335 réponses à ce sujet

[Fhaarkas]

@OP, not all IT-ists are part of the Retake movement. You seem to think that IT would dictate a further gameplay, or that the ending as it is is not the real ending. It doesn't. IT is the REASON some people think there are gonna be further gameplay and a 'real' ending. Catch the difference?

Modifié par Fhaarkas, 08 avril 2012 - 09:14 .

[Huojin]

OP: No, I don't.

Because as far as I'm concerned, until Bioware give us an ending that wasn't pulled out of their dog's butt, IT is true.

[heathxxx]

I do feel sorry for the IT's to a certain extent.

A group that had a good stab at what the horrendous ending of the game was about, which actually made more sense.

Unfortunately, the game is so fatally flawed in far more aspects than just the ending sequence, I don't think anyone can sensibly explain what went wrong... even the developers.

[nullobject]

Fhaarkas wrote...

@OP, not all IT-ists are part of the Retake movement. You seem to think that IT would dictate a further gameplay, or that the ending as it is is not the real ending. It doesn't. IT is the REASON some people think there are gonna be further gameplay and a 'real' ending. Catch the difference?

The orthodox IT as I understand it said that the ending as published was not to be taken at face value, and that Bioware had a "true" interpretation of the ending in mind (it was all a hallucination), and they also had a "true" ending sequence for the game all developed and ready to release, after a suitable delay. From what I read, everyone fully expected that the "true" ending would contain new gameplay sequences, and would override the existing endings (by confirming that they never actually happened).

An IT that is compatible with no extra gameplay and no change to the existing endings is a bit of a major step-down from the original theory, don't you think? It just becomes a fringe fan interpretation of the story that is not absolutely ruled out by the ending, and leaves the story hanging with no resolution, rather than Bioware's true intention from the very beginning.

[Fhaarkas]

nullobject wrote...

Fhaarkas wrote...

@OP, not all IT-ists are part of the Retake movement. You seem to think that IT would dictate a further gameplay, or that the ending as it is is not the real ending. It doesn't. IT is the REASON some people think there are gonna be further gameplay and a 'real' ending. Catch the difference?

The orthodox IT as I understand it said that the ending as published was not to be taken at face value, and that Bioware had a "true" interpretation of the ending in mind (it was all a hallucination), and they also had a "true" ending sequence for the game all developed and ready to release, after a suitable delay. From what I read, everyone fully expected that the "true" ending would contain new gameplay sequences, and would override the existing endings (by confirming that they never actually happened).

An IT that is compatible with no extra gameplay and no change to the existing endings is a bit of a major step-down from the original theory, don't you think? It just becomes a fringe fan interpretation of the story that is not absolutely ruled out by the ending, and leaves the story hanging with no resolution, rather than Bioware's true intention from the very beginning.

I've stated my thought about BioWare's intention in the previous post. To reiterate - there's also a group that think it's possible that IT is incorporated in the game, just not in the light of the 'original theory'. I personally still think that IT is very sound and possible.

These are some more posts (series) of my thought on this ending business. They may not be very coherent, but I hope the point get across if you decide to read them.

http://social.biowar...3/1244#11070491 
http://social.biowar...3/1247#11074453 
http://social.biowar...3/1248#11077214 

[nitefyre410]

They had hope and the tried but it was blind hope and blind faith, that is never good and always leads to despair.

[AntiDave]

I think people who at this point still believe in It should go and see the movie 'Event Horizon'.
It has a twist in the last 5 seconds of its ending that suggests that it's all not real.

There is no indicator as strong as this one in the current game. Sure Shepard wakes up in rubble for instance but that indicator isn't strong enough because it can be challenged. The people in event Horizon left a sztrong enough indicator in their movie. At the end you will definitely doubt that the protagonists made it out successfully.

Bioware successfully split the Retake movement by being too vague and lazy abouzt the ending.
"Lol you just don't UNDERSTAND."

As their is no gameplay with the new DLC starchild unfortunately does happen. No Shepard standing up in Lodnon walking into the beam after waking up from the most uncreative unartistic Reaper induced nightmare in gaming history..

Can't really blöame the IT believers though.
It's something I blame Bioware for: I want a DEFINITIVE ending to my story. As in: "This is the way it ACTUALLY went." No vague nonsense!

Modifié par AntiDave, 08 avril 2012 - 11:13 .

[Verit]

AntiDave wrote...
Can't really blame the IT believers though.
It's something I blame Bioware for: I want a DEFINITIVE ending to my story. As in: "This is the way it ACTUALLY went." No vague nonsense!

I feel the same way. If Bioware really believes in their artistic vision, they they should be willing to defend it. But they don't want to dismiss the IT altogether, because they're afraid of the backlash. They'd rather have people grasping at straws for months and believing the ending isn't real. By now it should be clear to anyone that the theory isn't real, especially after the Weekes interview which shows that they're in the process of trying to explain all the plotholes. Yet they still don't want to dismiss it because they "don't want to tell people how to interpret the ending". Meaning "We don't want to admit that the ending was in fact real". How long are they going to keep this up? Please Bioware, I'd rather have you admit that the current ending makes no sense and that you're going to fix it, rather than playing games with the community.

[Aiyie]

RADIUMEYEZ wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

I feel duped about the choices, but I think that a rushed product and "artistic integrity" explains it better than a fan-made theory that they could have easily confirmed or supported by now. The IT only came into existence to make sense of the plotholes; it was never discussed to this level of detail prior to ME3.

If they explain the plotholes, then I can accept it for what it is and move on. From what it sounds like, the Extended Cut will actually address my primary concern with the ending, although nothing is certain. If that's the case, so be it. To me, they've made their intentions clear and what they plan on doing about it, and it seems to distance itself from IT rather than support it.

Okay that's all good but now comes the real question. Them discussing/believing/thinking/ or for that matter promoting Indoctrination Theory affects you in no way unless it were to end up being true which I am not saying it is but you don't know what Bioware's plans are in anyway. So anyway though my point is why do you care? Why do you constantly argue with them? Are you mad about something one of them said? Do you wish you had thought up the idea first? Are you just bored?

some people see a problem and feel the need to fix it.  others see a problem and feel the need to complain about it.

Like or dislike IT theory, the people out there doing nothing but trying their damndest to disprove IT theory are part of the problem, not the solution.

I like the idea behind indoc theory (even if I never believed it was ever intentional by Bioware), if for no reason other than the only other option is to wallow in self-pity and anger at how bad the ending is.

[PoisonMushroom]

I still wouldn't rule IT out as a potential future 'what-if?' DLC. If anything this seems like a further way of addressing ending complaints whilst also holding on to their beloved artistic integrity. I'm not sure what other DLC they could do really? It's not like anyone would buy a character DLC pack, because it wouldn't be worth replaying just for a bit of extra dialogue.

[Hector Nunez]

AxholeRose wrote...

Indoc Theorists are people willing to give BioWare the benefit of doubt until they themselves make a confirming statement.

IT theorists are bigger fans of the game than you will ever be.

The part I hated the most of the IT was their suportes and their superiority pretentiousness claiming that if you don't believe in IT you are not a real fan or at least you are not smart enough to get it.