55528 réponses à ce sujet

[HellishFiend]

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...


No offense, but I feel no compulsion to answer your questions. You've been here long enough to know the answers yourself, and reiterating would just be trying to sway your opinion with knowledge you already have. That fits the definition of pointless quite well.

Sorry you feel that way, but even you must admit that IT is a huge topic full of many obscure references. It's possible I may have missed this one.

Epyon I have to be honest, you lost a lot of credibility when you basically decided to renounce IT entirely on the grounds that we disagreed with your theory. If you base your own opinion on the validation you receive from others, that indicates to me that you dont feel very strongly about that opinion in the first place. That's why I dont feel inclined to get into an opinion-swaying discussion with you, especially considering the information youre asking me for is easily found anywhere that talks about IT. 

[dreamgazer]

I wouldn't be surprised if they played down fan expectations of the information that'll come out of E3, then slyly dish out a release date and an innuendo to chew on.

If not, then they're doing the "playing it close to the vest" thing very well.

[HellishFiend]

byne wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

snip...

Ah...uhmmm...ehhhhh....just utterly speechless.  Well done!

About snip...?

About his *cough*fancreation*cough* post about his interpretation of how the endings should play out. 

We're aware its a fan creation, Hellish, you dont gotta point it out.

I'm guessing that since you went out of your way to do so, you arent a fan of it?

It's not that, it's just that I've never really been interested in fanfics of any kind, and there is a subforum dedicated to them. It's the same reason why I dont read any of the Star Trek novels, because they arent canon; they're essentially fanfics. For what it's worth, I did read one of his earlier revisions, and it was quite good. Just not my thing, is all. 

Modifié par HellishFiend, 04 juin 2012 - 08:00 .

[paxxton]

I'm off to EA's conference!

EDIT: The bandwidth is awful.

Modifié par paxxton, 04 juin 2012 - 08:18 .

[EpyonX3]

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...


No offense, but I feel no compulsion to answer your questions. You've been here long enough to know the answers yourself, and reiterating would just be trying to sway your opinion with knowledge you already have. That fits the definition of pointless quite well.

Sorry you feel that way, but even you must admit that IT is a huge topic full of many obscure references. It's possible I may have missed this one.

Epyon I have to be honest, you lost a lot of credibility when you basically decided to renounce IT entirely on the grounds that we disagreed with your theory. If you base your own opinion on the validation you receive from others, that indicates to me that you dont feel very strongly about that opinion in the first place. That's why I dont feel inclined to get into an opinion-swaying discussion with you, especially considering the information youre asking me for is easily found anywhere that talks about IT. 

Incorrect. I renounced IT based on my thoery, which has been refined thanks to some feedback, and not because you guys disagreed.

I've always been honest about my intentions here and how I felt towards the posters here. I don't know why my stance has less credibility than anyone else here.

[balance5050]

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...


No offense, but I feel no compulsion to answer your questions. You've been here long enough to know the answers yourself, and reiterating would just be trying to sway your opinion with knowledge you already have. That fits the definition of pointless quite well.

Sorry you feel that way, but even you must admit that IT is a huge topic full of many obscure references. It's possible I may have missed this one.

Epyon I have to be honest, you lost a lot of credibility when you basically decided to renounce IT entirely on the grounds that we disagreed with your theory. If you base your own opinion on the validation you receive from others, that indicates to me that you dont feel very strongly about that opinion in the first place. That's why I dont feel inclined to get into an opinion-swaying discussion with you, especially considering the information youre asking me for is easily found anywhere that talks about IT. 

I remember that, he was being a sensitive boy that day, acting like he wasn't even go to post here anymore. He cried wolf obviously.

[HellishFiend]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Incorrect. I renounced IT based on my thoery, which has been refined thanks to some feedback, and not because you guys disagreed.

I've always been honest about my intentions here and how I felt towards the posters here. I don't know why my stance has less credibility than anyone else here.

So you say, but its there in black and white in your posts. When we continually disagreed with your theory, you said something along the lines of "Thats it, I'm becoming anti-IT", heavily implying that it was our reaction to your theory that was your justification for your change in belief. 

[balance5050]

HellishFiend wrote...

byne wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

snip...

Ah...uhmmm...ehhhhh....just utterly speechless.  Well done!

About snip...?

About his *cough*fancreation*cough* post about his interpretation of how the endings should play out. 

We're aware its a fan creation, Hellish, you dont gotta point it out.

I'm guessing that since you went out of your way to do so, you arent a fan of it?

It's not that, it's just that I've never really been interested in fanfics of any kind, and there is a subforum dedicated to them. It's the same reason why I dont read any of the Star Trek novels, because they arent canon; they're essentially fanfics. For what it's worth, I did read one of his earlier revisions, and it was quite good. Just not my thing, is all. 

I agree, the script is good and it's a good example of how Bioware could do things without gameplay, but my main focus here is canon lore.

[byne]

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...


No offense, but I feel no compulsion to answer your questions. You've been here long enough to know the answers yourself, and reiterating would just be trying to sway your opinion with knowledge you already have. That fits the definition of pointless quite well.

Sorry you feel that way, but even you must admit that IT is a huge topic full of many obscure references. It's possible I may have missed this one.

Epyon I have to be honest, you lost a lot of credibility when you basically decided to renounce IT entirely on the grounds that we disagreed with your theory. If you base your own opinion on the validation you receive from others, that indicates to me that you dont feel very strongly about that opinion in the first place. That's why I dont feel inclined to get into an opinion-swaying discussion with you, especially considering the information youre asking me for is easily found anywhere that talks about IT. 

Incorrect. I renounced IT based on my thoery, which has been refined thanks to some feedback, and not because you guys disagreed.

I've always been honest about my intentions here and how I felt towards the posters here. I don't know why my stance has less credibility than anyone else here.

Do you actually have a fully fleshed out theory now? Last I heard you thought Shep was on the Crucible, not the Citadel, but a change in locations really hardly constitutes an entire theory.

I dont mean that in a rude way or anything, so I hope it doesnt come across like that.

[byne]

HellishFiend wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Incorrect. I renounced IT based on my thoery, which has been refined thanks to some feedback, and not because you guys disagreed.

I've always been honest about my intentions here and how I felt towards the posters here. I don't know why my stance has less credibility than anyone else here.

So you say, but its there in black and white in your posts. When we continually disagreed with your theory, you said something along the lines of "Thats it, I'm becoming anti-IT", heavily implying that it was our reaction to your theory that was your justification for your change in belief. 

But as far as I know Epyon never even believed IT in the first place. Claiming he was anti-IT was more or less him reiterating the stance he'd always held.

Theres a reason Epyon was always the one guy I referred to when I needed an example of a reasonable person who doesnt believe IT. Him believing it would kind have defeated the point of using him as an example.

[HellishFiend]

byne wrote...

But as far as I know Epyon never even believed IT in the first place. Claiming he was anti-IT was more or less him reiterating the stance he'd always held.

Theres a reason Epyon was always the one guy I referred to when I needed an example of a reasonable person who doesnt believe IT. Him believing it would kind have defeated the point of using him as an example.

That doesnt change the implications of what he said, though, so I think my point still stands...

[RavenEyry]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Incorrect. I renounced IT based on my thoery, which has been refined thanks to some feedback, and not because you guys disagreed.

Was your theory the thing about the choice chamber being on the tip of the crucible? If so, how does that disprove IT? Not being rude or anything, I literally can't see how the two theories relate.

[Fingertrip]

And there you have it, no announcement at EA's conference. Can we please drop it, like it should have been dropped since people began speculating about it, eventho they said nothing would be announced?

[balance5050]

RavenEyry wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Incorrect. I renounced IT based on my thoery, which has been refined thanks to some feedback, and not because you guys disagreed.

Was your theory the thing about the choice chamber being on the tip of the crucible? If so, how does that disprove IT? Not being rude or anything, I literally can't see how the two theories relate.

Personally I think it would add more credence to the I.T. considering that the crucible, you know, explodes.

[HellishFiend]

Fingertrip wrote...

And there you have it, no announcement at EA's conference. Can we please drop it, like it should have been dropped since people began speculating about it, eventho they said nothing would be announced?

Who was making a big deal about it? All I saw were people making jokes about it, and engaging in wishful thinking. 

[TSA_383]

MaximizedAction wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

@Rosewind:

Excerpt from the Origin section:

In reality, Athame was not a mythical goddess but a guise crafted by the Protheans. During the height of their empire, the Protheans discovered the asari and judged that they had potential as leaders for the races of the next cycle against the Reapers. They intervened in asari development by creating the myth of a goddess, Athame, who was imparting divine gifts and knowledge through her guides, Janiri and Lucen, who were actually Protheans. Among those "gifts" was the asari's natural ability to develop biotics, which was in reality the product of years of Prothean genetic research and manipulation.

Still an interesting coincidence that asari architecture has these Reaper peaks, as if they're culture is derived from worshipping the Reapers. After all, if it were the Protheans, then there would be more rectangular structures, like Javik's memory shard or the buildings we see in the From Ashes flashbacks.

Do you remember the "Batchelor Party" conversation in ME2, where it's suggested that the asari manipulate the minds of other species on a subconscious level, hence everyone finding them attractive? (Y'know, asides them being a race entirely composed of busty blue bisexual hotties...)

I wonder if the mental manipulation thing could have something to do with this...

Manipulation on such a scale would make the asari a truly worthy opponent of the Reapers, they would be basically the organic Reapers, if you wish.

Hm...and here's me guessing whether the Protheans had that in mind by interfering with the asari?

Does Liara's "gift" make a little more sense now?

Mother of god.jpg

I knew about that Bachelor's party. That's still (somehow) ok, but manipulating others into seeing things on the scales of objects different...I don't know yet.

But the fact that you can get Liara's gift even without her being your LI...manipulation could be the intention. The question is, was that manipulation to help Shepard or...

I see it as a "help" thing - Somehow they'll use either the prothean cipher or Liara's "gift" as the reason why shepard is special and can overcome the indoctrination process.
It'll be like the matrix, where neo is "the one" and thus can overcome the control of the matrix for incredibly poorly specified reasons

[paxxton]

Fingertrip wrote...

And there you have it, no announcement at EA's conference. Can we please drop it, like it should have been dropped since people began speculating about it, eventho they said nothing would be announced?

The conference has just started.

[HellishFiend]

balance5050 wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Incorrect. I renounced IT based on my thoery, which has been refined thanks to some feedback, and not because you guys disagreed.

Was your theory the thing about the choice chamber being on the tip of the crucible? If so, how does that disprove IT? Not being rude or anything, I literally can't see how the two theories relate.

Personally I think it would add more credence to the I.T. considering that the crucible, you know, explodes.

Exactly. Even if his theory were accurate, it would only increase the implausibility of the face-value context....

[Lakeshow1986]

Funny how in the spike feed there is a pole that has ME3's new ending as the second most most voted for after Dead Space 3

[balance5050]

paxxton wrote...

Fingertrip wrote...

And there you have it, no announcement at EA's conference. Can we please drop it, like it should have been dropped since people began speculating about it, eventho they said nothing would be announced?

The conference has just started.

Are you actually there? keep us updated man.... I'm going to do some dishes real quick and I want answers when I get back.

Modifié par balance5050, 04 juin 2012 - 08:23 .

[paxxton]

balance5050 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Fingertrip wrote...

And there you have it, no announcement at EA's conference. Can we please drop it, like it should have been dropped since people began speculating about it, eventho they said nothing would be announced?

The conference has just started.

Are you actually there? keep us updated man.... I'm going to do some dishes real quick and I want answers when I get back.

Unfortunately I'm not. Watching via webcast with horrible bandwidth.

[RavenEyry]

HellishFiend wrote...

Exactly. Even if his theory were accurate, it would only increase the implausibility of the face-value context....

It also proves Mr. Sparkle lies because he says Shep's on the citadel. If he lied about something as inconsequential as that, what else is he lying about.

[dreamgazer]

RavenEyry wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Exactly. Even if his theory were accurate, it would only increase the implausibility of the face-value context....

It also proves Mr. Sparkle lies because he says Shep's on the citadel. If he lied about something as inconsequential as that, what else is he lying about.

Every time you mention Mr. Sparkle, I instantly think (and kinda almost hear you say):



"Sometimes, I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion!"

[paxxton]

Muzyka's talking about Star Wars.

[EpyonX3]

RavenEyry wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Incorrect. I renounced IT based on my thoery, which has been refined thanks to some feedback, and not because you guys disagreed.

Was your theory the thing about the choice chamber being on the tip of the crucible? If so, how does that disprove IT? Not being rude or anything, I literally can't see how the two theories relate.

It wasn't really intended to be at first. I even started a blog where that was part of the disclaimer.

Here's the thread I started,

http://social.biowar...ndex/12261111/1