80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Rifneno]

Geez. I disappear for a week and you guys lost another thread?

[TJBartlemus]

paxxton wrote...

I just got an idea. On ME1's box cover Shepard is with other people, on ME2's too. But on ME3's he stands alone just like Harbinger said. You see the symbolism? Shepard has to fight his internal battle alone.

I thought that too but kept forgetting to mention it. 

[paxxton]

masster blaster wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I just got an idea. On ME1's box cover Shepard is with other people, on ME2's too. But on ME3's he stands alone just like Harbinger said. You see the symbolism? Shepard has to fight his internal battle alone.

Because when the smoke clears after the war is over. Shepard will be the last person in the Galaxy, and will live out his/her live alone. That's for a new ending, if you have low MES, high EMS Shepard get's married, and well the stuff the LI want in the game/the players really want the most for Shepard.

And then he ends up like Al Bundy from Married... with Children.

Modifié par paxxton, 31 juillet 2012 - 10:48 .

[Nightingale]

Rifneno wrote...

Geez. I disappear for a week and you guys lost another thread?

Only because it was too long...

[paxxton]

TJBartlemus wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I just got an idea. On ME1's box cover Shepard is with other people, on ME2's too. But on ME3's he stands alone just like Harbinger said. You see the symbolism? Shepard has to fight his internal battle alone.

I thought that too but kept forgetting to mention it. 

Don't worry. Just credit me as the originator when you mention it. 

Modifié par paxxton, 31 juillet 2012 - 11:03 .

[TJBartlemus]

paxxton wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I just got an idea. On ME1's box cover Shepard is with other people, on ME2's too. But on ME3's he stands alone just like Harbinger said. You see the symbolism? Shepard has to fight his internal battle alone.

I thought that too but kept forgetting to mention it. 

Don't worry. Just credit me as the originator when you mention it. 

NO. ALL THE CREDIT IS MINE. (just kidding...of course I will...maybe.....)  

[Grub Killer8016]

Mark 3? Dang this stuff is popular.

Personally, I've seen the evidence and just about every opinion on IT, but still not sure if I can totally accept it.

[masster blaster]

Grub Killer8016 wrote...

Mark 3? Dang this stuff is popular.

Personally, I've seen the evidence and just about every opinion on IT, but still not sure if I can totally accept it.

It's up to you to believe in IT, we can't force you to believe in IT, but if you give It a shot I promise it will question how you see the endings from an IT point of view.

[TheConstantOne]

paxxton wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

So, has anyone considered the possibility that the destroy option destroys not the Reapers themselves but rather the Reaper collective? In other words, it sends out a signal with the the relays that corrupts or destroys the Catalyst's hold on the Reapers?

I suggest this because it would bring an explanation to the Arrival "game over" image of Reapers attacking each other. The Crucible might operate with the intention of turning the Reapers against each other. Any thoughts on this?

What?

Yeah, if you look up the Arrival images, you can see Reapers attacking each other. See this:

 

BansheeOwnage wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

So, has anyone considered the possibility that the destroy option destroys not the Reapers themselves but rather the Reaper collective? In other words, it sends out a signal with the the relays that corrupts or destroys the Catalyst's hold on the Reapers? 

I suggest this because it would bring an explanation to the Arrival "game over" image of Reapers attacking each other. The Crucible might operate with the intention of turning the Reapers against each other. Any thoughts on this?

Well from an IT perspective, there is no catalyst-child and thus no collective. But that theory is similar to the one where the crucible is an unindoctrination device that frees all thralls. If you combine this with my (and others') theory that the reapers are indoctrinated, they could be "set free".

 

Even an IT perspective doesn't forbid the possibility of a Reaper collective.  I imagine it being less of a collective mind and more of a collective purpose.  The programmed purpose for all Reapers is to harvest organic and synthetic life.  The Star Child is the essence of indoctrination and would thus be a represntation of the Reapers' goals.  So, in that regard, it could be telling the truth.

Even with all of the lies in the end scenario, there could still be half truths presented to us. The Reapers' purpose is likely a lie, by the Star Child's rendition of how they were created may have some elements of truth.  We don't have the data to know for certain

[Grub Killer8016]

masster blaster wrote...

Grub Killer8016 wrote...

Mark 3? Dang this stuff is popular.

Personally, I've seen the evidence and just about every opinion on IT, but still not sure if I can totally accept it.

It's up to you to believe in IT, we can't force you to believe in IT, but if you give It a shot I promise it will question how you see the endings from an IT point of view.

I can see where you guys come from, cause it's all right there. I think Bioware put that stuff in to hint at something... I don't know.

[paxxton]

TheConstantOne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

So, has anyone considered the possibility that the destroy option destroys not the Reapers themselves but rather the Reaper collective? In other words, it sends out a signal with the the relays that corrupts or destroys the Catalyst's hold on the Reapers?

I suggest this because it would bring an explanation to the Arrival "game over" image of Reapers attacking each other. The Crucible might operate with the intention of turning the Reapers against each other. Any thoughts on this?

What?

Yeah, if you look up the Arrival images, you can see Reapers attacking each other. See this:

 

Not sure where to look.

[masster blaster]

Grub Killer8016 wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Grub Killer8016 wrote...

Mark 3? Dang this stuff is popular.

Personally, I've seen the evidence and just about every opinion on IT, but still not sure if I can totally accept it.

It's up to you to believe in IT, we can't force you to believe in IT, but if you give It a shot I promise it will question how you see the endings from an IT point of view.

I can see where you guys come from, cause it's all right there. I think Bioware put that stuff in to hint at something... I don't know.

I know it's a lot to hope for, but they did, and we are trying to find out the endings our selfs. And to be honest we have ran out of speculations because we have went through everything so quickly, and we have so many things that we think Bioware is doing. Also it's not that bad here. We play MP together, and  I consider them all my friends, and my BSN family.

So I think you should pm Byne, or anyone that you see on this thread and ask them what they think about IT.

[Andromidius]

Urgh, no PM's. Just keep it in the thread, its easier on everyone. Means everyone else can see and contribute anyway.

Also, all this closing due to 'length' is rather annoying.

[Leonia]

Much of the length is off-topic though, that can be trimmed down easily if people take conversations unrelated to IT or ME elsewhere.

[masster blaster]

leonia42 wrote...

Much of the length is off-topic though, that can be trimmed down easily if people take conversations unrelated to IT or ME elsewhere.

We have nothing to talk about, until Bioware gives us more things to speculate about. We could always go over what we have, but that's just it.

[waldstr18]

masster blaster wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Much of the length is off-topic though, that can be trimmed down easily if people take conversations unrelated to IT or ME elsewhere.

We have nothing to talk about, until Bioware gives us more things to speculate about. We could always go over what we have, but that's just it.

or maybe you could just take a hint and drop it eventually.

[MaximizedAction]

TJBartlemus wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I just got an idea. On ME1's box cover Shepard is with other people, on ME2's too. But on ME3's he stands alone just like Harbinger said. You see the symbolism? Shepard has to fight his internal battle alone.

I thought that too but kept forgetting to mention it. 

Ever since someone mentioned it, I cannot unsee it anymore: the way Shepard is positioned in many promotional pics and the game cover, it looks almost as if he'd be commanding the Reapers, not necessarily fleeing from them or attacking them.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 31 juillet 2012 - 11:39 .

[paxxton]

masster blaster wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Much of the length is off-topic though, that can be trimmed down easily if people take conversations unrelated to IT or ME elsewhere.

We have nothing to talk about, until Bioware gives us more things to speculate about. We could always go over what we have, but that's just it.

Have you read this?
http://social.biowar...87/blog/217245/

Modifié par paxxton, 31 juillet 2012 - 11:39 .

[TheConstantOne]

paxxton wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

So, has anyone considered the possibility that the destroy option destroys not the Reapers themselves but rather the Reaper collective? In other words, it sends out a signal with the the relays that corrupts or destroys the Catalyst's hold on the Reapers?

I suggest this because it would bring an explanation to the Arrival "game over" image of Reapers attacking each other. The Crucible might operate with the intention of turning the Reapers against each other. Any thoughts on this?

What?

Yeah, if you look up the Arrival images, you can see Reapers attacking each other. See this:

 

Not sure where to look.

Oops sorry.  Look at the 0:51 mark.  You'll see a Reaper being hit by several Reaper beams

[byne]

waldstr18 wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Much of the length is off-topic though, that can be trimmed down easily if people take conversations unrelated to IT or ME elsewhere.

We have nothing to talk about, until Bioware gives us more things to speculate about. We could always go over what we have, but that's just it.

or maybe you could just take a hint and drop it eventually.

I dont know what hint you're telling us to take, since BioWare has pretty much explicitly said that IT remains a valid interpretation. Maybe you should take a hint?

Also: Waldstr! Long time no see!

[Dwailing]

waldstr18 wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Much of the length is off-topic though, that can be trimmed down easily if people take conversations unrelated to IT or ME elsewhere.

We have nothing to talk about, until Bioware gives us more things to speculate about. We could always go over what we have, but that's just it.

or maybe you could just take a hint and drop it eventually.

Or maybe YOU could take the hint that BioWare is actively promoting our speculation by TELLING US that there are elements of the game that aren't meant to be taken literally, AND that the IT is STILL a valid possibility for what's going on in the ending, not just some random interpretation.

[paxxton]

TheConstantOne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

So, has anyone considered the possibility that the destroy option destroys not the Reapers themselves but rather the Reaper collective? In other words, it sends out a signal with the the relays that corrupts or destroys the Catalyst's hold on the Reapers?

I suggest this because it would bring an explanation to the Arrival "game over" image of Reapers attacking each other. The Crucible might operate with the intention of turning the Reapers against each other. Any thoughts on this?

What?

Yeah, if you look up the Arrival images, you can see Reapers attacking each other. See this:

 

Not sure where to look.

Oops sorry.  Look at the 0:51 mark.  You'll see a Reaper being hit by several Reaper beams

That's Harbinger destroying the Presidium on the Citadel. He can shoot several beams at the same time.

Modifié par paxxton, 31 juillet 2012 - 11:45 .

[JasonSic]

TheConstantOne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

paxxton wrote...

TheConstantOne wrote...

So, has anyone considered the possibility that the destroy option destroys not the Reapers themselves but rather the Reaper collective? In other words, it sends out a signal with the the relays that corrupts or destroys the Catalyst's hold on the Reapers?

I suggest this because it would bring an explanation to the Arrival "game over" image of Reapers attacking each other. The Crucible might operate with the intention of turning the Reapers against each other. Any thoughts on this?

What?

Yeah, if you look up the Arrival images, you can see Reapers attacking each other. See this:

 

Not sure where to look.

Oops sorry.  Look at the 0:51 mark.  You'll see a Reaper being hit by several Reaper beams

I'm pretty sure that's Harbinger firing several reaper beams, beacuse, you know, he does that.

[Rifneno]

If you're going to bother with that troll, at least provoke it into making up more sex stories. That was hilarious. "Dude, you don't even know! Dude, like, one time I had this three--no, foursome! and dude, it was all supermodels! dude!"

[masster blaster]

waldstr18 wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

Much of the length is off-topic though, that can be trimmed down easily if people take conversations unrelated to IT or ME elsewhere.

We have nothing to talk about, until Bioware gives us more things to speculate about. We could always go over what we have, but that's just it.

or maybe you could just take a hint and drop it eventually.

IF you mean IT, then you go take the hint and get out of BSn if you hate ME3 , and Bioware/Ea. We don't hate Bioware, and Bioware does not hate us. We only want to understand them, and the ME3 endings, as they want to learn what we come up with.

So calling ME3, or the endings bad writing, sorry I hear that a lot, and hey we are doing what teh **** Bioware wanted us to do, instead of acting like ******* children calling things bad because we don't get what happened, and we say this because we are angry at them. Well why not give IT a try. I bet you if you give It a try you will like it, or question what happened at the endings. Instead of giving a lame *** saying that it's all bad writing.