(XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

talking of multiple universes, the reapers being in dark space, the hidden relay in dark space. how does anything travel through the milky way almost instantly? the mass relays. space is as douglas adams said 'really big'. the problem with mass effect is that it gives no sense of scale, because hopping across the galaxy is as easy as stepping into one door and walking out of another.

also... why does entropy not apply to the reapers?

There's an opening here for a DOOM teleport-through-Hell-to-bypass-spacetime joke, but I'm above that.

also... why does entropy not apply to the reapers?


what do you mean?

The Reapers utilize technology based upon a substance with zero or negative mass and continuous positive energy output. Entropy be damned.

but entropy is a universal constant.... Things fall apart. It is the natural order of things.

Just like the ending of mass effect 3 seems to fall apart....or does it?

anyways.. (off topic) if you lot get chance watch Professor Brian Cox's Human Universe. (BBC) Last nights was really interesting in regards to parallel universes , expansion theory.

I remain a fan of the idea that the reapers are indeed subject to entropy, and that this is the whole point of them hibernating, as well as allowing "chaos" to go on, in the hope that it may someday yield them an answer to "the final question", making them as eternal as they like to make themselves out to be, because they have yet to come up with anything. (EDIT: ...I would have written "...on their own", but I surmise as far as they are concerned; once they have assimilated the sum knowledge of a culture, by building a reaper out of its constituents; that is "one of their own"... Not that I should care for their definitions, but... :P (EDIT2: There is also the assumption that "ascension" to reaperdom ends evolution of thought, along with everything else -- frozen under a single authority.))

(The mass effect would in this scenario be a side effect to a conversion process which is a real booster to entropy and responsible for dark matter buildup.)

jojon2se wrote:I remain a fan of the idea that the reapers are indeed subject to entropy, and that this is the whole point of them hibernating, as well as allowing "chaos" to go on, in the hope that it may someday yield them an answer to "the final question", making them as eternal as they like to make themselves out to be, because they have yet to come up with anything. (EDIT: ...I would have written "...on their own", but I surmise as far as they are concerned; once they have assimilated the sum knowledge of a culture, by building a reaper out of its constituents; that is "one of their own"... Not that I should care for their definitions, but... :P  (EDIT2: There is also the assumption that "ascension" to reaperdom ends evolution of thought, along with everything else -- frozen under a single authority.))

(The mass effect would in this scenario be a side effect to a conversion process which is a real booster to entropy and responsible for dark matter buildup.)

I 'd like to think reapers try to be truly alive and this would be their real quest which secretly superseded the leviathan original agenda.

.............the Reapers just want to be a real boy?  Pinocchio Theory?

No.  They live in a realm of existence far beyond our own.  Trying to be "real"-er than that is moving backwards.

It's like how we will never know what it's like to be a bird flying through the air because you can't stuff a human mind into a bird's brain or translate a bird's brain into anything a human brain could relate to. Except in this case the situation is many orders of magnitude beyond this example.

WATCH. I know its a while, but watch.

"They just needed the context first" (DLC)....

ME3 as 'second to last episode'.

'and they understand they never got the ending'

ZerebusPrime wrote:.............the Reapers just want to be a real boy?  Pinocchio Theory?

No.  They live in a realm of existence far beyond our own.  Trying to be "real"-er than that is moving backwards.

It's like how we will never know what it's like to be a bird flying through the air because you can't stuff a human mind into a bird's brain or translate a bird's brain into anything a human brain could relate to.  Except in this case the situation is many orders of magnitude beyond this example.

This is what they say, but how would you understand synthesis?
It's always how I undestood Mordin's little speech about the collectors lacking a soul, not being alive anymore.
Reapers are just harvesting and faking the preservation of life but there's no real creativity on their part, no sparks.

Yet at the same time life is chaos and need to be controlled.
Despite everything reapers are not alive and envy it but they fear life because it threatens them.
I think they are a little bit more complexe than the simple 'you couldn't fathom it'.
Add a little overinflated ego coming from the species which created them and it give harbinger or Sovereign in case Harbi is not what it seems. (or at least THE harbinger we saw)

They just need a little Space Jesus in their hearts.

SwobyJ wrote:WATCH. I know its a while, but watch.

"They just needed the context first" (DLC)....

ME3 as 'second to last episode'.

'and they understand they never got the ending'

feck. i'm at work. no speakers :(

Most of it isn't interesting to those who aren't into #GamerGate. The EA matters are also take-it-or-leave-it (I'm sure some here would have plenty of negative things to say about what he says here).

But what was interesting, as long as we believe this is really a sort of inside-source, is the sort of assertive wording about Bioware definitely having something planned for ME3 - for all we know, that 'Terminator DLC' rumor? But after the backlash, it could be that Extended Cut and staff shakeups kept this from happening, so they perhaps went for Citadel DLC instead. But regardless, according to this guy, it would seem that there was content planned, that Bioware was aware that enough players would realize that the ME3 ending was not really an ending, and that there was a whole other chapter to go for Shepard. That we're not dummies and can tell when something is actually climactic but not truly conclusive.

He seemed somewhat resentful/regretful that Bioware wasn't able to do the next chapter content, maybe because they were excited to go for it, but instead had to deal with angry customers, a lowered staff morale (one could imagine Citadel DLC to be partially meant as a big studio morale and IP-love booster), and maybe publisher/company uncertainty (funding?).

I still speculate whether the following is true:
-Terminator DLC was supposed to be a thing, truly finishing Shepard
-Mass Shift was supposed to be a thing for after that, turning Shepard into Advent and moving beyond Mass Effect itself
-Ending backlash brought on Extended Cut, Leviathan and Omega content to an extent, and Citadel DLC, instead of Terminator (and any associated) DLC
-Next Mass Effect will instead be the expanded form (and then some) of what was going to be Terminator DLC. We'll more-or-less play as Shepard-but-not, and finally get to do the last chapter of the 'trilogy' story. Sort of. Yeah.

I think that'd at least be a little amusing, as the scenario would also match the difficulties Bioware had with Dragon Age 2. From what I've seen, Bioware seemed to have Exhaled Marches DLC/expansion content for DA2, and may have even intended to have 'DA3' with Hawke again, but DLC plans for DA2 were scuttled and they decided to refresh it all with Inquisition. Both DA2 and ME3 would have their respective controversies that forced a major realignment of creative plans.

For reference:
Terminator DLC - http://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/comments/rcl7e/more_possible_leaked_information/
Mass Shift - http://forum.bioware.com/topic/300469-priestly-rumors-are-fake-possible-leak-of-april-24th-dlc-and-next-game-either-this-or-an-elaborate-fake/


Or that is all bullshit. Whatever. One more story!

The piece that interests me is Edi being a good side of the catalyst.
But even it his supposed leak is genuine, the next game will be quite different.
Levi dlc ensured that imho.

SwobyJ

I think the standout thing about this is recognising that mass effect 3 has no ending. even taking IT into account nothing is concluded. The Bioware fanboys and girls giving it some serious suckup to bioware for loving the ending? what fucking ending?

SwobyJ wrote:WATCH. I know its a while, but watch.

"They just needed the context first" (DLC)....

ME3 as 'second to last episode'.

'and they understand they never got the ending'

This guy is a fuckin' idiot. The very minute. The very second he said EA was a good company he lost any and all credibility.


Here's how bad EA is:


EA's most successful game of all time is Battlefield 3. Battlefield is also their most successful series, selling over 60 million units as a series to date.


BF3 sold over 18 million units. BF3 was the biggest selling game in EA history.


BF4 was arguably the most anticipated Multiplayer FPS since maybe Modern Warfare 2 or HALO 3.


EA FUCKED UP BF4 SO HARD. SO, SO HARD THAT OUT OF THE 9 MILLION UNITS IT SOLD, IT ONLY HAD 2.5 PERCENT OF THAT PLAYING THE GAME AT 4 MONTHS.........

BF4's debacle and issues are legendary. I think the series will never recover personally, but.... EA doesn't give a fuck.

What do they do????

Battlefield hardline mother fuckers!!! Bend over and bite the pillow, casue EA is going in dry, lol.


EA is terrible.

Anyone who supports them or thinks they're "okay" or "not that bad" are complete fucktards and should eat their own head.

Also, From Ashes is ABSOFUCKINLUTLY central to ME3's plot. THE FUCKIN' CRUCIBLE AND THE REAPER WAR WITH THE PROTHEAN..... DUH. Again, he lost credibility with his ignorance with the lore of Mass Effect.


Leviathan should have been included as well. (I don't think here I need to explain why, lol). But suffice it to say... Leviathan is kinda important.


This guy has a hard on for EA. He wants to suck EA's C0ck and milk that baby dry.


What a scrub.

Yes, dismiss an hour of commentary based on a single differing opinion about EA. The guy wants to keep working in the future. OF COURSE he says good things about EA.

dorktainian wrote:SwobyJ

I think the standout thing about this is recognising that mass effect 3 has no ending.  even taking IT into account nothing is concluded.  The Bioware fanboys and girls giving it some serious suckup to bioware for loving the ending?  what fucking ending?

Yes. Exactly this. His insistence on what ITers said all along - that ME3 may have been the end of the trilogy, but not the end of the whole story.

TurianRebel212 wrote:
What a scrub.

I get what you're saying and at least partially agree. I don't have love for EA, and I feel he's giving them more credit than they currently deserve.

But there's two things I wanted to bring up:

1)When it comes to DLC, developers may not realize that even though they make something optional, as long as it gives a significant amount of story content, players will see it as crucial. Especially if its integrated into the main story like ME3 DLC was. From Ashes was outright something to slot into the main story. Leviathan elaborated and explained much of the main story. Omega was highly hinted at in the base content. Citadel involves nearly every character still alive.

But I think his point (and where developers may stand on it) is that you don't need any of this DLC in order to understand what's going on. That its all optional to that core experience that one would spend 20-30 hours on. You don't need From Ashes to understand that the Prothians tried the Crucible and that Destroying the Reapers is what you should aim for. You don't need Leviathan to understand the supposed origins of the Reapers, or that the nature of the ending may be illusory. You don't need Omega to understand that anything Cerberus aims for is going to have a catch and involve unethical actions for the sake of some greater good of humanity, or that Paragon actions may end up killing you. You don't need Citadel to understand that there's a war going on, you should fight to truly defeat the Reapers and survive, and that other characters are waiting for you on the other side.

There's really nothing that is actually necessary for the ME3 experience, as it may be defined by the writers. There's a lot that one may personally regard as necessary for their playing enjoyment or greater understanding of the lore, but there's still nothing that changes the message of ME3: We Fight or We Die --> Indoctrination --> Destroy --> Breath. All of the stuff that we need to bolster that message is in that war game we bought in 2012.

What if the next game just dives us headfirst into content or themes or lore that ME3 DLC already introduces? In retrospect, does that make the ME3 unnecessary in order to understand the main storyline of the Mass Effect games? IMO it doesn't. If we already get the Leviathan info in ME4, much moreso than we have now, then ME3 Leviathan DLC becomes a side-adventure that only adds some layers of continuity and detail, but still isn't necessary. ME3 certainly isn't the 'Leviathan' or 'Prothian' or 'Cerberus' (as much as it seems like that sometimes) story. Its the 'Shepard and the Reapers' story, which we can then add to with choosing to play secondary-missions and DLC. For the fan, yes, we may want every piece of DLC and to play every bit of content (maybe several times over), but I think he was speaking to the gaming audience as a whole. The ones who just play to finish the game, don't buy DLC anyway, and often even skip over secondary missions - and I think ITers can agree that we have all we need to know with the base game. That's how IT started - people who didn't have EC/Levi/Omega/Citadel, and some people who didn't even have From Ashes, who felt something was up, that the Reapers were tricking us somehow, and that the ending wasn't real.

And keep in mind that I'd still assert that anyone who wants to play ME3 should get all of the DLC (save for maybe Omega; still hate the cutscene bug heh). I'm just addressing where he might be coming from.

Things were still to close-to-the-main-story than people liked though. I have a good friend who disliked the ME3 ending, but was especially pissed off by the DLC having such perceived story-importance (he's not an ITer is aware of it). I can understand that take as well, but just also think that none of it is necessary to understanding WTF is happening at the end.
Dragon Age: Inquisition may avoid this flaw - it sounds like the 'Day 1' (timed platform exclusive) DLC may not be very important, and that future DLC will exist more as side adventures in a book (able to even play after the 'book', like ME2 did), instead of integrated into the flow of the main storyline like the restoration of deleted scenes of film (ME3). We'll see how that goes, and if ME4 also goes down a similar route.

2)Lots of things to critisize about EA, but knowing a few who work for them and having met several more, they seem to have nothing but positive things to say about them, even when given chances to privately discuss it. Even a guy I knew who left them, only did so because Bioware can be cliquey (though most studios are) and so he wanted to get a higher position faster, instead of earn it within Bioware over more years of trust and networking.

Otherwise I agree with you. He avoided mention of the methods of monetization that EA employs (which ME3 can still be accused about, despite my defense earlier), buggy and lackluster releases of major franchises, silent treatment towards fans instead of just a (if they were concerned about more backlashes) more honest approach to them (how much could have been fixed by a statement of "We have a big plan for Mass Effect that involves the content you're this concerned about. Please give us time to show you what we mean." and things like that?), etc.

My only issue with this is how easily Bioware could have dealt with the backlash at any number of opportunities. That they would alter their entire plan and even change directions altogether when all they had to say was "More content coming that will answer all your questions. Trust us there is a specific plan in place"seems hard to believe. All this crazy and all this negativity just so they can be as vague as possible about the "speculationz" seems unlikely.

If there was an ace to be played it would already be on the table.

SwobyJ wrote:(...) you don't need any of this DLC in order to understand what's going on.  (...) There's really nothing that is actually necessary for the ME3 experience, as it may be defined by the writers. There's a lot that one may personally regard as necessary for their playing enjoyment or greater understanding of the lore, but there's still nothing that changes the message of ME3: We Fight or We Die --> Indoctrination --> Destroy --> Breath. All of the stuff that we need to bolster that message is in that war game we bought in 2012.

QFT

spotlessvoid wrote:My only issue with this is how easily Bioware could have dealt with the backlash at any number of opportunities. That they would alter their entire plan and even change directions altogether when all they had to say was "More content coming that will answer all your questions. Trust us there is a specific plan in place"seems hard to believe. All this crazy and all this negativity just so they can be as vague as possible about the "speculationz" seems unlikely.

If there was an ace to be played it would already be on the table.

This worries me as well. Like Rif always says, ME4 is our best chance for a reveal, and I agree with that, but at the same time I really have no expectations at all. I don't want to be disappointed again.

lol, I just got a week ban on BSN for telling the truth about this very topic. Ha, what a bunch of cry baby cunts. Yet again, when you communicate with EA devs honestly with no filler you get banned on their forums. I'm shocked that DICE LA allowed me to play CTE and give feedback and actually help them fix their game. DICE LA is the one. ONE, EA dev that are not complete cry baby scrubs and derptards, they're actually okay and take fan feedback no matter how harsh, and roll with it. Maybe it's just a Canadian/European thing with some of the other the EA Devs.... I think they need to toughen up a bit.


And this is the problem with BioWare. And it always has been.


They are closed minded. They can not handle the truth nor can they take real, legit criticism.


And as long as this is common practice, they will forever continue to make games like Mass Effect 3, SWOTOR and Dragons Age 2. (Back to back to back let downs).

But.... The EA hype train (which is almost on the level of Activsions PR and Hype train, I'll give them that ) will continue to hype up their games and many will continue to eat it up.


The problem with BioWare and other EA devs and EA, is......


Themselves.



Fans did not let Drew K. leave
Fans did not appoint Walters instead of Weekes for lead Writer of ME3
Fans did not strip down exploration and side missions in ME3
Fans did not have day 1 DLC on disc, only to be unlocked by a pay wall
Fans did not put forced MP in Mass Effect 3
Fans did not make an incomplete ending, only to be patched 3 months later lol.
Fans did not write a maccguffin and copy n' paste Deus ex and the Matrix endings.



Fans did buy the game.
Fans did play the game.
Fans did give their feedback.


BioWare and EA, like the cry babies they are, couldn't handle it and went into full on damage control mode and the "It's high level stuff. You don't get it you derptard minion" attitude toward fans.

The problem is their's and their's alone.


And is why... I will pirate Dragons Age 3, hehehe.

spotlessvoid wrote:My only issue with this is how easily Bioware could have dealt with the backlash at any number of opportunities. That they would alter their entire plan and even change directions altogether when all they had to say was "More content coming that will answer all your questions. Trust us there is a specific plan in place"seems hard to believe.  All this crazy and all this negativity just so they can be as vague as possible about the "speculationz" seems unlikely.

If there was an ace to be played it would already be on the table.

I like to agree with you there, so I will, mostly.

But it might also depend on wtf was even going on. For all we know, they could have had some internal shakeups in 2012-2013, a lack of confidence about what to do (assuming the initial plan was an ending DLC, paid or free), and they needed time to steady themselves. Plans could have been very in flux, keeping anyone from BW from being allowed to make any sort of definitive statements.

Remember at launch, when even their twitter was all teasing about IT-ish ideas? They sure shut up about that after, but that could have been part of the problems they were going through. The guy in this video talks about things costing more than they were initially expected (I guess stuff like legal fees, Extended Cut, and so on), so maybe things just had to be realigned. Like aiming to make as much money (and the least controversy) as possible with the Omega and Citadel DLCs. A lot of people still doubt that Omega was always going to cost $15 instead of $10ish.

I do doubt this guy. I'm not outright believing him. But I do think that what he's saying, or at least alluding to, is possible:
-Game comes out, gives people the feeling of a lack of finality
-DLC is originally set to be aimed around giving context and hints to the ending, with eventual DLC that expands ending (in whatever form, including a DA:Awakening semi-standalone one)
-Outrage happens, people want change NOW. Bottom line begins to be hurt and Bioware wants to deliver. DLC plan is changed. Extended Cut is prioritized, and future DLC may even be changed in design to focus on making ME3 feel more complete, instead of hinting towards there being more (though it still does that too). Citadel DLC is planned and happens.
-Ending content is scrapped, but DLC content continues to add hints that the story isn't over. Cue next game.

I mean that could be totally incorrect and we get nothing about this in the next game, but given what we've seen so far, its possible. That they did their Bioware thing and just pushed some story/design/content for the next game. They've done this before in both ME and DA, so in terms of IT, the same thing could be happening.

Imagine if the original plan was to sell a 'true ending', really? Even if that true ending was expansive and accounted for decisions to the same level of complexity of Citadel DLC (just + a lot of epicness), and was the perfect Mass Effect experience, the very fact that they'd be charging people for money would be a problem that after the ME3 debacle, they might have finally decided 'no, we can't do that. If we do it, it'll be a full game.' Not trying to get peoples' hopes up for 'ME4', but I do still consider this situation a possibility.

This worries me as well. Like Rif always says, ME4 is our best chance for a reveal, and I agree with that, but at the same time I really have no expectations at all. I don't want to be disappointed again.

Yeah I think most players who are still fans, think this. Personally, I've reached a positive and optimistic place when it comes to all this, but as with many things, I can temper it with a realism that based on previous Bioware experiences, its very possible that I'd be disappointed if I get carried away.

Like Spotless said, if their was a big reveal or ace in the hole BioWare would have already released it. EA would have made them lol, pure and simple.

I gave up hope after Leviathan DLC was released and it did nothing really to change anything with the end game.

Turian, BW really does need to come down to Earth on a lot of things. Even if they're doing it now internally, they're certainly not doing it externally. There has lately been a friendlier face, a less 'hype hype hype button awesome' approach, and greater engagement with the community (instead of just taking advantage of it), but it still comes with a catch - a strong over-defensiveness of their work, design choices, and pricing models.

I consider the current BSN/BF/BW stance to be overall better than the one before, but I have concerns about the 'happy happy happy' approach they seem to be going with now. Not everyone is going to be super polite and super friendly with their (probably positive) opinions. Sometimes someone will be pissed off, upset about their game, and have legit good points. And at that point, a dev/studio/PR has really gotta realize that its not enough to only pay attention to the nice players - the mean players will still be customers and will still have legit opinions. Moderating their discussion can and should be done, but I've seen people get banned for even the most tepid of aggressive stances. So someone says "The ME3 ending was stupid as HELL and here's why"? So? Devs may be sick of seeing and hearing it, but its still possible that some feedback may be in there that's still helpful in the creation of their games, and bring in more sales.


I guess we'll see how things go with DAI, and a possible 'ME4' in 2015 or at least 2016. For a great many, this will be their last chance they give BW. (most seemed happy enough with ME2, but ME3 and DA2 burned enough confidence that another strike would probably suck for BW)