622 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

balance5050 wrote...

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.

Inception, blade runner and total recall have open unawnsered endings as well.

[Makrys]

dreman9999 wrote...

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.

Alrighty then. 

[NoSpin]

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.

You are absolutely right that if ME3 is all that's left it is a TERRIBLE comparison. But IT says either big DLC is coming OR ME4. "But Bioware said this is the end!". Yeah, they have said lots of things. The possible existence of a ME4 makes that comparison valid, until proven otherwise.

[Tal_Elmar]

"Hey, Mike, why won't you come here and debate with the fans, instead of twitting some clever phrases from time to time?"

Modifié par Tal_Elmar, 26 avril 2012 - 06:49 .

[dreman9999]

Mr. Big Pimpin wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

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

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

It wasn't the ending that made it bad...It was the entire movie and the ending of reloaded.

[MegumiAzusa]

ME4 is certainly possible, just without Shep. Guess what the legend save is for?

Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 26 avril 2012 - 06:47 .

[dreman9999]

Tal_Elmar wrote...

"Hey, Mac, why won't you come here and debate with the fans, instead of twitting some clever phrases from time to time?"

He's using his twitter? I would think it would be spammed by a truck load of hate mail by now.

[Makrys]

What's funny is that Hudson hasn't been seen on his twitter since March. Hiding in the hills no doubt.

[FatalX7.0]

I'd rather have a movie with an open ending because I didn't participate in it.

[Taboo]

dreman9999 wrote...

Tal_Elmar wrote...

"Hey, Mac, why won't you come here and debate with the fans, instead of twitting some clever phrases from time to time?"

He's using his twitter? I would think it would be spammed by a truck load of hate mail by now.

He has. THE HUMOR INVOLVED MAKES ME LAUGH.

[dreman9999]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

ME4 is certainly possible, just without Shep. Guess what the legend save is for?

I imation ME4 would be about the unification ofthe galexy decades or centries afterthe end of ME3. The galexy is shattered but communication is up via qec. But the shattered galexy allow dangerous ideals and doctrins to come to place and a new threat in place as well...An up rising Yagh empire. And we have a new game about thegalatic civil war or it can be called the new unification wars.

[Cadence of the Planes]

Damn, what a blow to the ribs! Oof! Another smash to the face! Where next?!

[DJBare]

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.

How do you start the game without internet connection, or are consoles users not required to login initially?

[MadRabbit999]

DJBare 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.

How do you start the game without internet connection, or are consoles users not required to login initially?

They said they won't be adding new endings or changing the current ones, so whatever you saw, that is it, if IT is true then they left a great saga unfinished at the last moment of the fight... which would be like watching Lord of the Rings, a moment before Frodo makes his decision wether to throw the ring or not, and then immediate scene  cut to Sam and his kids.

[Unschuld]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Haven't you all figured out that Green is the canon ending for the next Mass Effect series? That's why its the most difficult to reach. 

Wrong.

Red ending with the Shepard breath scene is the hardest to reach.

Depending on your interpretation, that's either a check in the box for indoc theory/hinted continuation of the story by other means or a completely meaningless scene that's just "thrown in there" for no reason whatsoever. The former makes more logical sense.

Modifié par Unschuld, 26 avril 2012 - 07:41 .

[matthewmi]

DJBare 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.

How do you start the game without internet connection, or are consoles users not required to login initially?

You don't need a connection on a console unless you're trying to register your code for online play.

[SubAstris]

Good post. Of course, many IT theorists will just say that it doesn't matter, however none have presented a very convincing reasons for why IT can still be true. Some say BW are playing games, but if so, how could you ever find out they are telling the truth? If IT is true, then he could have just have said, "wait and see", or "we want the players to decide", but instead he gave a decisive response assuming the ending to be taken as face value

[Jaron Oberyn]

Lol Dreman if that's the best response you can come up with to my post then I feel sorry for you. Don't take this the wrong way, but I can't help but chuckle at the great lengths you guys go to justify this "theory". But if it makes you feel better about the endings, what can I say?

-Polite

[IronSabbath88]

SubAstris wrote...

Good post. Of course, many IT theorists will just say that it doesn't matter, however none have presented a very convincing reasons for why IT can still be true. Some say BW are playing games, but if so, how could you ever find out they are telling the truth? If IT is true, then he could have just have said, "wait and see", or "we want the players to decide", but instead he gave a decisive response assuming the ending to be taken as face value

But didn't he say he didn't want to be prescriptive?

Isn't basically telling you that the ending is literal a slight spoiler for EC? There's still a good possibility that we're just being toyed with.

[Darth_Trethon]

SubAstris wrote...

Good post. Of course, many IT theorists will just say that it doesn't matter, however none have presented a very convincing reasons for why IT can still be true. Some say BW are playing games, but if so, how could you ever find out they are telling the truth? If IT is true, then he could have just have said, "wait and see", or "we want the players to decide", but instead he gave a decisive response assuming the ending to be taken as face value

You don't....not until the content is releases and we all see exactly what the EC contains. Also note that Gamble carefully chooses his words and says that "personally"....that means little, we have no idea where most of the team stands aside frrom the disgraced Casey and Walters.

Patrick Weekes refused to respond to the IT question by saying that any reply on the matter would be too spoilerish.

[Darth_Trethon]

matthewmi wrote...

DJBare 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.

How do you start the game without internet connection, or are consoles users not required to login initially?

You don't need a connection on a console unless you're trying to register your code for online play.

Indeed....NO Origin BS for us...we can play offline long before logging in to EA servers and we are never required to install Origin at all.

[SubAstris]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Good post. Of course, many IT theorists will just say that it doesn't matter, however none have presented a very convincing reasons for why IT can still be true. Some say BW are playing games, but if so, how could you ever find out they are telling the truth? If IT is true, then he could have just have said, "wait and see", or "we want the players to decide", but instead he gave a decisive response assuming the ending to be taken as face value

But didn't he say he didn't want to be prescriptive?

Isn't basically telling you that the ending is literal a slight spoiler for EC? There's still a good possibility that we're just being toyed with.

He isn't being prescriptive, he is expressing an opinion on a single matter. He doesn't say destroy is wrong, but "personally" he wouldn't choose it. By expressing such an opinion, he is assuming the ending to be taken at face-value.

Well not really, we still have very little idea what is going to happen in the EC outside of providing clarification. If it is implied by his words that the ending is literal, so be it. If BW want to drop hints, that is their choice. But to assume that he is "playing with you" is unlikely, but is perhaps the only thing IT theorists have

[dreman9999]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Lol Dreman if that's the best response you can come up with to my post then I feel sorry for you. Don't take this the wrong way, but I can't help but chuckle at the great lengths you guys go to justify this "theory". But if it makes you feel better about the endings, what can I say?

-Polite

Best reponse? Realy? I need to comment on something that made to be vague that you are using to try to disprove a theory with sound evidence? I'm sorry,what you areusing dispoves nothing, if it wasfalse BW would have debunkedit many times over. Please, use something that clear stated IT is false, not something that made to speculate. 
And still havn't dispove the facts I put up.

[SubAstris]

Darth_Trethon wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Good post. Of course, many IT theorists will just say that it doesn't matter, however none have presented a very convincing reasons for why IT can still be true. Some say BW are playing games, but if so, how could you ever find out they are telling the truth? If IT is true, then he could have just have said, "wait and see", or "we want the players to decide", but instead he gave a decisive response assuming the ending to be taken as face value

You don't....not until the content is releases and we all see exactly what the EC contains. Also note that Gamble carefully chooses his words and says that "personally"....that means little, we have no idea where most of the team stands aside frrom the disgraced Casey and Walters.

Patrick Weekes refused to respond to the IT question by saying that any reply on the matter would be too spoilerish.

Presumably Gamble would stand by any creative decision BW make in regards to the ending (he would lose his job otherwise). The implication by using the word "personally" is that he does not like the ending of destroy taken at face value, because of the inevitable death of synthetics that will ensue. He is assuming the ending to be taken literally. For IT to work or be a possibility, Gamble would have said nothing, deflected the question or most unlikely, said destroy was the best option (as most IT theorists agree it is). However, such an event did not occur, even fact the exact opposite of what would have shown IT to be true would have happened. I think such comment from many IT theorists (I am not necessarily implicating you) shows a level of hypocrisy; if Gamble said something which alleged IT, then they would be screaming to the rafters that there was undeniable evidence, but now of course they can only deny and say that BW is playing games

I frankly don't care what Weekes said, we have evidence from another valid source; if he wants to give a little clue as to what actually happened in the end, or accidentally gave it away, then that is his choice and or problem. I can only go where the evidence leads, and seems as though Gamble was saying this in the context of the ending being taken at face value

[Cucobr]

it is just his opinion.

he likes of Space Magic.

do what? =/

Modifié par Cucobr, 26 avril 2012 - 10:16 .