57139 réponses à ce sujet

[mufasa121]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

So what are the most prominent plot holes that need to be filled in this dlc?

-Why was joker flying away
-how did my love intrest who was with me at the beam get off the normandy
-how did the explosion from a mass relay which has the power to destroy a star system not instantly wipe out the normandy/crew
-did shepard hallucinate/overcome indoctrination

I know I'm missing a few but its late and thats all I can think of ^.^

[Legion109]

Sovereign Skyguardian wrote...

Simon_Says wrote...

Damn it Skyguardian I was this close to actually forgetting it.
You monster.

I KNOW YOU FEEL THIS...

So looking at the ending again... Harbinger invaded Hogwarts so he could use Space Magic
Sneeky little bastard...

Jazz Hands

[GBGriffin]

Rob Psyence wrote...

You see, it's posts like that, that make people think you're a troll.

Why? Because I don't believe that the post will be in the ending DLC?

The poster asked for input on his post, and I simply stated that his fanfic ending will not be in the DLC.

Not agreeing with a post =/= trolling. Sorry.

Modifié par GBGriffin, 07 avril 2012 - 02:57 .

[AxholeRose]

mufasa121 wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

So what are the most prominent plot holes that need to be filled in this dlc?

-Why was joker flying away
-how did my love intrest who was with me at the beam get off the normandy
-how did the explosion from a mass relay which has the power to destroy a star system not instantly wipe out the normandy/crew
-did shepard hallucinate/overcome indoctrination

I know I'm missing a few but its late and thats all I can think of ^.^

-why was shepard seen breathing in Destroy ending
-what happened to all the allied forces stranded in the Sol system after mass relays blew up
-why did the alliance report that "everyone is wiped out" when Shepard and Anderson clearly made it to the beam?  Shepard was also shot in the arm, then gunned down Marauder Shields in cold blood and his 3 husketeers
-why didn't I see Anderson when i beamed myself up to the Citadel?
-why didn't Anderson stop and wait for me if he was ahead?

- WHERE THE HECK IN THE CITADEL WAS THAT?

[AnuzaGray]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

AnuzaGray wrote...

Everything.

Including an explanation of the Collectors...

what do you mean an explanation of the collectors?

What the hell is the point of the Collectors?  Why weren't they involved in ME1?  What was there long term goal?  

Are they just in the game to give TIM Reaper tech?

[Sovereign Skyguardian]

AnuzaGray wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

AnuzaGray wrote...

Everything.

Including an explanation of the Collectors...

what do you mean an explanation of the collectors?

What the hell is the point of the Collectors?  Why weren't they involved in ME1?  What was there long term goal?  

Are they just in the game to give TIM Reaper tech?

Why weren't Banshee?
Collectors were indoctrinated / huskified Protheans.
Their goal was to harvest Humans / serve the Reapers. (Why do I see a potential Nintendo DS game?)

[n00bsauce2010]

GBGriffin wrote...

Rob Psyence wrote...

You see, it's posts like that, that make people think you're a troll.

Why? Because I don't believe that the post will be in the ending DLC?

The poster asked for input on his post, and I simply stated that his fanfic ending will not be in the DLC.

Not agreeing with a post =/= trolling. Sorry.

Actually bud you're wrong. They're leaving enough room for interpretation on the extended cut as they've already stated. They're not going to deny possible interpretations. Best not to act like you know what you're talking about so you don't sound like a dumb sh*t.. oh wait.. you already do.

[mufasa121]

AnuzaGray wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

AnuzaGray wrote...

Everything.

Including an explanation of the Collectors...

what do you mean an explanation of the collectors?

What the hell is the point of the Collectors?  Why weren't they involved in ME1?  What was there long term goal?  

Are they just in the game to give TIM Reaper tech?

the collectors story is pretty much finished in mass effect 2 you really shouldnt need any more clarification.  They fail harbinger (because they fail to make/protect the human proto-reaper larva) and he has no longer need for them, so they go back to what they normally do.  Hiding in the omega 4 relay only leaving to take occasional prisoners in exchange for their tech.

[GBGriffin]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...


Actually bud you're wrong. They're leaving enough room for interpretation on the extended cut as they've already stated. They're not going to deny possible interpretations. Best not to act like you know what you're talking about so you don't sound like a dumb sh*t.. oh wait.. you already do.

He asked, openly, for thoughts about his fanfic ending, and I gave my opinion.

You're the one making an issue out of it.

[AnuzaGray]

That explains what they did and what happened to them, but the not logic or reasoning behind it.

[soundwave145]

So if this future dlc says nothing about shepherd surviving and nothing about the theory..is it dead?

[GBGriffin]

soundwave145 wrote...

So if this future dlc says nothing about shepherd surviving and nothing about the theory..is it dead?

Not as long as people BELIEVE! 


*edit* At the risk of sounding openly trollish, without an official "no", people will continue to believe in the theory, since you can easily twist anything to support it and throw out anything that contradicts it.

Modifié par GBGriffin, 07 avril 2012 - 03:04 .

[n00bsauce2010]

GBGriffin wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...


Actually bud you're wrong. They're leaving enough room for interpretation on the extended cut as they've already stated. They're not going to deny possible interpretations. Best not to act like you know what you're talking about so you don't sound like a dumb sh*t.. oh wait.. you already do.

He asked, openly, for thoughts about his fanfic ending, and I gave my opinion.

You're the one making an issue out of it.

Since when is opinion actually fact?

[GBGriffin]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Since when is opinion actually fact?

Now you're finally seeing things my way.

[noobcannon]

sooooooooo...more waiting..... good thing diablo 3 comes out soon.

[n00bsauce2010]

GBGriffin wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Since when is opinion actually fact?

Now you're finally seeing things my way.

I disagree. The ending is meant to be interpreted in multiple ways...hence biowares statements, and pr doublespeak. The theory itself, although not fact.. is an interpretation. It fits their intentions.

Best example I can think of is Blade Runner. No actual proof could be seen in the film that deckard was a replicant.. but alas Ridley Scott produly announces it years later. It's because he wanted people to come up with their own theories.

[killnoob]

GBGriffin wrote...

soundwave145 wrote...

So if this future dlc says nothing about shepherd surviving and nothing about the theory..is it dead?

Not as long as people BELIEVE! 

Hey man i did a quick google search and I think I found a picture of some IT believers:



Have fun with your cult. Reality doesn't need you.

Modifié par killnoob, 07 avril 2012 - 03:10 .

[GBGriffin]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

I disagree. The ending is meant to be interpreted in multiple ways...hence biowares statements, and pr doublespeak. The theory itself, although not fact.. is an interpretation. It fits their intentions.

Best example I can think of is Blade Runner. No actual proof could be seen in the film that deckard was a replicant.. but alas Ridley Scott produly announces it years later. It's because he wanted people to come up with their own theories.

It's your opinion that the theory fits their intentions. They haven't confirmed that it fits their intentions, which leaves it as an opinion.

And yet, it is being passed off as the only ending that makes sense, so it must therefore be their intention and nothing else will do. Sounds like an opinion being presented as a fact to me.

[AxholeRose]

killnoob wrote...

Have fun with your cult. Reality doesn't need you.

Be careful who you stick up for...  sometimes I get the feeling even BioWare is distorting reality

[n00bsauce2010]

http://t0.gstatic.co...ZGvLDbgU3oltA1g

[killnoob]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Since when is opinion actually fact?

Now you're finally seeing things my way.

I disagree. The ending is meant to be interpreted in multiple ways...hence biowares statements, and pr doublespeak. The theory itself, although not fact.. is an interpretation. It fits their intentions.

Best example I can think of is Blade Runner. No actual proof could be seen in the film that deckard was a replicant.. but alas Ridley Scott produly announces it years later. It's because he wanted people to come up with their own theories.

Hey hey is this a picture of you? 



No?

Well sorry, but It seemed likely.

[GBGriffin]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...



http://t0.gstatic.co...ZGvLDbgU3oltA1g

Not exactly the civil, logical, and well-thought out response your camp claims to be known for, but again, it's posts like these that convince me the fringe element of the IT, into which you fall, is crazy.

[killnoob]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...



%20http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSJnPDAqTjPSeUo8BUVjlUMU1StmOyw11P7zwBX-gUsAgrZGvLDbgU3oltA1g%20

[noobcannon]

GBGriffin wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

I disagree. The ending is meant to be interpreted in multiple ways...hence biowares statements, and pr doublespeak. The theory itself, although not fact.. is an interpretation. It fits their intentions.

Best example I can think of is Blade Runner. No actual proof could be seen in the film that deckard was a replicant.. but alas Ridley Scott produly announces it years later. It's because he wanted people to come up with their own theories.

It's your opinion that the theory fits their intentions. They haven't confirmed that it fits their intentions, which leaves it as an opinion.

And yet, it is being passed off as the only ending that makes sense, so it must therefore be their intention and nothing else will do. Sounds like an opinion being presented as a fact to me.

that's your opinion. it hasn't been confirmed. derp.

[n00bsauce2010]

GBGriffin wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

I disagree. The ending is meant to be interpreted in multiple ways...hence biowares statements, and pr doublespeak. The theory itself, although not fact.. is an interpretation. It fits their intentions.

Best example I can think of is Blade Runner. No actual proof could be seen in the film that deckard was a replicant.. but alas Ridley Scott produly announces it years later. It's because he wanted people to come up with their own theories.

It's your opinion that the theory fits their intentions. They haven't confirmed that it fits their intentions, which leaves it as an opinion.

And yet, it is being passed off as the only ending that makes sense, so it must therefore be their intention and nothing else will do. Sounds like an opinion being presented as a fact to me.

Apparently you neglected to read any of the last statements from bioware as well as what was said during the panel today at PAX.

I guess you don't really understand the definition of interpretation. They said they left room for it. So any theory that "makes sense" fits their intetions. Denying that the theory "makes sense" is just an attempt by trolls like you to present your opinion as fact.