57139 réponses à ce sujet

[EpyonX3]

SS2Dante wrote...

Skillz1986 wrote...

*harbinger voice*: THIS TROLLS YOU!

ASSUMING DIRECT TROLL

Kill one Troll and one hundred will replace it.

[SS2Dante]

EpyonX3 wrote...

@balance5050

Here are the pics.

Object from the front.




Object from behind.




The one from the multiplayer may be the only one on the level so it makes sense that that made that one right. Since they had to scatter these all over the place essentially they probably went the quick route.

You ARE proving to be useful, aren't you

[SS2Dante]

pirate1802 wrote...

holy crap that looks like Saren's head joined on a Mass Relay

Are you referring to my pic? And...joking? :S

[macrocarl]

MaximizedAction wrote...

More speculations inbound:

So I was watching these new vids, that got linked to in the BSN a few hours back: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11500315.
There the guy does a three parter analysing ME3's story on a literary level and it's really worth watching the three vids...but plugging is not the point of this post...

It's this:
at some point in the third vid he talks about the Cerberus base invasion. This part got my spidey-senses up.
What exactly?

After we defeated Kai Leng he suddenly gets up on his last breath to get ya, right?

Here the guy talks about this specific scene
www.youtube.com/watch

And he makes an interesting point about something I completly missed whily playing: Why does no one notice him stumbling towards you? Maybe you guys are willing to watch this bit and help me out with the following piece of speculation:

Was Kai Leng getting up after you defeated him real, or was it just as real as the kid in the vent on earth?

When playing, I got the impression Shep knew he was there with his kung-fu agression radar (trope used a whole whole bunch in Samurai and Kung-Fu movies, where the good guy turns his back on the defeated enemy and senses agression, turns around and unloads whoop **** all over said bad guy) <3

[DirtyPhoenix]

SS2Dante wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

holy crap that looks like Saren's head joined on a Mass Relay

Are you referring to my pic? And...joking? :S

Yeah about you pic, and I ain't joking bro, did it look like that? :'S

[SS2Dante]

macrocarl wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

More speculations inbound:

So I was watching these new vids, that got linked to in the BSN a few hours back: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11500315.
There the guy does a three parter analysing ME3's story on a literary level and it's really worth watching the three vids...but plugging is not the point of this post...

It's this:
at some point in the third vid he talks about the Cerberus base invasion. This part got my spidey-senses up.
What exactly?

After we defeated Kai Leng he suddenly gets up on his last breath to get ya, right?

Here the guy talks about this specific scene
www.youtube.com/watch

And he makes an interesting point about something I completly missed whily playing: Why does no one notice him stumbling towards you? Maybe you guys are willing to watch this bit and help me out with the following piece of speculation:

Was Kai Leng getting up after you defeated him real, or was it just as real as the kid in the vent on earth?

When playing, I got the impression Shep knew he was there with his kung-fu agression radar (trope used a whole whole bunch in Samurai and Kung-Fu movies, where the good guy turns his back on the defeated enemy and senses agression, turns around and unloads whoop **** all over said bad guy) <3

yeah, I saw nothing wrong with that scene, I've seen it a hundred times before in movies. Usually it's done with guns.

[SS2Dante]

pirate1802 wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

holy crap that looks like Saren's head joined on a Mass Relay

Are you referring to my pic? And...joking? :S

Yeah about you pic, and I ain't joking bro, did it look like that? :'S

I...um...most of us immediately saw a Reaper.

[EpyonX3]

SS2Dante wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

You know, it'd be interesting to find out the number of athiests and religious types on each side

the game itself puts religion to question. You'd think Shepard would remember what happened when he died like most people seem to do when they come back to life.

Benezia says she expected a light(?) when she died but was suprised to find that it was all going dark when she died.

Even the prevous cycle struggled with understanding where they came from according to Javik.

[EpyonX3]

SS2Dante wrote...

macrocarl wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

More speculations inbound:

So I was watching these new vids, that got linked to in the BSN a few hours back: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11500315.
There the guy does a three parter analysing ME3's story on a literary level and it's really worth watching the three vids...but plugging is not the point of this post...

It's this:
at some point in the third vid he talks about the Cerberus base invasion. This part got my spidey-senses up.
What exactly?

After we defeated Kai Leng he suddenly gets up on his last breath to get ya, right?

Here the guy talks about this specific scene
www.youtube.com/watch

And he makes an interesting point about something I completly missed whily playing: Why does no one notice him stumbling towards you? Maybe you guys are willing to watch this bit and help me out with the following piece of speculation:

Was Kai Leng getting up after you defeated him real, or was it just as real as the kid in the vent on earth?

When playing, I got the impression Shep knew he was there with his kung-fu agression radar (trope used a whole whole bunch in Samurai and Kung-Fu movies, where the good guy turns his back on the defeated enemy and senses agression, turns around and unloads whoop **** all over said bad guy) <3

yeah, I saw nothing wrong with that scene, I've seen it a hundred times before in movies. Usually it's done with guns.

First play through with full paragon, I still hit the renegade option. Kai Leng was a guy you just couldn't wait to kill.

[BatmanTurian]

SS2Dante wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

You know, it'd be interesting to find out the number of athiests and religious types on each side

me too. I have a feeling that there may be a smattering of both on each side. Perception is formed by personality and life experiences, so everyone will see things differently.

I'm not saying either are right or wrong, I'm only pointing out that one side (barring Eponyx3, Onadur, and GBGriffin and other reasonable people) seems to just proclaim they are right without providing substantiated proof while the other is trying to make sense of the chaos and form a theory.

Sure, you can say it's a fan-made theory and one is trying to fit evidence into it, but that is part of forming a theory. Scientists realized that galaxies were moving away from us. Thus they wound the universe back and found that it was once a single singularity of all space/time, matter, and energy. Then they fit this evidence into a theory called the Big Bang and added evidence to it through things like the Cosmic Background Radiation. All theories are " fan-made" and fit the evidence to prove it, thus they could not be presented with accompanying proof.

[DirtyPhoenix]

That part from 3 to A looks like a mass relay, the lower portion looks like a turian head. But you're right too, does look like a Reaper.

[SS2Dante]

EpyonX3 wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

macrocarl wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

More speculations inbound:

So I was watching these new vids, that got linked to in the BSN a few hours back: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11500315.
There the guy does a three parter analysing ME3's story on a literary level and it's really worth watching the three vids...but plugging is not the point of this post...

It's this:
at some point in the third vid he talks about the Cerberus base invasion. This part got my spidey-senses up.
What exactly?

After we defeated Kai Leng he suddenly gets up on his last breath to get ya, right?

Here the guy talks about this specific scene
www.youtube.com/watch

And he makes an interesting point about something I completly missed whily playing: Why does no one notice him stumbling towards you? Maybe you guys are willing to watch this bit and help me out with the following piece of speculation:

Was Kai Leng getting up after you defeated him real, or was it just as real as the kid in the vent on earth?

When playing, I got the impression Shep knew he was there with his kung-fu agression radar (trope used a whole whole bunch in Samurai and Kung-Fu movies, where the good guy turns his back on the defeated enemy and senses agression, turns around and unloads whoop **** all over said bad guy) <3

yeah, I saw nothing wrong with that scene, I've seen it a hundred times before in movies. Usually it's done with guns.

First play through with full paragon, I still hit the renegade option. Kai Leng was a guy you just couldn't wait to kill.

Same. And it was sweeeeeeet

[EpyonX3]

pirate1802 wrote...

That part from 3 to A looks like a mass relay, the lower portion looks like a turian head. But you're right too, does look like a Reaper.

Well that would suggest that the reapers have had that form since the beginning. Now is that they decided to build a human reaper?

[UrgedDuke]

SS2Dante wrote...

macrocarl wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

More speculations inbound:

So I was watching these new vids, that got linked to in the BSN a few hours back: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11500315.
There the guy does a three parter analysing ME3's story on a literary level and it's really worth watching the three vids...but plugging is not the point of this post...

It's this:
at some point in the third vid he talks about the Cerberus base invasion. This part got my spidey-senses up.
What exactly?

After we defeated Kai Leng he suddenly gets up on his last breath to get ya, right?

Here the guy talks about this specific scene
www.youtube.com/watch

And he makes an interesting point about something I completly missed whily playing: Why does no one notice him stumbling towards you? Maybe you guys are willing to watch this bit and help me out with the following piece of speculation:

Was Kai Leng getting up after you defeated him real, or was it just as real as the kid in the vent on earth?

When playing, I got the impression Shep knew he was there with his kung-fu agression radar (trope used a whole whole bunch in Samurai and Kung-Fu movies, where the good guy turns his back on the defeated enemy and senses agression, turns around and unloads whoop **** all over said bad guy) <3

yeah, I saw nothing wrong with that scene, I've seen it a hundred times before in movies. Usually it's done with guns.

Ever wonder why Shepard still kills Kai Leng if you don't use the Renegade interrupt, but you die if you don't use the Renegade interrupt against TIM.... very strange.

[SS2Dante]

EpyonX3 wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

You know, it'd be interesting to find out the number of athiests and religious types on each side

the game itself puts religion to question. You'd think Shepard would remember what happened when he died like most people seem to do when they come back to life.

Benezia says she expected a light(?) when she died but was suprised to find that it was all going dark when she died.

Even the prevous cycle struggled with understanding where they came from according to Javik.

The percentage of religious people in a given group tends to grow smaller the better educated they are. Since most people working on games (especially a sci-fi game like this) have degrees in maths and science, it's not surprising religion isn't mentioned much. In fact, someone wrote an article recently (I think it was in the escapist) about how in the majority of games religion is portrayed negatively.

[MaximizedAction]

SS2Dante wrote...

macrocarl wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

More speculations inbound:

So I was watching these new vids, that got linked to in the BSN a few hours back: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11500315.
There the guy does a three parter analysing ME3's story on a literary level and it's really worth watching the three vids...but plugging is not the point of this post...

It's this:
at some point in the third vid he talks about the Cerberus base invasion. This part got my spidey-senses up.
What exactly?

After we defeated Kai Leng he suddenly gets up on his last breath to get ya, right?

Here the guy talks about this specific scene
www.youtube.com/watch

And he makes an interesting point about something I completly missed whily playing: Why does no one notice him stumbling towards you? Maybe you guys are willing to watch this bit and help me out with the following piece of speculation:

Was Kai Leng getting up after you defeated him real, or was it just as real as the kid in the vent on earth?

When playing, I got the impression Shep knew he was there with his kung-fu agression radar (trope used a whole whole bunch in Samurai and Kung-Fu movies, where the good guy turns his back on the defeated enemy and senses agression, turns around and unloads whoop **** all over said bad guy) <3

yeah, I saw nothing wrong with that scene, I've seen it a hundred times before in movies. Usually it's done with guns.

Yeah, everyone has seen it in the movies. But there are three other persons in the room and no one notices something?
And after Shep stabs that Leng no one of them seemed to even care either, or at least the cutscene didn't show anything...

Now thus far I didn't come up with any implications on IT, but it's one of those things that was either a lazy attempt of the writers to add cheesy action to the scene or Leng was dead and that was just Shep imagining it.

It doesn't really matter, it's just again one of those ambiguities that you can either interpret or just leave it. It's just in the framework of this thread that I thought to give it an extra thought, since that's what we do here.

[BatmanTurian]

EpyonX3 wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

That part from 3 to A looks like a mass relay, the lower portion looks like a turian head. But you're right too, does look like a Reaper.

Well that would suggest that the reapers have had that form since the beginning. Now is that they decided to build a human reaper?

it was said that each species harvested is formed into a larva and placed inside the reaper form with the lesser species forming the destroyer design (which suspiciously have a body form that looks like Keepers in a way)

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 18 avril 2012 - 03:18 .

[SS2Dante]

UrgedDuke wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

macrocarl wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

More speculations inbound:

So I was watching these new vids, that got linked to in the BSN a few hours back: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11500315.
There the guy does a three parter analysing ME3's story on a literary level and it's really worth watching the three vids...but plugging is not the point of this post...

It's this:
at some point in the third vid he talks about the Cerberus base invasion. This part got my spidey-senses up.
What exactly?

After we defeated Kai Leng he suddenly gets up on his last breath to get ya, right?

Here the guy talks about this specific scene
www.youtube.com/watch

And he makes an interesting point about something I completly missed whily playing: Why does no one notice him stumbling towards you? Maybe you guys are willing to watch this bit and help me out with the following piece of speculation:

Was Kai Leng getting up after you defeated him real, or was it just as real as the kid in the vent on earth?

When playing, I got the impression Shep knew he was there with his kung-fu agression radar (trope used a whole whole bunch in Samurai and Kung-Fu movies, where the good guy turns his back on the defeated enemy and senses agression, turns around and unloads whoop **** all over said bad guy) <3

yeah, I saw nothing wrong with that scene, I've seen it a hundred times before in movies. Usually it's done with guns.

Ever wonder why Shepard still kills Kai Leng if you don't use the Renegade interrupt, but you die if you don't use the Renegade interrupt against TIM.... very strange.

I think the implication is that Shepard was aware of Kai Leng the whole time, so the renegade interrupt option might only have been there to give you the chance to really stick it to him

[SS2Dante]

BatmanTurian wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

That part from 3 to A looks like a mass relay, the lower portion looks like a turian head. But you're right too, does look like a Reaper.

Well that would suggest that the reapers have had that form since the beginning. Now is that they decided to build a human reaper?

it was said that each species harvested is formed into a larva and placed inside the reaper form with the lesser species forming the destroyer design (which suspiciously, have a body form that looks like Keepers in a way)

If you look up the concept art of the human reaper in the mass effect wiki it does actually look more Reaper like. Apparently they build a "core" of the target species then build on that. The human reaer was never going to have legs or a torso or anything.

EDIT: here

 http://images1.wikia...7/7d/Wcb6ug.png

Modifié par SS2Dante, 18 avril 2012 - 03:21 .

[The Captainator]

SS2Dante wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

You know, it'd be interesting to find out the number of athiests and religious types on each side

I'd say it's the other way around.  IT theorists are trying to prove that there is a God, give sense to chaos by imposing an unseen, all powerful force that is guiding things.  Atheists are the ones who take things as they are, without looking deeper.   Evolution happened by chance, 1 out of billions of stars.

The only way you could say that those who oppose IT are the religious is because of one's upbringing, that everything about God is how it is and not to question it.

You can look at it both ways.

I happen to be against IT theory.  The starchild in the vent theory means nothing.  To implant thoughts in someone's mind is powerful technology, and they surely can read those thoughts as well.  They would know that Shepard has been tormented by the death of this boy, so in this climactic moment he chose that form to throw him off more in order to believe the lies about the only ways to resolve things.

Indoctrination did happen, but only slightly, to convince Shepard to go for the control or synthesis endings, for self preservation.  Otherwise the destroy ending wouldn't have been an option, because Shepard knew he could destroy them, and they couldn't change that at the level of indoctrination they were able to get him to.

Modifié par The Captainator, 18 avril 2012 - 03:23 .

[EpyonX3]

SS2Dante wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

You know, it'd be interesting to find out the number of athiests and religious types on each side

the game itself puts religion to question. You'd think Shepard would remember what happened when he died like most people seem to do when they come back to life.

Benezia says she expected a light(?) when she died but was suprised to find that it was all going dark when she died.

Even the prevous cycle struggled with understanding where they came from according to Javik.

The percentage of religious people in a given group tends to grow smaller the better educated they are. Since most people working on games (especially a sci-fi game like this) have degrees in maths and science, it's not surprising religion isn't mentioned much. In fact, someone wrote an article recently (I think it was in the escapist) about how in the majority of games religion is portrayed negatively.

I don't think that's it. I think it's more to do with the Sci-Fi element of the story. Sci-fi in general doesn't seem to be too religious. Instead their more scientifically supernatural if that makes any sense to you.

[SS2Dante]

EpyonX3 wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

You know, it'd be interesting to find out the number of athiests and religious types on each side

the game itself puts religion to question. You'd think Shepard would remember what happened when he died like most people seem to do when they come back to life.

Benezia says she expected a light(?) when she died but was suprised to find that it was all going dark when she died.

Even the prevous cycle struggled with understanding where they came from according to Javik.

The percentage of religious people in a given group tends to grow smaller the better educated they are. Since most people working on games (especially a sci-fi game like this) have degrees in maths and science, it's not surprising religion isn't mentioned much. In fact, someone wrote an article recently (I think it was in the escapist) about how in the majority of games religion is portrayed negatively.

I don't think that's it. I think it's more to do with the Sci-Fi element of the story. Sci-fi in general doesn't seem to be too religious. Instead their more scientifically supernatural if that makes any sense to you.

*shrug* for this game specifically I couldn't say, I was just pointing out a general trend.

[BatmanTurian]

The Captainator wrote...

SS2Dante wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

posted from another thread because this is how I see the fundamental divide.

ZajoE38 wrote...

So.. the ME3 has turned to religion. Two dogmatic sides. And dogmatic because Bioware haven't explained the ending properly, so we can't get the conclusion.

religion requires no proof, only faith.

Both sides believe they have evidence or that the evidence can be interpreted differently. IT theorists try to take a more scientific approach while it sometimes seems the Anti-IT people just take it on faith that the ending is literal and don't want to think about it too hard.

The fundamental argument is " Bioware just wrote a bad ending and everything at face value just proves that and I refuse to question my own assumptions" ("God is real and I'll believe it no matter how much evidence you show me") and " IT seems logical based on evidence collected from the game, however we can't completely prove it but it seems to make sense. Until further evidence is aquired or we have a true confirmation of proof, it's up in the air. However, a conclusion follows logical evidence used to prove a hypothesis and slowly make it a theory." (like scientists and others who have a more analytical viewpoint and don't take the world at face value and strive to make logical sense of the universe. If they did take the world at face value, the Earth would still be rotating around the sun and the body would be sustained by humors in our modern textbooks).

So either you take life at face value without questioning your assumptions, or you choose to investigate something that doesn't make sense to you. Again, I ask you sincerely, which one of these really sounds like religion and which one sounds like someone taking a more analytical approach?

You know, it'd be interesting to find out the number of athiests and religious types on each side

I'd say it's the other way around.  IT theorists are trying to prove that there is a God, give sense to chaos by imposing an unseen, all powerful force that is guiding things.  Atheists are the ones who take things as they are, without looking deeper.   Evolution happened by chance, 1 out of billions of stars.

The only way you could say that those who oppose IT are the religious is because of one's upbringing, that everything about God is how it is and not to question it.

You can look at it both ways.

Fair enough, but the fact that it can be seen both ways should give others pause before calling IT a religion or a cult, considering it uses evidence from the game and canon itself. Religion would make things up and chalk it up to an unexplainable faith, not provide compelling evidence from reality itself.

[EpyonX3]

SS2Dante wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

That part from 3 to A looks like a mass relay, the lower portion looks like a turian head. But you're right too, does look like a Reaper.

Well that would suggest that the reapers have had that form since the beginning. Now is that they decided to build a human reaper?

it was said that each species harvested is formed into a larva and placed inside the reaper form with the lesser species forming the destroyer design (which suspiciously, have a body form that looks like Keepers in a way)

If you look up the concept art of the human reaper in the mass effect wiki it does actually look more Reaper like. Apparently they build a "core" of the target species then build on that. The human reaer was never going to have legs or a torso or anything.

EDIT: here

 http://images1.wikia...7/7d/Wcb6ug.png

But I think that art is assuming it wasn't completed since they never do finish it in the game. It would have been awesome to fight a human reaper in Mass Effect 3. Would have been an epic boss battle on earth.

[Orkfaeller]

So many hints. Unlimited ammo and botomless magasines for teh pistol. The trees from dreams, the overall ambiance that just screams "dream".
Not a coincidence for me, just artistic crap from BW ?!

The pistol has unlimited ammo, because you would be in a stupid situation if you ran out of ammo when facing TIM or the destroy ending. Exactly like you had unlimited ammo in the beginning of the game.

You dont have to reload, because Shep is  limping and they would have been forced to do a complete new reloading animation just for that few scenes.

I*d wish that people stop seeing "prooves" and "hints" in recycled models, textures and animations.