80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Restrider]

demersel wrote...

It's not totally random - the drell you rescue in LotSB really hates glyph cause he thinks that there is something about him that does not add up. (there are a lot of things he mentiones).

Glyph is the solely responsibly for finding the Crucible plans.

The whole -"Shadow Broker is a random dude" concept does not add up - in ME1 barla won tells you that the shadow broker was around for starting from times immemorable - and that his actions were always consistent with a single personality and goal. (which we know it can't be since Shadow Broker turned out ot be some random dude, who killed, some other random dude before him, with no agenda of his own). More over - the agenda of the shadow brooker, according to barla won - was to keep things at level - so no one would ever get the upper hand in the end - and he can not even inagine the way how shadow broker possibly menages to constantly do that.

What is the constantly present element, when shadow broker is some random dude, that kills some other random dude who was shadow broker before himher? Millenia old ship + helpful VI assistant.

THe ship is now destroyed, and the assistant is still present - Liara the new shadow broker says that the ship was not important - she took everything that was important with her and installed it on the normandy. Normandy - is the new shadow broker's ship now. But glyph is still present. And he will be still around if the normandy is destroyed and liara killled - he is the central part of liara's time capsules - I can bet, that whoever finds those - will become the new shadow broker for a new cycle.

And he doesn't have to be an A.I. He can even be a V.I. - and still menage all that.

It was a case in the court - it would hold.

If you put it this way, it sounds coherent, but I still feel that it is only a nice hypothesis. To call it a theory it still lacks evidence.
Still it is a neat train of thought you (I'm not knowing who exactly brought that up) have there.
Back to more calibrations (I am not kidding!).

[demersel]

Glyph is only thing in the normandy, that achknoledges your presence, and reacts to it, with out your input. He is the only thing on the normandy, and might be in the whole game, who says "Hello, commmander shepard", "Nice to see you". etc - without you interacting with it first. It's the only instance IN_GAME when such thing is directed to you personally, and not just some conversation which you happen to overhear. (And might I add that he is being snide, while doing it.)
And you say to me that he's just a mindless drone?
That NOTHING points to him being nto what he seems to be???

[demersel]

 Here is my original topic about glyph. 
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11342724 

note the date. 

[Restrider]

demersel wrote...

Glyph is only thing in the normandy, that achknoledges your presence, and reacts to it, with out your input. He is the only thing on the normandy, and might be in the whole game, who says "Hello, commmander shepard", "Nice to see you". etc - without you interacting with it first. It's the only instance IN_GAME when such thing is directed to you personally, and not just some conversation which you happen to overhear. (And might I add that he is being snide, while doing it.)
And you say to me that he's just a mindless drone?
That NOTHING points to him being nto what he seems to be???

You think he is being snide? That's subjective. I treat him as what I think he is, a (sometimes nagging) VI. That's the reason why Feron also hates Glyph, because it is just getting to his nerves. And it interacts directly with you, because it did that in ME 2. It is reasonable to assume that BW added that feature in ME 3 to have consistency. BTW, Kelly approached you too, telling that you have new messages/no new messages, when you were near your private terminal. I am not sure, if Traynor does that too, but maybe she is just too busy analyzing data.

[Rifneno]

There's so many ways that this game can play out... so many lives and their paths are in Shepard's hands. From the Council to entire races like the quarians & geth, so many things change upon your choices. Every squadmate from ME1&2 can die... except Liara. Liara is plot armored and no matter what you do, she WILL be with you in ME3 and she WILL be the Shadow Broker. Why is that? Why was it so integral to the plot that she becomes the SB when nothing has come of it?

Bonus points: remember how some characters say they feel like they're being watched when they're around Reaper tech? Signs of indoctrination and all that? Now... are we sure that "bug" with the monitors in Liara's office following Shepard's movement is really a bug? Cuz that sure looks like they're, you know, watching him.

[demersel]

Trainore and kelly do that only when there is new info. Glyph does that always.

He sometimes even gives you follow up comment, when you are leaving liara's office. 

Modifié par demersel, 06 septembre 2012 - 12:58 .

[demersel]

If i remember correctly - liara - is only Squad mate you have to recruit, and that cannot be killed at any point in the story. You can choose not recruit garrus and wrex in me1, You can even choose not ot take tali in ME1. But no matter what - you have to take liara. You can save here recruitment for even after virmire and do it last, but in this case she willl be a bit not-all-there, whhen you get her out (it is very funny).

Wrex can be killed in ME1

ME2
Garrus and Tali can be killed in ME2. as are all ME2 squad members.
Except Liara and Virmire surviver.

ME3
Again Tali can die.
Virmire surviver can be killed.

Liara can and Vega can die only if they are with you on the beam run and you have low ems.

Which tells me two things:
By the time of the beam run Liara has already fulfilled her plot armor role.

What happens if you shoot the kid with low ems, having liara killed in the beam run before that? what does the mesage say? Does it change? If it doesn't, how can she say the crucible didn't work? How can she even record the message in the first place?

[paxxton]

Someone suggested time ago that Harbinger might be controlling other Reapers. Leviathan DLC seems to bring evidence to support this claim. Harbinger is a Leviathan Reaper so he has the abilities and the mindset of Leviathans. Since other Reapers are created from lesser species it makes sense why would he control/indoctrinate/enthrall them.

Modifié par paxxton, 06 septembre 2012 - 01:26 .

[paxxton]

demersel wrote...

Trainore and kelly do that only when there is new info. Glyph does that always.

He sometimes even gives you follow up comment, when you are leaving liara's office. 

Have a pleasant day!

Modifié par paxxton, 06 septembre 2012 - 01:09 .

[demersel]

Not only that. ))

[Mindfane]

demersel wrote...

If i remember correctly - liara - is only Squad mate you have to recruit, and that cannot be killed at any point in the story. You can choose not recruit garrus and wrex in me1, You can even choose not ot take tali in ME1. But no matter what - you have to take liara. You can save here recruitment for even after virmire and do it last, but in this case she willl be a bit not-all-there, whhen you get her out (it is very funny).

Wrex can be killed in ME1

ME2
Garrus and Tali can be killed in ME2. as are all ME2 squad members.
Except Liara and Virmire surviver.

ME3
Again Tali can die.
Virmire surviver can be killed.

Liara can and Vega can die only if they are with you on the beam run and you have low ems.

Which tells me two things:
By the time of the beam run Liara has already fulfilled her plot armor role.

What happens if you shoot the kid with low ems, having liara killed in the beam run before that? what does the mesage say? Does it change? If it doesn't, how can she say the crucible didn't work? How can she even record the message in the first place?

The message was recorded sometime before. I think she comes to Shepard's cabin with this 'message VI' sometime in the game. So its more like 'If you see this, it means the crucible did not work....' kind of a message.

[demersel]

That is not what the message says.

[paxxton]

demersel wrote...

Not only that. ))

?

[demersel]

When liara comes into shepard's cabin - she only records a chapter that is about Shepard. not the ending message.

[demersel]

paxxton wrote...

demersel wrote...

Not only that. ))

?

"Take care, commander." )))
 and.
"Try to be carefull out there, commander."

Modifié par demersel, 06 septembre 2012 - 01:18 .

[RavenEyry]

demersel wrote...

If i remember correctly - liara - is only Squad mate you have to recruit, and that cannot be killed at any point in the story. You can choose not recruit garrus and wrex in me1, You can even choose not ot take tali in ME1. But no matter what - you have to take liara. You can save here recruitment for even after virmire and do it last, but in this case she willl be a bit not-all-there, whhen you get her out (it is very funny).

James as well. Though people suspect he's up to something as much as Liara.

[paxxton]

demersel wrote...

When liara comes into shepard's cabin - she only records a chapter that is about Shepard. not the ending message.

And what about it?

[paxxton]

demersel wrote...

paxxton wrote...

demersel wrote...

Not only that. ))

?

"Take care, commander." )))
 and.
"Try to be carefull out there, commander."

Considering there's a war raging on out there those remarks are understandable. Unless there's more to it than meets the ear.

Modifié par paxxton, 06 septembre 2012 - 01:36 .

[Restrider]

Liara cannot be killed and has to be recruited because she is integral to the plot (the melding sequences for example).
Her special/unkillable role in ME 2 / 3 compared to the roles of other beloved characters such as Garrus or Tali is an anomly, though. It has been discussed alot and usually been adressed as Liara being the "canon" LI. This explanation does not really convince me though.

Yes, the whole Glyph thing somehow is... odd. I am still not 100 % convinced (and I see the irony in it having Sparatus as my avatar, ).
BUT I will admit that the "Glyph" theory has more to it than mere speculation and is more fleshed out than I first thought. Still I would be surprised to see it announced.
Let me use an analogy with the movie Inception:
The literal view would be the state of being awake, the IT would be the first layer of dream and "Glyph" theory would be the second layer.

[D.Sharrah]

Glyphception?

[D.Sharrah]

Anyone else feel like there has been an explosion of indoctrination topics since Levithan? Are people finally starting to see the light?

[demersel]

not directly Mass Effect related, but still in the line of thought of current discussion -

There is a series of books, by a russian author Sergey Lukyanenko, called Night Watch.
There was even a movie made, and it was released in theaters in Europe and America...

Obviously - full spoilers ahead.


Anyway - in there it is about an invisible and eternal struggle of two groops of supernatural beings
and that there is a layer of existence, called Gloom. In concept - it is much like sauron vision from lord of the rings - everything loses colour, you see the true nature of things, you become invisible for those who are in real world, you can do *magic* etc. Those, whho can enter this layer of existence are called Others. There are lot's of lore that is very interesting in concept, but not really important - the thing is that there is a reveal at some point - that there is a second, even deeper layer of gloom, only the most owerfull get into. Also at that layer - there are some more colours, and you can meen some wandering souls in there - images of peaople long gone..etc.

There are more reveals as thee story goes on, like the one that the others are not really that powerfull, - in fact their level of life force is LOWER than normal, which allows them to syphon life force from other people. And thus the most powerfull Others are really more like black holes - points of nothingness that suck everything into them (powerwise).

Later it is revealed that there are more than two levels of thee gloom.

The final reveal, that our world, the one we think of as normal - is in fact the deepest level of the gloom.

My point is - this author is know for not doing anything truly original, but rather compiling lot's of good ideas present in fiction and sceince fiction. A bit like Mass Effect series borrows a lot of its elements, themes and ideas from sci-fi sources.

[Restrider]

D.Sharrah wrote...

Anyone else feel like there has been an explosion of indoctrination topics since Levithan? Are people finally starting to see the light?

Out of the gut I'd have to say: No.
Outside of the Mark III I still feel like being part of a minority. I just guess that the biggest part of haters left BSN. But there are still trolls frequently posting in the Mark III and in other posts IT is generally having negative connotations (like those who support IT being delusionals or worse...). I still don't get why there is so much hatred towards IT supporters or IT itself? Did I miss some flamewar or something?

[demersel]

Restrider wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Anyone else feel like there has been an explosion of indoctrination topics since Levithan? Are people finally starting to see the light?

Out of the gut I'd have to say: No.
Outside of the Mark III I still feel like being part of a minority. I just guess that the biggest part of haters left BSN. But there are still trolls frequently posting in the Mark III and in other posts IT is generally having negative connotations (like those who support IT being delusionals or worse...). I still don't get why there is so much hatred towards IT supporters or IT itself? Did I miss some flamewar or something?

No one likes smartasses. ))) 

[Restrider]

demersel wrote...

Restrider wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Anyone else feel like there has been an explosion of indoctrination topics since Levithan? Are people finally starting to see the light?

Out of the gut I'd have to say: No.
Outside of the Mark III I still feel like being part of a minority. I just guess that the biggest part of haters left BSN. But there are still trolls frequently posting in the Mark III and in other posts IT is generally having negative connotations (like those who support IT being delusionals or worse...). I still don't get why there is so much hatred towards IT supporters or IT itself? Did I miss some flamewar or something?

No one likes smartasses. ))) 

I see some of their points, such as "BW never inteded it" or "there will never be an IT revelation". But all that hatred...

Maybe what you said is the thing that explains it best. They were not able to interpret it by themselves (I wasn't, either. I just thought that the end is bizarre, unreal and there has to bemore... then I watched the documentaries) and feel stupid now. Otherwise... "haters gonna hate" is another good way to explain it.

Modifié par Restrider, 06 septembre 2012 - 03:39 .