1114 réponses à ce sujet

[balance5050]

KevShep wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

There is just ssssoooo much wild guessing by you that I just dont know how I can respond when you already believe your own assumptions as hard facts.

You didn't read my arguments at all if you really think that.  Or you did, and your reading comprehension really is that ****ty.  I don't know which is worse.

As a show of good faith Iam going to show you a long video of EVERYTHING I.T. so far! If your still not on board I will apologize to you and yeld to you!....but you have to watch it though, its already changed alot of minds!

First of all, I played all three games and I've seen the endings, so the video can't show me anything I haven't already seen. 

Second of all, by hiding behind that video and expecting me to respond to it instead of you, you're effectively asking me to put more work into your argument than you're willing to put yourself.  If you think there's something in that video that will change my mind, cite it here.  I'm not going to do your work for you when the burden of proof is on you.

Third of all, I don't care whether or not you apologize and "yeld" to me.  Your argument was weak to start with, and your cop-out "if you can't see why I'm right then there's no helping you" bull**** responses are even weaker.  At this point I'm not even convinced you understand what facts and assumptions actually are.

You have put no work into your argument because there is no proof to what your saying...What your saying is a bigger "?" then what I proposed!

Second Iam not hidding behind the video, Iam just done talking to some one that is not putting ANY thought into what Iam saying. Proof of this is the fact that your just making up answers as you go instead of actually trying to answer them truthfully!

Third, What the Hell is wrong with watching the video?....Its answers your questions...The only reason you would be against the video is if your only intrested in arguing/trolling!

Fourth, It does not matter if you have played all three games. What happend went over 90% of peoples heads so YES dude there is things in there that you HAVE NOT SEEN/NOTICED!

Just watch the d*mn video, good grief....You being complicated! Its no suprise that you cant see the evidence in front of you, its because you wont even look at it. If you cant see the sky then its not blue right?

Right, people need to respond directly to the arguments and evidences set forth, instead of avoiding it and calling it "weak".

Please don't evade engaging the evidence if you truly feel that you can back up what you are saying.

(not referring to you Kevshep)

[Jorojr]

thesnake777 wrote...

I dont bealive in IT, however I will pick destroy, every god damn time.

This.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Funny thing though, I actually picked Destroy because I heard that all endings unfold basically the exact same way. That made me feel like the endgame decision was pointless if we couldn't see the consequences for them. So I decided that the Destroy path was most in the spirit of what was going to happen in the end and I chose it.

Then I replayed it, because I thought the game was still fun and worth playing again despite the ending and I changed my mind. I felt synthesis had a lot of upside, so I went for it, and I feel marginally more satisfied with how the story ends than I did in the career before.

[Bizantura]

Oh my, I never noticed there where other options besides destroy, bad me!!

[KevShep]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Funny thing though, I actually picked Destroy because I heard that all endings unfold basically the exact same way. That made me feel like the endgame decision was pointless if we couldn't see the consequences for them. So I decided that the Destroy path was most in the spirit of what was going to happen in the end and I chose it.

Then I replayed it, because I thought the game was still fun and worth playing again despite the ending and I changed my mind. I felt synthesis had a lot of upside, so I went for it, and I feel marginally more satisfied with how the story ends than I did in the career before.

Youve been indoctrinated...



Even synthesis, Shepard has the illusive mans eyes!

[jijeebo]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Funny thing though, I actually picked Destroy because I heard that all endings unfold basically the exact same way. That made me feel like the endgame decision was pointless if we couldn't see the consequences for them. So I decided that the Destroy path was most in the spirit of what was going to happen in the end and I chose it.

Then I replayed it, because I thought the game was still fun and worth playing again despite the ending and I changed my mind. I felt synthesis had a lot of upside, so I went for it, and I feel marginally more satisfied with how the story ends than I did in the career before.

Synthesis is growing on me, I must admit.

I'm definitely going to try it on one of my runthroughs... But I might leave it until the EC.

[vixvicco]

KevShep wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Funny thing though, I actually picked Destroy because I heard that all endings unfold basically the exact same way. That made me feel like the endgame decision was pointless if we couldn't see the consequences for them. So I decided that the Destroy path was most in the spirit of what was going to happen in the end and I chose it.

Then I replayed it, because I thought the game was still fun and worth playing again despite the ending and I changed my mind. I felt synthesis had a lot of upside, so I went for it, and I feel marginally more satisfied with how the story ends than I did in the career before.

Youve been indoctrinated...



Even synthesis, Shepard has the illusive mans eyes!

And the whole skin thing as well.  

[KevShep]

vixvicco wrote...

KevShep wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Funny thing though, I actually picked Destroy because I heard that all endings unfold basically the exact same way. That made me feel like the endgame decision was pointless if we couldn't see the consequences for them. So I decided that the Destroy path was most in the spirit of what was going to happen in the end and I chose it.

Then I replayed it, because I thought the game was still fun and worth playing again despite the ending and I changed my mind. I felt synthesis had a lot of upside, so I went for it, and I feel marginally more satisfied with how the story ends than I did in the career before.

Youve been indoctrinated...



Even synthesis, Shepard has the illusive mans eyes!

And the whole skin thing as well.  

I think that the skin thing is him/her burning like in the third dream. In that dream he/she "hugs" the kid and burns, later we "accept" the kids logic and pick one of the two choices that he wants us to pick and we burn.  I guess people that picked control or synthesis did not listen to the clear warning in shepards dream.

[balance5050]

KevShep wrote...

vixvicco wrote...

KevShep wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Funny thing though, I actually picked Destroy because I heard that all endings unfold basically the exact same way. That made me feel like the endgame decision was pointless if we couldn't see the consequences for them. So I decided that the Destroy path was most in the spirit of what was going to happen in the end and I chose it.

Then I replayed it, because I thought the game was still fun and worth playing again despite the ending and I changed my mind. I felt synthesis had a lot of upside, so I went for it, and I feel marginally more satisfied with how the story ends than I did in the career before.

Youve been indoctrinated...



Even synthesis, Shepard has the illusive mans eyes!

And the whole skin thing as well.  

I think that the skin thing is him/her burning like in the third dream. In that dream he/she "hugs" the kid and burns, later we "accept" the kids logic and pick one of the two choices that he wants us to pick and we burn.  I guess people that picked control or synthesis did not listen to the clear warning in shepards dream.

Good connection. I like it. Shepard does burn in both control and synth but not destroy.

Modifié par balance5050, 13 mai 2012 - 02:43 .

[KevShep]

balance5050 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

vixvicco wrote...

KevShep wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Funny thing though, I actually picked Destroy because I heard that all endings unfold basically the exact same way. That made me feel like the endgame decision was pointless if we couldn't see the consequences for them. So I decided that the Destroy path was most in the spirit of what was going to happen in the end and I chose it.

Then I replayed it, because I thought the game was still fun and worth playing again despite the ending and I changed my mind. I felt synthesis had a lot of upside, so I went for it, and I feel marginally more satisfied with how the story ends than I did in the career before.

Youve been indoctrinated...



Even synthesis, Shepard has the illusive mans eyes!

And the whole skin thing as well.  

I think that the skin thing is him/her burning like in the third dream. In that dream he/she "hugs" the kid and burns, later we "accept" the kids logic and pick one of the two choices that he wants us to pick and we burn.  I guess people that picked control or synthesis did not listen to the clear warning in shepards dream.

Good connection. I like it. Shepard does burn in both control and synth but not destroy.

Yeah the videos all say that shepard looks like a husk but Ive never seen any blue cables or any of that on him like we do in other husks. Synthesis still just blows me away at the fact that shepards eyes SHOULD be green...They clearly are not...there control eyes.

[balance5050]

KevShep wrote...

Yeah the videos all say that shepard looks like a husk but Ive never seen any blue cables or any of that on him like we do in other husks. Synthesis still just blows me away at the fact that shepards eyes SHOULD be green...They clearly are not...there control eyes.

Yep, I even think that if Shepard ACTUALLY (not in a dream state) got shocked, his eyes would glow red.....

[Geneaux486]

You have put no work into your argument because there is no proof to what your saying...What your saying is a bigger "?" then what I proposed!

I've responded to you point by point, and explained why each thing you cite is not evidence that the ending is false.  Your response has been nothing but "It obviously is!" with nothing to back it up. 

Second Iam not hidding behind the video, Iam just done talking to some one that is not putting ANY thought into what Iam saying. Proof of this is the fact that your just making up answers as you go instead of actually trying to answer them truthfully!

So it is that you have ****ty reading comprehension.  In-game evidence is on my side, and I have shown that again and again.  Yes, you're hiding behind the video.

Third, What the Hell is wrong with watching the video?....Its answers your questions...The only reason you would be against the video is if your only intrested in arguing/trolling!

Cite what you think is important.  I'm not going to go watch your argument for you.

Fourth, It does not matter if you have played all three games. What happend went over 90% of peoples heads so YES dude there is things in there that you HAVE NOT SEEN/NOTICED!

Funny thing is "Shepard has become a legend by ending the Reaper threat" has completely gone over your head, and it's right there in your face after the credits.  The game itself contradicts your theory.  You barely have an argument to begin with.

Just watch the d*mn video, good grief....You being complicated! Its no suprise that you cant see the evidence in front of you, its because you wont even look at it. If you cant see the sky then its not blue right?

Go eat a grilled dick sandwich.

oh BTW...here is a little something that YOU DID NOT NOTICE...

I like how it isn't even originating in the same spot as the Arrival location.  Yet another example of your grasping at emergency induction ports.

Why did the last 10 minutes of the game make you contradict your entire serise playthrough? Wasnt the goal to destroy the reapers? Only suggestive indoctrination could get EVEN the PLAYER to sucome to indoctrination by the reapers themelves! I guess you forgot that the catalsyt is the MAIN REAPER yet you listened to him!

The Catalyst doesn't give you the choices, the Crucible does.  It's your weapon, your side built it.  The game doesn't make you contradict anything, you can choose destroy if you want to, and sacrifice the Geth and EDI, or you can take a more merciful route to spare your comrades.  The game has always been about things not being what they seemed, and it's always been about Shepard rolling with the punches.

Please don't evade engaging the evidence if you truly feel that you can back up what you are saying.

(not referring to you Kevshep)

You should be referring to him.  He's been the only one evading anything here.  I, on the other hand, have responded to him point by point, and will continue to do so.  This is a discussion thread, so if he thinks the video has something substantial, he should cite it here to be discussed.  There is nothing unreasonable about what I am saying on this subject.  It's his argument, he should be posting it here, not saying "Go watch this video to get my opinion".  As I said, if he doesn't care enough about it to post the relevant points here, why should I?

Modifié par Geneaux486, 13 mai 2012 - 03:44 .

[KevShep]

I think that the anti-I.T. people just dont understand that the game (last 10 minutes) tries to get you to go against everything you've been trying to do throughout the whole series. The whole reason is to destroy the reapers in ALL THREE GAMES and yet MANY people are very quickly convinced by a little boy (who happends to be the head reaper for that fact) or catalyst in the last few minutes of the game to do the unthinkable!

The unthinkable is to accept control (illusive man) who is our enemy the whole time by the way!

the unthinkable is also to accept synthesis (Saren) who has already stated this (and is our enemy as well) and from this we know that is a lie because Sovereign would have mentioned the crucible to him reguarding synthesis.

[Geneaux486]

KevShep wrote...

I think that the anti-I.T. people just dont understand that the game (last 10 minutes) tries to get you to go against everything you've been trying to do throughout the whole series. The whole reason is to destroy the reapers in ALL THREE GAMES and yet MANY people are very quickly convinced by a little boy (who happends to be the head reaper for that fact) or catalyst in the last few minutes of the game to do the unthinkable!

The unthinkable is to accept control (illusive man) who is our enemy the whole time by the way!

the unthinkable is also to accept synthesis (Saren) who has already stated this (and is our enemy as well) and from this we know that is a lie because Sovereign would have mentioned the crucible to him reguarding synthesis.

So you misunderstood the final twist of the game.  That's not anti-IT's fault.

[balance5050]

Reminder, debate is an on-going thing and if you end up saying things like "You barely have an argument to begin with" then you are essentially forfeiting...

If Project Rho is invalid then by that logic you didn't meet Javic or Kasumi, you didn't go to the Shadow broker's ship....

you can't pick and choose if the DLC counts or not, it's either all or none.

Modifié par balance5050, 13 mai 2012 - 03:52 .

[JShepppp]

Control and Synthesis, it was implicitly explained, had flaws not as ideas but in their execution prior to the Crucible. Basically, Saren and TIM were indoctrinated. The ideas are clearly nothing new in-universe given the Crucible was built by past races (at least the Protheans considered controlling). The drive for "what they believed in" is what lead to political fragmentation. Basically, people were too stubborn to give up.

The Crucible can apparently do all of them properly. Previously, Control/Synthesis were not thought of as possible options, but for the first time ever, admittedly a minute before the actual ending of the entire series, they can be realized properly.

I view it as kind of similar to the Hallows/Horcruxes thing in Harry Potter (only figuratively/symbolically, of course; the analogy only goes so far). Basically, Dumbledore has been telling Harry forever to go after Horcruxes like Anderson does about Destroy. The Hallows are the temptation for Harry to get power and deviate from his path, and they come to their own in the end as it turns out they are very real and powerful devices, in the same way that control and synthesis suddenly become very real and powerful options. Again, a very vague comparison, but this is all just my personal opinion, of course.

[KevShep]

Geneaux486 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

I think that the anti-I.T. people just dont understand that the game (last 10 minutes) tries to get you to go against everything you've been trying to do throughout the whole series. The whole reason is to destroy the reapers in ALL THREE GAMES and yet MANY people are very quickly convinced by a little boy (who happends to be the head reaper for that fact) or catalyst in the last few minutes of the game to do the unthinkable!

The unthinkable is to accept control (illusive man) who is our enemy the whole time by the way!

the unthinkable is also to accept synthesis (Saren) who has already stated this (and is our enemy as well) and from this we know that is a lie because Sovereign would have mentioned the crucible to him reguarding synthesis.

So you misunderstood the final twist of the game.  That's not anti-IT's fault.

So you misunderstood the lore...Indoctrinated people (like TIM) CANT control un-indoctrinated people or saren or the reaper would have done that a long time ago. But you go on and pretend that that the last 10 minutes of the game (with all the evidence of IT) and say that its just isnt so.

[Geneaux486]

Reminder, debate is an on-going thing and if you end up saying things like "You barely have an argument to begin with" then you are essentially forfeiting...

Saying he barely has an argument is a simple observation.  No forfeiting, I'm not going anywhere.

If Project Rho is invalid then by that logic you didn't meet Javic or Kasumi, you didn't go to the Shadow broker's ship....

If Shepard's eyes at the end of the game are indicative of Indoctrination, then Shepard has been indoctrinated since the beginning of Mass Effect 2.  Renegade Shepard has the same pattern only flipped upside down, and the Illusive Man, upon first getting his eyes, has the same upside down pattern as Renegade Shepard.  The whole "you can't pick and choose" thing works both ways.

So you misunderstood the lore...Indoctrinated people (like TIM) CANT control un-indoctrinated people or saren or the reaper would have done that a long time ago.

 
The Illusive Man unlocked the secrets of how Indoctrination worked.  I assume you didn't somehow skip the Sanctuary Mission where that's revealed so maybe you just weren't paying attention when you went through it.  Saren did not unlock those secrets, so yes, it does make sense for the Illusive Man to be able to manipulate people around him after that fact.

But you go on and pretend that that the last 10 minutes of the game (with all the evidence of IT) and say that its just isnt so.

There is no solid evidence of IT.  Furthermore, there is proof that the last ten minutes are real, as, once again, the game literally spells it out for you after the credits.

The funny thing is I'm not even saying IT isn't possible, because it very well could be true.  I'm saying your "evidence" isn't evidence, that you weren't one of the special little snowflakes that picked up on the non-existant subtlties in the narrative that you guys claim are so obvious that the other 90% of us morons missed it.  I wouldn't have a problem with the IT crowd if you guys didn't act like the damn hipsters of the Mass Effect fandom XD

Modifié par Geneaux486, 13 mai 2012 - 04:15 .

[Baldrick67]

jijeebo wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Control baby, control!




Plus I am not turning on my allies geth, friend EDI and making Legion's death go in vain.



And BTW, Indoctrination theory is even worse then actual endings.

I still love this picture, so much.

I find it creepy somewhat. Shepard has a new body made out of the remains of millions of dead sentients.

[KevShep]

Geneaux486 wrote...

So you misunderstood the lore...Indoctrinated people (like TIM) CANT control un-indoctrinated people or saren or the reaper would have done that a long time ago.

 
The Illusive Man unlocked the secrets of how Indoctrination worked.  I assume you didn't somehow skip the Sanctuary Mission where that's revealed so maybe you just weren't paying attention when you went through it.  Saren did not unlock those secrets, so yes, it does make sense for the Illusive Man to be able to manipulate people around him after that fact.

But you go on and pretend that that the last 10 minutes of the game (with all the evidence of IT) and say that its just isnt so.

There is no solid evidence of IT.  Furthermore, there is proof that the last ten minutes are real, as, once again, the game literally spells it out for you after the credits.

The funny thing is I'm not even saying IT isn't possible, because it very well could be true.  I'm saying your "evidence" isn't evidence, that you weren't one of the special little snowflakes that picked up on the non-existant subtlties in the narrative that you guys claim are so obvious that the other 90% of us morons missed it.  I wouldn't have a problem with the IT crowd if you guys didn't act like the damn hipsters of the Mass Effect fandom XD

Your saying that TIM found a way to make that form of indoctrination work when the reapers have had indoctrination for millions of years and TIM found a better way to use it?  No way man, the reapers would have done that along time ago ...This is the kid of stuff Iam talking about that your just pulling answers out of the air.

Second your saying that my evidence is not evidence...wow! Do you know what evidence is? Its bits of information that ties into an overall idea or plan that is unknown. You did not watch the video! The first 33 minutes of it can be skiped exept the part where it talks about there being piles of bodies on the ground (they look like rocks untill you get closer) when you get up from harbingers beam. Also the music from Shepards dreams can be heard in the background as you get up from harbingers beam as well as the catalsyt part.

[jijeebo]

Yeah but, c'mon...

He has a mini-umbrella and an N7 logo AND he's giving Harby lip. What's not to love? xD

[Geneaux486]

Your saying that TIM found a way to make that form of indoctrination work when the reapers have had indoctrination for millions of years and TIM found a better way to use it?  No way man, the reapers would have done that along time ago ...This is the kid of stuff Iam talking about that your just pulling answers out of the air.

I didn't pull them out of the air, I pulled them out of the part of the game where they were stated.  TIM figured out Indoctrination, next thing you know, he can exercise short term limited control over organics that are near him.  And how exactly is that "better" than what the Reapers do?  They turn people into sleeper agents that can integrate back into society then betray their allies.  That's certainly more elegant than what TIM was doing.  If that doesn't make sense to you then your beef is with the game, not me.

Second your saying that my evidence is not evidence...wow! Do you know what evidence is? Its bits of information that ties into an overall idea or plan that is unknown.

That's not what evidence is.

That which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief;  proof

something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign;

Source:  http://dictionary.re...se/evidence?s=t

So congratulations, you tried to condescend to me by defining evidence and you got the definition wrong.  It also ties into my previous point in that no, the information you presented does not qualify as evidence that the ending is a hallucination.  I already went through why that is with every point you brought up, so I'm not going to bother repeating myself.

You did not watch the video!

You really are perceptive, aren't you.

The first 33 minutes of it...

What the ******?  No wonder you didn't wanna cite that monstrosity, geez.  

piles of bodies on the ground (they look like rocks untill you get closer) when you get up from harbingers beam.

Yeah I remember that part.  There's some distortion when Shepard first gets up.  Probably due to the fact that he was just knocked unconcious aftering being near a massive reaper-blast. 

Also the music from Shepards dreams can be heard in the background as you get up from harbingers beam as well as the catalsyt part.

And at the beginning when the Normandy is leaving Earth.  Was that part a hallucination to, then?

Modifié par Geneaux486, 13 mai 2012 - 04:55 .

[KevShep]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Your saying that TIM found a way to make that form of indoctrination work when the reapers have had indoctrination for millions of years and TIM found a better way to use it?  No way man, the reapers would have done that along time ago ...This is the kid of stuff Iam talking about that your just pulling answers out of the air.

I didn't pull them out of the air, I pulled them out of the part of the game where they were stated.  TIM figured out Indoctrination, next thing you know, he can exercise short term limited control over organics he's directly nearby.  If that doesn't make sense to you then your beef is with the game, not me.

Second your saying that my evidence is not evidence...wow! Do you know what evidence is? Its bits of information that ties into an overall idea or plan that is unknown.

 
That's not what evidence is.

That which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief;  proof

something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign;

Source:  http://dictionary.re...se/evidence?s=t

So congratulations, you tried to condescend to me by defining evidence and you got the definition wrong.  It also ties into my previous point in that no, the information you presented does not qualify as evidence that the ending is a hallucination.  I already went through why that is with every point you brought up, so I'm not going to bother repeating myself.

You did not watch the video!

 
You really are perceptive, aren't you.

The first 33 minutes of it...

What the ******?  No wonder you didn't wanna cite that monstrosity, geez.  

piles of bodies on the ground (they look like rocks untill you get closer) when you get up from harbingers beam.

Yeah I remember that part.  There's some distortion when Shepard first gets up.  Probably due to the fact that he was just knocked unconcious aftering being near a massive reaper-blast. 

Also the music from Shepards dreams can be heard in the background as you get up from harbingers beam as well as the catalsyt part.

And at the beginning when the Normandy is leaving Earth.  Was that part a hallucination to, then?

Holy Crap dude! If you watch the video it will answer it all. the first 33 minutes are not impotant to me but they mite to you.

1. You did pull it out of the air because it is not backed by any facts.

2. Evidence are bits of facts that tell an unknown equation weather its fact or false.

3.I can tell you did not because you would not be asking these questions and making these statments.

4. the devs put that in there on purpose...why not use rock textures? No they used bodies that before the beam we see AS rocks, so why the change?

5. No, you dont hear that same song in that part of the game. Listen to the dreams again. Its a very low key sounds (even in the dreams) but it is in the "background" of the last 10 minutes off and on. The dreams are the only place you hear them.

[Geneaux486]

1. You did pull it out of the air because it is not backed by any facts.

I literally cited something stated outright in the game. You don't know what a fact is.

2. Evidence are bits of facts that tell an unknown equation weather its fact or false.

I just quoted the definition of evidence and you're still getting it wrong. You don't know what evidence is either.

3.I can tell you did not because you would not be asking these questions and making these statments.

You can't tell an elbow from an *sscheek.

4. the devs put that in there on purpose...why not use rock textures? No they used bodies that before the beam we see AS rocks, so why the change?

Before the beam they were soldiers running alongside you.

5. No, you dont hear that same song in that part of the game. Listen to the dreams again. Its a very low key sounds (even in the dreams) but it is in the "background" of the last 10 minutes off and on. The dreams are the only place you hear them.

You're talking about the music. You hear that music at the beginning of the game.

You're not just pulling things out of the air with regards to the game, you're doing it with regards to my argument as well.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 13 mai 2012 - 05:02 .

[KevShep]

Geneaux486 wrote...

1. You did pull it out of the air because it is not backed by any facts.

I literally cited something stated outright in the game. You don't know what a fact is.

2. Evidence are bits of facts that tell an unknown equation weather its fact or false.

I just quoted the definition of evidence and you're still getting it wrong. You don't know what evidence is either.

3.I can tell you did not because you would not be asking these questions and making these statments.

You can't tell an elbow from an *sscheek.

4. the devs put that in there on purpose...why not use rock textures? No they used bodies that before the beam we see AS rocks, so why the change?

Before the beam they were soldiers running alongside you.

5. No, you dont hear that same song in that part of the game. Listen to the dreams again. Its a very low key sounds (even in the dreams) but it is in the "background" of the last 10 minutes off and on. The dreams are the only place you hear them.

You're talking about the music. You hear that music at the beginning of the game.

You're not just pulling things out of the air with regards to the game, you're doing it with regards to my argument as well.

1.The end game is in question!

2.  Hey mister literal, it means the same d*nm thing. its does not have to be word for word!

3. I CAN tell you that you did not watch it because you would be bringing things from it to this debate.

4. The soliders running with you are around you yes, but those are not the ones Iam talking about. Its the ones on the FAR side of the left and right of you.

5. Ok I went back and listened to the begining and your right it is there but it is during the little boy scene and also when you try to get him out of the shaft. Then its in the dream parts as well as the last 10 minutes. It revolves around the boy.