57139 réponses à ce sujet

[earth_angel]

Baltar2009 wrote...

 Well I'm not going to wade through ~900 pages of posts but I will add my $0.02.

My principle objection to the indoctrination theory, even before questioning what appears to be pretty clear pattern seeking, is this:

If the intent really was to close the trilogy with a hallucination, and therefore not actually resolve the conflict sprawling across three games...shame on the writers of such an ending.  It is still every bit as bad as if the ending we have now were actually the literal ending, which I'm 99% sure it is.

QED.

Did they actually ever said that what we see in the citadel is the end ?

Well if this is the real ending and space magic is the key, they could have at least given me some space ponies. I am still searching for twilight sparkle and rainbow dash in space!

[Baltar2009]

masster blaster wrote...

Hay do you all think that if the new ending dlc is good Bioware may create a dlc called "The Retake Of Omega" Following Arie asking Shepard to help retake back Omega that is still in under control of of what's left of Cerbures people.

You are just full of terrible ideas aren't you?

[earth_angel]

masster blaster wrote...

What if we have to fight the Reapers again, or their creators, or any new enemy like Reaper in the new ME trilogy they are trying to consider, but if the Reapers win in the new DLC the players have to re fight the Reapers again/learn everything about them again in the next cycle.

Actually this is someting I was wondering : are we sur all reapers are out there in the galaxy and that they have no back-up reaper force still far away from the galaxy. If so then the reaper might not be as extinct as the destroy ending suggest.

[masster blaster]

well Baltar2009 somebody has to have bad ideas that make no sence or they do.

[Baltar2009]

masster blaster wrote...

well Baltar2009 somebody has to have bad ideas that make no sence or they do.

Don't worry.  You've always got a place in Bioware's story department.

[masster blaster]

Thanks.

[Kyzee]

Baltar2009 wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Baltar2009 wrote...

 Well I'm not going to wade through ~900 pages of posts but I will add my $0.02.

My principle objection to the indoctrination theory, even before questioning what appears to be pretty clear pattern seeking, is this:

If the intent really was to close the trilogy with a hallucination, and therefore not actually resolve the conflict sprawling across three games...shame on the writers of such an ending.  It is still every bit as bad as if the ending we have now were actually the literal ending, which I'm 99% sure it is.

QED.

I think the interesting part about the Indoc theory is people noticed the pattern before they had a theory for it.  I noticed everything that was pointed out but I could not put my finger on why it was out of place or what the significance of these things were.

And that would suck if they did not end up resolving things...

It is only 'interesting' in the same way 9/11 truthers are 'interesting'.

Okay, people who support IT and 9/11 conspiracy theorists are no where near the same thing. There's no need to sink to that level here. Let's keep it civil and discuss, not mock or belittle each other, all right?

[legaldinho]

tobito113 wrote...

Anyone knows what legaldinho was talking about a texture in the endings named dream?

It's on this thread, but lord help me find it...

[byne]

Baltar2009 wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Baltar2009 wrote...

 Well I'm not going to wade through ~900 pages of posts but I will add my $0.02.

My principle objection to the indoctrination theory, even before questioning what appears to be pretty clear pattern seeking, is this:

If the intent really was to close the trilogy with a hallucination, and therefore not actually resolve the conflict sprawling across three games...shame on the writers of such an ending.  It is still every bit as bad as if the ending we have now were actually the literal ending, which I'm 99% sure it is.

QED.

I think the interesting part about the Indoc theory is people noticed the pattern before they had a theory for it.  I noticed everything that was pointed out but I could not put my finger on why it was out of place or what the significance of these things were.

And that would suck if they did not end up resolving things...

It is only 'interesting' in the same way 9/11 truthers are 'interesting'.

Indoctrination Theory: Trying to find a way to make our favorite game series not have such a horrible end, and thus allow us to enjoy playing it

9/11 Truthers: Thinking the government purposefully killed 3000 people just for the lulz

Clearly these are the same things.

Also, werent we compared to truthers way earlier in the thread? And then to Young Earth Creationists?

At least be creative, man.

[McGlone16]

earth_angel wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

What if we have to fight the Reapers again, or their creators, or any new enemy like Reaper in the new ME trilogy they are trying to consider, but if the Reapers win in the new DLC the players have to re fight the Reapers again/learn everything about them again in the next cycle.

Actually this is someting I was wondering : are we sur all reapers are out there in the galaxy and that they have no back-up reaper force still far away from the galaxy. If so then the reaper might not be as extinct as the destroy ending suggest.

Lets not forget also although big, all this only takes place in OUR galaxy, one galaxy among many. Who knows what is going on outside of our galaxy.

[Denvian]

Baltar2009 wrote...

Denvian wrote...

Baltar2009 wrote...

 Well I'm not going to wade through ~900 pages of posts but I will add my $0.02.

My principle objection to the indoctrination theory, even before questioning what appears to be pretty clear pattern seeking, is this:

If the intent really was to close the trilogy with a hallucination, and therefore not actually resolve the conflict sprawling across three games...shame on the writers of such an ending.  It is still every bit as bad as if the ending we have now were actually the literal ending, which I'm 99% sure it is.

QED.

I think the interesting part about the Indoc theory is people noticed the pattern before they had a theory for it.  I noticed everything that was pointed out but I could not put my finger on why it was out of place or what the significance of these things were.

And that would suck if they did not end up resolving things...

It is only 'interesting' in the same way 9/11 truthers are 'interesting'.

Yeah because 9/11 and the ending of Mass Effect 3 have so much in common 

Keep on Trollen Trollen Trollen Trollen

Modifié par Denvian, 26 mars 2012 - 12:22 .

[legaldinho]

legaldinho wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

Anyone knows what legaldinho was talking about a texture in the endings named dream?

It's on this thread, but lord help me find it...

http://img13.imagesh...rtedtexture.png

http://img804.images...fofitviaumo.png

Look around here

http://social.biowar...dex/9727423/862

[Baltar2009]

byne wrote...


Indoctrination Theory: Trying to find a way to make our favorite game series not have such a horrible end, and thus allow us to enjoy playing it

9/11 Truthers: Thinking the government purposefully killed 3000 people just for the lulz

Clearly these are the same things.

Also, werent we compared to truthers way earlier in the thread? And then to Young Earth Creationists?

At least be creative, man.

Screw earlier in the thread--I'm not reading nearly 1000 pages.  I think I can make the comparison on the basis of the same free-association 'logic' that goes on in justifying IT.  Does anyone really think I was comparing the gravity of 9/11 to this game?

To my original point: How on Earth does IT make the game more enjoyable?  It isn't 'clever', it is a cop-out.

[Turbotanden]

Btw, the Child starts out talking about how he controls the reapers. By this time he already has decided the choices shepard has, all of which lead to Reapers stopping their attack. Why doesn't he stop their attack already while explaining the choices to Shepard? Also he jumps alot from talking about "my solution" and "they [=the Reapers]" (meaning he is separate from and above the Reapers) to talking about "us" and "we" (bunching himself up with the Reapers), which is rather odd.

[byne]

Baltar2009 wrote...

byne wrote...


Indoctrination Theory: Trying to find a way to make our favorite game series not have such a horrible end, and thus allow us to enjoy playing it

9/11 Truthers: Thinking the government purposefully killed 3000 people just for the lulz

Clearly these are the same things.

Also, werent we compared to truthers way earlier in the thread? And then to Young Earth Creationists?

At least be creative, man.

Screw earlier in the thread--I'm not reading nearly 1000 pages.  I think I can make the comparison on the basis of the same free-association 'logic' that goes on in justifying IT.  Does anyone really think I was comparing the gravity of 9/11 to this game?

To my original point: How on Earth does IT make the game more enjoyable?  It isn't 'clever', it is a cop-out.

It makes it more enjoyable, because whether or not its true, we can at least believe that the horrible endings we got arent what actually happened. We can just say 'Shep wakes up' then make up our own minds about what happened afterwards. We dont have to accept Space Magic as something that actually exists in the ME universe.

[Cucobr]

GBGriffin wrote...

ChuckieJ wrote...


It's not a joke. The decisions are very real, even if they are from Reapers invading your mind. When you make the correct decision you are defeating indoctrination.

Implying there is only one correct decision, that probably is the one you picked.

Seriously. If the game comes down to picking the "right" option, how is that less limiting than what we currently have? Why not make equally valid choices? 

Oh, right. The fan-made speculative theory demands that only one choice be correct...probably the one you'd pick 10/10 times.

IT isnt a End, never was.

Indoctrination Theory only have one purpose, make sense in everything.

The reapers are still there ... The Crucible is still there ..

[Jaykel]

twitter.com/#!/BioEvilChris/status/184071703050194944

Chris Priestly
‏Since people believe me ridiculing this
nonsense is some how avoiding the issue, this new DLC rumor on
Reddit/4Chan is FALSE. Movin' on now

Modifié par Jaykel, 26 mars 2012 - 12:34 .

[Denvian]

byne wrote...

Baltar2009 wrote...

byne wrote...


Indoctrination Theory: Trying to find a way to make our favorite game series not have such a horrible end, and thus allow us to enjoy playing it

9/11 Truthers: Thinking the government purposefully killed 3000 people just for the lulz

Clearly these are the same things.

Also, werent we compared to truthers way earlier in the thread? And then to Young Earth Creationists?

At least be creative, man.

Screw earlier in the thread--I'm not reading nearly 1000 pages.  I think I can make the comparison on the basis of the same free-association 'logic' that goes on in justifying IT.  Does anyone really think I was comparing the gravity of 9/11 to this game?

To my original point: How on Earth does IT make the game more enjoyable?  It isn't 'clever', it is a cop-out.

It makes it more enjoyable, because whether or not its true, we can at least believe that the horrible endings we got arent what actually happened. We can just say 'Shep wakes up' then make up our own minds about what happened afterwards. We dont have to accept Space Magic as something that actually exists in the ME universe.

If they did plan InDoc and have further plans... then it was clever as hell.

If they didn't... well then it is just lame.

[Baltar2009]

IT isnt a End, never was.

Indoctrination Theory only have one purpose, make sense in everything.

The reapers are still there ... The Crucible is still there ..

Exactly, thank you.

[Kyzee]

Baltar2009 wrote...

byne wrote...


Indoctrination Theory: Trying to find a way to make our favorite game series not have such a horrible end, and thus allow us to enjoy playing it

9/11 Truthers: Thinking the government purposefully killed 3000 people just for the lulz

Clearly these are the same things.

Also, werent we compared to truthers way earlier in the thread? And then to Young Earth Creationists?

At least be creative, man.

Screw earlier in the thread--I'm not reading nearly 1000 pages.  I think I can make the comparison on the basis of the same free-association 'logic' that goes on in justifying IT.  Does anyone really think I was comparing the gravity of 9/11 to this game?

You were the one who brought it up. You can't do that and then act incredulous when people point out how inappropriate the comparison is. Obviously, what you say is just as important as how you say it. 

All I am asking for is civility here. We can disagree with each other without being insulting.

As for how IT is more satisfying, I would suggest you read this article. It points out a lot of the narrative issues in the ending. Hope that helps.   https://docs.google....?pli=1&sle=true

[Baltar2009]

Denvian wrote...

If they did plan InDoc and have further plans... then it was clever as hell.

If they didn't... well then it is just lame.

Even if the DLC were *free* I don't think what they did was acceptable.

[byne]

legaldinho wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

Anyone knows what legaldinho was talking about a texture in the endings named dream?

It's on this thread, but lord help me find it...

http://img13.imagesh...rtedtexture.png

http://img804.images...fofitviaumo.png

Look around here

http://social.biowar...dex/9727423/862

Are those actually the filenames? Because that seems a bit convenient, like when someone edited the child's model to say Harbinger.

[Baltar2009]

Kyzee wrote...


You were the one who brought it up. You can't do that and then act incredulous when people point out how inappropriate the comparison is. Obviously, what you say is just as important as how you say it. 

All I am asking for is civility here. We can disagree with each other without being insulting.

As for how IT is more satisfying, I would suggest you read this article. It points out a lot of the narrative issues in the ending. Hope that helps.   https://docs.google....?pli=1&sle=true

Yeah, I get all that.  I'm saying IT doesn't improve the situation.

No IT: The ending makes no sense.
IT: No ending.

Sorry, this isn't acceptable.

[byne]

Baltar2009 wrote...

Denvian wrote...

If they did plan InDoc and have further plans... then it was clever as hell.

If they didn't... well then it is just lame.

Even if the DLC were *free* I don't think what they did was acceptable.

Whether or not releasing a 'real' ending as DLC is acceptable isnt actually the point of this thread though, so I dont see how it matters.

[legaldinho]

I dunno bro, the guy who was uploading file names was inviting others to use the freeware. Could be trolling, mind.