55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Andromidius]

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

Weak explaination.  Considering Shepard wasn't wounded there before, and only starts bleeding AFTERWARDS.  It sounds like a non-answer, stating something true (Shepard was badly wounded and struggling to walk) but ignoring WHY a massive wound appears when it shouldn't.

[Joedogg9999]

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

what do you mean "one of the few piecesof it evidence we have left"?

i havent been able to keep up with this thread fast enough. what else has been debunked? everything in the original ending IT wise is still there in EC

[EpyonX3]

Andromidius wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

Weak explaination.  Considering Shepard wasn't wounded there before, and only starts bleeding AFTERWARDS.  It sounds like a non-answer, stating something true (Shepard was badly wounded and struggling to walk) but ignoring WHY a massive wound appears when it shouldn't.

Perhaps it's because there's no wound there. The blood is coming from his arms. His hand is on his gut because he's been injured there. He hold his stomach way before he shoots Anderson.

[paxxton]

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

Funny how I was saying the same thing for months....

And yet you never once convincingly explained why she only starts bleeding heavily after she sits down.

Not trying to sound like a jerk, but I tried. I'll quote a line by Chris Rock from the movie Dogma.

"I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea, changing a
belief is trickier. Life should be malleable and progressive; working
from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and
limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant."

If you believe IT so strongly, it's hard for any suggestions and evidence present to convince you otherwise.

Now again, why did he bleed like that? He was already bleeding and you could see it getting worse as time progresses. I posted pics showing the progress of his blood running down his arms. Also, his left "wound" wouldn't bleed all over his right hand, forearm and biceps. Unless Shepard smeared his arms all over his wounds without us seeing.

Nice quote you found but Shepard was also shot in the shoulder. Yet he can still wield a gun without shouting in pain.

[Uncle Jo]

EpyonX3 wrote...

I'm starting to think that reapers actually have a tough time detecting the Normandy. Perhaps the Reaper IFF is still installed and makes them look like a friend. That's why the destroyer ignored them and Harbinger didn't bother shooting at it.

I don't think so. The Reaper IFF allowed you to go through the Omega 4 Relay without being sent to the blackhole. But even you were right, why did the collector ship and the oculus attacked the Normandy on sight ? It seems to me very unlikely that they possessed a technology or ability that a capital ship didn't have.

[Vaya]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Vaya wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

*snip*

If he wanted to deny it, he would have done so more explicitly, like when I tweeted him whether the Destroyer on Earth let the Normandy escape, his answer was a clear "No".

Wait Harbinger didn't let the Normandy escape on purpose ? It's really an incoherence ?

Bil Casey made a valid point on another thread about this, though : "It would have been completely stupid for Harbinger to destroy the Normandy since the brat couldn't use EDI as leverage" (paraphrasing)... Not to speak about Shep getting pretty mad after loosing her squadmates (and eventually her LI)...

I assume he asked and was answered about the destroyer in Vancouver, not Harbinger at the end.

I'm starting to think that reapers actually have a tough time detecting the Normandy. Perhaps the Reaper IFF is still installed and makes them look like a friend. That's why the destroyer ignored them and Harbinger didn't bother shooting at it.

The Reaper IFF is still installed, EDI has a line commenting on it.

[llbountyhunter]

Joedogg9999 wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

what do you mean "one of the few piecesof it evidence we have left"?

i havent been able to keep up with this thread fast enough. what else has been debunked? everything in the original ending IT wise is still there in EC

I know right... its a literalist posing as a It-er........ <_<

[Andromidius]

EpyonX3 wrote...

I'm starting to think that reapers actually have a tough time detecting the Normandy. Perhaps the Reaper IFF is still installed and makes them look like a friend. That's why the destroyer ignored them and Harbinger didn't bother shooting at it.

If that was the case, then the Reapers would never chase the Normandy (and destroy it if they caught it) using the scanning mini-game.  And before you say they detect the scan, that only alerts them someone is in the system - not the exact location of a fast moving target.

The Reapers have highly advanced technology, they wouldn't be confused easily.  Its been noted that technology that disables the sensors of Geth, for example, have no effect on Reapers (or even upgraded Geth, for that matter).

[Big Bad]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Vaya wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

*snip*

If he wanted to deny it, he would have done so more explicitly, like when I tweeted him whether the Destroyer on Earth let the Normandy escape, his answer was a clear "No".

Wait Harbinger didn't let the Normandy escape on purpose ? It's really an incoherence ?

Bil Casey made a valid point on another thread about this, though : "It would have been completely stupid for Harbinger to destroy the Normandy since the brat couldn't use EDI as leverage" (paraphrasing)... Not to speak about Shep getting pretty mad after loosing her squadmates (and eventually her LI)...

I assume he asked and was answered about the destroyer in Vancouver, not Harbinger at the end.

I'm starting to think that reapers actually have a tough time detecting the Normandy. Perhaps the Reaper IFF is still installed and makes them look like a friend. That's why the destroyer ignored them and Harbinger didn't bother shooting at it.

I'm sure there are many conceivable reasons why Harbinger didn't shoot the Normandy - plot armor being the most likely one - however, being too busy killing other people and not being able to see a space ship just several hundred yards away from him don't seem especially plausible.

[Andromidius]

EpyonX3 wrote...
Perhaps it's because there's no wound there. The blood is coming from his arms. His hand is on his gut because he's been injured there. He hold his stomach way before he shoots Anderson.

/sigh.

If that was the case, he'd have blood coming out of him from multiple locations.  Funny how its just from the one hole that wasn't there before, isn't it?

[llbountyhunter]

Vaya wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Vaya wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

*snip*

If he wanted to deny it, he would have done so more explicitly, like when I tweeted him whether the Destroyer on Earth let the Normandy escape, his answer was a clear "No".

Wait Harbinger didn't let the Normandy escape on purpose ? It's really an incoherence ?

Bil Casey made a valid point on another thread about this, though : "It would have been completely stupid for Harbinger to destroy the Normandy since the brat couldn't use EDI as leverage" (paraphrasing)... Not to speak about Shep getting pretty mad after loosing her squadmates (and eventually her LI)...

I assume he asked and was answered about the destroyer in Vancouver, not Harbinger at the end.

I'm starting to think that reapers actually have a tough time detecting the Normandy. Perhaps the Reaper IFF is still installed and makes them look like a friend. That's why the destroyer ignored them and Harbinger didn't bother shooting at it.

The Reaper IFF is still installed, EDI has a line commenting on it.

I find that a pretty weak explanation.... the collector ship and collector drones detected the normandy very easily despite the IFF.

so the collectors, reaper pawns, have better scanners than the reapers themselvs? 

Modifié par llbountyhunter, 30 juin 2012 - 11:54 .

[Dwailing]

Funny thing, they actually changed it so that Shepard's shoulder wound is emphasized in the cutscene right after Shepard get's on the Citadel. If they're going to show quite clearly that his shoulder is wounded, why not show that his stomach is injured so people won't get the wrong idea?

Modifié par Dwailing, 30 juin 2012 - 11:51 .

[Either.Ardrey]

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

Funny how I was saying the same thing for months....

And yet you never once convincingly explained why she only starts bleeding heavily after she sits down.

Not trying to sound like a jerk, but I tried. I'll quote a line by Chris Rock from the movie Dogma.

"I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea, changing a
belief is trickier. Life should be malleable and progressive; working
from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and
limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant."

If you believe IT so strongly, it's hard for any suggestions and evidence present to convince you otherwise.

Now again, why did he bleed like that? He was already bleeding and you could see it getting worse as time progresses. I posted pics showing the progress of his blood running down his arms. Also, his left "wound" wouldn't bleed all over his right hand, forearm and biceps. Unless Shepard smeared his arms all over his wounds without us seeing.

I have no real attachment to either IT or the literalist ending, and I'm still seeing signs that something's up. For every point that was added in the EC for the literalists, there was another WTF along for the ride, expanding legitimacy for both sides simultaneously, which is why the EC didn't work as well as it could/should have.

[legaldinho]

EpyonX3 wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

Without sounding like someone who's grasping at straws, but you didn't specificly say that the bleeding is not caused from Shepard shooting himself. He just suggested what some here have already suggested for an literal explaination for the bleeding.

It's nothing new, and his phrasing is important.

If he wanted to deny it, he would have done so more explicitly, like when I tweeted him whether the Destroyer on Earth let the Normandy escape, his answer was a clear "No".

If you mean Harbinger, then he's right, he didn't let them escape. The Normandy is not an easy target like foot soldiers and tanks. There were swarms of them running to the beam. One man goes up and the reapers are screwed. If you listen to the sound in the background while Shepard says goodbye, you'll here the explosions and reaper beams going off.

Unless you guys think Hammer stopped and stood still while the Normandy picked up two people and resumed after they were good?

The stationary normandy is not an easy target like the soldiers. It's so much bigger. Why, if you were shooting at ants, and a big fat stationary turtle protruded, you'd think "nah, I best keep shooting them ants cos that turtle looks like it's gonna dodge a bullet like gw bush dodges iraqi shoes".

Top marks, thumbs up. You're my hero.

[Uncle Jo]

Big Bad wrote...


I'm sure there are many conceivable reasons why Harbinger didn't shoot the Normandy - plot armor being the most likely one - however, being too busy killing other people and not being able to see a space ship just several hundred yards away from him don't seem especially plausible.

Not if you consider the last (long) moment after Joker picked up the wounded, where the Normandy and Harbinger are literally just staring at each other.

[Big Bad]

Uncle Jo wrote...

Big Bad wrote...


I'm sure there are many conceivable reasons why Harbinger didn't shoot the Normandy - plot armor being the most likely one - however, being too busy killing other people and not being able to see a space ship just several hundred yards away from him don't seem especially plausible.

Not if you consider the last (long) moment after Joker picked up the wounded, where the Normandy and Harbinger are literally just staring at each other.

Is the "not" in your comment in reference to the plot armor being the most likely explanation?  If so, you very well could be right, but I don't want to read too much into that scene.  Mostly because I just don't want to get my hopes up too high anymore. 

[Andromidius]

Either.Ardrey wrote...

I have no real attachment to either IT or the literalist ending, and I'm still seeing signs that something's up. For every point that was added in the EC for the literalists, there was another WTF along for the ride, expanding legitimacy for both sides simultaneously, which is why the EC didn't work as well as it could/should have.

Pretty much this.  Its why there's no clear cut explaination for everything that's going on, there's a great deal of muddied water concerning the end to Mass Effect 3.

Its why we can't even agree on whether or not the whole thing was a full-on hallucination.

[MegumiAzusa]

TSA_383 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Any chance you could send me some of those save files?

So found anything interesting?

How's this for a start?
There's what I think is a status for EDI (did you take different characters on the run?) which is different for destroy medium and high EMS:huh:

No it's always the same savegame I used (maybe I loaded another for control, dunno exactly)

[DJBare]

Andromidius wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Just something to think about.

That is actually something to think about.  Trusting the Rachni Queen is a huge risk, and an act of faith that she won't betray you.

Of course, the Reapers are much worse in terms of destructive ability and past history.  And are arrogant in the extreme. 

Remember how the queen sounded in ME3? that's obviously because she was using those krogans to communicate, but you have to admit it was hard to get passed she sounded an even bigger threat because of it, we have the obvious perception that reapers are basically the ultimate threat, but who is the real threat, the reapers or something behind them, as much as I know a lot of the fans don't like the idea, the reapers themselves could in the end just turn out to be tools, just as husks are tools of the reapers, it maybe that Harby is the AI and all other reapers are his slaves, remember, these are just my thoughts, but Bioware has been playing mind games with us, so I'm no longer looking to the obvious as I once did, reapers pure evil? that's the question is'nt it.

[ThisOneIsPunny]

Uncle Jo wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

I'm starting to think that reapers actually have a tough time detecting the Normandy. Perhaps the Reaper IFF is still installed and makes them look like a friend. That's why the destroyer ignored them and Harbinger didn't bother shooting at it.

I don't think so. The Reaper IFF allowed you to go through the Omega 4 Relay without being sent to the blackhole. But even you were right, why did the collector ship and the oculus attacked the Normandy on sight ? It seems to me very unlikely that they possessed a technology or ability that a capital ship didn't have.

Pretty sure they only remain undetected until they're within range of visual detection. So really if the reapers can see them, they're not fooling anyone with that IFF.

I think EDI even says something similar if you talk to her about it. Or someone regarding the IFF. My ME2 playthrough isn't fresh enough in my mind anymore.

[Andromidius]

Uncle Jo wrote...

Big Bad wrote...


I'm sure there are many conceivable reasons why Harbinger didn't shoot the Normandy - plot armor being the most likely one - however, being too busy killing other people and not being able to see a space ship just several hundred yards away from him don't seem especially plausible.

Not if you consider the last (long) moment after Joker picked up the wounded, where the Normandy and Harbinger are literally just staring at each other.

Also bothered me how Shepard only seems concerned with two injured soldiers on the battlefield - not a single other wounded soldier is rescued, and you see plenty clawing at the ground and calling for help right after the Normandy bugs out...

That's just cold, Shep.  Cold.

[FellishBeast]

legaldinho wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

Without sounding like someone who's grasping at straws, but you didn't specificly say that the bleeding is not caused from Shepard shooting himself. He just suggested what some here have already suggested for an literal explaination for the bleeding.

It's nothing new, and his phrasing is important.

If he wanted to deny it, he would have done so more explicitly, like when I tweeted him whether the Destroyer on Earth let the Normandy escape, his answer was a clear "No".

If you mean Harbinger, then he's right, he didn't let them escape. The Normandy is not an easy target like foot soldiers and tanks. There were swarms of them running to the beam. One man goes up and the reapers are screwed. If you listen to the sound in the background while Shepard says goodbye, you'll here the explosions and reaper beams going off.

Unless you guys think Hammer stopped and stood still while the Normandy picked up two people and resumed after they were good?

The stationary normandy is not an easy target like the soldiers. It's so much bigger. Why, if you were shooting at ants, and a big fat stationary turtle protruded, you'd think "nah, I best keep shooting them ants cos that turtle looks like it's gonna dodge a bullet like gw bush dodges iraqi shoes".

Top marks, thumbs up. You're my hero.

lmao, thank you for this. 

[Nightingale]

Andromidius wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

I'm starting to think that reapers actually have a tough time detecting the Normandy. Perhaps the Reaper IFF is still installed and makes them look like a friend. That's why the destroyer ignored them and Harbinger didn't bother shooting at it.

If that was the case, then the Reapers would never chase the Normandy (and destroy it if they caught it) using the scanning mini-game.  And before you say they detect the scan, that only alerts them someone is in the system - not the exact location of a fast moving target.

The Reapers have highly advanced technology, they wouldn't be confused easily.  Its been noted that technology that disables the sensors of Geth, for example, have no effect on Reapers (or even upgraded Geth, for that matter).

The technology used to jam the Geth just overloaded them with junk data, if I remember correctly. It still effects them but with the Reaper upgrades, their processing power just makes it useless.

As for my opinion on the IFF...It's still installed (EDI mentions it) and it's possible, I suppose. It was only meant to get them through the Omega-4 Relay though, it wasn't meant to trick the Reapers. Or the Collectors for that matter. Assumedly they'd be monitoring the Relay and would know the second someone passed through it. Since thier ship was already there, they'd know it was someone that shouldn't be there, IFF or not.

[byne]

EpyonX3 wrote...

byne wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Funny how I was saying the same thing for months....

And yet you never once convincingly explained why she only starts bleeding heavily after she sits down.

Not trying to sound like a jerk, but I tried. I'll quote a line by Chris Rock from the movie Dogma.

"I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea, changing a
belief is trickier. Life should be malleable and progressive; working
from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and
limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant."

If you believe IT so strongly, it's hard for any suggestions and evidence present to convince you otherwise.

Now again, why did he bleed like that? He was already bleeding and you could see it getting worse as time progresses. I posted pics showing the progress of his blood running down his arms. Also, his left "wound" wouldn't bleed all over his right hand, forearm and biceps. Unless Shepard smeared his arms all over his wounds without us seeing.

I know you tried Epyon. Thats what I like about you. You always try to explain your point of view. I just happen to disagree with it.

[XXIceColdXX]

llbountyhunter wrote...

Joedogg9999 wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

So just read this tweet by Gamble. Seems to remove one of the few pieces of IT evidence we have left.

http://twitter.com/G...402917286281216

His tweet explains why Shepard was bleeding from the same place Anderson was shot.

"Shepard got wounded pretty badly during the conduit run. Did you not notice his inability to walk for the citadel?"

what do you mean "one of the few piecesof it evidence we have left"?

i havent been able to keep up with this thread fast enough. what else has been debunked? everything in the original ending IT wise is still there in EC

I know right... its a literalist posing as a It-er........ <_<

Incorrect. Ive been posting every now and then since the first thread. And was a big fan of the theory.

Since EC not so sure. When i said few pieces of evidence we have left, maybe not the best words, but with the reject ending not getting the breath scene, the other ending seeming more literal than ever, the normandy pick up and joker leaving the fight explained, And now gamble tweeting this, i just havent felt like IT was the sure thing that i was expecting.

Still a fan just not confident about it any more.