80611 réponses à ce sujet

[ebuchala]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Do you think IT would have been less convincing to people if we had gotten what the EC added from the get go?

I don't think it would have been as popular since, if you believe the literal versions, there is some closure for the galaxy and some of your squaddies.  So, fewer people would have been looking for a reason to believe in IT, if that makes sense.

[paxxton]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Where does the story mention the Shadow Broker serving the reapers?

I think he meant the comic in which the Shadow Boker makes a deal with the Collector General about retrieving Shepard's body.

[NebuchadnezzaRT]

desert_beagle wrote...

Just got home from work. I was thinking about the threads regarding the Mars mission and Glyph. Has anyone pointed out that Liara mentions that the previous Shadow Broker, the yahg, was in fact serving the Reapers? Glyph has been passed down from SB to SB.

It may even be that the "position" of Shadow Broker in fact is another agent for the Reapers through each cycle. The Broker's ship is mentioned to be ancient by Liara in the DLC and was meant to stay completely hidden, even though TIM found it and destroyed it. The SB position may just be one of those agents that the Reapers take a long time to indoctrinate vs. the quickies they pull on most normal people. That way the SB retains complete cognitive function while still serving the Reaper's purposes.

With the SB as one of their agents, the Reapers can pass and receive pretty much all information throughout the known galaxy from all races they plan on harvesting.

@paxxton Nice

And the SB was working for the Collector General. He amassed evidence of the Reapers during Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2. In between both games he worked his network to do what Saren was trying to do- prove his usefulness to survive the coming storm. Even though he failed to retrieve Shepard's body for the Collector's he felt he would remain untouched on Hagalaz because his ship was so advanced in secrecy and security, completely self-sufficient and who would look for a ship on a worl completely uninhapitable? I don't think any Shadow Broker was Indoctrinated, nor do I beliieve that the Shadow Broker(s) ever served a role in previous cycles.

[desert_beagle]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Where does the story mention the Shadow Broker serving the reapers?

In the Lair of the Shadow Broker DLC from Mass Effect 2.  It is after you defeat the yahg Shadow Broker.  You go and talk to Liara after she chooses to take over the position and she tells you what the previous one was up to, and that he was helping the Reapers.  She then says that she will use her resources as the new SB to help fight the Reapers.

[paxxton]

desert_beagle wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

Where does the story mention the Shadow Broker serving the reapers?

In the Lair of the Shadow Broker DLC from Mass Effect 2.  It is after you defeat the yahg Shadow Broker.  You go and talk to Liara after she chooses to take over the position and she tells you what the previous one was up to, and that he was helping the Reapers.  She then says that she will use her resources as the new SB to help fight the Reapers.

And it's after she cries you a river and shows her big manga-style eyes.

Modifié par paxxton, 21 août 2012 - 11:56 .

[FifthBeatle]

Isn't there a piece of intel in Lair of the Shadow Broker that talks about how the Shadow Broker was looking for a huge weapon that basically foreshadows the Crucible? I swear I saw that in my last play through.

[paxxton]

FifthBeatle wrote...

Isn't there a piece of intel in Lair of the Shadow Broker that talks about how the Shadow Broker was looking for a huge weapon that basically foreshadows the Crucible? I swear I saw that in my last play through.

Hmm... That somehow rings a bell but I can't remember. The word "Crucible" couldn't have been used there because it was pre-ME3.

[GethPrimeMKII]

I can't believe I forgot about all that. And also, yes, the Shadow broker was searching frantically for a way to stop the Reapers. In fact he's the one who leaked the intel on the Saren to Tali. He didn't want Saren to succeed in allowing the Reapers to pour in from dark space.

[NebuchadnezzaRT]

FifthBeatle wrote...

Isn't there a piece of intel in Lair of the Shadow Broker that talks about how the Shadow Broker was looking for a huge weapon that basically foreshadows the Crucible? I swear I saw that in my last play through.

Ha no. But there was a video file showing Anderson meeting with a Cerberus person. Never understood that

@GethPrimeMkII Yes but after seeing the readouts on Soveriegns power he must have realized going against the Reapers would be near insanity, so by allying himself with the Collectors, the only other beings in the galaxy with super advanced tech, he was trying to secure his own survival.

Modifié par NebuchadnezzaRT, 22 août 2012 - 12:09 .

[paxxton]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

I can't believe I forgot about all that. And also, yes, the Shadow broker was searching frantically for a way to stop the Reapers. In fact he's the one who leaked the intel on the Saren to Tali. He didn't want Saren to succeed in allowing the Reapers to pour in from dark space.

So was he helping them or sabotaging their efforts?  Or had his own hidden agenda?

Modifié par paxxton, 22 août 2012 - 12:08 .

[Hrothdane]

paxxton wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

I can't believe I forgot about all that. And also, yes, the Shadow broker was searching frantically for a way to stop the Reapers. In fact he's the one who leaked the intel on the Saren to Tali. He didn't want Saren to succeed in allowing the Reapers to pour in from dark space.

So was he helping them or sabotaging their efforts?  Or had his own hidden agenda?

He made a deal with the Collector General to give him Shepard's body in exchange for technology (?).

Presumably, he would have tried using their own technology or whatever against them. Remember, from his perspective, all he is giving them is the dead body of some hero.

No matter what, the yahg was playing a very dangerous game.

[paxxton]

Hrothdane wrote...

paxxton wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

I can't believe I forgot about all that. And also, yes, the Shadow broker was searching frantically for a way to stop the Reapers. In fact he's the one who leaked the intel on the Saren to Tali. He didn't want Saren to succeed in allowing the Reapers to pour in from dark space.

So was he helping them or sabotaging their efforts?  Or had his own hidden agenda?

He made a deal with the Collector General to give him Shepard's body in exchange for technology (?).

Presumably, he would have tried using their own technology or whatever against them. Remember, from his perspective, all he is giving them is the dead body of some hero.

No matter what, the yahg was playing a very dangerous game.

Or maybe it was his another usual attempt at gaining something without upsetting the balance.

[GethPrimeMKII]

The Shadow broker's agenda was to save his own ass. Helping Tali stopped Saren from letting the Reapers into the galaxy. Handing Shepard body to the collectors would give him technology. Technology he could perhaps study and use to save himself from the impending reaper invasion

Modifié par GethPrimeMKII, 22 août 2012 - 12:17 .

[jgibson14352]

i believe the conversation with liara said that during the events of ME1 he was looking for a way to stop the reapers, which is why he tried to help tali in her quest to expose saren, but in between 1 and 2, was approached by the collectors with a deal he couldnt pass up. he was always trying to secure his own safety, but once he learned he could do it easily by betraying everybody else in the galaxy, he allied with the collectors

Modifié par jgibson14352, 22 août 2012 - 12:19 .

[desert_beagle]

The SB didn't leak the intel on Saren to Tali. Tali got it herself from a dead geth memory core she salvaged. She was going to make a deal to sell it to the SB. That is when you save her from Saren's goons on the Citidel.

[MKfighter89]

The shadow broker had a grudge in ME1 against Saren for up and leaving, Saren did alot of jobs for the Broker. When Saren was looking for Dr. Shu Quians artfact and met sovereign, he sided with the reaper to try and convince them to spare the organics, but we all know how that turned out. He left and started taking some of his information agents for himself. The Broker new he couldn't just put a bounty on Saren so he started taking out the hands that joined Saren like Fist.

[jgibson14352]

JillBSuiT wrote...

The shadow broker had a grudge in ME1 against Saren for up and leaving, Saren did alot of jobs for the Broker. When Saren was looking for Dr. Shu Quians artfact and met sovereign, he sided with the reaper to try and convince them to spare the organics, but we all know how that turned out. He left and started taking some of his information agents for himself. The Broker new he couldn't just put a bounty on Saren so he started taking out the hands that joined Saren like Fist.

...no, saren was always off doing is own thing, he never worked for the shadow broker. tali found the geth memory core exposing saren, and tried to show it to the council in return for a safe place to hide. when she couldnt get an audience, she turned to the shadow broker, who turned her to his agent, Fist. Fist betrayed the shadow broker by basically handing tali over to saren.

[demersel]

On the matter of existence of Extended Cut. 
I state that the fact it exists proves the IT. 
Here's how:
Bioware stated, when announcing the EC that it will not change the ending of the game but rather expand and clarify it for those who need futher clarity and closure. 

"Does the Extended Cut change the endings?[/b]The Extended Cut is an expansion of the original endings to Mass Effect 3. It does not fundamentally change the endings, but rather it expands on the meaning of the original endings, and reveals greater detail on the impact of player decisions.[/list]blog.bioware.com/2012/06/22/mass-effect-3-extended-cut-2/

This means that Mass Effect 3 (vanilla) = Mass Effect 3 Extended Cut. 
all the changes made by the Extended Cut were in the ending. so (ME3v - ending )= (ME3EC - extended ending) - so far so good? 
OK. that leaves us with original endings (OE)  vs extended enindgs (EE)
BUT we remember that Mass Effect 3 (vanilla) = Mass Effect 3 Extended Cut, or we can write it like this Mass Effect Extended Cut = Mass Effect 3 (vanilla)
So that in turn means that: 
OE = EE 
but that is simply not right cause there are significant differences. So let's break them down into elements. 
What is OE (original ending)?
OE = Beam Run (BR) + citadel corridor walk (CCW) + TIM confrontation (TC) + catalyst chamber (CC)  + red explosion (RE) + blue explosin (BE) + green explosion (GE) + normandy crash (NC) + breath scene only after high EMS destroy(BS) + storyteller epiloge (E)
or in short  
OE = BR + CCW + TC + CC + RE + BE + GE + NC + BS + E

Now, what is Extended Ending? 

It is BR + Normandy Pick up (NP) +  CCW + TC + Extended catalyst chamber (ECC) + RE + Destroy Slideshow (DS) + BE + (Control Slideshow) + GE + Synthesis Slideshow (SS) +  Liaras Message (LM) + 2 Memorial Scene (2MS) + Memorial Scene Destroy (MSD) + NC + Normandy lift Off (NL) + BS + E + Female Storyteller Epilog for Refuse (FE)
in short:

EE= BR + NP + CCW + TC + ECC + (RE + DS) + (BE + CS) + (GE + SS) + LM + 2MS + MSD + NC + NL + BS + E + FE

Now before we go any further, let's establish what is Catalyst Chamber (CC) and what is Extended Catalyst Chamber (ECC), because this is where most changes took place. 

CC = Destroy + Control + Synthesis  ( i thing we can leave EMS differentials out of it, since they are essentially the same, only in the ECC EMS requirements are lower)

ECC = Destroy (D) + Control © + Synthesis (S) + Refuse ®. 

So we have  

So now this looks like this:

OE = BR + CCW + TC + (D+C+S) + RE + BE + GE + NC + BS + E

Let's rearange this into 

OE = BR + CCW + TC + (D+RE+BS) + (C+BE) + (S+GE) + NC +E

Now Extended Ending looks like this:

EE = BR + NP + CCW + TC + (D + C + S + R) + (RE+DS) + (BE + CS) + (GE + SS) + LM + 2MS + MSD + NC + NL + BS + E + FE

Let's sort it out a bit:

EE = (BR + NP) + CCW + TC + (D + RE + DS + MSD + BS) + (C + BE + CS + MS) + (S + GE + SS + MS) + (R + LM + FE) + (NC + NL) + E 

Now we remember, tha according to bioware in the general sence it is the same ending. I won't go into detail how Destroy Control and Synthesis changed from mostly negative to mostly positive. Let's assume that they are indeed the same.  
I'll talk about it later in the conclusion. But for now let's just compare the OE and EE, keeping in mind that in general sense one equals the other. (according ot every statement by bioware)

OE = EE

=>

(BR + CCW + TC + (D+ RE + BS) + (C+BE) + (S+GE) + NC +E )
=  
((BR + NP) + CCW + TC + (D + RE + DS + MSD + BS) + (C + BE + CS + MS ) + (S + GE + SS + MS) + (R + LM + FE) + (NC + NL) + E)

No let's get rid of thing that are the same, to keed only what is different.

We get 

(BR + (D +RE + BS) + (C+BE) + (S+GE) + NC) = ((BR + NP) + (D + RE + DS + MSD + BS) + (C + BE + CS + MS) + (S + GE + SS + MS) + (R + LM + FE) + (NC + NL))

That is still a bit much on the eye. 

So let's look at the changes and original scenes as i grupped them , so we can decide what is essentially the same in terms of general picture. 

Firtst the beam run in th OE and beam run + normandy pick up in the EE.
Yes they added a whole scene (very stupid one i might add), but it doesn't fundamentally change the ending, this is just some small additional detail, that as well could be implyed in th original. So BR = (BR + NP). We can get rid of that. 

The same can be said about normandy crash and lift off scene. They add detail and context, but are essentially the same. The only thing they do achieve is to shift the whole tone of the ending from mostly negative to mostly positive.
So in truth it should be  like this  -NC  and  (NC+NL) - in the extended cut the do not show you the destruction of the engine. It terms of general meaning this is A HUGE difference. In the OE Normandy is crushed, engines destroyed, and no mass relay network. Best case scenario - your teammates are alive, but they a stranded forever.  In the EE  they crush on the planet, in high EMS scenario the ship is fine, they quickly patch it up and fly away to their new adventures. If you remember that the relays are not destroyed entirely , and then rebuilt - that is like unicorns and rainbows type of ending now as opposed to the bleak "marooned on the desolete planet with no chance of rescue). As you can see there is huge differennce.

But Bioware says OE = EE in terns of general meaning and thus we have to assume the since OE = EE =>  -NC = (NC+NL). 

In other words this sequence doesn't matter.   ( X=-X only if X=0,)  
NC = 0 
-NC = NC + NL
=>
NL = 0 

With that said we can get rid of this part to (since it is 0)

What do we have left?

OE=EE
=>
(D+RE+BS) +(C+BE) + (S +GE) = (D+RE+DS+BS+MSD) + (C+BE+CS+MS) + (S+GE++SS+MS) + (R+LM+FE)

First, let's do the math, and then I'll explain it in the conclusions.

In both parts we get rid of the same elements.

And we get this

0 = (DS + MSD) + (CS+MS) + (SS+MS) + (R+LM+FE)

In other words according to the BIoware's official statement  EVERYTHING that the EC ADDED in the EC EQUALS ZERO in terms of relevance to the general sense and theme of the ending.  

Bioware sad there will be no new endings. - there is refuse. 
Bioware said that the endings will not change. They have. Immensly. Again, form mostly sad and negative they changed to mostly positive and hopefull.  ( remember: X=-X, Only if X=0).  
If taken literaly the ending are changed immensly, by the Extended Cut, and this is hardly can be described as maintaining artistic integrity, while expanding on and clarifying.

In the original the relays were destroyed completely without any hope of rebuilding them, in the Extended Cut they are not, and more over they are shown rebuilt. 
In the original the citadel is shown comepletely destroyed, in the Extended Cut it is not. And shown rebuilt. 
In the original the normandy crashes and dameged beyond repair, in the Extended Cut it isn't, and it is show taking off again. 
in the original all you can is to listen to the catalst and then choose one of three options and you HAVE to make a choice, in the Extended Cut you can talk back at the catalyst and refuse to make a choice (after which you kinda sorta win anyway! Reapers are defeated. Not by you but by the next cycle, and commander shepard is still a legend that ended the reaper threat) 

In short, the original felt like no matter what you do - you lose. The Extended Cut feels like whatever you choose - you win! 

That is a huge difference. and that certainly makes OE =/= EE and thus ME3 =/= ME3 EXTENDED CUT 

If endings are meant to be taken literally this isn't clarification and providing more context - this is a full RETCON
However somehow it isn't..

And now comes the IT. 
The main game stays the same - which means that all the hints for the IT are still there.

The endings as we have seen a VASTLY different in. HOWEVER, every single hint for the IT is still present, and there are even more added with it. 

So the IT is still valid. 

And that really gives us that OE=EE formula that Bioware stated. 

The very existence of EC proves that bioware, when changing every event on the ending from - to +, consideres it still the same ending that is final and not a subject ot change, because of artistic integrity. 
Nothing that happens has any revelance, cause it is different content, but still the same ending. 

And another proof - the initial statement by bioware co-founder Ray Muzika where he announces the extended cut, is curiusly absent fron the official site, and from the internet as far as i can tell. (iyou can however refresh it's contents in memory, by watching a video by angry joe , where he reads this statement aloud. )
angryjoeshow.com/2012/04/mass-effect-3-extended-cut-dlc-discussion/

There you have it. The fact that Extended Cut exists the way it is proves Indoctrination Theory. 

Modifié par demersel, 22 août 2012 - 01:16 .

[munnellyladt]

Owwwww....

My brain hurts..

[ZerebusPrime]

demersel wrote...

On the matter of existence of Extended Cut. 

....*snip*....

I have a masters degree in computer science and a background in applied mathematics.

And I am not touching that monster of a post.

In a nutshell, the extended cut was meant to add to existing endings without overtly changing them, but changes WERE made to the "facts" of the origianl endings (we no longer see the relays blow up, for example).  BioWare said one thing and did another... unless everything post-choice is a hallucination with no bearing on reality.  Then they could change anything they want in that segment without changing anything at all.

[demersel]

ZerebusPrime wrote...

demersel wrote...

On the matter of existence of Extended Cut. 

....*snip*....

I have a masters degree in computer science and a background in applied mathematics.

And I am not touching that monster of a post.

In a nutshell, the extended cut was meant to add to existing endings without overtly changing them, but changes WERE made to the "facts" of the origianl endings (we no longer see the relays blow up, for example).  BioWare said one thing and did another... unless everything post-choice is a hallucination with no bearing on reality.  Then they could change anything they want in that segment without changing anything at all.

yep, that's the short version of it. except not only post-choice, but starting from the beginning of the beam run at least. Thank you. 

Modifié par demersel, 22 août 2012 - 01:22 .

[Hrothdane]

ZerebusPrime wrote...

demersel wrote...

On the matter of existence of Extended Cut. 

....*snip*....

I have a masters degree in computer science and a background in applied mathematics.

And I am not touching that monster of a post.

In a nutshell, the extended cut was meant to add to existing endings without overtly changing them, but changes WERE made to the "facts" of the origianl endings (we no longer see the relays blow up, for example).  BioWare said one thing and did another... unless everything post-choice is a hallucination with no bearing on reality.  Then they could change anything they want in that segment without changing anything at all.

I read the post in its entirety, and I took the same thing away from it.

Once you get past the over-abundance of initialisms, it was basically just a giant informal symbolic logic proof.

[desert_beagle]

My mind just exploded again. Too much math. I just thought of something else regarding the destroy option.

Starbrat says that the energy will not descriminate between synthetics and that technology currently in use would also be destroyed. We assume that means EDI and the Geth will be destroyed along with the Reapers.

I am debunking a literallist argument here so bear with me. How does the energy differentiate between anything synthetic and a synthetic life form? In all reality, if the energy wave destroyed the Reapers, EDI, Geth, Citidel, and Relays like a giant galactic EMP, then wouldn't ANYTHING synthetic caught in the wave be effectively destroyed? If it can't differentiate between Reapers and "good" synthetics, but wipes them all out, then wouldn't it also wipe out all of the fleets caught in the wave.

Their ships might not blow up, but they would lose their mobility, life support, weapons, artificial gravity, etc., and everyone on board the ships would be dead. They would have no way of getting off because the wave took out/damaged their synthetic tech. The Reapers are shown dropping as soon as the wave hits them, so the systems on the ships would have to be affected as well.

The Destroy ending has to be a dream sequence, because how could Hackett, or the Normandy crew survive on their ships? That is if you take what the Starbrat said literally.

Modifié par desert_beagle, 22 août 2012 - 01:31 .

[demersel]

desert_beagle wrote...

My mind just exploded again. Too much math. I just thought of something else regarding the destroy option.

Starbrat says that the energy will not descriminate between synthetics and that technology currently in use would also be destroyed. We assume that means EDI and the Geth will be destroyed along with the Reapers.

I am debunking a literallist argument here so bear with me. How does the energy differentiate between anything synthetic and a synthetic life form? In all reality, if the energy wave destroyed the Reapers, EDI, Geth, Citidel, and Relays like a giant galactic EMP, then wouldn't ANYTHING synthetic caught in the wave be effectively destroyed? If it can't differentiate between Reapers and "good" synthetics, but wipes them all out, then wouldn't it also wipe out all of the fleets caught in the wave.

Their ships might not blow up, but they would lose their mobility, life support, weapons, artificial gravity, etc., and everyone on board the ships would be dead. They would have no way of getting off because the wave took out/damaged their synthetic tech. The Reapers are shown dropping as soon as the wave hits them, so the systems on the ships would have to be affected as well.

The Destroy ending has to be a dream sequence, because how could Hackett, or the Normandy crew survive on their ships? That is if you take what the Starbrat said literally.

+1

[Hrothdane]

desert_beagle wrote...

My mind just exploded again. Too much math. I just thought of something else regarding the destroy option.

Starbrat says that the energy will not descriminate between synthetics and that technology currently in use would also be destroyed. We assume that means EDI and the Geth will be destroyed along with the Reapers.

I am debunking a literallist argument here so bear with me. How does the energy differentiate between anything synthetic and a synthetic life form? In all reality, if the energy wave destroyed the Reapers, EDI, Geth, Citidel, and Relays like a giant galactic EMP, then wouldn't ANYTHING synthetic caught in the wave be effectively destroyed? If it can't differentiate between Reapers and "good" synthetics, but wipes them all out, then wouldn't it also wipe out all of the fleets caught in the wave.

Their ships might not blow up, but they would lose their mobility, life support, weapons, artificial gravity, etc., and everyone on board the ships would be dead. They would have no way of getting off because the wave took out/damaged their synthetic tech. The Reapers are shown dropping as soon as the wave hits them, so the systems on the ships would have to be affected as well.

The Destroy ending has to be a dream sequence, because how could Hackett, or the Normandy crew survive on their ships? That is if you take what the Starbrat said literally.

Exactly. Also, geth and EDI are software, not hardware. We know this for a fact not only because they tell us as much, but the geth can upload themselves into quarian suits, and EDI is still technically part of the Normandy. Even if the wave somehow cannot differentiate between Reaper and good synthetic physical bodies, how does it destroy their consciousnesses if they weren't IN those bodies at the time?