218 réponses à ce sujet

[NM_Che56]

CavScout wrote...

So when you were complaining about being attacked by some over IT, you were just being a hypocrite. Because you sure like to attack personally when you can't actually defend your point.

Give me something to defend against other than some whack ass Wikipedia link.  In the meantime...

Modifié par Master Che, 22 avril 2012 - 02:50 .

[CavScout]

I'd sugges the one image bombing the thread is "mad"....

[Navasha]

CavScout wrote...


Those examples have the revel where the points are tied together. You have no such thing in ME3. There is not ending to connect them to. Just hope.

This is where we can come to an agreement.   The ending was missing in the game.   However, unlike a movie or book, a game has the option to add content later.    I believe this is what the developer always intended to do.    I don't think they expected this level of response though.  

I think they wanted people to speculate and see if people could follow the breadcrumbs that were laid down throughout the game.    If they added anything in the game to actually suggest that an indoctrination attempt on Shepard was taking place, then it would have been revealed to the world just HOURS after release.    It would have been a major SPOILER for nearly everyone.     Most people would have then chosen the "correct" path and then not understood the magnitude of Shepard actually starting to believe as the reapers do. 

The only way to do it for a game, would be to have the full reveal at a later time.     Imagine seeing the Usual Suspects for the very first time already knowing who the Kaiser really is?   It would completely ruin the dramatic reveal of the entire movie.

The breadcrumbs are there in the game.... undeniably.    The only thing missing is the giant reveal at the end.    People who are denying even the possibility of IT, are even trying to deny the existence of the breadcrumbs, which ARE in the game.

Modifié par Navasha, 22 avril 2012 - 03:05 .

[CavScout]

The breadcrumbs are there in the game.... undeniably.    The only thing missing is the giant reveal at the end.    People who are denying even the possibility of IT, are even trying to deny the existence of the breadcrumbs, which ARE in the game.

They're not bread crumbs if there is no trail to follow....

Modifié par CavScout, 22 avril 2012 - 03:00 .

[NM_Che56]

If they wanted it to be in the game then it'd be in the game

Nuff said

/sarcasm

[NM_Che56]

Ive noticed that a good number anti IT people seldom cite real flaws in the theory. They just assert their position. Usually what they think is a flaw is a biased induced misunderstanding. IRONICALLY if you point that out then you're accused of making it up as you go along...yet they can't rebut the clarification. Lol

Modifié par Master Che, 22 avril 2012 - 03:08 .

[CavScout]

Master Che wrote...

CavScout wrote...


Indoctrination is an element of the Reaper invasion...

...Shepard is immune to this element, I guess...even though you don't have any proof of it...

Shep not being indoctrinated is not the same thing as immune.

[CavScout]

Master Che wrote...

Ive noticed that a good number anti IT people seldom cite real flaws in the theory. They just assert their position. Usually what they think is a flaw is a biased induced misunderstanding. IRONICALLY if you point that out then you're accused of making it up as you go along...yet they can't rebut the clarification. Lol

The usual tactic of conspiracy theorist everywhere.. prove their theory wrong or it right!

You should try supporting a theory you are advancing instead of demanding others disprove it.

[DJBare]

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

CavScout wrote...


Indoctrination is an element of the Reaper invasion...

...Shepard is immune to this element, I guess...even though you don't have any proof of it...

Shep not being indoctrinated is not the same thing as immune.

For someone against IT you sure do keep the relevant threads bumped, I guess you just like having the last word, that's the only thing I can think of, or you do actually support IT.

Modifié par DJBare, 22 avril 2012 - 03:13 .

[CavScout]

DJBare wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

CavScout wrote...


Indoctrination is an element of the Reaper invasion...

...Shepard is immune to this element, I guess...even though you don't have any proof of it...

Shep not being indoctrinated is not the same thing as immune.

For someone against IT you sure do keep the relevant threads bumped, I guess you just like having the last word, that's the only thing I can think of, or you do actually support IT.

Why would anyone actually want to discuss something on a discussion board. It's madness, pure madness.....

[DOCTOR CHA0TICA]

In all honesty, I think I want IT to be true!! lol!!

Guess I'll find out when the extended cut DLC hits =)

[NM_Che56]

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Ive noticed that a good number anti IT people seldom cite real flaws in the theory. They just assert their position. Usually what they think is a flaw is a biased induced misunderstanding. IRONICALLY if you point that out then you're accused of making it up as you go along...yet they can't rebut the clarification. Lol

The usual tactic of conspiracy theorist everywhere.. prove their theory wrong or it right!

You should try supporting a theory you are advancing instead of demanding others disprove it.

Theres a whole thread on that.  And you can't prove a theory true.  That's a scientific fact.  You can only show evidence to support it...which there are threads devoted to...ad nauseam I might add.  All it takes is one out of 1 quadrillion or other ridiculously high number to flip gravitational theory on its head.  Impossible to prove it true. So unless u have a specific qualm then I'm not going to just vomit elements of it for the sake of doing so.

As for Shep being indoctrinated; why couldn't he be?  He's been exposed to do much reaper stuff that he's a good candadite .  He's also powerful.  That makes him a desirable one.

[NM_Che56]

CavScout wrote...

DJBare wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Indoctrination is an element of the Reaper invasion...

...Shepard is immune to this element, I guess...even though you don't have any proof of it...

Shep not being indoctrinated is not the same thing as immune.

For someone against IT you sure do keep the relevant threads bumped, I guess you just like having the last word, that's the only thing I can think of, or you do actually support IT.

Why would anyone actually want to discuss something on a discussion board. It's madness, pure madness.....

typical trolling diversionary tactic lol

[CavScout]

Master Che wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Ive noticed that a good number anti IT people seldom cite real flaws in the theory. They just assert their position. Usually what they think is a flaw is a biased induced misunderstanding. IRONICALLY if you point that out then you're accused of making it up as you go along...yet they can't rebut the clarification. Lol

The usual tactic of conspiracy theorist everywhere.. prove their theory wrong or it right!

You should try supporting a theory you are advancing instead of demanding others disprove it.

Theres a whole thread on that.  And you can't prove a theory true.  That's a scientific fact.  You can only show evidence to support it...which there are threads devoted to...ad nauseam I might add.  All it takes is one out of 1 quadrillion or other ridiculously high number to flip gravitational theory on its head.  Impossible to prove it true. So unless u have a specific qualm then I'm not going to just vomit elements of it for the sake of doing so.

As for Shep being indoctrinated; why couldn't he be?  He's been exposed to do much reaper stuff that he's a good candadite .  He's also powerful.  That makes him a desirable one.

Indoctrination Theory is not scientific theory.... p.s. scientific theories need to be falsifiable.

[N7Gold]

KingZayd wrote...

me too, but i think the Earthchild's actually real, and not part of the indoctrination itself.

I'm pretty concerned why nobody helped the kid onto the shuttle, I mean, he had to climb up there on his own. That really raised my eyebrow. Doesn't anyone care about the kid or are they too traumatized with the Reaper invasion? even so, that's no reason to ignore a 8 year old!

[balance5050]

N7Gold wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

me too, but i think the Earthchild's actually real, and not part of the indoctrination itself.

I'm pretty concerned why nobody helped the kid onto the shuttle, I mean, he had to climb up there on his own. That really raised my eyebrow. Doesn't anyone care about the kid or are they too traumatized with the Reaper invasion? even so, that's no reason to ignore a 8 year old!

I hate how he's like "You can't save me" when he's in the vent and then when he's outside he looks at you like "Why didn't you save me?"

Dumb kid.

[CavScout]

N7Gold wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

me too, but i think the Earthchild's actually real, and not part of the indoctrination itself.

I'm pretty concerned why nobody helped the kid onto the shuttle, I mean, he had to climb up there on his own. That really raised my eyebrow. Doesn't anyone care about the kid or are they too traumatized with the Reaper invasion? even so, that's no reason to ignore a 8 year old!

They kinda of were in a firefight... and they did see him.. they waited until he was aboard before closing the doors and taking off.

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Ive noticed that a good number anti IT people seldom cite real flaws in the theory. They just assert their position. Usually what they think is a flaw is a biased induced misunderstanding. IRONICALLY if you point that out then you're accused of making it up as you go along...yet they can't rebut the clarification. Lol

The usual tactic of conspiracy theorist everywhere.. prove their theory wrong or it right!

You should try supporting a theory you are advancing instead of demanding others disprove it.

Theres a whole thread on that.  And you can't prove a theory true.  That's a scientific fact.  You can only show evidence to support it...which there are threads devoted to...ad nauseam I might add.  All it takes is one out of 1 quadrillion or other ridiculously high number to flip gravitational theory on its head.  Impossible to prove it true. So unless u have a specific qualm then I'm not going to just vomit elements of it for the sake of doing so.

As for Shep being indoctrinated; why couldn't he be?  He's been exposed to do much reaper stuff that he's a good candadite .  He's also powerful.  That makes him a desirable one.

Indoctrination Theory is not scientific theory.... p.s. scientific theories need to be falsifiable.

But it is falsifiable. With EC.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

me too, but i think the Earthchild's actually real, and not part of the indoctrination itself.

I'm pretty concerned why nobody helped the kid onto the shuttle, I mean, he had to climb up there on his own. That really raised my eyebrow. Doesn't anyone care about the kid or are they too traumatized with the Reaper invasion? even so, that's no reason to ignore a 8 year old!

They kinda of were in a firefight... and they did see him.. they waited until he was aboard before closing the doors and taking off.

Sorry bro, I.T. always wins, and anti-IT people always end up looking like they don't "get it". You can keep trying to do what you're obviously trying to do, but you will just get frusterated.

[balance5050]

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Ive noticed that a good number anti IT people seldom cite real flaws in the theory. They just assert their position. Usually what they think is a flaw is a biased induced misunderstanding. IRONICALLY if you point that out then you're accused of making it up as you go along...yet they can't rebut the clarification. Lol

The usual tactic of conspiracy theorist everywhere.. prove their theory wrong or it right!

You should try supporting a theory you are advancing instead of demanding others disprove it.

Theres a whole thread on that.  And you can't prove a theory true.  That's a scientific fact.  You can only show evidence to support it...which there are threads devoted to...ad nauseam I might add.  All it takes is one out of 1 quadrillion or other ridiculously high number to flip gravitational theory on its head.  Impossible to prove it true. So unless u have a specific qualm then I'm not going to just vomit elements of it for the sake of doing so.

As for Shep being indoctrinated; why couldn't he be?  He's been exposed to do much reaper stuff that he's a good candadite .  He's also powerful.  That makes him a desirable one.

Indoctrination Theory is not scientific theory.... p.s. scientific theories need to be falsifiable.

But it is falsifiable. With EC.

Also, something that is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, if it is false, then some observation or experiment will produce a reproducible result that is in conflict with it. The EC will be this observation.

[DJBare]

CavScout wrote...

Why would anyone actually want to discuss something on a discussion board. It's madness, pure madness.....

But you are not discussing, all your posts consist of refuting IT without any backup, at least others against IT do add substance to their posts, your posts boil down to "you are wrong"

[KingZayd]

balance5050 wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Ive noticed that a good number anti IT people seldom cite real flaws in the theory. They just assert their position. Usually what they think is a flaw is a biased induced misunderstanding. IRONICALLY if you point that out then you're accused of making it up as you go along...yet they can't rebut the clarification. Lol

The usual tactic of conspiracy theorist everywhere.. prove their theory wrong or it right!

You should try supporting a theory you are advancing instead of demanding others disprove it.

Theres a whole thread on that.  And you can't prove a theory true.  That's a scientific fact.  You can only show evidence to support it...which there are threads devoted to...ad nauseam I might add.  All it takes is one out of 1 quadrillion or other ridiculously high number to flip gravitational theory on its head.  Impossible to prove it true. So unless u have a specific qualm then I'm not going to just vomit elements of it for the sake of doing so.

As for Shep being indoctrinated; why couldn't he be?  He's been exposed to do much reaper stuff that he's a good candadite .  He's also powerful.  That makes him a desirable one.

Indoctrination Theory is not scientific theory.... p.s. scientific theories need to be falsifiable.

But it is falsifiable. With EC.

Also, something that is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, if it is false, then some observation or experiment will produce a reproducible result that is in conflict with it. The EC will be this observation.

exactly. funnily enough IT predicted there would be an ending DLC.

IT will be confirmed or denied with the EC.

[Vox Draco]

DJBare wrote...

Navasha wrote...

People would have to blatantly turn a blind eye to all of the foreshadowing. Ever ask WHY so much foreshadowing is written in to the game?

But it is understandable why they are against IT, it would mean they never got the full game they paid for.

Hmm...if you don't own the Collector's Addition of ME3 you also own an incomplete game, as far as I am concerned...

And I wouldn't mind if there was more to come after the "ending" we currently have, as long as it is good, adds possible "happy endings" and closure to Shepard's epic story. The I.T. would be cool, because of the possibilites to rectify not only the stupid Starchild-scene, but also the entire "Priority:Earth"-mission, which is kinda weak compared to the rest of the game...

But do I really believe this happening? I did some weeks ago, but by now I doubt it. It seems more likely that Bioware truly screwed it at the end, and that all the foreshadowing to IT are simply leftovers from the original plan to implement IT, but in the end they decided against this end and plunged Starchild into it...

I still hope to be wrong, though...

[tractrpl]

If Shep was indoctrinated, why didn't the Prothean VI on thessia identify him as such? It identified TIM and Kai Leng as indoctrinated. IT might be better than the ending we're given, but it's not the true ending.

[balance5050]

tractrpl wrote...

If Shep was indoctrinated, why didn't the Prothean VI on thessia identify him as such? It identified TIM and Kai Leng as indoctrinated. IT might be better than the ending we're given, but it's not the true ending.

If you keep asking the same question, why don't you ever retain the answer? Shepard wasn't indoctrinated at that time. The VI's can't detect all indoctrination.