328 réponses à ce sujet

[Erield]

dreman9999 wrote...

1.Base on the lore , Yes. To have a thinking 
 thrall  takes time to do based on teh codex. Year and month is what it clearly says.
2. The first dream hapens exacly after palvin...Not mars.
The second after the last mission on Tuchanka.
the third after the last mission on rennoch.
The last one is afte sacturay/before the cerberus base.
Each dreams happens after facing the reapers and/or there forces...

3. The end of the game.
You know....
<snip.  Picture of the Star Child.> 

1.  Why does he never suffer a hallucination that would actually affect his actions?  Why does he never hear voices trying to pull him in one direction or another--at the behest of the Reapers?  Why is there a distinct lack of oily shadows or sour notes affecting him while he's awake?  Why does he not have shared memories with his squad-mates? (ala ME2 Reaper IFF scientists.)  Why do Shepard's squad-mates not suffer from Indoctrination?

2.  I'm going to have to play the stupid game all over again just to be able to specifically tell you when the dreams occur.  And how many.  There's only three.  Let's ignore that for now, though; let's go with you being right.  Each time you have a dream is also a major break in the story.  You know, like a new Chapter in a book. 

3.  No.  If IT is true, then you are not awake at that point in time, so it does not count.  If IT is false, then it's not an hallucination, so that does not count.  If it is some weird admixture of IT-true/IT-false, then I give up.

[jijeebo]

Erield wrote...

3.  No.  If IT is true, then you are not awake at that point in time, so it does not count.  If IT is false, then it's not an hallucination, so that does not count.  If it is some weird admixture of IT-true/IT-false, then I give up.

inb4

Funny Thing: There 3 theories to IT

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. Hurr durr Shepard watches the kid out of his window before the reapers are even there so you fail.

2. Did you miss the part where the credits rolled and the game ended? You can't go sticking crucial plot developments outside of the mandatory parts of the game.

3. I've been over this, Bioware hadn't thought of them yet. Why wasn't the omni-blade in ME1 and ME2? Why weren't cannibals or marauders or banshees in ME1 or ME2? Why wasn't Vega in ME1 or ME2? Why was Udinas hair not brown in ME1 and ME2? Where were sub-machine guns in ME1? Where were thermal clips in ME1? Where was TIM in ME1? Where were the drell in ME1? They didn't have the entire trilogy penned out when they started making ME1.


And yay, you ignored my question again...


Do you have any proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. Who's said that kid  on that roofwas not really? I only refer to the kid on a different roof you met later is not.

2.You missed the part where you talk to your crew after the game ends and Legion tells you a critical plot point?
3.So what? You still can't say is just a ptsd dream. Their's still plenty of wholes in that? Like where was this dreams after thessia, or thane's death or Samara's Death. I can go on. 
The thing your missing is that it only comes up after a mission with the reapers and/or reaper tech and forces.... Andthey way indoctrination works, you don't see that it's strage. The limbic system is where ptsd is, it  effects dreams, and causes hallucination. Indoctrination  attacks and effect that system first. And your saying it can't happen when Shepard goes and face foreces that indoctrinate?

1. Uh, this entire thread is about the kid on Earth not being real?

2. I don't remember what he says but I doubt it's THAT important.


How could I possibly miss it, you mention it in every single post even though I've given you my interpretation of those events.


I never said it couldn't I said I really, really think it didn't based on the games I played and the things i've seen since release.



13th time, or is it 14th? I've lost count...


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. True, but what say that kid Shepard saw then is the same one he meet's later? Looking the same doesn't mean they arethe same person.
2.
 
It's pretty important.....It one of the main argumentsageints the synthesis logic.

3.It call for shadowing. It TIM controls Shepard and Anderson with indoctriantion, based on the lore wouldn't Shepard need tobe indoctrianted first?

[dreman9999]

Erield wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1.Base on the lore , Yes. To have a thinking 
 thrall  takes time to do based on teh codex. Year and month is what it clearly says.
2. The first dream hapens exacly after palvin...Not mars.
The second after the last mission on Tuchanka.
the third after the last mission on rennoch.
The last one is afte sacturay/before the cerberus base.
Each dreams happens after facing the reapers and/or there forces...

3. The end of the game.
You know....
<snip.  Picture of the Star Child.> 

1.  Why does he never suffer a hallucination that would actually affect his actions?  Why does he never hear voices trying to pull him in one direction or another--at the behest of the Reapers?  Why is there a distinct lack of oily shadows or sour notes affecting him while he's awake?  Why does he not have shared memories with his squad-mates? (ala ME2 Reaper IFF scientists.)  Why do Shepard's squad-mates not suffer from Indoctrination?

2.  I'm going to have to play the stupid game all over again just to be able to specifically tell you when the dreams occur.  And how many.  There's only three.  Let's ignore that for now, though; let's go with you being right.  Each time you have a dream is also a major break in the story.  You know, like a new Chapter in a book. 

3.  No.  If IT is true, then you are not awake at that point in time, so it does not count.  If IT is false, then it's not an hallucination, so that does not count.  If it is some weird admixture of IT-true/IT-false, then I give up.

1.Subtle and not at the that level yet. Indoctriantion has stages. Entry level does not have that. Those are advance level indoctriantion you discribing.
2.And then you'll know they happen at every moment I told you.
3.
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.  

[Bill Casey]

Sorry I don't take this at face value...

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

Erield wrote...

3.  No.  If IT is true, then you are not awake at that point in time, so it does not count.  If IT is false, then it's not an hallucination, so that does not count.  If it is some weird admixture of IT-true/IT-false, then I give up.

inb4

Funny Thing: There 3 theories to IT

You know me so well.=]

[Erield]

dreman9999 wrote...

.3.It call for shadowing. It TIM controls Shepard and Anderson with indoctriantion, based on the lore wouldn't Shepard need tobe indoctrianted first?

Since this is at least the fourth time you've said that Shepard is Indoctrinated already in order for TIM to control him--doesn't that defeat the purpose of IT?

IT postulates that Shepard is resisting.  You are stating that TIM control means he's already Indoctrinated.  Already Indoctrinated means the only way to break free is to eat a bullet.

Are you saying that Anderson is Indoctrinated at this point too?  When did it happen?  If he's Indoctrinated, then why is he fighting against the Reapers and TIM?

More importantly: Is the very fact that Anderson is constantly saying he was born in London a symptom of being Indoctrinated?  Was he really born in London? Or is that just a cry for help?  Does anyone know if maybe he was really born in, say, Toronto? 

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. Uh, this entire thread is about the kid on Earth not being real?

2. I don't remember what he says but I doubt it's THAT important.


How could I possibly miss it, you mention it in every single post even though I've given you my interpretation of those events.


I never said it couldn't I said I really, really think it didn't based on the games I played and the things i've seen since release.



13th time, or is it 14th? I've lost count...


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. True, but what say that kid Shepard saw then is the same one he meet's later? Looking the same doesn't mean they arethe same person.
2.
 
It's pretty important.....It one of the main argumentsageints the synthesis logic.

3.It call for shadowing. It TIM controls Shepard and Anderson with indoctriantion, based on the lore wouldn't Shepard need tobe indoctrianted first?

1. L O L   D A F U Q   Y O U   B E E N   S M O K I N G   B R A H ? ? ?

2. It's an interesting conversation but it's hardly IT-scale importance in ME3 is it?

3. Um no. Where in the lore does it say you need to be indoctrinated for someone to try indoctrinate you? Saying that what TIM is doing at the end is purely indoctrination is just daft anyway... He is obviously doing something else as well.

[Erield]

dreman9999 wrote...

1.Subtle and not at the that level yet. Indoctriantion has stages. Entry level does not have that. Those are advance level indoctriantion you discribing.
2.And then you'll know they happen at every moment I told you.
3.
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.  

1.  And yet you are saying that Shepard is suffering this advanced level of Indoctrination at the very beginning of ME3, but never again.

2.  You are still completely ignoring the entirely different reason I gave you.  They serve as "breaks" in the game, the same way a Chapter serves in a book.  They let you know you're moving on to a new part of the story.

3.  Sorry, IT is such a moving target that anytime you successfully argue something they change whatever aspect is required to be able to still reject the endings.  According to the most popular version of IT, Shepard is still on Earth, because that's the way you get the "breath" scene--so that's the one I'm arguing.

[jsadalia]

A little OT, but I don't know if I've heard the IT explanation for what we see after Shepard makes his choices on the Citadel, other than it was a vision, which seems odd in the circumstances. Surely the difference in one's brain between being indoctrinated and escaping indoctrination is huge, and yet Shepard has essentially the same vision of the Crucible firing, victory of one kind or another being achieved, and the weird jungle planet stuff. Why does he see the same things in both states, indoctrinated and unindoctrinated? Why does he see it at all?

Also, after the stuff with Anderson and TIM, Shepard opens the Citadel arms and the camera view shifts to space, showing things Shepard could not possibly see. If all this is in Shepard's head, what are we seeing here? Did he have an unconscious out of body experience and not think it was weird?

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. Uh, this entire thread is about the kid on Earth not being real?

2. I don't remember what he says but I doubt it's THAT important.


How could I possibly miss it, you mention it in every single post even though I've given you my interpretation of those events.


I never said it couldn't I said I really, really think it didn't based on the games I played and the things i've seen since release.



13th time, or is it 14th? I've lost count...


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. True, but what say that kid Shepard saw then is the same one he meet's later? Looking the same doesn't mean they arethe same person.
2.
 
It's pretty important.....It one of the main argumentsageints the synthesis logic.

3.It call for shadowing. It TIM controls Shepard and Anderson with indoctriantion, based on the lore wouldn't Shepard need tobe indoctrianted first?

1. L O L   D A F U Q   Y O U   B E E N   S M O K I N G   B R A H ? ? ?

2. It's an interesting conversation but it's hardly IT-scale importance in ME3 is it?

3. Um no. Where in the lore does it say you need to be indoctrinated for someone to try indoctrinate you? Saying that what TIM is doing at the end is purely indoctrination is just daft anyway... He is obviously doing something else as well.

1. I'm sorry ...Twins are the same person just because they look the same?(And don't you dare try to spin this to say I'm stay the kid hasa twin)
My poin tis that their is no proff the kid you saw there is the same kid you see in the vents. That kid can be real, the vent kid is not real...Get it.

2.It's not. My point is that they can put plot point in a post end game ME2.

3.It shows this with every indoctrianted person . And my point was that the person need s have a form of indoctrination to be controled not for the attempt of indocrination. When in the lore is it shown in the lore that indoctriantion can control a person who has never been indoctrianted or near reaper tech?

[Rafficus III]

Wait.... so, I just noticed this. Why is the front end of the Normandy damaged, but not the back end, after it has crash landed on the mystery planet when it was CLEARLY burnt up from the tail end as Joker fled the exploding relays?

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. Uh, this entire thread is about the kid on Earth not being real?

2. I don't remember what he says but I doubt it's THAT important.


How could I possibly miss it, you mention it in every single post even though I've given you my interpretation of those events.


I never said it couldn't I said I really, really think it didn't based on the games I played and the things i've seen since release.



13th time, or is it 14th? I've lost count...


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. True, but what say that kid Shepard saw then is the same one he meet's later? Looking the same doesn't mean they arethe same person.
2.
 
It's pretty important.....It one of the main argumentsageints the synthesis logic.

3.It call for shadowing. It TIM controls Shepard and Anderson with indoctriantion, based on the lore wouldn't Shepard need tobe indoctrianted first?

1. L O L   D A F U Q   Y O U   B E E N   S M O K I N G   B R A H ? ? ?

2. It's an interesting conversation but it's hardly IT-scale importance in ME3 is it?

3. Um no. Where in the lore does it say you need to be indoctrinated for someone to try indoctrinate you? Saying that what TIM is doing at the end is purely indoctrination is just daft anyway... He is obviously doing something else as well.

1. I'm sorry ...Twins are the same person just because they look the same?(And don't you dare try to spin this to say I'm stay the kid hasa twin)
My poin tis that their is no proff the kid you saw there is the same kid you see in the vents. That kid can be real, the vent kid is not real...Get it.

2.It's not. My point is that they can put plot point in a post end game ME2.

3.It shows this with every indoctrianted person . And my point was that the person need s have a form of indoctrination to be controled not for the attempt of indocrination. When in the lore is it shown in the lore that indoctriantion can control a person who has never been indoctrianted or near reaper tech?

1. That is a level of fail even i'm unfamiliar with. The kid is real, but then he dies OFFSCREEN with no indication to the player? Then he reappears as a hallucination just to die again 5 minutes later? That is beyond deluded if you'd rather think that to support IT than think he's just an actual kid that dies. I'm sorry.

2. Nothing Legion says is as important as a dream sequence that shows Shepard suffering from PTSD though. Not even close.

3. What TIM uses is not just indoctrination, all you have to do is watch the scene to realise it's something different to anything we've seen so far.


Also, NEITHER of those latter two points are anything to do with the OP.


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

[comrade gando]

ask isaac clarke about indoctrination

[dreman9999]

Erield wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1.Subtle and not at the that level yet. Indoctriantion has stages. Entry level does not have that. Those are advance level indoctriantion you discribing.
2.And then you'll know they happen at every moment I told you.
3.
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.  

1.  And yet you are saying that Shepard is suffering this advanced level of Indoctrination at the very beginning of ME3, but never again.

2.  You are still completely ignoring the entirely different reason I gave you.  They serve as "breaks" in the game, the same way a Chapter serves in a book.  They let you know you're moving on to a new part of the story.

3.  Sorry, IT is such a moving target that anytime you successfully argue something they change whatever aspect is required to be able to still reject the endings.  According to the most popular version of IT, Shepard is still on Earth, because that's the way you get the "breath" scene--so that's the one I'm arguing.

1. No. Limbic system manipulation is an entry level form of indoctriantion. (AKA, the part of your mind that controls dreams,ptsd, and hallucinations.)
Influencese form indoctriantion and body control is advance level. Shepard never has a form on influence or body control on him till the end of the game and even then it can be resisted.
2.No, I already awnseredit when jijeebo said it....I awnsered it in a way that it left more question with his assumptions then awnsers. Let leave it at, race of machine with a history of deseption.
3. No, It has many perspectives on it. It's based on the fact that the ending can't be proven real and the contact with reaper tech Shepard has in the series. There's nothing there to prove that the end is real, a hillusciantion or a dreams, so people who belevie in IT argue it  based of those  3 point. Ironicly, no on ethat beleive IT disowns any of the 3 possiblities or the people who beleive one of the 3. Only the anti -iter do. So really, any of those 3 points can be correct.

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 juin 2012 - 03:52 .

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. Uh, this entire thread is about the kid on Earth not being real?

2. I don't remember what he says but I doubt it's THAT important.


How could I possibly miss it, you mention it in every single post even though I've given you my interpretation of those events.


I never said it couldn't I said I really, really think it didn't based on the games I played and the things i've seen since release.



13th time, or is it 14th? I've lost count...


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. True, but what say that kid Shepard saw then is the same one he meet's later? Looking the same doesn't mean they arethe same person.
2.
 
It's pretty important.....It one of the main argumentsageints the synthesis logic.

3.It call for shadowing. It TIM controls Shepard and Anderson with indoctriantion, based on the lore wouldn't Shepard need tobe indoctrianted first?

1. L O L   D A F U Q   Y O U   B E E N   S M O K I N G   B R A H ? ? ?

2. It's an interesting conversation but it's hardly IT-scale importance in ME3 is it?

3. Um no. Where in the lore does it say you need to be indoctrinated for someone to try indoctrinate you? Saying that what TIM is doing at the end is purely indoctrination is just daft anyway... He is obviously doing something else as well.

1. I'm sorry ...Twins are the same person just because they look the same?(And don't you dare try to spin this to say I'm stay the kid hasa twin)
My poin tis that their is no proff the kid you saw there is the same kid you see in the vents. That kid can be real, the vent kid is not real...Get it.

2.It's not. My point is that they can put plot point in a post end game ME2.

3.It shows this with every indoctrianted person . And my point was that the person need s have a form of indoctrination to be controled not for the attempt of indocrination. When in the lore is it shown in the lore that indoctriantion can control a person who has never been indoctrianted or near reaper tech?

1. That is a level of fail even i'm unfamiliar with. The kid is real, but then he dies OFFSCREEN with no indication to the player? Then he reappears as a hallucination just to die again 5 minutes later? That is beyond deluded if you'd rather think that to support IT than think he's just an actual kid that dies. I'm sorry.

2. Nothing Legion says is as important as a dream sequence that shows Shepard suffering from PTSD though. Not even close.

3. What TIM uses is not just indoctrination, all you have to do is watch the scene to realise it's something different to anything we've seen so far.


Also, NEITHER of those latter two points are anything to do with the OP.


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. Can you point to any proof that the kid on the roof at the start of the game is the kid in the vents?
2.Again. It has nothing to do with IT. It's just proof  BW can put heavy story elements post game.
3.No, it not something different at all. Every syntom of indoctriantion pops up as soon as he controls Shepard. It is indoctriantion, the thing he has been studying since ME1. It's not something elseand everytime you try your proven wrong. You're justbeinghard headed at this point.

[CuseGirl]

hornedfrog87 wrote...

Wait.... so, I just noticed this. Why is the front end of the Normandy damaged, but not the back end, after it has crash landed on the mystery planet when it was CLEARLY burnt up from the tail end as Joker fled the exploding relays?

Because that's only the 3721st mistake in the ending. You couldn't see it the first time because you were blinded by the absurdity of the ending itself.

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. That is a level of fail even i'm unfamiliar with. The kid is real, but then he dies OFFSCREEN with no indication to the player? Then he reappears as a hallucination just to die again 5 minutes later? That is beyond deluded if you'd rather think that to support IT than think he's just an actual kid that dies. I'm sorry.

2. Nothing Legion says is as important as a dream sequence that shows Shepard suffering from PTSD though. Not even close.

3. What TIM uses is not just indoctrination, all you have to do is watch the scene to realise it's something different to anything we've seen so far.


Also, NEITHER of those latter two points are anything to do with the OP.


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. Can you point to any proof that the kid on the roof at the start of the game is the kid in the vents?
2.Again. It has nothing to do with IT. It's just proof  BW can put heavy story elements post game.
3.No, it not something different at all. Every syntom of indoctriantion pops up as soon as he controls Shepard. It is indoctriantion, the thing he has been studying since ME1. It's not something elseand everytime you try your proven wrong. You're justbeinghard headed at this point.

1. You're making the claim, burden of proof is on you.

2&3 - these are off-topic and we've talked them to death already



I've asked this question 16 times now and am still awaiting an answer...

Do you have proof that the child on Earth is not real?

So far I've gotten "Nobody touched him." and "He's alive, then dies, then returns as a hallucination despite Shepard not knowing he is dead, then dies again."

[Rafficus III]

CuseGirl wrote...

hornedfrog87 wrote...

Wait.... so, I just noticed this. Why is the front end of the Normandy damaged, but not the back end, after it has crash landed on the mystery planet when it was CLEARLY burnt up from the tail end as Joker fled the exploding relays?

Because that's only the 3721st mistake in the ending. You couldn't see it the first time because you were blinded by the absurdity of the ending itself.

Eh, something rotten in the state of Mass Effect and I do intend on figuring out this dilemma....

[IndridColdx]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. That is a level of fail even i'm unfamiliar with. The kid is real, but then he dies OFFSCREEN with no indication to the player? Then he reappears as a hallucination just to die again 5 minutes later? That is beyond deluded if you'd rather think that to support IT than think he's just an actual kid that dies. I'm sorry.

2. Nothing Legion says is as important as a dream sequence that shows Shepard suffering from PTSD though. Not even close.

3. What TIM uses is not just indoctrination, all you have to do is watch the scene to realise it's something different to anything we've seen so far.


Also, NEITHER of those latter two points are anything to do with the OP.


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. Can you point to any proof that the kid on the roof at the start of the game is the kid in the vents?
2.Again. It has nothing to do with IT. It's just proof  BW can put heavy story elements post game.
3.No, it not something different at all. Every syntom of indoctriantion pops up as soon as he controls Shepard. It is indoctriantion, the thing he has been studying since ME1. It's not something elseand everytime you try your proven wrong. You're justbeinghard headed at this point.

1. You're making the claim, burden of proof is on you.

2&3 - these are off-topic and we've talked them to death already



I've asked this question 16 times now and am still awaiting an answer...

Do you have proof that the child on Earth is not real?

So far I've gotten "Nobody touched him." and "He's alive, then dies, then returns as a hallucination despite Shepard not knowing he is dead, then dies again."

Let me answer as this is my thread and our friend here sucks at answering questions and is hard to understand.  NO there is no physical proof for indoctrination only things that would support the case.  Where there are things that CAN point in that direction, it proves nothing.  We can only speculate and hope we are right.  We just want something better than the crap that was given to us at the end.  That's all

[jijeebo]

IndridColdx wrote...

jijeebo wrote...



1. You're making the claim, burden of proof is on you.

2&3 - these are off-topic and we've talked them to death already



I've asked this question 16 times now and am still awaiting an answer...

Do you have proof that the child on Earth is not real?

So far I've gotten "Nobody touched him." and "He's alive, then dies, then returns as a hallucination despite Shepard not knowing he is dead, then dies again."

Let me answer as this is my thread and our friend here sucks at answering questions and is hard to understand.  NO there is no physical proof for indoctrination only things that would support the case.  Where there are things that CAN point in that direction, it proves nothing.  We can only speculate and hope we are right.  We just want something better than the crap that was given to us at the end.  That's all

Thanks.

And don't worry, I only asked him 16 times because he kept demanding proof off of people earlier when they said they thought the child was real. I'm not usually quite as annoying as I have been tonight.


I agree completely with the final sentiment, but I find myself in the unfortunate position of not actually finding IT to be any better than what we got, so I just have to hope EC is complete amazeballs. *fingers crossed*

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. That is a level of fail even i'm unfamiliar with. The kid is real, but then he dies OFFSCREEN with no indication to the player? Then he reappears as a hallucination just to die again 5 minutes later? That is beyond deluded if you'd rather think that to support IT than think he's just an actual kid that dies. I'm sorry.

2. Nothing Legion says is as important as a dream sequence that shows Shepard suffering from PTSD though. Not even close.

3. What TIM uses is not just indoctrination, all you have to do is watch the scene to realise it's something different to anything we've seen so far.


Also, NEITHER of those latter two points are anything to do with the OP.


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. Can you point to any proof that the kid on the roof at the start of the game is the kid in the vents?
2.Again. It has nothing to do with IT. It's just proof  BW can put heavy story elements post game.
3.No, it not something different at all. Every syntom of indoctriantion pops up as soon as he controls Shepard. It is indoctriantion, the thing he has been studying since ME1. It's not something elseand everytime you try your proven wrong. You're justbeinghard headed at this point.

1. You're making the claim, burden of proof is on you.

2&3 - these are off-topic and we've talked them to death already



I've asked this question 16 times now and am still awaiting an answer...

Do you have proof that the child on Earth is not real?

So far I've gotten "Nobody touched him." and "He's alive, then dies, then returns as a hallucination despite Shepard not knowing he is dead, then dies again."

1. Ok...He was on a completly differnet roof at the start of the game and the vent kid you see is on a different  one. Also, you have know way to comfirm who is who.
2.TIM's control of Shepardis not off topic....
3....And is proof that Shepard mind is in suspect. There has to be a start point for the indoctriantion and that happens in ME1 through ME2... Being that Indoctriantion messes with the mind and in the start of the game mind controling machines are there, that bring furthe suspect. Also, the burden of proof for me to show is the fact there is no proof the child is not real...Not that he is not real. And my fact that there is no proof he is  real is that their is not clear indication of interactivity with any one but Shepard.

[dreman9999]

IndridColdx wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. That is a level of fail even i'm unfamiliar with. The kid is real, but then he dies OFFSCREEN with no indication to the player? Then he reappears as a hallucination just to die again 5 minutes later? That is beyond deluded if you'd rather think that to support IT than think he's just an actual kid that dies. I'm sorry.

2. Nothing Legion says is as important as a dream sequence that shows Shepard suffering from PTSD though. Not even close.

3. What TIM uses is not just indoctrination, all you have to do is watch the scene to realise it's something different to anything we've seen so far.


Also, NEITHER of those latter two points are anything to do with the OP.


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. Can you point to any proof that the kid on the roof at the start of the game is the kid in the vents?
2.Again. It has nothing to do with IT. It's just proof  BW can put heavy story elements post game.
3.No, it not something different at all. Every syntom of indoctriantion pops up as soon as he controls Shepard. It is indoctriantion, the thing he has been studying since ME1. It's not something elseand everytime you try your proven wrong. You're justbeinghard headed at this point.

1. You're making the claim, burden of proof is on you.

2&3 - these are off-topic and we've talked them to death already



I've asked this question 16 times now and am still awaiting an answer...

Do you have proof that the child on Earth is not real?

So far I've gotten "Nobody touched him." and "He's alive, then dies, then returns as a hallucination despite Shepard not knowing he is dead, then dies again."

Let me answer as this is my thread and our friend here sucks at answering questions and is hard to understand.  NO there is no physical proof for indoctrination only things that would support the case.  Where there are things that CAN point in that direction, it proves nothing.  We can only speculate and hope we are right.  We just want something better than the crap that was given to us at the end.  That's all

No proof?
 
How did TIM do that and why is every syntom of indoctriantion poping up?

[IndridColdx]

dreman9999 wrote...

IndridColdx wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. That is a level of fail even i'm unfamiliar with. The kid is real, but then he dies OFFSCREEN with no indication to the player? Then he reappears as a hallucination just to die again 5 minutes later? That is beyond deluded if you'd rather think that to support IT than think he's just an actual kid that dies. I'm sorry.

2. Nothing Legion says is as important as a dream sequence that shows Shepard suffering from PTSD though. Not even close.

3. What TIM uses is not just indoctrination, all you have to do is watch the scene to realise it's something different to anything we've seen so far.


Also, NEITHER of those latter two points are anything to do with the OP.


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. Can you point to any proof that the kid on the roof at the start of the game is the kid in the vents?
2.Again. It has nothing to do with IT. It's just proof  BW can put heavy story elements post game.
3.No, it not something different at all. Every syntom of indoctriantion pops up as soon as he controls Shepard. It is indoctriantion, the thing he has been studying since ME1. It's not something elseand everytime you try your proven wrong. You're justbeinghard headed at this point.

1. You're making the claim, burden of proof is on you.

2&3 - these are off-topic and we've talked them to death already



I've asked this question 16 times now and am still awaiting an answer...

Do you have proof that the child on Earth is not real?

So far I've gotten "Nobody touched him." and "He's alive, then dies, then returns as a hallucination despite Shepard not knowing he is dead, then dies again."

Let me answer as this is my thread and our friend here sucks at answering questions and is hard to understand.  NO there is no physical proof for indoctrination only things that would support the case.  Where there are things that CAN point in that direction, it proves nothing.  We can only speculate and hope we are right.  We just want something better than the crap that was given to us at the end.  That's all

No proof?
 
How did TIM do that and why is every syntom of indoctriantion poping up?

That doesn't prove anything.  It just proves a little more is going on than what we think.  You can sit there and say this proves it but what happens when the EC comes out and low and behold, I.T. isn't true.  We can only speculate.  I hope I.T. is true just like the next guy but until the is confirmation, we don't know

[dreman9999]

IndridColdx wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

IndridColdx wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. That is a level of fail even i'm unfamiliar with. The kid is real, but then he dies OFFSCREEN with no indication to the player? Then he reappears as a hallucination just to die again 5 minutes later? That is beyond deluded if you'd rather think that to support IT than think he's just an actual kid that dies. I'm sorry.

2. Nothing Legion says is as important as a dream sequence that shows Shepard suffering from PTSD though. Not even close.

3. What TIM uses is not just indoctrination, all you have to do is watch the scene to realise it's something different to anything we've seen so far.


Also, NEITHER of those latter two points are anything to do with the OP.


Do you have proof that the child on Earth isn't real?

1. Can you point to any proof that the kid on the roof at the start of the game is the kid in the vents?
2.Again. It has nothing to do with IT. It's just proof  BW can put heavy story elements post game.
3.No, it not something different at all. Every syntom of indoctriantion pops up as soon as he controls Shepard. It is indoctriantion, the thing he has been studying since ME1. It's not something elseand everytime you try your proven wrong. You're justbeinghard headed at this point.

1. You're making the claim, burden of proof is on you.

2&3 - these are off-topic and we've talked them to death already



I've asked this question 16 times now and am still awaiting an answer...

Do you have proof that the child on Earth is not real?

So far I've gotten "Nobody touched him." and "He's alive, then dies, then returns as a hallucination despite Shepard not knowing he is dead, then dies again."

Let me answer as this is my thread and our friend here sucks at answering questions and is hard to understand.  NO there is no physical proof for indoctrination only things that would support the case.  Where there are things that CAN point in that direction, it proves nothing.  We can only speculate and hope we are right.  We just want something better than the crap that was given to us at the end.  That's all

No proof?
 
How did TIM do that and why is every syntom of indoctriantion poping up?

That doesn't prove anything.  It just proves a little more is going on than what we think.  You can sit there and say this proves it but what happens when the EC comes out and low and behold, I.T. isn't true.  We can only speculate.  I hope I.T. is true just like the next guy but until the is confirmation, we don't know

So every syntom of indoctrination poping up means something else?
The man who was using indoctriantion on his own troups is using something else?
The man who found away to control husk via experimentation and then had that same tech implanted in him to control not onlyhis troops, husk and the reapers with this form of indoctrination is using something else?

......
Please, go on...Tell that having all the symtom of indoctrinatic pop up after a man you know  was experiment with indoctriantion,who learned everything about it and have the tech to control indoctrianted soilders and husk implanted in him is not using indoctriantion .

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 juin 2012 - 04:31 .