80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Iconoclaste]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Oh awesome! The clever guy is back

No wonder Bioware sticks to its "artistic integrity". If you look at things from their perspective, they see a bunch of players speculating on Bioware's intents without having a clue of the work that has been done. They DID try to "squeeze" a lot of stuff in the game, but if nobody knows how it's actually done, Bioware must feel the amount and quality of work they put in their game is very, very badly estimated by the players.

[plfranke]

Iconoclaste wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

FFZero wrote...

Okay I’ve been going through the Leviathan files and I’ve found some interesting things. They could easily mean nothing and just be asset re-use but they’re interesting all the same.

1. The nose bleed texture.

The texture used in Leviathan is the exact same as the one used on Shepard post-Harby’s beam. It also pops up everywhere over the ending. It’s dotted throughout the files to do with the London Level long before it’s actually used on Shepard. It’s also still loaded post final choice, both before and after EC. It shows up in the London/ending files a grand total of 46 times before EC is installed and a further 34 times post-EC.



Now while these textures are very small in size, for a game where they were apparently struggling to fit everything on the disk they seem to waste a lot of space. Also while the textures are still loaded they disappear from Shepards face once you’re in the decision chamber, just like it does when you’re talking to Leviathan.

2. Suspicious file names used in Leviathan

One of the files to do with the level where you have to find Ann Bryson is called BioA_Lev003_160CollectorShip…

There is absolutely nothing to do with Collectors within this level, or in this DLC other than when Leviathan brings it up. MaximizedAction put forward the idea that it was a name used by some other content that they didn’t bother changing, except every other file used within Leviathan has a name that you would expect. BioA_Lev004_200Underwater for the level once you’ve dived down in the mech, BioD_Lev004_310EscapeScene once you’re back up on the surface and your squadmates get you into the shuttle, etc.

Makes me wonder if there is/was something to that Truth DLC rumour from a few months ago. Anyway I’m still going through the files, if I find anything else interesting I’ll post about it later.

Still catching up but had to comment on this...

To FFZero...GREAT FIND!!! Regarding to the comments that, "Oh it's just asset reuse." Yes that may be but its what the importance of it that is interesting. Nosebleeding (texture) is a proven side effect of forcing Shepard into his/her mind. This side effect is present throughout London and on. Using deducting skills, I believe this is solid proof there is the process of forcing Shepard into his/her mind from London on. WNT claims that Indoctrination is slowly becoming stronger the mission goes on and eventually ends up with either a continuation of the WNT or IT. This could mean WNT and / or IT is right in a way.

I don't see the connection between the presence of a texture and the plot, frankly.

If you are wondering how come this specific texture (or any other, if applicable) is present in an apparently unrelated context, then you should look around the UDK forums and tutorials to see how textures are used. The "reused asset" meme is a vague reference to actual textures and assets usage in videogames today, and it does not describe anything else than the fact that assets (models, sounds, textures) are used and re-used in different forms, positions, renderings, scaling, mirroring, and regarding textures you will be surprised to see how a common tiny red square with a black spot in the middle can become a large array of effects and color patterns, just playing around with its different channels and mixing it in a chain with itself or another simple texture. The process is quite complex in fact, and far from being just a flat display of color or simple bumpmapping. The designers can use a single, random texture and make many applications of it in ways that the original texture can never be recognized (see "materials" on the UDK tutorials).

Have a look here :
http://www.unrealeng...re_environment/

This is, of course an extreme case of texture usage, but the same principle applies here. A single texture can be referenced in a lot of other "mixes" because of its color or the Alpha channel containing a particularly useful pattern that can be used in a number of situations that have absolutely no connection with the "name" of the texture.

Have a look if you're interested, this is interesting stuff, and should clarify why "materials" can require the same "texture" many times in its "building chain", hence it has to be included in any "pack" where these materials are used.
udn.epicgames.com/Three/GettingStartedContent.html#Materials%20and%20Textures

I'll be honest, I understand so little about what you said, I'm forced to agree with the texture proves IT. It would help if you could dumb down your analysis for the people who aren't masters on the subject. In any event, I don't see how labeling the level where you find Ann Bryson after the collectors was absolutely necessary.

[spotlessvoid]

Iconoclaste wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Oh awesome! The clever guy is back

No wonder Bioware sticks to its "artistic integrity". If you look at things from their perspective, they see a bunch of players speculating on Bioware's intents without having a clue of the work that has been done. They DID try to "squeeze" a lot of stuff in the game, but if nobody knows how it's actually done, Bioware must feel the amount and quality of work they put in their game is very, very badly estimated by the players.

Oooohhhhhhh.  Ya see I was talking about spectreownage. I posted that while catching up

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 02 septembre 2012 - 03:46 .

[Iconoclaste]

plfranke wrote...

I'll be honest, I understand so little about what you said, I'm forced to agree with the texture proves IT. It would help if you could dumb down your analysis for the people who aren't masters on the subject. In any event, I don't see how labeling the level where you find Ann Bryson after the collectors was absolutely necessary.

I'll "dumb it down", no problem.

You believe texture X has some implication towards the "plot" because of its name and position in apparently irrelevant packages. You don't know Bioware's intents, but you can learn how "materials" are made and "packages" are "cooked". This way, you will see that the names for the textures mean nothing regarding the plot, as they can be in many packages because of the way the Unreal Engine (3) works and the way game content is made.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 02 septembre 2012 - 03:42 .

[plfranke]

Iconoclaste wrote...

plfranke wrote...

I'll be honest, I understand so little about what you said, I'm forced to agree with the texture proves IT. It would help if you could dumb down your analysis for the people who aren't masters on the subject. In any event, I don't see how labeling the level where you find Ann Bryson after the collectors was absolutely necessary.

I'll "dumb it down", no problem.

You believe texture X has some implication towards the "plot" because of its name and position in apparently irrelevant packages. You don't know Bioware's intents, but you can learn how "materials" are made and "packages" are "cooked". This way, you will see that the names for the textures mean nothing regarding the plot, as they can be in many packages because of the way the Unreal Engine (3) works and the way game content is made.

That's a lot better, and it somewhat explains the nose bleed thing I suppose. Though I still don't understand why everything in Leviathan has a unique name except for the level with Ann Bryson. Though, I can't see how that would support IT in any event.

[Iconoclaste]

spotlessvoid wrote...
I think it was Rif who said something like "Never underestimate the stupidity of large groups"

Still, this is the IT thread and even most of it's stuanchest, well researched, and loyal supporters are having serious moments of doubt so I can't entirely blame the literalist for not believing IT

I just think that in some instances the "clues" do not have a lot of weight. IT has enough "plot-based" evidence to live well, don't worry.

[spotlessvoid]

Iconoclaste wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Oh awesome! The clever guy is back

No wonder Bioware sticks to its "artistic integrity". If you look at things from their perspective, they see a bunch of players speculating on Bioware's intents without having a clue of the work that has been done. They DID try to "squeeze" a lot of stuff in the game, but if nobody knows how it's actually done, Bioware must feel the amount and quality of work they put in their game is very, very badly estimated by the players.

yeah well "those" people are the only ones speculating that their art has any damned integrity.



edit: and yes some stuff is grasping at straws, but you know what? you can't really blame us. We werent left with a cliff hanger, we were left wondering if there  WAS a cliffhanger. Still, I agree that particular bit doesnt do much for me

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 02 septembre 2012 - 03:55 .

[Iconoclaste]

plfranke wrote...

That's a lot better, and it somewhat explains the nose bleed thing I suppose. Though I still don't understand why everything in Leviathan has a unique name except for the level with Ann Bryson. Though, I can't see how that would support IT in any event.

I did not get the Leviathan DLC yet, so I can't say a lot on it, but I know the game engine can load more than 1 package for any given level. The content of the DLC can very well be restricted to new elements only, and the engine will load additional ("vanilla") packages for specific resources if needed. This is not something you will see in the "file / directory" structure, It may be more fructuous to look into some "ini" file to see what packages are called upon, then look at the contents of these packages.

I'm not even sure if the "cooking" process allowes for any "unreferenced resource" to make its way into a package, since it is designed to save space and speed up loading time and gameplay.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 02 septembre 2012 - 04:00 .

[desert_beagle]

SwobyJ wrote...

Arashi08 wrote...

So just out of curiosity, can anyone explain this "Puzzle Theory" I've heard about?

Long story short, Bioware is presenting to us a mystery that they will clarify with every DLC. No one knows what the final result will be.

So yes, indoctrination is involved, but not only indoctrination.

In other words EA corporate making us spend $60+ for a game that wasn't finished, and then forcing us to spend $X more on DLC to find out what REALLY happens.

I hate sounding like a troll on this.  I really do.  Unfortunately, it is correct.  There is no reason or excuse on earth why any of us should have spend more money to get completion and closure out of a story that was advertised from the get go to be complete out of the box.

If the IT is true then it really is an awesome mechanic.  Why?  It is indoctrinating the fans.  IT is the only plausible explanation for the ending.  There is no other way around it.  Literalists can scream "bad writing" to high heaven, but the fact is that there is just too much evidence within all three games to the contrary to suggest that anything that happens after Harby's beam is real.  That means it was planned and calculated out.  

The hints and nods within Leviathan are enough to prove that this is more about money and less about making the fans happy with a complete game.  Did this DLC give us anything more than, "One more story about the Shepard?"  Not really.  In fact it seemed more like assets that should have already been in the game from release.  

BioWare just didn't have time to implement it before the execs said, "We need to capitalize on Mass Effect 3 NOW! Oh and stop saying this is the END for Shepard!  How can we make money on a dead hero?  GIve them something to make them keep coming back for more DLC until we tell you to start working on Mass Effect 4.  Oh and you will only have one year to make Mass Effect 4.  We're gonna turn this series into an 'annual' to compete with Call of Duty."

[spotlessvoid]

@desertbeagle:

Screams in horror at ME becoming an annual

[spotlessvoid]

Sigh

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 02 septembre 2012 - 04:06 .

[spotlessvoid]

Would revealing, or at minimum strongly (STRONGLY!) hinting at IT increase dlc sales, or decrease them?

[Iconoclaste]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Would revealing, or at minimum strongly (STRONGLY!) hinting at IT increase dlc sales, or decrease them?

I would bet my arm that, although I doubt IT would be what most here expect, that would increase DLC sales because Bioware, and Bioware only, can pull the final strings on this. I read a lot of people rejected IT because it was not "Bioware's plan or final intent". If IT comes in from Bioware, these people will surely review their position, don't you think? They mostly refused the "fan fiction" but why would they refuse Bioware's version?

There is indiscutably "Indoctrination elements" at the end, only the authors can shed some light on the parts most here have been "speculating" on. This is why I believe that frail evidence must be shoved out of IT, and strong evidence should be put to serious test to see if, beyond any reasonable doubt, Shepard is having hallucinations in some segments that lead up to the "breathing scene".

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 02 septembre 2012 - 04:24 .

[Codename_Code]

If Bioware reveals IT, I would pay them another 60 bucks for their DLC. Awesome narrative deserves to be rewarded. If they dontreveal It I will be a poor and sad fan

Modifié par Codename_Code, 02 septembre 2012 - 04:25 .

[XXIceColdXX]

Arashi08 wrote...

that's what I thought, and I actually kinda think that will be the case with the DLC, meaning we likely won't get the full picture until we get all the DLC.

Grr...I keep trying to work on my novel and/or short story but...damn ME3 multiplayer keeps pulling me back in!

If the IT doesnt happen, im hoping the puzzle theory is true and gives us a better finish to the game. Id be happy to part with a few more dollars if it means I can tell the catalyst to get f*&^%$# and kick his ass.

The way I see it , Puzzle theory mainly revolves around future DLC giving us new assets that will allow Shepard to win the war.  it could end up having IT elements to it, but the theory as is looks to improve the refuse option into victory. 

[TJBartlemus]

Iconoclaste wrote...

plfranke wrote...

I'll be honest, I understand so little about what you said, I'm forced to agree with the texture proves IT. It would help if you could dumb down your analysis for the people who aren't masters on the subject. In any event, I don't see how labeling the level where you find Ann Bryson after the collectors was absolutely necessary.

I'll "dumb it down", no problem.

You believe texture X has some implication towards the "plot" because of its name and position in apparently irrelevant packages. You don't know Bioware's intents, but you can learn how "materials" are made and "packages" are "cooked". This way, you will see that the names for the textures mean nothing regarding the plot, as they can be in many packages because of the way the Unreal Engine (3) works and the way game content is made.

Okay I understand. *shrugs* I guess it was a little bit of assuming there and grasping of straws. 

[The Twilight God]

plfranke wrote...

I'll be honest, I understand so little about what you said, I'm forced to agree with the texture proves IT. It would help if you could dumb down your analysis for the people who aren't masters on the subject. In any event, I don't see how labeling the level where you find Ann Bryson after the collectors was absolutely necessary.

He said one texture can be utilized to make completely different looking effects.

Futhermore, it does not require more disc space to reuse a texture. It is stored once. The ability to load it several times does not increase the necessary storage space on the disc. It only affects your computer's RAM.

[TJBartlemus]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Would revealing, or at minimum strongly (STRONGLY!) hinting at IT increase dlc sales, or decrease them?

Increase. IT is one of the biggest things that are giving people hope on the endings and if BioWare provides a bit of hope in a DLC people will buy it like crazy.

Pretty much this is how I see it. Give people what they want, they will come and buy it. The more people the more sales. Now for a metaphor. The BW fanbase is a giant beast that is being slowly starved of what made it that big. Leviathan may be a DLC but lacks the proper amount of nutrients (definite IT proof) the "beast" (us) requires to stay alive. That is why sales for Leviathan are low. 

[Iconoclaste]

Codename_Code wrote...

If Bioware reveals IT, I would pay them another 60 bucks for their DLC. Awesome narrative deserves to be rewarded. If they dontreveal It I will be a poor and sad fan

Don't be sad, be creative! That's what Bioware was expecting from the very start of the whole "ranting on endings". They opened a thread specifically for that : "We are listening". There was an opportunity to suggest ideas that could be realistically "added" to the game from there. IT was born, but it somehow went too far and alienated itself the possibility of being rigged in any kind of DLC. Think about the sheer amount of "hints", good or bad, the "plot holes" that lead some here to lenghty speculative dissertations, schisms from mainstream IT, and lack of cohesion.

In order to make some kind of IT DLC, Bioware would have needed a little more "help" in making it "believable", but since so many refused the fan-fiction that IT became because of its unfocussed nature, and mostly because it would have forced Bioware to revisit the entire game in some way (starting with ME2's "Arrival"), tying all these "loose ends" into a single DLC would have been very difficult. Should IT be re-centered around fewer elements, and not implying the design of a completely "new" ending, it might stand a chance to be validated by Bioware in some way. As it stands now, there is still this unproductive "hope" that Bioware will deliver some additional "clues" to fill "gaps" in the IT, and it has been said on a few occasions here that it was not a good idea. The main reason for this is that Bioware might have been expecting exactly that from the IT thread : to give them some more serious "clues" on a way to implement IT without doing lots of work or many changes to actual endings. So, who should have been the first to get to work on this : Bioware, or the IT workers?

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 02 septembre 2012 - 04:50 .

[desert_beagle]

SwobyJ wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Would revealing, or at minimum strongly (STRONGLY!) hinting at IT increase dlc sales, or decrease them?

IMO increase.

Because it would also get hopes up for a truly awesome and epic finale, which we never *really really* got to see.

You know, like the epic of facing Sovereign/Saren, or the Collectors/Harbinger.

But times ten.

We're missing that.


EDIT: Don't get me wrong. People WILL nerdrage. However, I think it will overall increase both perception of Mass Effect and put an optimistic feeling back into the fanbase for.... 

not post-ending DLC (I would call Arrival a post-ending for ME2 btw... hehe)

not 'changing the ending', as EC was, regardless of what Bioware says.

But *completing* the ending.

I agree completely that IT suggesting/confirming DLC will increase sales.  I'll buy it.  I want it.  I love my Shepard and I want to give him the ending he deserves, as well as actually get to kick some real Reaper @ss.

As far as ME2 goes, the DLC was simple and didn't need to add much.  Arrival was the perfect epilogue DLC for a mid trilogy game like ME2.  It was worth it.  LotSB was also a great story bridger for ME3.  It was lengthy, fun, and you got some closure for why Liara is acting the way that she is.  

ME3 on the other hand is the "end" of this story arc.  You can't very well have DLC that will bridge into another game.  It wouldn't make any sense.  If you can't have bridge type story based DLC then what else is there?  Even the asteroid mission in ME1 bridged into ME3, but now there is nowhere to go.

BioWare at this point has only two options for single player DLC.  Packs that only give more missions to complete before taking down Cerberus, or packs that actually add to the story and truly complete the game with a satisfying conclusion.  I want an explanation for why Shepard wakes up on earth after a perfect Destroy.  That scene alone is what sold me on the IT.

Modifié par desert_beagle, 02 septembre 2012 - 04:51 .

[Hrothdane]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Codename_Code wrote...

If Bioware reveals IT, I would pay them another 60 bucks for their DLC. Awesome narrative deserves to be rewarded. If they dontreveal It I will be a poor and sad fan

Don't be sad, be creative! That's what Bioware was expecting from the very start of the whole "ranting on endings". They opened a thread specifically for that : "We are listening". There was an opportunity to suggest ideas that could be realistically "added" to the game from there. IT was born, but it somehow went too far and alienated itself the possibility of being rigged in any kind of DLC. Think about the sheer amount of "hints", good or bad, the "plot holes" that lead some here to lenghty speculative dissertations, schisms from mainstream IT, and lack of cohesion.

In order to make some kind of IT DLC, Bioware would have needed a little more "help" in making it "believable", but since so many refused the fan-fiction that IT became because of its unfocussed nature, and mostly because it would have forced Bioware to revisit the entire game in some way (starting with ME2's "Arrival"), tying all these "loose ends" into a single DLC would have been very difficult. Should IT be re-centered around fewer elements, and not implying the design of a completely "new" ending, it might stand a chance to be validated by Bioware in some way. As it stands now, there is still this unproductive "hope" that Bioware will deliver some additional "clues" to fill "gaps" in the IT, and it has been said on a few occasions here that it was not a good idea. The main reason for this is that Bioware might have been expecting exactly that from the IT thread : to give them some more serious "clues" on a way to implement IT without doing lots of work or many changes to actual endings. So, who should have been the first to get to work on this : Bioware, or the IT workers?

Well said. I know Simon_says was working on coalescing all the most important information into a single document, but he hasn't been on for the past week or so. I would work on it myself, but I have been sick and quite swamped with freelance work, my job, and school.

[TJBartlemus]

Hrothdane wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

Codename_Code wrote...

If Bioware reveals IT, I would pay them another 60 bucks for their DLC. Awesome narrative deserves to be rewarded. If they dontreveal It I will be a poor and sad fan

Don't be sad, be creative! That's what Bioware was expecting from the very start of the whole "ranting on endings". They opened a thread specifically for that : "We are listening". There was an opportunity to suggest ideas that could be realistically "added" to the game from there. IT was born, but it somehow went too far and alienated itself the possibility of being rigged in any kind of DLC. Think about the sheer amount of "hints", good or bad, the "plot holes" that lead some here to lenghty speculative dissertations, schisms from mainstream IT, and lack of cohesion.

In order to make some kind of IT DLC, Bioware would have needed a little more "help" in making it "believable", but since so many refused the fan-fiction that IT became because of its unfocussed nature, and mostly because it would have forced Bioware to revisit the entire game in some way (starting with ME2's "Arrival"), tying all these "loose ends" into a single DLC would have been very difficult. Should IT be re-centered around fewer elements, and not implying the design of a completely "new" ending, it might stand a chance to be validated by Bioware in some way. As it stands now, there is still this unproductive "hope" that Bioware will deliver some additional "clues" to fill "gaps" in the IT, and it has been said on a few occasions here that it was not a good idea. The main reason for this is that Bioware might have been expecting exactly that from the IT thread : to give them some more serious "clues" on a way to implement IT without doing lots of work or many changes to actual endings. So, who should have been the first to get to work on this : Bioware, or the IT workers?

Well said. I know Simon_says was working on coalescing all the most important information into a single document, but he hasn't been on for the past week or so. I would work on it myself, but I have been sick and quite swamped with freelance work, my job, and school.

Is the document the same doc in the IT group that GethPrime was working on???  

PS. Why the thread so slow all of a sudden? Last couple days it seemed like it was going at hyperspace speed. Now...it's just too slow for my likings...