303 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaelef]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Again, missing the point.

Lets just boil this down. Nice and simple.

Statement 1: the IT provides a solution to most of the plotholes in the ending

Statement 2: the IT is true, and is already the intended interpretation of the endings


Both of us seem to agree with statement 1. The endings are full of plotholes, and the IT actually does cover most of them up.

However, statement 1 does not prove statement 2.

Very nice summary.  It won't help, but very nice summary.

[Siansonea]

I can't believe how much is being written about IT and other ending-related theories and proposals. It's all in vain. BioWare is going to do whatever they want to do, and more than likely it's not going to be anything like what has been discussed on the boards. It'll be out of left field, just like the existing ending. All this back-and-forth, all this effort being put into justifying the ending, justifying the anti-ending theories, etc., is really just an endless spiral.

Look at who we're dealing with here. You really think these people masterminded a total troll tactic of giving you a bait-and-switch Bobby-Ewing-In-The-Shower It-Was-All-A-Dream placeholder DLC-bait ending? No, they really thought that we'd take it at face value, think it was "deep" in that simplistic way THEY thought it was, and be happy. Because they're not smart enough to recognize a bad idea when they hear one. That's really it. We're not talking about Writing Geniuses here. We're talking about people who didn't really take their ideas to their logical conclusion, realize the implications thereof, and start over. How do we know this? Because they didn't start over.

[dreamgazer]

Kaelef wrote...

People who know nothing about programming trying to find meaning in the names of code objects and graphical assets... *sigh*

Enlighten, then: why does that plant in a probable heightened-reality sequence have a file name that organizes it with other files categorized as "dream" assets?  For laughs, or just because the designers thought they looked "dreamy"?

[dreamgazer]

Kaelef wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Again, missing the point.

Lets just boil this down. Nice and simple.

Statement 1: the IT provides a solution to most of the plotholes in the ending

Statement 2: the IT is true, and is already the intended interpretation of the endings


Both of us seem to agree with statement 1. The endings are full of plotholes, and the IT actually does cover most of them up.

However, statement 1 does not prove statement 2.

Very nice summary. It won't help, but very nice summary.

I agree, mostly---though it is possible that BioWare intended this interpretation alongside a more literal outlook.

[shepskisaac]

dreamgazer wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

People who know nothing about programming trying to find meaning in the names of code objects and graphical assets... *sigh*

Enlighten, then: why does that plant in a probable heightened-reality sequence have a file name that organizes it with other files categorized as "dream" assets?  For laughs, or just because the designers thought they looked "dreamy"?

You do realize that the same file is being used elsewhere in the game right? Or do you considering Priority: London to be a dream too?

[dreamgazer]

IsaacShep wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

People who know nothing about programming trying to find meaning in the names of code objects and graphical assets... *sigh*

Enlighten, then: why does that plant in a probable heightened-reality sequence have a file name that organizes it with other files categorized as "dream" assets?  For laughs, or just because the designers thought they looked "dreamy"?

You do realize that the same file is being used elsewhere in the game right? Or do you considering Priority: London to be a dream too?

No, I don't consider that (at least, most of it) to be surreal. I also wasn't aware that the plant from the original post was used in the London missions.

EDIT: Even if they are used elsewhere, the file name suggests that they might be organized and implemented for a more direct purpose---and our mental manifestations do constantly pull things from reality. 

Modifié par dreamgazer, 14 mai 2012 - 04:33 .

[Parabolee77]

OK to show I am more than fair to evidence against IT. I do believe I have cited this particular plant in the real dream sequence. Can't be 100% sure yet, but it certainly does undermine this evidence if proven to be true.

Not entirely though, the fact that some plants from Shepard's dream appear in that scene still adds weight to the theory in my opinion. Albeit less that if the "dream-foilage" only appeared in the Normandy scene.

EDIT: Definatly a reused assett from the dream sequence -

1e75g1.png

Again does not mean there is not significance to the fact that the same foilage appears in both a scene we know to be a dream and a scene we THINK might be a dream.

Updated my guide to reflect this info - parabolee.blogspot.com

Modifié par Parabolee77, 14 mai 2012 - 04:37 .

[incinerator950]

[BigGuy28]

It doesn't have to make sense! Indoctrination!

[balance5050]

BigGuy28 wrote...

It doesn't have to make sense! Indoctrination!

 

[BigGuy28]

balance5050 wrote...

BigGuy28 wrote...

It doesn't have to make sense! Indoctrination!

 

Not sure why you keep posting that when you are the one that is all about space magic not me. But you keep on fighting for the truth with your freedom fighter friends.


Also Indoctrination!

[kumquats]

anorling wrote...

You can get the feeling when the game is trying to show you that things are happening in almost-real time and when you just have to imagine that hours/days have passed. I get the impression that what happens after Shepard shoot the pipe happens pretty fast. Not real-time, but maybe in a few minutes.

So you feel that cutscenes are in real time, not like the rest of the entire game, because you have a feeling.
I have a feeling I should go, there is no point in having a discussion based on a feeling, you know....

[Deemz]

The dream plant assets were just simply used in the dream sequence area first.

[liggy002]

Deemz wrote...

The dream plant assets were just simply used in the dream sequence area first.

Really?  Attach an image then and show us all where they were used in that sequence.  We provided a picture as proof.

[Demoiselle]

Reusing this kind of thing in a film or tv show? Suspicous.

In a video game? Yeah, they just didn't want to make another graphic...

[EsterCloat]

incinerator950 wrote...

Needs more Kai Leng.

[Deemz]

liggy002 wrote...

Deemz wrote...

The dream plant assets were just simply used in the dream sequence area first.

Really?  Attach an image then and show us all where they were used in that sequence.  We provided a picture as proof.

Can't do that. My only option is my PS3 version since I just got back from the hospital. Spine problems and not going to be using a pc for awhile. I will set a reminder on my iPad though as with the heavy pain killers I have a good chance of not remembering.

[Swimming Ferret]

EsterCloat wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Needs more Kai Leng.

Pfft lol

What I don't get is why IT supporters think getting zapped by Harbinger's beam makes you indocrinated. It kinda obliterates everyone and Shep's armour is melted on them and dang near kills them. As we know, Reaper's don't use their beams as indocrination tools. As it said in ME1 by Rana, Reapers produce signals, a tone from within their bodies which interfear with our brains. Not by zapping people.

But I suppose SPACE MAGIC  

Modifié par Swimming Ferret, 15 mai 2012 - 12:39 .

[stysiaq]

"dream foliage" were used in the dream sequences. Yes, they were, check it again, don't believe the documentary's words for granted.

This case was closed long time ago.

IT has its charms, but this ain't one of them.

[Ultra Prism]

MY THEORY WORKS THEN here is it

http://social.biowar.../index/11491510

[stysiaq]

Siansonea II wrote...

I can't believe how much is being written about IT and other ending-related theories and proposals. It's all in vain. BioWare is going to do whatever they want to do, and more than likely it's not going to be anything like what has been discussed on the boards. It'll be out of left field, just like the existing ending. All this back-and-forth, all this effort being put into justifying the ending, justifying the anti-ending theories, etc., is really just an endless spiral.

Look at who we're dealing with here. You really think these people masterminded a total troll tactic of giving you a bait-and-switch Bobby-Ewing-In-The-Shower It-Was-All-A-Dream placeholder DLC-bait ending? No, they really thought that we'd take it at face value, think it was "deep" in that simplistic way THEY thought it was, and be happy. Because they're not smart enough to recognize a bad idea when they hear one. That's really it. We're not talking about Writing Geniuses here. We're talking about people who didn't really take their ideas to their logical conclusion, realize the implications thereof, and start over. How do we know this? Because they didn't start over.

also, QFT, but IT devotees will never accept the simple truth.

[Parabolee77]

liggy002 wrote...

Deemz wrote...

The dream plant assets were just simply used in the dream sequence area first.

Really?  Attach an image then and show us all where they were used in that sequence.  We provided a picture as proof.

I already did. And I'm a big IT supporter!

[ackalaya3]

IsaacShep wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

People who know nothing about programming trying to find meaning in the names of code objects and graphical assets... *sigh*

Enlighten, then: why does that plant in a probable heightened-reality sequence have a file name that organizes it with other files categorized as "dream" assets?  For laughs, or just because the designers thought they looked "dreamy"?

You do realize that the same file is being used elsewhere in the game right? Or do you considering Priority: London to be a dream too?

I don't recall seeing that plant in any other dream sequences...