33 réponses à ce sujet

[Nallski]

BlueShift makes a good point about the extensive parallels between Saren and Shep.



Edi could indeed be a reaper. She was able to fight off a reaper virus in the IFF and was able to work through thousands of collector firewalls in a few minutes. In both cases the tech involved was basically alien to her so the ability to perform so well against such advanced tech is disconcerting.



With that being the case its kinda cool/creepy to see that renegade Shep looks a bit like Saren, riding in what is essentially a reaper ship. His crew is basically indoctrinated by being turned to Shep's will (he's a "natural leader"). Hell just for fun I'll point out that your team could be said to be less capable by the end since that's when their mistakes actually get them killed.



Saren was doing what he did because he was xenophobic of humans and fell for the tempt of greater power. Renegade Shep is pretty xenophobic, Cerberus is known to be. Doing it all for the "good of xxxx race" theme is common. With legion on board you also have a small army of Geth potentially at your disposal. You also have an Asari matriarch on your ship (at least I think Samara is old enough to be considered one).



Would be hard to pull off, but really cool to see your paragon/renegade choice to make a HUGE difference in ME3. Renegade Shep becomes a human Saren, actually working for the reapers in the end to give us a special mantle among the reapers. While Paragon Shep finds a way to unite the galaxy for a last stand.

[xThunderblazex]

Edi had reaper technology installed, which is how she was able to do that. If you were paying attention, they say that.

[Spazticus]

Pandaman102 wrote...

Removing the evidence of something doesn't mean you've removed said something, you realize...

I had this same logic posed to me when I brought it up in another thread. As I stated in that other thread: "That doesn't make sense. If the implants remain,  then there is evidence, in and of itself.  I can see how one could interpret it as you did, though to "remove all evidence" typically means that there is a reversion to an unaltered state."

I'll add this as well: Why leave them there, if they no longer serve any purpose? The procedure both removes them, and repairs the tissue as though Shepard never had them.

Modifié par Spazticus, 16 février 2010 - 03:48 .

[Pandaman102]

Spazticus wrote...

I had this same logic posed to me when I brought it up in another thread. As I stated in that other thread: "That doesn't make sense. If the implants remain,  then there is evidence, in and of itself.  I can see how one could interpret it as you did, though to "remove all evidence" typically means that there is a reversion to an unaltered state."

I'll add this as well: Why leave them there, if they no longer serve any purpose? The procedure both removes them, and repairs the tissue as though Shepard never had them.

From the message that Chakwas sends you: "If you maintain a positive outlook, I believe your facial scarring will heal on its own. Otherwise, there is surgical equipment we could use to insulate your cybernetic implants and accelerate your healing regardless of your mental outlook."

The "remove all evidence" may have been ambiguous on its own but Chakwas' message coupled with the fact that you can still handle the Claymore shotgun and Widow rifle, both of which are described to break the arms of humans when fired, is a stronger argument for the cybernetics remaining. I'll start up a new game and get Chakwas to add the med-bay upgrade to the list again to see if there is further clarification (oddly I can't find a codex or upgrade entry in the game after buying it).

Edit: Oh, lucky, I have a Renegade save that never wasted money on the med-bay upgrade. The upgrade is described as "Upgrades the Normandy's medical facilities with an advanced dermal regeneration unit. Using this will immediately and completely heal your scars. Further scarring will not occur regardless of the actions you take." The upgrade is just a ridiculously expensive plastic surgery machine, not a cybernetics removal machine.

Modifié par Pandaman102, 16 février 2010 - 04:34 .

[Aisynia]

Spazticus wrote...

Pandaman102 wrote...

Removing the evidence of something doesn't mean you've removed said something, you realize...

I had this same logic posed to me when I brought it up in another thread. As I stated in that other thread: "That doesn't make sense. If the implants remain,  then there is evidence, in and of itself.  I can see how one could interpret it as you did, though to "remove all evidence" typically means that there is a reversion to an unaltered state."

I'll add this as well: Why leave them there, if they no longer serve any purpose? The procedure both removes them, and repairs the tissue as though Shepard never had them.

Chakwas, in her email, explicitly states the procedure is to INSULATE them.

They serve a purpose: Shepard only has like 1/3 of a skeleton without them

Modifié par Aisynia, 16 février 2010 - 04:29 .

[Aisynia]

Gill Kaiser wrote...

Aisynia wrote...

Gill Kaiser wrote...

So long as Shepard's cybernetics aren't Reaper tech, he should be fine. If they are (and I wouldn't put it past TIM), then I have a feeling that that may be a plot point in ME3.

Pretty sure they aren't. The novel coming out this summer has TIM implanting Paul Grayson with reaper tech, with the implication it's the first time. That's about all we know about the novel though.

When's the novel set? It could be set in the 2 years between ME1 and ME2, and TIM could be prototyping the technology he is planning to use on Shepard.

It hasn't been explicitly stated, but logic dictates it takes place between Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3, due to track record with the other books. They aren't going to release a book that takes place before ME2 6 months after it is released. It's also called a prequel, so the implication is that it's a prequel to ME3.

Modifié par Aisynia, 16 février 2010 - 04:29 .

[Spazticus]

Pandaman102 wrote...

Spazticus wrote...

I had this same logic posed to me when I brought it up in another thread. As I stated in that other thread: "That doesn't make sense. If the implants remain,  then there is evidence, in and of itself.  I can see how one could interpret it as you did, though to "remove all evidence" typically means that there is a reversion to an unaltered state."

I'll add this as well: Why leave them there, if they no longer serve any purpose? The procedure both removes them, and repairs the tissue as though Shepard never had them.

From the message that Chakwas sends you: "If you maintain a positive outlook, I believe your facial scarring will heal on its own. Otherwise, there is surgical equipment we could use to insulate your cybernetic implants and accelerate your healing regardless of your mental outlook."

The "remove all evidence" may have been ambiguous on its own but Chakwas' message coupled with the fact that you can still handle the Claymore shotgun and Widow rifle, both of which are described to break the arms of humans when fired, is a stronger argument for the cybernetics remaining. I'll start up a new game and get Chakwas to add the med-bay upgrade to the list again to see if there is further clarification (oddly I can't find a codex or upgrade entry in the game after buying it).

Edit: Oh, lucky, I have a Renegade save that never wasted money on the med-bay upgrade. The upgrade is described as "Upgrades the Normandy's medical facilities with an advanced dermal regeneration unit. Using this will immediately and completely heal your scars. Further scarring will not occur regardless of the actions you take." The upgrade is just a ridiculously expensive plastic surgery machine, not a cybernetics removal machine.

Well, there we go. I contend that the ambiguity came from their use of  the word "evidence" in the Yes/No dialog, because the other sources of information were conflicting to that. "Appearance" in the dialog would have been a more consistent choice of words. That said, it makes no sense to leave in the proverbial staples, if the tissue they were there to hold together has been regenerated. For all I know, we're both right, and then only the staple-like implants are removed, but strength-enhancing implants (which could have been present in an ME1 Soldier/Infiltrator/Vanguard Shepard) remain, leaving you with a pre-death ("default?") Shepard. That scenario would fit both of our theories. Until we know for certain, I will continue to enjoy the discussion. May it never devolve into a flame war. :innocent:

A side note, just for thought: Some of the upgrades you buy (such as Heavy Skin Weave) are along the lines of cybernetic upgrades, and there is no implied downside to adding those. That seems to support both of our points of view. Shepard's body is well above that of the average human, (and the hero!) so use of the Widow or Claymore is logical.

[Pandaman102]

Spazticus wrote...
Well, there we go. I contend that the ambiguity came from their use of  the word "evidence" in the Yes/No dialog, because the other sources of information were conflicting to that. "Appearance" in the dialog would have been a more consistent choice of words. That said, it makes no sense to leave in the proverbial staples, if the tissue they were there to hold together has been regenerated. For all I know, we're both right, and then only the staple-like implants are removed, but strength-enhancing implants (which could have been present in an ME1 Soldier/Infiltrator/Vanguard Shepard) remain, leaving you with a pre-death ("default?") Shepard. That scenario would fit both of our theories. Until we know for certain, I will continue to enjoy the discussion. May it never devolve into a flame war. :innocent:

A side note, just for thought: Some of the upgrades you buy (such as Heavy Skin Weave) are along the lines of cybernetic upgrades, and there is no implied downside to adding those. That seems to support both of our points of view. Shepard's body is well above that of the average human, (and the hero!) so use of the Widow or Claymore is logical.

The reason I'm disagreeing with your argument is because you're basically supporting it with two assumptions: interpreting "remove all evidence" as inclusive of the implants (which isn't explicitely stated in the Yes/No dialogue) and the nature of the glowing implants that disappear (which you're assuming are unnecessary once the flesh is healed); on the other hand without official word I can't claim I'm definitely right either, but I do maintain the message and description strongly suggest the upgrade only hides the cybernetics and that there is nothing that explicitely contradicts this.

That being said I just realized I made the mistake of assuming your statement about cybernetics being removed as inclusive of all of Shepard's cybernetics, which clearly isn't the case, so my point about using the Widow/Claymore is completely irrelevant to the argument of how Shepard's face was fixed.