Mass Effect 3 Release!!!

Started by SilentGemini, March 06, 2012, 05:52:05 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Inkidu

Quote from: Hemingway on March 21, 2012, 04:23:09 PM
Well, that's exactly what evolution means. If they're adapting, they're evolving. The only way they would avoid that is if there are no longer any mutations going on, which seems to me like a thoroughly undesireable situation. I mean, I don't know what the long-term implications of that are, but I can imagine it would become problematic after a while, what with inbreeding and such taking place at an increasing scale, children being basically clones of their parents. What about resistance to disease? Or will diseases stop evolving, too? Or maybe we're simply immune to them? What about death? Are we now immortal? If not, that kinda sucks - we're stuck with our short lifespans!

Now, even if that's not the case, why would you want to stop adapting? By its very nature, evolution does not have an end point. There can't be a "final evolution". It's just a nonsensical concept.

And even if, at that point, we're all posthuman half-synthetics, capable of rewriting our genetic code at will and adapting to any situation, that doesn't sound like a final evolution at all - quite the contrary! Evolving the ability to evolve at will would just create a new infinity of possibilities.

Edit: As a side note, isn't that a rather sinister idea too? Wouldn't that be eugenics taken to its absolute extreme?

EDIT 2: Well, I'll be....
Ten bucks says it was already planned and it will cause all these "Retake Mass Effect" shenanigans to go away when the outraged but flighty population of angry fans goes on to other things.

Notice that gamers cave way too easily?
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Chris Brady

Also, the BBC article has it wrong.  Fallout 3's ending WAS changed, the DLC was ADDED so they could change it.  Also, Portal 2 was never meant to be made, but fan outpouring and love motivated Valve to do so, so they did, and changed the ending to fit that expectation.
My O&Os Peruse at your doom.

So I make a A&A thread but do I put it here?  No.  Of course not.

Also, I now come with Kung-Fu Blog action.  Here:  Where I talk about comics and all sorts of gaming

Inkidu

Quote from: Chris Brady on March 21, 2012, 09:43:47 PM
Also, the BBC article has it wrong.  Fallout 3's ending WAS changed, the DLC was ADDED so they could change it.  Also, Portal 2 was never meant to be made, but fan outpouring and love motivated Valve to do so, so they did, and changed the ending to fit that expectation.
Actually, I'm not in favor of Fallout 3's ending from a story standpoint. I support it for a gameplay thing, but storywise. Well, ending's themselves provide closure, when you have a totally open ended game you'll eventually find and do everything and then your character won't have any meaning.  They'll just be there, like an automation.

It's more of my philosophy. Honestly, the more I think and look through the endings of ME3, the more I'm okay with them. There are much worse endings.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Cold Heritage

The scary part to me is that you have synthesis bacteria and viruses. Non-living technology could now contract synthesis herpes or you could download synthesis flu onto your omnitool.
Thank you, fellow Elliquiyan, and have a wonderful day.

Hemingway

Quote from: Cold Heritage on March 21, 2012, 10:15:53 PM
The scary part to me is that you have synthesis bacteria and viruses. Non-living technology could now contract synthesis herpes or you could download synthesis flu onto your omnitool.

Good news for the "family values" folks, I guess.

Laughing Hyena

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
Indoctrination theory is a touch more then a theory in my opinion. I have been playing through and am up to the middle part of the game and already I am noticing not only a gradual change in Shepards resolve but as the nightmares become worse and worse Im beginning to see the signs as well. The Rachni Queen warned of the effects. The Oily Shadows are showing up now! And that child, Im damn sure is a nightmarish hallucination meant to create doubt within Shepard. The reapers cannot seem to stop Shepard no matter what as far as killing him and does the impossible uniting enemies against a common cause and they gladly follow Shepard to death itself.

Shepard is perfect for indoctrination!

So in essence I believe and also feel that Bioware planned all that. I have heard about the endings and whilst not there yet I have a feeling Im going to need to stay the course and not give in.

Inkidu

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/9506-Mass-Effect-3-Ending-Controversy

Kind of why I think changing the endings are not only bad, but probably are not going to work.

Also, I don't buy indoctrination theory.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
I don't buy it because of three things. Shepard's been in a reaper before, two in point of fact, and it didn't have an effect before. Two, indoctrinated lose higher brain function, and there's never any instance where that appears to happen to Shepard. The main reason though, if Shepard is indoctrinated it doesn't change anything, it's just a spin. The ending is just as--if not more--pointless if he's indoctrinated. The reapers win big whoop. That or it's all made pointless by the, "It's a dream" trope. At least if it's not indoctrination theory then one of the ending's kill the reapers, one renders them obsolete, and the other makes them leave.

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense from where I stand.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Hemingway

I think the main argument against those points would be that, of the little we know about indoctrination, we know it's a subtle process. It becomes more and more difficult to resist the more fully you become indoctrinated, but it's possible to fight it - at least slowing it down. It would be perfectly consistent with the Shepard persona to resist and eventually break free, represented symbolically by the Destroy ending. It's in the early stages, and so, I suppose we can assume, it's possible to resist the effect that hasn't quite taken hold, but it's still difficult, and the Reapers are subtle and manipulative.

Inkidu

Quote from: Hemingway on March 23, 2012, 06:50:09 PM
I think the main argument against those points would be that, of the little we know about indoctrination, we know it's a subtle process. It becomes more and more difficult to resist the more fully you become indoctrinated, but it's possible to fight it - at least slowing it down. It would be perfectly consistent with the Shepard persona to resist and eventually break free, represented symbolically by the Destroy ending. It's in the early stages, and so, I suppose we can assume, it's possible to resist the effect that hasn't quite taken hold, but it's still difficult, and the Reapers are subtle and manipulative.
It's an interesting alternate take, but it doesn't actually change anything. So, I don't know why some anti-ME3-ending people ascribe to it.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Laughing Hyena

#134
Quote from: Inkidu on March 23, 2012, 06:10:02 PM
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/9506-Mass-Effect-3-Ending-Controversy

Kind of why I think changing the endings are not only bad, but probably are not going to work.

Also, I don't buy indoctrination theory.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
I don't buy it because of three things. Shepard's been in a reaper before, two in point of fact, and it didn't have an effect before. Two, indoctrinated lose higher brain function, and there's never any instance where that appears to happen to Shepard. The main reason though, if Shepard is indoctrinated it doesn't change anything, it's just a spin. The ending is just as--if not more--pointless if he's indoctrinated. The reapers win big whoop. That or it's all made pointless by the, "It's a dream" trope. At least if it's not indoctrination theory then one of the ending's kill the reapers, one renders them obsolete, and the other makes them leave.

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense from where I stand.

And now for my counter argument on what you say.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
First of all while it is true that Shepard has been inside a reaper twice over in fact. Indoctrination is more effective when its slow because you get more out of the victim and his lifespan. If Shepard was rapidly indoctrinated the victim would only last up for a week or two under the effects. So this rules the idea that his indoctrination starts at the end of the game is very unlikely. It would have been far too fast. Instead, it begins at the start of the game or possibly before it between Arrival DLC events and the events of ME3. Secondly the loss of brain function occurs at the far end of the indoctrination. True it occurs but as the codex states, this can take months or even years if it's slow. I cannot answer the last reason just yet until I see the ending for myself.

As for why I am ascribing to it before I have not seen the ending myself is because I'm seeing the signs myself before it comes to pass. I questioned why no one saw the boy except for myself nor heard him nor interacted with him. I saw the nightmares and how they slowly grew with time and how Shepard began to lose hope with the battle when he is at the very center of it all, the glue that is meant to hold it all together. I heard the rachni queen describe her indoctrination and how she was able to resist it and had to be physically restrained instead in order to serve their purposes. I saw the oily shadows as she described in their attempts to indoctrinate her and, I heard their horrible sounds within the game. The oily shadows within Shepard's nightmares for me was the biggest hint and made me go 'oh crap'.

I have not gotten to the ending yet and am merely at the half way point but I wanted to share my impressions from what I have found and experienced.

The codex is where I am gathering the information from on the loss of higher brain functions among a few other things.

Mass Effect 3 Indoctrination (Codex)

Inkidu

That's a fair enough interpretation, but remember, the main reason I don't by indoctrination theory, and in my opinion (which when talking narrative counts) at best it changes nothing about the actual ending, and at worst it makes the ending worse (in terms of outlook and tone, not getting into a form or function argument).

Also, it could be argued that it' main detractor is the Shepard/Jesus Allegory. Oh, yeah, it exists. In all the games. The stages of Jesus' life and supposed second coming are right there:

Spoiilered for Series Spoilers

The Prophet: Mass Effect. The reapers they're coming, and no one will listen except a few close followers. Disciples.
The Crucifixion: When he or she is killed by the collector ship.
The Resurrection: Lazarus Project naturally.
The millennium of peace could be seen as any attempt to stop the coming of the reapers and Shepard leave from the navy. It's not really a millennium obviously, but it is in spirit. That's generally the least Cthulhu filled part of the series.

The apocalypse: Yeah, look at Earth, Palaven, and Thesia, the Batarian home world, too.
The End War: Shepard uniting all the "faithful" against the Satan or the reapers in a final epic conclusive war.
The Defeat of the Anti-Christ: Though it doesn't fit the role traditionally. Catalyst is typically the anti-Shepard. Sure he came in in the last seconds, but his role is unmistakable.

The end of the world and the coming of a new age of heaven forever: Well, anyway you cut the three options they basically remove the reapers out of the equation and bring the rest of the world returns to a kind of peace (I mean it's not perfect and eternal probably, but symbolism is there).

Shepard obviously wouldn't really be able to live after something like that not in the traditional mortal sense (even though he she can technically with one ending and enough points). However, the one ending of synthesis, which is the best, but not only fitting ending for the allegory.

So, if you ascribe the allegory the Shepard is incorruptible by "sin" or in this case indoctrination. It's a real downer to have the Jesus allegory lose, especially after so much.

Also, you don't think they picked Shepard out of a hat do you?
   
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

NotoriusBEN

Spoilered is a cohesive argument of shepard's indoctrination in a youtube video. You all can take it as you will, but for me, the only way to come to terms with the horrible writing between casey and mac is this theory. Anything else feels like an injustice to a great sci fi epic.

All aside, I aint purchasing DLC unless it specifically addresses the ending. As it is, the universe has been destroyed by casey and mac unless bioware veto's them and readdresses the ending.

I especially like the ending of the second vid that shows the many questions that all theories must provide for in order to make a coherent argument. So far, the only other theory, ''bad writing'' can account for those questions. Even if that is true, bioware has an out through fan intervention in the indoc theory.


Chris Brady

This link has the article about what an alleged writer for Bioware said about the ending:

http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/5695/article/mass-effect-3-writer-allegedly-slams-controversial-ending/

I have no idea if it's truly accurate, or just some pissed off fan who decided to mimic/claim to be one of the writers.
My O&Os Peruse at your doom.

So I make a A&A thread but do I put it here?  No.  Of course not.

Also, I now come with Kung-Fu Blog action.  Here:  Where I talk about comics and all sorts of gaming

NotoriusBEN

I use the PA forums a lot, and I've seen Takayris's comments in passing, but I've never talked to him directly. Yea, he mentioned being a member of the ME3 team and assuming his post was real (I wasnt online when it was posted/removed), provides insight into how the team thinks and feels.

I know I would feel incredibly betrayed by my boss if they just up and did something similar. Well, the lead writer and Casey Hudson got their ''lots of speculation'' and reviews. This month has got to be a low point for those two, but I can forgive them with learning from their mistakes. Just dont expect their credibility to comeback soon.

Hemingway

Quote from: Chris Brady on March 25, 2012, 11:15:48 PM
This link has the article about what an alleged writer for Bioware said about the ending:

http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/5695/article/mass-effect-3-writer-allegedly-slams-controversial-ending/

I have no idea if it's truly accurate, or just some pissed off fan who decided to mimic/claim to be one of the writers.

It's fake.

Xanatos

Yeah I had that feeling as well. The biggest reason is supposedly the guy who wrote that is a writer. Yet I couldn't shake the fact that the writing was quite poor and a bit confusing in various parts. I would expect a better post from someone whose job it is to write. Not to mention that many of the points weren't very solid.

Chris Brady

Quote from: Hemingway on March 26, 2012, 11:57:44 AM
It's fake.
Evidence please?

A link would sincerely be appreciated.
My O&Os Peruse at your doom.

So I make a A&A thread but do I put it here?  No.  Of course not.

Also, I now come with Kung-Fu Blog action.  Here:  Where I talk about comics and all sorts of gaming

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Chris Brady on March 27, 2012, 11:08:03 PM
Evidence please?

A link would sincerely be appreciated.

Well for one thing..

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
there is mention of a good bye to Mordin

NotoriusBEN

#143
it is possible to say goodbye to mordin.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide

It however, requires wrex's death, and a few other things.

ME3 Mordin survives

final goodbye
Mass Effect 3 Mordin Final Conversation


Semantics

I'm not sure about the Indoctrination Theory.  On the one hand, it makes far more sense than anything else, because of the numerous plot holes and various other mistakes that arise without it.

On the other, that would, in my opinion, have to mean that they never intended this to be the ending, and right now they're all just acting when they talk about how surprised the reaction is making them, letting the outrage build to a fever-pitch before going, "Gotcha!" and releasing a DLC real ending they always intended.  Which, quite frankly, would make me want to punch them in the face, even if it's free.

Because if the Indoctrination Theory stuff is what they intended, and they didn't plan on releasing anymore ending-related stuff, just more DLC to expand the pre-ending stuff, then...that's actually worse than if the ending just is what it is, in my opinion.  Far, far worse.  Not because of the dark ending impacts, but because it means the ending answers even less.  For all you know it was just a dream and you never left!  [Insert spooky "Ooooo" sounds here.]

So, essentially.  Either the ending is pretty much flat-out horrible on numerous levels, plot wise, logic wise, closure wise, and hey-that's-impossible wise.  Or they sold you a game that didn't even have the ending just so they could screw with your head.  Or they sold you an ending that mostly makes sense, but answers absolutely nothing at all, not even a sliver.

Not exactly a good option among them.

As to my feelings on the ending itself...  They're too long-winded for me to want to post.  I did an...apparently 4,054 word rant in anger to rid myself of it since a friend I usually rant to (and who had apparently spoilered himself to ME3's ending after the controversy began to see what it was about, since he doesn't play the series) wasn't around for me to purge my anger directly to another person.  Suffice to say that I Was Not Amused.

The controversy on if they should or shouldn't change it and artistic integrity and all that, though, has me quite amused, considering there's at least the one big post-release game example, in addition to the fact that numerous people change an artist's vision before it ever sees the light of day, in gaming, television, movies, and books, to varying degrees.  But now apparently video games suddenly loses its controversial Art Card just because ME3 might get its ending changed.

I'm not saying they should.  (I want them to.  At least, I think I do.  I definitely can't sit through that again unless they at least fix the random impossibilities of people showing up where they shouldn't and such.)  They should examine how they feel about the ending and the criticisms directed at it (Especially the biggest criticism I've seen made, I think, the one about how they went back on very specific promises and even seemed proud of it and confused at everyone's outrage) and weigh these things carefully with how much they value their ties with fans and fan support.  Heck, they don't even have to use that to come to a decision.  It's not like artists haven't, as the accusation goes, "sold out"  before.

But between this and Dragon Age 2, two of their last three games have generated huge fan backlash, and if they don't consider things carefully, they might find the good will and trust often given to them by fans suddenly dried up.

Inkidu

At the end of the day fans don't own the creative rights and if we take away a creator's ability to take risks then they should never produce anything again, because it will probably be boring. Risk is what draws you to the thing in the first place. That element of "Hey, I've heard things about this, I'm going to buy it."

It's the gamble, people. You take shot, you put the money, and you bust. It happens in every other medium, but in video games people apparently can demand a recount.
If you're searching the lines for a point, well you've probably missed it; there was never anything there in the first place.

Hemingway


Chris Brady

Odd that Mr. Priestly just said that Mr. Weekes didn't write that.  Not that it was untrue.  It's just weird to me.

Whatever, not like I'll be playing this game anytime soon.  I'll just wait until they bundle it with a small portion of the DLC.
My O&Os Peruse at your doom.

So I make a A&A thread but do I put it here?  No.  Of course not.

Also, I now come with Kung-Fu Blog action.  Here:  Where I talk about comics and all sorts of gaming

Hemingway

I think you're reading too much into it.

Chris Brady

Probably, but it's still worded in a way that's not a denial.
My O&Os Peruse at your doom.

So I make a A&A thread but do I put it here?  No.  Of course not.

Also, I now come with Kung-Fu Blog action.  Here:  Where I talk about comics and all sorts of gaming