553 réponses à ce sujet

[ghost9191]

Seival wrote...

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

That's what Synthesis was missing the whole time. An epic fist bump!

Soldier and husk scene is much better than an epic fist bump. This scene says so much without any words - the great example of truly professional work.

I love how in synthesis and control when the guy without the helmet is attacked, the guy with the helmet just crawls away and leaves him to his fate, despite having just been rescued by him.

When you are wounded and too tired, the power of will stops helping at some point. Not all soldiers are Shepards.

not all shepards are soldiers. mine was a engineer


and well even in the destroy scene the marine with the helmet didn't do much . it is different because the marine without the helmet had a little more fight in him

[Seival]

Redbelle wrote...

Seival wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

That's what Synthesis was missing the whole time. An epic fist bump!

Soldier and husk scene is much better than an epic fist bump. This scene says so much without any words - the great example of truly professional work.

Yet raises question's as to.... 'how', both simultaneously came to the same viewpoint given that both were, a few seconds earlier, in a situation where the soldier was fighting for his life in a brown trousers life or death situation.....

While the husk, whose organs, skin and water content are converted into cybernetic materials after being impaled through the chest with a large spike that kills the victim, before being converted and released as a hostile agent of bitey clawry carnage........ stop attacking each other, given that just moment's ago they were fighting to the bitter end with not one of the repective opposing sides showing signs that they wanted to, or were prepared to stop. Till the green wave MADE them stop.

And here is where an element of movie magic comes into play. The motivations of each side should remain the same regardless of being pysically altered. Yet for the needs of the story, they don't.

Unless you want to develop the fact that the husks are also signal broadcasters for the Reapers, in which case the husks are in fact just mindless zombies enacting the new directive of the Reapers....... in which case we then have to look at the soldier who is likewise not fighting, consider the Reaper's are influencing their husks and think...... Hmmmmm.

@ tickle Clearly he comes from the "You must.....sacrifice yourself..... SO I CAN LIVE"!!! school of soldiering

How? Understanding is the great force, you know?

Just compare Control and Synthesis variants of "husks stopped attacking scene". In Control variant husks are just beasts on the leash, master ordered - they obeyed. In Synthesis variant husks stopped attacking because they gained understanding: the fighting is over, we don't have any reasons to attack those creatures.

Call this "space magic" if you want. The entire "Mass Effect" is space magic. All technologies described in the story might be completely impossible in reality.

[Seival]

ghost9191 wrote...

Seival wrote...

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

That's what Synthesis was missing the whole time. An epic fist bump!

Soldier and husk scene is much better than an epic fist bump. This scene says so much without any words - the great example of truly professional work.

I love how in synthesis and control when the guy without the helmet is attacked, the guy with the helmet just crawls away and leaves him to his fate, despite having just been rescued by him.

When you are wounded and too tired, the power of will stops helping at some point. Not all soldiers are Shepards.

not all shepards are soldiers. mine was a engineer


and well even in the destroy scene the marine with the helmet didn't do much . it is different because the marine without the helmet had a little more fight in him

Too different epilogues have to look differently even in some small details. Control and Synthesis are much closer to each other than to Destroy. Control and Synthesis represent positive side of the ending's concept, while Destroy and Refusal represent negative side of the ending's concept.

Modifié par Seival, 29 mai 2013 - 10:28 .

[Seival]

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

That's what Synthesis was missing the whole time. An epic fist bump!

Soldier and husk scene is much better than an epic fist bump. This scene says so much without any words - the great example of truly professional work.

I love how in synthesis and control when the guy without the helmet is attacked, the guy with the helmet just crawls away and leaves him to his fate, despite having just been rescued by him.

When you are wounded and too tired, the power of will stops helping at some point. Not all soldiers are Shepards.

fair point, but it still seems rather... heartless to just sit there and watch the guy about to be killed (things might be awkward between those two afterwards)

Believe me, when you are in shock (real shock, triggered by pain and exhaustion) you can't see or hear anything around. The best you can do is to crawl around, or just pointlessly move your limbs.

[Seival]

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...
and well even in the destroy scene the marine with the helmet didn't do much . it is different because the marine without the helmet had a little more fight in him

Too different epilogues have to look differently even in some small details. Control and Synthesis are much closer to each other than to Destroy. Control and Synthesis represent positive side of the ending's concept, while Destroy and Refusal represent negative side of the ending's concept.

prepare for the hate!

I still find avoiding unneeded deaths positive, and unneeded killing negative. No one can convince me otherwise.

[Redbelle]

Understanding is less a force, more of a calling. You are either prepared to go through the effort of scrutiny to gain a better understanding of something, or not. And it's no good arguing that we can neveer understand thing's in their entirity. Probably true, but it's the never ending search for better understanding heaped on the understandings of the past that allow us as a people to go from apples falling on heads, to postulating, based on theory of our understanding of how things work, that a Higg's Bosun is the logical way the unverse could work, and then build a wacking great big machine to go find it...... which apparently, it may have? Hard to say really. No one actually knows what a higgs looks like or how to detect it. But they say they may have because they detected something similar to their theorectical model. Give em 50 years, they'll figure it out eventually. And if it turns out the higgs was a unicorn? There are higgless models to pursue for how the universe works.

Getting off topic here.


Your example holds two models for husks for the two situations.

Control = husk who is a slave to a masters will.

Synthesis = husk who gain's understanding. (which holds several possible implication's).

Two things. The husk is either a slave or a sentient creature capable of thought, who is capable of the process of understanding.

In the slave event, the Reaper controls the husk. How I won't go into how. But the codex says that Reapers use husks as signal broadcasters. Given this to be the case, it is plusible that the Reaper told the husk to leave the soldier alone.

Synth on the other hand, you allude that it is the husk, not the Reaper control, that is the dominant factor at play. In which case, the event seen in control, described above, is likely false, and has to be the husk running away without Reaper control intervention.

A husk is essentially a dead person reanimated after having it's body cybernetically altered. So, is it the husk who is in the driving seat of deciding it's intent. Or, given that Reapers broadcast to it, is it the Reapers directing the intention's and subsequent action's of the husk?

Basically, it comes down to this. Who controls the husk. The husk itself, or the Reapers? And thereby, which of these two is responsible for not attacking the solider?

And along side that question is another. Does synthesis fundamentally change the nature of the husk that the Reapers no longer control it? Or is the husk still connected to the Reapers and it's action's are symbolic of a new Reaper frame of mind?

[Redbelle]

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

That's what Synthesis was missing the whole time. An epic fist bump!

Soldier and husk scene is much better than an epic fist bump. This scene says so much without any words - the great example of truly professional work.

I love how in synthesis and control when the guy without the helmet is attacked, the guy with the helmet just crawls away and leaves him to his fate, despite having just been rescued by him.

When you are wounded and too tired, the power of will stops helping at some point. Not all soldiers are Shepards.

fair point, but it still seems rather... heartless to just sit there and watch the guy about to be killed (things might be awkward between those two afterwards)

Only if the other guy lives..... otherwise then, you get to have his boots,

[Seival]

Redbelle wrote...

Understanding is less a force, more of a calling. You are either prepared to go through the effort of scrutiny to gain a better understanding of something, or not. And it's no good arguing that we can neveer understand thing's in their entirity. Probably true, but it's the never ending search for better understanding heaped on the understandings of the past that allow us as a people to go from apples falling on heads, to postulating, based on theory of our understanding of how things work, that a Higg's Bosun is the logical way the unverse could work, and then build a wacking great big machine to go find it...... which apparently, it may have? Hard to say really. No one actually knows what a higgs looks like or how to detect it. But they say they may have because they detected something similar to their theorectical model. Give em 50 years, they'll figure it out eventually. And if it turns out the higgs was a unicorn? There are higgless models to pursue for how the universe works.

Getting off topic here.


Your example holds two models for husks for the two situations.

Control = husk who is a slave to a masters will.

Synthesis = husk who gain's understanding. (which holds several possible implication's).

Two things. The husk is either a slave or a sentient creature capable of thought, who is capable of the process of understanding.

In the slave event, the Reaper controls the husk. How I won't go into how. But the codex says that Reapers use husks as signal broadcasters. Given this to be the case, it is plusible that the Reaper told the husk to leave the soldier alone.

Synth on the other hand, you allude that it is the husk, not the Reaper control, that is the dominant factor at play. In which case, the event seen in control, described above, is likely false, and has to be the husk running away without Reaper control intervention.

A husk is essentially a dead person reanimated after having it's body cybernetically altered. So, is it the husk who is in the driving seat of deciding it's intent. Or, given that Reapers broadcast to it, is it the Reapers directing the intention's and subsequent action's of the husk?

Basically, it comes down to this. Who controls the husk. The husk itself, or the Reapers? And thereby, which of these two is responsible for not attacking the solider?

And along side that question is another. Does synthesis fundamentally change the nature of the husk that the Reapers no longer control it? Or is the husk still connected to the Reapers and it's action's are symbolic of a new Reaper frame of mind?

In the epilogue synthesized husk definitely acted like an individual. Otherwise the scene would be almost the same as in case of Control.

[Redbelle]

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...
and well even in the destroy scene the marine with the helmet didn't do much . it is different because the marine without the helmet had a little more fight in him

Too different epilogues have to look differently even in some small details. Control and Synthesis are much closer to each other than to Destroy. Control and Synthesis represent positive side of the ending's concept, while Destroy and Refusal represent negative side of the ending's concept.

prepare for the hate!

I can't help but see that people think of refusal in the wrong light..... and to be honest, BW's take on refusal was not what fans were asking for.

Refusal, as a fan request, was a plea to not allow the ending's to stand as they were. Not with a Catalyst who made absolutist, contradictory statement's in such an intellectural emotion vacuum that it demonstrated an imbalanced viewpoint that made many fans rebel against not only it's multi pronged, contradictionary concepts of what to do with the Crucible, but resulted in alot of hate in that a Deus Ex Machina with no player emotional investment stepped in at the 11th hour and stole the inititive from Shepard and the player.

Refusal was a fan request to develop another ending that allowed to player to experience another option with a favourable outcome. At the same time, the ending of ME2 was mentioned, where the ME2's ending's ranged from Total success (everyone lives) > Partial Success (some die but the mission was a success) > Total failure (everyone and Shepard dies).

ME3's 3 ending's were looked upon as a partial success, in that none of the option's provided a satisfactory conclusion. Therefore, player's requested expanding the ending, so that we through our past action's, we could get a total failure or total success event.

Somewhere, the message got garbled. Or maybe BW decided to use it's DM pervogative and force the total success to go through a saving throw which it lost. Regardless. Refusal became a total failure event within the game...... because other fan requests were also at work........ including, Liara's time capsule.

The one extra ending and the ECDLC, hold alot of what fan's asked BW for...... but only those thing's that fitted BW's vision of the game. It is telling that while fan's asked a total success, AS WELL AS a total failure, endings, BW only provided one that is seen as a total failure event. Demonstrating a disconnect between what player's wanted as an end game objective, and the vision of what CH and co wanted the ending to be like. (Those guy's need to focus on making a video game an video game, before trying to make a game art. After all, how can a video game be deemed to video gamey? I'd say it's more about acheiving successful execution of game play element's...... anyways).

Refuse, IMO, was an effort by the fans to bring a broader spectrum of end game moment's to ME3's end game. An effort that would otherwise have left the ending as a rushed, and badly conceived narrative with no explanation's for how certain event's happened. And likewise, incorporated Chekov gun's that had been developed but left unfired.

Regardless. I would have to say that the Citadel DLC's video gamey execution was by far better handled than the end of ME3. Precisely because it gives you video game element's that are familier, but subverted to a point that they were expected, yet at the same time, came out of the blue. That and the brilliant execution and tone of the gameplay, along with giving player's the chance to really connect with the squad one last time, (like, I believe, Patrick Weekes fought for in the form of the message terminal during the priority Earth), made Citadel a much more satisfying and fufilling experience that would not have happened, without a player, being Shepard, calling the shots and directing the story. Right up till the best of times.

Modifié par Redbelle, 29 mai 2013 - 11:23 .

[Redbelle]

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...
Believe me, when you are in shock (real shock, triggered by pain and exhaustion) you can't see or hear anything around. The best you can do is to crawl around, or just pointlessly move your limbs.

i assume you're speaking from experience/intimate knowledge? if so, very well it was just something i noticed when watching the ending (and in destroy he isn't put in the same situation)

Oh believe me, you can do alot if you have the will power. Even if your body think's it's to exhausted or stressed to move. It just requires being concious and lucid, and having the drive to force yourself on.

A goal helps too. Otherwise there is no point in moving anywhere or doing anything other than lie where you are and focus on your breathing to try and oygenate the blood to help deal with whatever knocked you for six. Shallow breathing is good for quick bursts of activity, but for prolonged activity it's energy intensive. Deep breath's involving the diaphram are better as it provides more oxygen to the blood, helps slow the heartbeat and.........

I'm going on, aren't I-_-

Modifié par Redbelle, 29 mai 2013 - 11:28 .

[Redbelle]

tickle267 wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

tickle267 wrote...
fair point, but it still seems rather... heartless to just sit there and watch the guy about to be killed (things might be awkward between those two afterwards)

Only if the other guy lives..... otherwise then, you get to have his boots,

but he does live. so yeah... awkward.

Yeeeeah....... He didn't think the whole plan through.

[thehomeworld]

Seival wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

Seival wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

That's what Synthesis was missing the whole time. An epic fist bump!

Soldier and husk scene is much better than an epic fist bump. This scene says so much without any words - the great example of truly professional work.

Yet raises question's as to.... 'how', both simultaneously came to the same viewpoint given that both were, a few seconds earlier, in a situation where the soldier was fighting for his life in a brown trousers life or death situation.....

While the husk, whose organs, skin and water content are converted into cybernetic materials after being impaled through the chest with a large spike that kills the victim, before being converted and released as a hostile agent of bitey clawry carnage........ stop attacking each other, given that just moment's ago they were fighting to the bitter end with not one of the repective opposing sides showing signs that they wanted to, or were prepared to stop. Till the green wave MADE them stop.

And here is where an element of movie magic comes into play. The motivations of each side should remain the same regardless of being pysically altered. Yet for the needs of the story, they don't.

Unless you want to develop the fact that the husks are also signal broadcasters for the Reapers, in which case the husks are in fact just mindless zombies enacting the new directive of the Reapers....... in which case we then have to look at the soldier who is likewise not fighting, consider the Reaper's are influencing their husks and think...... Hmmmmm.

@ tickle Clearly he comes from the "You must.....sacrifice yourself..... SO I CAN LIVE"!!! school of soldiering

How? Understanding is the great force, you know?

Just compare Control and Synthesis variants of "husks stopped attacking scene". In Control variant husks are just beasts on the leash, master ordered - they obeyed. In Synthesis variant husks stopped attacking because they gained understanding: the fighting is over, we don't have any reasons to attack those creatures.

Call this "space magic" if you want. The entire "Mass Effect" is space magic. All technologies described in the story might be completely impossible in reality.

Back in ME you could discover some writings about husks and how they behave. They said that the husks will fallow the reapers orders once the reapers are out of range and the harvest is over the husks are still alive but they forgo the will to live they will do nothing for themselves they won't seek shelter, they won't try to obtain or scavange for food they will more or less just lay down to die without the reapers talking or constantly signaling them. They thought it was related to beacons but I think its more of wi-fi their bodies have tech in them that tech keeps in constant contact with the server (the reaper) and once that server cuts the link the husk no longer gets the check in signal to affirm their masters are still present once that reassurance and or command is gone they can't deal with it.

I think the reason that they've both come to the same conclusion is that they organic was brainwashed and the husk was told it was a friendly.

Modifié par thehomeworld, 29 mai 2013 - 11:52 .

[ghost9191]

Seival wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

Seival wrote...

tickle267 wrote...

Seival wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

That's what Synthesis was missing the whole time. An epic fist bump!

Soldier and husk scene is much better than an epic fist bump. This scene says so much without any words - the great example of truly professional work.

I love how in synthesis and control when the guy without the helmet is attacked, the guy with the helmet just crawls away and leaves him to his fate, despite having just been rescued by him.

When you are wounded and too tired, the power of will stops helping at some point. Not all soldiers are Shepards.

not all shepards are soldiers. mine was a engineer


and well even in the destroy scene the marine with the helmet didn't do much . it is different because the marine without the helmet had a little more fight in him

Too different epilogues have to look differently even in some small details. Control and Synthesis are much closer to each other than to Destroy. Control and Synthesis represent positive side of the ending's concept, while Destroy and Refusal represent negative side of the ending's concept.

well yeah , but what was negative about the destroy scene? or epilogue. low ems yeah , it was neg as hell lol but high was decent. Kinda left me with hope for the future of ME

Modifié par ghost9191, 29 mai 2013 - 11:52 .

[AlanC9]

Redbelle wrote...
ME3's 3 ending's were looked upon as a partial success, in that none of the option's provided a satisfactory conclusion. Therefore, player's requested expanding the ending, so that we through our past action's, we could get a total failure or total success event.

Somewhere, the message got garbled. Or maybe BW decided to use it's DM pervogative and force the total success to go through a saving throw which it lost. Regardless. Refusal became a total failure event within the game...... because other fan requests were also at work........ including, Liara's time capsule.

Part of the problem was that so many of the Refuse requests were arguments like "my Shepard would never go along with this!" rather than requests for a total victory.

Anyway, I don't see why Bio should feel obligated to make changes that are opposed to their vision of the game. 

[Auld Wulf]

The husk thing is far, far easily explained if you put a little thought into it.

Now, some have pushed that husks are controlled, and that's fine. What's being overlooked, however, is that control is two way. I/O. You have the signal coming in, and the signal going out. What this means is that the Reaper is able to experience being an individual husk.

Let that percolate for a moment.

In the Synthesis ending, we see a husk looking up in awe. It's clearly experiencing something it never has before. But here's the crux: Is it the husk experiencing that, or the Reaper? The I/O interface is constantly active, so the Reaper is there in the body of the husk as much as it is in its own body. To offer a comparison, think of EDI's new robotic body and the relation she has between the aforementioned and the Normandy. The situation is very similar.

Husks are Reaper controlled troops, and information is being fed from husks back to the Reapers all the time. When the Reaper is first granted sapience, it sees through the eyes of its husks -- many bodies, but each with two eyes. Smallness, largeness, and oneness at the same time, as it wakes to its own individuality. The feedback across the I/O is the expression of awe. Thus the husks under that Reaper's control stare in awe, as that's what the Reaper is feeling in regards to the new stimuli, and that's being fed back to the husks.

The husks might end up becoming more, but they don't necessarily have to be. They might just be reanimated bodies as some have suggested. I won't argue with the codex -- but even if they are just reanimated bodies, there's no reason that we wouldn't see the expression of awe on them by proxy of the Reaper who's feeling that awe. It has a face, it has many faces, it can express that feeling of awe. Something it never has before.

This, to me, is more than enough proof that the Reapers are completely free willed in Synthesis, as in that moment you see the feeling of the Reaper. You understand that it's overwhelmed. Couple this with how incredibly confused the Reaper acts in Synthesis versus Control, and what's going on is fairly obvious.

The husks are merely echoes, the awe is the Reaper's own.

[xlegionx]

Auld Wulf wrote...

Now, some have pushed that husks are controlled, and that's fine. What's being overlooked, however, is that control is two way. I/O. You have the signal coming in, and the signal going out. What this means is that the Reaper is able to experience being an individual husk.

Not necessarily the worst idea, and it's relatively well reasoned by the rest of your post, but ultimately I think this comes down as speculation, largely because we have no proof that the husks send a signal back to a Reaper.

[AlexMBrennan]

And how do you think they can control husks without getting any input? They could, at best, blindly flail and run into walls - it would be like driving a car blindfolded.

[xlegionx]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

And how do you think they can control husks without getting any input? They could, at best, blindly flail and run into walls - it would be like driving a car blindfolded.

It's not like the husks are marionettes that would fall limp on the ground if they lost contact with the Reapers. This is also speculation, but the nanites in husks might have some basic routines that allow the husk the slightest amount of autonomy it would need to independent carry out its task.

[Auld Wulf]

xlegionx wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

Now, some have pushed that husks are controlled, and that's fine. What's being overlooked, however, is that control is two way. I/O. You have the signal coming in, and the signal going out. What this means is that the Reaper is able to experience being an individual husk.

Not necessarily the worst idea, and it's relatively well reasoned by the rest of your post, but ultimately I think this comes down as speculation, largely because we have no proof that the husks send a signal back to a Reaper.

How on earth is it speculation? They control husks from half a system away or more with huge amounts of granularity. How are they going to achieve that with some form of I/O? This is robotics basics, right here. It's like expecting someone to fly a remote-controlled helicopter with their eyes closed -- but micro-managing an army of bipedal bodies is so much more complicated than that.

It's really not speculation if you think about it. Hence the 'let it percolate' statement.

[Asharad Hett]

In ME1, husks were everywhere. Are we saying that Sovereign controlled them all?