1814 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

The delivery definitely implied a joke, folks.

Time to lighten up and let it go.

[PMC65]

dreamgazer wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Conversely, if they were not doing that they would have had no issue showing a reunion scene/confirmation Shepard does not die under the rubble (insert comicon troll here)

Comicon troll? What did Bioware do there?

A dev very obviously joked around about the breath scene being a shot of Shepard's dying breath.

Certain folks of the BSN, who hadn't seen/heard it in person, latched onto it as some malicious and intended thing.

Actually, people that were there was also upset. I was at the San Diego Comic Con base that day (didn't have tickets to the actual comic con) and as the attendees started to arrive at the base, that was the hot topic. I spoke with the guy later that evening and he was surprised that people took it seriously. Bad timing really, but he was not trolling ... just making a joke that fell flat. Nothing more.

*I apologize for not remembering his name. He was a nice guy. All of the Bioware employees I've met in person have been nice, to be honest. Even Corey Gaspur, who still owes me a crayon level mission so that I can play MP.

[JamesFaith]

dreamgazer wrote...

The delivery definitely implied a joke, folks.

There is one saying in my country and raw translation is:

When someone wants to be offended, even 'good morning' would be enough for him.

It looks that it's working for "be trolled" too.

Modifié par JamesFaith, 21 décembre 2013 - 02:35 .

[crimzontearz]

Well PMC...question is...why nit CLARIFY later? Too hard?

[AlanC9]

crimzontearz wrote...

No? Too hard? Form of punishment for those who did not get/appreciate the joke?

Yep . Bio hates you. 

[crimzontearz]

Feeling is mutual for some of the Bio staff (especially some of the mods) but mine was a honest question

[Iakus]

dreamgazer wrote...

The delivery definitely implied a joke, folks.

Time to lighten up and let it go.

And the in-game scene clearly makes such a "joke" all too plausible.

[dreamgazer]

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

The delivery definitely implied a joke, folks.

Time to lighten up and let it go.

And the in-game scene clearly makes such a "joke" all too plausible.

Uh-huh. So long as you ignore intent and the nature of breathing, of course.

[crimzontearz]

Uh-huh. So long as you ignore intent and the nature of breathing, of course.

as per David Gaider himself "Author intent means nothing if it is not received the right way"

sooo yeah

[Nole]

These whiners.

[dreamgazer]

crimzontearz wrote...

Uh-huh. So long as you ignore intent and the nature of breathing, of course.

as per David Gaider himself "Author intent means nothing if it is not received the right way"

sooo yeah

And I, and most others, received it the right way. So, yeah.

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...
If they're so invincible then there are no "troublesome species"  They just crush everyone under their boot and be done with it "When a fire burns, is it conflict" and all that

This is a non sequitur. We were talking about a case where the Reapers are having trouble harvesting a cycle, remember? 

I'm saying the Reapers care nothing for individuals, but will take an effort to preserve a species as a whole (which appears to be what the Sovereign-class Reapers are for)  If a Reaper thinks a species is worthy of "preservation" they will not wipe them out.  Well, except they'll turn them into goo, but they consider that "ascension" or somesuch.  I think Reapers would distinguish between combatants and noncombatants.  Noncombatants are easier to take alive

OK ... so how does this actually inhibit the Reapers? They can't exterminate a race that's worthy of preserving. But they can still blow up their warships, right? Conquer their cities? Fire on their tanks? But they can't bomb their factories?

As for Walter White, are you, me, and Mac all talking about the same thing? Sounds like you're saying that Mac was trying to kill Shepard but Bio botched the job.

Modifié par AlanC9, 21 décembre 2013 - 03:05 .

[crimzontearz]

And for those who did not simple word of god would have served just fine, Bioware did it before but for this issue they do not, again I GENUINELY wonder why

[Dean_the_Young]

crimzontearz wrote...

And for those who did not simple word of god would have served just fine, Bioware did it before but for this issue they do not, again I GENUINELY wonder why

Either (a) they are out to spite you specifically, or ( they're leaving it open so people can conclude Shepard's survival as they prefer/feel appropriate within the context of Destroy.

[PMC65]

crimzontearz wrote...

Well PMC...question is...why nit CLARIFY later? Too hard?

I don't know, to be honest. I thought he did publicly say that he was joking later, but I can't say for sure. I just know what he was saying that night at the party.

Personally, I wish that they had shown Shepard get his/her butt up instead of that schlocky B movie snip, but we have what we have. The milk was spilled and I just refuse to look at it anymore. Time to move on.

EDIT: Bolded part is directed at myself, not others.

Modifié par PMC65, 21 décembre 2013 - 03:21 .

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

This is a non sequitur. We were talking about a case where the Reapers are having trouble harvesting a cycle, remember?

That's just it, if the Reapers are as all-powerful as ME3 claims,, having trouble in a cycle is a complete non-issue.

OK ... so how does this actually inhibit the Reapers? They can't exterminate a race that's worthy of preserving. But they can still blow up their warships, right? Conquer their cities? Fire on their tanks? But they can't bomb their factories?

 

Not if bombing the factories risks destroying a good crop of candidates worthy of ascension

As for Walter White, are you, me, and Mac all talking about the same thing? Sounds like you're saying that Mac was trying to kill Shepard but Bio botched the job.

Yeah pretty much.  The headsman's axe was pretty dull and rusty.  Though I guess in the end it got the job done.  

[Iakus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

And for those who did not simple word of god would have served just fine, Bioware did it before but for this issue they do not, again I GENUINELY wonder why

Either (a) they are out to spite you specifically, or ( they're leaving it open so people can conclude Shepard's survival as they prefer/feel appropriate within the context of Destroy.

What makes Destroy so special it requires leaving it open and not the other endings?

[dreamgazer]

iakus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

And for those who did not simple word of god would have served just fine, Bioware did it before but for this issue they do not, again I GENUINELY wonder why

Either (a) they are out to spite you specifically, or ( they're leaving it open so people can conclude Shepard's survival as they prefer/feel appropriate within the context of Destroy.

What makes Destroy so special it requires leaving it open and not the other endings?

Because the other endings have to deal with the lack of closure about the Reapers, I suppose.

[Dean_the_Young]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

This is a non sequitur. We were talking about a case where the Reapers are having trouble harvesting a cycle, remember?

That's just it, if the Reapers are as all-powerful as ME3 claims,, having trouble in a cycle is a complete non-issue.

Which is why conventional victory is a complete non-issue in ME3. It isn't possible, and no authority figure in the game pretends that it is.

You're still on a non-sequitur, since we're talking about a scenario in which the Crucible is localized in effect and is being attempted to justify a conventional victory scenario as a mobile superweapon. To which Alan and I are saying... that still wouldn't work, since the Reapers can escalate rather than staying to be beaten or retreating to launch an insurgency war.

OK ... so how does this actually inhibit the Reapers? They can't exterminate a race that's worthy of preserving. But they can still blow up their warships, right? Conquer their cities? Fire on their tanks? But they can't bomb their factories?

 

Not if bombing the factories risks destroying a good crop of candidates worthy of ascension

Berkenstein already demonstrates that the Reapers are willing to destroy a good crop of potential ascension candidates in pursuit of military efficacy.

The Reapers don't try to harvest everyone, just enough for their purposes.

As for Walter White, are you, me, and Mac all talking about the same thing? Sounds like you're saying that Mac was trying to kill Shepard but Bio botched the job.

Yeah pretty much.  The headsman's axe was pretty dull and rusty.  Though I guess in the end it got the job done.  

Pity. My destroy Shepard lived.

[Dean_the_Young]

iakus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

And for those who did not simple word of god would have served just fine, Bioware did it before but for this issue they do not, again I GENUINELY wonder why

Either (a) they are out to spite you specifically, or ( they're leaving it open so people can conclude Shepard's survival as they prefer/feel appropriate within the context of Destroy.

What makes Destroy so special it requires leaving it open and not the other endings?

Requires? Nothing. Fiction is arbitrary. Indulged? Quite likely as a narrative/emotional tradeoff for resolution of the ambiguity of the Reapers's fate in the other endings.

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
This is a non sequitur. We were talking about a case where the Reapers are having trouble harvesting a cycle, remember?

That's just it, if the Reapers are as all-powerful as ME3 claims,, having trouble in a cycle is a complete non-issue.

You're really not following the thread. We were talking about CrutchCricket's alternative version of the Crucible that would lead to a conventional victory. I certainly agree that in ME3 as written the Reapers aren't having any particular trouble. But if the Reapers aren't going to have trouble, why are you bothering to talk about limitations on Reaper actions below? What version of ME3 are you talking about?

Not if bombing the factories risks destroying a good crop of candidates worthy of ascension

Destroying a dreadnought doesn't also destroy a crop of candidates? 

Yeah pretty much.  The headsman's axe was pretty dull and rusty.  Though I guess in the end it got the job done.  

For your Shep, anyway. Shame his head was so loose.

[Iakus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Requires? Nothing. Fiction is arbitrary. Indulged? Quite likely as a narrative/emotional tradeoff for resolution of the ambiguity of the Reapers's fate in the other endings.

Funny, since in EC Bioware went to laughable lengths (especially with Synthesis) to try and convince us everything is just PEACHY with the Reapers.

Shepard?  Still in rubble.

[Deathsaurer]

I dunno man, plenty of people seem to have issue with the Reapers just standing around on everyone's planets for no good reason. I can't imagine why.

[KaiserShep]

Every ending went to considerable lengths to validate its respective decision. Suddenly the Citadel is rebuilt, everyone goes home and moves on.