230 réponses à ce sujet

[Ticonderoga117]

Yate wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

Power struggles are a thing, people. Those aliens can be just as complex as humans. Why have we, as gamers, come to hate complexity and intellectuality? It seems we've all just become anti-intellectual thugs who want this binary violence. I feel like those like me, who don't want that, are becoming a very, very fringe interest.

Pretty much this.

I love how the "fans" are all set to accuse BW of being too mainstream, then jump down their throat when they do something new and interesting. And of course, NEVER see the irony...

bioware needs better fans

New and interesting? What, prey tell, did they do that was new and interesting?

[GreyLycanTrope]

Yate wrote...
Pretty much this.

I love how the "fans" are all set to accuse BW of being too mainstream, then jump down their throat when they do something new and interesting. And of course, NEVER see the irony...

bioware needs better fans

Because it's not new, Deus Ex did it first, and it's not done well.

Keep white knighting though.

[Davik Kang]

Seboist wrote...
Like with the romance forum, they realized the amount of damage the ITers were doing to their brand and it had already served it's purpose of deflecting criticism. This "IT" nonsense was potentially spreading misinformation about the story and choices to BSN or series newcommers.

lol what that makes no sense, why would a thread that assumes the story is really cleverly planned be doing "damage to the brand".  but no surprise that complicated things make people angry...

AlanC9 wrote...
Wow... I didn't realize how much I missed having an IT thread.

For what it's worth, I don't agree with the IT guys cos I think they're wrong about a number of things, including that I think that we do go to the Citadel and we do activate the Crucible at the end.  And therefore that the game did end when we saw it end, future DLC not required.

But IT discussion is not the point of this thread at all.  What I'm trying to get at is: that the illusory aspects of the ending, the confusing narrative about-turn, and the lead-up to the climactic events - which include repeated fade-to-whites, Shepard falling unconscious 3 times, and the appearance of an icon represented in the Dream world throughout the rest of the game - suggest that interpreting the ending as potentially, or partially, imaginary, is not only something that Bioware were alluding to, but further, makes the most sense in trying to explain those final moments.

[Wayning_Star]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...
Look dude, what I'm saying is that's just not how mental scarring works.  You're saying it works how yoy want it to work.  You didn't carr about Kid, you do care about Kaidan, so you want Kaidan in your dreams.  These dreams aren't about hamfisting pointless emotion into the game - the irony is that the cheesy way of soing just that would've been to have Ash/Kaidan dreams.  They are there to set up the ending, but there are also in-game reasons as to why things happen as they do.

It is symbolic, of course it;s symbolic, many things are in ME and everywhere else, but it's not the level 1 crap symbolism effort that you're trying to claim it is.  Throughout the entire thread I've been explaining this.  It appears that way at first, just as Child appears to be DEM-like when he first presents himself, but both these assumptions are false, and you really don't have to dig very hard to reveal that this is the case.

It's a bit more than I just dont' care about the kid. The kid ACTIVELY killed himself. Shepard offered help. Kid said no, and then got himself killed.

I've still gotta see the body.. clear evidence, not staged props.

[Mr.House]

Yate wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

Power struggles are a thing, people. Those aliens can be just as complex as humans. Why have we, as gamers, come to hate complexity and intellectuality? It seems we've all just become anti-intellectual thugs who want this binary violence. I feel like those like me, who don't want that, are becoming a very, very fringe interest.

Pretty much this.

I love how the "fans" are all set to accuse BW of being too mainstream, then jump down their throat when they do something new and interesting. And of course, NEVER see the irony...

bioware needs better fans

What was new and intresting with the ending or what they pulled with ventkid?

[Gervaise]

Hi there, I've posted some of what follows previously but it does no harm to repeat.

The first time I played ME3 I kept questioning why Shepard was having those particular dreams of the kid. It crossed my mind that, whilst it might just be meant to represent Shepard's "guilt" or "desperation" or whatever, it actually was a manifestation of the Reapers inside Shepard's mind. People question how that can be but anything that has a connection to the Reapers is considered dangerous. In Leviathan Shepard is unhappy to see that Bryson had a bit of Sovereign in his lab and asks if it was properly shielded. Well it so happens that the Normandy has a bit of Sovereign in it, part of EDI. So I suppose it is plausible that it might be possible for some sort of signal that was mixed up in all the other radio waves, etc, and not obviously hostile to get past EDI' defense system. It should also be remembered that at the beginning of ME3, Joker removed EDI's shackles and that the Cerberus scientists thought this would be a very dangerous thing to do - we assume because they think EDI might rebel (she does of course against Cerberus) but may be they are also worried about the Reaper tech.

Getting back to the kid in the vent. We are told that almost immediately the Reapers start broadcasting an indoctrination signal to try and undermine people's resolve to either fight or flee. So there is the possibility that the reason the kid gives such an odd response to Shepard "You can't help me", is because the Reapers have already made contact with his mind. When the kid is making its way towards the ship and covers his ears, we assume it is in response to the noise the Reaper is making but it could be holding his head because of the signal.

Moving onto the dreams, if the kid isn't just symbolic guilt but the Reapers getting to Shepard, then the kid running away emphasises that Shepard can't help him. In the third dream the kid ends up in Shepard's arms (this is a generic Shepard) but when our Shepard (in whatever armour we have for him) catches up with them, they both are enveloped in flames.

Later the Intelligence tells us that Shepard has the power to control the Crucible but if he uses it to destroy the Reapers, then down the line all the organics will be wiped out by synthetics. So once again Shepard can't help humanity (or anyone else) by destroying the Reapers. So the Reaper boss may be using the kid image to remind Shepard "You can't help me." Only by listening the the Intelligence and making the choice he suggests, will a true solution be found.

All the debate is actually going on in Shepard's head. Someone quoted the writers as saying that the underlying Shepard voice is to indicate that the Intelligence is using Shepard's memories to give it a voice. Naturally it uses the image of a child because that is associated with innocence but also because of the dreams. They also admitted in Final Hours that they originally wanted to simulate Shepard fighting indoctrination and even have you lose total control of his avatar, but game mechanics made that problematic and still have dialogue options, so this is the best they could come up with.

Again going back to the first time I played through (without the EC), I reached the end game after a long day at work followed by an evening of fighting across earth. Because of the lack of opportunities to save
I was feeling very tired by the time I got to the decision chamber (I think this was deliberate on the writers part to simulate how Shepard would feel). I was suspicious by the sudden appearance of the kid but also befuddled by its explanations and the reversed colour scheme that made my previous intent of destroying the Reapers appear a ruthless, renegade option. I didn't even consider Control because I had just persuaded TIM to shoot himself but nevertheless was bothered by the blue. I actually started up the destroy path but the red colour kept bothering me and remembering Liara's shared memory scene, I wondered if she had had a premonition about synthesis (may be this was another instance of the Reapers/writers using your memories to confuse you). So I jumped into the beam of light - saw the result and freaked (this was the original ending so no happy EDI voiceover, just glowing eyes everywhere). And my immediate reaction was - you bastards managed to trick me. I wasn't angry with the writers but with myself for allowing them to fool me.

Subsequently playing Leviathan helped explain a bit more what was going on and confirmed it could all have been in Shepard's mind and I am still very much inclined towards the explanation that the writers were trying to simulate indoctrination. This may not be the case, but I for one am happy to go with that. Naturally I think the only valid ending is Destroy.

Modifié par Gervaise, 26 janvier 2013 - 09:23 .

[Wayning_Star]

Davik Kang wrote...

Seboist wrote...
Like with the romance forum, they realized the amount of damage the ITers were doing to their brand and it had already served it's purpose of deflecting criticism. This "IT" nonsense was potentially spreading misinformation about the story and choices to BSN or series newcommers.

lol what that makes no sense, why would a thread that assumes the story is really cleverly planned be doing "damage to the brand".  but no surprise that complicated things make people angry...

AlanC9 wrote...
Wow... I didn't realize how much I missed having an IT thread.

For what it's worth, I don't agree with the IT guys cos I think they're wrong about a number of things, including that I think that we do go to the Citadel and we do activate the Crucible at the end.  And therefore that the game did end when we saw it end, future DLC not required.

But IT discussion is not the point of this thread at all.  What I'm trying to get at is: that the illusory aspects of the ending, the confusing narrative about-turn, and the lead-up to the climactic events - which include repeated fade-to-whites, Shepard falling unconscious 3 times, and the appearance of an icon represented in the Dream world throughout the rest of the game - suggest that interpreting the ending as potentially, or partially, imaginary, is not only something that Bioware were alluding to, but further, makes the most sense in trying to explain those final moments.

Jumping between the catalysts' view of reality and then Sheps leads a person to suspect their is more to it than meets the minds eye. How to convince all Sheps of their personal view of events is a daunting task, we must admit.

The idea I got was the immersion into the catalyst world, but retain thoughts of Sheps organic reality and emotional responses to such an alien enviornment. How could anyone describe that in laymans terms?

[Davik Kang]

Auld Wulf wrote...
rant

Ok dude so you seem to have completely missed the point of the whole thread and used it as a vehicle for your own interpretation of the game.  Nice one.  I liked the personal insults at me as well.  Considering you also seem to have missed the point that I am trying to show how well-written this story was.  Kudos!

It also amusing that you're talking about 'binary' nature of stories and how fans expect things to be simple when I'm trying to show how the ending is anything but simple.  It seems you didn't actually read anything - or at least understand anything - written here and just vented a bunch of unrelated nonsense.  Congrats!

[AlanC9]

Davik Kang wrote...
But IT discussion is not the point of this thread at all.  What I'm trying to get at is: that the illusory aspects of the ending, the confusing narrative about-turn, and the lead-up to the climactic events - which include repeated fade-to-whites, Shepard falling unconscious 3 times, and the appearance of an icon represented in the Dream world throughout the rest of the game - suggest that interpreting the ending as potentially, or partially, imaginary, is not only something that Bioware were alluding to, but further, makes the most sense in trying to explain those final moments.

How about actually giving us your interpretation, then? Or did you do that already and I missed it?

Edit: someone here proposed a long time ago that the entire Catalyst scene is just psychic communication -- mostly as a way to rationalize the somewhat bizarre activiation procedure for the Crucible. The hard part is rationalizing the scene where the unconscious Shepard is riding up on an elevator; if Shepard's unconscious, she isn't hallucinating.

Modifié par AlanC9, 26 janvier 2013 - 09:36 .

[scottishrebel23]

Look at the indoctranation theory its to have an effect on shepard to show the ones who have been lost

[Wayning_Star]

Davik Kang wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...
rant

Ok dude so you seem to have completely missed the point of the whole thread and used it as a vehicle for your own interpretation of the game.  Nice one.  I liked the personal insults at me as well.  Considering you also seem to have missed the point that I am trying to show how well-written this story was.  Kudos!

It also amusing that you're talking about 'binary' nature of stories and how fans expect things to be simple when I'm trying to show how the ending is anything but simple.  It seems you didn't actually read anything - or at least understand anything - written here and just vented a bunch of unrelated nonsense.  Congrats!

calm down and read again that post, the poster isn't so much directed at you, but general audiences imho

that's why I teased them..or tried to..lol

[spirosz]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Yate wrote...
Pretty much this.

I love how the "fans" are all set to accuse BW of being too mainstream, then jump down their throat when they do something new and interesting. And of course, NEVER see the irony...

bioware needs better fans

Because it's not new, Deus Ex did it first, and it's not done well.

Keep white knighting though.

Even then, it's not a new "concept" in terms of sci-fi.  It's just that the execution in ME3 was done in a terrible way, which is why it bugs a lot of us (and not because we don't understand it).    

[Wayning_Star]

AlanC9 wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...
But IT discussion is not the point of this thread at all.  What I'm trying to get at is: that the illusory aspects of the ending, the confusing narrative about-turn, and the lead-up to the climactic events - which include repeated fade-to-whites, Shepard falling unconscious 3 times, and the appearance of an icon represented in the Dream world throughout the rest of the game - suggest that interpreting the ending as potentially, or partially, imaginary, is not only something that Bioware were alluding to, but further, makes the most sense in trying to explain those final moments.

How about actually giving us your interpretation, then? Or did you do that already and I missed it?

gosh, i sure hope Davik K isn't trying to pick our brains... biiiig trouble right there.

[Ridwan]

The writers probably stole that crap from Contact, which was a crappy film too.

[Davik Kang]

Gervaise wrote...

Hi there, I've posted some of what follows previously but it does no harm to repeat.

The first time I played ME3 I kept questioning why Shepard was having those particular dreams of the kid. It crossed my mind that, whilst it might just be meant to represent Shepard's "guilt" or "desperation" or whatever, it actually was a manifestation of the Reapers inside Shepard's mind. People question how that can be but anything that has a connection to the Reapers is considered dangerous. In Leviathan Shepard is unhappy to see that Bryson had a bit of Sovereign in his lab and asks if it was properly shielded. Well it so happens that the Normandy has a bit of Sovereign in it, part of EDI. So I suppose it is plausible that it might be possible for some sort of signal that was mixed up in all the other radio waves, etc, and not obviously hostile to get past EDI' defense system. It should also be remembered that at the beginning of ME3, Joker removed EDI's shackles and that the Cerberus scientists thought this would be a very dangerous thing to do - we assume because they think EDI might rebel (she does of course against Cerberus) but may be they are also worried about the Reaper tech.

Getting back to the kid in the vent. We are told that almost immediately the Reapers start broadcasting an indoctrination signal to try and undermine people's resolve to either fight or flee. So there is the possibility that the reason the kid gives such an odd response to Shepard "You can't help me", is because the Reapers have already made contact with his mind. When the kid is making its way towards the ship and covers his ears, we assume it is in response to the noise the Reaper is making but it could be holding his head because of the signal.

Moving onto the dreams, if the kid isn't just symbolic guilt but the Reapers getting to Shepard, then the kid running away emphasises that Shepard can't help him. In the third dream the kid ends up in Shepard's arms (this is a generic Shepard) but when our Shepard (in whatever armour we have for him) catches up with them, they both are enveloped in flames.

Later the Intelligence tells us that Shepard has the power to control the Crucible but if he uses it to destroy the Reapers, then down the line all the organics will be wiped out by synthetics. So once again Shepard can't help humanity (or anyone else) by destroying the Reapers. So the Reaper boss may be using the kid image to remind Shepard "You can't help me." Only by listening the the Intelligence and making the choice he suggests, will a true solution be found.

All the debate is actually going on in Shepard's head. Someone quoted the writers as saying that the underlying Shepard voice is to indicate that the Intelligence is using Shepard's memories to give it a voice. Naturally it uses the image of a child because that is associated with innocence but also because of the dreams. They also admitted in Final Hours that they originally wanted to simulate Shepard fighting indoctrination and even have you lose total control of his avatar, but game mechanics made that problematic and still have dialogue options, so this is the best they could come up with.

Again going back to the first time I played through (without the EC), I reached the end game after a long day at work followed by an evening of fighting across earth. Because of the lack of opportunities to save
I was feeling very tired by the time I got to the decision chamber (I think this was deliberate on the writers part to simulate how Shepard would feel). I was suspicious by the sudden appearance of the kid but also befuddled by its explanations and the reversed colour scheme that made my previous intent of destroying the Reapers appear a ruthless, renegade option. I didn't even consider Control because I had just persuaded TIM to shoot himself but nevertheless was bothered by the blue. I actually started up the destroy path but the red colour kept bothering me and remembering Liara's shared memory scene, I wondered if she had had a premonition about synthesis (may be this was another instance of the Reapers/writers using your memories to confuse you). So I jumped into the beam of light - saw the result and freaked (this was the original ending so no happy EDI voiceover, just glowing eyes everywhere). And my immediate reaction was - you bastards managed to trick me. I wasn't angry with the writers but with myself for allowing them to fool me.

Subsequently playing Leviathan helped explain a bit more what was going on and confirmed it could all have been in Shepard's mind and I am still very much inclined towards the explanation that the writers were trying to simulate indoctrination. This may not be the case, but I for one am happy to go with that. Naturally I think the only valid ending is Destroy.

Certinaly could be.  I would say that, at the very least, the writers were suggesting that this could be the case.  The idea about the Kid's confused, panicked responses at the beginning are pretty interesting too, never thought of that.

And the final dream - you mean that it could imply that Shepard's pursuit of his goals means certain doom for the future?  This would certainly imply that the Reapers are influencing, or even in control of, the dreams... hmm possible.  I'll admit I preferred them being more a clue into Shepard's own psyche, influenced by war and death as well as Reaper contact rather than controlled by them, but it does make sense... certainly possible

[Wayning_Star]

Davik Kang wrote...

Gervaise wrote...

Hi there, I've posted some of what follows previously but it does no harm to repeat.

The first time I played ME3 I kept questioning why Shepard was having those particular dreams of the kid. It crossed my mind that, whilst it might just be meant to represent Shepard's "guilt" or "desperation" or whatever, it actually was a manifestation of the Reapers inside Shepard's mind. People question how that can be but anything that has a connection to the Reapers is considered dangerous. In Leviathan Shepard is unhappy to see that Bryson had a bit of Sovereign in his lab and asks if it was properly shielded. Well it so happens that the Normandy has a bit of Sovereign in it, part of EDI. So I suppose it is plausible that it might be possible for some sort of signal that was mixed up in all the other radio waves, etc, and not obviously hostile to get past EDI' defense system. It should also be remembered that at the beginning of ME3, Joker removed EDI's shackles and that the Cerberus scientists thought this would be a very dangerous thing to do - we assume because they think EDI might rebel (she does of course against Cerberus) but may be they are also worried about the Reaper tech.

Getting back to the kid in the vent. We are told that almost immediately the Reapers start broadcasting an indoctrination signal to try and undermine people's resolve to either fight or flee. So there is the possibility that the reason the kid gives such an odd response to Shepard "You can't help me", is because the Reapers have already made contact with his mind. When the kid is making its way towards the ship and covers his ears, we assume it is in response to the noise the Reaper is making but it could be holding his head because of the signal.

Moving onto the dreams, if the kid isn't just symbolic guilt but the Reapers getting to Shepard, then the kid running away emphasises that Shepard can't help him. In the third dream the kid ends up in Shepard's arms (this is a generic Shepard) but when our Shepard (in whatever armour we have for him) catches up with them, they both are enveloped in flames.

Later the Intelligence tells us that Shepard has the power to control the Crucible but if he uses it to destroy the Reapers, then down the line all the organics will be wiped out by synthetics. So once again Shepard can't help humanity (or anyone else) by destroying the Reapers. So the Reaper boss may be using the kid image to remind Shepard "You can't help me." Only by listening the the Intelligence and making the choice he suggests, will a true solution be found.

All the debate is actually going on in Shepard's head. Someone quoted the writers as saying that the underlying Shepard voice is to indicate that the Intelligence is using Shepard's memories to give it a voice. Naturally it uses the image of a child because that is associated with innocence but also because of the dreams. They also admitted in Final Hours that they originally wanted to simulate Shepard fighting indoctrination and even have you lose total control of his avatar, but game mechanics made that problematic and still have dialogue options, so this is the best they could come up with.

Again going back to the first time I played through (without the EC), I reached the end game after a long day at work followed by an evening of fighting across earth. Because of the lack of opportunities to save
I was feeling very tired by the time I got to the decision chamber (I think this was deliberate on the writers part to simulate how Shepard would feel). I was suspicious by the sudden appearance of the kid but also befuddled by its explanations and the reversed colour scheme that made my previous intent of destroying the Reapers appear a ruthless, renegade option. I didn't even consider Control because I had just persuaded TIM to shoot himself but nevertheless was bothered by the blue. I actually started up the destroy path but the red colour kept bothering me and remembering Liara's shared memory scene, I wondered if she had had a premonition about synthesis (may be this was another instance of the Reapers/writers using your memories to confuse you). So I jumped into the beam of light - saw the result and freaked (this was the original ending so no happy EDI voiceover, just glowing eyes everywhere). And my immediate reaction was - you bastards managed to trick me. I wasn't angry with the writers but with myself for allowing them to fool me.

Subsequently playing Leviathan helped explain a bit more what was going on and confirmed it could all have been in Shepard's mind and I am still very much inclined towards the explanation that the writers were trying to simulate indoctrination. This may not be the case, but I for one am happy to go with that. Naturally I think the only valid ending is Destroy.

Certinaly could be.  I would say that, at the very least, the writers were suggesting that this could be the case.  The idea about the Kid's confused, panicked responses at the beginning are pretty interesting too, never thought of that.

And the final dream - you mean that it could imply that Shepard's pursuit of his goals means certain doom for the future?  This would certainly imply that the Reapers are influencing, or even in control of, the dreams... hmm possible.  I'll admit I preferred them being more a clue into Shepard's own psyche, influenced by war and death as well as Reaper contact rather than controlled by them, but it does make sense... certainly possible

many wish to reinvent the wheel by forcing any given choice as canon, without consideration of the story as the guide to the canon choice, as there is one, if not disclosed by the writers, it's there. So the fans/Sheps can 'pick' a choice, doesn't make it the actual 'story devised' canon ending choice.

probably what's so frustrating about IT..er. it..the actual canon ending for ME trilogy. Boware are NOW loath to admit to one..for obvious reasons.

[GreyLycanTrope]

spirosz wrote...

Even then, it's not a new "concept" in terms of sci-fi.  It's just that the execution in ME3 was done in a terrible way, which is why it bugs a lot of us (and not because we don't understand it).    

Absolutely I should have worded that better.

[kalasaurus]

fiendishchicken wrote...

Because of forced emotions.

BW thinks that the kid really affects Shepard. I felt genuinely sad seeing the kid die. But he just kept appearing.

Now everytime I see him, I'm like 'DIE MOTHER****ER DIE!!'

Ugh, this so much.

It also gives the Reapers a less sinister face.  The whole game we're told they're these evil space squids who only want our destruction, and we'd be less likely to buy their reason of trying to help us if a hologram of Harby started talking to us.

I guess the faces of the friends Shepard lost wasn't enough for this innocence/ manipulation/ forced emotion.  A dead child has more impact I guess.  Also, it's easier since all players saw vent-boy die, and not everyone lost Mordin/ Thane/ Kaidan or Ash/ Legion/ Miranda, etc..

[Davik Kang]

AlanC9 wrote...
How about actually giving us your interpretation, then? Or did you do that already and I missed it?

Edit: someone here proposed a long time ago that the entire Catalyst scene is just psychic communication -- mostly as a way to rationalize the somewhat bizarre activiation procedure for the Crucible. The hard part is rationalizing the scene where the unconscious Shepard is riding up on an elevator; if Shepard's unconscious, she isn't hallucinating.

Well it's in my sig... and you've read it already... in fact the person you mention in the Edit: could be me.

But the thing is, my interpretation isn't really relevant.  I'm happy to discuss it always, but this thread is more addressing the possible reasons for the Child's appearance, and motives behind it, according to ANY interpretation.  That is, simply attempting to explain it in a way that makes sense, regardless of whether you think IT or hallucinations or projections or the Child genuinely is there in holographic form.

Basically, the Kid being there makes sense so long as you accept that the Reapers are to some extent (even if it is minimal) manipulating Shepard's mind.  This opens up the possibility that they are manipulating more than just the appearance of the Kid, but maybe the whole scene or other things.  Secondly, I'm saying Bioware's use of this Dream Character indicates that the writers are at least suggesting that the ending could be a dream, even if it actually isn't.  It's not clear either way, but I'm trying to demonstrate that it makes a lot of sense in a way that assuming 'everything to be happening exactly as we see it' doesn't.

In other words, by constructing the ending as they have, Bioware are asking us "is this real?  Is it a dream?" and IMO we don't really know the answer to this, even now.  And my point being that this was the intention of the writers.  So it could be real, or imaginary, or somewhere in-between, and that's what the writers had in mind, though each player has their own (often very strong) view on that point, and perhaps the writers do too.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 26 janvier 2013 - 09:48 .

[Wayning_Star]

Davik Kang wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
How about actually giving us your interpretation, then? Or did you do that already and I missed it?

Edit: someone here proposed a long time ago that the entire Catalyst scene is just psychic communication -- mostly as a way to rationalize the somewhat bizarre activiation procedure for the Crucible. The hard part is rationalizing the scene where the unconscious Shepard is riding up on an elevator; if Shepard's unconscious, she isn't hallucinating.

Well it's in my sig... and you've read it already... in fact the person you mention in the Edit: could be me.

But the thing is, my interpretation isn't really relevant.  I'm happy to discuss it always, but this thread is more addressing the possible reasons for the Child's appearance, and motives behind it, according to ANY interpretation.  That is, simply attempting to explain it in a way that makes sense, regardless of whether you think IT or hallucinations or projections or the Child genuinely is there in holographic form.

Basically, the Kid being there makes sense so long as you accept that the Reapers are to some extent (even if it is minimal) manipulating Shepard's mind.  This opens up the possibility that they are manipulating more than just the appearance of the Kid, but maybe the whole scene or other things.  Secondly, I'm saying Bioware's use of this Dream Character indicates that the writers are at least suggesting that the ending could be a dream, even if it actually isn't.  It's not clear either way, but I'm trying to demonstrate that it makes a lot of sense in a way that assuming 'everything to be happening exactly as we see it' doesn't.

In other words, by constructing the ending as they have, Bioware are asking us "is this real?  Is it a dream?" and IMO we don't really know the answer to this, even now.  And my point being that this was the intention of the writers.  So it could be real, or imaginary, or somewhere in-between, and that's what the writers had in mind, though each player has their own (often very strong) view on that point, and perhaps the writers do too.

and the bold denotes the denial of their intetions. A fan based trilogy...

(while humming "We are the champions my friends"..etc. can't sell you what you already know?)

[Davik Kang]

Wayning_Star wrote...
many wish to reinvent the wheel by forcing any given choice as canon, without consideration of the story as the guide to the canon choice, as there is one, if not disclosed by the writers, it's there. So the fans/Sheps can 'pick' a choice, doesn't make it the actual 'story devised' canon ending choice. 

probably what's so frustrating about IT..er. it..the actual canon ending for ME trilogy. Boware are NOW loath to admit to one..for obvious reasons.

Yes absolutely, and hence why it would be better to keep IT discussion out of this, as it tends to bring emotional responses out of players when I'm trying to focus on the actual in-game content and reasons behind the devs' choices.

The thing is, the whole IT idea does emerge from in-game evidence, rather than being a retrospective attempt to use headcanon to force a canon ending on everyone (or - perhaps worse - to claim that some players' Shepard character screwed up the whole thing by making the wrong choice).  But just because it emerges from in-game evidence doesn't mean it's necessarily right, but it can be supported in this way.

It's one way to rationalise the ending, but it does make sense, as do various other interpretations; but we can look at the Child's endgame appearance independently of any given interpretation, even though that will of course influence our final opinions.

[AlanC9]

Davik Kang wrote...

Well it's in my sig... and you've read it already... in fact the person you mention in the Edit: could be me.

I didn't see the sig till now.

Basically, the Kid being there makes sense so long as you accept that the Reapers are to some extent (even if it is minimal) manipulating Shepard's mind.  This opens up the possibility that they are manipulating more than just the appearance of the Kid, but maybe the whole scene or other things.  Secondly, I'm saying Bioware's use of this Dream Character indicates that the writers are at least suggesting that the ending could be a dream, even if it actually isn't.  It's not clear either way, but I'm trying to demonstrate that it makes a lot of sense in a way that assuming 'everything to be happening exactly as we see it' doesn't.

In other words, by constructing the ending as they have, Bioware are asking us "is this real?  Is it a dream?" and IMO we don't really know the answer to this, even now.  And my point being that this was the intention of the writers.  So it could be real, or imaginary, or somewhere in-between, and that's what the writers had in mind, though each player has their own (often very strong) view on that point, and perhaps the writers do too.

And I guess I have the same objection to this that I had when we talked about it before, assuming that really was us talking. If Bio wants to play that strategy they need to remain in Shepard's POV. They didn't. It's one thing to lie to Shepard. It's another to lie to me.

[Wayning_Star]

but we can look at the Child's endgame appearance independently of any given interpretation, even though that will of course influence our final opinions.

Not me, I don't put much if any stock in the kids appearance, the dreamstates or even the catalysts' supposed intent. The Leviathan regulate that to the 'oh crap!' file.

The Apex race gambit roils the idea that the catalyst is actually running anything or even 'dosing' Shep with emotionals to gain trusts. It doesn't need trust, its the prime mover, a little too obviously. The only race to benefit from choices, such as all but synthesis is the Leviathan.

For me that ruins the other choices, IF the human element in the story don't want to end up thralls. It's what they do and they do it very well..for millions of years..even evaded thousands of years of harvest just to..well

We don't know what they will do..or do we?

[Davik Kang]

AlanC9 wrote...
And I guess I have the same objection to this that I had when we talked about it before, assuming that really was us talking. If Bio wants to play that strategy they need to remain in Shepard's POV. They didn't. It's one thing to lie to Shepard. It's another to lie to me.

Yes that was exactly your reaction before.  But I think they have to deceive the player to properly convey the possibility of indoctrination.  If we just watched Shepard struggling without being part of it ourselves, I think it would be quite weak and may be what they were talking about when they dropped the original idea due to the awkward mechanics.

But I also don't necessarily think that they were definitely lying to you - just that the possibility is there.  They're asking us "were we lying?" to follow the theme.  For a very basic analogy, is Paul Verhoeven lying to us in Total Recall?  Or is he just asking us to examine the facts?  It's not exactly the same because that's the theme of the whole movie, whereas such ideas are only briefly touched on in ME (such as in the Geth Consensus), but the idea of indoctrination, and how it is perceived, has always always there.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 26 janvier 2013 - 10:13 .