55528 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

Here's something pertinent: I'm trying to connect my impression of The Illusive Man and his fascination with indoctrination---as suggested on Horizon---with the medical procedure we witness in the final surveillance video we view at the Cerberus base. What exactly was done to him, and did it somehow "enhance" his susceptibility to indoctrination?

(That's where I'm at in my current play-through)

The statement that The Illusive Man became fascinated with indoctrination has continuously hit me hard, even from the first go-around with the game.

[Shermos]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Shermos wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Shermos wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Shermos wrote...

Fail.

This is comparable to mathematicians trying to fill the gaps in the Earth centric model of the solar system before Galileo's and Kepler's work finally put it to bed. Hopelessly inelegant and cumbersome. If a model needs more than minor revisions to remain consistent with observations of reality, it's usually wrong.

Yeah, except this is a literary interpretation and not science, which means we are analyzing what we think is an extended metaphor and not a physics or mathmatical phenomenon. In fiction, things happen for a reason and sometimes they are meant to happen because they mean something because they are produced by a thinking entity aware of their own creation and its meaning.

So you fail at logic, just as everyone who has tried to shoot this down before has done.

The principle is still relevant no matter what you're talking about. Good literary works aren't overly convoluted and self contradictory like IT is. The simplest and most elegant interpretation or theory is usually the best.

If people actually thought more scientifically, literature and the world as a whole would be much improved. And don't try and claim that science takes away from wonder and creativity, because it doesn't. 

You're actually wrong and your statements make me believe you've never analyzed literature in your life. Walk into a book club and spout comparisons to scientific analyzation and see how long they let you stick around. Science has no place in a literary interpretation, even if it's science fiction. So basically, stop doing it. It makes you look like you have book smarts, but no common sense.

I know a few people who have been to book clubs (and studied literature I might add) and they'd actually agree with me... The people you're talking about are the kind who write terrible stories which you find in the newsagent, not to mention have a massive pole up their arse.

Whatever, I'm done debating with you since you seem to believe we have to use the scientific method to interpret meaning in literature. You're a lost cause.

Look at my edited post above.

I said nothing about the scientific method, which I don't think you understand in the slightest I might add. If you want to get a better handle on what I'm talking about, check out a thing called model based realism.

The main idea good writers take out of it is that elegance and simplicity is desirable. If you need to make serious revisions to make your theory or your story continue to make sense and remove the holes in it, it's usually best to drop the whole thing and start again. Writers do this all the time I might add. 

IT has all the problems of a convoluted and inelegant story. It needs to be dropped and another interpretation adopted or devised.

[Icinix]

dreamgazer wrote...

Here's something pertinent: I'm trying to connect my impression of The Illusive Man and his fascination with indoctrination---as suggested on Horizon---with the medical procedure we witness in the final surveillance video we view at the Cerberus base. What exactly was done to him, and did it somehow "enhance" his susceptibility to indoctrination?

(That's where I'm at in my current play-through)

The statement that The Illusive Man became fascinated with indoctrination has continuously hit me hard, even from the first go-around with the game.

I'm fascinated by this too for a couple of reasons.

One - TIM actively worked against the Reapers for years to the point they declared war on him because he found a way to interupt the signal to husks etc. I find it really, really hard to believe TIM was ever, EVER actually indoctrinated.

Two - if IT theory is wrong or happens latter, no matter what implants or Reaper tech he had in him, there is no actualy way TIM could physically take control of Anderson and Shepards bodies while leaving their minds completely free - that is the total opposite of how indoctrination actually works.

As a strong believer of Indoctrination Theory, I don't believe TIM is indoctrinated, and he'll have a piece to play in the ending DLC.

Modifié par Icinix, 15 mai 2012 - 03:18 .

[Arian Dynas]

Shermos wrote...
*snip*
Look at my edited post above.

I said nothing about the scientific method, which I don't think you understand in the slightest I might add. If you want to get a better handle on what I'm talking about, check out a thing called model based realism.

The main idea good writers take out of it is that elegance and simplicity is desirable. If you need to make serious revisions to make your theory or your story continue to make sense and remove the holes in it, it's usually best to drop the whole thing and start again. Writers do this all the time I might add. 

IT has all the problems of a convoluted and inelegant story. It needs to be dropped and another interpretation adopted or devised.

We have one explanation; It was a hallucination

I looked in that little link in your sig, promoting the face value endings. You have 26 explanations.

Your argument is invalid.

Modifié par Arian Dynas, 15 mai 2012 - 03:19 .

[balance5050]

Shermos wrote...

Look at my edited post above.

I said nothing about the scientific method, which I don't think you understand in the slightest I might add. If you want to get a better handle on what I'm talking about, check out a thing called model based realism.

The main idea good writers take out of it is that elegance and simplicity is desirable. If you need to make serious revisions to make your theory or your story continue to make sense and remove the holes in it, it's usually best to drop the whole thing and start again. Writers do this all the time I might add. 

IT has all the problems of a convoluted and inelegant story. It needs to be dropped and another interpretation adopted or devised.

You are more than welcome to devise your own interpretation, but for now I think that I.T. is by far the best option. It stays truer to the themes presented in the previous games and let's the future be clear for any number of awesome scenarios. There is a reason that you see I.T. everywhere; because it narratively makes more sense (too most).

Modifié par balance5050, 15 mai 2012 - 03:24 .

[DJBare]

dreamgazer wrote...

Here's something pertinent: I'm trying to connect my impression of The Illusive Man and his fascination with indoctrination---as suggested on Horizon---with the medical procedure we witness in the final surveillance video we view at the Cerberus base. What exactly was done to him, and did it somehow "enhance" his susceptibility to indoctrination?

(That's where I'm at in my current play-through)

The statement that The Illusive Man became fascinated with indoctrination has continuously hit me hard, even from the first go-around with the game.

In my opinion TIM was already indoctrinate which is why he had the procedure done, check the cigarette butts on the floor in the booth overlooking the human reaper, he had been standing there a long time staring at that thing, and TIM is the type to use an ashtray, he likes things neat, he became Saren, upgraded at the suggestion of the reapers.

[TSA_383]

Shermos wrote...

IT has all the problems of a convoluted and inelegant story. It needs to be dropped and another interpretation adopted or devised.

Care to point out your chosen flaws with IT?
I know they exist, but there are relatively few, whereas almost nothing in the "face value" ending makes any sense at all.

So, point out what you think is wrong with IT, and why you think there are more problems with IT than with the "as is" story, and I'm sure people in this thread will be happy to debate you over it.
Honestly, if you try not to be arrogant or insulting, you'll find that most of the people in this thread (I say most) are eloquent and polite.

[BleedingUranium]

TSA_383 wrote...

Shermos wrote...

IT has all the problems of a convoluted and inelegant story. It needs to be dropped and another interpretation adopted or devised.

Care to point out your chosen flaws with IT?
I know they exist, but there are relatively few, whereas almost nothing in the "face value" ending makes any sense at all.

So, point out what you think is wrong with IT, and why you think there are more problems with IT than with the "as is" story, and I'm sure people in this thread will be happy to debate you over it.
Honestly, if you try not to be arrogant or insulting, you'll find that most of the people in this thread (I say most) are eloquent and polite.

I personally love hearing real problems with IT and IT evidence, because it helps us create a better theory. Very scientific, actually

[Auralius Carolus]

Priestly just couldn't stand it any longer, could he?  What, do they have lockdown quotas now or something?  Hrm. Probably just an itchy trigger finger.

Anyway, looks like everyone's here. I think I may have to develop a short paper, now that there's a new thread, regarding the known effects of EMF exposure and narrative/symbolic importance of the dreams. Especially so, now that I've recieved and official invitation to the cool people's club by Byne.

[Shermos]

The problem with the endings is that they are too esoteric for the average person. Basically, the average fan is stoo stupid and/or uneducated to appreciate them without some further explanation. I should rephrase that though, the problem isn't with the ending, but with the people viewing it.

An esoteric story does not equate to an inelegant and convoluted one. It's impossible to justify and explain the idea of a hillucination without getting overly convoluted and developing serious holes in your explanation. However, to get people to appreciate the current ending I need only explain the thinking and ideas behind it. Once you understand it, they make perfect sense without needing anything like IT tacked onto it. And if you still don't like the ending after that, that's just your personal taste, not a flaw.

As for intentifying the problems with IT, they have been explained over and over again in this and numerous other threads, including the one in my sig. I don't need to repeat them.

Modifié par Shermos, 15 mai 2012 - 03:37 .

[Arian Dynas]

Auralius Carolus wrote...

Priestly just couldn't stand it any longer, could he?  What, do they have lockdown quotas now or something?  Hrm. Probably just an itchy trigger finger.

Anyway, looks like everyone's here. I think I may have to develop a short paper, now that there's a new thread, regarding the known effects of EMF exposure and narrative/symbolic importance of the dreams. Especially so, now that I've recieved and official invitation to the cool people's club by Byne.

Hey... I sent that invitation first >.>...

[Auralius Carolus]

BleedingUranium wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Shermos wrote...

IT has all the problems of a convoluted and inelegant story. It needs to be dropped and another interpretation adopted or devised.

Care to point out your chosen flaws with IT?
I know they exist, but there are relatively few, whereas almost nothing in the "face value" ending makes any sense at all.

So, point out what you think is wrong with IT, and why you think there are more problems with IT than with the "as is" story, and I'm sure people in this thread will be happy to debate you over it.
Honestly, if you try not to be arrogant or insulting, you'll find that most of the people in this thread (I say most) are eloquent and polite.

I personally love hearing real problems with IT and IT evidence, because it helps us create a better theory. Very scientific, actually

Assisted Socratic Method- like sifting for gold, really. The current shifts back and forth, pushing aside light material, leaving only that which has weight and value behind.

[Arian Dynas]

Shermos wrote...

The problem with the endings is that they are too esoteric for the average person. Basically, the average fan is stoo stupid and/or uneducated to appreciate them without some further explanation. I should rephrase that though, the problem isn't with the ending, but with the people viewing it.

An esoteric story does not equate to an inelegant and convoluted one. It's impossible to justify and explain the idea of a hillucination without getting overly convoluted and developing serious holes in your explanation. However, to get people to appreciate the current ending I need only explain the thinking and ideas behind it. Once you understand it, they make perfect sense without needing anything like IT tacked onto it. And if you still don't like the ending after that, that's just your personal taste, not a flaw.

I see you ignored my comment.

Explain for me, oh hypocritical one. 

How is 26 seperate explanations for things happen to be simpler than one answer that covers everything?

[Shermos]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Shermos wrote...

The problem with the endings is that they are too esoteric for the average person. Basically, the average fan is too stupid and/or uneducated to appreciate them without some further explanation. I should rephrase that though, the problem isn't with the ending, but with the people viewing it.

An esoteric story does not equate to an inelegant and convoluted one. It's impossible to justify and explain the idea of a hillucination without getting overly convoluted and developing serious holes in your explanation. However, to get people to appreciate the current ending I need only explain the thinking and ideas behind it. Once you understand it, they make perfect sense without needing anything like IT tacked onto it. And if you still don't like the ending after that, that's just your personal taste, not a flaw.

I see you ignored my comment.

Explain for me, oh hypocritical one. 

How is 26 seperate explanations for things happen to be simpler than one answer that covers everything?

You didn't read and understand my post then.

Try again mate.

"The problem with the endings is that they are too esoteric for the average person. Basically, the average fan is too stupid and/or uneducated to appreciate them without some further explanation. I should rephrase that though, the problem isn't with the ending, but with the people viewing it.

An esoteric story does not equate to an inelegant and convoluted one. It's impossible to justify and explain the idea of a hillucination without getting overly convoluted and developing serious holes in your explanation. However, to get people to appreciate the current ending I need only explain the thinking and ideas behind it. Once you understand it, they make perfect sense without needing anything like IT tacked onto it. And if you still don't like the ending after that, that's just your personal taste, not a flaw.

As for intentifying the problems with IT, they have been explained over and over again in this and numerous other threads, including the one in  my sig. I don't need to repeat them. "

Modifié par Shermos, 15 mai 2012 - 03:43 .

[DJBare]

Shermos wrote...

The problem with the endings is that they are too esoteric for the average person. Basically, the average fan is stoo stupid and/or uneducated to appreciate them without some further explanation. I should rephrase that though, the problem isn't with the ending, but with the people viewing it. 

I guess you are calling people stupid, but I have another interpretation, it was made deliberately esoteric and convoluted, victims of indoctrination are not supposed to be aware they are indoctrinated, that would negate the whole point of it, it's us Bioware are attempting to indoctrinate, they want the player to feel what Shepard is feeling, confusion, uncertainty, you pick it, if it was simple and everyone worked it out then the whole thing would not work.

[DJBare]

Is there any chance this discussion could continue without insults, from both sides!?

[byne]

Shermos wrote...

The problem with the endings is that they are too esoteric for the average person. Basically, the average fan is stoo stupid and/or uneducated to appreciate them without some further explanation. I should rephrase that though, the problem isn't with the ending, but with the people viewing it.

An esoteric story does not equate to an inelegant and convoluted one. It's impossible to justify and explain the idea of a hillucination without getting overly convoluted and developing serious holes in your explanation. However, to get people to appreciate the current ending I need only explain the thinking and ideas behind it. Once you understand it, they make perfect sense without needing anything like IT tacked onto it. And if you still don't like the ending after that, that's just your personal taste, not a flaw.

As for intentifying the problems with IT, they have been explained over and over again in this and numerous other threads, including the one in my sig. I don't need to repeat them.

So, basically you like the endings because you think you're one of the few people deep enough to understand them, and won't specify your problems with IT when pressed on it?

Yeah I think we're done here, move along people.

[byne]

Anyways, I'm off for the night.

You people behave while I'm gone!

[balance5050]

Shermos wrote...
Once you understand it, they make perfect sense without 
needing anything like IT tacked onto it.

The thing is if you do that, that would be leaving indoctrination out of the equation, but if you play all 3 games you see that indoctrination plays a major role through out the series. If the literal endings is all there is to interpret, the major plot hole for me would be:

"Why didn't the reapers just indoctrinate Shepard"

Besides, I like that esoteric stuff.

[Rifneno]

DJBare wrote...

Is there any chance this discussion could continue without insults, from both sides!?

No chance, tubby. 

[balance5050]

A couple quotes for my friends:

"Kill them with kindness"

and

"To live well is the best revenge"

So basically, stay on topic, don't call anyone any names, and if people's arguments devolve into insults, simply ignore them.

Modifié par balance5050, 15 mai 2012 - 03:50 .

[marcelo_sdk]

DJBare wrote...

Uncle Jo wrote...

DJBare wrote...

This is one of my theories, I'm guessing that only Harbinger is not, all other reapers are under his control despite "each a nation"
I explained somewhere else, if the essence of each race is kept in those reaper hulls then they would need remain indoctrinated otherwise they would rebel against their new form.

Very interesting... But if Harbinger is not indoctrinated then what is he made of ? Is he actually the original Indoctrination device? I mean he's also a "nation" and partly organic, or am I wrong?

Harbinger is the original race, the Nazari who purposely melded themselves with synthetics, grotesquely I might add, the original story is they did it to combat a dark energy threat, it would not be a far stretch to say they became twisted due to their new form.

Where did you get all that stuff about Harbinger?

[Arian Dynas]

Anywho folks, at Jade8aby88's sugguestion, I've started a new blog where I'll store my stuff after posting it here,

http://social.biowar...42/blog/213133/ 

Check it out here.

Modifié par Arian Dynas, 15 mai 2012 - 03:51 .

[Auralius Carolus]

balance5050 wrote...

A couple quotes for my friends:

"Kill them with kindness"

and

"To live well is the best revenge"

So basically, stay on topic, don't call anyone any names, and if people's arguments devolve into insults, simply ignore them.

I personally find that ignorance can be a potent weapon. Generally speaking, those who hold their opinion in high regard desire reaction to the expression of said opinion. Right or wrong, the attention breeds validation; lack therefore leaves a hollow and sore wound.

Don't just "Don't feed the trolls". Starve them out!

[Shermos]

byne wrote...

Shermos wrote...

The problem with the endings is that they are too esoteric for the average person. Basically, the average fan is stoo stupid and/or uneducated to appreciate them without some further explanation. I should rephrase that though, the problem isn't with the ending, but with the people viewing it.

An esoteric story does not equate to an inelegant and convoluted one. It's impossible to justify and explain the idea of a hillucination without getting overly convoluted and developing serious holes in your explanation. However, to get people to appreciate the current ending I need only explain the thinking and ideas behind it. Once you understand it, they make perfect sense without needing anything like IT tacked onto it. And if you still don't like the ending after that, that's just your personal taste, not a flaw.

As for intentifying the problems with IT, they have been explained over and over again in this and numerous other threads, including the one in my sig. I don't need to repeat them.

So, basically you like the endings because you think you're one of the few people deep enough to understand them, and won't specify your problems with IT when pressed on it?

I don't need to repeat what's already been presented by others. I don't have the time and patience for it. All I need to do is point you to where you need to go, which I have.

I'm not an elitist. I would like everyone to understand the ending and I think they mostly are capable If they choose to open up their minds and learn instead of reacting the way they have. If you (genuinely) did this and still don't like the endings, that would be your personal taste, like I said earlier, and I could respect that.

An elitist wouldn't bother to post here and give yours the dignity of a reply.