Ce sujet est fermé
Auralius Carolus wrote...
niravital wrote...
Okey so ever since I posted it some pages ago I wanted to do this
Reaper Destroyer Uses Thanix Canon on Space Brat! Is SUPER Effective! Earns Extra Cookie.
Auralius Carolus wrote...
A lot of people and worse, but back to the subject:
I've been doing a little bit of "geneology"
I'm finding IT theory dating back to at least March 12. I didn't really get involved until April, but thinking that it had already developed before a week was up... that's deep.
byne wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
A lot of people and worse, but back to the subject:
I've been doing a little bit of "geneology"
I'm finding IT theory dating back to at least March 12. I didn't really get involved until April, but thinking that it had already developed before a week was up... that's deep.
Would a picture of my first draft of my first post in the original IT thread, complete with a timestamp showing when I wrote it help in any way?
None of this is a matter of fact. All is a matter of opinion.HellishFiend wrote...
The fact of the matter is, if you know and understand the themes of the ME trilogy, you basically can't believe in a literal interpretation.
Modifié par Legion of 1337, 08 juillet 2012 - 03:07 .
byne wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
A lot of people and worse, but back to the subject:
I've been doing a little bit of "geneology"
I'm finding IT theory dating back to at least March 12. I didn't really get involved until April, but thinking that it had already developed before a week was up... that's deep.
Would a picture of my first draft of my first post in the original IT thread, complete with a timestamp showing when I wrote it help in any way?
Legion of 1337 wrote...
None of this is a matter of fact. All is a matter of opinion.HellishFiend wrote...
Legion of 1337 wrote...
I thought about that. In truth, there is no way for me to completely refute your theory because everything is opinion.
However, ME has never been known for hidden meanings in the past. Ideas are clearly presented - what makes them significant are the moral implications. Hell, BW couldn't even plan out the whole story for the series before hand - they scrapped the original plot for ME3 even though they had already hinted at it in ME2. So I'm not convinced they had been planning this out for 3 games, and then never come out and present it as fact. It doesn't fit the "up front" nature of the rest of the game.
Obviously, however, it convinces you, and I'm never going to convince you otherwise, even if I tried.
The fact of the matter is, if you know and understand the themes of the ME trilogy, you basically can't believe in a literal interpretation.
Auralius Carolus wrote...
byne wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
A lot of people and worse, but back to the subject:
I've been doing a little bit of "geneology"
I'm finding IT theory dating back to at least March 12. I didn't really get involved until April, but thinking that it had already developed before a week was up... that's deep.
Would a picture of my first draft of my first post in the original IT thread, complete with a timestamp showing when I wrote it help in any way?
*snip*
That just reminds me of how much turd polishing the EC has done.
So were there any outside sources that may have influenced you?
byne wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
A lot of people and worse, but back to the subject:
I've been doing a little bit of "geneology"
I'm finding IT theory dating back to at least March 12. I didn't really get involved until April, but thinking that it had already developed before a week was up... that's deep.
Would a picture of my first draft of my first post in the original IT thread, complete with a timestamp showing when I wrote it help in any way?
byne wrote...
Auralius Carolus wrote...
Priss Blackburne wrote...
You
know. this is a first for video games is it not? For this type of an
ending that sparked this much debate over the choices and
implications?
Hmm, some others have had it but I don't
think to this degree. Most other debate has been political bullcrap:
video games causing violence and that sort of trash.
Then again, there's no real way for us to figure our numbers.
Speaking
of that sort of crap, I'm still disappointed that I never got to play
the version of ME1 that Fox apparently got to play.
Yknow, the
one where you could choose who you wanted to have sex with, and how you
wanted to have sex, and that showed full digital nudity?
That one sounded pretty awesome.
BansheeOwnage wrote...
After I changed mine, everyone else seemed to. I figured it was just a matter of time before you did.HellishFiend wrote...
DrTsoni wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
New profile photo, yay!--------------->
Hopefully it wont take you guys long to get used to it, cuz I'm already attached to it.
Glad you said something, I don't know that I would've recognized you
New one is from Legion and friends, right?
Yep, from this scene, specifically.
byne wrote...
Not really, I just thought the endings were weird. I kind of provided a basis for speculation and then the thread exploded way bigger than I expected it would.
TSA_383 wrote...
So what's the scoop? Have I missed anything major or are we just waiting around to see if they'll announce anything interesting?
15 minutes left until my vid is uploaded.FreddyCast wrote...
Hey guys, watsup? Anything new?
I'm uploading the first part to my two parts "Indoctrination Theory- ME3 Extended Cut DLC Analysis" series on youtube.
It should be up in about an hour. That's if nothing goes wrong. I've already had problems trying to upload it.
The second part should be up tomorrow, I hope.
I wanted it to be one entire video, but with the tools I have now, my computer just won't let me.
Anyways, I'll post the link soon, once it's uploaded
Tell me what you guys think.
And please be nice, it's my first time doing an analysis on a game, so I'm not a pro at it.
Peace
I am not trying to prove a case. I know I can't convince you. And you cannot convince me. But it is clear that you are attributing the sterotype that some IT supporters use towards literalists (that we are not thinkers, take everything at face value, dont' question, and, by inference, are not as smart) to me. In case you didn't notice I was trying not to get into that. But if you want to be that way, so be it. You clearly think less of me, and for that, I think less of you.HellishFiend wrote...
Legion of 1337 wrote...
None of this is a matter of fact. All is a matter of opinion.HellishFiend wrote...
Legion of 1337 wrote...
I thought about that. In truth, there is no way for me to completely refute your theory because everything is opinion.
However, ME has never been known for hidden meanings in the past. Ideas are clearly presented - what makes them significant are the moral implications. Hell, BW couldn't even plan out the whole story for the series before hand - they scrapped the original plot for ME3 even though they had already hinted at it in ME2. So I'm not convinced they had been planning this out for 3 games, and then never come out and present it as fact. It doesn't fit the "up front" nature of the rest of the game.
Obviously, however, it convinces you, and I'm never going to convince you otherwise, even if I tried.
The fact of the matter is, if you know and understand the themes of the ME trilogy, you basically can't believe in a literal interpretation.
I hope you realize you're not helping your case one bit by focusing on that last sentence. You even went so far as to delete the rest of my post from the quote. That says to me that it's time to end this discussion. Believe what you will.
Modifié par Legion of 1337, 08 juillet 2012 - 03:14 .
BatmanTurian wrote...
TSA_383 wrote...
So what's the scoop? Have I missed anything major or are we just waiting around to see if they'll announce anything interesting?
We're arguing/debating with a literalist, the most productive thing you can do on BSN /sarcasm
If it's anything, I can totally see where you're coming from, although at the same time I just can't reason out the endings being precisely the way they are when the whole thing just comes across as so wrong.Legion of 1337 wrote...
I am not trying to prove a case. I know I can't convince you. And you cannot convince me. But it is clear that you are attributing the sterotype that some IT supporters use towards literalists (that we are not thinkers, take everything at face value, dont' question, and, by inference, are not as smart) to me. In case you didn't notice I was trying not to get into that. But if you want to be that way, so be it. You clearly think less of me.
Modifié par TSA_383, 08 juillet 2012 - 03:17 .
Legion of 1337 wrote...
I am not trying to prove a case. I know I can't convince you. And you cannot convince me. But it is clear that you are attributing the sterotype that some IT supporters use towards literalists (that we are not thinkers, take everything at face value, dont' question, and, by inference, are not as smart) to me. In case you didn't notice I was trying not to get into that. But if you want to be that way, so be it. You clearly think less of me.HellishFiend wrote...
Legion of 1337 wrote...
None of this is a matter of fact. All is a matter of opinion.HellishFiend wrote...
Legion of 1337 wrote...
I thought about that. In truth, there is no way for me to completely refute your theory because everything is opinion.
However, ME has never been known for hidden meanings in the past. Ideas are clearly presented - what makes them significant are the moral implications. Hell, BW couldn't even plan out the whole story for the series before hand - they scrapped the original plot for ME3 even though they had already hinted at it in ME2. So I'm not convinced they had been planning this out for 3 games, and then never come out and present it as fact. It doesn't fit the "up front" nature of the rest of the game.
Obviously, however, it convinces you, and I'm never going to convince you otherwise, even if I tried.
The fact of the matter is, if you know and understand the themes of the ME trilogy, you basically can't believe in a literal interpretation.
I hope you realize you're not helping your case one bit by focusing on that last sentence. You even went so far as to delete the rest of my post from the quote. That says to me that it's time to end this discussion. Believe what you will.
I know. Some people cannot ignore the clues. I can't either - but I have systematically ruled them out through my own logic.TSA_383 wrote...
If it's anything, I can totally see where you're coming from, although at the same time I just can't reason out the endings being precisely the way they are when the whole thing just comes across as so wrong.Legion of 1337 wrote...
I am not trying to prove a case. I know I can't convince you. And you cannot convince me. But it is clear that you are attributing the sterotype that some IT supporters use towards literalists (that we are not thinkers, take everything at face value, dont' question, and, by inference, are not as smart) to me. In case you didn't notice I was trying not to get into that. But if you want to be that way, so be it. You clearly think less of me.
Then with a bit of literary analysis I think indoctrination becomes the only thing that can really explain what's happening towards the end. I just hope they decide to bring some sort of conclusion to this rather than dragging it out for more months...
byne wrote...
BatmanTurian wrote...
TSA_383 wrote...
So what's the scoop? Have I missed anything major or are we just waiting around to see if they'll announce anything interesting?
We're arguing/debating with a literalist, the most productive thing you can do on BSN /sarcasm
I'm currently re-reading the Party Temple thread, and I conveniently came across this one right as you said that
I give it a year before this is all over.TSA_383 wrote...
If it's anything, I can totally see where you're coming from, although at the same time I just can't reason out the endings being precisely the way they are when the whole thing just comes across as so wrong.Legion of 1337 wrote...
I am not trying to prove a case. I know I can't convince you. And you cannot convince me. But it is clear that you are attributing the sterotype that some IT supporters use towards literalists (that we are not thinkers, take everything at face value, dont' question, and, by inference, are not as smart) to me. In case you didn't notice I was trying not to get into that. But if you want to be that way, so be it. You clearly think less of me.
Then with a bit of literary analysis I think indoctrination becomes the only thing that can really explain what's happening towards the end. I just hope they decide to bring some sort of conclusion to this rather than dragging it out for more months...
I honestly can't believe this is coming to this.BatmanTurian wrote...
You naively believe a complicated story is not complicated. It's alright if you want to admit it. We can't flog you for it anyway even if we wanted to.
Modifié par Legion of 1337, 08 juillet 2012 - 03:22 .
FreddyCast wrote...
I give it a year before this is all over.
Legion of 1337 wrote...
I honestly can't believe this is coming to this.BatmanTurian wrote...
You naively believe a complicated story is not complicated. It's alright if you want to admit it. We can't flog you for it anyway even if we wanted to.
For a minute I actually thought everyone here was on the same level. But clearly, you two think more highly of yourselves and you think less of me because I do not buy your theory. That I am naive. I can't change that if that's what you think, but I can tell you you're wrong. Just because your theory involves a lot of thought does not mean that I am "naive" because I don't buy it.
Where are the other people I was talking to? The ones that respected my opinion?
Legion of 1337 wrote...
I honestly can't believe this is coming to this.BatmanTurian wrote...
You naively believe a complicated story is not complicated. It's alright if you want to admit it. We can't flog you for it anyway even if we wanted to.
For a minute I actually thought everyone here was on the same level. But clearly, you two think more highly of yourselves and you think less of me because I do not buy your theory. That I am naive. I can't change that if that's what you think, but I can tell you you're wrong. Just because your theory involves a lot of thought does not mean that I am "naive" because I don't buy it.
Where are the other people I was talking to? The ones that respected my opinion?
Legion of 1337 wrote...
I honestly can't believe this is coming to this.BatmanTurian wrote...
You naively believe a complicated story is not complicated. It's alright if you want to admit it. We can't flog you for it anyway even if we wanted to.
For a minute I actually thought everyone here was on the same level. But clearly, you two think more highly of yourselves and you think less of me because I do not buy your theory. That I am naive. I can't change that if that's what you think, but I can tell you you're wrong. Just because your theory involves a lot of thought does not mean that I am "naive" because I don't buy it.
Where are the other people I was talking to? The ones that respected my opinion?
byne wrote...
Legion of 1337 wrote...
I honestly can't believe this is coming to this.BatmanTurian wrote...
You naively believe a complicated story is not complicated. It's alright if you want to admit it. We can't flog you for it anyway even if we wanted to.
For a minute I actually thought everyone here was on the same level. But clearly, you two think more highly of yourselves and you think less of me because I do not buy your theory. That I am naive. I can't change that if that's what you think, but I can tell you you're wrong. Just because your theory involves a lot of thought does not mean that I am "naive" because I don't buy it.
Where are the other people I was talking to? The ones that respected my opinion?
I'm still here, and sitll respect your opinion. I disagree with it but I respect it.
Anyways, I think he was joking, but even if he wasnt, he can still respect your opinion and believe you're naive. The two arent mutually exclusive.
Retour en haut
