739 réponses à ce sujet

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...IT is not an interpretation of the ending,

WRONG! I don't even know how you.... nevermind, I interpret the ending as an indoctrination attempt, one is all it takes to make IT an interpetation.

Editing a sentence and taking it out of context won't actually score you any points.

"According to IT, BioWare has shipped a game with no ending. According to IT, BioWare won't even state that IT is their plan all the while being crucified in the press and on their forums for the reveled endings.

IT is not an interpretation of the ending, it is a claim that BW is hiding the real ending from its customers and taking a massive PR hit while doing so. "

Modifié par CavScout, 13 mai 2012 - 04:57 .

[Lookout1390]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...
BINGO!  We have a winner!

The Guy has offered nothing to the actual debate itself, other then the fact that he believes we are all debating wrong.Read number 14.  He refuses to debate you all because he believes you crazy for arguing in favor of IT, but has offered nothing solid in this thread to refute the evidence with which you present.

I guess if you ignore where your supposed evidence is systematically destroyed, then I guess you can pretend that.

Where is it systemically destroyed?  Where have you offered a counterpoint to anything, except to speak in hypotheticals?

That being true or false, do you really believe IT is going to gain something out of this?

Answer his question

I've done that on many threads, on many points. Do you really think anyone here is entitled to ask again and again, even if those same points were debunked many times?

Why would you expect me or anyone else to work harder at your stuff than yourselves? You did not put solid evidence in ordered fashion, so everytime an IT supporter opens up a "thread" to attract attention, he / she doesn't give all the "evidence" to open up a frank and honest discussion, it's always a tiny bit at a time. Why so? Because it would give opponents the "real matter of the theory", and IT supporters would not be able to "make up evidence" and change it in the course of a discussion. Instead, they casually send people searching in a thousand pages thread, or send them looking at fan made Youtube videos, or whatever time saving method to try to get their point through without having to show their theory in a structured manner.

I do not think IT would gain anything more than what it already has : a bunch of zealots trying to shut down opposition with rude manners, trollish behavior and immature argumentation and refusal of counter-evidence when presented. If any IT supporter thinks he's giving his theory a "nice look" by asking others to repeat endlessly the same points, knowing in advance how things will turn out, they just don't realise we are not all in a frenzy of frustration regarding the endings. Harsh words are used sometimes to describe some IT supporters and their manners, I don't think they have any merit to more respect than they give others.

Once again you just can't even answer me directly, thinking 2 typed up paragraphs will shut me up.

Not all IT are zealots, and people that argue with them are the ones labeling them as 'zealots' when you are generalizing all IT supporters to be trolls, rude, and immaturity. When this exact thread is a perfect  example of why that statement couldn't be anymore wrong.

No one likes a hypocrite.

[BatmanTurian]

CavScout wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

CavScout wrote...

STRAW MAN ALERT!!!!!
Note that I never said the Codex/Wiki were wrong....

Except you did. You as much as claimed that full reaper control is not indoctrination, which makes no sense because it's the only other lore-based way Reapers control organics other than turning them into husks.

Please link to my post where I state the Codex/Wiki are in error.

PS: "full reaper control" is in the App not the Codex/Wiki.

Dodging the facts. full reaper control is an obvious phrase synonym for indoctrination or huskification. Do you refute this? If so, what do you think they actually meant?

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...


PS: "full reaper control" is in the App not the Codex/Wiki.

Actually it is in the Codex, under the indoctrination section=]

[Iconoclaste]

ohupthis wrote...

Total waste of blood actually.

You do have something to win, or else you wouldn't stick around just to sound like a parrot repeating stuff learned by hearth. If you realise this opponent is not going to give into your version of the story, then you are staying just for your own sake, because you know you might just be on the wrong track. That's why insecure people tend to annoy others.

[CavScout]

Lookout1390 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...
I've done that on many threads, on many points. Do you really think anyone here is entitled to ask again and again, even if those same points were debunked many times?

Why would you expect me or anyone else to work harder at your stuff than yourselves? You did not put solid evidence in ordered fashion, so everytime an IT supporter opens up a "thread" to attract attention, he / she doesn't give all the "evidence" to open up a frank and honest discussion, it's always a tiny bit at a time. Why so? Because it would give opponents the "real matter of the theory", and IT supporters would not be able to "make up evidence" and change it in the course of a discussion. Instead, they casually send people searching in a thousand pages thread, or send them looking at fan made Youtube videos, or whatever time saving method to try to get their point through without having to show their theory in a structured manner.

I do not think IT would gain anything more than what it already has : a bunch of zealots trying to shut down opposition with rude manners, trollish behavior and immature argumentation and refusal of counter-evidence when presented. If any IT supporter thinks he's giving his theory a "nice look" by asking others to repeat endlessly the same points, knowing in advance how things will turn out, they just don't realise we are not all in a frenzy of frustration regarding the endings. Harsh words are used sometimes to describe some IT supporters and their manners, I don't think they have any merit to more respect than they give others.

Once again you just can't even answer me directly, thinking 2 typed up paragraphs will shut me up.

Not all IT are zealots, and people that argue with them are the ones labeling them as 'zealots' when you are generalizing all IT supporters to be trolls, rude, and immaturity. When this exact thread is a perfect  example of why that statement couldn't be anymore wrong.

No one likes a hypocrite.

But you are a zealot and you don't know what hypocrite means.

[Lookout1390]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

When/If the IT gets proven wrong. I expect some Hitler rant parodies. A lot of hitler rant parodies.

Hackett Out.

It has already proven wrong.

EA released a big ol' "**** you" back in April saying that it wasn't.

People keep saying this. Saying it doesn't make it true. In actuality, they refuted many theories but danced around I.T.

They said there will be no more gameplay added, and that they aren't changing the ending.

They are just elaborating on a few details so a few more people will be 'satisfied' with the ending.

Common sense says everything that peopled 'hated' about the ending, is staying...

And I.T. can still happen with all of that. I.T. doesn't change the ending and no additional gameplay is needed to end the game, only cutscenes and conversations.

More cutscenes with auto-dialogue.

Yay, because ME3 needs just more of that.

So Shepard will ask a few more questions....whoopie.

Everything that ruined the ending is staying, they made it clear they aren't chaing their 'art' (lol)

Hey, I'm not a big fan of the ending either, actually. I would have preferred a more cut-and-dry ending. It would have been a cleaner ending to the trilogy.

I just wanted closure.

I wanted the story to come to an end

I wasn't expecting a rainbow, bunnies and sunshine with your LI happily ever after and the Reapers defeated and things can go back to the way they were. I just wanted closure, and logical end to this story-arch, so they can't go on to milk the franchise name.

The major problems in ME3 can't be fixed with 5-7 more minutes of cutscenes and auto-dialogue.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...IT is not an interpretation of the ending,

WRONG! I don't even know how you.... nevermind, I interpret the ending as an indoctrination attempt, one is all it takes to make IT an interpetation.

Editing a sentence and taking it out of context won't actually score you any points.

"According to IT, BioWare has shipped a game with no ending. According to IT, BioWare won't even state that IT is their plan all the while being crucified in the press and on their forums for the reveled endings.

IT is not an interpretation of the ending, it is a claim that BW is hiding the real ending from its customers and taking a massive PR hit while doing so. "

Again. I.T. IS in fact an interpretation of the ending.

[Sisterofshane]

CavScout wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
A conspiracy theory is not true simply because it hasn't been "refuted".

There are a bunch of conspiracies that did turn out to be true as well.

And that has to do with the price of tea in China how?

And your arguments have what to do with IT and the endings of ME3?

That IT isn't in the ending of ME3 at all.

It's one thing to argue what Bioware intends to do with the EC - it's another thing to simply refute a metaphorical interpretation to the ending of a story, on the basis that you did not like the metaphor.

Unless Bioware comes out and with a statement out right disputing this interpretation of the ending as it was presented (which they might choose to let the EC do all of the talking), there is nothing to make IT any less valid then your own interpretation of the endings.

[Lookout1390]

CavScout wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...
I've done that on many threads, on many points. Do you really think anyone here is entitled to ask again and again, even if those same points were debunked many times?

Why would you expect me or anyone else to work harder at your stuff than yourselves? You did not put solid evidence in ordered fashion, so everytime an IT supporter opens up a "thread" to attract attention, he / she doesn't give all the "evidence" to open up a frank and honest discussion, it's always a tiny bit at a time. Why so? Because it would give opponents the "real matter of the theory", and IT supporters would not be able to "make up evidence" and change it in the course of a discussion. Instead, they casually send people searching in a thousand pages thread, or send them looking at fan made Youtube videos, or whatever time saving method to try to get their point through without having to show their theory in a structured manner.

I do not think IT would gain anything more than what it already has : a bunch of zealots trying to shut down opposition with rude manners, trollish behavior and immature argumentation and refusal of counter-evidence when presented. If any IT supporter thinks he's giving his theory a "nice look" by asking others to repeat endlessly the same points, knowing in advance how things will turn out, they just don't realise we are not all in a frenzy of frustration regarding the endings. Harsh words are used sometimes to describe some IT supporters and their manners, I don't think they have any merit to more respect than they give others.

Once again you just can't even answer me directly, thinking 2 typed up paragraphs will shut me up.

Not all IT are zealots, and people that argue with them are the ones labeling them as 'zealots' when you are generalizing all IT supporters to be trolls, rude, and immaturity. When this exact thread is a perfect  example of why that statement couldn't be anymore wrong.

No one likes a hypocrite.

But you are a zealot and you don't know what hypocrite means.

See? Right here, a perfect example. He never answered the major question and is still pretending it never happened.

[BatmanTurian]

Iconoclaste wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

Total waste of blood actually.

You do have something to win, or else you wouldn't stick around just to sound like a parrot repeating stuff learned by hearth. If you realise this opponent is not going to give into your version of the story, then you are staying just for your own sake, because you know you might just be on the wrong track. That's why insecure people tend to annoy others.

The same could be said for you, sir.

[CavScout]

BatmanTurian wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Please link to my post where I state the Codex/Wiki are in error.
PS: "full reaper control" is in the App not the Codex/Wiki.

Dodging the facts. full reaper control is an obvious phrase synonym for indoctrination or huskification. Do you refute this? If so, what do you think they actually meant?

Once again, you won't support your claim (ie I said that the Codex/Wiki) was wrong (or in error).

FATCS:
Indocrination is not mentioned in the Final Hours app you post so often.
Nothing in the Codex states that the only way to be under "full Reaper control" is by indoctrination.

These facts are indisputable. Why do you even try?

Modifié par CavScout, 13 mai 2012 - 05:03 .

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...
I've done that on many threads, on many points. Do you really think anyone here is entitled to ask again and again, even if those same points were debunked many times?

Why would you expect me or anyone else to work harder at your stuff than yourselves? You did not put solid evidence in ordered fashion, so everytime an IT supporter opens up a "thread" to attract attention, he / she doesn't give all the "evidence" to open up a frank and honest discussion, it's always a tiny bit at a time. Why so? Because it would give opponents the "real matter of the theory", and IT supporters would not be able to "make up evidence" and change it in the course of a discussion. Instead, they casually send people searching in a thousand pages thread, or send them looking at fan made Youtube videos, or whatever time saving method to try to get their point through without having to show their theory in a structured manner.

I do not think IT would gain anything more than what it already has : a bunch of zealots trying to shut down opposition with rude manners, trollish behavior and immature argumentation and refusal of counter-evidence when presented. If any IT supporter thinks he's giving his theory a "nice look" by asking others to repeat endlessly the same points, knowing in advance how things will turn out, they just don't realise we are not all in a frenzy of frustration regarding the endings. Harsh words are used sometimes to describe some IT supporters and their manners, I don't think they have any merit to more respect than they give others.

Once again you just can't even answer me directly, thinking 2 typed up paragraphs will shut me up.

Not all IT are zealots, and people that argue with them are the ones labeling them as 'zealots' when you are generalizing all IT supporters to be trolls, rude, and immaturity. When this exact thread is a perfect  example of why that statement couldn't be anymore wrong.

No one likes a hypocrite.

But you are a zealot and you don't know what hypocrite means.

Seems like you like us Cavscout, you spend a lot of time with us, you like us. Admit it. What else explains why you're here, you're not doing any one a services but making your self known as someone who can't have a civili conversation.

[BatmanTurian]

Lookout1390 wrote...


I just wanted closure.

I wanted the story to come to an end

I wasn't expecting a rainbow, bunnies and sunshine with your LI happily ever after and the Reapers defeated and things can go back to the way they were. I just wanted closure, and logical end to this story-arch, so they can't go on to milk the franchise name.

The major problems in ME3 can't be fixed with 5-7 more minutes of cutscenes and auto-dialogue.

Some of them might be, but here's hoping they can try for the whole thing. I'll at least try to be optimistic.

[Iconoclaste]

Lookout1390 wrote...


Once again you just can't even answer me directly, thinking 2 typed up paragraphs will shut me up.

Not all IT are zealots, and people that argue with them are the ones labeling them as 'zealots' when you are generalizing all IT supporters to be trolls, rude, and immaturity. When this exact thread is a perfect  example of why that statement couldn't be anymore wrong.

No one likes a hypocrite.

If you like to side with these guys, you will be identified like them. I don't care what you think if you believe in IT with its actual "supporting evidence", I know how deep one can get convinced of owning the 'truth" even if the majority will see flaws in it.

[balance5050]

Arguing semantics....

WHO HERE THINKS THAT "FULL REAPER CONTROL" = INDOCTRINATION?

Show of hands let's say.

Modifié par balance5050, 13 mai 2012 - 05:04 .

[KevShep]

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KevShep wrote...

CavScout ... Ive backed up my claim now you answer my question!

You have not.
You claimed "indoctrination" was used in that Final Hours app. It wasn't.
You claimed "full reaper control" can only mean indoctrination as proved by the codex. You failed to back it up.

Just because other Indoctrination Theory Adapts are cheering you on doesn't mean you've actually accomplished anything.

I guess I cant argue with some one that says the codex and wiki are wrong

STRAW MAN ALERT!!!!!

Note that I never said the Codex/Wiki were wrong....

You sound like you were easly indoctrinated/fooled by Bioware when you got to the ending. This whole serise has been about destroying the reapers and you let a REAPER kid talk you into throwing all of that out the window in JUST 10 minutes to pick control/synthesis...or TIM's/Saren's path!

A opening ad hominem followed by the odd ignoring of the actual game ending(s)/choice(s). For you can still destroy the Reapers in ME3.

You do know that for Shepard to be indoctrinated the PLAYER must also be indoctinrated?

Second you did mention that they were incomplete! Have you noticed that Bioware was not updated the wiki to say that TIM found a new way to indoctrinate?

the destroy ending means your destroying the reapers hold of you. Have you ever stopped ranting for one minute to think that maybe your the one that is not seeing the ending as it is? As a trick?

[KevShep]

balance5050 wrote...

Arguing semantics....

WHO HERE THINKS THAT "FULL REAPER CONTROL" = INDOCTRINATION?

As pre wiki and codex?...Yes!

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...IT is not an interpretation of the ending,

WRONG! I don't even know how you.... nevermind, I interpret the ending as an indoctrination attempt, one is all it takes to make IT an interpetation.

Editing a sentence and taking it out of context won't actually score you any points.

"According to IT, BioWare has shipped a game with no ending. According to IT, BioWare won't even state that IT is their plan all the while being crucified in the press and on their forums for the reveled endings.

IT is not an interpretation of the ending, it is a claim that BW is hiding the real ending from its customers and taking a massive PR hit while doing so. "

Again. I.T. IS in fact an interpretation of the ending.

I can't force you into reading comprehension.

[Lookout1390]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...


Once again you just can't even answer me directly, thinking 2 typed up paragraphs will shut me up.

Not all IT are zealots, and people that argue with them are the ones labeling them as 'zealots' when you are generalizing all IT supporters to be trolls, rude, and immaturity. When this exact thread is a perfect  example of why that statement couldn't be anymore wrong.

No one likes a hypocrite.

If you like to side with these guys, you will be identified like them. I don't care what you think if you believe in IT with its actual "supporting evidence", I know how deep one can get convinced of owning the 'truth" even if the majority will see flaws in it.

I really hope you don't go through life with that type of attitude and sense of logic, you can't black and white a world of grey.

Both sides of the argument have those 'individuals' that stick out. So don't even try to deny this. I'm pretty sure I haven't called anyone names, or acted rude...I've just been arguing with evidence instead of attacking their personal being.

[Sisterofshane]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Funny, I think the anti-IT side has presented this behavior more recently tonight...

Besides, jokes on you I don't believe in IT.  I can, however (and did, in this thread) come in and have a reasonable discussion with people who want to hear actual answers to questions based upon what happened in the game, not spout off red herrings learned from debate 101 in a hope to derail any thread with which might present a theory that is contrary to my way of thinking.

You got me there!

I've been on these threads just too many times, I know how it always turn out, and it's just too bad. A debate is a public thing, and even if readers don't come in systematically to voice their opinion, they can see what's happening, and that will be shown in other threads later, with sarcasm or irony against IT supporters.

And it's perfectly valid to believe in a literal interpretation of the ending, but what makes me mad with CavScout is that he comes into the Lions Den and pokes it stick to wake it up, but doesn't bring any actual meat for the Lion to chew.

[balance5050]

WHO HERE THINKS THAT "FULL REAPER CONTROL" = INDOCTRINATION?

-KevShep

[BatmanTurian]

CavScout wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Please link to my post where I state the Codex/Wiki are in error.
PS: "full reaper control" is in the App not the Codex/Wiki.

Dodging the facts. full reaper control is an obvious phrase synonym for indoctrination or huskification. Do you refute this? If so, what do you think they actually meant?

Once again, you won't support your claim (ie I said that the Codex/Wiki) was wrong (or in error).

FATCS:

• Indocrination is not mentioned in the Final Hours app you post so often.
  
  
• Nothing in the Codex states that the only way to be under "full Reaper control" is by indoctrination.

These facts are indisputable. Why do you even try?

[*]indoctrination doesn't have to be mentioned when it is alluded to by a synonym phrase in the app
[*]indoctrination is full reaper control. The subject may have some free will if slowly indoctrinated or be a complete slave if quickly indoctrinated. Either way they are under the Reapers sway, believe what the Reapers tell them, and the Reapers have complete control unless the subject is slowly indoctrinated and has enough strong will to break it temporarily. Ignoring this is to ignore the lore of the ME universe entirely, which is illogical.
[*]Also you dodged my questions again. It's looking bad for you.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 13 mai 2012 - 05:05 .

[CavScout]

Lookout1390 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
But you are a zealot and you don't know what hypocrite means.

See? Right here, a perfect example. He never answered the major question and is still pretending it never happened.

Even if true, it doesn't make my statement any less true.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...IT is not an interpretation of the ending,

WRONG! I don't even know how you.... nevermind, I interpret the ending as an indoctrination attempt, one is all it takes to make IT an interpetation.

Editing a sentence and taking it out of context won't actually score you any points.

"According to IT, BioWare has shipped a game with no ending. According to IT, BioWare won't even state that IT is their plan all the while being crucified in the press and on their forums for the reveled endings.

IT is not an interpretation of the ending, it is a claim that BW is hiding the real ending from its customers and taking a massive PR hit while doing so. "

Again. I.T. IS in fact an interpretation of the ending.

I can't force you into reading comprehension.

DUH! you can't force us to do anything.