55528 réponses à ce sujet

[titusrsoooooo1337]

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Who's up for more speculation? I may not post here anymore, but I will lurk the hell out of it. It's been an honor, whether IT is the truth or not doesn't matter, we speculated, and that was the goal, not badmouthing, trolling, dissing, disrespect, or anything but speculation. Essentially, nothing is true, everything is permitted.

Haha I just tried to bump this thread and it said I wasn't permitted to


But on that note, I really didn't see anything to disprove this theory. Sure the cinematics were beatiful and all, but wasn't it part of the theory in the first place that the "endings" were reassurances given to shepards mind to help promote his indoctrination?

[EpyonX3]

monrapias wrote...

Here's a question.

Hacket radio'd in and said that no one made it to the beam.

Then why does he "radio" shepard?

In my playthough he says "someone" made it.

[monrapias]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

monrapias wrote...

Here's a question.

Hacket radio'd in and said that no one made it to the beam.

Then why does he "radio" shepard?

He didn't radio shepard.

When you have a group of people using radios (depending on the setting) - if one person talks, everyone hears it.

  Group of people?

hacket "radioes" shepard when he is on the citadel, after he said that no one made it to the beam.

[v0rt3x22]

Captain Cornhole wrote...

this thing still going? lol

oh god. not you  haha.
I'm kidding - but your thread was....weird.

[monrapias]

SubAstris wrote...

monrapias wrote...

Here's a question.

Hacket radio'd in and said that no one made it to the beam.

Then why does he "radio" shepard?

He says that someone got to the beam on the radio in the EC

Ah, so they changed it.

[EpyonX3]

spotlessvoid wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

This week has just been epic ****ing suck
6 days in central bookings for punching an undercover cop
Cracked a tooth in half when his little goon friends restrained me
Lost my job as a result
Out bail money and inevitable attorney fees coming
And then the EC is nothing more than polishing a terd

There is only one word in the English language that can describe my current state of mind and I can't ****ing say it on the bsn

the trolls are here <_<

Wait what? You calling me a troll....?

He's had a rough day. All morning (at least where I am) he's been fighting off some trolls and others who don't believe IT.

[SubAstris]

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

I would if anyone else got confused by what I said... but if your the only one.. .then perhaps my spelling isnt the issue:P

To be honest, I don't think anyone else is following. But if you will just explain what you mean: do you think that, if IT was truly BW's original plan, an interpretation of the ending using IT requires a different take at the plot and the focus of the ME series than if you take the ending literally?

Yeah i think its different from the literal interpertaion, but more true to the me lore.

Good, that's the point I was trying to make, it changes and can't be compared to an Inception ending.

But the technique used can. 

The technique of a dream can be used, yes of course. However you have to realise the differences in the effects of such a technique. Whether the end is a dream or not in Inception is not crucial in any way to the story; that can't be said if IT is true

But if IT itself is used to stop the reaper threat as I think is the case, then it could work very much like inception. Maybe.

You mean one man's rejection of indoctrination means everyone is saved just by that? Even if so, with inception it doesn't really matter if it is a dream. IT needs the ending to be a dream

[v0rt3x22]

titusrsoooooo1337 wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Who's up for more speculation? I may not post here anymore, but I will lurk the hell out of it. It's been an honor, whether IT is the truth or not doesn't matter, we speculated, and that was the goal, not badmouthing, trolling, dissing, disrespect, or anything but speculation. Essentially, nothing is true, everything is permitted.

Haha I just tried to bump this thread and it said I wasn't permitted to


But on that note, I really didn't see anything to disprove this theory. Sure the cinematics were beatiful and all, but wasn't it part of the theory in the first place that the "endings" were reassurances given to shepards mind to help promote his indoctrination?

I agree - essentially the endings were the same when you think about it in terms of IT

[EpyonX3]

EpyonX3 wrote...

So....

Anybody notice Shepard being revived by his synthetics?

Pay close attention to when he arrives in the hallway. He's out cold, but you hear a wierd synthetic sound that wakes him up.

Check again..../Garrus Voice

Bumping FTW!

[v0rt3x22]

monrapias wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

monrapias wrote...

Here's a question.

Hacket radio'd in and said that no one made it to the beam.

Then why does he "radio" shepard?

He didn't radio shepard.

When you have a group of people using radios (depending on the setting) - if one person talks, everyone hears it.

  Group of people?

hacket "radioes" shepard when he is on the citadel, after he said that no one made it to the beam.

Did he say "Shepard! Noone made it....."?

[STEEEEVE]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

STEEEEVE wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

smokingotter1 wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

L0NEWOLF25 wrote...

I noticed that the squad getting of the Normandy actually helps the Indoctrination theory. Since shepard knows they were able to get onto the normandy safly then it would make since for him to think that he saved them and made the right decision with whatever he dicided to choose. Don't know if it's been brought up since I can't find anything in the sea of arguements.

yea that's true. I'm really wondering what the guy who made the IT documentary is thinking about this.

He's probably still going through the EC material frame by frame 

I know ACAVYOS who made Shepard's Indoctrination is calling it quits (from comments): 

"Apparently Bioware hadn't intended the Indoctrination Theory all
along. Although the IT with its many arguments makes perfectly sense
(also within the lore), Bioware tells us that it is all merely
coincidence... they want us to take the endings at face value. "

I don't get it. EC wasn't even planned - and IT is much older than EC.
Besides, EC doesn't disprove anything. 

Essentially (in the sense of IT) - we got the exact same ending - so nothing really has changed.

How many times will the developers have to tell you people that IT is fanfiction before it gets through to you?

Just once. But they haven't yet.

That's incorrect.  They've stated multiple times that the EC is their definitive vision for the ending, and that there will be no more post ending DLC coming.  Are you still trying to imply that their definitive vision for the ending is not to have an ending?

[SubAstris]

Starbuck8 wrote...

Well ~10 pages behind on the thread, and about to head to work for a few, but had some thoughts.
-First of all forgot to mention Adm Anderson's name is on the memorial wall in destroy/synth. In the middle. Shep's name gets placed just above in synthesis.
-I mentioned destroy ending, no scenes, mentions of EDI, the Geth, and EDI is absent from memorial wall scene. Has anyone seen EDI's name on the wall, or can check YT? I noticed in my second playthru (synthesis) Legion's name was on the wall (does it appear during your playthru after rannoch?). If we see EDI's name, we may have an answer as to her fate in Destroy.

Anderson's name is there in Control. I think EDI survives regardless

[v0rt3x22]

EpyonX3 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

So....

Anybody notice Shepard being revived by his synthetics?

Pay close attention to when he arrives in the hallway. He's out cold, but you hear a wierd synthetic sound that wakes him up.

Check again..../Garrus Voice

Bumping FTW!

Where is this? Synth ending?

[EpyonX3]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

So....

Anybody notice Shepard being revived by his synthetics?

Pay close attention to when he arrives in the hallway. He's out cold, but you hear a wierd synthetic sound that wakes him up.

Check again..../Garrus Voice

Bumping FTW!

Where is this? Synth ending?

Nope. Just as he gets to the citadel, right after Anderson contacts him. I will make a video.

[v0rt3x22]

STEEEEVE wrote...

That's incorrect.  They've stated multiple times that the EC is their definitive vision for the ending, and that there will be no more post ending DLC coming.  Are you still trying to imply that their definitive vision for the ending is not to have an ending?

Yes. I'm still implying that and have been all day - and will continue to do so.

Again - BioWare has neither confirmed nor denied that "IT" is true or false.

This has nothing to do with "post ending DLC".

[v0rt3x22]

EpyonX3 wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

So....

Anybody notice Shepard being revived by his synthetics?

Pay close attention to when he arrives in the hallway. He's out cold, but you hear a wierd synthetic sound that wakes him up.

Check again..../Garrus Voice

Bumping FTW!

Where is this? Synth ending?

Nope. Just as he gets to the citadel, right after Anderson contacts him. I will make a video.

thanx

[senshi420]

SubAstris wrote...

Starbuck8 wrote...

Well ~10 pages behind on the thread, and about to head to work for a few, but had some thoughts.
-First of all forgot to mention Adm Anderson's name is on the memorial wall in destroy/synth. In the middle. Shep's name gets placed just above in synthesis.
-I mentioned destroy ending, no scenes, mentions of EDI, the Geth, and EDI is absent from memorial wall scene. Has anyone seen EDI's name on the wall, or can check YT? I noticed in my second playthru (synthesis) Legion's name was on the wall (does it appear during your playthru after rannoch?). If we see EDI's name, we may have an answer as to her fate in Destroy.

Anderson's name is there in Control. I think EDI survives regardless

EDI was on my wall in the destroy ending...top left  if i recall correctly

[Gashie]

EDI is on the wall in the Destroy ending. A few names down on the right rows, probably the third or fourth in that row.

Edit: Anderson's name is on the wall for all three choices.

Modifié par Gashie, 26 juin 2012 - 08:01 .

[llbountyhunter]

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

I would if anyone else got confused by what I said... but if your the only one.. .then perhaps my spelling isnt the issue:P

To be honest, I don't think anyone else is following. But if you will just explain what you mean: do you think that, if IT was truly BW's original plan, an interpretation of the ending using IT requires a different take at the plot and the focus of the ME series than if you take the ending literally?

Yeah i think its different from the literal interpertaion, but more true to the me lore.

Good, that's the point I was trying to make, it changes and can't be compared to an Inception ending.

But the technique used can. 

The technique of a dream can be used, yes of course. However you have to realise the differences in the effects of such a technique. Whether the end is a dream or not in Inception is not crucial in any way to the story; that can't be said if IT is true

But if IT itself is used to stop the reaper threat as I think is the case, then it could work very much like inception. Maybe.

You mean one man's rejection of indoctrination means everyone is saved just by that? Even if so, with inception it doesn't really matter if it is a dream. IT needs the ending to be a dream

He's not just resisting indoxtrination. Its amental battle. Its aso better explained in my thread...

Also is inception was still a dream, then you dont get the real ending.

[spotlessvoid]

I think starchild being harbinger works for it and literal equally. doesn't change anything

@vortex22
I'm going to refrain from laying into you, since we are on th same side. Suffice to say I've been strongly supporting IT since before page 1000 of the first thread. s

[SirLugash]

This was probably brought up before.
In Synthesis and control, at one part we see a helmet in the later "People we never forget" part.
This helmet, even a bit damaged, is burried out of London rubble by a soldier in the Low EMS Destroy ending.
Question: Is this supposed to be Shepard's helmet oder any soldier's ?

Modifié par SirLugash, 26 juin 2012 - 08:04 .

[SubAstris]

senshi420 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Starbuck8 wrote...

Well ~10 pages behind on the thread, and about to head to work for a few, but had some thoughts.
-First of all forgot to mention Adm Anderson's name is on the memorial wall in destroy/synth. In the middle. Shep's name gets placed just above in synthesis.
-I mentioned destroy ending, no scenes, mentions of EDI, the Geth, and EDI is absent from memorial wall scene. Has anyone seen EDI's name on the wall, or can check YT? I noticed in my second playthru (synthesis) Legion's name was on the wall (does it appear during your playthru after rannoch?). If we see EDI's name, we may have an answer as to her fate in Destroy.

Anderson's name is there in Control. I think EDI survives regardless

EDI was on my wall in the destroy ending...top left  if i recall correctly

I stand corrected

[SubAstris]

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

I would if anyone else got confused by what I said... but if your the only one.. .then perhaps my spelling isnt the issue:P

To be honest, I don't think anyone else is following. But if you will just explain what you mean: do you think that, if IT was truly BW's original plan, an interpretation of the ending using IT requires a different take at the plot and the focus of the ME series than if you take the ending literally?

Yeah i think its different from the literal interpertaion, but more true to the me lore.

Good, that's the point I was trying to make, it changes and can't be compared to an Inception ending.

But the technique used can. 

The technique of a dream can be used, yes of course. However you have to realise the differences in the effects of such a technique. Whether the end is a dream or not in Inception is not crucial in any way to the story; that can't be said if IT is true

But if IT itself is used to stop the reaper threat as I think is the case, then it could work very much like inception. Maybe.

You mean one man's rejection of indoctrination means everyone is saved just by that? Even if so, with inception it doesn't really matter if it is a dream. IT needs the ending to be a dream

He's not just resisting indoxtrination. Its amental battle. Its aso better explained in my thread...

Also is inception was still a dream, then you dont get the real ending.

Point I have been trying to make about Inception, dream or not, real or not, it doesn't ultimately matter. What the whole film is about, how exactly it is resolved, these do not change depending on whether you think it was a dream or not. This cannot be said for IT

[EpyonX3]

smokingotter1 wrote...

I saw all the endings, so that was all 1.9GB? What? I... really?

There are different cinematics for different EMS and moral stances.

[v0rt3x22]

Did someone ask earlier about a noise that can be heard when Anderson says "Shepard?" on the citadel? It's definitely there. its strange.