80611 réponses à ce sujet

[legaldinho]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

BlazingZephyr wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

 So remember how Otter said that Harbinger's "eyes" can be seen throughout the ending sequence as if he was watching you?

RIGHT as the Catalyst starts talking about himself the camera changes. It changes to the angle looking DIRECTLY and what would be Harbinger. Harbinger is "talking" about himself here, the camera angle shows this.

Not seeing anything, please clarify (with slideshow DLC, if possible).

In the top right corner of every area during the ending sequence there is a yellow/orange light that is a similar color to Harbinger's eyes. And guess where Harbinger is when he shoots you? The top right corner of your screen! This orange glow (which could not be produced by earth yet it is still there) is in the top right of the screen and is supposed to be Harbinger watching Shepard. It would then not be a coincidence that right as the Catalyst (Harbinger) starts talking about himself you would then look DIRECTLY at Harbinger. Harbinger becomes interchangable with starbrat through this and it supports IT by suggesting the Catalyst is actually a reaper and would have biased ideals.

Edit: ok, it is 3:30 in the morning and I am really tired. I may have to repost this tomorrow because it is unlikely anyone is on or is awake enough to talk about this. See you guys tomorrow!

Edit again before I go: There is no reason that the angle of the camera should be that low seeing that Shepard is MUCH taller than the starbrat. The camera is level with the starbrat when it has no reason to be. I'm too tired to watch this again but if the camera angle means anything it is Harbinger subtly conveying the fact that he is "higher" than Shepard.

I can't see any orange glow
It's not Harbinger as Harbinger doesn't have the front most tentacle.

btw it's interesting how the camera when it's focusing on the Guardian is slowly zooming in all the time. Like being drawn in.

You need to see otter's posts, in full speculation mode, from the mk II thread.

I think it's tendentious, but every camera angle counts, that's important. I like the shot at the beginning, with the ship and the sounds and, oh, it's a toy ship, controlled, by some kid. Hmm

[legaldinho]

jojon2se wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

jojon2se wrote...

I beg to disagree with your dismissal of the refusal option, by the way.

The save files indicate in destroy EDI dies and in refuse everyone dies.

Both of which are ultimately untrue (or rather: "irrelevant") in any Shepard-never-left-Earth flavoured indoctrination scenario.

Incidently; In the Stuff-did-happen-but-we-saw-it-through-Harby's-beer-goggles varieties... There was something somebody said a few pages back... I don't know whether that was what the writer intended; But that beam we see coming out of the Crucible, until a choice is made -- if we assume for the time being that the Crucible did dock and the junction point looks pretty much the way it is shown; I wonder, then, whether it would be reasonable to speculate that that beam is not actually directly generated by the Crucible, but is rather the London Conduit - the Reapers' construct, which is either passed through directly, or collected at the back of the Crucible, conducted (with or without transformation) to the front and reemitted...

Well done man. Everyone in this thread needs to stop arguing about what "the files" say. Thematically, refuse is arguably more consistent with IT than destroy. 

I still chose destroy... because my shep can't know his choice is unreal for sure. On the offchance it actually does something, he will choose destroy. Edi and the Geth join the many sacrifices made to get there.

In MY head, it does nothing. Insofar as it indicates an acceptance of any of the starbrat's rhetoric, it is less acceptable than refuse. I choose destroy because Shep would choose it. Also because the token, rushed ending is SO unsatisfying. And no breath scene.

Remember folks, you're in the IT thread. Take face value consequences with a pinch of salt. Right?

Modifié par legaldinho, 11 août 2012 - 12:35 .

[Gwyphon]

Rosewind wrote...

BlazingZephyr wrote...

What a pleasant surprise: I come back to the IT thread to see non-ITers NOT criticizing or chastising anybody.

Faith in mankind +1

That is all.

I know right I was shocked my self

Ah I can just bookmark that link! Thanks! :happy:

[MaximizedAction]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

BlazingZephyr wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

 So remember how Otter said that Harbinger's "eyes" can be seen throughout the ending sequence as if he was watching you?

RIGHT as the Catalyst starts talking about himself the camera changes. It changes to the angle looking DIRECTLY and what would be Harbinger. Harbinger is "talking" about himself here, the camera angle shows this.

Not seeing anything, please clarify (with slideshow DLC, if possible).

In the top right corner of every area during the ending sequence there is a yellow/orange light that is a similar color to Harbinger's eyes. And guess where Harbinger is when he shoots you? The top right corner of your screen! This orange glow (which could not be produced by earth yet it is still there) is in the top right of the screen and is supposed to be Harbinger watching Shepard. It would then not be a coincidence that right as the Catalyst (Harbinger) starts talking about himself you would then look DIRECTLY at Harbinger. Harbinger becomes interchangable with starbrat through this and it supports IT by suggesting the Catalyst is actually a reaper and would have biased ideals.

Edit: ok, it is 3:30 in the morning and I am really tired. I may have to repost this tomorrow because it is unlikely anyone is on or is awake enough to talk about this. See you guys tomorrow!

Edit again before I go: There is no reason that the angle of the camera should be that low seeing that Shepard is MUCH taller than the starbrat. The camera is level with the starbrat when it has no reason to be. I'm too tired to watch this again but if the camera angle means anything it is Harbinger subtly conveying the fact that he is "higher" than Shepard.

I can't see any orange glow
It's not Harbinger as Harbinger doesn't have the front most tentacle.

btw it's interesting how the camera when it's focusing on the Guardian is slowly zooming in all the time. Like being drawn in.

Sometimes the camera also zooms on Shepard and sometimes it's fixed when showing the Catalyst/whoever. Though, the zooms are only during certain dialog bits and were likely done with some intention. But there is a huge ass zoom on Shep when Catalyst/whoever describes Synthesis as "The final evolution of life" (hint on 'Evolution'/Saren from ME1?)

Furthermore, that screenshot Chriz chose: I did find this particular shot of Catalyst/whoever with the pilar behind him very memorable. I don't know why that is.

But I also don't really see an orange glow in every shot.

[Chriz Tah Fah]

MaximizedAction wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

BlazingZephyr wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...

*snip*

*snip*

*snip*

*Snip*

Sometimes the camera also zooms on Shepard and sometimes it's fixed when showing the Catalyst/whoever. Though, the zooms are only during certain dialog bits and were likely done with some intention. But there is a huge ass zoom on Shep when Catalyst/whoever describes Synthesis as "The final evolution of life" (hint on 'Evolution'/Saren from ME1?)

Furthermore, that screenshot Chriz chose: I did find this particular shot of Catalyst/whoever with the pilar behind him very memorable. I don't know why that is.

But I also don't really see an orange glow in every shot.

Not every shot but every scene/area after you get onto the Citadel.

[MaximizedAction]

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...
Not every shot but every scene/area after you get onto the Citadel.

I knew I should've put the last sentence more concrete.
Of course I meant every scene on the final Citadel area. Could you please MSPaint the areas?

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 11 août 2012 - 01:43 .

[Chriz Tah Fah]

MaximizedAction wrote...

Chriz Tah Fah wrote...
Not every shot but every scene/area after you get onto the Citadel.

I knew I should've put the last sentence more concrete.
Of course I meant every scene on the final Citadel area. Could you please MSPaint the areas?

Otter already did this though! I'll make him repost it or something.
Edit: another reason is that I'm on my mac right now. No MS paint adventures for me .

Modifié par Chriz Tah Fah, 11 août 2012 - 01:50 .

[Codename_Code]

Guys, what about this stargaze scene :


The voice is obviously the same voice as the space bieber, the " did that all really" is pronounced as the space bieber would do , this could be classified as lazy atention to detail by bioware, but it is too wrong, what if this a sign that Shepard is dreaming ?.

Modifié par Codename_Code, 11 août 2012 - 01:49 .

[FFZero]

I just had a thought, has anyone on the PC tried editing Starbrats textures? We might be able to get proof on whether he smiles or not if we can get rid of the glow effect. In theory to achieve that it could be as simple as removing or editing the alpha channel on certain textures or just replacing the textures with one colour.

[MaximizedAction]

Codename_Code wrote...

Guys, what about this stargaze scene :


The voice is obviously the same voice as the space bieber, the " did that all really" is pronounced as the space bieber would do , this could be classified as lazy atention to detail by bioware, but it is too wrong, what if this a sign that Shepard is dreaming ?.

That's always the question:
Did they decide to do the post-credits scene (and even get Buzz Aldrin) voiced by the same VA because it is a 'negligible' risk, compared to the financial risk for getting an extra kid for only that scene?
But then, why put a kid there at all? Because it's so romantic and 'innocent' and makes the scene more authentic? What would be wrong about two dudes from a pre-spacefaring civilisation standing there and wondering about the universe and what's up there...

Furthermore, ME3 is the first game in the trilogy to feature a kid. And that only kid (except for the Krogan baby) is the most untrust worthy character besides the Reapers.

Writing that I think they must be aware that people could draw this connection.

FFZero wrote...

I just had a thought, has anyone on the PC tried editing Starbrats textures? We might be able to get proof on whether he smiles or not if we can get rid of the glow effect. In theory to achieve that it could be as simple as removing or editing the alpha channel on certain textures or just replacing the textures with one colour.

Someone posted a fake pic of that, with supposedly Miranda instead of the Catalyst. Someone else stated the problem of doing that would be that only Shep were a variable and could be exchanged with a different character, not NPCs.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 11 août 2012 - 02:05 .

[Gwyphon]

Codename_Code wrote...

Guys, what about this stargaze scene :


The voice is obviously the same voice as the space bieber, the " did that all really" is pronounced as the space bieber would do , this could be classified as lazy atention to detail by bioware, but it is too wrong, what if this a sign that Shepard is dreaming ?.

Makes sense that Shepard's mind uses a generic kids voice for every kid s/he sees.

[masster blaster]

What I liked about the Star Brat, was that he reminded me of Harbinger a lot. Think about it. Harbinger is been speaking about Shepard, and
telling the other Reapers about Shepard. Now this bothered me, for two
reasons.

One why is Harbinger telling the Reapers about Shepard,
if Shepard is nothing, but a gain of goo to the Reapers. And two why is
it that the Reaper is telling Shepard any of this. We already know what
the Reapers do in each cycle, but who is Controlling them/ who is their
Leader?


My thing is that the Leviathans used there own
people, to create the Proto Reaper Leviathan, but once the project
either failed, or succeed. They Created Harbinger. The first true
Reaper.

Also I like how in the Leviathan files. We can now
question, about Harbinger. Why is that. We don't need to ask about
Harbinger, since he is the oldest of the Reapers, unless Bioware is
hinting, that The catalyst is Harbinger. Since in the leaked script.
Shepard ask the Catalyst. " What's Harbingers old tongue, or something
along the lines." Which begs question, that even though the Catalyst is
the Leader of the Reapers, then why are the Reapers following Harbinger
to Earth, and what if the Crucible was completed, and Shepard got the
data from Vendetta earlier. Would the Reapers sense, that their Leader is in danger, or something is telling them, that something is happening at
the Citadel?

I mean it's funny that now at the end of the Game
they take the Citadel, instead of taking the Citadel, in the beginning
of the invasion, unless Earth is a trap. We all know that something is
just not right about going back to Earth, and saving the day.

I expected to see our squad/ former squad be there, at the charge, but then this would cause a big problem.

For
one. If we had our former squad mates there at the beam run, and if they
didn't go on the Normandy. Then they would be dead, since Coats says
that they are all gone, yet Anderson is unharmed.

He should be telling the resistance that Harbinger is gone, and keep moving forwarded.

And
his radio should still working, since Shepard's is and, he could call
Hackett, and tell him that Shepard and him are on the Citadel, but then lades to another question.

If Anderson told Hackett, that Him,
and Shepard are on the Citadel, then why does Hackett say that "
SOMEONE.." not some people made it to the Citadel.

Why would Hackett say holy sh** she, or did it, if only one person made it to the Citadel, but it's not Shepard.

Think
about it. I don't think Hackett cares about making sure, that Shepard
made it to the Citadel, and to have Hackett tell everyone, that Shepard
made it to the Citadel. Like we said it would boost the moral up ten
fold if Hackett said that Shepard is on the Citadel.

But then why does Hackett called Shepard at all. Remember when the Citadel was closed communication was not cut of, in ME1.

But
now when the Citadel opens Communication start. Now Joker should have
been trying to call Shepard, since they now that Shepard is on the
Citadel, if you look at the Scene, where Shepard's squad mate is telling
Joker we have to go.

One how the hell do they know that Shepard
is on the Citadel! Hackett could have used a private line to radio
Shepard, and I doubt Hackett would broad cast the Crucible is not firing/ Shepard is on the Citadel.

Also which reminds me. Why is Hackett calling a full back?

Hackett never told Shepard that there was a full back plan, or leave the Crucible without protecting it.

It
makes no sense, why Joker would leave Shepard, since I remember very
clearly, that Joker did not want to leave the Normandy, and Shepard had
to pick him up and drag is *** to the escape pod.

Also Joker at
the end of ME2 was a boss. Not only did he go pick up Shepard, but he
got out side, and gave Shepard covering fire. Now I want you all to
think about why is it that Joker at the end of ME3, is leaving.

Nobody
now that the Relays are going to blow up, or now what the Crucible
does, unless they listed to Shepard's conversation with the Child.

Now
here is the problem. If that were the case, I would beat you *** that
everyone would tell Shepard, that pick Destroy no matter what the Cost
are. And EDI would have a long good bye to Joker, and Shepard, and the
Geth would say that Shepard has given them thought of self Independence,
and it is now their turn, to repay Shepard with their lives.

Also I like to point out, that there is still now way the rest of you squad went back on the Normandy.

In ME2 in the Suicide mission, everyone was fighting. It wasn't just the squad you had, but everyone.

And
you mean to tell me at the hour of the most important battle in the history of ME, the rest of Shepard's squad just heads back to the
Normandy.

HELL NO. They would stay and fight, and I know for certain that no of Shepard's squad would leave Shepard to go fight,
while they run back to the Normandy.

Call it bad writing all you want, but from an IT perspective, it strengthens IT. And the endings, not all cracked up to be.


Did anyone read this?

Modifié par masster blaster, 11 août 2012 - 03:10 .

[masster blaster]

Also I call on people say, " in Destroy Shepard is committing genocide,
and they would not like it." BS. On Virmire did Ash, or Kadin complain,
about Shepard making a choice, to save on, or the other. Hell No. Also
in ME2. The choices Shepard makes are a commit of Genocide, since you
are ordering them to go fight, and you are telling them, that they have
to do this.

Now if you think about it, did your squad ever
complained about dying on the suicide mission, yes they did, but they
knew the risk, when they signed onto the mission, as do they know the
stakes in ME3 at the end.

Remembers Shepard's speech in the launch trailer.

"Each of you must be willing to die, anything less, and your already Dead."

Modifié par masster blaster, 11 août 2012 - 03:04 .

[EpyonX3]

Gwyphon wrote...

Codename_Code wrote...

Guys, what about this stargaze scene :


The voice is obviously the same voice as the space bieber, the " did that all really" is pronounced as the space bieber would do , this could be classified as lazy atention to detail by bioware, but it is too wrong, what if this a sign that Shepard is dreaming ?.

Makes sense that Shepard's mind uses a generic kids voice for every kid s/he sees.

Or bioware's budget...

[FFZero]

MaximizedAction wrote...

FFZero wrote...

I just had a thought, has anyone on the PC tried editing Starbrats textures? We might be able to get proof on whether he smiles or not if we can get rid of the glow effect. In theory to achieve that it could be as simple as removing or editing the alpha channel on certain textures or just replacing the textures with one colour.

Someone posted a fake pic of that, with supposedly Miranda instead of the Catalyst. Someone else stated the problem of doing that would be that only Shep were a variable and could be exchanged with a different character, not NPCs.

I believe I was the one who actually pointed that out. Texture mods are different to model changes, texture mods are simply changes to the textures that show on models. For instance there are texmods that exist that change some of the low resolution textures in the game to much higher resolution textures. That’s what I’m proposing here, changing starbrats textures at the end so that we can actually make out the details of his face.

[masster blaster]

I also forgot, that in ME1, by either saving, or leave the council to
die, you are committing acts of genocide. That's right. Your choice causes
a lot of people to die in ME1.

By saving the Council the Alliance loose one third of their forces.

By
leaving the Council to die, over 10,000 crew members, including the
Council die, and not to mention the Turians guarding the Ascension.
Also you still lose Alliance Ships, but you can recover your forces back
to full strength. So don't give me this BS about killing EDI, and the
Geth. You have done this if you played ME1, and ME2.

Modifié par masster blaster, 11 août 2012 - 03:00 .

[ebuchala]

masster blaster wrote...

I also forgot, that in ME1, by either saving, or leave the council to die, you are commiting acts of genocid. That's right. Your choice causes a lot of people to die in ME1.

By saving the Councile the Alliance loose one thrid of their forces.

By leaving the Councile to die, over 10,000 crew members, including the Council die, and not to meantion the Turians guarding the Ascention. Also you still lose Alliance Ships, but you can recover your forces back to full strength. So don't give me this BS about killing EDI, and the Geth. You have done this if you played ME1, and ME2.

While I do agree with you completely about the theme of sacrifice, expecting losses, etc., there is, technically, a difference in these situations because when the Council, crew members and Turians die, you're not committing genocide--you're just causing a lot of people to die. Without IT, choosing Destroy does commit genocide because ALL of the Geth die.

Someone mentioned somewhere (might not have been this thread) that since they have the knowledge and tech, they could perhaps rebuild the Geth and Edi. Personally, if you believe (as I do) that the Geth and Edi have "souls" then you really can't recreate them by just rebuilding the machine portion of them. They're essentially gone for good without IT.

[TSA_383]

MaximizedAction wrote...

FFZero wrote...

I just had a thought, has anyone on the PC tried editing Starbrats textures? We might be able to get proof on whether he smiles or not if we can get rid of the glow effect. In theory to achieve that it could be as simple as removing or editing the alpha channel on certain textures or just replacing the textures with one colour.

Someone posted a fake pic of that, with supposedly Miranda instead of the Catalyst. Someone else stated the problem of doing that would be that only Shep were a variable and could be exchanged with a different character, not NPCs.

Not entirely true - it is possible to change, just difficult. It shouldn't actually be that hard to remove the glow effect and give it the standard kid texture but I don't have the time or tools where I am now 

[masster blaster]

Ebuchala
No it's Genocide period. Wreath or not you try to think about it, they
didn't ask yo die, nor did they want to, but Shepard had the power to
save the council, and sacrifice the men, and woman of the Alliance, or sacrifice the men, and woman of the Ascension/ the Turian fleets, along
with Alliance ships, so either way it's the same. You are trying to stop Sovereign from bringing the Reapers into the galaxy, and you are trying
to end the Reapers once and for all. IT's the same, only a whole race
is going to die, along with a good friend.

But also you forget in arrival, in order to stop the Reapers, you either had to send the asteroid into the relay, and that's it. You couldn't save all the
Batarians in the system, so Shepard did kill a lot of people, weather
you tried to stop it, or not.

Also remember Legions ME2 loyalty mission. You committed genocide if you
killed them because they were reprogrammed by the Reapers because of an
error in the net work. Also if you rewrite the Geth, you are taking away
there freedom, of following the Reapers, but what is the best choice.

That is why weather or not IT is  right about Destroy ending waking up, or IT ever being wrong. I will always choose Destroy, because it's the right thing to do.

Modifié par masster blaster, 11 août 2012 - 03:08 .

[MegumiAzusa]

jojon2se wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

jojon2se wrote...

I beg to disagree with your dismissal of the refusal option, by the way.

The save files indicate in destroy EDI dies and in refuse everyone dies.

Both of which are ultimately untrue (or rather: "irrelevant") in any Shepard-never-left-Earth flavoured indoctrination scenario.

Incidently; In the Stuff-did-happen-but-we-saw-it-through-Harby's-beer-goggles varieties... There was something somebody said a few pages back... I don't know whether that was what the writer intended; But that beam we see coming out of the Crucible, until a choice is made -- if we assume for the time being that the Crucible did dock and the junction point looks pretty much the way it is shown; I wonder, then, whether it would be reasonable to speculate that that beam is not actually directly generated by the Crucible, but is rather the London Conduit - the Reapers' construct, which is either passed through directly, or collected at the back of the Crucible, conducted (with or without transformation) to the front and reemitted...

Why? It can well be your squad never left earth too and your choice ultimately results in these deaths.

[Macross]

Bro... do you know what Genocide is? Genocide isn't classified as just a large group of people, committing Genocide is killing a large group of a specific kind of people. That may be a race or a religious or ethnic group, etc. Killing a large group of people is just mass murder, while Genocide has to have a targeted effect.

I'm not saying your wrong, I agree with what you say on a basic level (although I could play devil advocate if I cared enough). The death of the Geth in destroy isn't really genocide on Sheps part (they're more collateral damage as Shep never picked destroy with the intent of murdering the geth) and the only genocide in the destroy ending is the genocide of the reapers (which I am totally cool with, obviously).

Modifié par Macross, 11 août 2012 - 03:14 .

[MegumiAzusa]

FFZero wrote...

I just had a thought, has anyone on the PC tried editing Starbrats textures? We might be able to get proof on whether he smiles or not if we can get rid of the glow effect. In theory to achieve that it could be as simple as removing or editing the alpha channel on certain textures or just replacing the textures with one colour.

It doesn't smile.

[masster blaster]

Any way I have been thinking about what Garrus Tell's after the coup attempt Shepard " If it have come down to it, would you pull the Trigger?

now for Renegade, Shepard is like yes i would, Bioware telling us that at the end, we are going to have to pull the Trigger to get the job done, would you do it.but Paragon Shepard is like " I don't see how. We start killing our friends, and wars TURNS INTO MURDER.

Destroy ending is murder if you think about it, but then Garrus tells Shepard " But it doesn't ALWAYS GIVE US THE EASY WAY OUT, does it?'

Dam I guess Bioware was hinting that Destroy isn't the easy way out, but maybe they were trying to tell us that maybe Destroy is the easy way out, only if you are willing to stay true to your believes.



Also I have been wondering what does Garrus mean after he tells Shepard, after the fall of Thessia

" I had to make a tough call with the Primarch he said our fleets are being decimated. So I advised him to call all offensive operations against the Reapers."

Then Shepard says " A full retreat."

www.youtube.com/watch
Now Shepard seems surprised about this, but what's more interesting, is that when your firing the Crucible, it's a Full retreat, as in they are hoping for the Crucible to let it do it's work.

just like Garrus said " The only way to save Palaven now is to hold our ships back, for the Crucible. But if I'm wrong.... Then a lot of other Turian families won't be as lucky as mine."

Could be Bioware telling us the Crucible could be a Reaper trap, or that the choices we make, will dictate, were things go from here.

Now here is the best part that Shepard says " That's a hell of a gamble. No other options"

The endings are a hell of a gamble too, but instead of there are other options, there are more options to choice to save everyone, form the Reapers. And weather or not you believe in the Catalyst or not/ Indoctrination, is a hell of gamble too.

And then Garrus tells Shepard " If there are. i can't see them, it's all comes down to the Crucible now." interesting that's what happened at the end, it comes down to the Crucible, but there are other options that Shepard can not see, but the player does, so we have to show Shepard the way.

Any thoughts.

Modifié par masster blaster, 11 août 2012 - 03:57 .

[masster blaster]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

FFZero wrote...

I just had a thought, has anyone on the PC tried editing Starbrats textures? We might be able to get proof on whether he smiles or not if we can get rid of the glow effect. In theory to achieve that it could be as simple as removing or editing the alpha channel on certain textures or just replacing the textures with one colour.

It doesn't smile.

More like a smirk on it's face, but it's eyes are shining as bright as the moon.

[jojon2se]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

jojon2se wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

The save files indicate in destroy EDI dies and in refuse everyone dies.

Both of which are ultimately untrue (or rather: "irrelevant") in any Shepard-never-left-Earth flavoured indoctrination scenario.
...

Why? It can well be your squad never left earth too and your choice ultimately results in these deaths.

How?

The idea is that the choices are metaphorical and have no direct real world effects, other than deciding the mind of the Shepard that comes out of this attempted final push at trying to sneakily co-opt any one of its inclinations.

You could say that, by extension, the post-event actions of a Shepard that has taken any of the paths, will cause these, or similar, effects, but those are not absolutes and are subject to numerous external influences.