57139 réponses à ce sujet

[balance5050]

waldstr18 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

called no one an idiot. also i was just checking everything is as usual in here. im actually trying to keep from posting too much, since people get called troll very quickly these days.

oh, and if you dont like to be called hard believers, maybe you should believe so hard. (if that makes any sense).

No it actually doesn't make sense.

oh, that should be "shouldnt believe so hard". better now?

Yes thank you.

[lex0r11]

waldstr18 wrote...

called no one an idiot. also i was just checking everything is as usual in here. im actually trying to keep from posting too much, since people get called troll very quickly these days.

oh, and if you dont like to be called hard believers, maybe you should believe so hard. (if that makes any sense).

The real problem is not what you write on the surface, it's the way you always come in here and make it subconsciously clear to everyone in here what you think of them. Basic rhetoric. Your initial questions are simply mocking, nothing more. Because there is no gain in asking them other then to remind people what they seem to be. Still fanatic? Look at these people. They are so laughable. There is no denying what you really want to say.

You don't need an PhD in psychology to discern the intentions of your words and really just basic understanding of human nature to realize why you are still doing it.

There is no need to stay here anymore and there is no need for IT supporters to follow your posts.

[Xd2delo]

Couple quick thoughts (and apologies if this has already been mentioned before).

First thing is a bit subtle, certainly not strong evidence of anything, but does anyone else find it intriguing that there's several references to the fact (in conversations with Miranda) that no control chip was implanted in Shepard during the Lazarus Project?  That in fact that was a decision made by the Illusive Man personally?  Nothing particularly significant about that in and of itself, for purposes of IDT anyway, but of course, it does permit one interesting inference: that no control chip was necessary for the IM to control Shep.  If Shep was to be indoctrinated, then why bother with a chip?  It gives Shepard the illusion that he remains uncontrolled, helps convince him of IM's good will (for ME2 at least), and, more intriguingly, if indoctrination is part of the goal with Shepard anyway, is it possible that a control chip would have interfered with that?  I mean, suppose he WAS indoctrinated... is it possible that if a control chip was implanted, that might give forces opposing the Reapers a chance to break indoctrination?  Obviously, that's all wild speculation, but just thought I would raise the point.

Second, there was some discussion pages and pages ago about how Shep got indoctrinated, as in what was the specific vehicle for his indoctrination.  And of course, he's clearly been around plenty of Reaper artifacts and even inside a dead Reaper.  But here's a wild speculation; at the beginning of ME3, there's a scene where Anderson makes a big deal out of giving Shepard back his dogtags.  Which are also prominently featured in the "Breathe" scene.  And which Shepard carries around with him everywhere.  Which could account for why Vega comments on that humming noise when Shepard comes around...  As I say, purely wild speculation, just kinda fun to throw it out there. 

It summer yet?

Modifié par Xd2delo, 12 avril 2012 - 08:11 .

[waldstr18]

didnt i already say why im still posting here? 3 or 40 times? my intentions arent to make anyone of you mad or something. but if you call me a troll, well, i feel i have to defend myself, cause im actually no troll yet. once my in your face moment comes, then i gladly accept that, but until then, its your problem if you think everyone who posts in here about idt being senseless (and im talking here about the planned all along part mostly) is a troll. im not and im not trying to be.

if one of you had posted a quick "yes, still believing" to my initial hard believer comment, that would have been that, no arguing, nothing. but instead one of you called me a troll again.

[Ravel1992]

Aethgeir wrote...

This is a terrible idea.  It’s clearly little more than a fan-fiction attempt to cope with ME3’s disappointing ending.
Its proponents sound like religious fanatics or conspiracy buffs: holding up plot holes, inconsistencies and minute details as ‘evidence’ that BioWare was planning this all along.  They completely ignore the fact that this idea comes with its own set of plot holes and inconsistencies.
In reality this is just a weak attempt to smooth out the plot holes, inconsistencies and illogical nonsense of the ME3’s current ending  in the vain hope that ‘it was all just a bad dream’ and ‘the REAL ending is coming in a DLC’.
The worst thing about it though, is that it validates the existing bad ending while completely ignoring what actually makes bad in first place:

• Shepard’s mission still ultimately fails.
• Shepard’s decisions still don’t matter.
• The illusion of choice is still shattered.
• Mass Effect's greatest strength is still lost: Indoctrination theory doesn’t make players want to replay the game anymore than the current ending does.

I sincerely, hope that BioWare doesn’t cave to a bad idea that could make the ending even worse.
The dropped ‘Dark Energy Plot’ has far more promise for improving the ending than ‘indoctrination theory’ does and it requires only the smallest changes to the existing ending.  I’ve posted details on my BioWare social network blog:
 http://social.biowar...entry_id=212578
The idea was largely inspired by this article:
http://doycetesterma...tistic-process/

I disagree with you. For me that would be the best plot twist I have ever seen in any game.

[balance5050]

Xd2delo wrote...

Couple quick thoughts (and apologies if this has already been mentioned before).

First thing is a bit subtle, certainly not strong evidence of anything, but does anyone else find it intriguing that there's several references to the fact (in conversations with Miranda) that no control chip was implanted in Shepard during the Lazarus Project?  That in fact that was a decision made by the Illusive Man personally?  Nothing particularly significant about that in and of itself, for purposes of IDT anyway, but of course, it does permit one interesting inference: that no control was necessary for the IM to control Shep.  If Shep was to be indoctrinated, then why bother with a chip?  It gives Shepard the illusion that he remains uncontrolled, helps convince him of IM's good will (for ME2 at least), and, more intriguingly, if indoctrination is part of the goal with Shepard anyway, is it possible that a control chip would have interfered with that?  I mean, suppose he WAS indoctrinated... is it possible that if a control chip was implanted, that might give forces opposing the Reapers a chance to break indoctrination?  Obviously, that's all wild speculation, but just thought I would raise the point.

Second, there was some discussion pages and pages ago about how Shep got indoctrinated, as in what was the specific vehicle for his indoctrination.  And of course, he's clearly been around plenty of Reaper artifacts and even inside a dead Reaper.  But here's a wild speculation; at the beginning of ME3, there's a scene where Anderson makes a big deal out of giving Shepard back his dogtags.  Which are also prominently featured in the "Breathe" scene.  And which Shepard carries around with him everywhere.  Which could account for why Vega comments on that humming noise when Shepard comes around...  As I say, purely wild speculation, just kinda fun to throw it out there. 

It summer yet?

Just to play devils advocate on one detail on your first speculaltion about TIM controlling Shep and anderson. It is said that he could be using reaper enhanced biotics to control them. Though it is never explicitly implied. 

Vega mentioning the humming is always a good clue because it is indicating that there is reaper tech on the ship. Combine that clue with Kaiden mentioning the humming in ME1 and the "indoctrination" codex and it's a good package.

[lex0r11]

waldstr18 wrote...

[...]

once my in your face moment comes

[...]

No further words required.

waldstr18 wrote...

if one of you had posted a quick "yes,
still believing" to my initial hard believer comment, that would have
been that, no arguing, nothing. but instead one of you called me a troll
again.

Be honest, even you would not believe that.

Modifié par lex0r11, 12 avril 2012 - 08:21 .

[Tirian Thorn]

Aethgeir wrote...

This is a terrible idea.  It’s clearly little more than a fan-fiction attempt to cope with ME3’s disappointing ending.
Its proponents sound like religious fanatics or conspiracy buffs: holding up plot holes, inconsistencies and minute details as ‘evidence’ that BioWare was planning this all along.  They completely ignore the fact that this idea comes with its own set of plot holes and inconsistencies.
In reality this is just a weak attempt to smooth out the plot holes, inconsistencies and illogical nonsense of the ME3’s current ending  in the vain hope that ‘it was all just a bad dream’ and ‘the REAL ending is coming in a DLC’.
The worst thing about it though, is that it validates the existing bad ending while completely ignoring what actually makes bad in first place:

• Shepard’s mission still ultimately fails.
  
• Shepard’s decisions still don’t matter.
  
• The illusion of choice is still shattered.
  
• Mass Effect's greatest strength is still lost: Indoctrination theory doesn’t make players want to replay the game anymore than the current ending does.

I sincerely, hope that BioWare doesn’t cave to a bad idea that could make the ending even worse.
The dropped ‘Dark Energy Plot’ has far more promise for improving the ending than ‘indoctrination theory’ does and it requires only the smallest changes to the existing ending.  I’ve posted details on my BioWare social network blog:
 http://social.biowar...entry_id=212578
The idea was largely inspired by this article:
http://doycetesterma...tistic-process/

Clearly?  I do not see where anyone from Bioware has said IDT isn't true. 

At this point, it's all up in the air.  IDT may be true or not.  But to say that "It’s clearly little more than a fan-fiction attempt to cope with ME3’s disappointing ending" is false and merely your opinion.  Just like IT is an opinion shared by a number of people. 

With IDT Shepard's mission doesn't automatically fail. 

Shepard's decisions DO matter. 

And there is more choice with IT than there is now. 

All IT does is explain the ending and ideally it leaves room to actually continue the ending and see what your choices during the Indoctrination attempt actually caused in the real world. 

Under IT if you chose:

1)  Destroy - you resist indoctrination and wake up in London and resume the fight.

2)  Control & Synthesis you are under varrying control of the reapers and the actual ending will shake out differently.  Maybe your squad can save you if you have a high enough EMS or something.

But you know, I could just hop over to your blog and post the same thing as you "that it's a terrible idea, blah blah blah."  But hey, I happen to think the Dark Energy Ending would have been pretty cool too. 

[balance5050]

waldstr18 wrote...

didnt i already say why im still posting here? 3 or 40 times? my intentions arent to make anyone of you mad or something. but if you call me a troll, well, i feel i have to defend myself, cause im actually no troll yet. once my in your face moment comes, then i gladly accept that, but until then, its your problem if you think everyone who posts in here about idt being senseless (and im talking here about the planned all along part mostly) is a troll. im not and im not trying to be.

if one of you had posted a quick "yes, still believing" to my initial hard believer comment, that would have been that, no arguing, nothing. but instead one of you called me a troll again.

It's true guys, the friendly troll GBGriffin taught us that you summon trolls by mentioning their name. So lets just ignore now shall we?

[waldstr18]

lex0r11 wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

[...]

once my in your face moment comes

[...]

No further words required.

well, i truely think i deserve to tell you i told you so for all the things you called me in here. and im going to enjoy it immensely. but until then, no troll actions from my side.

[Vahilor]

lex0r11 wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

[...]

once my in your face moment comes

[...]

No further words required.

I think ignoring would be the best way =) cause all you will tell Waldstr. will not have any impact on what he is saying. He can't understand that his posts are allways provoking...

[Aethgeir]

estebanus wrote...

Aethgeir wrote...

This is a terrible idea.  It’s clearly little more than a fan-fiction attempt to cope with ME3’s disappointing ending.
Its proponents sound like religious fanatics or conspiracy buffs: holding up plot holes, inconsistencies and minute details as ‘evidence’ that BioWare was planning this all along.  They completely ignore the fact that this idea comes with its own set of plot holes and inconsistencies.
In reality this is just a weak attempt to smooth out the plot holes, inconsistencies and illogical nonsense of the ME3’s current ending  in the vain hope that ‘it was all just a bad dream’ and ‘the REAL ending is coming in a DLC’.
The worst thing about it though, is that it validates the existing bad ending while completely ignoring what actually makes bad in first place:

• Shepard’s mission still ultimately fails.
  
• Shepard’s decisions still don’t matter.
  
• The illusion of choice is still shattered.
  
• Mass Effect's greatest strength is still lost: Indoctrination theory doesn’t make players want to replay the game anymore than the current ending does.

I sincerely, hope that BioWare doesn’t cave to a bad idea that could make the ending even worse.
The dropped ‘Dark Energy Plot’ has far more promise for improving the ending than ‘indoctrination theory’ does and it requires only the smallest changes to the existing ending.  I’ve posted details on my BioWare social network blog:
 http://social.biowar...entry_id=212578
The idea was largely inspired by this article:
http://doycetesterma...tistic-process/

   
Thanks for your feedback! What else did you like about the indoctrination theory?

Well, the indoctrination idea is an interesting plot twist: Shepard facing temptation.  The fact is though, it just doesn't offer this story the proper resolution that it deserves.

[Dwailing]

balance5050 wrote...

Xd2delo wrote...

Couple quick thoughts (and apologies if this has already been mentioned before).

First thing is a bit subtle, certainly not strong evidence of anything, but does anyone else find it intriguing that there's several references to the fact (in conversations with Miranda) that no control chip was implanted in Shepard during the Lazarus Project?  That in fact that was a decision made by the Illusive Man personally?  Nothing particularly significant about that in and of itself, for purposes of IDT anyway, but of course, it does permit one interesting inference: that no control was necessary for the IM to control Shep.  If Shep was to be indoctrinated, then why bother with a chip?  It gives Shepard the illusion that he remains uncontrolled, helps convince him of IM's good will (for ME2 at least), and, more intriguingly, if indoctrination is part of the goal with Shepard anyway, is it possible that a control chip would have interfered with that?  I mean, suppose he WAS indoctrinated... is it possible that if a control chip was implanted, that might give forces opposing the Reapers a chance to break indoctrination?  Obviously, that's all wild speculation, but just thought I would raise the point.

Second, there was some discussion pages and pages ago about how Shep got indoctrinated, as in what was the specific vehicle for his indoctrination.  And of course, he's clearly been around plenty of Reaper artifacts and even inside a dead Reaper.  But here's a wild speculation; at the beginning of ME3, there's a scene where Anderson makes a big deal out of giving Shepard back his dogtags.  Which are also prominently featured in the "Breathe" scene.  And which Shepard carries around with him everywhere.  Which could account for why Vega comments on that humming noise when Shepard comes around...  As I say, purely wild speculation, just kinda fun to throw it out there. 

It summer yet?

Just to play devils advocate on one detail on your first speculaltion about TIM controlling Shep and anderson. It is said that he could be using reaper enhanced biotics to control them. Though it is never explicitly implied. 

Vega mentioning the humming is always a good clue because it is indicating that there is reaper tech on the ship. Combine that clue with Kaiden mentioning the humming in ME1 and the "indoctrination" codex and it's a good package.

OK, I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment and point out that the humming that Kaidan mentioned in ME1 was from the Conduit, a piece of Prothean tech, not Reaper tech.  However, I do think that the thing with James was a hint.  When I heard him say that the first time, I thought, "What the heck?"  But if it is a hint about IT, then it makes perfect sense.  What can I say, I never really heard a "hum" on the Normandy.  All I could think of was I might be the sound of the Drive Core, but that wasn't really a hum.

[Dwailing]

balance5050 wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

didnt i already say why im still posting here? 3 or 40 times? my intentions arent to make anyone of you mad or something. but if you call me a troll, well, i feel i have to defend myself, cause im actually no troll yet. once my in your face moment comes, then i gladly accept that, but until then, its your problem if you think everyone who posts in here about idt being senseless (and im talking here about the planned all along part mostly) is a troll. im not and im not trying to be.

if one of you had posted a quick "yes, still believing" to my initial hard believer comment, that would have been that, no arguing, nothing. but instead one of you called me a troll again.

It's true guys, the friendly troll GBGriffin taught us that you summon trolls by mentioning their name. So lets just ignore now shall we?

You know, I kind of miss GB.  I think it's kind of weird that he hasn't appeared given all the times that we have said his name.

[Falloutwarfare]

@balance5050 iv wondered about the humming vega mentions because if you listen you can hear a kind of reverberating (that the right word?) sound that could be what he is referencing but humming does indicate a kind of constant sound can you clarify this for me m8?

Also guys stop the hate. Is what the reapers want lol

[Voodzik]

LeRavelle wrote...

If they take the most advanced race and take the form they harvest then why are they in the form of fish and instects? Surely the reaper's were hopping about with a bug net and fishing rods while speeching " We are your salvation

If humans are the most advanced race, why do we look like monkeys?

Lije what if the Hanar had been the most advanced race? Or Thorians? Anthropoid races may not have been the standard for all cycles.

[Xd2delo]

Thanks for the feedback!
Re: Kaidan in ME1; Prothean tech, yes, but derived from what was originally Reaper technology. Of course, it's straining credulity to suggest that EVERY piece of Reaper-derived tech must somehow produce an indoctrination field, but I suppose it's possible. Or maybe a hum is just a hum.

[Rifneno]

Aethgeir wrote...

This is a terrible idea. It’s clearly little more than a fan-fiction attempt to cope with ME3’s disappointing ending.
Its proponents sound like religious fanatics or conspiracy buffs: holding up plot holes, inconsistencies and minute details as ‘evidence’ that BioWare was planning this all along. They completely ignore the fact that this idea comes with its own set of plot holes and inconsistencies.
In reality this is just a weak attempt to smooth out the plot holes, inconsistencies and illogical nonsense of the ME3’s current ending in the vain hope that ‘it was all just a bad dream’ and ‘the REAL ending is coming in a DLC’.
The worst thing about it though, is that it validates the existing bad ending while completely ignoring what actually makes bad in first place:

Shepard’s mission still ultimately fails.

Shepard’s decisions still don’t matter.

The illusion of choice is still shattered.

Mass Effect's greatest strength is still lost: Indoctrination theory doesn’t make players want to replay the game anymore than the current ending does.


I sincerely, hope that BioWare doesn’t cave to a bad idea that could make the ending even worse.
The dropped ‘Dark Energy Plot’ has far more promise for improving the ending than ‘indoctrination theory’ does and it requires only the smallest changes to the existing ending. I’ve posted details on my BioWare social network blog:
http://social.biowar...entry_id=212578
The idea was largely inspired by this article:
http://doycetesterma...tistic-process/

(Removed formatting because the forums are apparently incredibly retarded with their own built-in list design.)

It's very telling that you neither respond to the stronger arguments in favor of IT or list the supposed "plot holes". Which is odd since you claim it opens as many as it closes and it closes a TON of them. Instead you come in like Waldstr Lite and accuse others of being zealots and conspiracy nuts for disagreeing with your own ill-informed, unsubstantiated opinion. Nobody wants to read your blog BTW. If we wanted to hear condescending nonsense from people that don't do any fact checking, we've already got FOX News.

In one sentence you acknowledge the fact the majority of IT believes that the rest will come in DLC (what a coincidence that an ending DLC was announced) and then go on to complain about all the problems with IT that would only exist if that wasn't the case. Just as laughable as all the claims you made and then didn't back up in favor of linking a blog. The only person I've seen so malevolently attack fundamental logic is starkid himself.

God, I miss the days when we had IT opponents who at least tried to make a case for their side.

[Arian Dynas]

Dwailing wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

didnt i put that correctly? what i meant was "you guys are still believing in the indoctrination theory like a bunch of fanatics ready to behead everyone who thinks its just a bunch of ballony." thats what i meant with believing hard. sorry, no native speaker.

And he wonders why people think he's a troll.  With a charming personality like that.

Yeah at least a certain other person was polite about his oppostion.  And yes, I know I probably just summoned him.

Don't worry, his name is required for a summoning to happen.

Good to know.  I wasn't quite sure.

Oh, we are required to name GBGriffin to summon him? *trollface*

NOOOOOO!!!  You spoke his name!!!  How could yo...  wait, I actually kind of like talking to the guy.  As you were Arian.

As I were what? What were I? *sinks into "The Thinker" pose* as I were... but what were I?

Ah, but seriously, a horrible idea occured to me.

After hearing Javik give the comment that Joker insists he call himself "Prothy the Prothean" it occured to me that Javik probably only exists because people insisted, jokingly, that there should be a Prothean Squadmate.

So what does that make you think this Marauder Shields buisness will turn out as? <_<

On the plus side, done right it could actually make a very interesting tragic character, maybe a former squadmate or, hell a resurrected enemy, fighting on your side, brought back by the Reapers to act as a more efficient tactical commander, made too intelligent and strong willed, breaking away from Reaper control, turned and twisted into a hateful monster fighting to retain it's last dregs of humanity ect.

And another thing... there is two new multiplayer maps, there are also three new weapons in multiplayer. The Batarians are present in this one. There are also NO multiplayer maps that don't have single player N7 mission counterparts... you guys picking up what I am putting down?

Dwailing wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

captainbob8383 wrote...

Sometime ago someone posted a link to an old topic (like 7-8 months old) where a Bioware employee was talking about indoctrination and was basically saying poeple should bookmark this topic to not feel dumb when ME3 would come out. 
Maybe it was a coincidence, maybe he was joking, but still, If somebody knows which topic I'm talking about and still has the link, if you'd be kind enough to post it, I just cant find it.

wut.. now that sounds interesting...

guys, please stop the trolling, so relevant posts don't get drowned

Maybe he was refering to one of those "kid is a hallucination" threads.  That's right, there was speculation even before the game was out that the kid wasn't real.  I didn't think much of it at the time, but now...

 

Weirdly enough, I was in one of those. I stopped posting because I either got ignored, or just had people calling me crazy.

WHO'S CRAZY NOW ****ES? 

(still me ^.^ lol)

[balance5050]

Dwailing wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Xd2delo wrote...

Couple quick thoughts (and apologies if this has already been mentioned before).

First thing is a bit subtle, certainly not strong evidence of anything, but does anyone else find it intriguing that there's several references to the fact (in conversations with Miranda) that no control chip was implanted in Shepard during the Lazarus Project?  That in fact that was a decision made by the Illusive Man personally?  Nothing particularly significant about that in and of itself, for purposes of IDT anyway, but of course, it does permit one interesting inference: that no control was necessary for the IM to control Shep.  If Shep was to be indoctrinated, then why bother with a chip?  It gives Shepard the illusion that he remains uncontrolled, helps convince him of IM's good will (for ME2 at least), and, more intriguingly, if indoctrination is part of the goal with Shepard anyway, is it possible that a control chip would have interfered with that?  I mean, suppose he WAS indoctrinated... is it possible that if a control chip was implanted, that might give forces opposing the Reapers a chance to break indoctrination?  Obviously, that's all wild speculation, but just thought I would raise the point.

Second, there was some discussion pages and pages ago about how Shep got indoctrinated, as in what was the specific vehicle for his indoctrination.  And of course, he's clearly been around plenty of Reaper artifacts and even inside a dead Reaper.  But here's a wild speculation; at the beginning of ME3, there's a scene where Anderson makes a big deal out of giving Shepard back his dogtags.  Which are also prominently featured in the "Breathe" scene.  And which Shepard carries around with him everywhere.  Which could account for why Vega comments on that humming noise when Shepard comes around...  As I say, purely wild speculation, just kinda fun to throw it out there. 

It summer yet?

Just to play devils advocate on one detail on your first speculaltion about TIM controlling Shep and anderson. It is said that he could be using reaper enhanced biotics to control them. Though it is never explicitly implied. 

Vega mentioning the humming is always a good clue because it is indicating that there is reaper tech on the ship. Combine that clue with Kaiden mentioning the humming in ME1 and the "indoctrination" codex and it's a good package.

OK, I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment and point out that the humming that Kaidan mentioned in ME1 was from the Conduit, a piece of Prothean tech, not Reaper tech.  However, I do think that the thing with James was a hint.  When I heard him say that the first time, I thought, "What the heck?"  But if it is a hint about IT, then it makes perfect sense.  What can I say, I never really heard a "hum" on the Normandy.  All I could think of was I might be the sound of the Drive Core, but that wasn't really a hum.

I forgot that the conduit was prothean.

[Dwailing]

Rifneno wrote...

Aethgeir wrote...

This is a terrible idea. It’s clearly little more than a fan-fiction attempt to cope with ME3’s disappointing ending.
Its proponents sound like religious fanatics or conspiracy buffs: holding up plot holes, inconsistencies and minute details as ‘evidence’ that BioWare was planning this all along. They completely ignore the fact that this idea comes with its own set of plot holes and inconsistencies.
In reality this is just a weak attempt to smooth out the plot holes, inconsistencies and illogical nonsense of the ME3’s current ending in the vain hope that ‘it was all just a bad dream’ and ‘the REAL ending is coming in a DLC’.
The worst thing about it though, is that it validates the existing bad ending while completely ignoring what actually makes bad in first place:

Shepard’s mission still ultimately fails.

Shepard’s decisions still don’t matter.

The illusion of choice is still shattered.

Mass Effect's greatest strength is still lost: Indoctrination theory doesn’t make players want to replay the game anymore than the current ending does.


I sincerely, hope that BioWare doesn’t cave to a bad idea that could make the ending even worse.
The dropped ‘Dark Energy Plot’ has far more promise for improving the ending than ‘indoctrination theory’ does and it requires only the smallest changes to the existing ending. I’ve posted details on my BioWare social network blog:
http://social.biowar...entry_id=212578
The idea was largely inspired by this article:
http://doycetesterma...tistic-process/

(Removed formatting because the forums are apparently incredibly retarded with their own built-in list design.)

It's very telling that you neither respond to the stronger arguments in favor of IT or list the supposed "plot holes". Which is odd since you claim it opens as many as it closes and it closes a TON of them. Instead you come in like Waldstr Lite and accuse others of being zealots and conspiracy nuts for disagreeing with your own ill-informed, unsubstantiated opinion. Nobody wants to read your blog BTW. If we wanted to hear condescending nonsense from people that don't do any fact checking, we've already got FOX News.

In one sentence you acknowledge the fact the majority of IT believes that the rest will come in DLC (what a coincidence that an ending DLC was announced) and then go on to complain about all the problems with IT that would only exist if that wasn't the case. Just as laughable as all the claims you made and then didn't back up in favor of linking a blog. The only person I've seen so malevolently attack fundamental logic is starkid himself.

God, I miss the days when we had IT opponents who at least tried to make a case for their side.

I know.  I liked the thread when it was fast and quiet.  Now we have these things, they're like Thread cancer. 

[Tirian Thorn]

Aethgeir wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Aethgeir wrote...

This is a terrible idea.  It’s clearly little more than a fan-fiction attempt to cope with ME3’s disappointing ending.
Its proponents sound like religious fanatics or conspiracy buffs: holding up plot holes, inconsistencies and minute details as ‘evidence’ that BioWare was planning this all along.  They completely ignore the fact that this idea comes with its own set of plot holes and inconsistencies.
In reality this is just a weak attempt to smooth out the plot holes, inconsistencies and illogical nonsense of the ME3’s current ending  in the vain hope that ‘it was all just a bad dream’ and ‘the REAL ending is coming in a DLC’.
The worst thing about it though, is that it validates the existing bad ending while completely ignoring what actually makes bad in first place:

• Shepard’s mission still ultimately fails.
  
  
• Shepard’s decisions still don’t matter.
  
  
• The illusion of choice is still shattered.
  
  
• Mass Effect's greatest strength is still lost: Indoctrination theory doesn’t make players want to replay the game anymore than the current ending does.

I sincerely, hope that BioWare doesn’t cave to a bad idea that could make the ending even worse.
The dropped ‘Dark Energy Plot’ has far more promise for improving the ending than ‘indoctrination theory’ does and it requires only the smallest changes to the existing ending.  I’ve posted details on my BioWare social network blog:
 http://social.biowar...entry_id=212578
The idea was largely inspired by this article:
http://doycetesterma...tistic-process/

   
Thanks for your feedback! What else did you like about the indoctrination theory?

Well, the indoctrination idea is an interesting plot twist: Shepard facing temptation.  The fact is though, it just doesn't offer this story the proper resolution that it deserves.

Indoctrination Theory isn't the end of the game.  Indoctrination Theory just explains what is currently called the ending.  If IT were true, I would expect there to be more gameplay and more story and then the true ending/epilogue. 

But you also say in your blog that in ME2 Shepard was always going to defeat the collectors and in ME3 was always going to defeat the reapers. 

In ME2 you can fail and Shepard can die.
Why can't you fail in ME3 and the reapers win?  If you didn't do all the right things in ME2 (upgrades, loyalty missions and chose the right squad members) then you fail.  You had the choice to do them or not.  So why can't you fail in ME3?  Why can't the wrong choices in ME3 lead to an ending where the reapers win? 

[lex0r11]

waldstr18 wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

[...]

once my in your face moment comes

[...]

No further words required.

well, i truely think i deserve to tell you i told you so for all the things you called me in here. and im going to enjoy it immensely. but until then, no troll actions from my side.

I don't care if you still deny it to others, but you know it yourself. You know what your initial questions will invoke and you still post them. And you want them to. I don't buy your 'wasn't my intention. You can't fool me. Stop fooling yourself an be honest.

And unless you come here with a elaborate argument and dont start it with a spit in your face question, i will discuss with you. You should learn from Griffin.

[waldstr18]

Rifneno wrote...

Aethgeir wrote...

This is a terrible idea. It’s clearly little more than a fan-fiction attempt to cope with ME3’s disappointing ending.
Its proponents sound like religious fanatics or conspiracy buffs: holding up plot holes, inconsistencies and minute details as ‘evidence’ that BioWare was planning this all along. They completely ignore the fact that this idea comes with its own set of plot holes and inconsistencies.
In reality this is just a weak attempt to smooth out the plot holes, inconsistencies and illogical nonsense of the ME3’s current ending in the vain hope that ‘it was all just a bad dream’ and ‘the REAL ending is coming in a DLC’.
The worst thing about it though, is that it validates the existing bad ending while completely ignoring what actually makes bad in first place:

Shepard’s mission still ultimately fails.

Shepard’s decisions still don’t matter.

The illusion of choice is still shattered.

Mass Effect's greatest strength is still lost: Indoctrination theory doesn’t make players want to replay the game anymore than the current ending does.


I sincerely, hope that BioWare doesn’t cave to a bad idea that could make the ending even worse.
The dropped ‘Dark Energy Plot’ has far more promise for improving the ending than ‘indoctrination theory’ does and it requires only the smallest changes to the existing ending. I’ve posted details on my BioWare social network blog:
http://social.biowar...entry_id=212578
The idea was largely inspired by this article:
http://doycetesterma...tistic-process/

(Removed formatting because the forums are apparently incredibly retarded with their own built-in list design.)

It's very telling that you neither respond to the stronger arguments in favor of IT or list the supposed "plot holes". Which is odd since you claim it opens as many as it closes and it closes a TON of them. Instead you come in like Waldstr Lite and accuse others of being zealots and conspiracy nuts for disagreeing with your own ill-informed, unsubstantiated opinion. Nobody wants to read your blog BTW. If we wanted to hear condescending nonsense from people that don't do any fact checking, we've already got FOX News.

In one sentence you acknowledge the fact the majority of IT believes that the rest will come in DLC (what a coincidence that an ending DLC was announced) and then go on to complain about all the problems with IT that would only exist if that wasn't the case. Just as laughable as all the claims you made and then didn't back up in favor of linking a blog. The only person I've seen so malevolently attack fundamental logic is starkid himself.

God, I miss the days when we had IT opponents who at least tried to make a case for their side.

i resend that. but i like waldstr lite. hmm.. maybe i should loose a few pounds.

anyways: i have explained my views.

makes no sense if there is the possibility of only one ending (which can be the right one) with low ems.

bioware would have given us an unfinished game.

and its way too difficult to figure out that you are indictrinated. who will care if they tell us in summer? most of the players wont, and mass effect is for most of the players, not only the indoctrination sherlocks.

boom. (i just dropped the mic like one of those hip hop guys.)

[Tirian Thorn]

Enough with the troll talk. Good discussion is getting buried by the nonsense.