57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Vahilor]

Nobody has to die only cause you want to end a Seriesor a story of a character. Lord of the Rings is a good example without the main protagonists dying and still the triology had an end.

And somhow it would have be really cool, if in ME 4 you play another character and probably meet your Shep in a short sequence when you have imported saves from ME3..

Modifié par Vahilor, 17 avril 2012 - 12:04 .

[MaximizedAction]

SCJ90 wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

SCJ90 wrote...

gunslinger_ruiz wrote...

I know I'll still buy DLC for this game if it comes out, regardless of what type it is,  because I'm still a Bioware fan in spite of the ME3 ending, I still enjoy re-playing all my Bioware games. I wasn't even upset with the endings when I saw all three, especially after I saw the breath scene. It didn't make me angry in the least, it just made me want to see the rest of the story. It made me question what the endings meant. I know there's more after that breath.

I still see myself as a BW fan, but if nothing happens I wont have buy more ME DLC, I just want the story to be over in that case. Only reason that I was pissed off, was the promises that we got and the expectations of a epic end to a trilogy. The thing is that I cant replay this game, because in the end nothing matters, wich is sad because the game is sooo great.

I think to myself, why did they do this, why did they develope the end like this, with the bruches and the "small clues", and why on earth would they make an end where Shep lives if they are finishing a trilogy? 

That in my opinion is worse, if they wanted him to sacrifice himself dont let him live, and dont end with a breath scene. They left with so many questions unansweard, they must have something planned... but.... im just not sure, maybe BW trolled us to get PR I dont know

What about post-ending DLC? No one ever denied it. The devs always added as a remark that the DLC will make sense where they come in.
I for one won't buy a single pre-ending DLC like, say, the rumored Omega, but post-ending. That is pretty much what everybody wants, right?
If it's post-ending and playing as Shep, I'm all in.

From what I have gathered, as said, when dont know squat about anything but the extended cut DLC was not planned but it was a "olive branch" to the retake movment and the fans, so all this was suppose to be the end all along, OR they have been planning this for a loong time, to be able to make a GREAT ending, but so far nothing has hinted to this. And in the extended cut you get cutscenes and "maybe dialog" but no gameplay.
( Don't know if I interpeted your post right)

The devs where planning DLC, but no end or post-ending dlc (again, what I know)

Nah, you got it right.
Your claims are still only claims, interpretations of the fans. The official announcement never denied gameplay explicitly.
Jessica tweet-replied "I don't know where you got that from" to someone sharing his disappointment about the EC FAQ not mentioning gameplay.
An no, at no point did any dev say what the DLC are exactly going to be, only things along the line "It'll make sense", which in itself still makes me wonder why they wanted to emphasize this.

All in all, strange, vague and disappointing comments and anwers have been made by the devs, but still very few concrete ones. So there you go...

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 17 avril 2012 - 12:10 .

[Hacedor1566]

Muhvitus wrote...

This thing is becoming a religion. I now understand why people still believe in Christ or how they started to do so 2000 years ago...

[OdanUrr]

Muhvitus wrote...

This thing is becoming a religion. I now understand why people still believe in Christ or how they started to do so 2000 years ago...

The fact that many people want to believe helps immensely.

Modifié par OdanUrr, 17 avril 2012 - 12:14 .

[Rifneno]

OdanUrr wrote...

Muhvitus wrote...

This thing is becoming a religion. I now understand why people still believe in Christ or how they started to do so 2000 years ago...

The fact that many people want to believe helps immensely.

Yeah, we're doing the most laughable things to conform the evidence to our viewpoint... like dismissing the fact Shepard would've had to survive being at ground zero of a 10 km+ wide explosion capable of damaging a quantum shielded structure.

Oh no wait, that's you.  Nevermind. :happy:

[lex0r11]

Muhvitus wrote...

This thing is becoming a religion. I now understand why people still believe in Christ or how they started to do so 2000 years ago...

I'm gonna help you there.

[OdanUrr]

Rifneno wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Muhvitus wrote...

This thing is becoming a religion. I now understand why people still believe in Christ or how they started to do so 2000 years ago...

The fact that many people want to believe helps immensely.

Yeah, we're doing the most laughable things to conform the evidence to our viewpoint... like dismissing the fact Shepard would've had to survive being at ground zero of a 10 km+ wide explosion capable of damaging a quantum shielded structure.

Oh no wait, that's you.  Nevermind. :happy:

You're interpreting things to suit your viewpoint, one that was created after the fact and did not follow from the game itself. Any interpretation is valid until Bioware says otherwise, but let us remember it is interpretation and not fact.

[Rifneno]

OdanUrr wrote...

You're interpreting things to suit your viewpoint, one that was created after the fact and did not follow from the game itself. Any interpretation is valid until Bioware says otherwise, but let us remember it is interpretation and not fact.

Bull****. I'm looking at the evidence and drawing a conclusion based on it. That's what I base my stance on: evidence shown to us in the game. You prefer to give us this pop psychology trash and tell us we're looking at the evidence wrong while not providing any counterpoint that deals with the actual subject at hand.

When "psychology" picked up from Jerry Springer is your first, last, and only line od defense, it's probably time to take a step back. Hopefully more than one step back.

[OdanUrr]

Rifneno wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

You're interpreting things to suit your viewpoint, one that was created after the fact and did not follow from the game itself. Any interpretation is valid until Bioware says otherwise, but let us remember it is interpretation and not fact.

Bull****. I'm looking at the evidence and drawing a conclusion based on it. That's what I base my stance on: evidence shown to us in the game. You prefer to give us this pop psychology trash and tell us we're looking at the evidence wrong while not providing any counterpoint that deals with the actual subject at hand.

When "psychology" picked up from Jerry Springer is your first, last, and only line od defense, it's probably time to take a step back. Hopefully more than one step back.

Okay, you're telling me that when you finished playing ME3 you knew Shepard had been indoctrinated and that wasn't the ending?

Besides, I've provided plenty of counterpoints to most pieces of evidence people have used to support IT. It all comes down to interpretation.

By the way, psychology does play a part here. Why is it that people have only scrambled to explain the ending and nothing else?

[SirLugash]

Just in case this wasn't posted before:
twitter.com/#!/JessicaMerizan/status/192133411362705408

I know, personal opinion and stuff, but anyway.

Modifié par SirLugash, 17 avril 2012 - 01:03 .

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

OdanUrr wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

You're interpreting things to suit your viewpoint, one that was created after the fact and did not follow from the game itself. Any interpretation is valid until Bioware says otherwise, but let us remember it is interpretation and not fact.

Bull****. I'm looking at the evidence and drawing a conclusion based on it. That's what I base my stance on: evidence shown to us in the game. You prefer to give us this pop psychology trash and tell us we're looking at the evidence wrong while not providing any counterpoint that deals with the actual subject at hand.

When "psychology" picked up from Jerry Springer is your first, last, and only line od defense, it's probably time to take a step back. Hopefully more than one step back.

Okay, you're telling me that when you finished playing ME3 you knew Shepard had been indoctrinated and that wasn't the ending?

Besides, I've provided plenty of counterpoints to most pieces of evidence people have used to support IT. It all comes down to interpretation.

By the way, psychology does play a part here. Why is it that people have only scrambled to explain the ending and nothing else?

Again with the claim of evidence against IT! How about one of you anti-IT actually post this evidence for us to see instead of repeatedly saying there is evidence but never actually showing it!

(Deep breath)

Sorry about that, but that is the tenth time at least someone has claimed there is alot of evidence against It but posted none. You are not making a very good case of making us any less certain about IT by doing that.

[waldstr18]

OdanUrr wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

You're interpreting things to suit your viewpoint, one that was created after the fact and did not follow from the game itself. Any interpretation is valid until Bioware says otherwise, but let us remember it is interpretation and not fact.

Bull****. I'm looking at the evidence and drawing a conclusion based on it. That's what I base my stance on: evidence shown to us in the game. You prefer to give us this pop psychology trash and tell us we're looking at the evidence wrong while not providing any counterpoint that deals with the actual subject at hand.

When "psychology" picked up from Jerry Springer is your first, last, and only line od defense, it's probably time to take a step back. Hopefully more than one step back.

Okay, you're telling me that when you finished playing ME3 you knew Shepard had been indoctrinated and that wasn't the ending?

Besides, I've provided plenty of counterpoints to most pieces of evidence people have used to support IT. It all comes down to interpretation.

By the way, psychology does play a part here. Why is it that people have only scrambled to explain the ending and nothing else?

i actually compared the jesus guys and the indoctrination theorist in my mind a few times reading posts in here. the only difference is, i cant proof the jesus guys wrong. the indoctrination theory on the other hand ... well, we just have to wait. so dont waste your time trying to question their believes. theyre not going to change their views anyway, they might call you a troll, but thats about it.

anyhow. just wanted you to know, im on your side, i just approach the theory a lot more childish these days in the way of waiting until its proven wrong and then telling them, i called it.

Modifié par waldstr18, 17 avril 2012 - 01:11 .

[OdanUrr]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Again with the claim of evidence against IT! How about one of you anti-IT actually post this evidence for us to see instead of repeatedly saying there is evidence but never actually showing it!

(Deep breath)

Sorry about that, but that is the tenth time at least someone has claimed there is alot of evidence against It but posted none. You are not making a very good case of making us any less certain about IT by doing that.

Evidence against IT? Where did I say that? I said I provided counter-points, alternatives to most pieces of evidence people interpret to support IT. The only real evidence for or against IT would be Bioware releasing a statement endorsing or dismissing the theory (or a DLC that conclusively demonstrates Shepard is being indoctrinated).

Why is it that every time someone says, "I don't support IT," people demand, "show me your evidence!" IT is based on interpretation of a number of things that happen in the game. Likewise, those same events can be interpreted differently.

Modifié par OdanUrr, 17 avril 2012 - 01:20 .

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

OdanUrr wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Again with the claim of evidence against IT! How about one of you anti-IT actually post this evidence for us to see instead of repeatedly saying there is evidence but never actually showing it!

(Deep breath)

Sorry about that, but that is the tenth time at least someone has claimed there is alot of evidence against It but posted none. You are not making a very good case of making us any less certain about IT by doing that.

Evidence against IT? Where did I say that? I said I provided counter-points, alternatives to most pieces of evidence people interpret to support IT. The only real evidence for or against IT would be Bioware releasing a statement endorsing or dismissing the theory (or a DLC that conclusively demonstrates Shepard is being indoctrinated).

Why is that every time someone says, "I don't support IT," people demand, "show me your evidence!" IT is based on interpretation of a number of things that happen in the game. Likewise, those same events can be interpreted differently.

Then post those other interpretations so they can be discussed?

Yeah i might have been hasty in saying evidence, but so far you have only done the same as every other anti-IT that came before. Made claims of counter points but not actually posted any of them for us to see and discuss.

It makes alot of you anti-IT people very hard to take serously in here even as many IT people bring up codex entries, video and picture to picture comparisions explaining the points we discuss.

Modifié par Raistlin Majare 1992, 17 avril 2012 - 01:23 .

[OdanUrr]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Then post those other interpretations so they can be discussed?

Yeah i might have been hasty in saying evidence, but so far you have only done the same as every other anti-IT that came before. Made claims of counter points but not actually posted any of them for us to see and discuss.

It makes alot of you anti-IT people very hard to take serously in here even as many IT people bring up codex entries, video and picture to picture comparisions explaining the points we discuss.

My bad, it's just that every time I post this, people just mock instead of discuss.

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

And remember to read the note at the beginning so you don't take offense later on.

[Rifneno]

OdanUrr wrote...

Okay, you're telling me that when you finished playing ME3 you knew Shepard had been indoctrinated and that wasn't the ending?

Besides, I've provided plenty of counterpoints to most pieces of evidence people have used to support IT. It all comes down to interpretation.

By the way, psychology does play a part here. Why is it that people have only scrambled to explain the ending and nothing else?

1) You read "I'm looking at the evidence and drawing a conclusion based on that" as "I figured it out immediately" and you're lecturing us about bad interpretations? I wonder if OJ Simpson is free to give me some marriage counseling after this.

2) "It all comes down to interpretation" is a sugar-coated way of saying you have not and cannot provide a more logical explanation than IT.

3) Yes, psychology plays a major part in almost everything people do. But people who actually know anything about psychology also know things like "you can't painbrush everyone who disagrees with you as doing so for faulty reasons." Unsubstantiated paintbrushing I might add, but not backing up what you claim seems to be a theme of yours so I suppose that's to be expected. I disgress though. It turns out, psychology is actually complex! I know, right? Who'd have thought that it wouldn't be reasonable to psychoanalyze strangers en masse by the criteria of "has a different opinion than I do."

[KevShep]

OdanUrr wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Again with the claim of evidence against IT! How about one of you anti-IT actually post this evidence for us to see instead of repeatedly saying there is evidence but never actually showing it!

(Deep breath)

Sorry about that, but that is the tenth time at least someone has claimed there is alot of evidence against It but posted none. You are not making a very good case of making us any less certain about IT by doing that.

Evidence against IT? Where did I say that? I said I provided counter-points, alternatives to most pieces of evidence people interpret to support IT. The only real evidence for or against IT would be Bioware releasing a statement endorsing or dismissing the theory (or a DLC that conclusively demonstrates Shepard is being indoctrinated).

Why is it that every time someone says, "I don't support IT," people demand, "show me your evidence!" IT is based on interpretation of a number of things that happen in the game. Likewise, those same events can be interpreted differently.

The interpretation is really easy to understand and when you look at all the things that people have found you notice a pattern and see that the I.T. is the ONLY interpretation. Only those that are die hard fans will understand it( because of the lore and direction of the series).

[OdanUrr]

Rifneno wrote...

1) You read "I'm looking at the evidence and drawing a conclusion based on that" as "I figured it out immediately" and you're lecturing us about bad interpretations? I wonder if OJ Simpson is free to give me some marriage counseling after this.

2) "It all comes down to interpretation" is a sugar-coated way of saying you have not and cannot provide a more logical explanation than IT.

3) Yes, psychology plays a major part in almost everything people do. But people who actually know anything about psychology also know things like "you can't painbrush everyone who disagrees with you as doing so for faulty reasons." Unsubstantiated paintbrushing I might add, but not backing up what you claim seems to be a theme of yours so I suppose that's to be expected. I disgress though. It turns out, psychology is actually complex! I know, right? Who'd have thought that it wouldn't be reasonable to psychoanalyze strangers en masse by the criteria of "has a different opinion than I do."

1) Not what I meant. What I'm saying is that if we cannot deduce this naturally as we play the game, then it's highly unlikely it'll be true, particularly considering ME3 was marketed as the "natural entry point" of the franchise. Mass Effect is not, by any means, a detective story. If we're meant to deduce things, there has to be enough foreshadowing.

2) Logical explanation to what exactly?

3) I don't support IT. I've tried to explain why and when someone asks me on a particular piece of evidence I've tried to provide an alternate explanation. This is not meant to say my explanation is the right explanation as you apparently believe I'm saying, but that it is also a possible explanation. That is why I say it comes down to interpretation, because there can be any number of possible explanations.

Modifié par OdanUrr, 17 avril 2012 - 01:40 .

[SS2Dante]

Skillz1986 wrote...

Hey, one thing i have just noticed (probably been brought up before..ignore this, if it has).
In the dream sequence after priority tuchanka, just before your last approach to star bieber, there's this very distinct beeping sound...like a tinitus. the same sound can be heard at me3's beginning, after you have talked to the defense commity, right before the reapers land. it also stops, once the reaper touches ground. could be nothing though.

Don't suppose you have any link to this sound? Because in the crucible if you turn off the music and turn up the sound effects there is a weird whistle that pulses on and off. Might be the same sound, might not be. Alas I don't have my capture device to show people :@

[KevShep]

OdanUrr wrote...


My bad, it's just that every time I post this, people just mock instead of discuss.

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

And remember to read the note at the beginning so you don't take offense later on.

I read some of the wall of text and I have this to say about what I read...

About the cut scenes after your choice (such as the normandy crashing)...You cant indoctrinate YOUR shepard without the PLAYER thinking that they are NOT indoctrinated. The crucible maybe a weapon for the reapers to blow up the relays (like in arrival) and they have "tricked" him/her into seeing an illusion of colored explostion when in real life it will kill all systems. This mite explain why the ending"s" are alot different such as, If you rush throuhg the game to get to the end you will have the catalyst say "what are you doing here" as if they are not ready for you and then you see the crucible actually killing the galaxy. This means that the illusions are not ready for shepard(indoctrination).

Second. The biggest peice of evidence is that FACT that you can hear shepards voice wispering in the back ground of the catalyst's OWN voice. Its hard to hear at first but you can mke it out as he talk more and more. Also you need good headphones to hear it!

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

OdanUrr wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Then post those other interpretations so they can be discussed?

Yeah i might have been hasty in saying evidence, but so far you have only done the same as every other anti-IT that came before. Made claims of counter points but not actually posted any of them for us to see and discuss.

It makes alot of you anti-IT people very hard to take serously in here even as many IT people bring up codex entries, video and picture to picture comparisions explaining the points we discuss.

My bad, it's just that every time I post this, people just mock instead of discuss.

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

And remember to read the note at the beginning so you don't take offense later on.

Thank you, really. As I mentioned alot of Anti-It come in here saying there is a alot of proof against IT, but when uestioned their answers pretty much amount o "Bioware were lazy." Nice to see someone who actually puts thoughts into it.

I havent read it all, but I will address two points you bring up:

1: Why Indoctrinate Shepard and not just kill him?
2: Why not shut down the Relay network?

1:

As many have said the entire "symbol of hope" thing and Indoctrinating him would break their spirits and I agree on that, but I will also add a bit to that. Killing Shepard outright wuld certainly be a victory to the Reapers but we know they are interested in him from harbinger quotes in ME2, possibly because they want him for a human Reaper, but that is in itself just a later effect.

The immediate effects of Indoctrinating Shepard would be a agent litterally at the heart of the resistance. If Shepard orders the fleets to retreat they will follow, if he orders them into battle, they will follow. He has acess to secrets from every species and could easily infiltrate even the most secret places.

What this means is that if Shepard is Indoctrinated and if the Reapers moved carefully they could avoid alot of resitance, lure large fores into traps and generally make the entire process faster. Just as the species beeing united is there greatest strength, so can it become their greatest weakness if the one holding them together starts acting for the enemy. That is what indoctrinating Shepard could accomplish the way i see it.

2:

As for the Relay network not beeing shut down. I will agree that is one of the bigger questions, but it lingers wether IT is true or not.

I think it is the Reapers luring everyone into a trap, a final battle that will end the war in one swoop. The cycle has not continued according to plan as we know and the Reapers know the forces are allied against them unlike the other cycles. So instead of spreading their forces out to harvest and such where they might fall prey to the combined force individually, they gather at Earth along with the big prize luring the combined forces into a final battle, one they are confident they can win (and will if the crucible dosent work). Thus they can destroy all resistance once and for all.

Off course that dosent explain why they dont disable the relays and take the planets one by one, only why they move it to earth.

Well I think it might be because it did not work for Sovreign or it might be that it takes a bit of time to shut down the network. Maybe they also left it open because they needed to gather their forces at earth and move the Citadel there and thy simply dident have the time to shut it down before we arrived? Far fetched, but the entire question as to why the network hasent been shut down remains one of the main ones, IT or otherwise.

Personally I might have an Idea, one I just came up with. Maybe the Citadel as we see it closed, wasent done by the Reapers?

Maybe C-Sec closed the Citadel as the Reapers arrived (remember we still have control of the station back form ME1) and the Reapers moved the closed Citadel to Earth to faciliate the beam which could bring not only human corpses, but even more importantly Reaper groundforces onto the Citadel to take it back.

Perhaps even as the battle rages outside, a battle is also raging inside the Citadel, C-Sec and the Citizens desperately fighting the Reaper forces trying to seize control of the station in order to open it so the Reapers can shut down the network?

It is my own theory, but would bring the Citadel War assets into play in an Extended Ending, explain what happened on the Citadel and explain why the Network has not been shut down. Woudl also give a better explanation for a transport beam going between the Citadel and Earth as it is glaring hole in the defense.

That is just my thoughts on it off course, but I will look through the rest of your thread in time and see

[OdanUrr]

KevShep wrote...

I read some of the wall of text and I have this to say about what I read...

About the cut scenes after your choice (such as the normandy crashing)...You cant indoctrinate YOUR shepard without the PLAYER thinking that they are NOT indoctrinated. The crucible maybe a weapon for the reapers to blow up the relays (like in arrival) and they have "tricked" him/her into seeing an illusion of colored explostion when in real life it will kill all systems. This mite explain why the ending"s" are alot different such as, If you rush throuhg the game to get to the end you will have the catalyst say "what are you doing here" as if they are not ready for you and then you see the crucible actually killing the galaxy. This means that the illusions are not ready for shepard(indoctrination).

Second. The biggest peice of evidence is that FACT that you can hear shepards voice wispering in the back ground of the catalyst's OWN voice. Its hard to hear at first but you can mke it out as he talk more and more. Also you need good headphones to hear it!

I think if it were IT, it would make much more sense that the game ended once you make your choice.

I know, I heard it the first time, but you can also hear FemShep. I never thought much about it because, seeing as the Catalyst could take the form of the kid, I didn't put it past him to mimic Shepard's voice.

[Skillz1986]

@ss2 dante, no i'm sorry but i'm sure you can find some walkthrough vids on youtube and fast forward to those scenes.
1.reapers landing on earth (right before the first one enters earth's atmosphere)
2. Tuchanka dream sequence. During your last approach to the child. it even gets gradualy louder as you come nearer.

@odanurr

Look, i'm not trying to be offensive here, i'm writing this in a very calm tone.
What exactly is yoir purpose. i don't get it. you tried to make your point here and i'll be honest i have read your list of counter arguments yesterday (or someday)...and i personally found it ridiculous, for once..you had no argument for why anderson manages to beat shepard to the console.."the place is shifting" is no counter since (applying your own logic) it is not shown in game. i only saw one...and only one approach to the console. well, anyway. you must have noticed, that you are not particularly welcome here. i'm not speaking for myself here, i honestly do not care how you want to spend your time. i'm saying, i don't get it. you are not going to convince anyone here. main reason for this is, that your rgumentation is weak as hell. we had some guy here gb griffin or something. he was able to at least put up a decent discussion. your are not. so why come back all the time? Is this your kind of thing? Bein mocked? Please..i'm just curious

[byne]

OdanUrr wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

Then post those other interpretations so they can be discussed?

Yeah i might have been hasty in saying evidence, but so far you have only done the same as every other anti-IT that came before. Made claims of counter points but not actually posted any of them for us to see and discuss.

It makes alot of you anti-IT people very hard to take serously in here even as many IT people bring up codex entries, video and picture to picture comparisions explaining the points we discuss.

My bad, it's just that every time I post this, people just mock instead of discuss.

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

And remember to read the note at the beginning so you don't take offense later on.

To address just one point from your link:

"In fact, why go for this elaborate charade at all? Why not just kill Shepard?"

I'll let Bastila Shan explain this one:

"What greater weapon is there than to turn an enemy to your cause? To use their own knowledge against them?"

Also, from the codex entry on indoctrination:

"Should a Reaper subvert a well-placed political or military leader, the resulting chaos can bring down nations."

[Tr0n01d]

Vahilor wrote...

Nobody has to die only cause you want to end a Seriesor a story of a character. Lord of the Rings is a good example without the main protagonists dying and still the triology had an end.

And somhow it would have be really cool, if in ME 4 you play another character and probably meet your Shep in a short sequence when you have imported saves from ME3..

I can imagine a ME4 in which you can play not only as a  human, but also as a quarian, asari and turian.

at first I thought that ME4 would open a new arch with Shepard's son/daughter, in wich you would have to fight a nw foe ( the dark energy plot can be reused here ) tring to follow his foot steps, make honor to shepard's name.


but as it was pointed out, a biological turian / quarian son/daughter is quite unlickely.

but, an adopted orphan or abandoned child would compensate for that.

the story would begin 20 years after the reaper war, Shepard if s/he survives would become older and not fit to fight like in his younger days, a new generation of heros came fort guided by your daughter/son.


atleast that is what I think,