328 réponses à ce sujet

[Makrys]

Tom Lehrer wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

After watching that, I believe more in IT. It has to be true.

"Now you're just a 'Bible thumping' moron, basing your interpretation on a confirmation bias because you're so desperate to believe the endings aren't as they are, even though there is plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise. You are an idiot for believing in such a thing. Give up and become a Bioware hater! Its much more fun and self gratifying. Plus, we mock people who don't agree with us! You'll love it!"

Pull that stick out of your ass you'll feel better.

That's a mirror you're standing in front of, buddy. 

[Shallyah]

Makrys wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

After watching that, I believe more in IT. It has to be true.

"Now you're just a 'Bible thumping' moron, basing your interpretation on a confirmation bias because you're so desperate to believe the endings aren't as they are, even though there is plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise. You are an idiot for believing in such a thing. Give up and become a Bioware hater! Its much more fun and self gratifying. Plus, we mock people who don't agree with us! You'll love it!"

I'm not sure what's that for, but it's my opinion and as such, as valid as anyone's else, including yours.

You have been reported, by the way. Probably a few hours off these forums should help to cool off all that rage.

Modifié par Shallyah, 01 juin 2012 - 07:48 .

[RavenEyry]

Shallyah wrote...

I'm not sure what's that for, but it's my opinion and as such, as valid as anyone's else, including yours.

You have been reported, by the way. Probably a few hours off these forums should help to cool off all that rage.

Um, they were satirising another poster whom you haven't reported.

[Makrys]

Shallyah wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

After watching that, I believe more in IT. It has to be true.

"Now you're just a 'Bible thumping' moron, basing your interpretation on a confirmation bias because you're so desperate to believe the endings aren't as they are, even though there is plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise. You are an idiot for believing in such a thing. Give up and become a Bioware hater! Its much more fun and self gratifying. Plus, we mock people who don't agree with us! You'll love it!"

I'm not sure what's that for, but it's my opinion and as such, as valid as anyone's else, including yours.

You have been reported, by the way. Probably a few hours off these forums should help to cool off all that rage.

Lol. Apparently it wasn't dripping with enough sarcasm. 

And I guess its not obvious I support the IT. I mean, its not like my signature has anything to do with it. Or my other posts in this same thread. READ, my friend! Read. :happy:

Modifié par Makrys, 01 juin 2012 - 07:54 .

[Tom Lehrer]

Makrys wrote...

Tom Lehrer wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

After watching that, I believe more in IT. It has to be true.

"Now you're just a 'Bible thumping' moron, basing your interpretation on a confirmation bias because you're so desperate to believe the endings aren't as they are, even though there is plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise. You are an idiot for believing in such a thing. Give up and become a Bioware hater! Its much more fun and self gratifying. Plus, we mock people who don't agree with us! You'll love it!"

Pull that stick out of your ass you'll feel better.

That's a mirror you're standing in front of, buddy. 

Im not the one making insulting posts and baseless generalizations.

Modifié par Tom Lehrer, 01 juin 2012 - 07:54 .

[B3ckett]

There are two options:
a) there is something into the IT theory (like Chris' question about it at htl forums)
BW was too rushed by EA and made just helluva mistakes

Because we did not like the endings, we started inspecting each and every detail of the game. The scene OP mentioned was found a looong time ago, but can fit perfectly both into a and b options.

There's a lot more, but to be honest - I'm done with this. I'll get back to it after EC. I'll either be a bit more satisfied and close the lid on the ending or just rage a bit more and swear that ME3 was my last purchase from BW.
Simple as that.

[jsadalia]

Makrys wrote...

 Anti-ITists...

Makrys wrote... 

 I'm fine and always have been fine with people not agreeing with or liking the IT... Where I lose respect is when people, like yourself, go out of their way to bash and mock other people's opinions. So, yes, that I take issue with. Individual differing opinions? Not at all... Perhaps you should find a mirror.

This is beyond parody.

[Makrys]

Tom Lehrer wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Tom Lehrer wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Shallyah wrote...

After watching that, I believe more in IT. It has to be true.

"Now you're just a 'Bible thumping' moron, basing your interpretation on a confirmation bias because you're so desperate to believe the endings aren't as they are, even though there is plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise. You are an idiot for believing in such a thing. Give up and become a Bioware hater! Its much more fun and self gratifying. Plus, we mock people who don't agree with us! You'll love it!"

Pull that stick out of your ass you'll feel better.

That's a mirror you're standing in front of, buddy. 

Im not the one making insulting posts and baseless generalizations.

Never said you were. Anti-ITists do, though.

It was a joke. Mocking those who mock. Don't take it personally.

[Makrys]

jsadalia wrote...

Makrys wrote...

 Anti-ITists...

Makrys wrote... 

 I'm fine and always have been fine with people not agreeing with or liking the IT... Where I lose respect is when people, like yourself, go out of their way to bash and mock other people's opinions. So, yes, that I take issue with. Individual differing opinions? Not at all... Perhaps you should find a mirror.

This is beyond parody.

When did I say I was always right? I said I don't like people who mock other people. Are you so desperate to try and do all you can to make ITists look bad? Apparently so. 

The picture and what you quoted me saying have no corrolation at all, and are actually completely opposite. I was saying the people who mock other's views are the ones who stand up and say they know everything. Didn't think I'd have to explain that. 

Modifié par Makrys, 01 juin 2012 - 08:01 .

[jsadalia]

Actually I was referring to your high moral stance on mockery. Perhaps you should find a mirror?

[Makrys]

jsadalia wrote...

Actually I was referring to your high moral stance on mockery. Perhaps you should find a mirror?

When did I mock some one smarty pants? I said I don't like mocking. So that does that offend you?

[Tom Lehrer]

Makrys wrote...

Never said you were. Anti-ITists do, though.

It was a joke. Mocking those who mock. Don't take it personally.

There you go making baseless generalizations.

[Shallyah]

Lol. Apparently it wasn't dripping with enough sarcasm.

And I guess its not obvious I support the IT. I mean, its not like my signature has anything to do with it. Or my other posts in this same thread. READ, my friend! Read.

Well, I just walked into this thread, and said that the points exposed in the video are pretty solid and as such, they reinforced my belief in IT.

I do not have the gift of clairvoyance to identify such sarcasm because no, I did not read the whole thread. In any case, I'm sure the other people you're bickering with understood what you mean and your reply does not involve me, but I have no way to know it.

Modifié par Shallyah, 01 juin 2012 - 08:05 .

[Makrys]

Tom Lehrer wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Never said you were. Anti-ITists do, though.

It was a joke. Mocking those who mock. Don't take it personally.

There you go making baseless generalizations.

I didn't say ALL. I said they do it. Which they do. Not all of them, but they definitely do it. You can make my words whatever you want, I didn't say all.

[Makrys]

Shallyah wrote...

Lol. Apparently it wasn't dripping with enough sarcasm.

And I guess its not obvious I support the IT. I mean, its not like my signature has anything to do with it. Or my other posts in this same thread. READ, my friend! Read.

Well, I just walked into this thread, and said that the points exposed in the video are pretty solid and as such, they reinforced my belief in IT.

I do not have the gift of omnipotent clairvoyance to identify such sarcasm, and no, I did not read the whole thread. In any case, I'm sure the other people you're bickering with understood what you mean and your reply does not involve me, but I have no way to know it.

I was joking. I agree with you. I'm just pissed at the moment because of the amount of hypocrisy I'm seeing.

[RavenEyry]

Everyone stop making generalisations! Agh, now I did it...

[Makrys]

Yeah. I'm done here. Nothing but a flame fest. 

Modifié par Makrys, 01 juin 2012 - 08:10 .

[Tom Lehrer]

Makrys wrote...

Tom Lehrer wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Never said you were. Anti-ITists do, though.

It was a joke. Mocking those who mock. Don't take it personally.

There you go making baseless generalizations.

I didn't say ALL. I said they do it. Which they do. Not all of them, but they definitely do it. You can make my words whatever you want, I didn't say all.

When saying such things you need to add more context or else it is very easy to misinterpret what you said and force you to give clearification in a separate post.

[Makrys]

Tom Lehrer wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Tom Lehrer wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Never said you were. Anti-ITists do, though.

It was a joke. Mocking those who mock. Don't take it personally.

There you go making baseless generalizations.

I didn't say ALL. I said they do it. Which they do. Not all of them, but they definitely do it. You can make my words whatever you want, I didn't say all.

When saying such things you need to add more context or else it is very easy to misinterpret what you said and force you to give clearification in a separate post.

Sure. I apologize. I was frustrated at the moment.

Modifié par Makrys, 01 juin 2012 - 08:12 .

[Darth_Atreyu]

IndridColdx wrote...

 

I was watching Angry Joe's view on the Indoctrination Theory and something strikes me as strange.  At  2:57 to 3:32 it shows the child running into a locked building.  The building then gets hit by a reaper's beam which should have seemingly killed the child.  I havent seen that evidence anywhere else or heard anybody talk about it at all, but to me, it seems pretty compelling.  Does anybody know if it was debunked in some way? 

I hate the endings, but at the time, was completely against the Indoctrination Theory.  I would rather Bioware ret-con'd the entire ending getting rid of the god child.  Now that I know that won't be the case I'm hoping IT is true.  And it seems to me there are too many coincidences happening in this game for Bioware not to be hiding something from us.  Whether it's the Indoctrination Theory or something else.  

(At the end of Angry Joe's video it shows tweets obviously showing Bioware is probably hiding something from us.  I don't have a twitter account.  Nothing has been communicated to me in any way saying they could be hiding something at all.  I wish Bioware had better ways of getting things across to us.  I've been literally stressed out these passed few months hoping the endings they gave us weren't completely set in stone.) 

What is a God child+ Iv''e completed the game 3 times now and i didn't see any Child God.
BTW i am really satified with the way my favorite IP turned out.

[RavenEyry]

Darth_Atreyu wrote...
What is a God child+ Iv''e completed the game 3 times now and i didn't see any Child God.

Starbinger. ReaperBieber. Mr. Sparkle. The catalyst if you don't like silly nicknames.

[AngryFrozenWater]

I do not believe in the IT.

I have played ME3 five times. All I can see is conflicting in-game statements or situations. The list is long. I think that was caused by BW trying out different endings. We know about a leaked possible ending where dark energy plays a role and Tali mentioning dark energy problems in a star in ME2. Then we see the dream sequences with the boy in the ending in ME3. Did they try something else that got canned and where we see traces of? The reapers mention order and chaos since ME1. In ME3 order and chaos change from ascension through destruction to the fight against synthetics. Is that a planned revelation?

If the reapers were about preventing synthetics from rebelling against their creators then why did the reapers convert some of the geth to heretics?

I highly doubt any planning. Nothing in the series seems to be planned. The content of the series seems to be made up on the fly. ME3 feels like a desperate attempt to figure out how to deal with the extremely powerful reapers.

The reapers were too strong. In ME2 BW was able to hide that by introducing the collectors. In ME3 they had to come up with an actual ending. We were promised that we didn't get a reaper-off switch and no ABC ending. However, that's exactly what we got. It seems impossible to defeat them by conventional means.

The reapers are not about the fight against synthetics. They are about harvesting advanced civilizations through genocide and collecting tech. It is their way to reproduce and stay on top of the food chain. For them it would be counterproductive to have emotion, ethics, morale and even free will.

That was the basic idea and I think BW is obviously struggling to dream up a way to get rid of them. I think the company ran out of time to clean up all traces of their ending experiments and create a proper ending. Instead of delaying ME3 until the end was polished it got released as is.

It will be very hard for the EC DLC to iron out all problems in ME3. I suspect we will have more heated discussions on the forums when it will be released, unless the DLC is accompanied by a huge patch to clean up the main game.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 01 juin 2012 - 08:34 .

[my Aim is True]

It's come up before. It boils down to an IT vs Bad Writing debate

[jla0644]

Makrys wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
 You refuse to look at any evidence presented to you and only favor that which supports your claims..

Its funny you say that considering you're the same way in regards to the IT. Every anti-ITist is. Loads of evidence you just want to ignore.

Speaking only for myself, but I don't ignore any of the supposed evidence. I simply don't believe it means what you are convinced it means. I don't see "loads of evidence", I see people working backwards from the theory, forcing things to fit rather than letting the evidence lead them to the theory, I see people taking things that are practically meaningless and attaching great importance to them, and I see things that are much easier to explain by simply taking them at face value. But I haven't ignored any of the IT arguments. I simply haven't been convinced by any of them.

[Erield]

DazenCobalt17 wrote...

I see the delay about the doors, but as far as the soldiers or anyone not helping the kid. I dun buy any explanation for that other than he's not actually there. We're programmed to be protective of children. even if they were helping the injured I'm sure someone would have addressed the kid or when he was climbing into the shuttle, yanked em in faster. There were people in the shuttle as the kid was climbing in. I say the whole door delaying is just a coincidence

There comes a point when our biological programming can't keep up with the stress that's occurring.  This happens fairly frequently in times of great chaos, such as a powerful earthquake or a war.  It's a state of mind known as "shock."  If the child had kin in the area, they're likely panicking like nobody's business--but without that extra layer of connection, it's not such a big surprise that he's relatively ignored.  The soldiers aren't helping him because he's 1) uninjured, 2) moving generally towards the shuttle, 3) they're busy shooting things, 4) seems genuinely capable.  Right before he starts getting on the shuttle, those two people that it's supposedly waiting on?  Yeah, at least one of them was injured.  Does it make more sense to aid the walking wounded, or a kid who's doing what he should be?  Manpower and time are both critically low.  It's also more than possible that someone helps the child during one of the many times where the viewpoint focused on the Child breaks to show us other stuff going on, like Shepard's face.

squee365 wrote...
How come the "terrible writing" argument only ever pertains to IT theory related topics?
I've never heard anyone point out continuity errors for something like...Tuchanka or...Rannoch, or the Cerberus Coup.

There have been entire threads devoted to the Cerberus Coup.  If you've missed the several arguments people have had about it, then the short-lived one in this thread should count for at least something.  Tuchanka and Rannoch rarely come up in anti-IT posts because they rarely come up in pro-IT posts.  Anti-ITers aren't looking in-game for evidence to prove their theory right; we respond to how the evidence you are presenting is being interpreted wrong.  This means that the focus of both arguments lies in the beginning (when we see the kid) and the end (when it's just terrible.)  There's also a very real possibility that Tuchanka and Rannoch remain relatively unscathed by the argument because the storylines were actually good, and so people have been unwilling to bring them under the scope of scrutiny that other scenes have received.