328 réponses à ce sujet

[Mobius-Silent]

dreman9999 wrote...
Those clearly are oliy shadows. They pop up when TIM controls Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game as well. And with bring that up adds a question....Does Shepard and Anderson have to have some form of indoctriantion first to be caontroled like that by TIM?

Thats hilarious
"the assets are called smoke" and you reort with "Those clearly are oliy shadows" how do you make a shadow "oily" precisely?

Would it be the multi-coloured sheen?
Would it be the high specular high lights?
Would it be motion based on a liquid?

Well no, because the smoke-people use a texture labled "smoke" in a particle emitter bound to a biped where the particles are subject to a gently ambient wind.

So... no they're not "songs the color of oily shadows" (Funny how I.T.ers always miss off the "songs" part.)

Oh and the edge fx for TIM using his "control mojo" (Not indoctrination) is a completely different asset and thats not called "oily" either, in fact there isn't a single mention of "oily" in any of the ME3 assets

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 02 juin 2012 - 12:35 .

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...


1. Stop being pedantic.

2. You're comparing gameplay elements with story elements, cloak would be useless as a skill if everything still knew where you were. DERP.

3. No, I am not going and screengrabbing a cutscene and uploading it because you're being stubborn.


Let's try this a third time because I still haven't seen any "proof"



Prove he ISN'T real. Prove that between ME2 and ME3 Shepard has become so indoctrinated that he is hearing and seeing clear prolonged visions of a child that are so vivid he has ACTUAL conversations with it WHILST AWAKE.

PROVE IT.

1. No, because I'm not wrong....It's not like a zombie movie...No one turns into a husk when they are bitten by  a husk.....Notlike a zombie movie at all.

2.Wasn't that Scene with the husk happening during gameplay?Oh...It was...

3.It has nothing to do with scene grabing. It about understanding perspectives....Can you look into the mind of that soldier and see the he is looking at a child or empty space?  Can you prove that he comprihends a child is there?
That's may point. You can't say he is looking at the child because we don't see any reaction.

1,2,& 3. I'm done arguing with your pedantic smartass retorts. If you were Jilhali Bhadablabadah I would be seriously tempted by a certain Renegade Interrupt that would be flashing right now.


Anyhoo...

Surprise surprise, still no proof, try again.


Prove he ISN'T real. Prove that between ME2 and ME3 Shepard has become so indoctrinated that he is hearing and seeing clear prolonged visions of a child that are so vivid he has ACTUAL conversations with it WHILST AWAKE.

PROVE IT.

Modifié par jijeebo, 02 juin 2012 - 12:32 .

[IndridColdx]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

IndridColdx wrote...
]Rachni may be indoctrinated.  It's ironic she described Shepards dream so accurately.  The point is this is one of many things that happen in the game supporting indoctrination that I could bring up.  

It's not ironic, it's fabricated.

"Songs the color of oils shadows" is just a visual/literal as "A sour yellow note" The Rachni queen't suffers from Synthesia when she tries to translate her communication into aural communication.

Also, fun point: the "oily shadows" in the dream aren't oily or shadows. The assets are described as "smoke" not even "shadows" just "smoke"

Go back and look at the dream, do they look "oily"? or like smoke?

For perspectives sake I did take a look at the dream sequences.  They definitely look like oily shadows to me.  I would say thats a pretty accurate description of them.  

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

1. Husks are nothing more than mindless zombies, and ME is the closest thing to a movie I've ever seen in a video game.

2. They are already aware of the child when they reach the area, once a husk has seen you it pretty much chases you until you kill it.

3. That isn't proof as a soldier looks at him, try again.


Prove he ISN'T real. Prove that between ME2 and ME3 Shepard has become
so indoctrinated that he is hearing and seeing clear prolonged visions
of a child that are so vivid he has ACTUAL conversations with it WHILST
AWAKE.

PROVE IT.

1. I'm sorry...I see these giant things called reapers invading from space...THis must some how make it a like a zombie movie....
2.You miss the fact that they don't know where the child went. As an infiltrator, I can have huck chasing me till the point I cloak my self. They go away once I do......Yet, they would magicly know where the child is even though the don't know where he went.
3. Prove that the soldier is looking at and sees the child. The solder look in child direction does mean he looking at the child.

1. Stop being pedantic.

2. You're comparing gameplay elements with story elements, cloak would be useless as a skill if everything still knew where you were. DERP.

3. No, I am not going and screengrabbing a cutscene and uploading it because you're being stubborn.


Let's try this a third time because I still haven't seen any "proof"



Prove he ISN'T real. Prove that between ME2 and ME3 Shepard has become so indoctrinated that he is hearing and seeing clear prolonged visions of a child that are so vivid he has ACTUAL conversations with it WHILST AWAKE.

PROVE IT.

1. I'm sorry ...I tjust though it was an invation story...
2.But it prove that the husk don't sense thing they way you think they do...The story elemet still happen during the game play elements. It still can be used.
3.It's has nothing to do with Screen grabing...Can you see with that soldiers eyes at that time and tell me what he is seeing?

[dreman9999]

Mobius-Silent wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Those clearly are oliy shadows. They pop up when TIM controls Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game as well. And with bring that up adds a question....Does Shepard and Anderson have to have some form of indoctriantion first to be caontroled like that by TIM?

Thats hilarious
"the assets are called smoke" and you reort with "Those clearly are oliy shadows" how do you make a shadow "oily" precisely?

Would it be the multi-coloured sheen?
Would it be the high specular high lights?
Would it be motion based on a liquid?

Well no, because the smoke-people use a texture labled "smoke" in a particle emitter bound to a biped where the particles are subject to a gently ambient wind.

So... no they're not "songs the color of oily shadows" (Funny how I.T.ers always miss off the "songs" part.)

Oh and the edge fx for TIM using his "control mojo" (Not indoctrination) is a completely different asset and thats not called "oily" either, in fact there isn't a single mention of oil in any of the ME3 assets

What assets? Point to an assets that call it smoke. Those are cleary oily shadows and you have nothing to prove ageints it but your word. There is no other person all calling it anything else but oily shadows but you.

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 juin 2012 - 12:41 .

[Lord Goose]

Well, have you thought about it before you've watched IT? If no, that could be the case of certain psychological phenomena, when you choose preferable explanation for ambigous situation.

[Erield]

dreman9999 wrote...

No, proof the kid esist at all. And being that we can't prove it the door is a mistake or not, no one can us it to prove or disporve anything. That still leave the child in a state of non exsistance.

I saw the kid before, during, and after that scene.  You saw the kid before, during, and after that scene.  Prove that we didn't see what we saw.

[malakim2099]

If it were called Indoctrination Hypothesis I think less people would have a problem with it. Though really the only things against IH (calling it that now, because I prefer it) people come up with are bad writing and/or laziness by the writing team. And that's impossible to prove or disprove so both sides go round and round.

Me,I like the IH but I'll wait to see what the EC has.

[dreman9999]

Erield wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, proof the kid esist at all. And being that we can't prove it the door is a mistake or not, no one can us it to prove or disporve anything. That still leave the child in a state of non exsistance.

I saw the kid before, during, and after that scene.  You saw the kid before, during, and after that scene.  Prove that we didn't see what we saw.

http://www.youtube.c...oDs2z-CE#t=965s

Just to let you know how viable your perspective is....

Do you understand that your fighting machine that can warp your perspective?  Indoctriantion attacks the limbic system first...That were hallucinations come from...

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 juin 2012 - 12:47 .

[dreman9999]

malakim2099 wrote...

If it were called Indoctrination Hypothesis I think less people would have a problem with it. Though really the only things against IH (calling it that now, because I prefer it) people come up with are bad writing and/or laziness by the writing team. And that's impossible to prove or disprove so both sides go round and round.

Me,I like the IH but I'll wait to see what the EC has.

No, it's a theory...A hapthisis is an idea the has to be tested and has no facts supporting it. IT has facts supporting it.

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 juin 2012 - 12:46 .

[IndridColdx]

Lord Goose wrote...

Well, have you thought about it before you've watched IT? If no, that could be the case of certain psychological phenomena, when you choose preferable explanation for ambigous situation.

I doubt anybody thought much of the shadows before the indoctrination theory was brought up, but it was hardly an issue before then as well.  In fact I would argue describing it as smoke is just a preferable way to disprove IT as they can easily be described as "oily shadows."  

Modifié par IndridColdx, 02 juin 2012 - 12:49 .

[Erield]

dreman9999 wrote...

Erield wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, proof the kid esist at all. And being that we can't prove it the door is a mistake or not, no one can us it to prove or disporve anything. That still leave the child in a state of non exsistance.

I saw the kid before, during, and after that scene.  You saw the kid before, during, and after that scene.  Prove that we didn't see what we saw.

http://www.youtube.c...oDs2z-CE#t=965s

Just to let you know how viable your perspective is....

Do you understand that your fighting machine that can warp your perspective?  Indoctriantion attacks the limbic system first...That were hallucinations come from...

So, what you're saying is that at the very beginning of ME3, we're plugged into a giant machine that is controlling everything we see and experience, and that none of it is real?  That's cool.  I guess the game is complete and utter ****, then, because stories that do that are complete and utter ****.

[dreman9999]

IndridColdx wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

Well, have you thought about it before you've watched IT? If no, that could be the case of certain psychological phenomena, when you choose preferable explanation for ambigous situation.

I doubt anybody thought of the shadows before the indoctrination theory was brought up, but it was hardly an issue before then as well.  In fact I would argue describing it as smoke is just a preferable to disprove IT as they can easily be described as oily shadows.  

Added those oily shadow come up agian when TIM controls Shepard with Indocrination.

[IndridColdx]

dreman9999 wrote...

IndridColdx wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

Well, have you thought about it before you've watched IT? If no, that could be the case of certain psychological phenomena, when you choose preferable explanation for ambigous situation.

I doubt anybody thought of the shadows before the indoctrination theory was brought up, but it was hardly an issue before then as well.  In fact I would argue describing it as smoke is just a preferable to disprove IT as they can easily be described as oily shadows.  

Added those oily shadow come up agian when TIM controls Shepard with Indocrination.

link?

[jijeebo]

dreman9999 wrote...

A reply to a post he'd already replied to.

*sigh*

Prove he ISN'T real. Prove that between ME2 and ME3 Shepard has become so indoctrinated that he is hearing and seeing clear prolonged visions of a child that are so vivid he has ACTUAL conversations with it WHILST AWAKE.



PROVE IT.

Modifié par jijeebo, 02 juin 2012 - 12:52 .

[Tom Lehrer]

dreman9999 wrote...

malakim2099 wrote...

If it were called Indoctrination Hypothesis I think less people would have a problem with it. Though really the only things against IH (calling it that now, because I prefer it) people come up with are bad writing and/or laziness by the writing team. And that's impossible to prove or disprove so both sides go round and round.

Me,I like the IH but I'll wait to see what the EC has.

No, it's a theory...A hapthisis is an idea the has to be tested and has no facts supporting it. IT has facts supporting it.

Speculation and conjecture are not facts.

[Erield]

dreman9999 wrote...

No, it's a theory...A hapthisis is an idea the has to be tested and has no facts supporting it. IT has facts supporting it.

Hypothesis:

hy·poth·e·sis
[ hī póthəssiss ]

• theory needing investigation: a tentative explanation for a phenomenon, used as a basis for further investigation
• assumption: a statement that is assumed to be true for the sake of argument
• antecedent clause: in logic, the antecedent of a conditional statement

I think that all aspects of IT can fall under #1 if you believe it is true.  If you didn't think it needed further investigation, then why are people still poring over it, debating the pros and cons, etc.?)


the·o·ry
[ th əree ]

• rules and techniques: the body of rules, ideas, principles, and techniques that applies to a subject, especially when seen as distinct from actual practice
• speculation: abstract thought or contemplation
• idea formed by speculation: an idea of or belief about something arrived at through speculation or conjecture

IT also firmly falls under the category of #3 of theory. 

[IndridColdx]

Mobius-Silent wrote...Thats hilarious"the assets are called smoke" and you reort with "Those clearly are oliy shadows" how do you make a shadow "oily" precisely?

Weak

Modifié par IndridColdx, 02 juin 2012 - 12:57 .

[themaniac003]

man, this thread is full of butt hurt people

[dreman9999]

Erield wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Erield wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, proof the kid esist at all. And being that we can't prove it the door is a mistake or not, no one can us it to prove or disporve anything. That still leave the child in a state of non exsistance.

I saw the kid before, during, and after that scene.  You saw the kid before, during, and after that scene.  Prove that we didn't see what we saw.

http://www.youtube.c...oDs2z-CE#t=965s

Just to let you know how viable your perspective is....

Do you understand that your fighting machine that can warp your perspective?  Indoctriantion attacks the limbic system first...That were hallucinations come from...

So, what you're saying is that at the very beginning of ME3, we're plugged into a giant machine that is controlling everything we see and experience, and that none of it is real?  That's cool.  I guess the game is complete and utter ****, then, because stories that do that are complete and utter ****.

If you think that...Try again. You missed the point. I'm saying just because you see it with your eyes doesn't mean it's real. This is a consept stories like the Matrics, inception and total recall bring up. Other  movies like blade runner even bring up the point that just because you beleive something does not mean it's true. My  point is your facing a race of machine that can warp the minds perspective, they first attack the part of the mindt that causes hallucinations, controls emotion and is the center of dreams and you dare not question if they are manipulation that now with the child? Even if we take the end scene with TIM controling Shepard with indoctriantion as real we can see the reapers have Shepard in the process of indoctrination. Shepard and Anderson has to to even be controled like that. And then suddenly you see the star child in the same imagame as the child on earth....And you don't start to question your self what is real?

[Erield]

dreman9999 wrote...

Added those oily shadow come up agian when TIM controls Shepard with Indocrination.

The shadows seen at the corners and edges of the screen during TIMdoctrination are different in every regard from the so-called oily shadows in the dream sequences.  The shadows in the dream sequence are vaguely humanoid, for instance; the TIMdoctrination ones are not.  If we were actually Shepard at that point, we'd see constant shadowy flickers out of the corners of our eyes, but be completely inable to actually focus on or see them directly. 

The oily shadows we see from TIM are one of the primary reasons why I dismiss the dreams as being evidence of Indoctrination.  There is no question about what we are seeing, hearing, or experiencing in the TIM sequence; in order for the dreams to be a part of Indoctrination attempt, we have to assume that 1) the shadows can take on significantly different appearances, and 2) the voices can be clear phrases from dead friends or incoherent whispers.  While it's possible that this is true, I am unwilling to make that assumption without clear evidence.

Modifié par Erield, 02 juin 2012 - 12:59 .

[Erield]

themaniac003 wrote...

man, this thread is full of butt hurt people

I'm at work, and currently have nothing better to do.

[dreman9999]

jijeebo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

A reply to a post he'd already replied to.

*sigh*

Prove he ISN'T real. Prove that between ME2 and ME3 Shepard has become so indoctrinated that he is hearing and seeing clear prolonged visions of a child that are so vivid he has ACTUAL conversations with it WHILST AWAKE.



PROVE IT.

Indoctriantion attacke the limbic system first.
The limbic system is where hallucination s come from.
Shepard has been in on an off cantact with reaper teck for 3 years.
Object rho.
TIM controling Shapard and Anderson with indoctination at the end of the game that only controls this that have a form of  indoctrination first.....

[Erield]

dreman9999 wrote...

If you think that...Try again. You missed the point. I'm saying just because you see it with your eyes doesn't mean it's real. This is a consept stories like the Matrics, inception and total recall bring up. Other  movies like blade runner even bring up the point that just because you beleive something does not mean it's true. My  point is your facing a race of machine that can warp the minds perspective, they first attack the part of the mindt that causes hallucinations, controls emotion and is the center of dreams and you dare not question if they are manipulation that now with the child? Even if we take the end scene with TIM controling Shepard with indoctriantion as real we can see the reapers have Shepard in the process of indoctrination. Shepard and Anderson has to to even be controled like that. And then suddenly you see the star child in the same imagame as the child on earth....And you don't start to question your self what is real?

Show one point in the game, anywhere else, where Shepard is having a waking/conscious hallucination.  Point me where he's awake, aware, and not plugged into a machine--and seeing things that aren't there.  Just one more.

Modifié par Erield, 02 juin 2012 - 01:01 .

[Mobius-Silent]

IndridColdx wrote...
For perspectives sake I did take a look at the dream sequences.  They definitely look like oily shadows to me.  I would say thats a pretty accurate description of them.  

Really?, so tell me, what _specifically_ is "oily" about them that would not be better described as "smoke"?
wet? shiny? iridescent? no?
Here's a picture to help

Looks more. matte, particulate, whispy to me...
Funny that, given Bioware called it "smoke"