time of war isn't that moment in time and neither is this thread. But still...

I only say that because its true.

And for the record, I'm against the death penalty.

Isn't that a bit hypocritical? Wow! The thread is moving at FTL!

I never claimed it wasnt.

[dorktainian]

Also Eryri, think about SH's quote about sad music et al. How sad would it be to actually play as one of sheps comrades and have to watch as he literally goes to pieces and (potentially) hands over the galaxy to the reapers?

you might even have to stop him....  

Modifié par dorktainian, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:07 .

[paxxton]

lex0r11 wrote...

Please, paxxton. Please give me more than two lines of an answer about control.

This is driving me crazy!

The solutions pop up only in the last few minutes of the game because they are controversial. Many people might be upset if all of them were presented as equally legitimate throughout the series.

[Steelcan]

paxxton wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

Please, paxxton. Please give me more than two lines of an answer about control.

This is driving me crazy!

The solutions pop up only in the last few minutes of the game because they are controversial. Many people might be upset if all of them were presented as equally legitimate throughout the series.

Thats why I figured the end choice would be between Control and Destroy.  Then came the Catalyst and Synthesis

[ElSuperGecko]

draconian139 wrote...
In the literal interpretation you actually do control the Reapers though, somehow all those independent nations agree to recognize you as their new godlike controller and obey the new AI!Shep commands instead of continuing to massacre everyone.  Of course in the literal interpretation Sheperd is an idiot for believing that it would work and the galaxy is incredibly lucky that it did...well at least for now. 

No, you don't.  Literalists assume we do, because the Catalyst tells us that is what will happen.  But whatever it is that is controlling the Reapers, it is not Shepard.  It goes so far as to explicitly tell us as much.

[Dwailing]

byne wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

And I agree. What I meant was:
Watching this discussion where paxx is taking the standpoint of the forgiving one, who thinks that someone can redeem themselves no matter who, or what they used to be, or how many they killed.
Then there's byne, stating that "they deserve to die".

It's like where different countries have different policies with death sentences. If you really had the chance and time to ponder about the Reapers as a nation what would you do? Of course a time of war isn't that moment in time and neither is this thread. But still...

I only say that because its true.

And for the record, I'm against the death penalty.

I go back and forth on the death penalty.  Some people just deserve a stay in prison.  A very long stay.  However, I think there are some people who do things that are so truly horrible that they don't deserve continued existence.

[paxxton]

Steelcan wrote...

paxxton wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

Please, paxxton. Please give me more than two lines of an answer about control.

This is driving me crazy!

The solutions pop up only in the last few minutes of the game because they are controversial. Many people might be upset if all of them were presented as equally legitimate throughout the series.

Thats why I figured the end choice would be between Control and Destroy.  Then came the Catalyst and Synthesis

But Synthesis was first introduced as early as ME1.

Modifié par paxxton, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:09 .

[Dwailing]

paxxton wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

Please, paxxton. Please give me more than two lines of an answer about control.

This is driving me crazy!

The solutions pop up only in the last few minutes of the game because they are controversial. Many people might be upset if all of them were presented as equally legitimate throughout the series.

No, the solutions are controversial BECAUSE they pop up only in the last few minutes of the game.  If they had been presented as equally legit throughout the series, THEN they would be less controversial.

[lex0r11]

We have to keep in mind that Shepard presented by the game is pretty specific. We do make choices yes. But in the case of morality, we chose either ruthless or thoughtful and Shepard will stay that way. Both, as they are characterized by the story, will destroy the reapers IMO. No compromise in the last 5 minutes from some THING shooting nonsense at you at minigun speed.

If I interpreted Shepard wrong and had brain dead moments through key moments in the trilogy, please stop me right now.

Modifié par lex0r11, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:11 .

[Dwailing]

paxxton wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

paxxton wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

Please, paxxton. Please give me more than two lines of an answer about control.

This is driving me crazy!

The solutions pop up only in the last few minutes of the game because they are controversial. Many people might be upset if all of them were presented as equally legitimate throughout the series.

Thats why I figured the end choice would be between Control and Destroy.  Then came the Catalyst and Synthesis

But Stnthesis was first introduced as early as ME1.

Yes, Husks, Saren, and the Reapers themselves.  Those are great examples to go by. <_<

[byne]

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

And for the record, I'm against the death penalty.

I go back and forth on the death penalty.  Some people just deserve a stay in prison.  A very long stay.  However, I think there are some people who do things that are so truly horrible that they don't deserve continued existence.

I'm against it because it actually costs more money than just keeping them locked up for life.

[Pascal219]

 Primitives. Dead reapers is the only solution.

Modifié par Pascal219, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:10 .

[Rifneno]

Dwailing wrote...

I go back and forth on the death penalty.  Some people just deserve a stay in prison.  A very long stay.  However, I think there are some people who do things that are so truly horrible that they don't deserve continued existence.

Sometimes prison is worse than death.

[Steelcan]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

draconian139 wrote...
In the literal interpretation you actually do control the Reapers though, somehow all those independent nations agree to recognize you as their new godlike controller and obey the new AI!Shep commands instead of continuing to massacre everyone.  Of course in the literal interpretation Sheperd is an idiot for believing that it would work and the galaxy is incredibly lucky that it did...well at least for now. 

No, you don't.  Literalists assume we do, because the Catalyst tells us that is what will happen.  But whatever it is that is controlling the Reapers, it is not Shepard.  It goes so far as to explicitly tell us as much.

Another problem with Control as presented by the Catalyst.  
But the issue isn't "is it Shepard" because Shepard has become something very different.  You really can't compare him to anything

[Eryri]

dorktainian wrote...
both.... i could call it worse but i wont.  

. I can think of a few myself. However, to avoid lowering the tone of this fine thread, I shall also refrain.

Particularly from one colourful metaphor involving Galactus and proctology...

Modifié par Eryri, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:16 .

[draconian139]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

draconian139 wrote...
In the literal interpretation you actually do control the Reapers though, somehow all those independent nations agree to recognize you as their new godlike controller and obey the new AI!Shep commands instead of continuing to massacre everyone.  Of course in the literal interpretation Sheperd is an idiot for believing that it would work and the galaxy is incredibly lucky that it did...well at least for now. 

No, you don't.  Literalists assume we do, because the Catalyst tells us that is what will happen.  But whatever it is that is controlling the Reapers, it is not Shepard.  It goes so far as to explicitly tell us as much.

An AI based off of him, hence "AI!Shep".

[Samtheman63]

byne wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

And for the record, I'm against the death penalty.

I go back and forth on the death penalty.  Some people just deserve a stay in prison.  A very long stay.  However, I think there are some people who do things that are so truly horrible that they don't deserve continued existence.

I'm against it because it actually costs more money than just keeping them locked up for life.

only because they would fanny about doing it in some bs "humane" way

go to supermarket, buy a knife for £1, slit throats of 100+ criminals. sorted.

[Steelcan]

paxxton wrote...

But Synthesis was first introduced as early as ME1.

And was completely ignored until the ending of ME3.  It wasn't in any one's mind when playing ME3.  Control and Destroy were

[BansheeOwnage]

Dwailing wrote...

I go back and forth on the death penalty.  Some people just deserve a stay in prison.  A very long stay.  However, I think there are some people who do things that are so truly horrible that they don't deserve continued existence.

Part of my view on the death penalty entails not what the offender deserves - as that is secondary - but what society deserves. Does society deserve for the offender to have continued existence? Try to think about it both ways the next time you think about the death penalty. It's interesting.

[paxxton]

lex0r11 wrote...

We have to keep in mind that Shepard presented by the game is pretty specific. We do make choices yes. But in the case of morality, we chose either ruthless or thoughtful and Shepard will stay that way. Both, as they are characterized by the story, will destroy the reapers IMO. No compromise in the last 5 minutes from some THING shooting nonsense at you at minigun speed.

If I interpreted Shepard wrong and had brain dead moments through key moments in the trilogy, please stop me right now.

It's true that in ME3 Shepard is squarely supporting Destroying the Reapers and despises Control. That does mean Control might be viewed as suspicious (IT). But it's not an evil, bad option. It's the story that makes it look so.

[Eryri]

dorktainian wrote...

Also Eryri, think about SH's quote about sad music et al. How sad would it be to actually play as one of sheps comrades and have to watch as he literally goes to pieces and (potentially) hands over the galaxy to the reapers?

you might even have to stop him....  

While that would be far more fitting and appropriate, and could even be cathartic in its way, I think Bioware would be wary of ratcheting up the sadness factor even higher. I think I'd prefer to finish the game without getting depressed.

For a change.

Modifié par Eryri, 02 janvier 2013 - 09:16 .