286 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

Elyiia wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, I mean, wouldn't them tell people the ending is not real be pure PR as well?
Also, your not getting the concept to where they would make this annoucement. They mostly do via twitter and all forums. They also, could of said this at Pax as well.

No, it wouldn't. Their PR team is preventing Bioware from saying anything so they can fix the situation in the best way. It would have been a completely different situation.

They mostly do it via Twitter/all forums, that means they can't just post it here until more people have finished and posted it in a more public manner and altogether avoided this ragefest?

It's not the pr team preventing any thing BW says. It's them just making sure things don't get out of control. It's the devs that decide what is what. Your missing the point that they are focus on making EC, which they said will explian everything. If IT is true and being used in EC, they couldn't say anything about it less they spoil what will happen in EC.

It's not a simple mostly....All the so call"pr move " are from twitter post. Also, anything they state still is a spoiler on EC. They clearly want us to wait.

[BDelacroix]

No I don't have to admit it. It isn't clever. It would be a waste of our time and and disrepsectful to the reader (player).

[Elyiia]

dreman9999 wrote...
It's not the pr team preventing any thing BW says. It's them just making sure things don't get out of control. It's the devs that decide what is what. Your missing the point that they are focus on making EC, which they said will explian everything. If IT is true and being used in EC, they couldn't say anything about it less they spoil what will happen in EC.

It's not a simple mostly....All the so call"pr move " are from twitter post. Also, anything they state still is a spoiler on EC. They clearly want us to wait.

I can assure you that the PR team is preventing anything from being said until everything is set in stone. It's basic PR stuff.
I don't know why you are bring EC into it when I specifically said if it was what they intended, they would have said so from the start. Aka before EC was even thought of.

But since you are bringing in the EC:

Are there going to be more/different endings or ending DLCs in the future?
No.
BioWare strongly believes in the team's artistic vision for the end of
this arc of the Mass Effect franchise. The extended cut DLC will expand
on the existing endings, but no further ending DLC is planned.

That pretty much kills any plan for IT seeing as to use it would be a new ending.

[dreman9999]

BDelacroix wrote...

No I don't have to admit it. It isn't clever. It would be a waste of our time and and disrepsectful to the reader (player).

Do you know how indoctrination works? It's all about tricking the person to doing what the reaper want. You can say we as the player is Shepard, and to indoctrinate Shepard is to indoctrinate us. No matter how you cut it , it is a clear idea.

[dreman9999]

Elyiia wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
It's not the pr team preventing any thing BW says. It's them just making sure things don't get out of control. It's the devs that decide what is what. Your missing the point that they are focus on making EC, which they said will explian everything. If IT is true and being used in EC, they couldn't say anything about it less they spoil what will happen in EC.

It's not a simple mostly....All the so call"pr move " are from twitter post. Also, anything they state still is a spoiler on EC. They clearly want us to wait.

I can assure you that the PR team is preventing anything from being said until everything is set in stone. It's basic PR stuff.
I don't know why you are bring EC into it when I specifically said if it was what they intended, they would have said so from the start. Aka before EC was even thought of.

But since you are bringing in the EC:

Are there going to be more/different endings or ending DLCs in the future?
No.
BioWare strongly believes in the team's artistic vision for the end of
this arc of the Mass Effect franchise. The extended cut DLC will expand
on the existing endings, but no further ending DLC is planned.

That pretty much kills any plan for IT seeing as to use it would be a new ending.

1. No, you can't. You not with BW, have inside info, nor on the pr team. You can't 
assure  anything.
2. No, it doesn't. Fot IT to work, the ending can't be change, just added on. Any form of clearity applied to the ending would be adding things on.

Modifié par dreman9999, 09 mai 2012 - 01:28 .

[Elyiia]

dreman9999 wrote...

1. No, you can't. You not with BW, have inside info, nor on the pr team. You can't arrue anything.
2. No, it doesn't. Fot IT to work, the ending can't be change, just added on. Any form of clearity applied to the ending would be adding things on.

Yes, I can. It's basic PR stuff. Anyone with any history in business could tell you this.
Yes, it does. If IT is true then the game doesn't have an ending. Therefor any ending is new.

And of course the most damning evidence against IT, you can't even come up with a single theory. Even the main thread has multiple theories because no single theory can explain everything.

[GreenFlag]

beginning of the true end

[dreman9999]

Elyiia wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. No, you can't. You not with BW, have inside info, nor on the pr team. You can't arrue anything.
2. No, it doesn't. Fot IT to work, the ending can't be change, just added on. Any form of clearity applied to the ending would be adding things on.

Yes, I can. It's basic PR stuff. Anyone with any history in business could tell you this.
Yes, it does. If IT is true then the game doesn't have an ending. Therefor any ending is new.

And of course the most damning evidence against IT, you can't even come up with a single theory. Even the main thread has multiple theories because no single theory can explain everything.

1.It's basoc pr stuff to control the sisutation. And Agein, you don't have any real knowlegde to what is happen behind BW closed doors...You can't 
assure anything.
2. . That is still adding on to the ending we already have.

3.What? That comment makes no sense. What other theories is being used other thant the ending is real or it's fake. Nothing you point or refer to goes ageints IT.

Modifié par dreman9999, 09 mai 2012 - 01:34 .

[Grimgaww]

dreman9999 wrote...
So the concept of inception and total recall are stupid, too...Because IT is simular to those plots....Also, Shepard facing indoctrination has been forshadow from ME1.....

Indoctrination is part of ME world.

If Bioware will choose to go on the EC with IT (which i'm sure they do) and explaining
Shepard was affecting by IT at the very end is very bad choise and also very stupid.
you need  actions from Shepard throughout
the series or only ME3 that really prove
that Shepard started to "change" and become value to the reapers and not some stupid kid dreams -
and saying wow this what's broke Shepard. He has never saw throughout his life
as a soldier children dying.

You didn't get the DLC idea ???

Bioware can say the war has not ended shepard as dreaming/indoctrinating/hallucinating
when he was badly injured. He will recover (don't forget the prothean war against the reapers was for centuries)
and get back to action as a DLC.

Modifié par Grimgaww, 09 mai 2012 - 01:34 .

[Elyiia]

dreman9999 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. No, you can't. You not with BW, have inside info, nor on the pr team. You can't arrue anything.
2. No, it doesn't. Fot IT to work, the ending can't be change, just added on. Any form of clearity applied to the ending would be adding things on.

Yes, I can. It's basic PR stuff. Anyone with any history in business could tell you this.
Yes, it does. If IT is true then the game doesn't have an ending. Therefor any ending is new.

And of course the most damning evidence against IT, you can't even come up with a single theory. Even the main thread has multiple theories because no single theory can explain everything.

1.It's basoc pr stuff to control the sisutation. And Agein, you don't have any real knowlegde to what is happen behind BW closed doors...You can't 
assure anything.
2. . That is still adding on to the ending we already have.

3.What? That comment makes no sense. What other theories is being used other thant the ending is real or it's fake. Nothing you point or refer to goes ageints IT.

1) Is exactly what's happening, thanks for agreeing with me.
2) No, according to IT we don't have an ending. The Reapers are still alive, and if they are still alive there is no ending. If there's no ending, then any ending is new.
3) Yes, it makes perfect sense. You have theories that start from Harby's beam, theories that start from the TIM scene etc etc.

Of course, I'm willing to forfeit this argument if you can give me a plausible explanation as to how the Reapers are going to be defeated with just:

additional cinematics and epilogue scenes to the existing ending sequences

[pharsti]

Hm, i dont see why its creative or clever, its one of the worst plot devices ever used (it was all a dream\\not real) and its been used much better in different things..... so.... no, its nothing of the sort.

[Darth_Trethon]

Arcian wrote...

I've read the app, and they clearly state they wanted the Reapers to take control of Shepard's movements towards the end, but that it was incredibly difficult to code which convinced them to scrap the idea.

Screwing with controls =//= IDT magical "battle of wills" dream state.

The dream state is something you people came up with, disregarding every single piece of indoctrination lore from all three games to create a magical and incredibly retarded reset button for the ending. Nevermind that indoctrination cannot be reset, but it's not like you listen to reason anyway.

Oh, and the burden of proof where the IDT is concerned is on YOU, not me.

You are getting offensive and you alredy posted this once and I replied to it already.

To add on top of my previous reply, there is no accounting to what would happen to indoctrination once all reaprs and reaper tech is destroyed....if an artifact or reaper is influencing the mind it would be gone, if the brain's structure is affected it could theoretically speaking undo the reaper grip. The "impossible to remove" has never been tested after all reapers and their tech are gone.

[dreman9999]

Grimgaww wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
So the concept of inception and total recall are stupid, too...Because IT is simular to those plots....Also, Shepard facing indoctrination has been forshadow from ME1.....

Indoctrination is part of ME world.

If Bioware will choose to go on the EC with IT (which i'm sure they do) and explaining
Shepard was affecting by IT at the very end is very bad choise and also very stupid.
you need  actions from Shepard throughout
the series or only ME3 that really prove
that Shepard started to "change" and become value to the reapers and not some stupid kid dreams -
and saying wow this what's broke Shepard. He has never saw throughout his life
as a soldier children dying.

You didn't get the DLC idea ???

Bioware can say the war has not ended shepard as dreaming/indoctrinating/hallucinating
when he was badly injured. He will recover (don't forget the prothean war against the reapers was for centuries)
and get back to action as a DLC.

Then you missed it. 
1. Shepard has been near reaper tech since ME1 from Eden prime. That's 3 years of on and off contact.
2. The arrival dlc, which has Shep hit by an indoctrination wave and see visions and vocies after.
3.In ME3, Shep goes through every symtom of indoctrination.
4.Indoctrination is subtle...
  
5. The theory is he is in the process of  it.

It's a case of a last straw breaking the camals back. ME1 and ME2 is like the post of inception which explains the rules of everything, and ME3 is like inceptions ending and have us use the rules given to make connection to the ending.
If you're saying it's bad because it's not implied or shown.......Then it's clear that you missed it.
More my point can be explained here...
http://social.biowar...75/blog/212630/ 

[dreman9999]

pharsti wrote...

Hm, i dont see why its creative or clever, its one of the worst plot devices ever used (it was all a dreamnot real) and its been used much better in different things..... so.... no, its nothing of the sort.

The plot device is not"It's all a dream". It's a "It's all a trick".

[NoSpin]

pharsti wrote...

Hm, i dont see why its creative or clever, its one of the worst plot devices ever used (it was all a dreamnot real) and its been used much better in different things..... so.... no, its nothing of the sort.

No, Deus Ex Machina is one of the worst plot devices ever used. A dream would be a HUGE step up.

[dreman9999]

Elyiia wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. No, you can't. You not with BW, have inside info, nor on the pr team. You can't arrue anything.
2. No, it doesn't. Fot IT to work, the ending can't be change, just added on. Any form of clearity applied to the ending would be adding things on.

Yes, I can. It's basic PR stuff. Anyone with any history in business could tell you this.
Yes, it does. If IT is true then the game doesn't have an ending. Therefor any ending is new.

And of course the most damning evidence against IT, you can't even come up with a single theory. Even the main thread has multiple theories because no single theory can explain everything.

1.It's basoc pr stuff to control the sisutation. And Agein, you don't have any real knowlegde to what is happen behind BW closed doors...You can't 
assure anything.
2. . That is still adding on to the ending we already have.

3.What? That comment makes no sense. What other theories is being used other thant the ending is real or it's fake. Nothing you point or refer to goes ageints IT.

1) Is exactly what's happening, thanks for agreeing with me.
2) No, according to IT we don't have an ending. The Reapers are still alive, and if they are still alive there is no ending. If there's no ending, then any ending is new.
3) Yes, it makes perfect sense. You have theories that start from Harby's beam, theories that start from the TIM scene etc etc.

Of course, I'm willing to forfeit this argument if you can give me a plausible explanation as to how the Reapers are going to be defeated with just:

additional cinematics and epilogue scenes to the existing ending sequences

1. I didn't agree with any thing you said. I'm say you don't know.
2. And clearity will make that clear....It's still an add on.
3.That's still IT. IT is just saying that Shepard has a warped perspective in the end. It's not saying when or what part ofthe scene. You arguing ageints the dream theory version of IT. But of course they different veriosn of IT...But it's still IT no matter how you try and twist it.

[Grimgaww]

dreman9999 wrote...
Then you missed it. 
1. Shepard has been near reaper tech since ME1 from Eden prime. That's 3 years of on and off contact.
2. The arrival dlc, which has Shep hit by an indoctrination wave and see visions and vocies after.
3.In ME3, Shep goes through every symtom of indoctrination.
4.Indoctrination is subtle...
  
5. The theory is he is in the process of  it.

It's a case of a last straw breaking the camals back. ME1 and ME2 is like the post of inception which explains the rules of everything, and ME3 is like inceptions ending and have us use the rules given to make connection to the ending.
If you're saying it's bad because it's not implied or shown.......Then it's clear that you missed it.
More my point can be explained here...
http://social.biowar...75/blog/212630/ 

"5. The theory is he is in the process of  it."
I take that as a joke.
You've meant The theory is he is in the process of  it till Bioware decide whether or not to use it.

I haven't miss anything believe me.
If the IT was so clear you didn't need to analyze anything, it was
sharp and clear.

Hallucination is more reliable than the IT but it still stupid for this kind of series.

[kalasaurus]

I guess I'm indifferent as to whether or not IT is true. I honestly doubt it, but I don't care if other people still think it is real.

If EC uses IT, I'll probably be relieved. IT makes a good headcanon to get through the ending and could make the ending a lot better imo.

[Elyiia]

I find it hilarious they use Arrival as evidence, when it doesn't even necessarily happen with Shepard.

[NoSpin]

Elyiia wrote...

I find it hilarious they use Arrival as evidence, when it doesn't even necessarily happen with Shepard.

The ME:Conviction comic has Vega get upset over the treatment of Shep after the events in Arrival, it happened as far as Bioware is concerned. And know what? If it didn't, Bioware can point to....Soverign, Collector Base, Cerberus Base etc. Any bloody time Shepard comes within 100ft of reaper tech as the start.

[frylock23]

IT would have been very clever and I would have believed it as solely a BioWare idea if they had had a reasonable timetable in place to announce it after release. That they haven't come clean over it despite the anger says to me that they didn't think of it, we did. Now, even if they use for their EC which I think to be a smart move to explain some of the things that are otherwise unexplainable, I will still have doubts as to who actually came up with it.

[Elyiia]

NoSpin wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

I find it hilarious they use Arrival as evidence, when it doesn't even necessarily happen with Shepard.

The ME:Conviction comic has Vega get upset over the treatment of Shep after the events in Arrival, it happened as far as Bioware is concerned. And know what? If it didn't, Bioware can point to....Soverign, Collector Base, Cerberus Base etc. Any bloody time Shepard comes within 100ft of reaper tech as the start.

"There is no canon"

Shepard doesn't come within 100m of Soveriegn, why would the Collector base indoctrinate people it has a complete different purpose, Cerberus base is the only point on your list that actually makes sense but even then I did not interact with any Reaper tech when passing through. The only real example you have is the derelict Reaper but even that is a stretch, Shepard is on there for a few hours at most?