55528 réponses à ce sujet

[BatmanTurian]

Auralius Carolus wrote...

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!

Doing my share right now actually *salute*

[DJBare]

marcelo_sdk wrote...

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?

Like this thread, it's a theory based on how old Harbinger "might" be and stuff I picked up about the Nazari the original race, possibly the very first race in the galaxy, the Final Hours apps has information on the Nazari.

[balance5050]

Auralius Carolus wrote...

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!

You're right, I guess the problem for me is recognizing when someone is a troll, and when someone is genuinely trying to gain information and have a civil discussion.

[Erield]

Icinix wrote...

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.

1.  Shepard actively worked against the Reapers for years, to the point that Harbinger declared war on him.  TIM was exposed much earlier than Shepard, and was fighting for longer--and yet TIM wasn't ever Indoctrinated?  Couldn't this be directly used to argue against the Shepard-exposure part of IT? 

2.  Why is there no way for TIM to take control of Anderson and/or Shepard's bodies without taking over their minds?  Morinth's Dominate power from ME2 shows that it is possible. 

Directly regarding TIM's Indoctrination: He implanted himself with new, relatively untested tech--and then flew directly to the Citadel to inform the Reapers about the Crucible plot.  I'm pretty sure that it was when he was interfacing with the Reapers directly that he became Indoctrinated.

[BatmanTurian]

Erield wrote...

Icinix wrote...

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.

1.  Shepard actively worked against the Reapers for years, to the point that Harbinger declared war on him.  TIM was exposed much earlier than Shepard, and was fighting for longer--and yet TIM wasn't ever Indoctrinated?  Couldn't this be directly used to argue against the Shepard-exposure part of IT? 

2.  Why is there no way for TIM to take control of Anderson and/or Shepard's bodies without taking over their minds?  Morinth's Dominate power from ME2 shows that it is possible. 

Directly regarding TIM's Indoctrination: He implanted himself with new, relatively untested tech--and then flew directly to the Citadel to inform the Reapers about the Crucible plot.  I'm pretty sure that it was when he was interfacing with the Reapers directly that he became Indoctrinated.

Also, if you read Mass Effect: Evolution, TIM got his blue husk eyes from a reaper artifact. He was trying to save his friend, Ben, when Ben touched the artifact. Ben became a husk but TIM only got grazed. Saren was also indoctrinated by the same object.

TIM has been indoctrinated by the artifact since the First Contact War so that's 30 years (same with Saren). The entire time, he's been forming an organization called Cerberus that is Pro-human and eventually turned on Humans in their bid to control the reapers. It's the same long-term Batman Gambit tactic the Reapers used against the Protheans. A group of them wanted to control the Reapers and turned out to be indoctrinated.

Divide and conquer is the Reapers' favorite tactic.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 15 mai 2012 - 04:15 .

[americanidiot53]

americanidiot53 wrote...

I'm not sure how much CleverNoob's documentary is valued here in the forums as being valid, but I just watched it and agreed with most of it (I am an IT supporter; there's simply no other way to make sense of the ending). However, I came up with a couple questions and possible flaws. I am by nature a skeptic even about the things I believe, so I need some pretty solid proof to completely take something on as my own belief.

I know there's a wall of text below, but I would greatly appreciate it if I got some of these questions answered or some rebuttals against my own rebuttals. Anyways. Please note again that I have nothing against IT and appreciate it; I just have some questions needing answering.

Thanks![list][*]Some clarification- So did Harbinger actually leave or is this taking place in Shephard’s mind? If it’s taking place in Shephard’s mind, why would he think Harbinger would leave? If you say the Reapers caused Shepard to think Harbinger was leaving for the “ray of hope” that Shepard might feel, then the Reapers are in control of his mind, defeating your earlier claim that Shepard is not actually indoctrinated.
[/b]
[/b][*]Dream sounds- The “dream-like” noises after Shepard gets up could just be the developer’s attempt to demonstrate the hearing loss that Shepard went through after being hit by the beam. Especially given the higher pitch, the sounds resemble more of a “ringing” than any “dream-like” sounds.
[/b]
[/b][*]Reaper and Dream Sounds- The reaper growl is heard in many places by other people. For example, the opening sequence with all the men and women on the ground and the scene on Thessia with the Reaper in the background both feature the Reaper growls. Simply put, the growls in the dream sequences are simply in the back of Shepard's mind while he dreams.
[/b]
[/b][*]Fade-out sequences- White light is merely a fade-out technique, and given that both situations (the dream and the laser beam) featured some form of produced light (fire and laser respectively), it makes sense to game developers as the white light fade out brings the player into Shepard’s shoes (i.e. being blinded and having the whole “slow-down, life flash before your eyes” moment). If you look more closely at the whole game, many things are reused (i.e. big things like mission structure: go to planet, meet comrade, make final decision, leave planet). These reused transition screens are more likely a development of lazy game design than anything else. It’s possible that there was some grand scheme, but unlikely when looking at the game as a whole.
[/b]
[/b][*]Blurry horizon on the ground in front of the beam- Shephard could very well be blinded by the light and energy of intensity of Harbinger’s laser. However, I like the pulsating ambient point though. I had never thought of that before and agree that potentially it could mean something. Could have something to do with the effects of Harbinger’s laser on Shepard’s eyesight though, too.
[/b]
[/b][*]If they really were dead bodies, why not give them texture instead of just overlaying them on a smooth surface? If anything, this goes to show that Bioware was at least a little lazy in their last efforts of the game, if they weren’t rushed. I agree that this is one of your strong points (and this is kind of a weak refutation), but I’m curious as to why they would abandon the 3D models outside of the beam.
[/b]
[/b][*]Anderson’s entry- How do you know that there weren’t other entrances around the citadel. When exiting the dark red hallway, the player sees the curvature of the room, and it’s possible that Anderson was teleported somewhere else on the curvature.
[/b]
[/b][*]Anderson could have been referring to the moving panels of electricity as the “moving walls.” This one is a bit of a stretch, but I’ll throw it out there anyway.
[/b]
[/b][*]Why would the Reapers make the Keepers be alive in Shepard’s hallucination? Why even include them?
[/b]
[/b][*]1M1 Theory- If Shepard remembers those minute of details, then why doesn’t he remember the main room of the citadel or other MAJOR aspects of the Citadel?
[/b]
[/b][*]Clarification question- I’ve never been quite sure why Anderson seemed to wobble on his feet while standing. Was the Illusive Man in control of both of Shepard and his bodies?
[/b]
[/b][*]Bullet Hole from Marauder Shields- Why does Shepard’s armor not show wear and tear most of the time? Simply put, Bioware throughout all three Mass Effect games has never done something along the lines of the Batman “Arkham” games and had the main characters suit get slowly tattered. It makes no sense for them to begin that trend in the last 15 minutes of the game. I will concede, however, that this shot from Marauder Shields is much more prominent than any other shots that Shepard has endured.
[/b]
[/b][*]If Shepard is naturally inquisitive, then why does he not ask questions in his dream? If he’s not fully indoctrinated and the catalyst sequence is just a hallucination, wouldn’t he still ask questions given that his mind is still under his own control?
[/b]
[/b][*]How is Shepard aware of what the colors mean? That’s a player thing. I highly doubt Shepard sees “blue” as a good color and “red” as a bad color. If we are talking about the players, then we have to think a little bit more. I highly doubt players would simply make a decision because of color coordination in the different sectors of the Crucible. This is the final choice, and it’s easy for the player to notice this because of the music and the massive consequences of each choice. MOST players would think critically about their options and pick the one that makes sense to their Shepard (i.e. hopefully “Destroy”). It is highly unlikely to say that Bioware would institute a color discord in order to “fool” their players about which ending to pick.
[/b]
[/b][*]The developers had a different ending planned. How can we take all the “hints” displayed in the past two games as hints if the intended ending wasn’t actually used?[/b]

[*]I posted this earlier. Is there a better forum to put this in? So far I haven't had any conclusive responses, and I was really wondering what some people had to say about this. Not trying to be a petulant child here. I would just like some answers.

[Shermos]

I'll admit that my words have been too harsh toward those who are not ignorant by choice and I apologise all of you. Those who who do choose to remain ignorant however, need a kick in the pants and also need to be shown for what they are to those who might otherwise be swayed. I wouldn't call that trolling.

[gunslinger_ruiz]

Gunslinger_ruiz reporting for Theorizing and support /salute.

Comparison screenshots, as always, are in the sig.

[Arian Dynas]

Shermos wrote...

I'll admit that my words have been too harsh toward those who are not ignorant by choice and I apologise all of you. Those who who do choose to remain ignorant however, need a kick in the pants and also need to be shown for what they are to those who might otherwise be swayed. I wouldn't call that trolling.

Noooo.... I wouldn't either, considering that what you are ACTUALLY doing is closer to being a pretientious coffee shop hipster sitting there, complaining about all the plebians whom aren't as "deep" and witty as you are, to understand this deep ending that means absolutely nothing.

[Auralius Carolus]

balance5050 wrote...

You're right, I guess the problem for me is recognizing when someone is a troll, and when someone is genuinely trying to gain information and have a civil discussion.

If a question is presented directly, I try to make a habit of answering it- if it is within my body of knowledge. So long as questions that may follow can be viewed as a logical evolution of discourse, I continue to treat the questions as true in intent. If signs of intentional "trolling" are detected, (i.e., breaks in what would seem logical discourse), I may begin to question the subject.

And then there are the "Spiteful Trolls", as I call them. Instead of tricking you into wasting your time, they have a habit of baiting defensive reactions through pointed remarks, that are usually spoken in absolutes, and present minimal material for debate.

[balance5050]

Recognition affirmative.

On topic, I've been playing with the music turned all the way down, and the Voice and SFX turned all the way up, creepy noises are everywhere in this game.

[DJBare]

balance5050 wrote...

Recognition affirmative.

On topic, I've been playing with the music turned all the way down, and the Voice and SFX turned all the way up, creepy noises are everywhere in this game.

Have you tried standing in the holographic room, I turned my music to zero yet a tune still plays in there, it's defintely a familiar tune but I cannot think from where.

[Arian Dynas]

DJBare wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Recognition affirmative.

On topic, I've been playing with the music turned all the way down, and the Voice and SFX turned all the way up, creepy noises are everywhere in this game.

Have you tried standing in the holographic room, I turned my music to zero yet a tune still plays in there, it's defintely a familiar tune but I cannot think from where.

It's Vigil, the ME1 theme.

[balance5050]

Auralius Carolus wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

You're right, I guess the problem for me is recognizing when someone is a troll, and when someone is genuinely trying to gain information and have a civil discussion.

If a question is presented directly, I try to make a habit of answering it- if it is within my body of knowledge. So long as questions that may follow can be viewed as a logical evolution of discourse, I continue to treat the questions as true in intent. If signs of intentional "trolling" are detected, (i.e., breaks in what would seem logical discourse), I may begin to question the subject.

And then there are the "Spiteful Trolls", as I call them. Instead of tricking you into wasting your time, they have a habit of baiting defensive reactions through pointed remarks, that are usually spoken in absolutes, and present minimal material for debate.

Yeah, I'll be much more wary from now on, I used to like getting deep into the debate and dropping logic bombs and what not, but now I realize that should be left to lesser threads. This one is strictly for genuine, engaging discussion.

[Arashi08]

Shermos wrote...

I'll admit that my words have been too harsh toward those who are not ignorant by choice and I apologise all of you. Those who who do choose to remain ignorant however, need a kick in the pants and also need to be shown for what they are to those who might otherwise be swayed. I wouldn't call that trolling.

The way you worded this sounds alot like those fundamentalists who come to college campuses to tell everyone they are condemned if they don't see things their way.  You have your own reasons why you like the endings and I can respect your choice, even if I don't agree with it,  I think it is only fair you treat us with the same level of respect.

I like the IT for several reasons, but the main reason I enjoy it is because the theory has brought alot of people who didn;t like the endings together and given them a sense of hope that the game they became emotionally invested in didn't let them down.  I fell that is what is most important about this thread, NOT who is right and wrong. 

In one of your previous posts you stated that IT was too convoluted for the majority of people to grasp, and your ideas about the ending supposedly allow players to appreciate them more.  yet I haven't heard of this happening with the majority of fans who were still angry about the endings so clearly your own idea went over their heads as well.  Even if you have a list of people who agree with you, in the end it is no different than out theory and I believe it holds as much weight as yours.

Still, I appreciate that you appear to want to have a civil discussion about it, but it is not your place to "educate" us when you have as little evidence as we do about BioWare's true intentions.

[Shermos]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Erield wrote...

Icinix wrote...

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.

1.  Shepard actively worked against the Reapers for years, to the point that Harbinger declared war on him.  TIM was exposed much earlier than Shepard, and was fighting for longer--and yet TIM wasn't ever Indoctrinated?  Couldn't this be directly used to argue against the Shepard-exposure part of IT? 

2.  Why is there no way for TIM to take control of Anderson and/or Shepard's bodies without taking over their minds?  Morinth's Dominate power from ME2 shows that it is possible. 

Directly regarding TIM's Indoctrination: He implanted himself with new, relatively untested tech--and then flew directly to the Citadel to inform the Reapers about the Crucible plot.  I'm pretty sure that it was when he was interfacing with the Reapers directly that he became Indoctrinated.

Also, if you read Mass Effect: Evolution, TIM got his blue husk eyes from a reaper artifact. He was trying to save his friend, Ben, when Ben touched the artifact. Ben became a husk but TIM only got grazed. Saren was also indoctrinated by the same object.

TIM has been indoctrinated by the artifact since the First Contact War so that's 30 years (same with Saren). The entire time, he's been forming an organization called Cerberus that is Pro-human and eventually turned on Humans in their bid to control the reapers. It's the same long-term Batman Gambit tactic the Reapers used against the Protheans. A group of them wanted to control the Reapers and turned out to be indoctrinated.

Divide and conquer is the Reapers' favorite tactic.

And I think it's a stroke of brilliance since control is objectively the best and most ethical option available from the point of view of Type 1 civilisations and worst for the Catalyst since it dies and is replaced by an uploaded Shep. What better way to conceal your greatest weakness than by influencing an organisation which turns against the rest of the galaxy to advocate for it? And it kills two birds with one stone. 

[Parabolee77]

@Shermos

First of all I would like to ask that you try to remain respectful while disagreeing. Debate is welcome, as long as it comes wth respect rather than belligerence.

That article you linked is actually a brilliantly thought out counter argument to IT and positive argument for the literal ending. I welcome such intelligent points.

I have not had time to read all of it and offer full rebuttal yet but I would like to quickly point out it's biggest flaw before going back to play some more Mass Effect 2.

First of all the claim that those of us that do not like the ending simply "are too stupid to understand it" is not only obnoxious but incorrect (I think you phrased it like that, not him).

You see I understand all the esoteric concepts he's talking about in that post. I'm a long time sci fi fan and I am well aware of these themes and theories of the dangers of synthetic life. The problem with this in Mass Effect is that the series has thematically been been arguing in defense of synthetics up to that point. It would simply be terrible writing and contrary to established mythology to suddenly argue that synthetics will always wipe out all organic life.

You will not find me arguing against the Terminator movies based on a belief that synthetic life not being a threat. It is well established in that world.

However had they argued that all synthetics were destined to wipe out organics and had to be stopped at the end of Short Circuit I would have taken offense.Not to mention understanding these "esoteric" concepts does not fix all the plot holes.You simply cannot say that having an ending that can only be understood by applying esoteric knowledge (which most of the audience will not have by it's very definition) and that in every other way contradicts established themes is a good ending in my opinion.Bioware had literally over a hundred hours to establish these esoteric themes, specifically to establish the possibility of the enevitability of synthetics wiping out organics. But did they? No instead they make us care for the Geth, show us that the Geth never wanted to harm organics but only acted in self defense. Then show us that peace can be achieved between the Geth and their makers. They also ask us to embrace EDI, see her willingness to fight for organics, learn morality and compassion and even believe she can love an organic.Only to say in the last 15 minutes, "oh by the way synthetics are doomed to always destroy organics".And this guy argues this is good writing?Sorry the arguments the Catalyst makes are illogical to what we have learnt in the series up to that point. The "esoteric" themes are counter to the games themes and lore.However Indoctrination is completely in line with the games themes and lore!

Modifié par Parabolee77, 15 mai 2012 - 04:29 .

[DJBare]

Arian Dynas wrote...

DJBare wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Recognition affirmative.

On topic, I've been playing with the music turned all the way down, and the Voice and SFX turned all the way up, creepy noises are everywhere in this game.

Have you tried standing in the holographic room, I turned my music to zero yet a tune still plays in there, it's defintely a familiar tune but I cannot think from where.

It's Vigil, the ME1 theme.

Ahh, thank you, now I got to go and think why they have it playing as an ambient effect.

[balance5050]

DJBare wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Recognition affirmative.

On topic, I've been playing with the music turned all the way down, and the Voice and SFX turned all the way up, creepy noises are everywhere in this game.

Have you tried standing in the holographic room, I turned my music to zero yet a tune still plays in there, it's defintely a familiar tune but I cannot think from where.

Not yet, I saw your video's on the footsteps and what not. I personally noticed this weird high pitched hum when the reapers shoot their laser in Vancouverl, almost like a high violin note or something.

Modifié par balance5050, 15 mai 2012 - 04:30 .

[Shermos]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Shermos wrote...

I'll admit that my words have been too harsh toward those who are not ignorant by choice and I apologise all of you. Those who who do choose to remain ignorant however, need a kick in the pants and also need to be shown for what they are to those who might otherwise be swayed. I wouldn't call that trolling.

Noooo.... I wouldn't either, considering that what you are ACTUALLY doing is closer to being a pretientious coffee shop hipster sitting there, complaining about all the plebians whom aren't as "deep" and witty as you are, to understand this deep ending that means absolutely nothing.

It doesn't look like you bother to read my posts properly. At worst, you quote me out of context and straw man as above.

As for belligerence. Lex talionis. I'm merely replying in kind. 

.  

Modifié par Shermos, 15 mai 2012 - 04:37 .

[DJBare]

Arashi08 wrote...


I like the IT for several reasons, but the main reason I enjoy it is because the theory has brought alot of people who didn;t like the endings together and given them a sense of hope that the game they became emotionally invested in didn't let them down.  I fell that is what is most important about this thread, NOT who is right and wrong. 

If you have ever read his blog, his theories make IT look positively tame in comparison, that's not an insult, he seriously questions IT, yet comes up with the most fantastical stuff in his own blog.

Modifié par DJBare, 15 mai 2012 - 04:33 .

[balance5050]

 
Control- 

The reapers LOVE to control, it's what they are all about. They have left technology scattered around the galaxy in order to control our evolutionary path, they control our future by forcing the most advanced civilizations to become them, there is practically NO aspect of life that they don't control in one way or another

Synthesis-

The reapers have always regarded themselves as the most advanced civilization, they ARE the prime example of synthesis, it's not pretty. They ARE the alpha predator and DON'T consider pure organics or pure synthetics to be anything more than fuel or nuisances. They believe that synthesis is the best evolutionary model to live by.

Destroy- 

One thing the Catalyst says that rings true is they DO preserve life, they let organics live simply because they need us for survival, to destroy is to create chaos, but out of that chaos rises freedom, a new beginning, and infinite possibilities.

To believe that either control or synthesis is the answer is to agree with the reapers, which opens the door for them to exploit that side of your psyche, convincing you that siding with the reapers is a better solution than destroying them.

[Arian Dynas]

Shermos wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Shermos wrote...

I'll admit that my words have been too harsh toward those who are not ignorant by choice and I apologise all of you. Those who who do choose to remain ignorant however, need a kick in the pants and also need to be shown for what they are to those who might otherwise be swayed. I wouldn't call that trolling.

Noooo.... I wouldn't either, considering that what you are ACTUALLY doing is closer to being a pretientious coffee shop hipster sitting there, complaining about all the plebians whom aren't as "deep" and witty as you are, to understand this deep ending that means absolutely nothing.

It doesn't look like you bother to read my posts properly. At worst, you quote me out of context and straw man as above.

Whatever.
I've dismissed you by now, so say what you will.

[BatmanTurian]

oh geez, the bait's right there. must resist... must resist...

[Shermos]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Shermos wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Shermos wrote...

I'll admit that my words have been too harsh toward those who are not ignorant by choice and I apologise all of you. Those who who do choose to remain ignorant however, need a kick in the pants and also need to be shown for what they are to those who might otherwise be swayed. I wouldn't call that trolling.

Noooo.... I wouldn't either, considering that what you are ACTUALLY doing is closer to being a pretientious coffee shop hipster sitting there, complaining about all the plebians whom aren't as "deep" and witty as you are, to understand this deep ending that means absolutely nothing.

It doesn't look like you bother to read my posts properly. At worst, you quote me out of context and straw man as above.

Whatever.
I've dismissed you by now, so say what you will.

And that's your problem. Choosing to remain ignorant.