328 réponses à ce sujet

[IndridColdx]

dreman9999 wrote...

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 .

Yes every symptom of indoctrination poping up could mean nothing at all.  It could be poor writing.  There is no absolute evidence for I.T.  The only thing we can argue is the sheer volume of circumstances that point to I.T. because there is a lot.  Passed that all the evidence is circumstantial.  Again this is coming from a guy that hopes it's true.  We can only speculate with what has been given to us so far until Bioware Clarifies what is going on in the DLC.  Period.

[dreman9999]

IndridColdx wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

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 .

Yes every symptom of indoctrination poping up could mean nothing at all.  It could be poor writing.  There is no absolute evidence for I.T.  The only thing we can argue is the sheer volume of circumstances that point to I.T. because there is a lot.  Passed that all the evidence is circumstantial.  Again this is coming from a guy that hopes it's true.  We can only speculate with what has been given to us so far until Bioware Clarifies what is going on in the DLC.  Period.

It poor writing to use something you establishe in your own story? You don't even have proof that it's bad writing.While that scene alone, provesit's there...It make no sense to use something you astablish in your owns story and not have it mean what you astablished it to mean. That called a plot hole. Their's not even proofit's something other then indoctriantaion. 
So really, you just in denial. Show proof that it's not indoctriantion or the symtoms are something else or just stop posting. And use thing that are astablish in the storythis time.

[111987]

Supposed symptoms of indoctrination that Shepard 'experiences':

Headaches: Yeah, cause indoctrination is the most likely explanation for headaches in the middle of the biggest war ever...
Buzzing sounds: James hears the buzzing noises on the Normandy, not Shepard.
Feelings of being watched: Nope, never happens to Shepard.
Hallucinations: Shepard doesn't hallucinate, he has nightmares.
"Oily shadows": This piece of evidence doesn't make any sense because oily shadows is how the RACHNI experience indoctrination; cause, you know if you paid attention to the Queen, they experience and percieve the world totally different from us. Why would Shepard experience indoctrination like a Rachni would (hint: he wouldn't).
"Alien voices": Nope!

Indoctrnation leads to...

Betraying friends: Yeap, that never happened in my playthrough.
Trusting enemies: Pretty sure I argued vehemently against the Illusive Man and the Rannoch Reaper...
Viewing Reapers with superstitious awe: All my Shepard talked about with the Reapers is how kill them, not worship them.

[Tom Lehrer]

dreman9999 wrote...
]It poor writing to use something you establishe in your own story? You don't even have proof that it's bad writing.While that scene alone, provesit's there...It make no sense to use something you astablish in your owns story and not have it mean what you astablished it to mean. That called a plot hole. Their's not even proofit's something other then indoctriantaion. 
So really, you just in denial. Show proof that it's not indoctriantion or the symtoms are something else or just stop posting. And use thing that are astablish in the storythis time.

No one is saying that it is bad writing to use indoctriantion . What people are saying is that there is no solid evidence for Shepard's indoctriantion because every bit of evidence for IT can also be interpreted as poor design and bad writing.

Modifié par Tom Lehrer, 02 juin 2012 - 06:09 .