300 réponses à ce sujet

[malra]

Yes they did, but they did not sell the Hordes of the Underdark as the completion of a trilogy. Which is going to cause a bigger problem if it turns out that they told everyone this game was complete and come to find out it wasn't.

[dreman9999]

Ellychid32 wrote...

Wasn't there a scene in DA:O like this as well? You woke up in the Grey Warden palace (or whatever it was, can't remember exactly) to find Duncan there. He says the war is won. You quickly figure out it is a dream.

Everything was too wrong to consider that part of DA: O to be real so it was easy to not get tricked by it.....And everything inthe ending of ME3 is extremely wrong with strong hints of reality in it.....And as the more you progress into the dream...the more warped it gets......

Modifié par dreman9999, 04 avril 2012 - 06:02 .

[Savber100]

Holy sh*t, you're right.

[kyg_20X6]

Another thing to add, Casey (I think it was) said that the original plan for the ending was to put you under TOTAL Reaper control. But that it was to hard to have, gameplay-wise, and still give the player dialogue options and some control.

So, if that was your original plan, would you scrap it entirely or would you try to get as close to that as possible while finding a way to give the player some control?

Now what did we get? What does IT say about the endings?

Hmmm...

[Sal86]

Hmm, you have a point, BW do have a history of using mind controlling monsters but.....who knows..... *ready for PAX now*

[Agiyosi]

Word. I think they've topped themselves with IT. It's been handled about as poorly as possible, but we'll see how it all plays out.

[Caz Tirin]

dreman9999 wrote...

Hraedonius wrote...

"Lazy writing" is an explanation that is much more plausible than "an elaborate set of clues that merely appears to be lazy writing." Even granting the premise, one still has to explain the point of the Stargazer ending followed by the appeal to "expand the legend" through DLC: is that also part of the cunning plot to release an unfinished game?

If it was a case of lazy writing...The game would end in the scene with Anderson and Shepard.
Also, the clues were built up during the last 3 games....
Read this to understand...
http://social.biowar...ndex/10946125/1 

There's also plenty of other articles and essays pointing out the flaws of the Indoctrination THEORY.  For some reason, the majority of the IT crowd no longer consider IT to be theory, bt rather cold, indisputable fact.  Even though the entire concept has theory in the name.

Also, there's plenty of things that point away from IT as pointed out in many articles and essays.  Funny how the IT sheep refuse to even acknowledge those, or worse say they're wrong when the article or essay is pointing to literary techniques and models that have been used for centuries.

Speaking of literary techniques and models...  lazy writing doesn't just mean they stopped writing at some point.  It refers to the quality going to crap.  Which it did.  Which is why people needed a real ending.  Which is how IT formed because people refused to accept that anyone would crap all over a franchise like that.  Funny how the IT crowd refuses to acknowledge that little gem.

[askanec]

I believe the pieces of evidence in the Indoctrination Theory are the result of fans grasping for straws. People will believe what they want to believe, and then find "supporting evidence" later.

Just like how someone who thinks "the world is out to get him" will start to see conspiracies and enemies everywhere.

[kilgorek]

Caz Tirin wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Hraedonius wrote...

"Lazy writing" is an explanation that is much more plausible than "an elaborate set of clues that merely appears to be lazy writing." Even granting the premise, one still has to explain the point of the Stargazer ending followed by the appeal to "expand the legend" through DLC: is that also part of the cunning plot to release an unfinished game?

If it was a case of lazy writing...The game would end in the scene with Anderson and Shepard.
Also, the clues were built up during the last 3 games....
Read this to understand...
http://social.biowar...ndex/10946125/1 

There's also plenty of other articles and essays pointing out the flaws of the Indoctrination THEORY.  For some reason, the majority of the IT crowd no longer consider IT to be theory, bt rather cold, indisputable fact.  Even though the entire concept has theory in the name.

Also, there's plenty of things that point away from IT as pointed out in many articles and essays.  Funny how the IT sheep refuse to even acknowledge those, or worse say they're wrong when the article or essay is pointing to literary techniques and models that have been used for centuries.

Speaking of literary techniques and models...  lazy writing doesn't just mean they stopped writing at some point.  It refers to the quality going to crap.  Which it did.  Which is why people needed a real ending.  Which is how IT formed because people refused to accept that anyone would crap all over a franchise like that.  Funny how the IT crowd refuses to acknowledge that little gem.

No matter how many times you spout this, it doesn't make any more true. The majority DO NOT regard it as fact. We just regard it as very plausible. There is a difference.

[Caz Tirin]

askanec wrote...

I believe the pieces of evidence in the Indoctrination Theory are the result of fans grasping for straws. People will believe what they want to believe, and then find "supporting evidence" later.

Just like how someone who thinks "the world is out to get him" will start to see conspiracies and enemies everywhere.

Indeed.

None of the IT crowd can point to a thread, post or website discussing IT prior to the ending of ME3 happening.  No one put all this together and shared it as a guess before we all discovered how horrible the ending turned out to be.

[kilgorek]

askanec wrote...

I believe the pieces of evidence in the Indoctrination Theory are the result of fans grasping for straws. People will believe what they want to believe, and then find "supporting evidence" later.

Just like how someone who thinks "the world is out to get him" will start to see conspiracies and enemies everywhere.

Except, of course, that we found supporting evidence first and then came to a theory.

[Caz Tirin]

kilgorek wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Hraedonius wrote...

"Lazy writing" is an explanation that is much more plausible than "an elaborate set of clues that merely appears to be lazy writing." Even granting the premise, one still has to explain the point of the Stargazer ending followed by the appeal to "expand the legend" through DLC: is that also part of the cunning plot to release an unfinished game?

If it was a case of lazy writing...The game would end in the scene with Anderson and Shepard.
Also, the clues were built up during the last 3 games....
Read this to understand...
http://social.biowar...ndex/10946125/1 

There's also plenty of other articles and essays pointing out the flaws of the Indoctrination THEORY.  For some reason, the majority of the IT crowd no longer consider IT to be theory, bt rather cold, indisputable fact.  Even though the entire concept has theory in the name.

Also, there's plenty of things that point away from IT as pointed out in many articles and essays.  Funny how the IT sheep refuse to even acknowledge those, or worse say they're wrong when the article or essay is pointing to literary techniques and models that have been used for centuries.

Speaking of literary techniques and models...  lazy writing doesn't just mean they stopped writing at some point.  It refers to the quality going to crap.  Which it did.  Which is why people needed a real ending.  Which is how IT formed because people refused to accept that anyone would crap all over a franchise like that.  Funny how the IT crowd refuses to acknowledge that little gem.

No matter how many times you spout this, it doesn't make any more true. The majority DO NOT regard it as fact. We just regard it as very plausible. There is a difference.

YOU might not, but that would put you in the minority.  Besides, it doesn't need me, or anyone else, "spouting" it, it's already true.

Modifié par Caz Tirin, 04 avril 2012 - 06:14 .

[daecath]

I'm torn. There's a lot of compelling circumstantial evidence. Including that PAX, and the rumored announcement of their plans, is exactly one month after the initial release. Maybe it is all a gimmick, maybe they've had this planned from the start. I really want to believe it, but at this point, all of this circumstantial evidence is lacking one thing. Motive. Why? Why would they do this? Ok, maybe they couldn't get an ending ready in time, so they figured out a clever way to stall. Why would they not just tell us? It's one thing to build suspense, but another to build frustration and ire. Typically, pissing off your customers is bad for business, and there are a lot of pissed off people over this. Yeah, they've gotten a firestorm of publicity, but a lot of it has been pretty bad. And contrary to what some people think, there is such a think as bad publicity. So while I want it to be true, I seriously doubt it is.

[kilgorek]

Caz Tirin wrote...

askanec wrote...

I believe the pieces of evidence in the Indoctrination Theory are the result of fans grasping for straws. People will believe what they want to believe, and then find "supporting evidence" later.

Just like how someone who thinks "the world is out to get him" will start to see conspiracies and enemies everywhere.

Indeed.

None of the IT crowd can point to a thread, post or website discussing IT prior to the ending of ME3 happening.  No one put all this together and shared it as a guess before we all discovered how horrible the ending turned out to be.

Whaaaa? Of course we didn't. We hadn't PLAYED THE GAME YET. You can't form an educated opinion on something until you've experienced it.

[balance5050]

kilgorek wrote...

askanec wrote...

I believe the pieces of evidence in the Indoctrination Theory are the result of fans grasping for straws. People will believe what they want to believe, and then find "supporting evidence" later.

Just like how someone who thinks "the world is out to get him" will start to see conspiracies and enemies everywhere.

Except, of course, that we found supporting evidence first and then came to a theory.

Yep, the evidence created the theory.

[kilgorek]

Caz Tirin wrote...

kilgorek wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Hraedonius wrote...

"Lazy writing" is an explanation that is much more plausible than "an elaborate set of clues that merely appears to be lazy writing." Even granting the premise, one still has to explain the point of the Stargazer ending followed by the appeal to "expand the legend" through DLC: is that also part of the cunning plot to release an unfinished game?

If it was a case of lazy writing...The game would end in the scene with Anderson and Shepard.
Also, the clues were built up during the last 3 games....
Read this to understand...
http://social.biowar...ndex/10946125/1 

There's also plenty of other articles and essays pointing out the flaws of the Indoctrination THEORY.  For some reason, the majority of the IT crowd no longer consider IT to be theory, bt rather cold, indisputable fact.  Even though the entire concept has theory in the name.

Also, there's plenty of things that point away from IT as pointed out in many articles and essays.  Funny how the IT sheep refuse to even acknowledge those, or worse say they're wrong when the article or essay is pointing to literary techniques and models that have been used for centuries.

Speaking of literary techniques and models...  lazy writing doesn't just mean they stopped writing at some point.  It refers to the quality going to crap.  Which it did.  Which is why people needed a real ending.  Which is how IT formed because people refused to accept that anyone would crap all over a franchise like that.  Funny how the IT crowd refuses to acknowledge that little gem.

No matter how many times you spout this, it doesn't make any more true. The majority DO NOT regard it as fact. We just regard it as very plausible. There is a difference.

YOU might not, but that would put you in the minority.  Besides, it doesn't need me, or anyone else, "spouting" it, it's already true.

Wrong. You see a few randoms making claims that it is fact and then you assume. It's clear that you spend no time in the actual IT thread because that is not what wer are doing at all.

[Hraedonius]

dreman9999 wrote...

If it was a case of lazy writing...The game would end in the scene with Anderson and Shepard.
Also, the clues were built up during the last 3 games....
Read this to understand...
http://social.biowar...ndex/10946125/1 

I've seen all of the "evidence" that people have put forth in support of indoctrination theory and remain wholly unmoved. When you cast any inconsistency as a brilliant allusion to the "truth" and wave away any other explanation, no counter argument is going to amount to more than a hill of beans in your mind. We'll simpy have to agree to disagree.

For what it's worth, I hope you and all the other IT True Believers are right, because even something as awful as indoctrination theory is at least potentially far better than the endings as they currently are.

Additionally, had the game concluded with Shepard and Anderson staring out at the battle, victory presumably moments away, the ending would have actually been far better constructed than what we actually got. As it stands, we either have a hastily written bit of grimdark tripe or an incomplete game built on a plot twist the fans had to invent.  You'll have to forgive me for not being excited about either.

[ubermensch007]

StrickenMaverick wrote...

Why would Bioware have Ray speak about the endings to try and control the PR disaster if the plan all along was indoc? Same with them defending the endings as art. Don't get me wrong, I sort of hope that this is true, as the only ending I have ever selected was "destroy". Seeing Anderson in the vision shooting the whatever it was convinced me as well as the fact that Shepard only 'survives' in that choice to stick with destroy. Our objective all along was to kill the reapers, why would we change that objective in the last five minutes?

Because its that old trope of some Revenge Films and stupid ass Anime series like Claymore.

[img]http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://i.animecrazy.net/Claymore.jpg&sa=X&ei=tuZ7T_C5LcTV0QG9ioGNDA&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNEH8v_YXTl5xeB7-Ard7QRAYFAvpg[/img]

I sacrificed this and that to get to this point where I avenge my friend, lover, child or blah blah blah.But now that I have you at my mercy.I'm going to let you live.And go scott free.Even though you are a cold-blooded sadistic murderer. <_<

Teresa of the Faint Smile should have been avenged!

[img]http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://a3.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/111/c1cdbfc3f1d143909ba7c7713e5b8767/l.jpg&sa=X&ei=Oud7T6CmLOf00gHFtvn2Cw&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNHxK3QqxSCE4V-IvrsjbImfyMSnqQ[/img]

[img]http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/28600000/Claymore-Teresa-and-Clare-claymore-anime-and-manga-28670469-512-384.jpg&sa=X&ei=ned7T_XFELSy0AHtrO37Cw&ved=0CAoQ8wc4Fg&usg=AFQjCNFvhZb0ZXXXE7OdcxZv1-OpQypZZg[/img]

Modifié par ubermensch007, 04 avril 2012 - 06:21 .

[daecath]

Caz Tirin wrote...

kilgorek wrote...
No matter how many times you spout this, it doesn't make any more true. The majority DO NOT regard it as fact. We just regard it as very plausible. There is a difference.

YOU might not, but that would put you in the minority.  Besides, it doesn't need me, or anyone else, "spouting" it, it's already true.

You can want it to be fact all you want. You can believe it's fact, you can even accept it as fact. Just like if you want you can accept that horse manure tastes like cotton candy, or that the sky is orange with green polka dots. Just because you accept something as fact, doesn't make it fact. Until Bioware comes out and says "Hey guys, congratulations, you figured it out, and here's the undeniable proof that this was what we had in mind all along, and we aren't just covering our backsides with a convenient theory," then it will remain a theory.

[Joolazoo]

So do IT theorists believe Bioware intentionally sold a game that ended before the concluding act?

[Caz Tirin]

kilgorek wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

askanec wrote...

I believe the pieces of evidence in the Indoctrination Theory are the result of fans grasping for straws. People will believe what they want to believe, and then find "supporting evidence" later.

Just like how someone who thinks "the world is out to get him" will start to see conspiracies and enemies everywhere.

Indeed.

None of the IT crowd can point to a thread, post or website discussing IT prior to the ending of ME3 happening.  No one put all this together and shared it as a guess before we all discovered how horrible the ending turned out to be.

Whaaaa? Of course we didn't. We hadn't PLAYED THE GAME YET. You can't form an educated opinion on something until you've experienced it.

Then IT is a result of a bad ending and people grasping for anything that isn't a horrible ending.  This isn't a "chicken or egg" question.  IT was compiled AFTER the ending was seen, not before.  Therefore, it's the result of a bad ending instead of an actual attempt by the writers.

[malra]

The thing I don't get is why those who know the ending is wrong want to argue amongst themselves. Between IT and Retake and the rest of us who have no formal allegiance but know the ending is crap, why are we all fighting over whose theory of the ending makes it better? Whether your IT or Retake or whoever, you saw this ending as it stands is either a) incomplete or a total hack job. Either way we'ver been screwed over and now all we can do is wait. Bioware is either going to give us a song and dance and a real ending or a song and a dance and a thats all folks. Do I want IT to be true? Sure, who wouldn't. Do I think it a plausible theory? Yes. Can I get away from the fact that Bioware then sold an incomplete game and made the claim that it was complete? No. None of us can. We may be able to ignore it, for now. But I assure you, that in business when companies lie and manipulate to that extent in order to drive sales it is not a good thing.

sorry for the wall text.

[Cazlee]

"Bioware actually used the Indoctrination Theory hallucination idea" because some other game did? Sorry to interrupt the church sermon, but the mechanics of a completely unrelated game is not proof of IT. Good God BSN.

Modifié par Cazlee, 04 avril 2012 - 06:25 .

[bahamutomega]

wow...  just...  wow...
thank you for remembering and posting this.  i never finished Hordes.  i may go edit my post to add this to my theory: the rest of the ending(s) were cut.
http://social.biowar...ndex/10636496/1

[Caz Tirin]

kilgorek wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

kilgorek wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Hraedonius wrote...

"Lazy writing" is an explanation that is much more plausible than "an elaborate set of clues that merely appears to be lazy writing." Even granting the premise, one still has to explain the point of the Stargazer ending followed by the appeal to "expand the legend" through DLC: is that also part of the cunning plot to release an unfinished game?

If it was a case of lazy writing...The game would end in the scene with Anderson and Shepard.
Also, the clues were built up during the last 3 games....
Read this to understand...
http://social.biowar...ndex/10946125/1 

There's also plenty of other articles and essays pointing out the flaws of the Indoctrination THEORY.  For some reason, the majority of the IT crowd no longer consider IT to be theory, bt rather cold, indisputable fact.  Even though the entire concept has theory in the name.

Also, there's plenty of things that point away from IT as pointed out in many articles and essays.  Funny how the IT sheep refuse to even acknowledge those, or worse say they're wrong when the article or essay is pointing to literary techniques and models that have been used for centuries.

Speaking of literary techniques and models...  lazy writing doesn't just mean they stopped writing at some point.  It refers to the quality going to crap.  Which it did.  Which is why people needed a real ending.  Which is how IT formed because people refused to accept that anyone would crap all over a franchise like that.  Funny how the IT crowd refuses to acknowledge that little gem.

No matter how many times you spout this, it doesn't make any more true. The majority DO NOT regard it as fact. We just regard it as very plausible. There is a difference.

YOU might not, but that would put you in the minority.  Besides, it doesn't need me, or anyone else, "spouting" it, it's already true.

Wrong. You see a few randoms making claims that it is fact and then you assume. It's clear that you spend no time in the actual IT thread because that is not what wer are doing at all.

Except I do read the IT thread.  And if anyone brave enters that thread to disgree, they get shouted down and told "IT is fact!" even if they don't use those exact words.  So perhaps you're the one that isn't spending time in the IT thread?