57139 réponses à ce sujet

[IronSabbath88]

I have a hard time believing that the ending sequence was real.. just the way it was done.. was off. Something was off about it that I can't quite explain.

I think Weekes MIGHT be just talking in general about what we saw on the screen. It seems to me like the writers would be the ones to keep very hush about the IT. The only thing we've heard is Gamble's statement and nobody else has said anything except Merizan but she's a PR rep as mentioned before.

If my big surprise started gaining a lot of steam I'd try to be evasive and make it as unlikely as possible too. That's what it seems like they're doing to me. They're not outright denying the theory but they're making it seem like the literal ending has a chance to be true without saying anymore about IT. Seems odd to me is all.

Who knows, I'm prepared to wait until summer at this point.

Btw, for the earlier discussion on Grunt and people saying they thought they were the only fan of him... Grunt is actually my favourite squadmate.

[balance5050]

KILLER SQUIDZ wrote...

AgentStark wrote...

I think I can summarize all of your comments in this fashion:

The fans of the series are not impressed with what they saw and think it could be done better. They try to make a collection of theories as to why an ending such as this was given, and thus try to make the pain go away. Truth be told, this is not the reality of the situation.

I am seeing Bioware writers mad because of the stunt EA pulled in controlling creativity. The same thing happened with Dice in Battlefield, which used to be revered for its interesting single player campaign but is now being flooded with Call of Duty gamers making it change to their perspective. It's pretty clear by now that EA is turning into Activision and trying to squeeze as much money out of the die hard fans as possible. This cannot happen.

How is this related to IT? I believe that Bioware intended for the IT to be true. I believe that they are trying to trick EA into thinking that they get the ending they want. This is why the additional DLC after the extended cut is called The Truth because it will show what really happened. There needs to be some light shed on this. Fight the good fight, people. Its looking like a conspiracy.

They specifically denied DLC called "The Truth". As of right now it's still just the Extended Cut DLC. 

Actually they just denied that it was called the "Truth" the multiplayer stuff we saw in "the truth" actually came true and is in the resurgence pack, The post said that the truth would come out in "april or may" so at least part of itis true and shouldn't be discounted just yet.

[balance5050]

GBGriffin wrote...

@ kyzee

Lol, yes, friends. My apologies for misunderstanding you.

In closing, for now, I'd just like to apologize for beginning to lose my cool and just state why it's fairly easy to get irritated over this from my perspective : arguing against this theory is, at its core, arguing against faith. I am not a great debater, and I don't know how to argue against faith, or if it's even possible.

People have faith that the IT is true, that it was planned or that they'll just run with it. Faith of any kind is deeply personal and I believe that only the person who holds it can decide to change it based on whatever they feel is appropriate.

If this faith in BioWare lets you appreciate the series again, that's great. I'd just caution you to brace yourself for the possibility of disappointment. Please, don't adopt the "IT or nothing else" mentality.

Even if they never confirm I.T. in the DLC, I don't think they'll ever do anything that will disprove it either, I.T. is the only thing that let's me somewhat enjoy the endings and multiple playthroughs. You're right, you can argue with how people percieve things, but you'll rarely win, much like debating someone's sprituality.

[llbountyhunter]

GBGriffin wrote...

@ kyzee

Lol, yes, friends. My apologies for misunderstanding you.

In closing, for now, I'd just like to apologize for beginning to lose my cool and just state why it's fairly easy to get irritated over this from my perspective : arguing against this theory is, at its core, arguing against faith. I am not a great debater, and I don't know how to argue against faith, or if it's even possible.

People have faith that the IT is true, that it was planned or that they'll just run with it. Faith of any kind is deeply personal and I believe that only the person who holds it can decide to change it based on whatever they feel is appropriate.

If this faith in BioWare lets you appreciate the series again, that's great. I'd just caution you to brace yourself for the possibility of disappointment. Please, don't adopt the "IT or nothing else" mentality.

"arguing against this theory is, at its core, arguing against faith" 

wow. just wow. and to think that for moment i didnt belive you were a troll. 

you realize how weak your argument are dont you? I could easily trun around (ingore all the evidence) and say that all IT disbelivers are grasping at straws on bioware bieng crappy writers, which we know is not the case (Kotor)

[OdanUrr]

llbountyhunter wrote...

You forgot the other crucial truth on IT: anyone who doesn't like it simply dismisses all the evidence supporting it or calls it false

Not quite. Have fun.

http://social.biowar...scussion/20730/

[Sire Styx]

What irritates me is that at the last moment of the series, a whole load of new concepts, characters, ideas and that have been added.
We've got a new character, a previously unknown area of the citadel, we've found out the citadel is now made out of concrete-like materials, Joker's personality has changed and decides to flee and we have to believe teleportation or something is now a possibility so that your squadmates can get onto the normandy. either that, or joker just happens to fly in, pick them up and avoid getting attacked by reaper forces.

we now know that the citadel has the ability to create some sort of forcefield incase it's blown up which allows people to survive, we know that the citadel either doesn't fall towards earth after exploding OR it can somehow protect everyone on it from being incincerated/squished. The citadel must also land in the ocean or somehow miss major cities on earth for people not to die.

Shepard can either now withstand explosions or can survive the vacuum of space, re-entry into earths atmosphere and survive hitting the ground.

The mass relays now, when they explode, send out harmless coloured lights instead of destroying the system they're in like we've been previously told. Scientific progress now progresses incredibly fast, allowing the discovery of really good FTL travel
OR everyone just happened to bring years worth of supplies with them to earth so that they won't starve.

To meet up with the nomrandy, shepard can now either use the same teleportation beam his/her squadmates used or has to wait years to travel by conventional FTL speed or wait years while better FTL tech is invented. Either way, it must be a stroke of luck that the normandy had enough food supplies for Garrus/Tali to survive years, or that they've landed on a planet populated by dextro-amino plants, which means it's an even greater stroke of luck that the normandy just happened to have years worth of food for everyone else to survive
-------------------------
I know it's a bit messy what I typed, but to me there seems to be a load of new concepts and ideas that we have to suddenly understand in the last few minutes for the ending to make sense, plus a lot of speculation to fill the rest of the plot holes.

[llbountyhunter]

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

You forgot the other crucial truth on IT: anyone who doesn't like it simply dismisses all the evidence supporting it or calls it false

Not quite. Have fun.

http://social.biowar...scussion/20730/

Thank you for proving my point.

[GBGriffin]

@ llbountyhunter

My point is that theorists are doing that already

As for it being a matter of faith, what do you call believing that something which hasn't been expressly confirmed or denied and hoping that it's true? How is that not having faith in something.

As for kotor, you have faith in BioWare that they're planning such a great reveal. A feeling. A belief. Faith.

Call me a troll and feel free to report me as such. I don't mind and won't take offense.

[Sire Styx]

In my mind, the ending to mass effect would be like in, for example, the Harry Potter books, having on the last few pages of the last book, one of Dudley's friends from the first book (when they were still children) suddenly appearing, saying that actually, voldemort was created to stop the muggles killing the wizards.
Harry now has the choice to control Voldemort, fuse with voldemort or destroy voldemort. Harry chooses destroy, then avada kadava (spelling) curses suddenly just turn into harmless colourful lights, then hogwarts explodes (which is suddenly not made from stone and is now made out of plastic) with Harry Potter still in it, then blowing up all the wands so no one can aparate, then Hermionie and Ron running away to somewhere half way around the globe and leaving Harry behind. Dumbledore suddenly comes back alive and teleports to where Ron and that is (just like your squadmates if they died byt that beam).
Harry then wakes up in the hogwarts rubble. Everyone else in hogwarts is fine, because it now (even though no one knew of it before) has the ability to stop people dying if it explodes.

(Edit: I know this is a bit illogical, but I think it's close enough to the ME3 ending lol)

Modifié par Sire Styx, 08 avril 2012 - 04:39 .

[taliefer]

even if IT is true, the ending is horrible. even if you pick the destroy option, and fight off indoctrination....the reapers are kicking everyones ass and shepard wakes up severly injured in a pile of rubble. and thats how the mass effect trilogy ends. i dont get why this is so popular. its only slightly better in that it explains all the gaping plot holes and circular logic. the ending still sucks

[IronSabbath88]

GBGriffin wrote...

@ llbountyhunter

My point is that theorists are doing that already

As for it being a matter of faith, what do you call believing that something which hasn't been expressly confirmed or denied and hoping that it's true? How is that not having faith in something.

As for kotor, you have faith in BioWare that they're planning such a great reveal. A feeling. A belief. Faith.

Call me a troll and feel free to report me as such. I don't mind and won't take offense.

I wouldn't say it's all faith to me. I just think certain parts of the sequence don't make sense unless something else is going on. Like Shepard just so happens to be bleeding in the exact same place you shot Anderson, and I know, he could've got that wound anywhere, but they directly made it a center of attention.

Everything just strikes me as too odd to be real.

[Sire Styx]

taliefer wrote...

even if IT is true, the ending is horrible. even if you pick the destroy option, and fight off indoctrination....the reapers are kicking everyones ass and shepard wakes up severly injured in a pile of rubble. and thats how the mass effect trilogy ends. i dont get why this is so popular. its only slightly better in that it explains all the gaping plot holes and circular logic. the ending still sucks

It's popular because IT says that this ISN'T actually the ending, and that we're getting new DLC to show us what really happens.

However, if IT is true, and we don't get any DLC to add onto the ending, then it would be a terrible ending.

[IronSabbath88]

taliefer wrote...

even if IT is true, the ending is horrible. even if you pick the destroy option, and fight off indoctrination....the reapers are kicking everyones ass and shepard wakes up severly injured in a pile of rubble. and thats how the mass effect trilogy ends. i dont get why this is so popular. its only slightly better in that it explains all the gaping plot holes and circular logic. the ending still sucks

Who says they're kicking everyone's ass? Wouldn't that depend on your assets?

[Kyzee]

llbountyhunter wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

@ kyzee

Lol, yes, friends. My apologies for misunderstanding you.

In closing, for now, I'd just like to apologize for beginning to lose my cool and just state why it's fairly easy to get irritated over this from my perspective : arguing against this theory is, at its core, arguing against faith. I am not a great debater, and I don't know how to argue against faith, or if it's even possible.

People have faith that the IT is true, that it was planned or that they'll just run with it. Faith of any kind is deeply personal and I believe that only the person who holds it can decide to change it based on whatever they feel is appropriate.

If this faith in BioWare lets you appreciate the series again, that's great. I'd just caution you to brace yourself for the possibility of disappointment. Please, don't adopt the "IT or nothing else" mentality.

"arguing against this theory is, at its core, arguing against faith" 

wow. just wow. and to think that for moment i didnt belive you were a troll. 

you realize how weak your argument are dont you? I could easily trun around (ingore all the evidence) and say that all IT disbelivers are grasping at straws on bioware bieng crappy writers, which we know is not the case (Kotor)

I will repost what I just wrote:

"You know, the fact of the matter is that both IT supporters and anti-IT supporters are, to a degree, trying to prove negatives to each other. IT supports are trying to show that the endings as is aren't real, and anti-IT supporters are trying to show that IT isn't true. Not enviable positions to be in for either party."

This can easily been mistaken for the opinions on both sides being a matter of faith. They're not; they're just difficult (if not poor) positions to argue from.

Also, in case nobody has noticed ::snort::, people tend to get very emotional when discussing IT, something that we really should avoid. I honestly understand why GB in particular gets a bit . . . emphatic when expressing his views: he's been attacked relentlessly since showing up. And he's not a bad guy! He just has his own opinion, as he's entitled to, and has every right to express it. I don't want to see this forum be only welcome to people who believe in IT, and non-believers are shouted out. Debate is a good thing, so long as it's done respectfully.

And with that . . . well, if I could figure out how to post the Thresher M'aaaaaaaaw pic, I would. <3

Modifié par Kyzee, 08 avril 2012 - 04:42 .

[Chief Commander]

Shepard can barely walk when choosing an ending and when you choose synthesis he suddenly has all the energy of the world and runs and jumps like nothing happened. Just another little puzzle piece of the giant logic hole that is the ending of Mass Effect 3.

[Verin_Matvin]

In addition, I also think that Weekes is only theorizing. Why would he say anything regarding ending's plotholes if DLC is created to clarify them? Why didn't he or anyone else do that before? It could have been easier just to explain the ending as he answers the questions, and not create DLC.

[balance5050]

llbountyhunter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

You forgot the other crucial truth on IT: anyone who doesn't like it simply dismisses all the evidence supporting it or calls it false

Not quite. Have fun.

http://social.biowar...scussion/20730/

Thank you for proving my point.

I know right? for example:

"iv) The eye that glows
 
It’s called reflection. Shepard is staring at a glowing blue beam. Moving on. "   

How can you dismiss the obvious TIM eye pattern for "reflections".

He uses the words "it's nothing more" and  "Oh my God!" alot as if he is frustrated to have all the evidence there and he is tasked with disproving it with out a proper rebuttal besides the usual "lazy writing".

It's another fruitless attempt at disproving I.T. that really bring nothing new to the table.

[OdanUrr]

llbountyhunter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

You forgot the other crucial truth on IT: anyone who doesn't like it simply dismisses all the evidence supporting it or calls it false

Not quite. Have fun.

http://social.biowar...scussion/20730/

Thank you for proving my point.

I'm not sure I understand. If I dismiss evidence of IT, even if I provide other explanations, this is somehow proof IT is true?

[llbountyhunter]

GBGriffin wrote...

@ llbountyhunter

My point is that theorists are doing that already

As for it being a matter of faith, what do you call believing that something which hasn't been expressly confirmed or denied and hoping that it's true? How is that not having faith in something.

As for kotor, you have faith in BioWare that they're planning such a great reveal. A feeling. A belief. Faith.

Call me a troll and feel free to report me as such. I don't mind and won't take offense.

false logic: if you see a rock fall on the gound after you throw it, and exepect it to happen a second time.... is that faith?

by your reasoning EVERYTHING from quantom mechanics to black holes is faith

[OdanUrr]

balance5050 wrote...

How can you dismiss the obvious TIM eye pattern for "reflections".

He uses the words "it's nothing more" and  "Oh my God!" alot as if he is frustrated to have all the evidence there and he is tasked with disproving it with out a proper rebuttal besides the usual "lazy writing".

It's another fruitless attempt at disproving I.T. that really bring nothing new to the table.

Well, at least you read it, that's something. And, I'm not really trying to disprove anything, I'm just trying to provide other explanations for what many people consider evidence of IT. You don't have to agree with me at all.

[balance5050]

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

You forgot the other crucial truth on IT: anyone who doesn't like it simply dismisses all the evidence supporting it or calls it false

Not quite. Have fun.

http://social.biowar...scussion/20730/

Thank you for proving my point.

I'm not sure I understand. If I dismiss evidence of IT, even if I provide other explanations, this is somehow proof IT is true?

LOL at this:

"18. Read the codex entry/listen to the Rachni Queen

I did. What's next? "

You don't even have any comments on it!?!? You're not very good at this debate thing are you?

[llbountyhunter]

double post

Modifié par llbountyhunter, 08 avril 2012 - 04:52 .

[Sammuthegreat]

Sire Styx wrote...

In my mind, the ending to mass effect would be like in, for example, the Harry Potter books, having on the last few pages of the last book, one of Dudley's friends from the first book (when they were still children) suddenly appearing, saying that actually, voldemort was created to stop the muggles killing the wizards.
Harry now has the choice to control Voldemort, fuse with voldemort or destroy voldemort. Harry chooses destroy, then avada kadava (spelling) curses suddenly just turn into harmless colourful lights, then hogwarts explodes (which is suddenly not made from stone and is now made out of plastic) with Harry Potter still in it, then blowing up all the wands so no one can aparate, then Hermionie and Ron running away to somewhere half way around the globe and leaving Harry behind. Dumbledore suddenly comes back alive and teleports to where Ron and that is (just like your squadmates if they died byt that beam).
Harry then wakes up in the hogwarts rubble. Everyone else in hogwarts is fine, because it now (even though no one knew of it before) has the ability to stop people dying if it explodes.

(Edit: I know this is a bit illogical, but I think it's close enough to the ME3 ending lol)

The worrying thinig is that this is a really good parrallel! Shows how much sense the endings make at the moment.

Also, those who don't like the Indoc Theory - do you like the endings as they stand? I'm not trying to make a point, just wondering. I assume everyone dislikes the ending, theorists or not.

taliefer wrote...

even if IT is true, the ending is horrible. even if you pick the destroy option, and fight off indoctrination....the reapers are kicking everyones ass and shepard wakes up severly injured in a pile of rubble. and thats how the mass effect trilogy ends. i dont get why this is so popular. its only slightly better in that it explains all the gaping plot holes and circular logic. the ending still sucks

 

Man, if I had a penny for every time this came up...

[LeRavelle]

llbountyhunter wrote...

double post

So let us briefly explain it by means of this hologram resembling a little kid.

[GBGriffin]

@ llbountyhunter

Would arguing against belief or hope be better terminology? Was it just a poor choice of words?

What would you call the belief in IT when it still, at its very best, fan speculation?