1357 réponses à ce sujet

[KevShep]

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Who wouldn't believe
 
A) the Devs used a voice because they liked it
 
over

the conspiracy theory that the voices were mixed to lay a deliberate trail of clues to hint at a game outcome that the company will not admit to.

B is so clearly the more believable answer.

 You are missing SSSOOOO much more info. The answer is when you look at everything.

Do you know how indoctrination works? if you want to move on to other evidence then I will be happy to as this is going nowhere if your just going to throw me a default answer with no backing to it.

Keep preaching brother! Perhaps you'll convert a few more of the gullible to your side.

PS: How can we move on when you can't even get started with this "evidence"? You need to support IT not demand it be debunked.

Are you crazy?......Ive only mentioned ONE bit of evidence and your acting like I should have proven it with this only bit. The way we CAN prove it is by moving on to other evidence!

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Creating connections between unrelated data to paint a picture of something is unhealthy. It's also not constructive to debate.

Also, the "mean either nothing or indoctrination" mantra is pretty pathetic. The false dilemma tripe has to stop.

Story's have points. The point of this story is NOT to "control" the reapers or turn everyone into robot people. You must finish the fight.

And if and when A.I. synthetics rise up, the galaxy will unite again.

They used the Citadel to surprise the galaxy, to keep everyone separated.

BECAUSE UNITED WE CAN BEAT THE REAPERS!

Follwing up a false dilemma fallacy with a non sequitur is probably not going to be very effective.

[Raiil]

balance5050 wrote...



But you see, that's the thing, there are dozens of odd anomlies that stand out to long time fans of the series. And if we just assume that there is no signicance, then it has all truly led no where, led to nothing.

So following that line of thought, dozens of things mean either nothing or indoctrination.

I'd  much faster beleive that all the anomlies mean that the reapers pulled a fast one then "nothing".

And if these things don't mean "nothing" or IT, then what do you think is the meaning of that puzzle of an ending?

Two things:

One is the issue of 'long term fans'. This game was marketed to be a great place to jump into the series, and they have purposely made it to help new players understand the world around them. Unfortunately, that didn't extend much to indoctrination.

Much of what we know- and quite a bit of evidence that the IT group touts- requires extensive knowledge of the first game, as well as the books. If BW is as good as writing as people say, it would behoove them to explain it much better so new players would be able to 'guess' at what's happening. Otherwise, new gamers are going to walk into a situation where they end up indoctrinated while not really understanding what's going on.


Two, you are assuming that there's a puzzle in the first place. Since we know that at some point, BW had to scrap a planned idea for creating a situation where Shepard was indoctrinated, would it not make sense for some parts of that to remain in the game? It wouldn't be the first time that's happened; we already have evidence of other gameplay mechanics and quests in game that had to be scrapped, but somehow remain in the files. If you played DA:O and you had the toolkit, you'll see the same thing in character descriptions and some cut dialogue- it was cut out of the game proper and isn't part of the canon, but remains in the files nonetheless.

[CavScout]

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Who wouldn't believe
 
A) the Devs used a voice because they liked it
 
over

the conspiracy theory that the voices were mixed to lay a deliberate trail of clues to hint at a game outcome that the company will not admit to.

B is so clearly the more believable answer.

 You are missing SSSOOOO much more info. The answer is when you look at everything.

Do you know how indoctrination works? if you want to move on to other evidence then I will be happy to as this is going nowhere if your just going to throw me a default answer with no backing to it.

Keep preaching brother! Perhaps you'll convert a few more of the gullible to your side.

PS: How can we move on when you can't even get started with this "evidence"? You need to support IT not demand it be debunked.

Are you crazy?......Ive only mentioned ONE bit of evidence and your acting like I should have proven it with this only bit. The way we CAN prove it is by moving on to other evidence!

You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

[KevShep]

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You are creating significance where none is evident. You are asked to provide evidence of importance and your answer is "but it is!" That's not evidence, that's faith.

But you see, that's the things, there are dozens of odd anomlies that stand out to long time fans of the series. And if we just assume that there is no signicance, then it has all truly led no where, led to nothing.

So following that line of thought, dozens of things mean either nothing or indoctrination.

I'd  much faster beleive that all the anomlies mean that the reapers pulled a fast one then "nothing".

And if these things don't mean "nothing" or IT, then what do you think is the meaning of that puzzle of an ending?

Creating connections between unrelated data to paint a picture of something is unhealthy. It's also not constructive to debate.

Also, the "mean either nothing or indoctrination" mantra is pretty pathetic. The false dilemma tripe has to stop.

 Your assuming again that the data is unrelated.  Again I ask...Do you know what indoctrination is and how it works?

Show how the data is related without first assuming Indoctrination Theory. You can't. Out here among the non-converted we call that circular reasoning.

First off dont say that I cant, because I can....This is why we are going nowhere with this. You need to listen and not assume before I say  something.

[CavScout]

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote..
Show how the data is related without first assuming Indoctrination Theory. You can't. Out here among the non-converted we call that circular reasoning.

First off dont say that I cant, because I can....This is why we are going nowhere with this. You need to listen and not assume before I say  something.

Until you do, I'll say you can't. By the way, you can't.

[KevShep]

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Who wouldn't believe
 
A) the Devs used a voice because they liked it
 
over

the conspiracy theory that the voices were mixed to lay a deliberate trail of clues to hint at a game outcome that the company will not admit to.

B is so clearly the more believable answer.

 You are missing SSSOOOO much more info. The answer is when you look at everything.

Do you know how indoctrination works? if you want to move on to other evidence then I will be happy to as this is going nowhere if your just going to throw me a default answer with no backing to it.

Keep preaching brother! Perhaps you'll convert a few more of the gullible to your side.

PS: How can we move on when you can't even get started with this "evidence"? You need to support IT not demand it be debunked.

Are you crazy?......Ive only mentioned ONE bit of evidence and your acting like I should have proven it with this only bit. The way we CAN prove it is by moving on to other evidence!

You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Creating connections between unrelated data to paint a picture of something is unhealthy. It's also not constructive to debate.

Also, the "mean either nothing or indoctrination" mantra is pretty pathetic. The false dilemma tripe has to stop.

Story's have points. The point of this story is NOT to "control" the reapers or turn everyone into robot people. You must finish the fight.

And if and when A.I. synthetics rise up, the galaxy will unite again.

They used the Citadel to surprise the galaxy, to keep everyone separated.

BECAUSE UNITED WE CAN BEAT THE REAPERS!

Follwing up a false dilemma fallacy with a non sequitur is probably not going to be very effective.

LOL! what is your point then, what side do you represent? Every fallacy you apply to me also applies to you, it's called hipocrisy. Basically you need to bring up evidence that represents the point you are trying to make because so far thereare just pages and pages of you calling everyone else wrong without providing evidence of such anomolies occuring ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE SERIES. That is how you can provide legitamacy to your point.

Go and look for evidence of prolific asset reuse ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE GAME. Or you could just avoid the issue again and copy/paste some wiki page.

[KevShep]

Valentia X wrote...

 BW had to scrap a planned idea for creating a situation where Shepard was indoctrinated, would it not make sense for some parts of that to remain in the game?

Wrong...The part that was srcaped was the control of shepard TAKEN away from you. You need to read it word for word because you can easly get it wrong. 

His statment proves that the I.T. was in the making. They just needed to find another way to pull it off.

[CavScout]

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

I am asking you to provide evidence to back-up your claim that the voice of the Catalyst is proof of Indocrination. This was your claim. I am asking you to prove it.

[balance5050]

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Who wouldn't believe
 
A) the Devs used a voice because they liked it
 
over

the conspiracy theory that the voices were mixed to lay a deliberate trail of clues to hint at a game outcome that the company will not admit to.

B is so clearly the more believable answer.

 You are missing SSSOOOO much more info. The answer is when you look at everything.

Do you know how indoctrination works? if you want to move on to other evidence then I will be happy to as this is going nowhere if your just going to throw me a default answer with no backing to it.

Keep preaching brother! Perhaps you'll convert a few more of the gullible to your side.

PS: How can we move on when you can't even get started with this "evidence"? You need to support IT not demand it be debunked.

Are you crazy?......Ive only mentioned ONE bit of evidence and your acting like I should have proven it with this only bit. The way we CAN prove it is by moving on to other evidence!

You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

This is true, the catalyst has both male and female Shep's voice embedded in with the kids voice.

[KevShep]

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote..
Show how the data is related without first assuming Indoctrination Theory. You can't. Out here among the non-converted we call that circular reasoning.

First off dont say that I cant, because I can....This is why we are going nowhere with this. You need to listen and not assume before I say  something.

Until you do, I'll say you can't. By the way, you can't.

 
Your not even interested in what I have to say if your already trolling me..."By the way, you can't"

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

I am asking you to provide evidence to back-up your claim that the voice of the Catalyst is proof of Indocrination. This was your claim. I am asking you to prove it.

Must we do everything for you? It's ok, I've been doing this since the game came out.


 

[DTKT]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

I am asking you to provide evidence to back-up your claim that the voice of the Catalyst is proof of Indocrination. This was your claim. I am asking you to prove it.

Must we do everything for you? It's ok, I've been doing this since the game came out.


 

This is going in circles.

To you, this represents firm proof that the IT is true.

To me, it means that Bioware used the 3 voices because it was sounding nice. Because it was cute to use M/F Shepard voice for the very last conversation in the game.

Btw, I have issues with your Sherlock quote. You didn't quite eliminate the impossible. Bioware could have ran out of time and rushed the endings. There, the possible still exists.

Modifié par DTKT, 07 mai 2012 - 03:34 .

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Creating connections between unrelated data to paint a picture of something is unhealthy. It's also not constructive to debate.

Also, the "mean either nothing or indoctrination" mantra is pretty pathetic. The false dilemma tripe has to stop.

Story's have points. The point of this story is NOT to "control" the reapers or turn everyone into robot people. You must finish the fight.

And if and when A.I. synthetics rise up, the galaxy will unite again.

They used the Citadel to surprise the galaxy, to keep everyone separated.

BECAUSE UNITED WE CAN BEAT THE REAPERS!

Follwing up a false dilemma fallacy with a non sequitur is probably not going to be very effective.

LOL! what is your point then, what side do you represent? Every fallacy you apply to me also applies to you, it's called hipocrisy.

 
I think you need to look up hypocrisy. Maybe then you'll understand why you are using it wrong.

Basically you need to bring up evidence that represents the point you are trying to make because so far thereare just pages and pages of you calling everyone else wrong without providing evidence of such anomolies occuring ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE SERIES. That is how you can provide legitamacy to your point.

That's not how this works. You are making a claim (IT) and you are tasked with proving it. You don't get to demand that others disprove it or otherwise you claim is valid. That's not how it works.

Go and look for evidence of prolific asset reuse ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE GAME. Or you could just avoid the issue again and copy/paste some wiki page.

Again, this is not evidence for IT and is the very example of a false dilemma.

[balance5050]

DTKT wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

I am asking you to provide evidence to back-up your claim that the voice of the Catalyst is proof of Indocrination. This was your claim. I am asking you to prove it.

Must we do everything for you? It's ok, I've been doing this since the game came out.


 

This is going in circles.

To you, this represents firm proof that the IT is true.

To me, it means that Bioware used the 3 voices because it was sounding nice. Because it was cute to use M/F Shepard voice for the very last conversation in the game.

I was only providing what he was asking for, please stop acting like you know what's happening here.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

I am asking you to provide evidence to back-up your claim that the voice of the Catalyst is proof of Indocrination. This was your claim. I am asking you to prove it.

Must we do everything for you? It's ok, I've been doing this since the game came out.


 

You linked the wrong video. You said you had evidence.

[KevShep]

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

I am asking you to provide evidence to back-up your claim that the voice of the Catalyst is proof of Indocrination. This was your claim. I am asking you to prove it.

Fine...If your ready to move on then ok...

Second bit of evidence, shepards dreams

The rachni queen mentioned indoctrination like see was seeing oily shadows and in shepards dreams we see oily shadows of people.

Indoctrination also has people hearing whisperings in the mind (as per codex) in shepards dreams we hear our squadmates whispering our name and if the dialogue is on-screen you see them labled as "whisperings" in the exact way the codex mentions them.

The little by is only veiwed by shepard and no one else the entire time. I will get into that one more but first the other two.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Creating connections between unrelated data to paint a picture of something is unhealthy. It's also not constructive to debate.

Also, the "mean either nothing or indoctrination" mantra is pretty pathetic. The false dilemma tripe has to stop.

Story's have points. The point of this story is NOT to "control" the reapers or turn everyone into robot people. You must finish the fight.

And if and when A.I. synthetics rise up, the galaxy will unite again.

They used the Citadel to surprise the galaxy, to keep everyone separated.

BECAUSE UNITED WE CAN BEAT THE REAPERS!

Follwing up a false dilemma fallacy with a non sequitur is probably not going to be very effective.

LOL! what is your point then, what side do you represent? Every fallacy you apply to me also applies to you, it's called hipocrisy.

 
I think you need to look up hypocrisy. Maybe then you'll understand why you are using it wrong.

Basically you need to bring up evidence that represents the point you are trying to make because so far thereare just pages and pages of you calling everyone else wrong without providing evidence of such anomolies occuring ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE SERIES. That is how you can provide legitamacy to your point.

That's not how this works. You are making a claim (IT) and you are tasked with proving it. You don't get to demand that others disprove it or otherwise you claim is valid. That's not how it works.

Go and look for evidence of prolific asset reuse ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE GAME. Or you could just avoid the issue again and copy/paste some wiki page.

Again, this is not evidence for IT and is the very example of a false dilemma.

So you can't provide any evidence that proves I.T. false then? Didn't think so......

Care to refute why they're are reflections of trees on the citadel?

http://i.imgur.com/bK9Vv.jpg

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

DTKT wrote...
This is going in circles.

To you, this represents firm proof that the IT is true.

To me, it means that Bioware used the 3 voices because it was sounding nice. Because it was cute to use M/F Shepard voice for the very last conversation in the game.

I was only providing what he was asking for, please stop acting like you know what's happening here.

There is irony in you saying that.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

DTKT wrote...
This is going in circles.

To you, this represents firm proof that the IT is true.

To me, it means that Bioware used the 3 voices because it was sounding nice. Because it was cute to use M/F Shepard voice for the very last conversation in the game.

I was only providing what he was asking for, please stop acting like you know what's happening here.

There is irony in you saying that.

Oh yeah youre right, thought you wanted evidence that Shepards voice was embedded with the kids.

[CavScout]

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You haven't even offered up "evidence". And what you offered up doesn't point to Indoctrination. You don't get to just "move on" because you failed. Finish what you started.

You are Crazy if you think that Iam going to prove the I.T. with this ONE bit of evidence! I cant finish this if your not willing to listen. There is more info and it all points to the catalsyt and the catalyst has shepards voice.

I am asking you to provide evidence to back-up your claim that the voice of the Catalyst is proof of Indocrination. This was your claim. I am asking you to prove it.

Fine...If your ready to move on then ok...

Second bit of evidence, shepards dreams

The rachni queen mentioned indoctrination like see was seeing oily shadows and in shepards dreams we see oily shadows of people.

Indoctrination also has people hearing whisperings in the mind (as per codex) in shepards dreams we hear our squadmates whispering our name and if the dialogue is on-screen you see them labled as "whisperings" in the exact way the codex mentions them.

The little by is only veiwed by shepard and no one else the entire time. I will get into that one more but first the other two.

Is this where you just throw out "evidence" at a rapid rate hoping we forget how the previous example was utterly devoid of support for IT?

I mean really, you are not going to claim that because Shep dreams it is proof of indocrination?

[KevShep]

CavScout wrote...

here you go buddy..

[CavScout]

KevShep wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

 BW had to scrap a planned idea for creating a situation where Shepard was indoctrinated, would it not make sense for some parts of that to remain in the game?

Wrong...The part that was srcaped was the control of shepard TAKEN away from you. You need to read it word for word because you can easly get it wrong. 

His statment proves that the I.T. was in the making. They just needed to find another way to pull it off.

If you read it word for word, you'll notice that indoctrination isn't even mentioned.

[Taboo]

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

 BW had to scrap a planned idea for creating a situation where Shepard was indoctrinated, would it not make sense for some parts of that to remain in the game?

Wrong...The part that was srcaped was the control of shepard TAKEN away from you. You need to read it word for word because you can easly get it wrong. 

His statment proves that the I.T. was in the making. They just needed to find another way to pull it off.

If you read it word for word, you'll notice that indoctrination isn't even mentioned.

You can't reason with these people. Don't  try.