@LTiberious
You trying to prove something?
We already knew that several elements from Mass Effect's story weren't defined at the beginning, that's nothing new. If you're suggesting that's why the Prothy doesn't have tentacles, then you're still grasping a straws. (As per usual apparently.) as Casey never once mentions either them, or the Collectors. So they may or may not be included in that list.
Not mention I remember Mac in a twitter post once saying that the Collector idea was around near the end of ME1, due to fans asking "What the hell? where did these things come from? Why didn't Sovereign use them? This is so random and stupid!" Etc.
We don't know if the Collector "Look," was around back then, or just the story arc, but that's not the point. The point is simply; we have had numerous reasons, given by Bioware, that the Protheans resembled the Ilos Statues, even after ME2 was released and the Collectors were completed, Bioware said "Yes!" to Darkhorse putting a statue look- alike in Genesis to represent the Protheans. And we've had nothing until ME3 to even remotely suggested that they resembled Collectors. Yet they completely disregard everything they've done this way, and go a with a look that will appeal to the "Yeah, that's badass!" players.
Many people were completely justified in believing that Prothy would look like the Ilos Statues, and are still valid even now. Unlike you and your absurd and empty theories. If Bioware chooses to explain away the reasons I and others (Like Volc) have given to explain why Prothy should be a Cthulhu-Face, I'll be fine. But until then, as fun as Prothy's design is, (Mostly due to his armor, for me.) its makes little sense when placed beside the facts.
Your attempt to irritate me worked, but not for the reason you evidently wanted. I love how, when backed against the wall and your theories completely unglued, you disappeared instantly, but now that this news has appeared, you can't wait to stab at me.
Modifié par BentOrgy, 27 janvier 2012 - 10:13 .