622 réponses à ce sujet

[Makrys]

Unschuld wrote...

 Funny thing is that Indoc theory is built on a litany of circumstantial evidence collected from clues given in all three games. Its opponents constantly claim that the theorists are grasping at straws, interpreting bugs and irrelevant information as proof for the theory that isn't really there. Whenever they find any tiny bit of circumstantial evidence that *might* contradict it, they vehemently claim that Indoc theory has been "blown out of the water" and "proven false" yet again. Yet, when some Bioware employee posts something that might support Indoctrination, they say that Bioware is just lying again. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this?

What Gamble said in the tweet is not concrete evidence either way. He stated an opinion. Depending on how you interpret it, Gamble himself might be "indoctrinated" and actually helping the theory. All of this, on both sides, is still just conjecture at this point and BOTH camps would be foolish to take it as otherwise.

Very well, said. Thank you for that. No they don't see the hypocrisy in it, because they simply don't want to believe that Bioware actually ISN'T a group of idiots. It's easier to suggest that a company f***** you over and are just lame ass selfish losers, than it is to admit that maybe they have a deeper meaning in mind and that you just need to wait and see what they do.

[dreman9999]

x

Modifié par dreman9999, 26 avril 2012 - 06:37 .

[matthewmi]

IT is very odd, Bioware releases a game without a true ending? What about people who don't have an internet connection they'd never get the "real" ending that would be released later. I do feel bad for people who somehow think synthesis is the best ending, since it seems rather ethically and morally suspect.

[dreman9999]

matthewmi wrote...

IT is very odd, Bioware releases a game without a true ending? What about people who don't have an internet connection they'd never get the "real" ending that would be released later. I do feel bad for people who somehow think synthesis is the best ending, since it seems rather ethically and morally suspect.

People with out internect connection would not be able to compline. Why should I care about their problems?

[balance5050]

matthewmi wrote...

IT is very odd, Bioware releases a game without a true ending? What about people who don't have an internet connection they'd never get the "real" ending that would be released later. I do feel bad for people who somehow think synthesis is the best ending, since it seems rather ethically and morally suspect.

Those same people can't play Diablo 3. "The Arrival" wasn't available in every country. The Dragonball MMO is Asia only. We all have problems.

[Makrys]

dreman9999 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

 Funny thing is that Indoc theory is built on a litany of circumstantial evidence collected from clues given in all three games. Its opponents constantly claim that the theorists are grasping at straws, interpreting bugs and irrelevant information as proof for the theory that isn't really there. Whenever they find any tiny bit of circumstantial evidence that *might* contradict it, they vehemently claim that Indoc theory has been "blown out of the water" and "proven false" yet again. Yet, when some Bioware employee posts something that might support Indoctrination, they say that Bioware is just lying again. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this?

What Gamble said in the tweet is not concrete evidence either way. He stated an opinion. Depending on how you interpret it, Gamble himself might be "indoctrinated" and actually helping the theory. All of this, on both sides, is still just conjecture at this point and BOTH camps would be foolish to take it as otherwise.

Very well, said. Thank you for that. No they don't see the hypocrisy in it, because they simply don't want to believe that Bioware actually ISN'T a group of idiots. It's easier to suggest that a company f***** you over and are just lame ass selfish losers, than it is to admit that maybe they have a deeper meaning in mind and that you just need to wait and see what they do.

Do someone here forget that bw has a history of tricking the player with it's plot and twist. Really, if bw was what you sy they were then they would be charging for EC....Really, you're just letting anger blind you.

... who are you referring to? Both of us agree with your point of view...

Modifié par Makrys, 26 avril 2012 - 06:33 .

[balance5050]

Makrys wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

 Funny thing is that Indoc theory is built on a litany of circumstantial evidence collected from clues given in all three games. Its opponents constantly claim that the theorists are grasping at straws, interpreting bugs and irrelevant information as proof for the theory that isn't really there. Whenever they find any tiny bit of circumstantial evidence that *might* contradict it, they vehemently claim that Indoc theory has been "blown out of the water" and "proven false" yet again. Yet, when some Bioware employee posts something that might support Indoctrination, they say that Bioware is just lying again. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this?

What Gamble said in the tweet is not concrete evidence either way. He stated an opinion. Depending on how you interpret it, Gamble himself might be "indoctrinated" and actually helping the theory. All of this, on both sides, is still just conjecture at this point and BOTH camps would be foolish to take it as otherwise.

Very well, said. Thank you for that. No they don't see the hypocrisy in it, because they simply don't want to believe that Bioware actually ISN'T a group of idiots. It's easier to suggest that a company f***** you over and are just lame ass selfish losers, than it is to admit that maybe they have a deeper meaning in mind and that you just need to wait and see what they do.

Do someone here forget that bw has a history of tricking the player with it's plot and twist. Really, if bw was what you sy they were then they would be charging for EC....Really, you're just letting anger blind you.

... who are you referring to? Both of us agree with you...

Yeah, CALM DOWN dreman9999! You're not alone.

[NoSpin]

matthewmi wrote...

IT is very odd, Bioware releases a game without a true ending? What about people who don't have an internet connection they'd never get the "real" ending that would be released later. I do feel bad for people who somehow think synthesis is the best ending, since it seems rather ethically and morally suspect.

Empire Strikes Back ends with Han Solo in carbonite, Lando going off to find him, Vader being revealed as Luke's father....and a lot of unanswered questions. A cliffhanger. There is an ending to ME3, it is a cliffhanger.

[Makrys]

Balance 5050 wrote...
Yeah, CALM DOWN dreman9999! You're not alone.

Turians... 

Modifié par Makrys, 26 avril 2012 - 06:36 .

[dreman9999]

Makrys wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

 Funny thing is that Indoc theory is built on a litany of circumstantial evidence collected from clues given in all three games. Its opponents constantly claim that the theorists are grasping at straws, interpreting bugs and irrelevant information as proof for the theory that isn't really there. Whenever they find any tiny bit of circumstantial evidence that *might* contradict it, they vehemently claim that Indoc theory has been "blown out of the water" and "proven false" yet again. Yet, when some Bioware employee posts something that might support Indoctrination, they say that Bioware is just lying again. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this?

What Gamble said in the tweet is not concrete evidence either way. He stated an opinion. Depending on how you interpret it, Gamble himself might be "indoctrinated" and actually helping the theory. All of this, on both sides, is still just conjecture at this point and BOTH camps would be foolish to take it as otherwise.

Very well, said. Thank you for that. No they don't see the hypocrisy in it, because they simply don't want to believe that Bioware actually ISN'T a group of idiots. It's easier to suggest that a company f***** you over and are just lame ass selfish losers, than it is to admit that maybe they have a deeper meaning in mind and that you just need to wait and see what they do.

Do someone here forget that bw has a history of tricking the player with it's plot and twist. Really, if bw was what you sy they were then they would be charging for EC....Really, you're just letting anger blind you.

... who are you referring to? Both of us agree with your point of view...

.....Oh, your being sarcasitic....Sorry, It did not dawn on me.

[MattFini]

balance5050 wrote...

matthewmi wrote...

IT is very odd, Bioware releases a game without a true ending? What about people who don't have an internet connection they'd never get the "real" ending that would be released later. I do feel bad for people who somehow think synthesis is the best ending, since it seems rather ethically and morally suspect.

Those same people can't play Diablo 3. "The Arrival" wasn't available in every country. The Dragonball MMO is Asia only. We all have problems.

Right.  Plus, they do HAVE an ending on the disc.  It's just a terrible one.

[balance5050]

Makrys wrote...

Balance 5050 wrote...
Yeah, CALM DOWN dreman9999! You're not alone.

Turians... 

Hey, we just get a little excited sometimes! Not all of us can be proper and perfect Asari's 

[zambingo]

Shaigunjoe wrote...

I think parts of indoctrination theory still hold, Shep was definitely under indoc attacks throughout the game. I never liked the whole 'indoc means destroy is the best ending' argument.

This.

Shep was definitely under an Indoctrination Assault (for lack of a better term) during the entire game and one that really ramped up at the end.

That doesn't mean that any ending is more valid than the other. It also doesn't mean that what happened at the end(s) is some hallucination. Even imparied, even if some stuff is in Shep's mind, that doesn't mean Shep isn't actually, physically manipulating devices on the Crucible which then produce each end.

Also everything about the endings give answers but leave more questions. Yay for possibilities?

Check it:

Control makes the Reapers leave, at least for that moment. But could they reassert themselves?

Synthesis makes everything Borg, but natural looking not horrific robo-zombie borg. And I do mean everything, even Joker's hat. What's up with that? Oooo yeah.[/saturday night live]

Destroy makes the Reapers go boom, implies Geth and EDI should go boom but doesn't show it. Destroy does outright show that without high enough EMS destruction happens on just massive levels (implying perhaps High EMS = a better working Crucible).

Normandy crash... okay... where dey go? how'd [insert name] get on board?

Stargazing? How far in the future is that? Must be far if all ends can still lead to happy story time.

In regards to the Relays exploderating, we don't know how the tech works or what the Crucible did. Comparitively Star Trek's USS Enterprise warp engines can explode in massive levels of destruction, so yes Relays going Nova and killing untold kazillions is valid. However the Enterprise's warp engines can also be destroyed in a way that doesn't produce that type of massive explody force of doom, so Go Team Optimism?

Modifié par zambingo, 26 avril 2012 - 06:40 .

[Lyrebon]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Hey guys I brought new straws, the old ones were getting sweaty from all that grasping.




I find it surprising that people are still clinging to the indoctrination excuse. If you read the ending as written by Mac Walters, all on one sheet of paper, you'd see indoctrination is nowhere to be found move on guys...

-Polite

Yes, but as we've all established, Mac Walters is a terrible writer and we - the fans - are forced to envision the ending in a way that doesn't demean our intelligence and make us want to throttle a virtual character against all common sense of the impossibility of it.

[DiebytheSword]

NoSpin wrote...

matthewmi wrote...

IT is very odd, Bioware releases a game without a true ending? What about people who don't have an internet connection they'd never get the "real" ending that would be released later. I do feel bad for people who somehow think synthesis is the best ending, since it seems rather ethically and morally suspect.

Empire Strikes Back ends with Han Solo in carbonite, Lando going off to find him, Vader being revealed as Luke's father....and a lot of unanswered questions. A cliffhanger. There is an ending to ME3, it is a cliffhanger.

Wow, that's a terrible comparison.  Try again with Return of the Jedi and tell me what you come up with.  Mass Effect is the last game in a trilogy.  Not the second, like Empire.

[Unit-Alpha]

Lol, they are moronic if they think synthesis is in any way better.

[MisterJB]

It needs to be taken behind the barn.

[dreman9999]

zambingo wrote...

Shaigunjoe wrote...

I think parts of indoctrination theory still hold, Shep was definitely under indoc attacks throughout the game. I never liked the whole 'indoc means destroy is the best ending' argument.

This.

Shep was definitely under an Indoctrination Assault (for lack of a better term) during the entire game and one that really ramped up at the end.

That doesn't mean that any ending is more valid than the other. It also doesn't mean that what happened at the end(s) is some hallucination. Even imparied, even if some stuff is in Shep's mind, that doesn't mean Shep isn't actually, physically manipulating devices on the Crucible which then produce each end.

Also everything about the endings give answers but leave more questions. Yay for possibilities?

Check it:

Control makes the Reapers leave, at least for that moment. But could they reassert themselves?

Synthesis makes everything Borg, but natural looking not horrific robo-zombie borg. And I do mean everything, even Joker's hat. What's up with that? Oooo yeah.[/saturday night live]

Destroy makes the Reapers go boom, implies Geth and EDI should go boom but. Outright shows that without high enough EMS destruction happens on just massive levels (implying perhaps High EMS = a better working Crucible).

Normandy crash... okay... where dey go? how'd [insert name] get on board?

Stargazing? How far in the future is that? Must be far if all ends can still lead to happy story time.

In regards to the Relays exploderating, we don't know how the tech works or what the Crucible did. Comparitively Star Trek's USS Enterprise warp engines can explode in massive levels of destruction, so yes Relays going Nova and killing untold kazillions is valid. However the Enterprise's warp engines can also be destroyed in a way that doesn't produce that type of massive explody force of doom, so Go Team Optimism?

I personlly think the starchild is not tell the truth. There is no proof that they thing new he brings up is true.

[Makrys]

dreman9999 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

 Funny thing is that Indoc theory is built on a litany of circumstantial evidence collected from clues given in all three games. Its opponents constantly claim that the theorists are grasping at straws, interpreting bugs and irrelevant information as proof for the theory that isn't really there. Whenever they find any tiny bit of circumstantial evidence that *might* contradict it, they vehemently claim that Indoc theory has been "blown out of the water" and "proven false" yet again. Yet, when some Bioware employee posts something that might support Indoctrination, they say that Bioware is just lying again. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this?

What Gamble said in the tweet is not concrete evidence either way. He stated an opinion. Depending on how you interpret it, Gamble himself might be "indoctrinated" and actually helping the theory. All of this, on both sides, is still just conjecture at this point and BOTH camps would be foolish to take it as otherwise.

Very well, said. Thank you for that. No they don't see the hypocrisy in it, because they simply don't want to believe that Bioware actually ISN'T a group of idiots. It's easier to suggest that a company f***** you over and are just lame ass selfish losers, than it is to admit that maybe they have a deeper meaning in mind and that you just need to wait and see what they do.

Do someone here forget that bw has a history of tricking the player with it's plot and twist. Really, if bw was what you sy they were then they would be charging for EC....Really, you're just letting anger blind you.

... who are you referring to? Both of us agree with your point of view...

.....Oh, your being sarcasitic....Sorry, It did not dawn on me.

WHAT?! I'm confused. We were not being sarcastic. If you're confused, please detail what you don't agree with us on. I think we do agree... not sure what is going on here. 

[balance5050]

DiebytheSword wrote...

NoSpin wrote...

matthewmi wrote...

IT is very odd, Bioware releases a game without a true ending? What about people who don't have an internet connection they'd never get the "real" ending that would be released later. I do feel bad for people who somehow think synthesis is the best ending, since it seems rather ethically and morally suspect.

Empire Strikes Back ends with Han Solo in carbonite, Lando going off to find him, Vader being revealed as Luke's father....and a lot of unanswered questions. A cliffhanger. There is an ending to ME3, it is a cliffhanger.

Wow, that's a terrible comparison.  Try again with Return of the Jedi and tell me what you come up with.  Mass Effect is the last game in a trilogy.  Not the second, like Empire.

How about Matrix Revolutions. Lot's of unanswered questions there.

[dreman9999]

MisterJB wrote...

It needs to be taken behind the barn.

Only BW can do that and they have yet to do it. I wonder why?:innocent:

[Biotic_Warlock]

one of these threads again.

[MegumiAzusa]

Makrys wrote...

WHAT?! I'm confused. We were not being sarcastic. If you're confused, please detail what you don't agree with us on. I think we do agree... not sure what is going on here. 

My guess is your double negation confused him.

[dreman9999]

Makrys wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

 Funny thing is that Indoc theory is built on a litany of circumstantial evidence collected from clues given in all three games. Its opponents constantly claim that the theorists are grasping at straws, interpreting bugs and irrelevant information as proof for the theory that isn't really there. Whenever they find any tiny bit of circumstantial evidence that *might* contradict it, they vehemently claim that Indoc theory has been "blown out of the water" and "proven false" yet again. Yet, when some Bioware employee posts something that might support Indoctrination, they say that Bioware is just lying again. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this?

What Gamble said in the tweet is not concrete evidence either way. He stated an opinion. Depending on how you interpret it, Gamble himself might be "indoctrinated" and actually helping the theory. All of this, on both sides, is still just conjecture at this point and BOTH camps would be foolish to take it as otherwise.

Very well, said. Thank you for that. No they don't see the hypocrisy in it, because they simply don't want to believe that Bioware actually ISN'T a group of idiots. It's easier to suggest that a company f***** you over and are just lame ass selfish losers, than it is to admit that maybe they have a deeper meaning in mind and that you just need to wait and see what they do.

Do someone here forget that bw has a history of tricking the player with it's plot and twist. Really, if bw was what you sy they were then they would be charging for EC....Really, you're just letting anger blind you.

... who are you referring to? Both of us agree with your point of view...

.....Oh, your being sarcasitic....Sorry, It did not dawn on me.

WHAT?! I'm confused. We were not being sarcastic. If you're confused, please detail what you don't agree with us on. I think we do agree... not sure what is going on here. 

Just ingore my comment, I thught you meant something else...I understand now , sorry.

[Mr. Big Pimpin]

balance5050 wrote...

How about Matrix Revolutions. Lot's of unanswered questions there.

And the ending of that movie was so well-received, too.