265 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkSeraphym]

Taleroth wrote...

http://tvtropes.org/...Main.SureWhyNot 

Take another look at what you just posted. "Whether it's officially shown in a canon work is another matter." It is one thing for the writers to agree with a fan and adopt their explanation. It is another thing entirely for them to take that theory and use it as is within a canon piece. You have to give credit to people when you actually take their ideas and elaborate on them in further works. Going to be hard to do that when it was an idea that was just tossed around online.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 14 mars 2012 - 05:24 .

[jeska22]

obvious troll is obvious

[MPSai]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

Eyjh wrote...

Right now, either Bioware is completely incompetent, or there is something that we don't know. Currently the ending contradicts everything that was promised. The question is, could one of the most celebrated game producers in the world suddenly become incompetent? Possible, but...

I think Dragon Age 2 would like a word with you.

All of Dragon Age 2 is not nearly as bad as the last 5 minutes of Mass Effect 3. In fact in the wide scheme of things, Dragon Age 2 is not all that bad. Before the ME3 ending I would have said "Bioware's worst is still better than most developers' best."

[savionen]

I don't get all the Dragon Age 2 story hate. It was pretty decent to me, the main issue I had was bugs.

[Talogrungi]

I've yet to read a credible debunk of the hallucination/indoctrination theory.

'til I do, I'll continue to regard it as entirely likely.

[MadMatt910]

Baronesa wrote...

byne wrote...

Lemonwizard wrote...

Seriously guys, let's get some Occam's Razor in here.  The ending wasn't cryptic and needing analysis, it was actually just poorly done.

While I agree we should use Occam's Razor in most occasions, any occasion where Occam's Razor leads to a god child using space magic should probably be treated as very suspect at best.

Well... There are FAR more problems and inconsistencies taking the endings as they are, than if you apply the ID  Hypothesis.

Neither is perfect, but the glaring plotholes are way bigger if you take the endings at face value.

Indoctrination is pretty much a get otu of jail free card for them. Without using it the ending smashed the lore of both previous games. Are bioware writers really that terrible? Even if they are, they surely can't pass up the oppertunity to make appropriate endings using this as an excuse.

[Tequila Man]

Lemonwizard wrote...

PKchu wrote...

Yeah, I remembered something like that being funny. You should make a blog or something.

I wonder who will be the first to defend YEC, and if so, what version of the ending they believe...

Most people who try to defend young earth creationism don't realize that "young earth creationism" and "creationism" do not mean the same thing, and quickly stop defending it once the difference is explained.

So it begins.


In an attempt to prevent a runaway freight train of unimaginable proportions (Biblical? ), let's focus more on Indoctrination fanfiction.

[Tequila Man]

Talogrungi wrote...

I've yet to read a credible debunk of the hallucination/indoctrination theory.

'til I do, I'll continue to regard it as entirely likely.

It was made up by a fan.

Debunked?


Edit - Seriously. I was here when the thread started. Does it make sense? Sure. 

www.fanfiction.net

So does a lot of stuff there.

Modifié par Tequila Man, 14 mars 2012 - 05:19 .

[Phydeaux314]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

Eyjh wrote...

Right now, either Bioware is completely incompetent, or there is something that we don't know. Currently the ending contradicts everything that was promised. The question is, could one of the most celebrated game producers in the world suddenly become incompetent? Possible, but...

I think Dragon Age 2 would like a word with you.

Thing is... DA2's ending was foreshadowed, and fairly heavily. To top it off, that game world is SUPPOSED to be dark, grim, and brutal. I thought the ending to DA2 was quite well done, actually.

[DarkSeraphym]

MPSai wrote...

All of Dragon Age 2 is not nearly as bad as the last 5 minutes of Mass Effect 3. In fact in the wide scheme of things, Dragon Age 2 is not all that bad. Before the ME3 ending I would have said "Bioware's worst is still better than most developers' best."

I have no disagreements with that assessment whatsoever. However, Dragon Age 2 was still a disappointment when it was released. This was reflected in its reviews. Just pointing out that this is not the first time BioWare may have failed to deliver on some of our expectations in a big way.

[savionen]

MadMatt910 wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

byne wrote...

Lemonwizard wrote...

Seriously guys, let's get some Occam's Razor in here.  The ending wasn't cryptic and needing analysis, it was actually just poorly done.

While I agree we should use Occam's Razor in most occasions, any occasion where Occam's Razor leads to a god child using space magic should probably be treated as very suspect at best.

Well... There are FAR more problems and inconsistencies taking the endings as they are, than if you apply the ID  Hypothesis.

Neither is perfect, but the glaring plotholes are way bigger if you take the endings at face value.

Indoctrination is pretty much a get otu of jail free card for them. Without using it the ending smashed the lore of both previous games. Are bioware writers really that terrible? Even if they are, they surely can't pass up the oppertunity to make appropriate endings using this as an excuse.

Basically. If the hallucination/indoctriation theory isn't true, they might as well use it anyway, since it makes 100x more sense than the actual ending. While gaining back respect and selling DLC. Seems like a win/win.

[stysiaq]

OP nailed it.

[Tequila Man]

savionen wrote...

Basically. If the hallucination/indoctriation theory isn't true, they might as well use it anyway, since it makes 100x more sense than the actual ending. While gaining back respect and selling DLC. Seems like a win/win.

See, I can get behind this. They should use it. Except, they haven't. So, until they do.... stop parading the idea around like we've all solved some insanely deep, awesome, universal Buddha-truth.

[Davies993]

How is it even remotely like it?

YEC - disbelief in the face of established fact

Indoc theory - A rational and logical argument for ME3's ending, based on facts (i.e things that happened in the game). There is no fact to prove that Indoc theory is not true.

What you are saying is logically fallacious and utterly ridiculous.

Tequila Man wrote...

savionen wrote...

Basically. If the hallucination/indoctriation theory isn't true, they might as well use it anyway, since it makes 100x more sense than the actual ending. While gaining back respect and selling DLC. Seems like a win/win.

See, I can get behind this. They should use it. Except, they haven't. So, until they do.... stop parading the idea around like we've all solved some insanely deep, awesome, universal Buddha-truth.

And how do you know they haven't? You are asserting something is true without providing any sort of rationale what so ever.

Modifié par Davies993, 14 mars 2012 - 05:24 .

[Tequila Man]

Davies993 wrote...

Indoc theory - A rational and logical argument for ME3's ending, based on facts (i.e things that happened in the game). There is no fact to prove that Indoc theory is not true.

 Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam

Modifié par Tequila Man, 14 mars 2012 - 05:24 .

[Mysten]

RowanCF wrote...
How do you explain the breath scene when you pick destroy then? The indoctrination theory pretty much fits it all perfectly and you offer nothing of substance in your post to indicate otherwise.

It's funny. People seem willing to believe that Bioware came down with a sudden case of awful-scriptwiriting-itis at the most crucial point in the story despite openly praising other moments in the game (Mordin's death, anyone?) for being outstanding in this very regard and ignoring Bioware's long-standing reputation for their brilliantly written games rather than just accept that Shepard was indoctrinated which the game blatantly hints towards many times during the Citadel sequence.

"What's this? I'm magically back in my default armour, my squad is gone, Nigel Fishnchips is radioing that everyone in the assault is dead, Anderson managed to board the Citadel immediately after me completely unharmed, did not radio the aforementioned Major Fishnchips to report in when he declared everyone dead and describes the one and only corridoor leading up to the platform as being where he entered the Citadel despite the fact you're clearly also standing in it and he is nowhere to be found? THIS IS NOT SUSPICIOUS AT ALL."

[Smiley556]

So theres 2 main explenation currently going round about the ending (I'm not gonna call either theory, cos some people experience the ending one way, some experience it the other. If Indoctrination is a theory, then so is god kid space magic).

1 - Indoctrination - The story is sound and there are no plotholes

2 - God kid space magic - Full of plotholes

Sorry, I'm gonna go for the one that makes sense.

[Tequila Man]

Smiley556 wrote...

So theres 2 main explenation currently going round about the ending (I'm not gonna call either theory, cos some people experience the ending one way, some experience it the other. If Indoctrination is a theory, then so is god kid space magic).

1 - Indoctrination - The story is sound and there are no plotholes

2 - God kid space magic - Full of plotholes

Sorry, I'm gonna go for the one that makes sense.

One of these is fanficton.

One of these is canon.

Horribly enough, I'm going with canon.

Hence the rage.

[Ieldra]

Lemonwizard wrote...
You pick a premise and then frantically search for anything that can be interpreted to support it, ignoring the premise's utter lack of expression anywhere else.

Seriously guys, let's get some Occam's Razor in here.  The ending wasn't cryptic and needing analysis, it was actually just poorly done.

The voice of sanity. Many thanks.

[Davies993]

Tequila Man wrote...

Davies993 wrote...

Indoc theory - A rational and logical argument for ME3's ending, based on facts (i.e things that happened in the game). There is no fact to prove that Indoc theory is not true.

 Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam

Yet I did not assert that what the THEORY states is true - I was replying to the comment where he outright said it was false without providing anything to substantiate his claims, so how is it an argument from ignorance?

[Tequila Man]

See post two above you.

[Rockpopple]

You can choose to accept everything you see at face value, in which case you believe that the writers suddenly forgot how nearly every aspect of the ME universe works in the last 5 minutes of the story, or you can ask yourself the hard questions about what you're seeing.

Watch the Destroy ending again, watch the breathe scene, and ask yourself some damn questions. We're not Flat Earthers or Creationists, we're the ones who see bones and asks ourselves questions of evolution. We don't accept what say, a religious text tells us at face value. That'd be the other side.

[Taleroth]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

http://tvtropes.org/...Main.SureWhyNot 

Take another look at what you just posted. "Whether it's officially shown in a canon work is another matter." It is one thing for the writers to agree with a fan and adopt their explanation. It is another thing entirely for them to take that theory and use it as is within a canon piece. You have to give credit to people when you actually take their ideas and elaborate on them in further works. Going to be hard to do that when it was an idea that was just tossed around online.

You should take another look at it. "Another matter" doesn't mean "it doesn't happen." There are multiple instances listed where it is shown in a canon work.

[Burnham1]

The indoctrination theory is simply a theory with some pretty convincing evidence that it could possibly be true. However, it can not be deemed as fact until Bioware points it out as fact, because it would have to be their intent for it to actually be fact. It may seem hard to believe that all that stuff can't be a coincidence, but it actually can be just that.

It is a really cool thing to think about, and there is nothing wrong with people wanting to use it as their explanation for the ending, but until Bioware comes out and confirms it, it is not the true ending and you can't go around telling people they are wrong if they don't agree with an unproven theory.

[Tequila Man]

Rockpopple wrote...

You can choose to accept everything you see at face value, in which case you believe that the writers suddenly forgot how nearly every aspect of the ME universe works in the last 5 minutes of the story, or you can ask yourself the hard questions about what you're seeing.

Watch the Destroy ending again, watch the breathe scene, and ask yourself some damn questions. We're not Flat Earthers or Creationists, we're the ones who see bones and asks ourselves questions of evolution. We don't accept what say, a religious text tells us at face value. That'd be the other side.

I could sum all that up for you:

fanfiction.


I'm going to be really fair now: if it turns out the Devs did this, and are doing new endings (hell, even if they aren't), I will apologize. To all of you.

Would you do me the same honor if the positions were reversed?

Modifié par Tequila Man, 14 mars 2012 - 05:29 .