174 réponses à ce sujet

[Revan Reborn]

First and foremost, Arrival is canon. The only reason Shepard and the Normandy are impounded on Earth is because of the genocide of the Batarian's due to Shepard sacrificing them to prevent the early arrival of the reapers.

 

Secondly, Shepard is indoctrinated, but only partially. This would explain his visions of seeing the same kid who also looks identical to starchild. This would also explain when Anderson "dies," there is fresh blood on Shepard as if he was shot by the Illusive Man instead.

 

Not to mention, there was also the various plants Shepard sees that were also in his dream while he was approaching Harbinger, etc. He wasn't entirely indoctrinated, but he was certainly feeling the effects of it.

 

Did it start with Arrival? Perhaps? It's difficult to know when it truly began.

[birefringent]

I'm not disagreeing with that. It just doesn't seem relevant because it doesn't actually take away from anything Kaboom said.

"Not to be that guy, but Mass Effect was a book first...in the sense that Revelation was released like half a year before ME1."

 

Nothing you say will change the fact that Revelation WAS released before Mass Effect. I agree that there is a difference between the goals the novels (Star Wars, Mass Effect) sought to accomplish but it doesn't change the fact that the novel DID come out first. Which is all Kaboom was saying. It WAS a book first in the sense that it WAS released first as a novel.

 

You said Mass Effect was always a game first, Kaboom pointed out the fact that it was released as a novel first. Technically speaking that is true, it was released as a novel before it was a game. Regardless of their intentions or motivations for doing so.

 

 

 

It is likely that Hackett's line is actually based off your EMS and NOT your Readiness Rating. He says it when your readiness rating is high not because of the RR but because having high RR multiplies your EMS score. Though I can't say this definitively. Only way to know for certain is to mod a save a give yourself immensely high war sets and EMS right off the bat to see if the dialogue is triggered regardless of your Readiness Rating.

Hackett's line is based on your EMS score.

[Vazgen]

First and foremost, Arrival is canon. The only reason Shepard and the Normandy are impounded on Earth is because of the genocide of the Batarian's due to Shepard sacrificing them to prevent the early arrival of the reapers.

 

Secondly, Shepard is indoctrinated, but only partially. This would explain his visions of seeing the same kid who also looks identical to starchild. This would also explain when Anderson "dies," there is fresh blood on Shepard as if he was shot by the Illusive Man instead.

 

Not to mention, there was also the various plants Shepard sees that were also in his dream while he was approaching Harbinger, etc. He wasn't entirely indoctrinated, but he was certainly feeling the effects of it.

 

Did it start with Arrival? Perhaps? It's difficult to know when it truly began.

I never thought of it that way, that the kid in the dreams is the Catalyst.

I think that it's vice versa - that the Catalyst simply picks the kid's image from Shepard's mind. Like Skynet in Terminator Salvation

[ImaginaryMatter]

I never thought of it that way, that the kid in the dreams is the Catalyst.

I think that it's vice versa - that the Catalyst simply picks the kid's image from Shepard's mind. Like Skynet in Terminator Salvation

 

I don't think the Catalyst's form is supposed to be the kid. Shepard has no reaction to it. I think BioWare was going for the trope where a higher being appears in the form of a child.

[Kabooooom]

I'm not disagreeing with that. It just doesn't seem relevant because it doesn't actually take away from anything Kaboom said.
"Not to be that guy, but Mass Effect was a book first...in the sense that Revelation was released like half a year before ME1."

Nothing you say will change the fact that Revelation WAS released before Mass Effect. I agree that there is a difference between the goals the novels (Star Wars, Mass Effect) sought to accomplish but it doesn't change the fact that the novel DID come out first. Which is all Kaboom was saying. It WAS a book first in the sense that it WAS released first as a novel.

You said Mass Effect was always a game first, Kaboom pointed out the fact that it was released as a novel first. Technically speaking that is true, it was released as a novel before it was a game. Regardless of their intentions or motivations for doing so.



It is likely that Hackett's line is actually based off your EMS and NOT your Readiness Rating. He says it when your readiness rating is high not because of the RR but because having high RR multiplies your EMS score. Though I can't say this definitively. Only way to know for certain is to mod a save a give yourself immensely high war sets and EMS right off the bat to see if the dialogue is triggered regardless of your Readiness Rating.

Yes, as Valmar correctly points out - that was the ONLY point I was making, and in a tongue-in-cheek fashion at that, Revan.

[Valmar]

No, technically it was an ME1 game trailer in written format. The novel does not cover the storyline of ME1 or ME2 let alone ME3. If it did I would readily concede the point. I would liken it more to that comic book thing that helps PS3 players get into ME3 without having played ME1 first.

 

You're objectively wrong. With all due respect, you're letting your emotion guide your reason here. I never said it covered the storyline or was a novel of the game's events. Mass Effect was released as a novel before it was a game. I don't mean the story of the first Mass Effect game was a novel first. I meant the Mass Effect SERIES released as a NOVEL before it released as a GAME. If I was to apply your reason to everything else then Mass Effect Galaxy wasn't part of the series because it didn't retell the  events of the trilogy.

 

Mass Effect released as a novel before it was released as a game, period. This is factually accurate. Anything to the contrary is simply wrong.
 

 

First and foremost, Arrival is canon. The only reason Shepard and the Normandy are impounded on Earth is because of the genocide of the Batarian's due to Shepard sacrificing them to prevent the early arrival of the reapers.

 

This is false. Arrival is not canon. If you do not do the mission an alliance squad takes care of it. Shepard is taken in due to his involvement with Cerberus. I wish people would stop perpetuating this misconception.

 

 

Secondly, Shepard is indoctrinated, but only partially. This would explain his visions of seeing the same kid who also looks identical to starchild. This would also explain when Anderson "dies," there is fresh blood on Shepard as if he was shot by the Illusive Man instead.
 

 

Pure speculation and headcanon which is in turn debunked by the existence of the endings - unless you pretend the endings are just dreams of course. You can believe in IT if you'd like, just don't tout it as a fact, please.

 

 

Hackett's line is based on your EMS score.

 

I figured as much, thank you.

 

 

I don't think the Catalyst's form is supposed to be the kid. Shepard has no reaction to it. I think BioWare was going for the trope where a higher being appears in the form of a child.

 

This is a more reasonable explanation that I've seen in a while for the starbrat.

[Vazgen]

I don't think the Catalyst's form is supposed to be the kid. Shepard has no reaction to it. I think BioWare was going for the trope where a higher being appears in the form of a child.

I think the Catalyst doesn't have a fixed form. It's an "Intelligence" why does it need any? What we see is a projection, created using images from Shepard's mind to better influence him

 

And no reaction is not true. If it appeared in the image of Habringer would you even consider of what it has to say?

"Die Reaper!!"

"So be it." Refuse ending

[Valmar]

I think the Catalyst doesn't have a fixed form. It's an "Intelligence" why does it need any? What we see is a projection, created using images from Shepard's mind to better influence him

 

And no reaction is not true. If it appeared in the image of Habringer would you even consider of what it has to say?

"Die Reaper!!"

"So be it." Refuse ending

 

 

Bioware adding the SO BE IT line was a bit of a slap to face, imo. At any rate I don't think Shepard would had avoided conversation with it had it been shaped like a reaper. He's talked to reaper holograms before throughout the series without shooting them. The player may just shut the reapers out and go LALALALA IM NOT LISTENING DIE REAPER IMMA HERO but Shepard, as a character, has always shown some interest in communications. Even the reaper he blows up on Rannoch he talks to a little bit before potentially renegading it. Honestly it would be out of character for Shepard to only now overreact to a hologram.

[Vazgen]

Bioware adding the SO BE IT line was a bit of a slap to face, imo. At any rate I don't think Shepard would had avoided conversation with it had it been shaped like a reaper. He's talked to reaper holograms before throughout the series without shooting them. The player may just shut the reapers out and go LALALALA IM NOT LISTENING DIE REAPER IMMA HERO but Shepard, as a character, has always shown some interest in communications. Even the reaper he blows up on Rannoch he talks to a little bit before potentially renegading it. Honestly it would be out of character for Shepard to only now overreact to a hologram.

Having a Habringer hologram however, would not have made as much impact as the kid. You would not trust a Reaper, but you can trust a child. 

When I played the game for the first time I was quite surprised with the Rachni queen. I saw the queen in ME1, so the visuals were not surprising. But hearing krogan voice instead of an asari instantly made me distrust her which was drastically different from what I experienced in ME1. 

It's about provoking positive emotional reaction to sway Shepard into choosing synthesis.

[Valmar]

I will agree that the intelligence taking the form of a child had significant impact... just not for any good reasons. It would had been better had it been the form of a reaper, imo.

 

Personally I would trust a reaper hologram MORE than the starbrat... the starbrat being the same kid haunting Shepard's dreams is the kind of stuff that makes you doubt yourself and get confused. I'd even go as far to say that the starbrat being the kid from Shepard's dream is one of the bigger points that lead people into believing the Indoctrination Theory. The fact that Shepard doesn't even bat an eyelash to this makes the situation all the more confusing. We didn't even get a cliche "I took a form that your mind could comprehend" line. We get ZERO justification as to why the catalyst is the same kid haunting  Shepard's dreams. Is this a dream too? Is Shepard indoctrinated? Are they in his head? Why does it talk with the voice of male and female Shepard? What the hell is going on?

[ImaginaryMatter]

I think the Catalyst doesn't have a fixed form. It's an "Intelligence" why does it need any? What we see is a projection, created using images from Shepard's mind to better influence him

 

And no reaction is not true. If it appeared in the image of Habringer would you even consider of what it has to say?

"Die Reaper!!"

"So be it." Refuse ending

 

I meant Shepard has no reaction to the Catalyst appearing as the kid. If it was the kid you think Shepard would say something or give some sort of acknowledgement.

[themikefest]

Shepard: Why are you taking the form of a child?

Catalyst: You don't need to know and there isn't enough time to explain it to you.

[nukembaby]

You're objectively wrong. With all due respect, you're letting your emotion guide your reason here. I never said it covered the storyline or was a novel of the game's events. Mass Effect was released as a novel before it was a game. I don't mean the story of the first Mass Effect game was a novel first. I meant the Mass Effect SERIES released as a NOVEL before it released as a GAME. If I was to apply your reason to everything else then Mass Effect Galaxy wasn't part of the series because it didn't retell the  events of the trilogy.

 

Mass Effect released as a novel before it was released as a game, period. This is factually accurate. Anything to the contrary is simply wrong.
 

 

I think you're forgetting my original point. I was arguing that multiplayer should be considered part of the canon, power creep and all. Someone objected to that saying that the story should be separated from the gameplay. I countered that ME never existed as a story first without a game, so gameplay cannot be separated from the story.

 

Then someone brought up that ME did in fact exist as a novel before the game--which is totally bogus because that novel does not cover the entire story. So no, there was no novel that existed before the game itself that covers the entire story. There was however a "novel" that was released before ME1 that introduces the game series. 

[Valmar]

I think you're forgetting my original point. I was arguing that multiplayer should be considered part of the canon, power creep and all. Someone objected to that saying that the story should be separated from the gameplay. I countered that ME never existed as a story first without a game, so gameplay cannot be separated from the story.

 

I happen to agree with the sentiment that gameplay should be seperated from lore. Especially in the case of Mass Effect where the gameplay is constantly and continuously inconsistent with the lore. I believe the STORY elements of multiplayer should be considered lore but the actual statistics? No, its just gameplay, imo.

 

Sometimes gameplay is just gameplay. You know, like in a video game, where you play to have fun. There are some people who have fun soloing platinum with a volus - does that mean we have to consider it lore that there are volus vanguards out there devastating geth primes, banshees, atlas, brutes, phantoms, so on and so forth? No, it's just gameplay. Gameplay mechanics are RARELY part of the lore. The only game I can think of where it is could be is, perhaps, Dark Souls.

 

 

 

Then someone brought up that ME did in fact exist as a novel before the game--which is totally bogus because that novel does not cover the entire story. So no, there was no novel that existed before the game itself that covers the entire story. There was however a "novel" that was released before ME1 that introduces the game series. 

 

It is irrelevant what the story of the novel covered - it is still Mass Effect. You argue against a stance that Kaboom never took. You're arguing about something no one was talking about but you. Which really only results in you arguing with yourself. At no point in rambling of what Mass Effect Revelation is and isn't did you ever change the fact that what Kaboom said was accurate and true. Yet you still argue about it. Here I am arguing to you about you arguing about it, so I'm not helping matters. I just take offense to people who shift others statements around and make their argument something it wasn't just so that they can argue about how wrong that person is and how right they are. I find that totally bogus.

[Eterna]

They deleted your stupid theory and deemed it a fanfic almost a year ago, let it go. 

[Vazgen]

I will agree that the intelligence taking the form of a child had significant impact... just not for any good reasons. It would had been better had it been the form of a reaper, imo.

 

Personally I would trust a reaper hologram MORE than the starbrat... the starbrat being the same kid haunting Shepard's dreams is the kind of stuff that makes you doubt yourself and get confused. I'd even go as far to say that the starbrat being the kid from Shepard's dream is one of the bigger points that lead people into believing the Indoctrination Theory. The fact that Shepard doesn't even bat an eyelash to this makes the situation all the more confusing. We didn't even get a cliche "I took a form that your mind could comprehend" line. We get ZERO justification as to why the catalyst is the same kid haunting  Shepard's dreams. Is this a dream too? Is Shepard indoctrinated? Are they in his head? Why does it talk with the voice of male and female Shepard? What the hell is going on?

I'd say that confusing Shepard is exactly what it tried to achieve. Think of it, Shepard came there to destroy the Reapers, that was his goal. If Harbinger appears next to him Arrival-style and tries to convince him that there is another option it won't work. That's why it tries to confuse Shepard, sway his mind away from the initial goal.

 

I meant Shepard has no reaction to the Catalyst appearing as the kid. If it was the kid you think Shepard would say something or give some sort of acknowledgement.

I think the scene flows quite naturally. 

"What? Where am I?" - confusion about the place and events

"The Citadel. It's my home"

"Who're you?" - natural question

"I'm the Catalyst"

"I thought the Citadel was the Catalyst" - both confusion about child's appearance and the revelation that Citadel is not the Catalyst.

"No. The Citadel is part of me" - which is confusing, to be honest, since it kinda contradicts its previous "It's my home" statement

"I need to stop the Reapers. Do you know how I can do that?" - Shepard realizes that this is going nowhere. He doesn't know about the connection between the Reapers and the Catalyst, for all he knows, the Catalyst is the final ingredient for the Crucible - a device meant to destroy the Reapers. He perceives the Catalyst as an equivalent to Vendetta. 

 

I just don't see where can a line about child's appearance fit. IMO asking something like "Are you that kid from Vancouver?" is close to "I thought the asari needed other species to reproduce"

[nukembaby]

 

 

It is irrelevant what the story of the novel covered - it is still Mass Effect. You argue against a stance that Kaboom never took. You're arguing about something no one was talking about but you. Which really only results in you arguing with yourself.

Then why are still responding? 

 

Let's just agree to disagree. I think we flogged it long enough.

[nukembaby]

 I just take offense to people who shift others statements around and make their argument something it wasn't just so that they can argue about how wrong that person is and how right they are. I find that totally bogus.

Well then you should see that this was also done to my argument. My original argument was that ME did not exist as pre-existing novel or movie like Star Wars and Dune. Kaboom then "shifted" or changed my argument to: there was no novel released before ME--which is not at all the same as my original argument. I argued that it needs to exist as a FULL pre-existing story like Star Wars or Dune before any game is made of it.

[ImaginaryMatter]

I'd say that confusing Shepard is exactly what it tried to achieve. Think of it, Shepard came there to destroy the Reapers, that was his goal. If Harbinger appears next to him Arrival-style and tries to convince him that there is another option it won't work. That's why it tries to confuse Shepard, sway his mind away from the initial goal.

 

I think the scene flows quite naturally. 

"What? Where am I?" - confusion about the place and events

"The Citadel. It's my home"

"Who're you?" - natural question

"I'm the Catalyst"

"I thought the Citadel was the Catalyst" - both confusion about child's appearance and the revelation that Citadel is not the Catalyst.

"No. The Citadel is part of me" - which is confusing, to be honest, since it kinda contradicts its previous "It's my home" statement

"I need to stop the Reapers. Do you know how I can do that?" - Shepard realizes that this is going nowhere. He doesn't know about the connection between the Reapers and the Catalyst, for all he knows, the Catalyst is the final ingredient for the Crucible - a device meant to destroy the Reapers. He perceives the Catalyst as an equivalent to Vendetta. 

 

I just don't see where can a line about child's appearance fit. IMO asking something like "Are you that kid from Vancouver?" is close to "I thought the asari needed other species to reproduce"

 

If Shepard recognized the Catalyst as taking the image of the kid the conversation wouldn't really be natural at all. I don't think Shepard would ask if he was literally the kid but rather ask why the Catalyst was assuming the form; if I was Shepard and was having guilt fed nightmares or whatever I think I would be some mixed of angry and curious. I guess it's possible that Shepard took a glimpse at the form, put together that the Catalyst had some sort of mind reading power, then decided not to bring it up (I guess this is the same guy who was pretty unfazed about dying and coming back to life); but it would still be weird. Then again the conversation contains a lot of other weirdness (like why Shepard shoots the tube in Destroy when no one says anything about shooting tubes).

 

In my mind the Catalyst's child form is like the NPC's of the same race having the same builds, it's a recycled model that doesn't mean anything story wise. It only looks like the kid because that's the only kid size model they had.

[Vazgen]

If Shepard recognized the Catalyst as taking the image of the kid the conversation wouldn't really be natural at all. I don't think Shepard would ask if he was literally the kid but rather ask why the Catalyst was assuming the form; if I was Shepard and was having guilt fed nightmares or whatever I think I would be some mixed of angry and curious. I guess it's possible that Shepard took a glimpse at the form, put together that the Catalyst had some sort of mind reading power, then decided not to bring it up (I guess this is the same guy who was pretty unfazed about dying and coming back to life); but it would still be weird. Then again the conversation contains a lot of other weirdness (like why Shepard shoots the tube in Destroy when no one says anything about shooting tubes).

 

In my mind the Catalyst's child form is like the NPC's of the same race having the same builds, it's a recycled model that doesn't mean anything story wise. It only looks like the kid because that's the only kid size model they had.

Doesn't he get those visions?

[ArabianIGoggles]

Arrival is canon.  It's in the game.  It happened.  You don't get to pick and choose which DLC is canon.  

[Vazgen]

Arrival is canon. It's in the game. It happened. You don't get to pick and choose which DLC is canon.

They meant canon as in the way the sory is told. DLC events are obviously canon but whether they happened due to Shepard's intervention or an atbitrary Alliance squad depends on whether the player had played the DLC or not.

[Valmar]

Arrival is canon.  It's in the game.  It happened.  You don't get to pick and choose which DLC is canon.  

 

 

They meant canon as in the way the sory is told. DLC events are obviously canon but whether they happened due to Shepard's intervention or an atbitrary Alliance squad depends on whether the player had played the DLC or not.

 

Exactly, you have to remember to take it with context. It is canon that Shepard did arrival in the same sense that it is canon that Shepard made peace with the Geth. It is not default canon, it is something OPTIONAL - its more lore than it is canon. People were talking as if the events with Shepard and Arrival were 100% canon in the same sense that Liara becoming Shadow Broker is canon. Liara being SB is canon because it happens in the story no matter what but it is NOT canon that Shepard was involved. The Arrival is stopped by the relay blowing up no matter what but it is NOT canon that Shepard was the one who did it.

 

So saying that Shepard was indoctrinated because he was, by default canon, affected by the reaper artifact in Arrival is false because it only works if you consider the event canon in the lore. It's like saying that Shepard is canon male or female. It doesn't work like that. This one of the 'problems' you run into when you play a game where the events, narrative and characters are so gravely defined by your decisions.

[Kabooooom]

Exactly, you have to remember to take it with context. It is canon that Shepard did arrival in the same sense that it is canon that Shepard made peace with the Geth. It is not default canon, it is something OPTIONAL - its more lore than it is canon. People were talking as if the events with Shepard and Arrival were 100% canon in the same sense that Liara becoming Shadow Broker is canon. Liara being SB is canon because it happens in the story no matter what but it is NOT canon that Shepard was involved. The Arrival is stopped by the relay blowing up no matter what but it is NOT canon that Shepard was the one who did it.

So saying that Shepard was indoctrinated because he was, by default canon, affected by the reaper artifact in Arrival is false because it only works if you consider the event canon in the lore. It's like saying that Shepard is canon male or female. It doesn't work like that. This one of the 'problems' you run into when you play a game where the events, narrative and characters are so gravely defined by your decisions.

How does Liara become the Shadow Broker if Shep doesn't help her? I've only ever played the dlc and I never thought about it before - is there dialogue in the game where she is like "thanks for all the help *******, I could have used a hand with the whole shadow broker thing but its cool, this random and convenient Alliance squad helped me instead"?

[themikefest]

Its canon that Shepard is female.