80611 réponses à ce sujet

[JasonSic]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Does anyone see a possibility for IT to play out through refuse?

I do.

By the time EC was released, Bioware was fully aware that a lot of fans, maybe a majority, love the idea of IT and want it in ME3. Just look at this poll.

Back in 2011, before ME3 came out, Casey Hudson said something about after releasing a game, Bioware really, REALLY pays attention to fan feedback. Bioware then creates something similar to what fans want, but not exactly as fans want because it would ruin surprise.

All the dedication us Theorists have put into IT plus that poll Chris Priestly made, among other things, leads me to think that Bioware will make some sort of Indoctrination related ending to ME3.

Since Bioware wouldn't want to create exactly what IT says, they might make refuse the only option to break free of indoctrination, rather than destroy. Refuse was added in EC, long after Bioware knew about IT. This also ties into your theory, the Puzzle Theory, because even after choosing refuse and breaking indoctrination, there is no way to defeat the Reapers conventionally... yet. Leviathan and other future DLC may or may not change that, only time will tell.

[pseudonymic]

TSA_383 wrote...

Liara's actually an interesting candidate to be a traitor.
I'm in two minds as to whether I think they'd actually do it - they've spent three games trying to make us connect with her character.

to me, it's always seemed that liara is part of some sort of take of the world scheme. work of my imagination or not, in ME1 she was directly connected with the whole benezia-saren story by being benezia's daughter and she got into your head several times. then in lotsb, she basically drags you into taking over the shadow broker's ship and gaining her control of the information network of the galaxy. in ME3, she hands you the plans of what would "save the universe". and on top of all of that, she's likable (to some) and a love interest. sounds to me like the perfect recipe for a plot traitor, though i don't think liara would be tied in with the whole indoctrination thing unless considering how much exposure to artifacts shepard may have had because of her. to me, she makes more sense than say, anderson or hackett.

[cydoniawarrior]

JasonSic wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Does anyone see a possibility for IT to play out through refuse?

I do.

By the time EC was released, Bioware was fully aware that a lot of fans, maybe a majority, love the idea of IT and want it in ME3. Just look at this poll.

Back in 2011, before ME3 came out, Casey Hudson said something about after releasing a game, Bioware really, REALLY pays attention to fan feedback. Bioware then creates something similar to what fans want, but not exactly as fans want because it would ruin surprise.

All the dedication us Theorists have put into IT plus that poll Chris Priestly made, among other things, leads me to think that Bioware will make some sort of Indoctrination related ending to ME3.

Since Bioware wouldn't want to create exactly what IT says, they might make refuse the only option to break free of indoctrination, rather than destroy. Refuse was added in EC, long after Bioware knew about IT. This also ties into your theory, the Puzzle Theory, because even after choosing refuse and breaking indoctrination, there is no way to defeat the Reapers conventionally... yet. Leviathan and other future DLC may or may not change that, only time will tell.

I think the EC is testament to the fact that BioWare cares, I understand people were saying it was damage control and they are probably right for some part, but I know of no other company that has done something like with a game when people didn't like a certain part, with the exception of Bethesda

[cydoniawarrior]

FFZero wrote...

cydoniawarrior wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

I'm really curious as to what thoughts Javik and Liara will have regarding Leviathan, hopefully someone can report back on any interesting developments from them.

I somehow think Javik will want to kill it, if it is a reaper, which I asume it is

^ This. I fully expect him to say something along the lines “We’re going to need a bigger airlock...”

that made me chuckle 

[Galifreya]

Refuse could simply be a second winning option. Whereas before, there was only one with destroy. They saw people clammoring for a refuse option and were like, "Why not? At best, the odds of success are supposed to be even, aren't they?"

Two losing options and two winning options makes sense to me.

[pseudonymic]

Gallifreya wrote...

Refuse could simply be a second winning option. Whereas before, there was only one with destroy. They saw people clammoring for a refuse option and were like, "Why not? At best, the odds of success are supposed to be even, aren't they?"

Two losing options and two winning options makes sense to me.

refuse is not quite a winning option, though - imho. the idea of "life goes on" is seen on every scenario you pick between the 3 original ones. plus, there's the whole "ok another cycle used the crucible" implied idea (or validation as per twitter), but it's never established what that cycle decided to do with the "choices" they were given. so how is that a victory, when commander random or whoever could've gone up the citadel and decided to become commander lord of the reapers instead? seeing as control, for example, is seen as a loss scenario.

[GethPrimeMKII]

cydoniawarrior wrote...

JasonSic wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Does anyone see a possibility for IT to play out through refuse?

I do.

By the time EC was released, Bioware was fully aware that a lot of fans, maybe a majority, love the idea of IT and want it in ME3. Just look at this poll.

Back in 2011, before ME3 came out, Casey Hudson said something about after releasing a game, Bioware really, REALLY pays attention to fan feedback. Bioware then creates something similar to what fans want, but not exactly as fans want because it would ruin surprise.

All the dedication us Theorists have put into IT plus that poll Chris Priestly made, among other things, leads me to think that Bioware will make some sort of Indoctrination related ending to ME3.

Since Bioware wouldn't want to create exactly what IT says, they might make refuse the only option to break free of indoctrination, rather than destroy. Refuse was added in EC, long after Bioware knew about IT. This also ties into your theory, the Puzzle Theory, because even after choosing refuse and breaking indoctrination, there is no way to defeat the Reapers conventionally... yet. Leviathan and other future DLC may or may not change that, only time will tell.

I think the EC is testament to the fact that BioWare cares, I understand people were saying it was damage control and they are probably right for some part, but I know of no other company that has done something like with a game when people didn't like a certain part, with the exception of Bethesda

I think the purpose was to make the ending seem less rediculous from a literal perspective. They filled in the gaps with scenes like the evac during the beam run. I personally liked the EC because it added so much more evidence to support the theory.

[spotlessvoid]

question regarding control

scenario one: Starchild is in full control of the Reapers yet refuses to simply follow Shepards orders, instead forcing his annihilation as a human being. Clearly then he isn't benevolent towards Shepard

scenario two: Starchild is not in full control of the Reapers and cannot simply execute Shepards commands. In that case how does he even know control can work, since he can't even control them

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 21 août 2012 - 04:33 .

[spotlessvoid]

Jasonsic

that poll has a sample size of 1000. It's on an IT thread.
Pretty hard to gather anything from it other than only a tiny fraction of the customer base voted in it

[smokingotter1]

spotlessvoid wrote...

question regarding control

scenario one: Starchild is in full control of the Reapers yet refuses to simply follow Shepards orders, instead forcing his annihilation as a human being. Clearly then he isn't benevolent towards Shepard

scenario two: Starchild is not in full control of the Reapers and cannot simply execute Shepards commands. In that case how these he even know control can work, since he can'teven control them

Also this from awhile ago I posted (with current edits), analysis of the control panels:



Shepard gets "control" of the reapers by grabing on to the control panels. My concern: why are there four handles?

1.First Shepard can't take full control of the reaper no matter how hard he tries. He does not have four hands. This hints that taking full control of the reapers is a impossible task, even for Shepard.
2. Second again we see doubling implying control is an illusion.
3. The positioning of the higher handles that Shepard is not grabing might imply subordination to the higher ups? If Shepard wants to take control wouldn't it be symbolic for him to grab the higher ones, not the lower ones?
4. Why the **** is there an active current going through controls? Implies a trap?

Symbolism!

[Lokanaiya]

leonia42 wrote...

It would certainly explain the dramatic change in Liara's personalty over the course of the trilogy and she does wear the thickest of plot armour, that has to make her important somehow.

Speaking of squads for Leviathan, what's everyone planning for the first run?

I'm going with Garrus and Vega, they seem to have some of the most interesting banter and I like seeing things "fresh" from Vega's point-of-view (and do you really think I wouldn't take Garrus on every mission?). Probably playing post-Thessia.

We should try to do as many "combinations" as possible to compare notes.

I'll be doing Garrus and Tali for my first playthrough. Afterward, I'll probably be going through with EDI and Javik, although it pains me to leave Garrus behind.

Modifié par Lokanaiya, 21 août 2012 - 04:42 .

[spotlessvoid]

Garrus and Shepard are like cookies and milk. Awesome apart, perfection together

[D.Sharrah]

Lokanaiya wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

It would certainly explain the dramatic change in Liara's personalty over the course of the trilogy and she does wear the thickest of plot armour, that has to make her important somehow.

Speaking of squads for Leviathan, what's everyone planning for the first run?

I'm going with Garrus and Vega, they seem to have some of the most interesting banter and I like seeing things "fresh" from Vega's point-of-view (and do you really think I wouldn't take Garrus on every mission?). Probably playing post-Thessia.

We should try to do as many "combinations" as possible to compare notes.

I'll be doing Garrus and Tali for my first playthrough. Afterward, I'll probably be going through with EDI and Javik, although it pains me to leave Garrus behind.

As Liara is my LI...of course she will be along...then probably Javik - since I like to roll with a Biotic Death Squad.

[Lokanaiya]

Well, we certainly won't be lacking for Garrus' dialogue....

[spotlessvoid]

Smoking otter...never saw the four rods in control!

[D.Sharrah]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Smoking otter...never saw the four rods in control!

I know...its so easy to miss some of the details...that's why I love this thread - the combined expierences of the community really does enrichen my personal expierence...

[spotlessvoid]

At the rate we collect evidence I'll be dumping childhood memories before we hit Mark 4 just to keep up

[ebuchala]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Garrus and Shepard are like cookies and milk. Awesome apart, perfection together

:wub:LOVE:wub:

[smokingotter1]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Smoking otter...never saw the four rods in control!

That was a giveaway to me. Also it ALL goes back to the speech Shepard gives to Saren at the climax of ME1.

"you could have fought"
"you could have resisted"
"instead you surrendered"
"you quit"

What is control? Why is there electricity going through the control panels? There are two common components in electrical wiring: conductors and resistors. Let's explore what a resistor does in terms of electricity: "A device used to control current in an electric circuit by providing resistance." 

I think it's telling that Shepard is grabing two electrical control panels, he's creating an electrical circuit, what is passing through Shepard? Reaper influence.

When Shepard first grabs the control panel he is acting as a resistor, thus the pain. He can't hold on and if you watch the ending again he quits, kneels in pain. When he grabs on again he doesn't seem to be affected by pain, he's not resisting the current anymore. He's acting as an electrical conductor. There is a bit of play on words with electricial and train conductor. It's also telling that there are train sounds when the catalyst is slowed down to 300%

(edit: need physics/engineer help but doesn't resisting also create heat which would explain the insane amount of pain and burning that Shepard much be experiecing at the beginning, fortunately the indoc kicks in "pain is an illusion" anyway feel free to chime in if ya know physics.)

Remember what the Illusive man said when Shepard accussed him of not fighting the reapers "I've been fighting them longer than you know."

There is a much deeper meaning and truth to what TIM is saying. In a way TIM has been holding those two control panels in his mind far longer than Shepard has. The difference between TIM and Saren is although both became indoctrinated one choose the path of surrender and one choose the path of resistance.

Saren never fought the reapes. TIM did, not only in real life but also in his mind. It's a battle that even as smart and as tough as TIM is he couldn't win. Could Shepard? What makes Shepard special?

Nothing, the beginning of ME2 hammered that home pretty hard. When Shepard was cast out into space alone in the void did he activate his magical powers to save himself? No he died like a normal human would in the same situation.

tl;dr Control is about electrical resistance and conducting, electricity is symbolic for the reapers, TIM fought and lost, Saren gave up (synthesis). Control ending is play on words-train and electrical conducting

Modifié par smokingotter1, 21 août 2012 - 05:20 .

[paxxton]

D.Sharrah wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Smoking otter...never saw the four rods in control!

I know...its so easy to miss some of the details...that's why I love this thread - the combined expierences of the community really does enrichen my personal expierence...

I saw 2 bottom handles but noticed 2 upper ones only after someone pointed it out in this thread.  In fact I learned that there are 4 identical objects.

Modifié par paxxton, 21 août 2012 - 05:14 .

[paxxton]

An unsettling idea (if IT isn't true). What if the mediocre ending is a consequence of DLC-based model? I mean it's not fully comprehensible because we don't have the full context which DLCs are supposed to provide. This (the lack of all the details) also allows BioWare to tease fans with "not denying, not proving IT" comments, even though they already now how the ending should be viewed.

Modifié par paxxton, 21 août 2012 - 05:40 .

[ebuchala]

Ok, so I found the scene where you meet Liara on Mars.

I think that will go right to the part that talks about the crucible and why everyone ended up on Mars at that moment. It's all very vague--Liara said that Hackett asked her to use her resources as Shadow Broker to find something to stop the reapers and she said that by process of elimination, her search led her to Mars. So there's no specific reference to either Glyph or really anyone specific knowing about the crucible before Liara showed up and dug the info up.

*I know I'm behind in the conversation--there was some discussion a few pages back about why they searched the archives for the info to begin with.

Modifié par ebuchala, 21 août 2012 - 05:38 .

[D.Sharrah]

paxxton wrote...

An unsettling idea (if IT isn't true). What if the mediocre ending is a conequence of DLC-based model? I mean it's not fully comprehensible because we don't have the full context which DLCs are supposed to provide. This (the lack of all the details) also allows BioWare to tease fans with "not denying, not proving IT" comments, even though they already now how the ending should be viewed.

You could say that from a certain point of view...

[paxxton]

CON + TEXT = CONTEXT. The readers are deceived by their own interpretations until they have all the details fleshing the whole story out.

Modifié par paxxton, 21 août 2012 - 05:38 .

[spotlessvoid]

I'm not sure Bioware is fully aware of the potential impact their treatment of the IT fans will reflect on them as a whole. There may only be a relative handful of ardent IT supporters, but many many more like the idea, and a lot of people are watching. If they are just stringing us along it's going to make a very negative, lasting impression on the company's credibility. They've already lost a lot of good will.
What keeps me hopeful is they all seem like such nice honest people in person