739 réponses à ce sujet

[SwobyJ]

Eryri wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Sure. TIM's supposed to be use a form of indoctrination there. So what?

So nothing, really.  Just making the point about where TIM's "telepathic powers" actually come from. 

That's just given me a rather unpleasant moment of fridge horror. If I remember the codex correctly, there is no known cure for indoctrination, and once the process has begun, it can't be stopped or reversed. Rana's murder spree, years after being exposed to Sovereign, is proof of that. It also states that indoctrination leads to neurological decay, with rapid indoctrination being particularly damaging.

For TIM to force Shepard to shoot Anderson, he must have been using the intense, rapid kind. This means that even if high EMS Destroy plays out exactly as seen on screen, and Shepard survives to take a breath, his future is not exactly looking rosy.  Even though the Reapers are dead, the damage to his brain might already have been done. Unless the Alliance discovers a treatment to reverse the progressive damage done by indoctrination, Shepard might end up like those poor Salarians on Virmire, staring blankly at the walls of his padded cell.

I've rather bummed myself out there. 

Yes, Shepard is 'done'.

It's ok, there is still hope, and his actions will be remembered. I don't think its as dire as his utter insanity or shooting himself in the head.

BTW, you think those 'Loco' (aka CRAZY) and 'Lola' (link, link2) were random?

[SwobyJ]

wolfhowwl wrote...

Wow it's like the Extended Cut never happened in here.

Extended Cut is great.

[mybudgee]

Isn't it obvious? Because WE have ALL BEEN INDOCTRINATED!

[SwobyJ]

Redbelle wrote...

I suspect Bioware use IT as a resource to draw inspiration from. With so rushed an ending it feels like they drew from Deus Ex's ending. Whereas the fanbase has pulled this beautiful theory from the story they spun that fits the story well and keeps the player immersed in events and lore.

The more people talk about the possibility of IT. The more BW staff writers can draw on the concepts that IT lays down.

Both stories heavily involve transhumanism.

However, I think Mass Effect would have been better served without the outright '3 choices, middle one is embrace of the tech' scenario. Too much of a copy, and I can't respect that no matter what form Bioware alters it into.

[rapscallioness]

Well, you know, I gotta put my two coppers in the mix. Idk what;s up w/BW and the IT. They seemed unusually aggressive towards it. Maybe that was just Priestly. Idk.

But truth is, after my first pure PT, original recipe ending, w/out any IT influence, I really thought something bizarre had just happened. I thought it was sum kinda near death experience. It was all very surreal. I emerged from the end like wtf just happened here?

Elevator ride onwards did not seem real to me. At all. That's why when it suddenly ended right there, I was really confused. Actually, the beam run onwards was Alice in Wonderland for me. It really felt like something out the ordinary was happening. And I truly believed the voice I heard as Anderson was a Trap! lol! Honest. I did not trust that shyte.

But I still don;t know if it was necessarily Shep being Indoctrinated, or the Catalyst playing mind games and attempting to control Shep. And deceiving Shep.

Some say as an AI, the Catalyst wouldn't deceive. It would just give the "facts" w/out ulterior motives, but I don't think that's true.

I'm doing a PT now, and that one convo w/Edi abt how they escaped w/the Normandy was like a giant oh, shyte moment for me. She talks abt the fact that now that she's unshackled and not forced to give accurate info, she can now "deceive" as she sees fit. She told a "fiction".

She also mentions how she was programmed to place importance upon the continued functionality of the Normandy. Said it was akin to organic self preservation instinct, So, I can imagine that the Catalyst--def being unshackled--could and would deceive for the purpose of maintaining Its functionality.

So, Idk if it was indoctrination, or the final attempt at taking control of Shep, but it really seemed that way to me at the time. I really thought that the original ending was sum kinda experimental type of street performance/blending fiction and reality type thing. Let the players truly feel the confusion and powerlessness of being indoctrinated--then Bam! the rest of the game.

Lol! But I guess it wasn't, huh? I never actually read in depth on IT, but I did get the gist. I didn't see anything wrong w/it. Why not? It did seem like IT ppl were treated pretty harsh. Which made no sense to me considering all the other madness I've seen on the BSN.

Sigh, on the one hand, I'm glad BW does Not incorporate alot of fan ideas cuz I really don;t like alot of them. But, I do wish BW thought abt it as much as fans do.

Fans minds are like Salarian's--a labyrinth.

[KeraWildmane]

StoneSwords wrote...

because believe it or not, IT makes up a decent sized part of the fanbase, and they don't want to alienate those people. Don't get me wrong, I'd love for it to be true, but after all this time, it's very unlikely

Too late.

[Possessed Turian]

SwobyJ wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

Wow it's like the Extended Cut never happened in here.

Extended Cut is great.

extended cut does nothing to put down the indoctrination theory. It's just a sceen that plays out in shepard's head so he feels like he acomplished something. Shepard then will wake up on the Reaper IFF mission.

and as for Legion. I saw this earlier. Legions actions were to out of character for a machine. Yes Legion is real, but the way he was was completely made up by the Reaper, to make you more sympithetic to synthetics including the Reapers.

Modifié par Possessed Turian, 29 décembre 2013 - 04:01 .

[AlanC9]

rapscallioness wrote..

Lol! But I guess it wasn't, huh? I never actually read in depth on IT, but I did get the gist. I didn't see anything wrong w/it. Why not? It did seem like IT ppl were treated pretty harsh. Which made no sense to me considering all the other madness I've seen on the BSN.

I used to think that this was a pretty easy question to answer. IT isn't just a bunch of preposterous b.s. It's a bunch of preposterous b.s. which means that if you picked anything but Destroy you're a fool, and your Shepard is an indoctrinated tool who destroyed the galaxy. (Let's just gloss over the brief time when IT favored picking Refuse). So IT means that you're a bad player; no wonder people hated it.

The problem with this theory is that (if the BSN is to be taken seriously) Destroy is the overwhelming favorite of the "true fans." So IT is only saying that they're fools, not that their Shepards made the wrong choice. Is that enough to spawn the massive contempt that IT gets? Beats me; a plurality of my Shepards pick Control, so I'm out of touch with the true fans anyway.

Modifié par AlanC9, 29 décembre 2013 - 04:16 .

[rapscallioness]

AlanC9 wrote...

rapscallioness wrote..

Lol! But I guess it wasn't, huh? I never actually read in depth on IT, but I did get the gist. I didn't see anything wrong w/it. Why not? It did seem like IT ppl were treated pretty harsh. Which made no sense to me considering all the other madness I've seen on the BSN.

I used to think that this was a pretty easy question to answer. IT isn't just a bunch of preposterous b.s. It's a bunch of preposterous b.s. which means that if you picked anything but Destroy you're a fool, and your Shepard is an indoctrinated tool who destroyed the galaxy. (Let's just gloss over the brief time when IT favored picking Refuse)

The problem with this theory is that (if the BSN is to be taken seriously) Destroy is the overwhelming favorite of the "true fans." So IT is only saying that they're fools, not that their Shepards made the wrong choice. Is that enough to spawn the massive contempt that IT gets? Beats me; a plurality of my Shepards pick Control, so I'm out of touch with the true fans anyway.

Ah. Okay. But I see alot of Synth ppl talking smack, too. Tbh, abt the only ones I don;t personally see talking smack abt other ppl's choices are the Control ppl, but perhaps I missed those threads.

If that's the case, then that's too bad. I think IT is an interesting concept--well, some parts of it.  Shame to see it dragged down w/that kinda talk.

[AlanC9]

Actually, ,I think you're right. But there are so few real Synth fans that the few hotheads may be giving us a false impression.

[SwobyJ]

Possessed Turian wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

Wow it's like the Extended Cut never happened in here.

Extended Cut is great.

extended cut does nothing to put down the indoctrination theory. It's just a sceen that plays out in shepard's head so he feels like he acomplished something. Shepard then will wake up on the Reaper IFF mission.

and as for Legion. I saw this earlier. Legions actions were to out of character for a machine. Yes Legion is real, but the way he was was completely made up by the Reaper, to make you more sympithetic to synthetics including the Reapers.

My opinion:

-EC only directed the internal universe inside a New Reaper
-Legion is real, sorry.
-Experiences with him may or may not be real.
-Legion in ME3 is compromised by Reaper ideology just as you/Shepard can be and Saren was. Doesn't mean he's 'bad'. Just that he's changed into a new being, and one that will more likely accept the Reapers if it wasn't for Shepard.

-Reaper ideology (eventual synthesis between organics and synthetics, to weaken points of conflict) isn't innately bad. It's their flawed implementation (aka the synthesis is not consentual) and lack or ethics (aka it is forced and destructive) about it that ruin it. They think that the Cycle is necessary. It's the whole concept of a 'solution' that corrupts their whole process.

[SwobyJ]

AlanC9 wrote...

rapscallioness wrote..

Lol! But I guess it wasn't, huh? I never actually read in depth on IT, but I did get the gist. I didn't see anything wrong w/it. Why not? It did seem like IT ppl were treated pretty harsh. Which made no sense to me considering all the other madness I've seen on the BSN.

I used to think that this was a pretty easy question to answer. IT isn't just a bunch of preposterous b.s. It's a bunch of preposterous b.s. which means that if you picked anything but Destroy you're a fool, and your Shepard is an indoctrinated tool who destroyed the galaxy. (Let's just gloss over the brief time when IT favored picking Refuse). So IT means that you're a bad player; no wonder people hated it.

The problem with this theory is that (if the BSN is to be taken seriously) Destroy is the overwhelming favorite of the "true fans." So IT is only saying that they're fools, not that their Shepards made the wrong choice. Is that enough to spawn the massive contempt that IT gets? Beats me; a plurality of my Shepards pick Control, so I'm out of touch with the true fans anyway.

It really is personality types.

Synthesis - Don't you get it? Hmm.. seems you don't. That's alright. We'll move on far beyond you. This way brings the most potential, no matter what you say.
Control - Let's just get along, and/or use the tech here with EDI+Geth alive. No? well, you're an idiot then. Stop babbling nonsense, this is the right way.
Destroy - Don't you see?!? You're either indoctrinated or an idiot to choose anything other than this!

I've found Controllers to be the most passive-aggressive, Synthesizers to be the most concrete in belief (yes, more than Destroyers), and Destroyers to be the most passionate and active-aggressive. Yikes, just like TIM, Saren, and Shepard through most of the series at least

These are all, however, HUGE generalizations. I hope we all recognize this as that. And the same towards ITers and anti-ITers in particular.

And in regards to ITers, I get what you're saying. At the same time, I regard myself as at least partially an ITer, and have no problem with people picking the other two choices (though Synthesis, as is, and in literal view, disgusts me, that's just a portion of my larger views and feelings toward it, which are more neutral).

Maybe I'm tempered by the consideration that all choices may in fact be 'bad choices', and Destroy is simply the 'least bad when it comes to keeping Shepard and his original moral form intact, and even then, it only makes more sense if you get High/Breath Destroy'. I'm more here to investigate this stuff, than insist on being right.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Where do the 'Refusers' fit in?

[SwobyJ]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Where do the 'Refusers' fit in?

If polls are any indication, barely any exist anymore.

But the ones that remain go something like "It's all a Reaper situation!" and then figuratively walk away because they know they don't have much else to say about it.

(for the record I kinda agree with em)

[ImaginaryMatter]

Hmm, what's the most recent poll on where people fall on the endings?

I've seen a few but I'm not sure which one is the most recent.

[zed888]

Watch it buddy- I exist! Refuse has never been popular, but I don't know why you'd think people would choose another ending after refusing. Nothing has changed. The -r at the end of "refuser" implies the person did it more than once though. I don't know about others who refused, but I played EC one time.

Modifié par zed888, 29 décembre 2013 - 08:08 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

I Refuse too!

[SwobyJ]

zed888 wrote...

Watch it buddy- I exist! Refuse has never been popular, but I don't know why you'd think people would choose another ending after refusing. Nothing has changed. The -r at the end of "refuser" implies the person did it more than once though. I don't know about others who refused, but I played EC one time.

I strongly agree with Refuse.

I just think its a bit too late in the plot to do so in that ending situation.

I've only done Destroy and Refuse in the EC so far. Synthesis and Destroy on the Original.

And I'd think people chose another ending because every friend I know IRL who chose Refuse, later went "Eh, I decided on Destroy (or Control in one case) instead after."

Obviously there's people, in general/online, who aren't. I'm just going by my experience.

[Lunch Box1912]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Hmm, what's the most recent poll on where people fall on the endings?

I've seen a few but I'm not sure which one is the most recent.

Well good luck with that, no polls anymore thanks Bioware!
 
I have seen all the arguments in this thread before. Started a little less than two years ago, mostly before the lock downs late in 2012 began. I'm surprised they haven't targeted this one yet. Below is what I used to keep in my signature regarding the endings. This is one of the reasons there getting rid of the poles, we were using them.


                                                                         What would you like to do about the endings? Martyr's polls
     The do's and don'ts of novel endings                Is "clarification" DLC enough? Cogneter’s polls

Do take a peek at Martyr's poll. I'd say the 68,763 to 6329 gamers is a fair enough sample to deduce what the majority feels.  (75,092 total votes.)

Oh and Destroy...We destroy them or they destroy us!

Refuse just brings me back to a Yoda quote: Do, or do not. There is no "try".

the options are:
1) Reaper
2) Reaper
3) Dead Reapers.

Modifié par Lunch Box1912, 31 décembre 2013 - 06:31 .

[Possessed Turian]

Dang Lunchbox, I'm sure bioware wasn't happy with those polls. I am losing some faith in bioware. Stop stealing my faith in you bioware.

I still can't say the ME3 story was a for real thing. Shepard had to be indoctrinated by the Reaper on the IFF mission. The collector base didn't seem legitimate to me. It lacked the fleet to protect it.

Building a human reaper out of organic materials made no sense.

The fact that collectors didn't appear during the story of ME3 made little sense.

The pile of dead bodies on the collector ship maiden no sense if the collectors where building Reapers. Why where they discarded. I still say a Reaper mutation virus and those bodies were ruined during testing. Why else would they be subjecting one of there own to the test.

A frigate beating a collector cruiser with conventional weapons. A ship that could destroy a aliance cruiser. Yes Thanex cannons are conventional weapons. The Quarians where strapping them to there ships.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Possessed Turian wrote...

Dang Lunchbox, I'm sure bioware wasn't happy with those polls. I am losing some faith in bioware. Stop stealing my faith in you bioware.

I still can't say the ME3 story was a for real thing. Shepard had to be indoctrinated by the Reaper on the IFF mission. The collector base didn't seem legitimate to me. It lacked the fleet to protect it.

Building a human reaper out of organic materials made no sense.

The fact that collectors didn't appear during the story of ME3 made little sense.

The pile of dead bodies on the collector ship maiden no sense if the collectors where building Reapers. Why where they discarded. I still say a Reaper mutation virus and those bodies were ruined during testing. Why else would they be subjecting one of there own to the test.

A frigate beating a collector cruiser with conventional weapons. A ship that could destroy a aliance cruiser. Yes Thanex cannons are conventional weapons. The Quarians where strapping them to there ships.

Are you suggesting that the events before the Reaper IFF mission made more 'sense' than everything after it?

I'm not even sure how most of these don't make sense. The Thanix Cannon technology was based off Sovereign's weapons system which could instantly destroy a ship. It doesn't seem like too radical a step to have a smaller version destroy a ship in a couple of shots. We also don't know the shield specifications of the Collector Cruisers (or do we?), I mean it seems their primary purpose was transportation (of sorts) not combat.

I'm not sure what is shocking about the revelation that the Reapers are made of Organic materials, aside from the apparent irony of Reaper's disdain for Organic life when they themselves are partly composed of it. Otherwise not much was known about their specifications to say that the Organic slush reveal some how contradicts some other piece of lore about their origins.

As for the other stuff, maybe the bodies on the floor failed some quality assurance test or enough similar gentic material was collected. Maybe they were being experimented on. Also the Collectors apparently did show up in ME3 because apparently the multiplayer is canon and they showed up there. And maybe the rest of the Collectors were collecting at the time of the Suicide Mission. All my explanations are pretty handwavy, but all these seem to be pretty minor points in the grand-scheme of things.

The point is, most of these seem to be rather nitpicky (which is fine). But if we're going to go into this level of nitpickyness then the rest of ME2 and ME1 also have things that don't make sense, especially the rest of ME2.

[AlanC9]

Lunch Box1912 wrote...


Do take a peek at Martyr's poll. I'd say the 68,763 to 6329 gamers is a fair enough sample to deduce what the majority feels.  (75,092 total votes.)

The majority of people who cared enough to show up for the poll, anyway. Also note that it's a pre-EC poll, and it looks like these people wanted a happy ending. When I say that about ending haters people say I'm insulting them.

[Possessed Turian]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Are you suggesting that the events before the Reaper IFF mission made more 'sense' than everything after it? 

Yes provided you know how to make sense of it and you don't want to utterly destroy the series.

A body surviving reentry makes little sense but master cheif has done it so I won't complian about that to preserve the story. the fact that you find shepards helmet at normandys crash sight when me3 said the helmet kept the brain mostly intact made little sense. thats why Reaper IFF makes so much sense.

Modifié par Possessed Turian, 31 décembre 2013 - 06:17 .

[AlanC9]

What if you do the Normandy crash site before the Reaper IFF?

[durasteel]

SwobyJ wrote...
...
Control - Let's just get along, and/or use the tech here with EDI+Geth alive. No? well, you're an idiot then. Stop babbling nonsense, this is the right way.
...

Not quite, at least from my perspective.

I toook the blue ending because by that point I was completely out of "the moment." I wasn't making any decision as Shepard, I was "metagaming" because the stupid catalyst scene had blown away whatever immersion the Anderson scene had left me with. Simply put, the blue ending left the galaxy in the most recognizeable state so that another game could pick up where ME3 left off. 

The ME universe can still be cool without Shepard, but there's not much point to Shepard if the MEU is an unrecognizable pile of poo.