319 réponses à ce sujet

[3DandBeyond]

First off this is all opinion and conjecture.

Short Version: DLC could be used to add to EMS, finish crucible, add dialogue to kid that makes Synthesis and Control worse choices.  Leviathan text indicates the devs started to already my Synthesis more the kid's choice.
Destroy could be more discriminate if the crucible is fixed, making it so it only targets the reapers.  Really low EMS already will destroy just about everything, higher EMS could save EDI and the Geth and maybe even Shepard.
------


My goal here is just to explore something I thought about in another thread.  I see it as a way to make an ME4 game, set after ME3 takes place, possible.  And a way to make DLC matter.

This involves the creation and use of a "better" Destroy and a more intact Crucible.

The Leviathan dialogue that has been found kind of indicates just how much the kid wants Shepard to choose Synthesis.  It kind of says he's all but telling Shepard to choose it.  This makes it more of a "reaper" choice and not so desirable.  It's like the DLC is telling you "don't choose this", but at this point it's still a bit subtle.

Right now I have 9000 EMS and when the kid describes destroy he says the crucible is mostly intact.  Destroy is also the only choice where the crucible is not very specific.  It seems to target everything and damages a lot while destroying things with less discrimination.  It also leaves us with a cliffhanger with high enough EMS.  With lower EMS we get the crucible in even worse shape, less discriminate and destroys just about everything.  This seems to leave open the possibility for EMS that improves the crucible.  In Leviathan there is also specific dialogue that says the geth will be destroyed-that's not in the game at the moment.  It's like it's starting to really define the worst and the best that the crucible can do.

It may be that with DLC will come a refinement of the choices.  Synthesis and Control might become less viable.  I dislike all choices equally so I'm not particularly biased against these except to say that a pristine Destroy choice would always have been canon.  It is very likely they decided for the game with no DLC that Destroy needed to be non-canon.  So the crucible isn't finished and Destroy had very dire consequences and meaning, including an ambiguous torso scene for Shepard.  Destroy was always what every sane person wanted to do.  The only ones that didn't were crazy or indoctrinated or reapers (and the kid). 

Higher EMS through DLC could finish the crucible and it might change what the kid says.  Leviathan DLC begins to close off Synthesis perhaps.  Omega might continue that and then start to close off Control.  Omega is where the Collectors started the plague and where the obsession with humans began to play out.  Omega DLC could answer what that was about and since the collectors were an attempt at synthesis (maybe the kid's first since creating reapers) and control, he might have new dialogue about both.  That dialogue might close off synthesis totally as something Shepard would choose and start to close off Control.

In the end this might lead to a fully workable Destroy choice.  Intact crucible that only targets reapers and paves the way for post-ME3 games.  I'm not saying games with Shepard in them (though they could decide they'd like that), but games that could reference Shepard's accomplishment and life or death (based on everything you did).

I know Omega is one of the inaccessible star systems at the end of ME3-ones that were never opened and there are 3 others.  One is presumably for Leviathan.  So, there could be at least 2 other DLCs that have been planned.  I think there are 4 inaccessible star systems.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 14 août 2012 - 12:51 .

[DWH1982]

I'd love to see a destroy ending that doesn't kill EDI and the geth. Frankly, it's what I wanted in the ending in the first place. There were plenty of sacrafices during the game. Just let me kill the d*mn Reapers and the d*mn Reapers only.

I don't think Bioware will do it, though. For some reason, it's not right for anyone to want a happy ending to be an option... 

Also, they pretty much said they're not making any more major changes to the endings. I would say that is that.

Modifié par DWH1982, 12 août 2012 - 03:53 .

[Baronesa]

DWH1982 wrote...

I'd love to see a destroy ending that doesn't kill EDI and the geth. Frankly, it's what I wanted in the ending in the first place. There were plenty of sacrafices during the game. Just let me kill the d*mn Reapers and the d*mn Reapers only.

I don't think Bioware will do it, though. For some reason, it's not right for anyone to want a happy ending to be an option... 

Also, they pretty much said they're not making any more major changes to the endings. I would say that is that.

Funny... this posts resumes my own thoughts .


If they would ever do that, they could improve reject as well, giving an option to win (Depending on your EMS, as it should have been), if we remember how the ACTUAL petitions for the reject ending went... (the results depending on EMS, not auto lose) even if that means heavier loses than any other ending, but doing so without using the Crucible. For some of us, rejecting the logic of the Catalyst as nonsensical is important. So no, it would not be a happier ending, it would probably imply YEARS of fighting, more sacrifice... or, an auto lose if your EMS are too low (keeping the same reject as it is now)

Also... Check the polls about the endings... so far Destroy is the most popular, adding to it won't change it... and despite all the rage and disdain shown... Reject is the second most popular ending, leaving Control and Synthesis almost at a tie.

Modifié par Baronesa, 12 août 2012 - 04:02 .

[DWH1982]

Ehhh, to be honest, I'm not sure I want to see a reject victory possible.

Ever since ME1, a big point has been how hard it is to stop the Reapers. Yeah, a small one was brought down by a thresher (which, as cool as it was, maybe wasn't the best idea for the game), but a more regular sized Reaper needed several shots from the combined quarian fleet to go down. During the battle for Earth, the fleets of the galaxy are facing at least hundreds of those things.

To me, a reject victory doesn't make a lot of sense. I hate the endings as they stand, but I always figured, starting with ME1, that we'd eventually need a super weapon of some sort. All I want is to be able to use that super weapon to kill the Reapers, without undoing everything I've done with EDI and the geth.

Modifié par DWH1982, 12 août 2012 - 04:05 .

[AresKeith]

Baronesa wrote...

DWH1982 wrote...

I'd love to see a destroy ending that doesn't kill EDI and the geth. Frankly, it's what I wanted in the ending in the first place. There were plenty of sacrafices during the game. Just let me kill the d*mn Reapers and the d*mn Reapers only.

I don't think Bioware will do it, though. For some reason, it's not right for anyone to want a happy ending to be an option... 

Also, they pretty much said they're not making any more major changes to the endings. I would say that is that.

Funny... this posts resumes my own thoughts .


If they would ever do that, they could improve reject as well, giving an option to win (Depending on your EMS, as it should have been), if we remember how the ACTUAL petitions for the reject ending went... (the results depending on EMS, not auto lose) even if that means heavier loses than any other ending, but doing so withouth using the Crucible. So no, it would not be a happier ending, it would probably iomply YEARS of fighting, more sacrifice... or, an auto lose if your EMS are too low (keeping the same reject as it is now)

exactly, I was assuming Bioware would make our War Assets actually mean something in the refuse option by basing it off our EMS cause I have over 10,000, but nope we got a middle finger because we didn't like Bioware's God-child and art.

I like this idea about Destroy, but I know EA/Bioware will pull something out their butts to make ME4

[DWH1982]

At this point, I rather hope there really isn't a ME4.

I'm saying this up front: If I find out that everyone in ME4 is synthasized, I will not be buying it.

[tyrvas]

I really really want this to happen.

[AlanC9]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Destroy was always what every sane person wanted to do.

I don't particularly mind you putting in a gratuitous insult towards everyone who disagrees with your ending choice -- including me, obviously --  but does this sort of thing actually help your argument?

As for the argument, you seem to have an implicit assumption that ME4 requires ME3 to have a single canon ending. If true, that really should be made explicit. I'm also unclear why having the geth around is a requirement for ME4. I get that it would make you happier about your preferred ending choice, of course.

[3DandBeyond]

You miss the point DWH1982. They wouldn't have to change it. They would merely polish it. They did in effect change what Synthesis is and what Control is and they said they wouldn't do that either.

But the coding could already exist just as dialogue keeps popping up for the next DLC when they release something. The EC contained Leviathan dialogue that does change the meaning of Synthesis and it also changes some of the meaning of the choices. It solidifies the kid's relationship to the reapers as well.

Again this is just conjecture and an idea. As it is they have no clear path forward to make any post ME3 game. They've said they aren't going to do that, but they've done things before that they said they weren't going to do.

[3DandBeyond]

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Destroy was always what every sane person wanted to do.

I don't particularly mind you putting in a gratuitous insult towards everyone who disagrees with your ending choice -- including me, obviously --  but does this sort of thing actually help your argument?

As for the argument, you seem to have an implicit assumption that ME4 requires ME3 to have a single canon ending. If true, that really should be made explicit. I'm also unclear why having the geth around is a requirement for ME4. I get that it would make you happier about your preferred ending choice, of course.

That was not a slam against real people at all.  You cut out my next sentence which specifically states I was talking about people in the game.  " Destroy was always what every sane person wanted to do.  The only ones
that didn't were crazy or indoctrinated or reapers (and the kid)."  I was not referring to real people at all and you know it.  Please apologize.


ME4 would have to work off of one ending or it would be one huge and very complicated game.  It's been stated all over the place here.  It would be impossible to make one game based on someone choosing control, someone choosing destroy, and someone else choosing synthesis and work all the dialogue and programming and modeling and graphics out.

I said this was my opinion.  But you have always stated you wanted the galaxy to be destroyed completely so why even enter into this discussion since your opinion is there could be no ME4 after ME3 takes place?

I am saying that for many people destroying the geth is objectionable.  It's wrong.  It's genocide.  And it most likely occurs because the crucible is not intact and is less discriminate.  Having the geth around is actually less cliche then having killer robots which is what the kid assumes they'd become.  Having them become a part of the galaxy would be an interesting story line and they'd be essential for rebuilding.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 12 août 2012 - 04:19 .

[3DandBeyond]

DWH1982 wrote...

At this point, I rather hope there really isn't a ME4.

I'm saying this up front: If I find out that everyone in ME4 is synthasized, I will not be buying it.

Ok my point is I don't think they are going for synthesis.  The leaked Leviathan text shows the kid all but forcing Shepard to choose it.  That's why I think they were starting to close it off as something Shepard would choose.  You still could choose it, but it sounds worse.

[Urdnot Amenark]

I'd love to see Reject improved via EMS. ME 4 will likely have a new threat from another galaxy, quite possibly, so I think there's still plenty of room for it to develop a good premise provided there's sufficient time. I think the destruction of synthetics in the Destroy ending is fitting though I dislike that element; then again, perhaps it could relate to a signal being broadcast that only Reapers and indoctrinated can react to that deactivates them, making it plausible for EDI and the Geth to survive.

[dreamgazer]

Sure, it could. Very easily, by leading to discoveries that make it so the Crucible can discriminate between the Reapers and other tech.

Could be pretty slick to pull the curtain back on that while learning about the origin of the Reapers, and whether the other choices have been unsuccessfully attempted before.

[Wayning_Star]

We cannot actually head canon the game as it's a given that the 'decision' is left up to the player, per se, the "synthesis" option is just that, an option. I've always tried to fathom from what the people of the Mass Effect universe would want or really need to survive, an attempt not including any old earth bias.

The primise being that organosynthetic life there is inevitible as the creation of the reaper threat. We don't know what mischeif is in store with Leviathan, I would guess a patent answer to the (5) riddles isn't one...

[3DandBeyond]

Urdnot Amenark wrote...

I'd love to see Reject improved via EMS. ME 4 will likely have a new threat from another galaxy, quite possibly, so I think there's still plenty of room for it to develop a good premise provided there's sufficient time. I think the destruction of synthetics in the Destroy ending is fitting though I dislike that element; then again, perhaps it could relate to a signal being broadcast that only Reapers and indoctrinated can react to that deactivates them, making it plausible for EDI and the Geth to survive.

That's the thing.  I think an intact crucible could hit on only reapers and not all synthetics.  Destroy is in some ways more viable than reject because in order for reject to be viable (understand I'd almost prefer it to be), it would require a real build up of actual fighting capabilities and retconning of a lot of dialogue in ME3.  Or Hackett would have to come out and say, "oops it was possible after all."

The problem with destroy as it is is the description is ambiguous.  All synthetics, even Shepard are targeted-well what does that mean for anyone with synthetic augmentation or Shepard?  Are those destroyed?  If so, Shepard should die and so should many many others.

And just what defines "synthetics"?  The kid doesn't say synthetic life.  Synthetic is anything not naturally occurring.  But it damages tech-well tech is synthetic.  So the description of destroy is crazy.

[Wayning_Star]

it's really 'big headed' of humans to consider, after not actually being there, to think that there is absolutely no possiblity that "life" cannot spring from purely synthetic origin..spontaniously. For all we actually know, it could actually exist somewhere out in the far reaches of the galaxy, or even right next door. We simply don't know, but yet assume that it is uncanny.

It's a matter of what came first the chicken or the pot to cook it in?

Edit: DLC..lol

http://www.cracked.c...ing-your-brain/

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 12 août 2012 - 04:55 .

[3DandBeyond]

Wayning_Star wrote...

We cannot actually head canon the game as it's a given that the 'decision' is left up to the player, per se, the "synthesis" option is just that, an option. I've always tried to fathom from what the people of the Mass Effect universe would want or really need to survive, an attempt not including any old earth bias.

The primise being that organosynthetic life there is inevitible as the creation of the reaper threat. We don't know what mischeif is in store with Leviathan, I would guess a patent answer to the (5) riddles isn't one...

Well head canon is exactly what Destroy's meaning is now.

And you missed the point that in Leviathan dialogue the kid is making synthesis sound worse.  He is telling Shepard (I don't have the exact words) that it is his best choice.  Not many people like the kid and really want to do what he wants, but I think they could make it sound even worse with further dialogue.  Synthesis can in no way be considered an inevitability by virtue of what it is.  A synthetic is something not naturally occurring.  By definition it cannot ever naturally just grow into organic material.  It would always have to be placed there purposely.  This alone shows the kid's ideas to be flawed.

I'm not saying this is what they will do, but am saying this is what they could do.  And since it appears the reapers were the kid's first attempt at synthesis as the solution and something his creators did not agree with, the Leviathan is likely to be very anti-synthesis.  Again, conjecture.

[3DandBeyond]

Wayning_Star wrote...

it's really 'big headed' of humans to consider, after not actually being there, to think that there is absolutely no possiblity that "life" cannot spring from purely synthetic origin..spontaniously. For all we actually know, it could actually exist somewhere out in the far reaches of the galaxy, or even right next door. We simply don't know, but yet assume that it is uncanny.

It's a matte of what came first the chicken or the pot to cook it in?

The very meaning of the word synthetic is artificial.  Tech that exists is created in a lab.  In other galaxies there maybe other origins of life and other material that forms life, but that isn't what is talked about here.  An AI is artificial.  The kid believes that artificial, not naturally occurring tech will spontaneously grow within organic material.  Well that's a contradiction in terms.  If he defined tech as something that was naturally occurring, then ok. 

I've actually always eschewed the idea that everything needs to be organic in the galaxy to be life.  I've wondered why life couldn't be silicon-based (silicate) or methane based or some other such.  And I've wondered why searches for life have always been based on the search for carbon and hydrogen and oxygen.

However, in ME they set up life as organic and synthetic.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 12 août 2012 - 05:01 .

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

We cannot actually head canon the game as it's a given that the 'decision' is left up to the player, per se, the "synthesis" option is just that, an option. I've always tried to fathom from what the people of the Mass Effect universe would want or really need to survive, an attempt not including any old earth bias.

The primise being that organosynthetic life there is inevitible as the creation of the reaper threat. We don't know what mischeif is in store with Leviathan, I would guess a patent answer to the (5) riddles isn't one...

Well head canon is exactly what Destroy's meaning is now.

And you missed the point that in Leviathan dialogue the kid is making synthesis sound worse.  He is telling Shepard (I don't have the exact words) that it is his best choice.  Not many people like the kid and really want to do what he wants, but I think they could make it sound even worse with further dialogue.  Synthesis can in no way be considered an inevitability by virtue of what it is.  A synthetic is something not naturally occurring.  By definition it cannot ever naturally just grow into organic material.  It would always have to be placed there purposely.  This alone shows the kid's ideas to be flawed.

I'm not saying this is what they will do, but am saying this is what they could do.  And since it appears the reapers were the kid's first attempt at synthesis as the solution and something his creators did not agree with, the Leviathan is likely to be very anti-synthesis.  Again, conjecture.

I figure that is the kids first response is control, that is make the creators in "its" chosen form, to control them and as well as synthetic life, as both are harvested for spare parts. It thinks like a machine. No clue as to what both parties are really interested in for a 'quality of life' realisation. It has no morals because it hasn't the need to justify not killing/maiming/ or otherwise consider what 'can go wrong' with spontainous organic life. Its "inhuman". Like the Geth immitate the Quarians, the catatalyst mimics its creators. The creators who're flawed by improper logic, made worse by an AI that couldn't make the changes work. So, the MEU asks Old Earthians for help..lol

[3DandBeyond]

Wayning_Star wrote...

I figure that is the kids first response is control, that is make the creators in "its" chosen form, to control them and as well as synthetic life, as both are harvested for spare parts. It thinks like a machine. No clue as to what both parties are really interested in for a 'quality of life' realisation. It has no morals because it hasn't the need to justify not killing/maiming/ or otherwise consider what 'can go wrong' with spontainous organic life. Its "inhuman". Like the Geth immitate the Quarians, the catatalyst mimics its creators. The creators who're flawed by improper logic, made worse by an AI that couldn't make the changes work. So, the MEU asks Old Earthians for help..lol

Well, that would mean he wants to give up control, when he says he's been trying for synthesis.  If he's been trying for synthesis and says it's about perfection, I think he wants synthesis and not to give someone else control.

He may indeed need to justify what he is doing because he attempts to justify it.

Anyway, this is getting off track I think.  I just think they are trying to make Synthesis less desirable.  If they wanted you to choose it and they know everyone mostly hates the kid, they wouldn't keep affirming that he really likes it.

[Baronesa]

Urdnot Amenark wrote...

I'd love to see Reject improved via EMS. ME 4 will likely have a new threat from another galaxy, quite possibly, so I think there's still plenty of room for it to develop a good premise provided there's sufficient time. I think the destruction of synthetics in the Destroy ending is fitting though I dislike that element; then again, perhaps it could relate to a signal being broadcast that only Reapers and indoctrinated can react to that deactivates them, making it plausible for EDI and the Geth to survive.

Personally... if there is a ME4... wouldn't it be more itneresting than rather than external force coming to gt us (no another yuuzhan vong debalce or tyranids, please) it focused more on political struggle among the different powers?

Rebuilding Batarians, almost extinct Elcor struggling to rebuild, the Terminus maybe having more power than before... the political backlash after the war is far more itneresting than an external uber enemy, imho

[AresKeith]

Baronesa wrote...

Urdnot Amenark wrote...

I'd love to see Reject improved via EMS. ME 4 will likely have a new threat from another galaxy, quite possibly, so I think there's still plenty of room for it to develop a good premise provided there's sufficient time. I think the destruction of synthetics in the Destroy ending is fitting though I dislike that element; then again, perhaps it could relate to a signal being broadcast that only Reapers and indoctrinated can react to that deactivates them, making it plausible for EDI and the Geth to survive.

Personally... if there is a ME4... wouldn't it be more itneresting than rather than external force coming to gt us (no another yuuzhan vong debalce or tyranids, please) it focused more on political struggle among the different powers?

Rebuilding Batarians, almost extinct Elcor struggling to rebuild, the Terminus maybe having more power than before... the political backlash after the war is far more itneresting than an external uber enemy, imho

Having a Civil War between Council Space and the Terminus System a few years after the Reaper Wars would be cool to see. But having a new race from a different Galaxy show us could be cool too.

I hope Bioware doesn't copy off of what Halo 4 is doing

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

I figure that is the kids first response is control, that is make the creators in "its" chosen form, to control them and as well as synthetic life, as both are harvested for spare parts. It thinks like a machine. No clue as to what both parties are really interested in for a 'quality of life' realisation. It has no morals because it hasn't the need to justify not killing/maiming/ or otherwise consider what 'can go wrong' with spontainous organic life. Its "inhuman". Like the Geth immitate the Quarians, the catatalyst mimics its creators. The creators who're flawed by improper logic, made worse by an AI that couldn't make the changes work. So, the MEU asks Old Earthians for help..lol

Well, that would mean he wants to give up control, when he says he's been trying for synthesis.  If he's been trying for synthesis and says it's about perfection, I think he wants synthesis and not to give someone else control.

He may indeed need to justify what he is doing because he attempts to justify it.

Anyway, this is getting off track I think.  I just think they are trying to make Synthesis less desirable.  If they wanted you to choose it and they know everyone mostly hates the kid, they wouldn't keep affirming that he really likes it.

Perfection? lol, that's a good one, but coming from such a young AI/sentient, I could understand the confusion. I don't believe the kid "likes" stuff, it has core programmings to obtain objectives. It's why the Reapers gives the military such a run for their money... but all in all its really the 'choices' given from the creator race, not the catalyst, it's merely a 'functional', a tool as it were. The missed point being that becoming a reaper NEVER was sythesis, or even an attempt at it. Players who think that haven't analyzed the proposition enough. WE have to think along the lines of 'creator' and 'created' and what that consists of, what is SO important about being 'first' in such creation. What, reallly IS the difference between "life", not sythetic vs organic. That is a "hang up".

 That I think is where Leviathan is heading, but that is just a head canon.
 
I don't think "they" as being evil Devs, I say no, they are not pushing anyone toward any decisions at all. It's totally up to the player/advisors from Old Earth to decide. There is a limit tho, as to how the game can propose the myrid assortment of choices relating to the observational perceptions of countless players, so they did generalize..excessively,considering the 'heavy' princibles they provide, but not the needed mechanics to evaluate the premise. It's a "bite off and chew" thing..imho

good luck, and thanks for all them fish!! heheh (ie, no 'best' answer to the problems, so run like hell, as it were, typical human consideration?)

[MattFini]

If each DLC adds a little more context to the ending then I wish BioWare had just said so at the very beginning.

Because this would be a VERY ambitious undertaking - and I would've been happy to take more of a "wait and see" stance back in March, rather than watching that piece of crap ending in disbelief.

[SpamBot2000]

Yeah... but it would still mean a billion years of galactic history as "yo dawg..."

I find idiocy on such a scale very hard to take. Like "upping my fluoxetin dose" hard. I guess most people just ignore stuff like that. I wish I could.