505 réponses à ce sujet

[Bill Casey]

jijeebo wrote...

TIM is using biotic powers for the physical control aspect

It's called ReaperPowerarmright...

[CavScout]

Sdrol117 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

by pretending it never happened.

Stop using fallacies...
No version of IT is "it never happened" or "all a dream"...
It's Shepard fighting the Reapers most insidious weapon...

They all speculate that the ending sequence didn't not occur outside of Shep's mind, I.E. it did not literally happen. Don't' be coy.

Typical IT defender response right there. 

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

[balance5050]

Sdrol117 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

 And they are all equally stupid.

Typical anti-I.T. response.

"Herp derp... it's stupid... derp."

Mind backing up that disingenuous assertion?

The fact that the entire theory hinges on "fixing" bad writing by pretending it never happened. Your theory sucks, time to move on.

It hinges on the entire series. Most of us knew it was coming to this especially if your Shepard has done all the DLC, creating a more "complete" Mass Effect experience.

I'm sorry you didn't get the full effect.

[CavScout]

Bill Casey wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

TIM is using biotic powers for the physical control aspect

It's called ReaperPowerarmright...

If the ability was gained from Reaper implants, does that preclude from being Biotic in nature?

[Gorkan86]

CavScout wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

by pretending it never happened.

Stop using fallacies...
No version of IT is "it never happened" or "all a dream"...
It's Shepard fighting the Reapers most insidious weapon...

They all speculate that the ending sequence didn't not occur outside of Shep's mind, I.E. it did not literally happen. Don't' be coy.

What about Citadel explosion?
If you support IT number 2, it's mean Shep will have to die in Citadel explosion. But somehow he draw breath.

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...The fact that the entire theory hinges on "fixing" bad writing by pretending it never happened. Your theory sucks, time to move on.

It hinges on the entire series. Most of us knew it was coming to this especially if your Shepard has done all the DLC, creating a more "complete" Mass Effect experience.

I'm sorry you didn't get the full effect.
Only us smart folks get IT. You too dumb!

In other words.... ^

[jijeebo]

Bill Casey wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

TIM is using biotic powers for the physical control aspect

It's called ReaperPowerarmright...

He gained it by adding reaper implants.

EDIT: ninja

Modifié par jijeebo, 13 mai 2012 - 07:11 .

[Bill Casey]

CavScout wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

by pretending it never happened.

Stop using fallacies...
No version of IT is "it never happened" or "all a dream"...
It's Shepard fighting the Reapers most insidious weapon...

They all speculate that the ending sequence didn't not occur outside of Shep's mind, I.E. it did not literally happen. Don't' be coy.

No, they literally did happen in Shepard's mind...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 13 mai 2012 - 07:11 .

[Sdrol117]

Gorkan86 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

by pretending it never happened.

Stop using fallacies...
No version of IT is "it never happened" or "all a dream"...
It's Shepard fighting the Reapers most insidious weapon...

They all speculate that the ending sequence didn't not occur outside of Shep's mind, I.E. it did not literally happen. Don't' be coy.

What about Citadel explosion?
If you support IT number 2, it's mean Shep will have to die in Citadel explosion. But somehow he draw breath.

What makes everybody think that isn't just some sort of final breath for Shepard? I mean it hasn't really been proven otherwise. 

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading Lord of the Rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

Modifié par balance5050, 13 mai 2012 - 07:12 .

[CavScout]

Gorkan86 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

by pretending it never happened.

Stop using fallacies...
No version of IT is "it never happened" or "all a dream"...
It's Shepard fighting the Reapers most insidious weapon...

They all speculate that the ending sequence didn't not occur outside of Shep's mind, I.E. it did not literally happen. Don't' be coy.

What about Citadel explosion?
If you support IT number 2, it's mean Shep will have to die in Citadel explosion. But somehow he draw breath.

I don't intend to "support" any of the ITs... IT supprters will say the Citadel didn't explode (it was all in his head) and then will use the explosion as proof of IT (Shep could live if it exploded!). A major case of having your cake and eating it too!

[Sdrol117]

CavScout wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

by pretending it never happened.

Stop using fallacies...
No version of IT is "it never happened" or "all a dream"...
It's Shepard fighting the Reapers most insidious weapon...

They all speculate that the ending sequence didn't not occur outside of Shep's mind, I.E. it did not literally happen. Don't' be coy.

Typical IT defender response right there. 

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Exactly. It's either face value bad writing, or IT. And since I particularly wasn't a fan of ME2s writing/story after the beauty of ME1...I may be slightly biased towards simply bad writing.  

[CavScout]

Bill Casey wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

by pretending it never happened.

Stop using fallacies...
No version of IT is "it never happened" or "all a dream"...
It's Shepard fighting the Reapers most insidious weapon...

They all speculate that the ending sequence didn't not occur outside of Shep's mind, I.E. it did not literally happen. Don't' be coy.

No, they literally did happen in Shepard's mind...

Being coy doesn't suit you sir. You can't pull it off.

[jijeebo]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading lord of the rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

EC wasn't planned, IT wasn't their intention.

Unless part of the IT scheme involved deliberately lieing to an already angry fanbase.

[Bill Casey]

I'm not being coy...
Saying it never happened is bull****...
That denotes unimportance...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 13 mai 2012 - 07:14 .

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

Gorkan86 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Sdrol117 wrote...

by pretending it never happened.

Stop using fallacies...
No version of IT is "it never happened" or "all a dream"...
It's Shepard fighting the Reapers most insidious weapon...

They all speculate that the ending sequence didn't not occur outside of Shep's mind, I.E. it did not literally happen. Don't' be coy.

What about Citadel explosion?
If you support IT number 2, it's mean Shep will have to die in Citadel explosion. But somehow he draw breath.

I don't intend to "support" any of the ITs... IT supprters will say the Citadel didn't explode (it was all in his head) and then will use the explosion as proof of IT (Shep could live if it exploded!). A major case of having your cake and eating it too!

You're missing the point, the citadel DID explode, in Shepards head.... Which is evident by him waking up on Earth.

[Sdrol117]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading Lord of the Rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

SPECULATION FOR EVERYONE? 

[balance5050]

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading lord of the rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

EC wasn't planned, IT wasn't their intention.

Unless part of the IT scheme involved deliberately lieing to an already angry fanbase.

That's left up to speculation. You can't say that with certainty.

 

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading Lord of the Rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

No, the analogy would be One Ring Deniers (ORDs) posting all over Middle Earth forums claiming they have connected the dots showing there are other rings and that the ring Frodo drops into Mt. Doom was a decoy. You IT folks are ORDs!

[Sdrol117]

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading lord of the rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

EC wasn't planned, IT wasn't their intention.

Unless part of the IT scheme involved deliberately lieing to an already angry fanbase.

The next thing they will say is Bioware was just indoctrinating us IRL.

[CavScout]

Sdrol117 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Exactly. It's either face value bad writing, or IT. And since I particularly wasn't a fan of ME2s writing/story after the beauty of ME1...I may be slightly biased towards simply bad writing.  

It really isn't the bolded. That is an IT positioned false choice fallacy.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading Lord of the Rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

No, the analogy would be One Ring Deniers (ORDs) posting all over Middle Earth forums claiming they have connected the dots showing there are other rings and that the ring Frodo drops into Mt. Doom was a decoy. You IT folks are ORDs!

DAFUQ? you missed the point again?

[jijeebo]

balance5050 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading lord of the rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

EC wasn't planned, IT wasn't their intention.

Unless part of the IT scheme involved deliberately lieing to an already angry fanbase.

That's left up to speculation. You can't say that with certainty.

 

Not speculation, quote from Bioware Co-Founder.

"Building on their research, Exec Producer Casey Hudson and the team are hard at work on a number of game content initiatives that will help answer the questions, providing more clarity for those seeking further closure to their journey. You’ll hear more on this in April.  We’re working hard to maintain the right balance between
the artistic integrity of the original story while addressing the fan feedback we’ve received.  This is in addition to our existing plan to continue providing new Mass Effect content and new full games, so rest assured that your journey in the Mass Effect universe can, and will, continue."


You can't "Speculate" what Bioware meant when they said EC is in addition to their existing plan... It's pretty clear.

Modifié par jijeebo, 13 mai 2012 - 07:18 .

[balance5050]

Sdrol117 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Yep. The other is "nothing in game can be used against IT because it is IT and so can't be used against IT".

Thats like reading lord of the rings and saying "nothing can be used against the theory that there is one ring to rule them all" 

The author wouldn't write anything that says they aren't trying to indoctrinate Shepard, because indoctrinating Sheprd was the author's intention.

As well as indoctrinating the player.

EC wasn't planned, IT wasn't their intention.

Unless part of the IT scheme involved deliberately lieing to an already angry fanbase.

The next thing they will say is Bioware was just indoctrinating us IRL.

I actually already said that....

[CavScout]

Bill Casey wrote...

I'm not being coy...
Saying it never happened is bull****...
That denotes unimportance...

I can have a dream. I may have dreamed but what I dreamed didn't really happen. Same with the IT endings.