285 réponses à ce sujet

[r3apz515]

Gruntburner wrote...

sheppard7 wrote...

Vizard355 wrote...

The PTSD would have been better used after shepard died in ME2 or the Virmire choice in ME.

Yep. Doing it so late makes it a laughable plot hole.

Not a plot hole, as it has no relation to plot whatsoever.  It is an inconsistency of character at worst.  Plus, PTSD doesn't always strike after a traumatic event.  Often it takes years to manifest or multiple straining events.

well said. I have PTSD personally, but it manifested 2 years after the events. Same with Shepard.

Also remember how Legion had to provide a "visual" of his world (geth server) to shepard, maybe the Catalyst or starchild had to the same since Shepard was the FIRST organic to ever reach him. Starchild not necessarly his true form, we do not know how far the civilization that created him went, they did have more tech, thats clear, so there.

[Mysten]

CoolioThane wrote...

It's a cool interpretation! So what in your eyes is the catalyst, exactly? An AI that can enter the mind? 

The Catalyst says as much. When Shepard asks, "so you're just an AI?" the Catalyst retorts, "yes, in as much as you are just an animal." When it introduces itself it also mentions that the citadel is "a part of [it]", not an AI that resides within the citadel but an entitiy that regards an enormous space station as simply an extension of itself.

Reaper technology can go so far as to implant false memories in organic minds (and not entirely false memories either, but legitimate memories from someone else's mind), so it's not a long stretch of the imagination to believe the Catalyst is capable of reaching into Shepard's mind and picking an avatar that is significant and above all else sympathetic.

[CoolioThane]

Han Shot First wrote...

Norrax wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

The same Shepard who A. watched his entire unit get destroyed by giant space worms, B. butchered the slaver moon of Torfan with little regard for casualties or C. who killed wave after wave after wave of batarians on Elysium trying to defend the colony.
What about Jenkins? What about Kaidan? No PTSD after any of that?

But on noes a random kid who refused your help dies! You now have PTSD!

this

I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but I suppose that is what happens when people post without reading the thread. PTSD doesn't work that way.

The more someone is exposed to traumatic events the greater their risk factor in experiencing symptoms of PTSD. And the event that is the trigger doesn't necessarily have to be the most traumatic event a person has experienced. The fall of Earth could very well have been the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back for Shepard.

Do you even know what PTSD is?
Nightmares =/= PTSD

Incorrect.

Nightmares and sleeplessness are two of the symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, and they are two symtpoms that Shepard experiences.

The kid in Vancouver, imo, is not real, and a Reaper projection

The kid in Vancouver was real.

The evidence for that is that he looks like a real person, while the Star Child just looks like a VI projection. If the kid in Vancouver had just been a Reaper mind f--k, the Star Child would have looked like a real child as well rather than a VI imitation of one.

Also the child was supposed to represent the faceless millions that Shepard had failed to save on Earth. His presence in the dream sequences were a projection of Shepard's survivor's guilt, rather than a symptom of Reaper indoc.

No, the kid is not real in my opinion. No way he should survive all that happened before you speak to him, nor should a real kid disappear in the blink of an eye at the same time a reaper growl is heard.

[CoolioThane]

Mysten wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

It's a cool interpretation! So what in your eyes is the catalyst, exactly? An AI that can enter the mind? 

The Catalyst says as much. When Shepard asks, "so you're just an AI?" the Catalyst retorts, "yes, in as much as you are just an animal." When it introduces itself it also mentions that the citadel is "a part of [it]", not an AI that resides within the citadel but an entitiy that regards an enormous space station as simply an extension of itself.

Reaper technology can go so far as to implant false memories in organic minds (and not entirely false memories either, but legitimate memories from someone else's mind), so it's not a long stretch of the imagination to believe the Catalyst is capable of reaching into Shepard's mind and picking an avatar that is significant and above all else sympathetic.

I'd argue the kid would be the worst form it could choose. Shepard's having nightmares about this kid, seeing it burn every time he/she sleeps. You'd be ****ting bricks if it appeared at the apex of the journey ?

[drak4806.2]

Some poeple are just immune to PTSD as explianed in this article.

http://www.torontosu...1/14354816.html

Is that unreasonble to say that some Shepards might be immune?

Anyway would it been so hard for Bioware to not make the stupid dream squences and instead through optional dialog establish that Shepard was going through something?

[halbert986]

Psych 101 doesn't qualify you to diagnose PTSD.... I have trouble sleeping, I don't have PTSD.

That asari in the hospital had it. Just because shepard has a dream doesn't mean he's got PTSD. I believe the thought they were trying to convey was people are dying by the millions every day. As time goes by the number of shadows in your dreams increase. Everything depends on shepard, it's high stress not PTSD. Seeing a kid get smoked is a drop in the bucket.

Now watching the crew from ME2 melt in front of your eyes on the other hand...

And the kid can still be a metaphor within the confines of IT. The reapers aren't stupid, of course they'd pick a sympathetic face to haunt shepard with. Having that kid represent the millions upon millions shepard couldn't save is brilliant.

[knightnblu]

First, I don't agree that Shepard has PTSD. He has nightmares. Combat takes an emotional toll on you. You see things that most people don't, there are damned few that understand the experiences that you have been through, and you want to shelter the people that you love from those things so you usually don't speak of it. It is the not speaking about it part that eats you up inside when you have had to do ugly things.
 
Shepard is lucky. He has an LI that has been through his particular brand of hell in Williams. But when he needs her the most she tells him that he shouldn't go through the loss of Thessia alone and should talk to someone about it. For a minute there, I thought W.T.F.? But writers are civilians after all and their experience with combat, killing, and watching people die in agony is usually very limited. In short, they don't know any better.
 
So Shepard is impacted by his experiences. He is tired, he has nightmares, he has been under the microscope for killing 300K innocents, and until the Reapers showed up in force most people thought of him as nothing more than a crazed alarmist. Watching the kid die that he couldn't save was the straw that broke the camel's back and it stuck with him as a representation of what he has lost and is yet to lose. But that isn't PTSD.
 
I also disagree with you regarding the glorification of war. All too often we are told that violence is not the answer. In fact, we have been told it so much that we now believe that violence is never the answer and that just isn't true. There are heroes in war and they should be celebrated.
 
Of those who participate in combat there are those who demonstrate incredible valor, honor, and loyalty to their fellow soldiers. If you have a problem with the cause of conflict then take it up with a politician because soldiers don't get a say in where they are deployed or why. That is left up to the people who pass the laws and veto them. When the soldier is ordered to go into combat, he goes. Simple as that.
 
By not honoring the sacrifices, acts of valor, and the honor of these people under the banner of "not glorifying war" you do a disservice to the people who fought and died to protect and defend the nation. Was World War II a war not worth fighting? You mentioned Audie Murphy, so I presume that you are aware of the history of that war. Did not the men who fought that war for the Allies deserve to be honored for their actions in securing victory? If you have ever saw the movie Saving Private Ryan, you saw what it was like wading ashore at Normandy. Should the doctrine of not glorifying war prevent those men from being honored by the people back home or remembered with honor?
 
War is at best a necessary evil and at worst an adventure designed to kill the young. But that statement speaks to causation, which resides with the legislature or the executive branches of governments and has absolutely no bearing upon those called up for service. The men of the Light Brigade live on in honor because they followed orders that they knew would likely result in their deaths. The same can be said of the men who died at Gallipoli to follow a pointless order. While the General officers of both actions were roundly criticized for those orders, the men were celebrated for doing their duty despite knowing the likely outcome of death beforehand.
 
The same could be said of the Vietnam war. The government sent men into that conflict and then abandoned them there because they played at war rather than fought a war. The public's interest in the war faded as the years marched by and the men who returned home were not honored with celebratory parades, but viewed as pariahs and baby killers. The same society that sent them into combat now reviled them for performing their duties as soldiers. If you wore a military uniform you marked yourself as a target on the streets. That was the true cause of many cases of Vietnam era PTSD and was the atmosphere from which the phrase "not glorifying war" truly got its meaning. The phrase "not glorifying war" was as hostile to soldiers then as it is today. In other words, it means that there is no such thing as a war hero.
 
I beg to differ and if you are aware of Audie Murphy then you know that of which I speak.
 

[Mysten]

CoolioThane wrote...

I'd argue the kid would be the worst form it could choose. Shepard's having nightmares about this kid, seeing it burn every time he/she sleeps. You'd be ****ting bricks if it appeared at the apex of the journey ?

A child is the personification of innocence and are considered too young to be able to capable of deception making them trustworthy. That's a useful form to take if you're trying to convince someone who has regarded you as a merciless slaughterer of entire galactic civilisations until now to work with you. Additionally, the child is further a personification of the loss of innocent life in the war in Shepard's mind so any message of "you can make the senseless killing of innocents end" is going to have more impact.

[SP2219]

 The PTSD dreams would have made far more sense if they had been about Virmire and Shepard dying in ME2.

They're not.  they're of a boy we barely know, and whose dialogue in the entire trilogy spans 2 lines.

But I am glad we got confirmation that Shepard actually has the capacity to experience emotion.  Cause I was worried he could have been, you know, a psychopath.

[CoolioThane]

Mysten wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

I'd argue the kid would be the worst form it could choose. Shepard's having nightmares about this kid, seeing it burn every time he/she sleeps. You'd be ****ting bricks if it appeared at the apex of the journey ?

A child is the personification of innocence and are considered too young to be able to capable of deception making them trustworthy. That's a useful form to take if you're trying to convince someone who has regarded you as a merciless slaughterer of entire galactic civilisations until now to work with you. Additionally, the child is further a personification of the loss of innocent life in the war in Shepard's mind so any message of "you can make the senseless killing of innocents end" is going to have more impact.

I'd also argue kids lie a hell of a lot  No way I agree with you!

[D24O]

Mysten wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

I'd argue the kid would be the worst form it could choose. Shepard's having nightmares about this kid, seeing it burn every time he/she sleeps. You'd be ****ting bricks if it appeared at the apex of the journey ?

A child is the personification of innocence and are considered too young to be able to capable of deception making them trustworthy. That's a useful form to take if you're trying to convince someone who has regarded you as a merciless slaughterer of entire galactic civilisations until now to work with you. Additionally, the child is further a personification of the loss of innocent life in the war in Shepard's mind so any message of "you can make the senseless killing of innocents end" is going to have more impact.

That kid was like 10, plenty old enough to lie. If they were trying to make the reapers seem innocnet, it sure as hell didn't work for me. 

[Han Shot First]

drak4806.2 wrote...

Some poeple are just immune to PTSD as explianed in this article.

http://www.torontosu...1/14354816.html

Is that unreasonble to say that some Shepards might be immune?

Anyway would it been so hard for Bioware to not make the stupid dream squences and instead through optional dialog establish that Shepard was going through something?

The author is incorrect in stating that some people are seemingly immune to PTSD.

Every human (except for perhaps sociopaths and psychopaths) has a breaking point, the threshhold just differs from person to person. Also a high percentage of those medal recipients he is referring to, did in fact suffer from PTSD. Medal of Honor and Victoria Cross recipients are no less prone to it than other soldiers or Marines.

By not honoring the sacrifices, acts of valor, and the honor of these people under the banner of "not glorifying war" you do a disservice to the people who fought and died to protect and defend the nation. Was World War II a war not worth fighting? You mentioned Audie Murphy, so I presume that you are aware of the history of that war. Did not the men who fought that war for the Allies deserve to be honored for their actions in securing victory? If you have ever saw the movie Saving Private Ryan, you saw what it was like wading ashore at Normandy. Should the doctrine of not glorifying war prevent those men from being honored by the people back home or remembered with honor?

I think you misunderstood my post.

Not glorifying war isn't the same as not honoring the men who fought in it. When you glorify war you romanticize it, and paint an idealized picture of it that is divorced from the brutal reality on the ground. By whitewashing the experience you do a disservice to the men who actually suffered and fought and died in it.

[Gibril]

I should point this out, I just thought of it,
Like I said in my earlier post, my Headcanon shep is Colonist, War hero, etc.
As a colonist, my shep would've seen the batarians do horrible things to everyone, from kids to adults.
Not a single bit of PTSD is shown, although if he had it, it was fixed by the beginning of ME1. Long before it infact.
If there's one thing I know, it's that bioware wants us to use more headcanon than canon. My shep doesn't care about a little kid. Legitimately, after mindoir, he hates them. That scene were the cata-kid dies was just a replay of what happened so many times on mindoir. He's not upset that he couldn't save a kid too dumb to follow a soldier, but he is upset he couldn't save Kaidan, or legion, or mordin for that matter. Any one of those character would be better replacements, since they were all good friends, people I cared for. Seeing a little kid die over and over in the nightmare, a little kid my shep obviously had no feelings for, is gonna do nothing for him. But watching thane, or mordin, or kaidan, or even legion get roasted, that would be severe mental scarring for him.

[Binary_Helix 1]

It was a pretentious attempt to push a political agenda and I found it offensive. Gaming has risen to heights totally unimaginable 15 years ago in large part because it caters to men. Like it or not that means fighting, shooting, adventure, exploration, and conquest. Watering that down with the same crap men fled from in other mediums will kill the golden goose.

Modifié par Binary_Helix 1, 19 août 2012 - 02:15 .

[Xellith]

Everyones shepard was suppost to be UNIQUE. Railroading EVERY shepard into someone with PTSD is ridiculous. ESPECIALLY for renegade sheps.

Im sorry but I cared more about rewriting the geth or not than I did about those who died in the war.

And thats the point. I as a human being am being told "this is what you are feeling. People are dying. Now you are in pain and upset over this" and Im just sitting there saying "no I really dont care. Especially about humans. They can all go to hell".

Adding those dream sequences was just contrived. It wasnt brave. It wasnt smart. It wasnt anything short of contrived and painfully stupid to watch and endure.

Modifié par Xellith, 19 août 2012 - 01:29 .

[Conniving_Eagle]

Sole Survivor...

[Tipsyfresh]

TookYoCookies wrote...

PTSD causes you to have nightmares about little boys?

Ugh.  

Good post OP, at first I was like here comes some wierd "video game is just like real life crap". But no sir, I'm impressed and I like that perspective about the Shepard not being immune to psych issues. Bioware did pull that off really well.

Though I'm not sure the war itself was going on before ME3 but shepard had been through the fire by then for sure.

[samb]

 Okay I dusted off my DSM and it seems Shep doesn't have PTSD. First, the symptoms must cause significant distress and impairment. Shep seems to be doing okay, still kicking ass. Second, the symptoms have to persist for over 1 month. Time can be funny in a universe that has FTL travel, but I think it is safe to assume one month hasn't passed. 

At most he has acute stress disorder. Or "baby PTSD". Or the kid in her/his dreams is just symbolic of the people he couldn't save. 

[Sajuro]

OP, when I saw this title, I thought you were about to say the ME3 endings gave you ptsd and I would admit that I would have wanted to hit you with a cudgel over the internet if you did. But you make a very good point through your posts and I have read through the thread because of it. I know this isn't the same thing as the veterans who posted here, and I don't want to diminish them. But I found the child sympathetic and I can buy the PTSD theory because when I was 18, a cat that we had for about 12 years was attacked by a dog in the middle of the night and I held him in my lap as we drove to Anderson (long drive) to get to the nearest emergency vet and I still remember not being able to tell whether he was breathing about halfway there or if it was just the car bumping up and down on the road and I was imagining it. He died before we got to the vet and the only way I could 'recover' (not cry when I think about him) from it was to talk about it in papers I wrote for school in college (when it was applicable) and talk about it to my friends.
I'm glad ME3 gave Shepard some emotional depth beyond "Lets do this guys" and joking about sex with Garrus. LoTSB was the first time I saw the opportunity to really emote as Shepard beyond being stoic and I think Bioware did it well in ME3

[Blueprotoss]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

The same Shepard who A. watched his entire unit get destroyed by giant space worms, B. butchered the slaver moon of Torfan with little regard for casualties or C. who killed wave after wave after wave of batarians on Elysium trying to defend the colony.
What about Jenkins? What about Kaidan? No PTSD after any of that?

But on noes a random kid who refused your help dies! You now have PTSD!

Civilian deaths will mess up you more then seeing you're comrade being killed.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 19 août 2012 - 02:02 .

[M920CAIN]

Those dream were not shell shock induced. They were BWST (Bad Writing Stress Syndrome) induced.

[sheppard7]

r3apz515 wrote...

Gruntburner wrote...

sheppard7 wrote...

Vizard355 wrote...

The PTSD would have been better used after shepard died in ME2 or the Virmire choice in ME.

Yep. Doing it so late makes it a laughable plot hole.

Not a plot hole, as it has no relation to plot whatsoever.  It is an inconsistency of character at worst.  Plus, PTSD doesn't always strike after a traumatic event.  Often it takes years to manifest or multiple straining events.

well said. I have PTSD personally, but it manifested 2 years after the events. Same with Shepard.

Also remember how Legion had to provide a "visual" of his world (geth server) to shepard, maybe the Catalyst or starchild had to the same since Shepard was the FIRST organic to ever reach him. Starchild not necessarly his true form, we do not know how far the civilization that created him went, they did have more tech, thats clear, so there.

Are you a colonist/sole survivor? That decision way back in ME1 makes Shep have to deal with people dying around him/her since being a kid. So suddenly that Shep is having nightmares about a little kid he/she never met before? Or even spoke to? Colonist/sole survivor Shep has had family and squadron die around him/her but a stranger hits that hard? 

DOUBT IT

[Blueprotoss]

M920CAIN wrote...

Those dream were not shell shock induced. They were BWST (Bad Writing Stress Syndrome) induced.

Why didn't this happen to ME2?

[sheppard7]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

The same Shepard who A. watched his entire unit get destroyed by giant space worms, B. butchered the slaver moon of Torfan with little regard for casualties or C. who killed wave after wave after wave of batarians on Elysium trying to defend the colony.
What about Jenkins? What about Kaidan? No PTSD after any of that?

But on noes a random kid who refused your help dies! You now have PTSD!

Civilian deaths will mess up you more then seeing you're comrade being killed.

Colonist origin says hello.

[Binary_Helix 1]

M920CAIN wrote...

Those dream were not shell shock induced. They were BWST (Bad Writing Stress Syndrome) induced.

LOL