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

Page 4 of 40 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 22 ... 40  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

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

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Wed Dec 24, 2014 1:03 pm

Yup, right there on the arm. N7 insignia.

No, you're not a soldier in the universe. Nope.

Fucking Bioware. Angry

_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2960
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

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

Post by windsurfing on Wed Dec 24, 2014 2:41 pm

Another classic from this guy, contradicting his own claims in the same statement.:

Casey Hudson wrote:You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide some answers to these people.” — Casey Hudson

Of course Mike Gamble is up there with Casey when it comes to pathetic PR. Before ME3 launch:

Mike Gamble wrote:There are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t
say any more than that…
avatar
windsurfing
Scion

Posts : 629
Join date : 2013-01-19
Location : Restroom, Deck 2, SR2 Normandy

Back to top Go down

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

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Wed Dec 24, 2014 3:03 pm


_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2960
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Guest on Wed Dec 24, 2014 3:15 pm

windsurfing wrote:Another classic from this guy, contradicting his own claims in the same statement.:

Casey Hudson wrote:You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide some answers to these people.” — Casey Hudson

Of course Mike Gamble is up there with Casey when it comes to pathetic PR. Before ME3 launch:

Mike Gamble wrote:There are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t
say any more than that…

The only way that I can construe these into truths (which may be more than this deserves, but whatever, I feel like it):

1)You may get SOME answers to EVERYTHING, but 'some' means that you won't get 'all'. So whatever they have set up for you to get answers on, ME3 will only loretease and provide SOME answers. But it'll still be answers about EVERY topic ("hidden in the data").
Basically, they'll still keep us in the dark, but give the appearance of giving full truths, even while giving us half truths. That whole 'lacking context' theme that some of us have noticed is in ME3's script.

2)This may be partially tongue-in-cheek and partially true, for all we know.
But this requires taking a leap of faith as the player, and we don't have much to go on there, except seeing how Citadel DLC was quite the test of the studio to make many (even if small and more conversationally based) consequences to trilogy-wide actions. This could be their testing for a next game that can (optionally) recognize actions taken in a much bigger way.
So if ME3 ending is a dream/whatever, then Shepard's 'actual' ending still happens, but we're just not allowed to see it visually. Just given clues enough for it to still be a part of the series narrative.
Basically, Casey could be using 'endings' as in 'story results', not 'ending of ME3 as we literally see it', hoping players will catch on to and respect the irony of then giving us a ABC ending, and realizing what that means (whatever it means).

This is me trying to be optimistic. I still don't approve of this PR style and their tendency for cryptic answers (or seemingly lies).

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Wed Dec 24, 2014 5:07 pm

Not seeming lies. Lies.

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2624
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 36
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by dorktainian on Wed Dec 24, 2014 5:28 pm

Just a quick question guys. A post popped up on my timeline today regarding dragon age inquisition and some hidden dialogue that plays in the background of a scene in reverse. I cannot remember anything like that in mass effect 3 but could it be there?

_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3500
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

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

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Wed Dec 24, 2014 5:43 pm

Of course it could. What kind of question is that?

I think you mean: did we find any?

No, we didn't.

_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2960
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

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

Post by smash016 on Wed Dec 24, 2014 6:24 pm

I didn't find any backward speech.

However, just recently I noticed that the rather bizarre and eerie choir-like sound you hear upon entering the T-GES facility, "you don't belong here" and all that, is taken directly from the Catalyst soundtrack. Not the arpeggio part your hear during the conversation, but afterwards when you need to make a decision.

FYI / FWIW.

_________________
"Refuse to believe life ends here. Too wasteful. Have more to offer. Mistakes to fix. Cannot end here. Could do so much more."
avatar
smash016
Scion

Posts : 642
Join date : 2014-03-25
Location : Everywhere at Once

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Thu Dec 25, 2014 5:00 am

smash016 wrote:I didn't find any backward speech.

However, just recently I noticed that the rather bizarre and eerie choir-like sound you hear upon entering the T-GES facility, "you don't belong here" and all that, is taken directly from the Catalyst soundtrack. Not the arpeggio part your hear during the conversation, but afterwards when you need to make a decision.

FYI / FWIW.
And yet, people still think Levithans are legit.

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2624
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 36
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by windsurfing on Thu Dec 25, 2014 7:32 am

It's sort of incompatible to have that in the background ambiance. It's more fitting if the whole thing was a dream. We are already getting the vibe from the people's responses at T-GES.
avatar
windsurfing
Scion

Posts : 629
Join date : 2013-01-19
Location : Restroom, Deck 2, SR2 Normandy

Back to top Go down

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

Post by dorktainian on Thu Dec 25, 2014 5:23 pm

I dunno if I would buy the whole thing was a dream thing. You can take IT as being the answer to the mass effect 3 riddle, or you can look at it as a literal mess, but a dream.????

Perhaps a simulation?

_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3500
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Thu Dec 25, 2014 5:45 pm

windsurfing wrote:It's sort of incompatible to have that in the background ambiance. It's more fitting if the whole thing was a dream. We are already getting the vibe from the people's responses at T-GES.
The only part that should be a "dream" is when Shepard - and Shepard alone - meets the Leviathan at the end.  The rest of the DLC is fine.  But there's way too much, IMO, pointing to Leviathan simply being a Reaper mind game with the intent of indoctrinating Shepard.  The fact that only Shepard ever sees Leviathan screams at the top of its lungs that there's more to it than what we're seeing.  The only other time in the entire series when Shepard has to go it alone is on Arrival.  Think about that.

It may be for other shady reasons, but (again, IMO) I think the reason Shepard has to go it alone in Leviathan was because only Shepard was being influenced enough to see those things down there.  If he had anyone else along, the jig would up instantly.

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2624
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 36
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by smash016 on Thu Dec 25, 2014 8:07 pm

I never considered it but it makes a lot of sense.

Although, if Leviathan was already an underwater creature the mech was mandatory and it has a 1st-person view by default. Can't really imagine seeing 3 mechs dropping in 3rd person, you know. Would be harder to implement, too, technically speaking.

_________________
"Refuse to believe life ends here. Too wasteful. Have more to offer. Mistakes to fix. Cannot end here. Could do so much more."
avatar
smash016
Scion

Posts : 642
Join date : 2014-03-25
Location : Everywhere at Once

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Thu Dec 25, 2014 9:04 pm

smash016 wrote:I never considered it but it makes a lot of sense.

Although, if Leviathan was already an underwater creature the mech was mandatory and it has a 1st-person view by default. Can't really imagine seeing 3 mechs dropping in 3rd person, you know. Would be harder to implement, too, technically speaking.
It's not the real world.  The world is designed to suit their needs.  Leviathan is a deep sea creature because the writers decided it so.  There are no alternative ways to get to the deep because the writers wanted it so.  The fact that we have to use a mech is by design of the writers (and if I'm right, the Reapers as well).  Furthermore, there is no combat or any other real gameplay down there.  We simply walk around until we meet it.  It could easily have been done in cutscene form with 2 additional mechs following Shepard if they wanted it to be.  It wouldn't have changed anything.  But they went out of their way to force the situation where Shepard is alone with the so-called Leviathans.  So no, I would say technical limitations are a highly improbable.  Whatever their reasoning, it was story-related.

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2624
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 36
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by smash016 on Thu Dec 25, 2014 11:21 pm

I hear you, but just saying that if Leviathan was already decided to be a deep sea creature (likely given its name), they had to think of a way for Shepard to meet it, and maybe they didn't want to sacrifice all player agency getting there. I for one think the underwater hike is absolutely stunning, and I doubt it'd be the same had it been just a cutscene.

But like I said, your reasoning and comparison to Arrival is just as interesting. It certainly makes you wonder. Always felt like the lore introduced by the Leviathans is... restrained, or distorted, possibly to the point of it being a deception for Shepard's eyes only, yeah.

_________________
"Refuse to believe life ends here. Too wasteful. Have more to offer. Mistakes to fix. Cannot end here. Could do so much more."
avatar
smash016
Scion

Posts : 642
Join date : 2014-03-25
Location : Everywhere at Once

Back to top Go down

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

Post by ZerebusPrime on Thu Dec 25, 2014 11:53 pm

What gets me is always the food.

What the hell are the Leviathans supposed to be eating down there? We know from entries on the crashed ships above that there are no fish. In fact, there are probably no non-Leviathan critters with a nervous system on the entire planet. Forget photosynthetic plants; the Leviathans live too deep down. Hydrothermal vent based abiotic synthesis? At the size of the Leviathans??? Forget it; when we meet the Leviathans there is nothing living around the cliff precipice. Creatures of that size have got to eat a lot but there's no food around.
avatar
ZerebusPrime
Space Cow

Posts : 838
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 38

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Fri Dec 26, 2014 12:46 am

smash016 wrote:I hear you, but just saying that if Leviathan was already decided to be a deep sea creature (likely given its name),

Plenty of non-aquatic Leviathans.
http://marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Leviathan
http://supernatural.wikia.com/wiki/Leviathans
And a great many more of them that can surface above water rather than being only at very deep depths.

they had to think of a way for Shepard to meet it, and maybe they didn't want to sacrifice all player agency getting there. I for one think the underwater hike is absolutely stunning, and I doubt it'd be the same had it been just a cutscene.

It's one of many ways they could've handled it.  The idea that Shepard went solo at that part due to coding issues is baseless speculation.  The AI for NPCs to use Atlas mechs has always been there.  Obviously.  The notion that it would be so difficult to code them to be non-hostile and follow Shepard as squadmates is simply ridiculous, especially given that they don't need any combat AI.

ZerebusPrime wrote:What gets me is always the food.

What the hell are the Leviathans supposed to be eating down there?  We know from entries on the crashed ships above that there are no fish.  In fact, there are probably no non-Leviathan critters with a nervous system on the entire planet.  Forget photosynthetic plants; the Leviathans live too deep down. Hydrothermal vent based abiotic synthesis?  At the size of the Leviathans???  Forget it; when we meet the Leviathans there is nothing living around the cliff precipice.  Creatures of that size have got to eat a lot but there's no food around.

This... is an incredible point.  A blue whale eats upto 8,000 pounds of krill a day.  We don't really know exactly how big a Leviathan is, but I'd bet money Leviathans are larger than blue whales (Earth's largest animal).  Much larger.  They look about as big compared to Shepard as Harbinger did (although admittedly we have more depth perception available with Leviathan).

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2624
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 36
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Fri Dec 26, 2014 1:00 am

I'm not sure what to think, really. It seems like anything is possible as far as that goes.

They said: "You guys don't know the first thing about the creators of the Reapers." when Leviathan DLC came out.

Funny, after playing the DLC I still felt the same way.

_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2960
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

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

Post by windsurfing on Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:32 am

Rifneno wrote:
The only part that should be a "dream" is when Shepard - and Shepard alone - meets the Leviathan at the end.  The rest of the DLC is fine.  But there's way too much, IMO, pointing to Leviathan simply being a Reaper mind game with the intent of indoctrinating Shepard.  The fact that only Shepard ever sees Leviathan screams at the top of its lungs that there's more to it than what we're seeing.  The only other time in the entire series when Shepard has to go it alone is on Arrival.  Think about that.

It may be for other shady reasons, but (again, IMO) I think the reason Shepard has to go it alone in Leviathan was because only Shepard was being influenced enough to see those things down there.  If he had anyone else along, the jig would up instantly.

Yeah personally am not buying the whole thing was a dream pitch but it's just the only way for ambiance to have those kind of choirs smash016 mentions.

I can see why Shepard has to go it alone, leviathans claim he is an anomaly so obviously they are only interested in him. But yeah he could have had henchmen with him but they will not see or experience anything Shepard does all they will see is him blacking out for a little while before the beeps start to buzz about water pressure warnings. It is more believable like you said that this was a deliberate part of the narrative and not down to having to deal with henchmen tagging along.

smash016 wrote:
Although, if Leviathan was already an underwater creature the mech was mandatory and it has a 1st-person view by default. Can't really imagine seeing 3 mechs dropping in 3rd person, you know. Would be harder to implement, too, technically speaking.

Coding for these games are done in C++, these henchmen are "classes", calling a class to have them as non participant NPC where Shepard has no control over them is not at all a difficult job infact it's too easy. You write the class once and you can have properties you can toggle on and off long before they start making level designs. in C programming terms it's like calling a function, in C++ functions are too rudimentary, that's why classes exist, Classes are a way of grouping many functions as methods.

We are already know having henchmen along is not a technical limitation in terms of rendering, the game is very much based on henchmen play style, so that is ruled out. The shading on the mechs are pretty neat but they are still low polygon count having two more rendered in the scene is not going to tax the GPU. It will take up more vRAM but vRAM has never been a problem for consoles, (PC is a non-issue) it's always GPU compute power.
avatar
windsurfing
Scion

Posts : 629
Join date : 2013-01-19
Location : Restroom, Deck 2, SR2 Normandy

Back to top Go down

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

Post by smash016 on Fri Dec 26, 2014 8:47 am

Rifneno wrote:Plenty of non-aquatic Leviathans.
http://marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Leviathan
http://supernatural.wikia.com/wiki/Leviathans
And a great many more of them that can surface above water rather than being only at very deep depths.

I don't see what this changes. If they had decided on a sea creature they had to think of a way for Shepard to meet it. Sure, they could've made it a land creature instead. But they could also have put Shepard in a vehicle capable of submersion in order to meet a creature which is clearly based on an aquatic creature from "real-life lore." I honestly don't understand what Marvel Comics has to do with it.

Anything is possible, like Doomsday says, and I'm not even sticking to one interpretation, yours or mine or anybody else's, just keeping things open.

Also, not every decision has to be made on narrative grounds. Maybe they just liked the idea of diving because they thought it was cool, and something else for a change. The whole trip is spectacular if you ask me, I mean aesthetically, and I'm glad they did it this way.

It's one of many ways they could've handled it.  The idea that Shepard went solo at that part due to coding issues is baseless speculation.  The AI for NPCs to use Atlas mechs has always been there.  Obviously.  The notion that it would be so difficult to code them to be non-hostile and follow Shepard as squadmates is simply ridiculous, especially given that they don't need any combat AI.

I never talked about any coding or non-hostility, also in response to Windsurfing.

Fact is Atlas gameplay was already designed a certain way and now they could conveniently reuse it. Implementing squadmate Atlas boarding as well would've required more effort. Not saying it can't be done, but for one thing, the already taxing game map would've required more space to accommodate those two extra clunky mechs. The whole sequence is basically a preset course with only rudimentary player freedom and Shepard being pushed down a literally narrow path. Not sure how that would play out with company.

I guess what they could've done is simply put two other mechs in pursuit of Shepard's at some distance and then have your squadmates chatter over the radio without any other kind of interaction between them, keeping the 1st-person POV intact so your squadmates would represent only something of a token presence. Yeah, that would've been quite easy. But my initial thought was Atlas gameplay is based on a 1st-person, non-henchmen perspective. Perhaps too quick a thought. However, I wouldn't call it "baseless" or "ridiculous". I know you would.

Also I like the idea of Shepard being there all alone, quite vulnerable. Maybe that was the devs' idea, too. Although Shepard eventually losing radio contact lends extra credence to your idea of it being an experience exclusive to Shepard.

Hell, both interpretations are not even mutually exclusive.

This... is an incredible point.  A blue whale eats upto 8,000 pounds of krill a day.  We don't really know exactly how big a Leviathan is, but I'd bet money Leviathans are larger than blue whales (Earth's largest animal).  Much larger.  They look about as big compared to Shepard as Harbinger did (although admittedly we have more depth perception available with Leviathan).
In the context of meeting such an ancient, mighty creature the question of how it feeds seems rather... trivial, but on the other hand, yeah, it could be a hint things aren't legit.

_________________
"Refuse to believe life ends here. Too wasteful. Have more to offer. Mistakes to fix. Cannot end here. Could do so much more."
avatar
smash016
Scion

Posts : 642
Join date : 2014-03-25
Location : Everywhere at Once

Back to top Go down

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

Post by dorktainian on Fri Dec 26, 2014 9:25 am

I think the achievement you get tells us all things aren't legit.


_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3500
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Fri Dec 26, 2014 10:14 am

smash016 wrote:Anything is possible, like Doomsday says, and I'm not even sticking to one interpretation, yours or mine or anybody else's, just keeping things open.

And as long as you keep trying to make argument for the absurdity that is the literal version of Leviathan, I'll argue against it.

I never talked about any coding or non-hostility, also in response to Windsurfing.

Yes.  Yes, you very much did.  "Can't really imagine seeing 3 mechs dropping in 3rd person, you know. Would be harder to implement, too, technically speaking."  Exactly what do you think this is about, if not coding?

You argued that the mech is a coding or gameplay restriction that justifies Shepard going it alone.  It does not.  You were wrong, and you were being called on it.

Fact is Atlas gameplay was already designed a certain way and now they could conveniently reuse it. Implementing squadmate Atlas boarding as well would've required more effort. Not saying it can't be done, but for one thing, the already taxing game map would've required more space to accommodate those two extra clunky mechs. The whole sequence is basically a preset course with only rudimentary player freedom and Shepard being pushed down a literally narrow path. Not sure how that would play out with company.

In a single file line obviously.  Implementing squadmates being able to follow Shepard in a mech that's already designed for NPC use, without needing any combat scripts, would take a few minutes of work.

Minutes.

I guess what they could've done is simply put two other mechs in pursuit of Shepard's at some distance and then have your squadmates chatter over the radio without any other kind of interaction between them, keeping the 1st-person POV intact so your squadmates would represent only something of a token presence. Yeah, that would've been quite easy. But my initial thought was Atlas gameplay is based on a 1st-person, non-henchmen perspective. Perhaps too quick a thought. However, I wouldn't call it "baseless" or "ridiculous". I know you would.

No, I'm not going to sugar-coat it.  It was a baseless speculation made by someone who clearly doesn't have any coding experience.

The point of view of the Atlas is a complete non-factor.  I don't know why you keep bringing it up as if it matters.  Do you think the game can't have events take place out of your view?  Do you have some strangely glitched version of the game where your squadmates disappear everytime you climb into an Atlas in the vanilla game?

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2624
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 36
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by windsurfing on Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:17 pm

smash016 wrote:
Fact is Atlas gameplay was already designed a certain way and now they could conveniently reuse it. Implementing squadmate Atlas boarding as well would've required more effort. Not saying it can't be done, but for one thing, the already taxing game map would've required more space to accommodate those two extra clunky mechs.

The leviathan DLC had a multiple locales, this development comes under 'level design'. Every part of a game these days is treated as an object. We call this OOP, or Object Oriented Programing. C++ facilitates OOP style of coding. A map, effects shader, vehicle, buildings, character, player, henchmen are all objects. The objects are made from C++ Classes. The 3D engine does all the work of rendering chosen objects/classes in the scene. It doesn't take anymore effort to add two more low polygon count mechs in the scene. Draw calls to the desired class increases, the increase is very tiny. Like I mentioned earlier only impact is on vRAM but this is not a problem for past gen consoles. You don't need multiple copies of the same mech as "files", these objects are created from a template and multiplied on the go by the 3D engine, in this case Unreal 3.x+ The objects we see in the scene are rendered in real time.

Animations are heavily reused for most NPCs, some unique movements have been reserved for various important characters like Shepard and his henchmen, the other NPCs all repeat the same predifined MoCaps for all NPCs. Shepard's boarding MoCap for boarding the mech can be reused for any other henchmen boarding a Mech, so that is also pretty trivial.

In terms of of actual code it will be mere few lines. The trade offs are not at code level it is at render level but like I pointed out two mechs added to the scene is not going to hurt frame rates. Size of assets is not an issue as one asset is reused and multiplied on the go. The mechs have to be different at C++ Class level to call for seperate templates for reach mech, that is not the case here since they are all the same mech if it is an Atlas mech.
avatar
windsurfing
Scion

Posts : 629
Join date : 2013-01-19
Location : Restroom, Deck 2, SR2 Normandy

Back to top Go down

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

Post by smash016 on Sat Dec 27, 2014 12:20 am

@Rifneno

I've been supportive of your interpretation and I backed down somewhat on the alternative I suggested, so I figure there's not much left for me to say.

Yet, even if we take away the technical part, what then remains of my reasoning is: Leviathan is sea creature / Shepard must meet it / Need underwater vessel / Reuse Atlas gameplay / Is 1st-person and without henchmen by default / Deep sea drop is more chilling if Shepard is alone and helpless anyway (or whatever BW might've liked about the concept)

I mean, why not? Do you really believe yours is the only possible interpretation?

Also, if Leviathan is a Reaper trick, what would be the purpose? In-universe for the Reapers, but also of this entire DLC? Do you believe the lore it adds is legit? What do you think is really down there, if not a Leviathan?

_________________
"Refuse to believe life ends here. Too wasteful. Have more to offer. Mistakes to fix. Cannot end here. Could do so much more."
avatar
smash016
Scion

Posts : 642
Join date : 2014-03-25
Location : Everywhere at Once

Back to top Go down

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

Post by windsurfing on Sat Dec 27, 2014 10:25 am

My gut feeling is that the Leviathans are not telling the whole truth. They could may well be what they claim they are, i.e egoistical bastards who thought creating a super AI to solve a problem was a great idea. It burst up right in their buttholes and nearly drove them to extinction but there is something about them that rubs me the wrong way. It's almost like yeah we nearly got destroyed but we like the reaping to continue, war? what war? there is only the reaping. The leviathan says it as if it's a good thing and is happy that it is continuing.

My hunch, they are reflecting what the Quarians wanted to do all along. Regain back control of their toys. Quarians wanted to take back the geth as their manual laborers and establish themselves as masters of their creations. We are probably seeing the same parallels with Leviathans. They knew they lost their grip on their starbrat toy now they want to get back in control. Not for a minute I buy them as being an ally in the war against reapers even out of convenience. They surely know more how to beat the reapers than they are letting on. I get the vibe they don't want the reapers to be completely beaten or destroyed.

You know speaking of which maybe the new threat bioware wants to focus on post ME3 as a sequel is the emergence of the Leviathans as arrogant and controlling menace. They have got it all to be a reaper like menace.

This is all of couse we accept the notion Leviathans are not some smoke and mirrors by the reapers themselves to get to something out of Shepard so Rif's suggestion is just as valid. We really don't know much about the leviathans. We only have superficial vibes from one DLC.

FWIW one thing to note is that we saw cave painting of the supposed leviathans descending on ancient people, the drawings are vividly different from that of a reaper shape, it had the more rocky, pointy outlines just like the Leviathans.


Last edited by windsurfing on Sat Dec 27, 2014 2:42 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : typos)
avatar
windsurfing
Scion

Posts : 629
Join date : 2013-01-19
Location : Restroom, Deck 2, SR2 Normandy

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 40 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 22 ... 40  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum