432 réponses à ce sujet

[N7Gold]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

OP, I just remembered another quote that supports your theory, at the end of the Leviathan DLC when Shepard is speaking to Hackett.
Hackett: "This is a big step in the right direction, Shepard. Good work."

What do you think it is referring to? I'm not sure what you mean. =)

Possibly how learning the history of the Reapers takes us a few steps closer to truly "breaching the darkness", finishing the ME3's puzzle that will possibly give us the ending that is NOT an "illusion".

Could be! Who knows what role Leviathan may play eventually... =)

I assume Leviathan and his race will become the next threat after the Reapers in the next Mass Effect trilogy if it will be a sequel trilogy. Leviathan's ancestors ruled the galaxy with an iron fist many eons before the Reapers existed. If the next trilogy is a sequel,  if the next trilogy is set 6 or 7 centuries or more after the first ME trilogy, and when Leviathan's kind are done repopulating, they'll most likely reassert their dominance over "lesser" races by using their mind controlling abilities to enslave them, now that the Reapers' harvesting cycle has been stopped.

Also, Leviathan's kind are rumored to be MUCH more powerful than Reapers are, hence the dead Reaper known as the "Leviathan of Dis" that the batarian hedgemony found 20 years before ME3. Do you remember what Harbinger says while Shepard and his squad run to the Normandy after defeating the Human Reaper in ME2?

"Human, you've changed nothing. Your species has the attention of those who are infinitely greater. That which you know as Reapers are your salvation through destruction."


And in the Leviathan DLC, Leviathan says this:

"I have witnessed your actions in this cycle: the destruction of Soveriegn, the fall of the Collectors. The Reapers precieve you as a threat. And I must understand why."

This can't be coincidence, right?

Modifié par N7Gold, 16 décembre 2012 - 05:18 .

[ategio]

so tell me, who finished his/her first playthrough thinking: "yea hes indoctrinated, almost got me BW". i think im part of the vast majority when i admit: i sure dont. stumbled upon IT by accident nerdraging about the ending.
Indoctrination is a significant part of the mass effect universe but this is not something BW chose to have a huge impact on shepard in the end. Its more likely BW wanted to give Shep more character depth that way by showing self-doubt for one.
And again: The continual dumbing down of dialogue/characters/story just makes it hard for me to believe theres going to be something so revolutionary after ME3 got obviously rushed through.
If IT had never been developed by a handful of fans ME4 would be even more abstract to all new comers not to mention how to connect ME3 to ME4.

I hope im wrong but i just dont see BW pulling that off.

[GethPrimeMKII]

ategio wrote...

so tell me, who finished his/her first playthrough thinking: "yea hes indoctrinated, almost got me BW". i think im part of the vast majority when i admit: i sure dont. stumbled upon IT by accident nerdraging about the ending.
Indoctrination is a significant part of the mass effect universe but this is not something BW chose to have a huge impact on shepard in the end. Its more likely BW wanted to give Shep more character depth that way by showing self-doubt for one.
And again: The continual dumbing down of dialogue/characters/story just makes it hard for me to believe theres going to be something so revolutionary after ME3 got obviously rushed through.
If IT had never been developed by a handful of fans ME4 would be even more abstract to all new comers not to mention how to connect ME3 to ME4.

I hope im wrong but i just dont see BW pulling that off.

Exactly how have dialogue, story and characters been dumbed down? Why would the writers not choose to have the most important aspect of the story impact Shepard at some point in the story?

I just find it annoying when people speak of Bioware's supposedly poor intentions as if they are part of their writting staff. A quick look at many of their previous games show that they've pulled off mind-screw endings like this before,where they successfully trick many players into being defeated by the enemy by believing a false reality.

[Falaxe]

If it`s too good to be true, it isn`t.

[ategio]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

ategio wrote...

so tell me, who finished his/her first playthrough thinking: "yea hes indoctrinated, almost got me BW". i think im part of the vast majority when i admit: i sure dont. stumbled upon IT by accident nerdraging about the ending.
Indoctrination is a significant part of the mass effect universe but this is not something BW chose to have a huge impact on shepard in the end. Its more likely BW wanted to give Shep more character depth that way by showing self-doubt for one.
And again: The continual dumbing down of dialogue/characters/story just makes it hard for me to believe theres going to be something so revolutionary after ME3 got obviously rushed through.
If IT had never been developed by a handful of fans ME4 would be even more abstract to all new comers not to mention how to connect ME3 to ME4.

I hope im wrong but i just dont see BW pulling that off.

Exactly how have dialogue, story and characters been dumbed down? Why would the writers not choose to have the most important aspect of the story impact Shepard at some point in the story?

I just find it annoying when people speak of Bioware's supposedly poor intentions as if they are part of their writting staff. A quick look at many of their previous games show that they've pulled off mind-screw endings like this before,where they successfully trick many players into being defeated by the enemy by believing a false reality.

really? social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/15299168
           social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/15283203

just on the first site cause im tired as hell

and im not saying that they have bad intentions (of course i could because they misled people countless times on ME3) im saying they stopped trying in the middle of the process.
i like BW but its irrational to believe that 9 month after release theyre revamping the whole ending after a good bulk of the playerbase stopped caring. they reluctantly admitted their mistake and polished the turd somewhat with the EC and now they are coming out of the closet, 9 month later declaring "surprise, its all a joke"? 

[GethPrimeMKII]

 

ategio wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

ategio wrote...



so tell me, who finished his/her first
playthrough thinking: "yea hes indoctrinated, almost got me BW". i
think im part of the vast majority when i admit: i sure dont. stumbled upon IT
by accident nerdraging about the ending. 

Indoctrination is a significant part of the mass
effect universe but this is not something BW chose to have a huge impact on
shepard in the end. Its more likely BW wanted to give Shep more character depth
that way by showing self-doubt for one.

And again: The continual dumbing down of
dialogue/characters/story just makes it hard for me to believe theres going to
be something so revolutionary after ME3 got obviously rushed through. 

If IT had never been developed by a handful of
fans ME4 would be even more abstract to all new comers not to mention how to
connect ME3 to ME4.



I hope im wrong but i just dont see BW pulling
that off.

Exactly how have dialogue, story and characters
been dumbed down? Why would the writers not choose to have the most important
aspect of the story impact Shepard at some point in the story?



I just find it annoying when people speak of
Bioware's supposedly poor intentions as if they are part of their writting
staff. A quick look at many of their previous games show that they've pulled
off mind-screw endings like this before,where they successfully trick many
players into being defeated by the enemy by believing a false reality.

really? social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/15299168

         
 social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/15283203



just on the first site cause im tired as hell



and im not saying that they have bad intentions
(of course i could because they misled people countless times on ME3) im saying
they stopped trying in the middle of the process.

i like BW but its irrational to believe that 9
month after release theyre revamping the whole ending after a good bulk of the
playerbase stopped caring. they reluctantly admitted their mistake and polished
the turd somewhat with the EC and now they are coming out of the closet, 9
month later declaring "surprise, its all a joke"? 

Really? Thats your evidence? I had a good idea
what links you'd post, I just hoped you'd surprise me with something more
interesting to look at than yet more ignorant fan rage. I stopped reading the
second link when the idiotic thread starter asked "who the hell is James
Vega?". 



Everyone is entitled to their own opinion so
long as one isnt spewing a bunch of ignorance and crap. As far as your
arguement that ME3 is a dumbed down product, you couldnt be more wrong. I'd
argue that there are just as many, if not more, clues and forehadowing that can
be picked up from the characters and the dialogue as the previous two games. 



Ambient dialogue plays a much greater roll in
ME3 than it does in the previous two games. They make up a good chunk of the
foreshadowing evidence Doomsday has been presenting. Many pieces of important information can also be gleaned from ambient dialogue. So you will have to be paying attention to far more than just cut scenes and dialogue options to understand ME. Oh and don't forget the codex. That too is crucial to understanding Mass Effect, yet it often gets ignored by many players.

[ategio]

haven´t seen any evidence for the contrary either. look im not going into nerdwars with you. take an honest look @ the game the prologue and the obvious jersy shorification. ambient dialogue?foreshadowing what? IT isnt even canon and got denied time and again by the devs. but if its not really happening in the end then there is no foreshadowing but more likely a specific atmospheric setup. i wish IT was true but it got obviously scrapped which makes all the metaphors and foreshadowings meaningless. or at least we cant be sure.

[GethPrimeMKII]

ategio wrote...

haven´t seen any evidence for the contrary either. look im not going into nerdwars with you. take an honest look @ the game the prologue and the obvious jersy shorification. ambient dialogue?foreshadowing what? IT isnt even canon and got denied time and again by the devs. but if its not really happening in the end then there is no foreshadowing but more likely a specific atmospheric setup. i wish IT was true but it got obviously scrapped which makes all the metaphors and foreshadowings meaningless. or at least we cant be sure.

I stopped reading at "denied by the devs". They haven't confirmed nor denied anything regarding the theory. This is the kind ignorance and crap I'm talking about. 

[Ithurael]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...

ategio wrote...

haven´t seen any evidence for the contrary either. look im not going into nerdwars with you. take an honest look @ the game the prologue and the obvious jersy shorification. ambient dialogue?foreshadowing what? IT isnt even canon and got denied time and again by the devs. but if its not really happening in the end then there is no foreshadowing but more likely a specific atmospheric setup. i wish IT was true but it got obviously scrapped which makes all the metaphors and foreshadowings meaningless. or at least we cant be sure.

I stopped reading at "denied by the devs". They haven't confirmed nor denied anything regarding the theory. This is the kind ignorance and crap I'm talking about. 

Anytime Bioware says anything plot or lore related people freak out and says "bioware lies lol"

Priestly stated IT is a valid interpretation of the ending
Merizan stated that if your version of IT requres more content that is not the interpretation of bioware
Both have said that ME3 is the end of shepard and there is no more Ending DLC planned.

You can say they were lying or telling the truth. But, in the end, it is either one or the other.

[DoomsdayDevice]

ategio wrote...

so tell me, who finished his/her first playthrough thinking: "yea hes indoctrinated, almost got me BW". i think im part of the vast majority when i admit: i sure dont. stumbled upon IT by accident nerdraging about the ending.

No, sorry, I 'got it' on my first playthrough.

I didn't trust the "catalyst".

For one, he appeared as the child back on Earth, the one I had been having nightmares about the entire time. Alarm bells were going off all over the place for me.

Then when he told me I could control the Reapers, I just laughed out loud. After that whole thing with convincing TIM that he was indoctrinated, offering Shepard that option was just obviously a trap to me.

I didn't know what to think of synthesis, it just sounded completely absurd (machines have DNA now?), and it was way too much of a gamble for me to even seriously consider.

I picked destroy, because I didn't trust the other options. It was also obviously the choice the "catalyst" didn't want me to make, so it was relatively easy. Especially because all your friends and allies keep telling you the entire game long that you should be unwavering, stay on target, do what you came to do, there is only one way to defeat the Reapers, etcetera.

So yeah, even on my first playthrough I felt like the ending was some kind of attempt to talk me into suicide.

Then after I finished it, I realized synthesis was exactly the concept Saren (another indoctrinated villain) had been advocating.

Then seeing the breath scene made me question whether I had actually been on the Citadel at all.

So no, I didn't need the internet to tell me about this theory, I figured it out pretty quickly, and IMO Bioware absolutely intended for players to ask themselves all these questions.

And when Leviathan came out, and it was established that Shepard's memories can be used to construct elaborate illusions, that pretty much sealed the deal to me. It is beyond me how people can play that DLC and only take away from it that the AI was foreshadowed.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 17 décembre 2012 - 04:38 .

[Wayning_Star]

communication with a super computer Ai isn't being indoctrinated, per se. Why talk to Shep if indoctrination is the goal? Just zap them and be done with it. No tricks needed.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Shep isn't indoctrinated until (s)he goes willingly along with one of the Reaper suggested 'solutions'.

As for why would they indoctrinate Shepard:

"Should a political or military leader become indoctrinated, the resulting chaos could bring down nations." - Codex on Indoctrination.

[chidingewe8036]

Shepard said it himself TIM (Control lovers) and Saren (Synthesis lovers) were delusional. The fact is that the Reapers and their Catalyst are evil beings of a higher existence in which I have no interest in trying to understand their reasoning for wiping us out. The only thing that matters is stopping them........controlling them will have long term effects good but mostly bad, joining with them as one is phsyco, destroying them may cause some hardships technology wise but nothing as bad as having them around to possibly one day say "screw it" and do it all over again.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Chidingewe, you're back!

[GethPrimeMKII]

Wayning_Star wrote...

communication with a super computer Ai isn't being indoctrinated, per se. Why talk to Shep if indoctrination is the goal? Just zap them and be done with it. No tricks needed.

No. Shepard is far more valuable to the Reapers as their agent. Their interest in Shepard and what Shepard manages to accomplish in ME3 play right into their hands. 

Its brilliant when you really sit and think about it. Allow Shepard to travel the galaxy and gather the best and only resistance the galaxy has to offer. Allow him to rally the galaxy with the hope that the Crucible, a mysterious and conveniently found super weapon, will win the war for them. Allow Shepard to gather this galactic resistance to a single system, all the while Shepard is slowly succumbing to indoctrination. 

[ME859]

Argolas wrote...


I can't really believe it anymore either, but I also keep thinking "If Bioware is actually pulling that off right now, they'll be legends.". Of course they'd ****** some people off, but if they did it in a good way, it won't be anything like the initial ending ****storm. And the others would probably buying all Bioware stuff for the next 50 years.

At this point we don't care.  Most have us just want a satisfying relevant conclusion that makes us just as motivated to do multiple playthroughs as the first two games did.  I'm sorry but theres a limit to how many times I can replay ME2 and still find it interesting.....nah just kidding Mass Effect 2 is always awesome.  

Modifié par ME859, 18 décembre 2012 - 04:13 .

[Ithurael]

ME859 wrote...

At this point we don't care.  Most have us just want a satisfying relevant conclusion that makes us just as motivated to do multiple playthroughs as the first two games did.  I'm sorry but theres a limit to how many times I can replay ME2 and still find it interesting.....nah just kidding Mass Effect 2 is always awesome.  

I totally do agree with this. I actually tried to play some ME3 SP last night and just struggle through the citadel mission. And it sucks because now if I play ME1 and 2 I get to the great parts like Soveriegn Convo, Save Council, Save Rachni, Collector base, and I just say to myself "all this for the colored explosions". It really does suck and makes me a sad volus.

I will be waiting till the end of the DLC Cycle. Then I am out. There is no way they will have an IT (classic) reveal for ME4.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Samara: I want you to know there's no one else I'd rather see leading us in our last hours.
Shepard: These aren't our last hours. I'm fighting this war to win it.
Samara: (...) We'll both be tested in fire soon enough.

This one is hilarious (synthesis foreshadowing):

Javik: The Sinril claimed to have found the path to eternal peace.
Garrus: So what happened?
Javik: The Dittakar preferred war, and wiped them out.
Garrus: I hope you guys had alcohol.

Traynor: Garrus mentioned something about having some fun next time you're on the Citadel. Don't get into trouble.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 20 décembre 2012 - 10:22 .

[Kabooooom]

For one, he appeared as the child back on Earth, the one I had been having nightmares about the entire time. Alarm bells were going off all over the place for me.

I agree. Same here. Although, admittedly, the very first time I played through the ending I didn't think "Shep is indoctrinated". What I thought was "the Reapers are trying to deceive me into picking an option that literally five seconds ago was presented by my arch nemesis".

I don't believe Bioware intended IT. What I do think is that they intended to trick or reverse the opinion/motivation of the player at the very end of the game - to cause many to not destroy the Reapers as had been their struggle all along, but preserve them instead. They probably deemed this a "deeper" or more clever ending than simply having Destroy be paragon, Control be renegade.

Superficially, this idea is genius as it plays towards classical conditioning, and they seem to have pulled it off by making many choose to do exactly that. But, the delivery was horrendous.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Kabooooom wrote...

For one, he appeared as the child back on Earth, the one I had been having nightmares about the entire time. Alarm bells were going off all over the place for me.

I agree. Same here. Although, admittedly, the very first time I played through the ending I didn't think "Shep is indoctrinated". What I thought was "the Reapers are trying to deceive me into picking an option that literally five seconds ago was presented by my arch nemesis".

Yeah, same for me, until I realized Saren had advocated synthesis. That's when both options became 'indoctrinated' for me.

Kabooooom wrote...

I don't believe Bioware intended IT. What I do think is that they intended to trick or reverse the opinion/motivation of the player at the very end of the game - to cause many to not destroy the Reapers as had been their struggle all along, but preserve them instead. They probably deemed this a "deeper" or more clever ending than simply having Destroy be paragon, Control be renegade.

But isn't that exactly what indoctrination is? To convince someone that he was mistaken, and then get him to go along with one of your suggestions?

Kabooooom wrote...

Superficially, this idea is genius as it plays towards classical conditioning, and they seem to have pulled it off by making many choose to do exactly that. But, the delivery was horrendous.

I personally didn't have any problems with the delivery. In fact, I loved it.

[GethPrimeMKII]

I'll admit that on my first complete playthrough I was sold on the entire thing being real until I saw the child, and realized what the decision chamber was shaped like. At that moment I realized this has to be a mental battle to resist indoctrination.

[Daniel_N7]

I'm a believer.

[dorktainian]

well the answer to everything IMO is the crudible. Its a weapon (no it isnt) of massive design with capable of unquantifyable levels of destruction.

right ok...

playing through the beginning of the game again tonight something struck me.#

When Liara is addressing the council, they are talking about the crudible and discussing possibilities when liara saiys something along the lines of...

'the protheans completed the crudible but were missing one final component - the catalyst'

For me the key is that the crucible is 'always' built. that would tie into the fact of it being of Reaper origin (not developed by the various cycles). As i've said in other threads the only thing the crudible does is act as a power source for a massive gun. Red/blue/green. fake choices. whoever/whatever organic makes it that far has the dubious pleasure of activating the citadel as a weapon....(this ties into IT indirectly in the fact that shep is indoctrinated / undergoing indoctrination with the aim of fooling him into action). A weapon that disables the mass relay network and traps us all for easy pickings. while the relay network is still running we have a chance, without it we are boned.

This would tie in with Bioware in that IT still exists (in a way) but so does the ending - its all a matter of context.

[Gravbh]

IT is basically Harold Camping, the guy who claimed to know the date for the end of the world by reading patterns in the bible. When the date came and went, he found yet another date. When that came and went, well you get the idea.

[TheProtheans]

Gravbh wrote...

IT is basically Harold Camping, the guy who claimed to know the date for the end of the world by reading patterns in the bible. When the date came and went, he found yet another date. When that came and went, well you get the idea.

I referenced that over 400 pages ago in the IT thread, you're late.

Modifié par TheProtheans, 21 décembre 2012 - 09:27 .