190 réponses à ce sujet

[2484Stryker]

The Invisible Commando wrote...

I don't see how people are still talking IT theory that I never believed. The StarBrat comments himself that TIM could never use the control method himself because he is indoctrinated. Obviously if Shepard is indoctrinated he can never control the Reapers. Also if he was indoctrinated, he would be a puppet. Why even give him the illusion of choice? StarBrat could just order him to do whatever. The IT theory logic is flawed even by the game itself.

Umm maybe that illusion of choice is exactly how Shepard is being indoctrinated? 

[dreman9999]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

You're assuming a lot. Just because it makes sense for him to lie to Shepard, and it makes sense for Shepard not to believe him does not actually mean he's lying.

In control we see the Reapers leave, if Shepard wasn't in control the Catalyst would have just been like "Lol, back to work"

The singularity is the (new) reason for the Reapers, bypassing it causes the Reapers not to need to destroy organics anymore. And again, assuming Synthetics and organics can be created again without fully knowing what synthesis actually does. For all you know, something about it prevents pure organics/synthetics ever being created again.

The reapers are sentient despite what starkid would have you believe, all sentent creatures primary focus is to live...

You're making things up again.

1. The starkid never said they are not sentient.
2. did you miss the conversation with the 3 reapers in this series?

[Candidate 88766]

balance5050 wrote...

They ARE going through the backlash though, by NOT changing the ending, just "clarifying and adding extended scenes (Shpeard Alive scene) to add insight to the conclusion of Commander Shepards Journey"

I meant as in they wouldn't go through the backlash if they didn't have an ace up their sleeve - the 'real' ending as the IT supporters call it. The fact that they are going through all this backlash cements the notion that there never was a 'real' ending coming out later - the endings were what we got in the game.

It's an advert for DLC, it's not actuallt contained in the lore and should be disreegarded, just like messages that tell you to play again on a harder difficulty.

If you have to ignore what the game tells you for your theory to work, your theory is wrong. Ignoring something is not the same as disproving it.

[Candidate 88766]

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Also the reapers say they only choose organics that are worthy for ascension, so harvesters are actually proof of his lies.

Ascension means turning a race into a Reaper. The harvesters are husks. Massive difference.

They are still killing a race for no other reason than too make them their slaves no?

They only choose worthy organics to become Reapers.

They use every organic race as husks, because they are the perfect weapon: there is an unlimited supply (until your enemy is defeated), they are utterly loyal, they require no food or water, they will never break, and they are often terrifying for the opposing force to behold.

[balance5050]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

It's an advert for DLC, it's not actuallt contained in the lore and should be disreegarded, just like messages that tell you to play again on a harder difficulty.

If you have to ignore what the game tells you for your theory to work, your theory is wrong. Ignoring something is not the same as disproving it.

But don't you see, the actual ending ignores the themes and morals expressed to you since ME1. So by accepting what starkid says, YOU are ignoring the entire series.

Modifié par balance5050, 12 mai 2012 - 04:44 .

[dreman9999]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Also the reapers say they only choose organics that are worthy for ascension, so harvesters are actually proof of his lies.

Ascension means turning a race into a Reaper. The harvesters are husks. Massive difference.

They are still killing a race for no other reason than too make them their slaves no?

They only choose worthy organics to become Reapers.

They use every organic race as husks, because they are the perfect weapon: there is an unlimited supply (until your enemy is defeated), they are utterly loyal, they require no food or water, they will never break, and they are often terrifying for the opposing force to behold.

Both of you need to know that they are doing all this to advance, contol, give order, and perserve ,via allow a path for future organic life to develop and perserving advance organic lifeas reapers,  all organic life

[balance5050]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Also the reapers say they only choose organics that are worthy for ascension, so harvesters are actually proof of his lies.

Ascension means turning a race into a Reaper. The harvesters are husks. Massive difference.

They are still killing a race for no other reason than too make them their slaves no?

They only choose worthy organics to become Reapers.

They use every organic race as husks, because they are the perfect weapon: there is an unlimited supply (until your enemy is defeated), they are utterly loyal, they require no food or water, they will never break, and they are often terrifying for the opposing force to behold.

They said that they "leave the younger ones alone"... clearly not true.

[draken-heart]

okay, the ending was the way it is so BW can cause Speculation as to what they were trying to do. and were they not originally going to do Indoctrination after the leak but scrapped it, leaving the evidence in there? because that is what i see.

also what about the Shepard lives destroy ending? i do not believe IT wholeheartedly but i doubt that even Shepard is special enough to survive not only an explosion of that magnitude (saw part of the destroy ending, that explosion Shepard would normally not survive) and being shot into space (the scene has Shepard on Earth. so, unless the completely rebuilt the Citadel with Concrete, which i doubt, Shepard is dead by icy cold, soul-sucking darkness of Space).Explain, and do not use the "but, but the Citadel protected him so he can land on Earth safely" excuse as to how he could be on the Citadel then on Earth unless he never actually left Earth.

[balance5050]

Candidate 88766 wrote...




I meant as in they wouldn't go through the backlash if they didn't have an ace up their sleeve - the 'real' ending as the IT supporters call it. The fact that they are going through all this backlash cements the notion that there never was a 'real' ending coming out later - the endings were what we got in the game.

But, they do have an ace up there sleeves, they've sold 3.5 million and it's still selling faster than ME2, so the backlash isn't to massive anyway.

Modifié par balance5050, 12 mai 2012 - 04:47 .

[dreman9999]

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

It's an advert for DLC, it's not actuallt contained in the lore and should be disreegarded, just like messages that tell you to play again on a harder difficulty.

If you have to ignore what the game tells you for your theory to work, your theory is wrong. Ignoring something is not the same as disproving it.

But don't you see, the actual ending ignores the themes and morals expressed to you since ME1. So by accepting what starkid says, YOU are ignoring the entire series.

The ending is not ignoring what the game tells you, it checking if you paid attention to everything that was said. In away, everything the star kid say is true, a warp truth to point that they are right...But it's a biest argument.
Remeber, these are a race of machines who say theay are a pinnical of life, but then get destroyed by a thresser maw.

[SoloPala]

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...




I meant as in they wouldn't go through the backlash if they didn't have an ace up their sleeve - the 'real' ending as the IT supporters call it. The fact that they are going through all this backlash cements the notion that there never was a 'real' ending coming out later - the endings were what we got in the game.

But, they do have an ace up there sleeves, they've sold 3.5 million and it's still selling faster than ME2, so the backlash isn't to massive anyway.

The backlash will be felt in future bioware games/dlc, the backlash probably actually helped sales, i personally didn't believe the ending oculd be nearly as bad as everyone said, till it ****ing happened.

Modifié par SoloPala, 12 mai 2012 - 04:51 .

[OnelShot]

"I know you have thought about destroying us"

That quote says more imo.

[kal_reegar]

"One StarChild line that destroys IT theory."

why? flattering = lying
nobody can do that, except you, you are SPECIAL!

[balance5050]

dreman9999 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

It's an advert for DLC, it's not actuallt contained in the lore and should be disreegarded, just like messages that tell you to play again on a harder difficulty.

If you have to ignore what the game tells you for your theory to work, your theory is wrong. Ignoring something is not the same as disproving it.

But don't you see, the actual ending ignores the themes and morals expressed to you since ME1. So by accepting what starkid says, YOU are ignoring the entire series.

The ending is not ignoring what the game tells you, it checking if you paid attention to everything that was said. In away, everything the star kid say is true, a warp truth to point that they are right...But it's a biest argument.
Remeber, these are a race of machines who say theay are a pinnical of life, but then get destroyed by a thresser maw.

Right right right, I meant that what starkid tells you goes against what you've been lead to beleive about the reapers. They are a combination of machine and organic.

And he's trying his darndest to get you  not to destroy them.

I do kinda think that their purpose is only to stay the alpha predator personally.

[balance5050]

SoloPala wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...




I meant as in they wouldn't go through the backlash if they didn't have an ace up their sleeve - the 'real' ending as the IT supporters call it. The fact that they are going through all this backlash cements the notion that there never was a 'real' ending coming out later - the endings were what we got in the game.

But, they do have an ace up there sleeves, they've sold 3.5 million and it's still selling faster than ME2, so the backlash isn't to massive anyway.

The backlash will be felt in future bioware games/dlc, the backlash probably actually helped sales, i personally didn't believe the ending oculd be nearly as bad as everyone said, till it ****ing happened.

Probably, but hopefully the free EC will remedy that...

[OnelShot]

SoloPala wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...




I meant as in they wouldn't go through the backlash if they didn't have an ace up their sleeve - the 'real' ending as the IT supporters call it. The fact that they are going through all this backlash cements the notion that there never was a 'real' ending coming out later - the endings were what we got in the game.

But, they do have an ace up there sleeves, they've sold 3.5 million and it's still selling faster than ME2, so the backlash isn't to massive anyway.

The backlash will be felt in future bioware games/dlc, the backlash probably actually helped sales, i personally didn't believe the ending oculd be nearly as bad as everyone said, till it ****ing happened.

Wasn't even close to as bad as I thought it would be judging from peoples reaction. I thought it was going to be some halo 2 type ending or something.

[The Invisible Commando]

I could have wrote my original post a bit better. Extended Cut? (LOL) I saw through IT from the start as desperate attempt at denial. "There is no way Bioware would write an ending this bad!" Sorry, but I don't live in denial like that.

I still think it is highly overlooked that anyone indoctrinated like Saren, Collectors or others are just slaves. The illusion of free will is only there to make them not fight too hard. Shepard is fighting them the whole time. Why let him destroy countless Reapers when he is becoming a Reaper slave? He could be used long before that to sabotage the alliance.

Sorry we got a Dues Ex ending, but we did! Stop indoctrinating yourselves.

[KingZayd]

Elyiia wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

By the same logic, another Shepard might have ended the reaper threat

I don't see why it's such a stretch, in the case of indoctrination theory (where the scene itself would be a lie) for them to have that sort of message? It's not as if the credits and the scenes before it wouldn't be intended to give you that same impression.

Personally, since we see what happens in the far future anyway, it's quite possible that the threat was ended after that dream, maybe for all the choices involved. It's not as if Shepard's the only person in London you know. I imagine he'd still get credit for all he's done.

It's because it specifically says that Shepard has defeated the Reapers.

If you believe IT, he hasn't actually defeated the Reapers, contridicting the in game message.

by ending the reaper threat. Doesn't necessarily mean he pulled the trigger himself. We also see the far future before that message. By that time we can assume the reaper threat is over. It doesn't contradict whatever happens after he wakes up.

So how does Shepard waking up defeat the Reapers? Having the actual ending off screen might be worse than not shipping the ending with the game itself.

Ending DLC was predicted by IT. It wouldn't be offscreen.

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

You're assuming a lot. Just because it makes sense for him to lie to Shepard, and it makes sense for Shepard not to believe him does not actually mean he's lying.

In control we see the Reapers leave, if Shepard wasn't in control the Catalyst would have just been like "Lol, back to work"

The singularity is the (new) reason for the Reapers, bypassing it causes the Reapers not to need to destroy organics anymore. And again, assuming Synthetics and organics can be created again without fully knowing what synthesis actually does. For all you know, something about it prevents pure organics/synthetics ever being created again.

The reapers are sentient despite what starkid would have you believe, all sentent creatures primary focus is to live...

You're making things up again.

Oh really? I guess Mass effect 1 and 2 were lies then?

[Xellith]

The Invisible Commando wrote...

I don't see how people are still talking IT theory that I never believed. The StarBrat comments himself that TIM could never use the control method himself because he is indoctrinated. Obviously if Shepard is indoctrinated he can never control the Reapers. Also if he was indoctrinated, he would be a puppet. Why even give him the illusion of choice? StarBrat could just order him to do whatever. The IT theory logic is flawed even by the game itself.

lol "destroys IT theory".  I admit I havent read any of the other replies - but this is just too funny.  Lets say that you were talking to starchild INSIDE your head because its a dream/indoctrination.  The point is you as the player dont know you are indoctrinated.  Besides if its a dream he could have said anything and it didnt matter if it made sense or not.

Your entire argument is fundamentally flawed.  Good day sir.

[OnelShot]

The Invisible Commando wrote...

I could have wrote my original post a bit better. Extended Cut? (LOL) I saw through IT from the start as desperate attempt at denial. "There is no way Bioware would write an ending this bad!" Sorry, but I don't live in denial like that.

I still think it is highly overlooked that anyone indoctrinated like Saren, Collectors or others are just slaves. The illusion of free will is only there to make them not fight too hard. Shepard is fighting them the whole time. Why let him destroy countless Reapers when he is becoming a Reaper slave? He could be used long before that to sabotage the alliance.

Sorry we got a Dues Ex ending, but we did! Stop indoctrinating yourselves.

Please understand the IT before bashing it. Shepard is under attack to becoming indoctrinated he isn't indoctrinated or under the influence. "Desperate attempts" do not have as much viable evidence that has been presented.

[matt-bassist]

The Invisible Commando wrote...

I don't see how people are still talking IT theory that I never believed. The StarBrat comments himself that TIM could never use the control method himself because he is indoctrinated. Obviously if Shepard is indoctrinated he can never control the Reapers. Also if he was indoctrinated, he would be a puppet. Why even give him the illusion of choice? StarBrat could just order him to do whatever. The IT theory logic is flawed even by the game itself.

i think IT states that talking to the Star Child at the end is the final step to becoming completely indoctrinated. I *think* from what I understand - Shepard is still on Earth during the end of ME3 (when you confront Illusive Man and Star Child), and the events are all taking place inside Shepards mind. He is fighting the indoctrination process (hence why he can stop Illusive man). Anderson (which represents Shepards ideal of right and good) congratulations him/her for doing the right thing, and the Reapers force Shepard to pass out. Star Child intervenes and tries to convince Shepard that Destroy is the worst option, while Control and Synthesis are best. Shepard sees Anderson "destroying" and if he chooses the other two he dies. However, if he does the *right* thing and destroys, he wakes up back on Earth, and has overcome indoctrination.

Future DLC will expand on the ending and give us a REAL conclusion I.E. shep wakes up and beams up to the Citadel, finds himself in the council chambers, activates the Crucible and sends out a signal shutting them all down. He returns to Earth, and the galaxy is saved. Whether Anderson and co. survived the assault from harbinger is unknown.

[CavScout]

Silhouett3 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Is that the right link?

My point was that the game tells you at the end that the Reaper threat has just been ended, which negates the IT being true.

Your link is talking about how Bioware has used a vaguely similar idea to the IT in one of the Baldur's Gate games. 

The two aren't connected 

Well, maybe there wasn't no "You have became a legend" message window at the end of Hordes of the Underdark, but the idea of IT is there:

"where at one point you confront an advanced civilisation of psychic Mind Flayers, ruled by a giant Elder Brain. You can choose to negotiate with it, but if you try to attack, it psychically creates an illusion that makes you think you've won the war, ended up in a small idyllic forest, with a charming hostess inviting you to a celebration (to my recollection, it's been years since I played this). If you accept, the credits roll exactly as if you completed the game."

Except that game has a distinct ending for each option. The game doesn't end the same for both choices.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Also the reapers say they only choose organics that are worthy for ascension, so harvesters are actually proof of his lies.

Ascension means turning a race into a Reaper. The harvesters are husks. Massive difference.

They are still killing a race for no other reason than too make them their slaves no?

Non sequitur.

[CavScout]

dreman9999 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

You're assuming a lot. Just because it makes sense for him to lie to Shepard, and it makes sense for Shepard not to believe him does not actually mean he's lying.

In control we see the Reapers leave, if Shepard wasn't in control the Catalyst would have just been like "Lol, back to work"

The singularity is the (new) reason for the Reapers, bypassing it causes the Reapers not to need to destroy organics anymore. And again, assuming Synthetics and organics can be created again without fully knowing what synthesis actually does. For all you know, something about it prevents pure organics/synthetics ever being created again.

The reapers are sentient despite what starkid would have you believe, all sentent creatures primary focus is to live...

You're making things up again.

1. The starkid never said they are not sentient.
2. did you miss the conversation with the 3 reapers in this series?

I am refering to the claim "all sentent creatures primary focus is to live".