463 réponses à ce sujet

[DangerDavidson]

DoctorEss wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

DoctorEss wrote...

Indoctrination is false. Deal with it. Period.

Here's why:

1.
First and foremost, business, legality. That is to say, bad business,
and a lack of legality. That would imply they knowingly sold a product
under false pretenses (false advertising is not legal), and continually
did so, and then sold a product that was incomplete. This is not only,
again, illegal, but horribly foolish, as they'd damage sales, cause
product returns, and damage their reputation.

2. Bandwidth. Not
every player has a great internet connection available to download a
large DLC package. Further, not ever Xbox player is on Live Gold, thus,
no downloading of DLC at all, forcing them to pay Microsoft to upgrade
their account, and download said DLC. Otherwise, stuck with an
incomplete product.

3. Ending itself: There would be no ending,
everything would be the indoc dream or whatever, so nothing actually
happened, galaxy still hosed in some way or other.

Indoctrination theory is nothing but desperate, sad grasping at straws.

First, it is understood that you are replying to OP in your post. lol. Please do not quote the entire original post in its entirety.

Second, a LOT of people have quite excellent internet connections. We are not on par with South Korea, per se, but I think they can expect everyone they sold a game to that includes an ONLINE PASS, which is not an insignificant amount of content, to be able to download future patches.

They are NOT selling you a knowingly complete product. THe end user agreement allows for the existance of bugs, etc. They reserve the right to update/redo any content as they see fit. The box says that an internet connection is required for MP/whatever. 

You have ALL the information that is required for you to make a purchasing decision, even if you/hardly anyone actually reads it. They are in the clear.

I saw somewhere that like >2/3 of all ME2 owners bought LSB. I will not use this for evidence at this point because I don't have a reference. If someone has one, please present it, I'm quite sure it exists. 

Doesn't matter if they can figure a bunch of people will have a decent connection.  They still can't sell a product based on that assumption.  That's why, in general, DLC is supposed to be non-essential stuff, and for the most part, usually is.

The EULA allows for some things, but again:  Advertising it as a complete product, and so on and so forth, and then revealing NO! HAH!  In fact, we have a secret REAL ending! counts as selling you an incomplete product, as the DLC is required to make it the actual game.

They would not be in the clear.

You have obviously very little knowledge of how these things work.  I understand you're sad and desperate for the indoc theory to be real, but face it, it's not.

Again, you are assuming that the April DLC will cost money. I'm not 100% convinced of that. I too will be dissapointed if it does. I think it would set a terrible precedent, (holding fans hostage, etc).

[Jacobcus]

Hmm its getting perty cereal in here....lighten the mood....lighten the mood....ITS ADVENTURE TIME ಠᴥಠ!!!!!

[Holding5Aces]

I do believe there are enough clues in the game to conclude that indoctrination was, at one point, a part of the story and was largely removed from the ending.

It seems like the indoctrination theme ended with TIM's scene.

[DangerDavidson]

Holding5Aces wrote...

I do believe there are enough clues in the game to conclude that indoctrination was, at one point, a part of the story and was largely removed from the ending.

It seems like the indoctrination theme ended with TIM's scene.

You don't think it continued into the RBG endings? Interesting. Just curious, what makes you think its a falsity up until TIM and then real after?

[KingDan97]

DoctorEss wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...

DoctorEss wrote...

2. Bandwidth. Not
every player has a great internet connection available to download a
large DLC package. Further, not ever Xbox player is on Live Gold, thus,
no downloading of DLC at all, forcing them to pay Microsoft to upgrade
their account, and download said DLC. Otherwise, stuck with an
incomplete product.

Sorry but you don't need gold to buy DLC. You need it to play multiplayer.

Fine, so?  Still not ever player is on Live, nor is every player on live given a connection good enough to download the package.

Nor can you force people to BUY dlc for an incomplete game that was illegally, falsely advertised.

That's the thing about "free" arguments.  Unless things have changed, Microsoft still doesn't allow for free content on XBL.

Well, I'm not disagreeing with the basic arguement of internet connections but Microsoft has at times made exceptions for publishers(Included EA, go ahead and take a look at the "Update 1.9" for Burnout Paradise, it added an entire other island to the game, as well as the data for multiple new cars, challenges and gameplay modes.

A whopping 1.2 gigs, which is just .8 gigs short of the 2 gig limit, which was 1.5 at the time that came out. Microsoft has done it before and they can do it again, especially since if EA wants this covered properly, in a way that leaves no chance of accusations of this being the plan will push for it heavily.

[Jacobcus]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Holding5Aces wrote...

I do believe there are enough clues in the game to conclude that indoctrination was, at one point, a part of the story and was largely removed from the ending.

It seems like the indoctrination theme ended with TIM's scene.

You don't think it continued into the RBG endings? Interesting. Just curious, what makes you think its a falsity up until TIM and then real after?

They state that the Catalyst was the main ending, that they actually had more dialogue that also explained how long the reapers had been doing what they did, but they found it unimportant for us to know, so they cut it and alot of other stuff. The reason the Catalyst was in the form of the kid chances are is because it took the form of someone he was thinking of through the whole game.

[Kusy]

Jacobcus wrote...

When the Co-founder of Bioware announces a world-wide official statement that this is the ending they intended. That is not evidence that is pure fact.

When the Co-founder of Bioware announces a world-wide official statement that there will be a global event to make up for a previous even that ended up being a middle finger to half of the world. That is not evidence... oh wait... that didn't work out so well. Trolololol.

[Carnage752]

OP. It's still a theory.

NOTHING IS CONFIRMED!!!

It may be hinted at extensively, but it is still TECHNICALLY a theory.

So ya, it's still a theory. Bioware even went to lengths to say they scrapped an indoctrination ending.

I'm neutral on the IT, but it is still a theory. There is no concrete or conclusive proof, nor backup from Bioware on it.

I also don't like how you act like if we disagree with you, we are all bad. It's an opinion. Deal with it.

And yes, I think they better either change or expand GREATLY on the current endings.

[KingDan97]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

When the Co-founder of Bioware announces a world-wide official statement that this is the ending they intended. That is not evidence that is pure fact.

When the Co-founder of Bioware announces a world-wide official statement that there will be a global event to make up for a previous even that ended up being a middle finger to half of the world. That is not evidence... oh wait... that didn't work out so well. Trolololol.

No one is claiming Indoctrination isn't something they are currently considering, but there is a significant number of overwhelming statements from multiple Bioware developer sources collected both before and after ME3 launched that both state outright and then go on to explain why we got the ending we did as we got it, directly tearing down one of the common points of indoctrinators(Lack of investigate options) in the process.

They might at this point choose to use indoctrination theory as a mulligan for the ending as it stands, it's been both explicitly and implicitly stated by both the lead writer and the executive producer that this was what they made, this is how they meant to make it and they're only working on clarifying it now due to fan outcry.

[DangerDavidson]

KingDan97 wrote...

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

When the Co-founder of Bioware announces a world-wide official statement that this is the ending they intended. That is not evidence that is pure fact.

When the Co-founder of Bioware announces a world-wide official statement that there will be a global event to make up for a previous even that ended up being a middle finger to half of the world. That is not evidence... oh wait... that didn't work out so well. Trolololol.

No one is claiming Indoctrination isn't something they are currently considering, but there is a significant number of overwhelming statements from multiple Bioware developer sources collected both before and after ME3 launched that both state outright and then go on to explain why we got the ending we did as we got it, directly tearing down one of the common points of indoctrinators(Lack of investigate options) in the process.

They might at this point choose to use indoctrination theory as a mulligan for the ending as it stands, it's been both explicitly and implicitly stated by both the lead writer and the executive producer that this was what they made, this is how they meant to make it and they're only working on clarifying it now due to fan outcry.

So the second paragraph is 100% true. They are and have been working on clarifying it.  I have not seen one DETAILED, CONCRETE explanation of the current ending from any official bioware source. As stated previously, conjectures about the completness of the game by developers do not disprove IT. They only assert that what we got is what we were meant to get.

[Lokanaiya]

I'd just like to point out that, technically, gravity is still a theory too, yet I'm pretty sure everyone can attest to its existence. I'm not saying that's the case with IT, but calling it a "theory" doesn't mean that it's any less true. It can still be proven wrong, though I think that's unlikely at this point. And until Bioware comes out with a big public statement or DLC saying it's not true/it is true, it still counts as a theory.

[Jacobcus]

DangerDavidson wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

When the Co-founder of Bioware announces a world-wide official statement that this is the ending they intended. That is not evidence that is pure fact.

When the Co-founder of Bioware announces a world-wide official statement that there will be a global event to make up for a previous even that ended up being a middle finger to half of the world. That is not evidence... oh wait... that didn't work out so well. Trolololol.

No one is claiming Indoctrination isn't something they are currently considering, but there is a significant number of overwhelming statements from multiple Bioware developer sources collected both before and after ME3 launched that both state outright and then go on to explain why we got the ending we did as we got it, directly tearing down one of the common points of indoctrinators(Lack of investigate options) in the process.

They might at this point choose to use indoctrination theory as a mulligan for the ending as it stands, it's been both explicitly and implicitly stated by both the lead writer and the executive producer that this was what they made, this is how they meant to make it and they're only working on clarifying it now due to fan outcry.

So the second paragraph is 100% true. They are and have been working on clarifying it.  I have not seen one DETAILED, CONCRETE explanation of the current ending from any official bioware source. As stated previously, conjectures about the completness of the game by developers do not disprove IT. They only assert that what we got is what we were meant to get.

Ita be a hot day in hell when I see Bioware openly admit something they stick with though.

[wheelierdan]

Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance" (where "ignorance" stands for: "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false.

[ryuasiu]

Dominus Solanum wrote...

http://social.biowar.../index/10582165

This guy really nails my feelings on the IT. If you don't want to watch, basically he says that he's read everything there possibly is about it and can't find a single thing the theory brings up that couldn't be explained by the game creators simply not caring. In the end, the fan base cares way more about the game then the people that made it.

The problem I have with the "they didnt care/were lazy" theory is that the other 98% (the other 1% was the photoshopped tali pic, now that was lazy) was done so well. I have a hard time believing that they put so much care and love only not to care last 15 min of it. Also they have been droping hints at it on their twitter feeds before IT came up on forums

[Jacobcus]

wheelierdan wrote...

Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance" (where "ignorance" stands for: "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false.

I see what you did thar 
ಠᴥಠ 

[Well]

I just wanted to make this comment.It is on the OP initial comment.

"Can we stop calling IT a theory? Its so blatantly obvious what is going on at this point. We need to bin the people saying:

- I hate the ending it doesnt make sense
- The ending is fine I like it they way it is

into the following category:

- I didn't get that Shepard is being indoctrinated."



So I going to put you in a category.

Those that can't see beyond their own nose.

I don't understand why people are allowed different views.I will minimize their opinions since it conflicts with mine.Consensus has been reached.I have agree with myself on numerous times.

[DangerDavidson]

wheelierdan wrote...

Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance" (where "ignorance" stands for: "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false.

Ooooooh. This is interesting. Hmmmmm.

Is it a valid counter argument to say that I am not asserting that it is true because no one can prove it is false and that I am actually asserting it is true based on the physical evidence?

I feel like that would nullify argumentum ad ignoratiam pretty quickly no?

[wheelierdan]

you have physical evidence the game ends on indoctrination theory, the game itself isnt physical

[DangerDavidson]

Well wrote...

I just wanted to make this comment.It is on the OP initial comment.

"Can we stop calling IT a theory? Its so blatantly obvious what is going on at this point. We need to bin the people saying:

- I hate the ending it doesnt make sense
- The ending is fine I like it they way it is

into the following category:

- I didn't get that Shepard is being indoctrinated."



So I going to put you in a category.

Those that can't see beyond their own nose.

I don't understand why people are allowed different views.I will minimize their opinions since it conflicts with mine.Consensus has been reached.I have agree with myself on numerous times.

Sorry Well, I think at this point, it goes beyond just simple opinion. Mostly because of the overwhelming amount of physical evidence. If you read this thread in its entirety, the quality/coherence of evidence against IT pales in comparison to the opposite. 

There is a threshold where certain opinions no longer become acceptable in society, e.g., creationism.

[Holding5Aces]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Holding5Aces wrote...

I do believe there are enough clues in the game to conclude that indoctrination was, at one point, a part of the story and was largely removed from the ending.

It seems like the indoctrination theme ended with TIM's scene.

You don't think it continued into the RBG endings? Interesting. Just curious, what makes you think its a falsity up until TIM and then real after?

I believe IF the indoctination theme continued with starchild, the writers would have eventually revealed Harbinger's influence, depending on the actions you chose.

Having the ability to resist indoctrination and destroy the Reapers never came to being in the end-game sequences.  If the destroy ending was the "true" ending to resist indoctrination, why are all three endings largely the same?  If there was an attempt being carried out, you would expect to see a sequence to confirm that indoctrination failed.

Either Shepard was fully indoctrinated and all three choices are simply an illusion, or indoctrination itself must have ended with TIM.  
 
If the choices were an illusion, the Reapers would have won, and the legend of Shepard would have died as well.  The grandfather and child scene contradicts that possibility.

[Jacobcus]

wheelierdan wrote...

you have physical evidence the game ends on indoctrination theory, the game itself isnt physical

Neither is air, but we physically breathe it 
ಠᴥಠ 

[DangerDavidson]

wheelierdan wrote...

you have physical evidence the game ends on indoctrination theory, the game itself isnt physical

Hmm, well the C++/CUDA/ java, whatever used to write the shaders and execution threads of the game result in physical bit-wise logic on the operating platform/display system which provide me with visual representation of the developer's concieved story. From these phenomena I can peice together their intent!

Modifié par DangerDavidson, 26 mars 2012 - 02:20 .

[DangerDavidson]

Holding5Aces wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

Holding5Aces wrote...

I do believe there are enough clues in the game to conclude that indoctrination was, at one point, a part of the story and was largely removed from the ending.

It seems like the indoctrination theme ended with TIM's scene.

You don't think it continued into the RBG endings? Interesting. Just curious, what makes you think its a falsity up until TIM and then real after?

I believe IF the indoctination theme continued with starchild, the writers would have eventually revealed Harbinger's influence, depending on the actions you chose.

Having the ability to resist indoctrination and destroy the Reapers never came to being in the end-game sequences.  If the destroy ending was the "true" ending to resist indoctrination, why are all three endings largely the same?  If there was an attempt being carried out, you would expect to see a sequence to confirm that indoctrination failed.

Either Shepard was fully indoctrinated and all three choices are simply an illusion, or indoctrination itself must have ended with TIM.  
 
If the choices were an illusion, the Reapers would have won, and the legend of Shepard would have died as well.  The grandfather and child scene contradicts that possibility.

What do you think of the assertion that that entire spaceship/planet/grandfather sequence is a distraction? You know that the shepard breathing scene exists and that he is all mashed up in concrete after the destroy ending. I feel like that was the manifestation of his resistance, that he recovered, his allies held off harbinger, and now he's ready to do some damage, no?

[N-Seven]

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

[wheelierdan]

you cant use the word physical evidence that somethign is true unless you can somwehow touch it. you really need to think aobut the words you use.

what you have is called circumstantial evidence.

stephen hawking is in a wheelchair. this is a fact.
I am in a wheelchair, this is also a fact.
You could suggest that i am perhaps stephen hawking based on this information.
aka you have circumstantial evidence that i am stephen hawking.

however i am not stephen hawking despite this evidence.

do you understand?