57139 réponses à ce sujet

[n00bsauce2010]

Freakaz0idx wrote...

I'm watching the theory vid right now. I don't know if every point is identical in everyone's explanation because I haven't been keeping track of this. But, one of the points were that Shepard had infinite ammo and couldn't harm the keepers or anderson, but how is that relevant at all? At no point in any 3 games were you able to harm friendlies with a weapon, it was just a game mechanic and it still is. I don't get how that support the theroy that he's indoctrinated.

Where have you been the past 3-4 weeks when this theory was presenting arguments?
Start at page 1. We'll see you in a couple days.

[Fhaarkas]

killnoob wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

Exactly my thought.
If an open ending is what Bioware wanted, they wouldn't even clarify.
They have also stated there won't be a new ending, which renders I.T impossible since it requires further expansion.

Now it's all boils down to a bunch of rational people (you) vsing a bunch of people in denial. (IT believers)
Have fun explaining to the kids why there's no santa claus.

Ending the game with IT without further gameplay is possible. Just saying.

[killnoob]

Sovereign Skyguardian wrote...



Must really suck hard to have no friends to talk to and instead go into a thread and troll the hell out of it.
I' feel sorry that my Shepard fought for the people on earth which included your kind... =/

Your shepard probably doomed the entire galaxy so here's me thanking you.

[Alex_Dur4and]

I'm starting to understand a little bit better now... Preserving artistic integrity...

I think this probably means;

<< We planned something (INDOCTRINATION) since the beginning... We left you so many clues so you could figure that out by yourselves. We don't want to change that!

We might give you a longer ending with maybe more clues and unique variation so you can stand still and relax... But it still is going to stay an indoctrination attempt!

Don't worry! It's not the last time you will hear from Commander Shepard. He still needs to take out the trash! (or the Alliance... maybe...) If you knew what we had planned for you, you would not have reacted so agressively...

Anyway, we still thank you for the attention and publicity. No! We will not comment (confirm) the indoctrination theory... Silly people... It's a surprise! >>

I tried to read between the lines... This is what I came up with.

I'm still 100% convinced about indoctrination!

[killnoob]

Fhaarkas wrote...

killnoob wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

Exactly my thought.
If an open ending is what Bioware wanted, they wouldn't even clarify.
They have also stated there won't be a new ending, which renders I.T impossible since it requires further expansion.

Now it's all boils down to a bunch of rational people (you) vsing a bunch of people in denial. (IT believers)
Have fun explaining to the kids why there's no santa claus.

Ending the game with IT without further gameplay is possible. Just saying.

Winning the lottery is also possible. just saying.

[GBGriffin]

NoSpin wrote...

Which is just it, they haven't said anything. We know nothing more now than we did release day. All we have are hints in the game, which can be interpreted several different ways. You can see the sign next to the kid in the vent with the lightning bolt going through a head as just a standard "warning" sign, or you can see it as a clue to something trying to get in Sheps mind. Finding clues and debating is supposed to be FUN.


So until Bioware TELLS US what they say happens, have fun debating and searching for clues that may or may not exist. It's only a game.

Not to people such as n00bsauce2010 or some of the other fanatics.

Again, if this whole theory is based on speculation...why is it so hard to speculate that BioWare just screwed up? Why is that unlikely when compared to this mess? That's the frustrating part to me: people claim IT is the only ending that makes sense, when it actually isn't.

If you think that there are only ingame hints, then you're ignoring everything else that has taken place outside of the game which would debunk IT, which proves my point. You can dismiss the lack of support for IT, the deaths on the Citadel, whatever doesn't fit the theory as long as you have some stuff that fits the theory.

To me, they've done enough post-launch to show that the IT didn't make it into the final product and, by extension, won't be in the DLC, but that's me weighing the in-game evidence versus the developer's reactions to this mess. 

[n00bsauce2010]

killnoob wrote...

Why would i be in this thread? 
Cuz slapping people out of their fantasies is fun.

I merely see a 12 year old child with poor trolling tactics.

You're in here because you have nothing better to do with your life. Isn't it obvious?

[killnoob]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Why would i be in this thread? 
Cuz slapping people out of their fantasies is fun.

I merely see a 12 year old child with poor trolling tactics.

You're in here because you have nothing better to do with your life. Isn't it obvious?

And you have something to do with your life because you're ...here? Arguing abount the ending of a game, hanging on to your last straw and refusing to let go?

LOOL.

nice logic.

[Freakaz0idx]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Freakaz0idx wrote...

I'm watching the theory vid right now. I don't know if every point is identical in everyone's explanation because I haven't been keeping track of this. But, one of the points were that Shepard had infinite ammo and couldn't harm the keepers or anderson, but how is that relevant at all? At no point in any 3 games were you able to harm friendlies with a weapon, it was just a game mechanic and it still is. I don't get how that support the theroy that he's indoctrinated.

Where have you been the past 3-4 weeks when this theory was presenting arguments?
Start at page 1. We'll see you in a couple days.

I was out having a life, no offense.

[n00bsauce2010]

killnoob wrote...

Winning the lottery is also possible. just saying.

I think the troll is gonna cry.

[GBGriffin]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Why would i be in this thread? 
Cuz slapping people out of their fantasies is fun.

I merely see a 12 year old child with poor trolling tactics.

You're in here because you have nothing better to do with your life. Isn't it obvious?

Finally looked in the mirror, did you?


OOOOH SICK BURN BRO

[killnoob]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Winning the lottery is also possible. just saying.

I think the troll is gonna cry.

I think you are in denial.

[n00bsauce2010]

Freakaz0idx wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Freakaz0idx wrote...

I'm watching the theory vid right now. I don't know if every point is identical in everyone's explanation because I haven't been keeping track of this. But, one of the points were that Shepard had infinite ammo and couldn't harm the keepers or anderson, but how is that relevant at all? At no point in any 3 games were you able to harm friendlies with a weapon, it was just a game mechanic and it still is. I don't get how that support the theroy that he's indoctrinated.

Where have you been the past 3-4 weeks when this theory was presenting arguments?
Start at page 1. We'll see you in a couple days.

I was out having a life, no offense.

Then don't expect stupid questions to be answered.

And I find it very hard to believe that you have a life that amounts to anything more than facebook stalking girls you'll never talk to in person.

[GBGriffin]

Freakaz0idx wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Freakaz0idx wrote...

I'm watching the theory vid right now. I don't know if every point is identical in everyone's explanation because I haven't been keeping track of this. But, one of the points were that Shepard had infinite ammo and couldn't harm the keepers or anderson, but how is that relevant at all? At no point in any 3 games were you able to harm friendlies with a weapon, it was just a game mechanic and it still is. I don't get how that support the theroy that he's indoctrinated.

Where have you been the past 3-4 weeks when this theory was presenting arguments?
Start at page 1. We'll see you in a couple days.

I was out having a life, no offense.

There's no point in reading up on the thread; just watch the video and then take something from the game, anything really, and somehow work it out to support the belief that Shepard is indoctrinated.

[n00bsauce2010]

killnoob wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Winning the lottery is also possible. just saying.

I think the troll is gonna cry.

I think you are in denial.

Nerd Rage ^ He is pissed.

[lex0r11]

Guys, maybe we should just give in for their sake. Just for a minute, so they can move on with a dose of acknowledgement in their pockets.

You have fought long and well to hold your certificate of being right up high and be proud .

Let's gather in for a group hug and say: Yes, you are right! Everything is going to be alright!
















Seriously, W T F.

Modifié par lex0r11, 07 avril 2012 - 03:42 .

[NoSpin]

killnoob wrote...

noobcannon wrote...

killnoob wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

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.

Interpretation, sure, but I'd like to think not this interpretation.

I read the statements and, to me, and even some of your former believers, they leaned against IT rather than towards it. But, as I said, anyone who truly believes in IT can dismiss any evidence to the contrary.

Again. Your opinion. Not fact. And that bolded statement of yours has nothing to do with what I just said.

Actually it is fact.


Do you see Chris Nolan clarifying Inception's Ending?

No.

Because the ending is open to interpretation.
Bioware has announced they're gonna clarify the ending.
Therefore IT = dead.

Got it?

isn't the indoc theory itself clarification? not saying i still believe it or don't believe it, but really that's all it is right? speculative clarification of what we already have?

and how does someone wanting to cling to indoc theory have anything to do with you? in fact, why would you even be in this thread?

no, Bioware's gonna release new cutscene to clarify.
Indoc Theory is a Theory that actually 'complicates' the ending.
It has a lot of people coming up with a lot of goofy evidence that requires careful observations and some leaps in logic. You answer one question using I.T, more question arise, and IT believer will switch on their LALALA I'M NOT LISTENING mode when they can't answer them.
I.T = Clarification?
looool.

Why would i be in this thread? 
Cuz slapping people out of their fantasies is fun.

Is is clearer to take a leap of faith that somehow Joker picked up your crew and left you to rot, Anderson who FOLLOWED you up is now in front of you (when nobody made it), Mass Relays don't destroy the system they are in when they explode, Shepard honestly sits there and takes the logic the there will never be peace between organics and synthetics, when HE JUST MADE PEACE BETWEEN THEM an hour ago, that Shepard somehow survives the citadel explosion......or is it clearer to say "Harbinger was right there, Shep got hit by the laser and is fighting Harbinger in his mind, nothing you see from this point on is real until you breathe in the rubble."

There isn't enough evidence to prove me or you correct. That's why this thread exists, for simple respectful debate. Once people start to forget the respect part....I'm sure you guys know.

[noobcannon]

Freakaz0idx wrote...

I'm watching the theory vid right now. I don't know if every point is identical in everyone's explanation because I haven't been keeping track of this. But, one of the points were that Shepard had infinite ammo and couldn't harm the keepers or anderson, but how is that relevant at all? At no point in any 3 games were you able to harm friendlies with a weapon, it was just a game mechanic and it still is.

i agree, alot of things in that video could be easily passed off as neglect or oversight. like you said you've never been able to shoot the keepers, why would you be able to now?

there are three things that gave the indoc theory weight for me. the first was what certainly looked like "oily shadows" in shepard's dreams which, according to the rachni queen, are a sign of indoctrination. the second is how anderson got to the citadel, got there before you, and was somehow already at the console, even though there was clearly only one way to get there. the third is you breathing under the rubble at the very end after the citadel blows up.

i've only considered 2 possible explanations for these 3 points. Either poor writing, or some form of the indoctrination theory. whatever the extended cut dlc reveals/speculates/clarifies, it HAS to be able to answer those three points, and actually make sense. otherwise i'm just not interested.

[Fhaarkas]

Is it such an alien concept to grasp that this is not the day of Super Mario Bros anymore?

[killnoob]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Nerd Rage ^ He is pissed.

^Proves me right.

A clear case of " LALALA I'M NOT LISTENING".

[noobcannon]

NoSpin wrote...

Is is clearer to take a leap of faith that somehow Joker picked up your crew and left you to rot, Anderson who FOLLOWED you up is now in front of you (when nobody made it), Mass Relays don't destroy the system they are in when they explode, Shepard honestly sits there and takes the logic the there will never be peace between organics and synthetics, when HE JUST MADE PEACE BETWEEN THEM an hour ago, that Shepard somehow survives the citadel explosion......or is it clearer to say "Harbinger was right there, Shep got hit by the laser and is fighting Harbinger in his mind, nothing you see from this point on is real until you breathe in the rubble."

There isn't enough evidence to prove me or you correct. That's why this thread exists, for simple respectful debate. Once people start to forget the respect part....I'm sure you guys know.

i'm done reading his posts. he's obviously trolling. just report him.

[GBGriffin]

NoSpin wrote...

Is is clearer to take a leap of faith that somehow Joker picked up your crew and left you to rot, Anderson who FOLLOWED you up is now in front of you (when nobody made it), Mass Relays don't destroy the system they are in when they explode, Shepard honestly sits there and takes the logic the there will never be peace between organics and synthetics, when HE JUST MADE PEACE BETWEEN THEM an hour ago, that Shepard somehow survives the citadel explosion......or is it clearer to say "Harbinger was right there, Shep got hit by the laser and is fighting Harbinger in his mind, nothing you see from this point on is real until you breathe in the rubble."

There isn't enough evidence to prove me or you correct. That's why this thread exists, for simple respectful debate. Once people start to forget the respect part....I'm sure you guys know.

Actually, a leap of faith versus what you're actually being shown does make less sense. To me, what you're being shown, in addition to their defense of it, is "clearer" than a fan-made theory they haven't backed up.

Seriously, there's all this supposed proof in game, but no proof that seems just as valid outside of the game? Whereas, if you believed the product was rushed, then both in game and out of game evidence can explain that.

[Pirates10i]

Well from biowares reaction to the I.t. Theory it seems like to me they did not in fact mean to do it and they are not ruling it out to clean up their mess

[Freakaz0idx]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Freakaz0idx wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Freakaz0idx wrote...

I'm watching the theory vid right now. I don't know if every point is identical in everyone's explanation because I haven't been keeping track of this. But, one of the points were that Shepard had infinite ammo and couldn't harm the keepers or anderson, but how is that relevant at all? At no point in any 3 games were you able to harm friendlies with a weapon, it was just a game mechanic and it still is. I don't get how that support the theroy that he's indoctrinated.

Where have you been the past 3-4 weeks when this theory was presenting arguments?
Start at page 1. We'll see you in a couple days.

I was out having a life, no offense.

Then don't expect stupid questions to be answered.

And I find it very hard to believe that you have a life that amounts to anything more than facebook stalking girls you'll never talk to in person.

it was a stupid question? I thought it was legitimate question that could have had a short reply without any unecessary disrespect towards me. Since I'm new to learning about this theory, I need other people who are here to confirm that my question was stupid.




Can anyone who is a reg in this forum please confirm that my question was stupid? Did everyone just automatically know the answer to my question without any insight?

[n00bsauce2010]

killnoob wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Nerd Rage ^ He is pissed.

^Proves me right.

A clear case of " LALALA I'M NOT LISTENING".

^I made the troll cry

http://t2.gstatic.co...t4oz53jGtffIycQ

You merely prove my point of a trolls need to "fill in" his low self esteem.