80611 réponses à ce sujet

[dorktainian]

you can deffo see the UK and europe on the 'earth' burning.

[Andromidius]

BleedingUranium wrote...

I really try to avoid thinking of people who don't get IT as idiots (or worse), but this? Yeah that's just ****ing retarded. That's like taking Fight Club literally, or Inception, if that's even possible.

I'm hoping one day game "journalists" will do more than either promote what they've been paid to, or just agree with whatever the community in general is thinking/feeling.

Well, I try too, but some people really make it hard for me.  And ME3's less obvious, and is already in a somewhat 'magical' setting with extremely sophisticated technology.  FC3 doesn't have that, and the writer even supports the notion that people aren't understanding the game.

I swear, if one of those 'journalists' played Eternal Darkness on the Gamecube, they'd write a review saying something similar to:

"This game is very badly written and makes no sense.  Weird things keep happening, it keeps jumping back and forth in time, and the game randomly crashes and deletes all my data and makes me restart all the time!  Unplayable!"

(If you don't know, that game really dicked with the player.  It would pretend to turn off the tv, mess with sound volume and give messages like "data files corrupted" all in an attempt to freak the player out when the mind-destroyingly freaking monsters failed to do so.)

[Andromidius]

paxxton wrote...

I've been playing AC2 recently and I've got a feeling the game is a hallucination.  Definitely not a good idea to jump off a 50-story high tower onto a haystack.

I know you're probably joking, but yeah that game is all set in an artificial reality.

That game's story is legit crazy.  Not bad, just crazy.

[paxxton]

Andromidius wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I've been playing AC2 recently and I've got a feeling the game is a hallucination.  Definitely not a good idea to jump off a 50-story high tower onto a haystack.

I know you're probably joking, but yeah that game is all set in an artificial reality.

That game's story is legit crazy.  Not bad, just crazy.

So far I absolutely love the idea of the Animus. Great game. How the cities appear out of white sparks is absolutely stunning. And the idea of reliving your ancestor's life based on data from your own DNA - very unusual. It's like a gigantic simulator. The inhabitants of that world think Ezio is real but it's still unclear at the point of the story where I am at whether Ezio is aware he is Desmond. I know there are operators' voices here and there but Ezio never acknowledges them.

Modifié par paxxton, 05 janvier 2013 - 10:17 .

[BleedingUranium]

Andromidius wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

I really try to avoid thinking of people who don't get IT as idiots (or worse), but this? Yeah that's just ****ing retarded. That's like taking Fight Club literally, or Inception, if that's even possible.

I'm hoping one day game "journalists" will do more than either promote what they've been paid to, or just agree with whatever the community in general is thinking/feeling.

Well, I try too, but some people really make it hard for me.  And ME3's less obvious, and is already in a somewhat 'magical' setting with extremely sophisticated technology.  FC3 doesn't have that, and the writer even supports the notion that people aren't understanding the game.

I swear, if one of those 'journalists' played Eternal Darkness on the Gamecube, they'd write a review saying something similar to:

"This game is very badly written and makes no sense.  Weird things keep happening, it keeps jumping back and forth in time, and the game randomly crashes and deletes all my data and makes me restart all the time!  Unplayable!"

(If you don't know, that game really dicked with the player.  It would pretend to turn off the tv, mess with sound volume and give messages like "data files corrupted" all in an attempt to freak the player out when the mind-destroyingly freaking monsters failed to do so.)

That's pretty much exactly what I meant


LOL that's hilarious! The Metal Gear Solid series had weird/funny fourth-wall breaking things similar to that, though I have yet to actually play any of them

[Andromidius]

BleedingUranium wrote...

LOL that's hilarious! The Metal Gear Solid series had weird/funny fourth-wall breaking things similar to that, though I have yet to actually play any of them

The Gamecube version is the craziest.  Its the only version where Psycho Mantis unplugs the controller during a boss fight and forces you to switch to port #2.

Gamecube, totally underrated system.  All Nintendo's fault for their DRM nonsense with mini-discs.

[BleedingUranium]

Andromidius wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

LOL that's hilarious! The Metal Gear Solid series had weird/funny fourth-wall breaking things similar to that, though I have yet to actually play any of them

The Gamecube version is the craziest.  Its the only version where Psycho Mantis unplugs the controller during a boss fight and forces you to switch to port #2.

Gamecube, totally underrated system.  All Nintendo's fault for their DRM nonsense with mini-discs.

That's awesome  Gamecube was my first console, I still have it hidden away somewhere.

[BleedingUranium]

Was going to be a response to a thread, but I figured it was just going to get buried, so I made it its own thead.

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 05 janvier 2013 - 11:21 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

So we're assigning meaning to which threads on the forum have Bioware tags now?

Really, people?

[lex0r11]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

So we're assigning meaning to which threads on the forum have Bioware tags now?

Really, people?

Who did?

[BleedingUranium]

(From my thread) This is why Refuse is a bad choice, and this is without even getting into the themes:


If you play the game from a literal perspective, then everything happens as you see it, even Synthesis. So if you don't want Synthesis, the so-called best (but disgusting) one, pick Control, and if you don't like the idea of the Reapers becoming Space Big Brother, then pick Destroy. Refuse is just plain worse than Destroy, in literally every single way possible.

If you play the game from an IT perspective, then Destroy isn't one of the kid's choices. The choices are just metaphors for Shepard's possible goal: destroying the Reapers, attempting to control them, or adopting their methods and goals as your own. Every single Shepard, not matter how you play yours, enters the room wanting to destroy the Reapers, and since they're just representations of possible goals, and that is Shepard's goal, it has to exist. All the kid can do is tell you you shouldn't do it and that it's bad, but he cannot make it go away.

So, in either case, there's no reason to pick Refuse. The only actual reasons are to say FU to Bioware/the kid/the end/whatever, but those are meta reasons and have nothing to do with the actual narrative.

[Rosewind]

lex0r11 wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

So we're assigning meaning to which threads on the forum have Bioware tags now?

Really, people?

Who did?

We do apparently.

[Andromidius]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Was going to be a response to a thread, but I figured it was just going to get buried, so I made it its own thead.

Heh.  I found the 'two wrongs don't make a right' literal wording quite apt.

Two wrongs = offers Control and Synthesis
Don't make a right = tells you not to Destroy



And yeah, some people seem to confuse Shepard with themselves.  Sorry, but Mass Effect doesn't allow for the level of roleplaying some people do in their heads.  Shepard is a warrior 100% of the time.  Shepard is a good guy 99% of the time (I would have said 100% of the time but some of the ME3 Renegade options are actually evil, not ruthless).  Shepard is friends with Anderson 100% of the time.

Nearly every choice you make in the game is how you do something, not if you do it or not.  Shepard is not the player.  And despite what some people think, your Shepard is not unique.  Its just one of about a dozen variables which are all mostly similar too.

What gets me is when people talk about what their Shepard believes in.  It has zero bearing on the story, and isn't represented in the game at all - all Shepards 'believe' the same thing (more or less), that the Galaxy is worth saving, that Earth needs saving, that the Reapers need to be stopped at any cost, and that TIM has gone insane with power/is indoctrinated.

[Andromidius]

BleedingUranium wrote...

So, in either case, there's no reason to pick Refuse. The only actual reasons are to say FU to Bioware/the kid/the end/whatever, but those are meta reasons and have nothing to do with the actual narrative.

Pretty much.  It was only added because of fan annoyance.  It was never intended in the original story.

Refuse is giving up.  If Refuse came with a backup plan, or at least some kind of resistance, then I'd respect it.  But its essentially throwing your hands in the air and declaring you aren't willing to act at the moment some action - ANY action - is required, right now.

Destroy is ruthless.  Control is foolish.  Synthesis is insane.  Refuse is indecisive.

Here's what Refuse should have been:

Shepard rejects Starbinger's choices, and hails the Victory Fleet for reinforcements.  Word of Shepard making it to the Crucible and being on the verge of activating it rallys the fleet and a find push it made to secure it and bring experts down to figure out how to make it work.

Doesn't matter it if fails, at least you've done more then make a speech and then stand there like a muppet as the camera pans back.

[umadcommander]

Andromidius wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

So, in either case, there's no reason to pick Refuse. The only actual reasons are to say FU to Bioware/the kid/the end/whatever, but those are meta reasons and have nothing to do with the actual narrative.

Pretty much.  It was only added because of fan annoyance.  It was never intended in the original story.

Refuse is giving up.  If Refuse came with a backup plan, or at least some kind of resistance, then I'd respect it.  But its essentially throwing your hands in the air and declaring you aren't willing to act at the moment some action - ANY action - is required, right now.

Destroy is ruthless.  Control is foolish.  Synthesis is insane.  Refuse is indecisive.

Here's what Refuse should have been:

Shepard rejects Starbinger's choices, and hails the Victory Fleet for reinforcements.  Word of Shepard making it to the Crucible and being on the verge of activating it rallys the fleet and a find push it made to secure it and bring experts down to figure out how to make it work.

Doesn't matter it if fails, at least you've done more then make a speech and then stand there like a muppet as the camera pans back.

thats why i dont like refuse, feels too much like a failure than a victory even if it does have a good speech

[MaximizedAction]

Andromidius wrote...
Pretty much.  It was only added because of fan annoyance.  It was never intended in the original story.

Refuse is giving up.  If Refuse came with a backup plan, or at least some kind of resistance, then I'd respect it.  But its essentially throwing your hands in the air and declaring you aren't willing to act at the moment some action - ANY action - is required, right now.

Destroy is ruthless.  Control is foolish.  Synthesis is insane.  Refuse is indecisive.

Here's what Refuse should have been:

Shepard rejects Starbinger's choices, and hails the Victory Fleet for reinforcements.  Word of Shepard making it to the Crucible and being on the verge of activating it rallys the fleet and a find push it made to secure it and bring experts down to figure out how to make it work.

Doesn't matter it if fails, at least you've done more then make a speech and then stand there like a muppet as the camera pans back.

I'm sorry to be that guy, but where's your source for the bolded part?

What Refuse "should've" been is exactly what Refuse is at this point. We still have a couple of months to go and it can still become something.

And you're arguing about Refuse as if the whole scene was at least a waking nightmare and Shepard was indeed on the Citadel and in the decision chamber. That's not clear at all.

[dorktainian]

refuse doesnt half upset some peeps doesnt it?

[umadcommander]

dorktainian wrote...

refuse doesnt half upset some peeps doesnt it?

im not upset by it, i just dont think its the way to go, at least for now:bandit:

[dorktainian]

i just look at refusal being the only answer that honks star brat off. that to me is a good thing. whether its the right choice is another thing.

[MaximizedAction]

dorktainian wrote...

i just look at refusal being the only answer that honks star brat off. that to me is a good thing. whether its the right choice is another thing.

Same here.
And if it weren't for Refuse, I couldn't be sure whether the Guardian was supposed to be a Reaper himself or not. The reaperized "So be it!" settles that pretty much...it's like that awesome fanart pic of Synthesis that popped up here a few days ago: it emphasizes the circumstances, and I'm all for that.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 05 janvier 2013 - 02:24 .

[MegumiAzusa]

magnetite wrote...

N7Avin180 wrote...
Huh? I thought Harbinger was the first Reaper? The one made using the Levitahans, and Starchild was the "intelligence" Leviathan spoke of?

The intelligence gathered an army of pawns searching the galaxy for physical data drawn from organic life in the cosmos, Leviathan is referring to Harbinger enslaving the Collectors (which he mentions).

Therefore, I believe Harbinger is the Intelligence.

Remember though, you refuse, and he gets all mad and starts sounding like a Reaper (SO BE IT).

It's a few hours since it was posted but I wanted wanted to clarify something here:
The said line is before Harbinger was created, in fact it is the answer of the question how the intelligence could execute the first harvest (which resulted in Harbinger)
http://www.youtube.c...k346RUl8#t=5m1s

[MegumiAzusa]

Rosewind wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

So we're assigning meaning to which threads on the forum have Bioware tags now?

Really, people?

Who did?

We do apparently.

http://social.biowar...7/3171#15486340

[Andromidius]

MaximizedAction wrote...

I'm sorry to be that guy, but where's your source for the bolded part?

Why would I need a source?  It wasn't in the core game, and people were complaining about a lack of choice.  1 + 1 = 2.

Refuse is a slap in the face at that.  It leads you on to thinking something awesome will happen, and then you pretty much get told you're a failure and the next Cycle had to do it for you.

[D.Sharrah]

Sorry for the way off topic post, but not having much luck anywhere else...

I picked up the Kotor Collection for PC and wanted to replay the game...and I would love to do some modding, but can't seem to find a reliable source anywhere to download Fred Tetra's Kotor Tool. Anyone know where I can find a reliable source?

Edit:  Oh man...this is a really bad post to be on top.

Modifié par D.Sharrah, 05 janvier 2013 - 03:34 .

[MaximizedAction]

Andromidius wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

I'm sorry to be that guy, but where's your source for the bolded part?

Why would I need a source?  It wasn't in the core game, and people were complaining about a lack of choice.  1 + 1 = 2.

Refuse is a slap in the face at that.  It leads you on to thinking something awesome will happen, and then you pretty much get told you're a failure and the next Cycle had to do it for you.

Well, post-ending material also isn't in the core game and yet it's still necessary to provide an overall satisfyingly complete storyline.
Neither was an outcome and positively sounding soundtrack for the Normandy escape scene that made sense somehow or was somehow related to your EMS. And yet it still makes more sense for the scene, once there.

A lot of stuff isn't in the core game. I'd judge the game on it's latest updated version and somehow that's the EC version. Also, in my opinion, the differences between an IT and literal interpretation are quite altered with the EC. So I for example am not at all sure which version to take as the version.

And yes, Refuse is a slap in the face, but I have no reason to trust what the game is showing me in these final moments. I can't make exclusions: "Oh, I believe this but I won't believe that", especially since it's that hard of slap in the face. It's so hard, it can't be the last words fron the writers.

But ok, I know that the Refuse ending is odd and causes different opinions and this is an IT thread after all. So let's keep it IT.