496 réponses à ce sujet

[killage_wizard]

RebelReya wrote...

Yes, but then they sold us a game without an end, and your choice doesn't matter.
And then why are their 3 choices, and not just 2?

In order for the indoctrination to  truly take hold Shepard must willingly choose not to destroy the Reapers.  In order to do that he must be given the option to.

[RebelReya]

killage_wizard wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Yes, but then they sold us a game without an end, and your choice doesn't matter.
And then why are their 3 choices, and not just 2?

The choices don't matter now.  No matter what you choose the you get a colored energy wave, the relays are destroyed (even in control the relays are destroyed), the fleet will starve to death, for some reason the normandy crash lands on a random planet, and Buzz Aldrin says he forgot the details.

No, I really don't think that's the case. (If your interested in what I think, check out the link in my sig.) But That's exactly how alot of IT carries itself. Even in the first post of this thread we are presented with a fake choice. Accept  ' IT control ' or have a slightly less awful ending. And that's bull. IT is not the ONLY way this could play out.

[Ageless Face]

Leafs43 wrote...


Maybe because:


*Snip*


Nobody would survive that.

Good question.

There is a theory that all of the interaction with the catalyst happned on the crucible. But without any theories and only a spectulation on my part.... 

Shepard was on a part of the citadel that was not destroyed. The catalyst would have build the place he stayed in very well protected. Even that was barely enough and the place was rubble. But the protection was enough for Shepard to survive.

If that is not true -and if the catalyst  was smart enough, it is- then that is a major point to IT. Or the "bad writing with huge plotholes" theory.

[Leafs43]

RebelReya wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Yes, but then they sold us a game without an end, and your choice doesn't matter.
And then why are their 3 choices, and not just 2?

The choices don't matter now.  No matter what you choose the you get a colored energy wave, the relays are destroyed (even in control the relays are destroyed), the fleet will starve to death, for some reason the normandy crash lands on a random planet, and Buzz Aldrin says he forgot the details.

No, I really don't think that's the case. (If your interested in what I think, check out the link in my sig.) But That's exactly how alot of IT carries itself. Even in the first post of this thread we are presented with a fake choice. Accept  ' IT control ' or have a slightly less awful ending. And that's bull. IT is not the ONLY way this could play out.

There are only 2 ways this plays out.

We keep the same crappy endings just with further explanation (which is like trying to filling the grand canyon with cement).

Or 

IT because bioware said they aren't doing a retcon.  IT is built within the game and is in context of the events that occur, thus does not qualify as a retcon no more than Matrix 3 is a retcon of Matrix 2.

[ericjdev]

IT is silly and most of us have had to endure countless threads on it. It started out mildly annoying now I just want someone to take that thing out back and put a burning slug in it. As many have previously noted, the devotion of people to it is pseudo-religious and uber creepy. I hate the ending but you won't catch me grasping at those straws.

[Leafs43]

HagarIshay wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...


Maybe because:


*Snip*


Nobody would survive that.

Good question.

There is a theory that all of the interaction with the catalyst happned on the crucible. But without any theories and only a spectulation on my part.... 

Shepard was on a part of the citadel that was not destroyed. The catalyst would have build the place he stayed in very well protected. Even that was barely enough and the place was rubble. But the protection was enough for Shepard to survive.

If that is not true -and if the catalyst  was smart enough, it is- then that is a major point to IT. Or the "bad writing with huge plotholes" theory.

Shepard was right smack dab in the middle of:




Not on some other part of the citadel.  That is irrefutable evidence.

Modifié par Leafs43, 04 juin 2012 - 05:38 .

[Ageless Face]

Leafs43 wrote...

Dude....


They give you 3 choices because it's based on what the reapers want, not what you want.

There is a reason why destroy is painted so negatively by the catalyst.

Need I remind you the IT was not confirmed by BioWare yet? Don't treat the IT as a fact.

[RebelReya]

HagarIshay wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...


Maybe because:


*Snip*


Nobody would survive that.

Good question.

There is a theory that all of the interaction with the catalyst happned on the crucible. But without any theories and only a spectulation on my part.... 

Shepard was on a part of the citadel that was not destroyed. The catalyst would have build the place he stayed in very well protected. Even that was barely enough and the place was rubble. But the protection was enough for Shepard to survive.

If that is not true -and if the catalyst  was smart enough, it is- then that is a major point to IT. Or the "bad writing with huge plotholes" theory.

Or Shepard wasn't in the citadel, or indoctrinated, but inside the reaper consensus, and when he/she chooses destory, they are freed from Harbinger's hold and wakes up back in london. Just sayin, it could be a possiblity.

Modifié par RebelReya, 04 juin 2012 - 05:39 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

P47 ace wrote...

so for the IT theory Haters out there you have 2 chioces

1) unfinshed game that sucks
or
2) unfinished game that does not suck 

the chioce is your's

Except IT and the literal interpretation are both examples of #1. The only way I'll ever accept IT as an explanation is if it's made into an important plot point. I want IT to extend from the logic of the storyline, not because I think the literal ending is so badly written that I'd rather pretend it was all a dream. Crap vs. crap, at its core.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 04 juin 2012 - 05:39 .

[DieHigh2012]

killage_wizard wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

I wish IT was real, but it obviously is not.

If it were true it *would* have been finished before the game shipped, and it *would* have been released already.

Bioware would have released it as soon as they saw the gigantic backlash wave crashing down on their heads.

Really?  Because Bioware hasn't denied it, and they have been asked.  And if they wanted the "true ending" to be a DLC add on it would not have necessarily been finished.

It's bad business. EA can be accused of many things but being bad at business is not one of them.

Bioware has not denied it because of the "much speculation" stance they took early on. It's a great idea and I tip my hat to the guys that thought it up, but it's just not possible that it's true at this late a date.

EA would have forced them to release it or to tell fans that the real ending is coming soon as soon as their stocks took a hit.

[xsdob]

This is the thought process of the IT hardline believer,



Where t=truth, and v=everyone who doesn't agree being wrong, and finally equaling to R(t)= I am automatically right.

Modifié par xsdob, 04 juin 2012 - 05:44 .

[RebelReya]

Leafs43 wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Yes, but then they sold us a game without an end, and your choice doesn't matter.
And then why are their 3 choices, and not just 2?

The choices don't matter now.  No matter what you choose the you get a colored energy wave, the relays are destroyed (even in control the relays are destroyed), the fleet will starve to death, for some reason the normandy crash lands on a random planet, and Buzz Aldrin says he forgot the details.

No, I really don't think that's the case. (If your interested in what I think, check out the link in my sig.) But That's exactly how alot of IT carries itself. Even in the first post of this thread we are presented with a fake choice. Accept  ' IT control ' or have a slightly less awful ending. And that's bull. IT is not the ONLY way this could play out.

There are only 2 ways this plays out.

We keep the same crappy endings just with further explanation (which is like trying to filling the grand canyon with cement).

Or 

IT because bioware said they aren't doing a retcon.  IT is built within the game and is in context of the events that occur, thus does not qualify as a retcon no more than Matrix 3 is a retcon of Matrix 2.

And THAT is the problem most 'haters' have with IT. IT'S NOT THE ONLY POSSIBLE SOLUTION! Even if every supporter of IT thinks it's so, that doesn't make it really the case. 

[killage_wizard]

RebelReya wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Yes, but then they sold us a game without an end, and your choice doesn't matter.
And then why are their 3 choices, and not just 2?

The choices don't matter now.  No matter what you choose the you get a colored energy wave, the relays are destroyed (even in control the relays are destroyed), the fleet will starve to death, for some reason the normandy crash lands on a random planet, and Buzz Aldrin says he forgot the details.

No, I really don't think that's the case. (If your interested in what I think, check out the link in my sig.) But That's exactly how alot of IT carries itself. Even in the first post of this thread we are presented with a fake choice. Accept  ' IT control ' or have a slightly less awful ending. And that's bull. IT is not the ONLY way this could play out.

I read it, and that what you think is plausible too.  But even if what you say is true, the endings still don't have any real difference to them as far as where things end up.  No matter what you do there is still a colored wave, the planet, etc. 

[Ageless Face]

Leafs43 wrote...




Shepard was right smack dab in the middle of:

*Snip*


Not on some other part of the citadel.  That is irrefutable evidence.

There are still flaoting parts from the heart of the Citadel. Shepard can be on one of them. I'm guessing the explosion on the catalyst's room was not the only place the citadel was exploded. Could be the explosion there was even considered little. The catalyst is maybe an idiot psychopath, but he has enough advanced technology and intellect to know to protect his room from huge explosions. 

[Leafs43]

DieHigh2012 wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

I wish IT was real, but it obviously is not.

If it were true it *would* have been finished before the game shipped, and it *would* have been released already.

Bioware would have released it as soon as they saw the gigantic backlash wave crashing down on their heads.

Really?  Because Bioware hasn't denied it, and they have been asked.  And if they wanted the "true ending" to be a DLC add on it would not have necessarily been finished.

It's bad business. EA can be accused of many things but being bad at business is not one of them.

Bioware has not denied it because of the "much speculation" stance they took early on. It's a great idea and I tip my hat to the guys that thought it up, but it's just not possible that it's true at this late a date.

EA would have forced them to release it or to tell fans that the real ending is coming soon as soon as their stocks took a hit.

If IT was always intended, that would be a good reason why EC is not out yet.  If EC was just a couple cutscenes and dialog,  it would be out by now to stem the backlash.


But it has been in development for at least 3 months now, if not longer.


If Bioware was going to rush it out asap to stem backlash why bother with multiplayer dlc?

[killage_wizard]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

P47 ace wrote...

so for the IT theory Haters out there you have 2 chioces

1) unfinshed game that sucks
or
2) unfinished game that does not suck 

the chioce is your's

Except IT and the literal interpretation are both examples of #1. The only way I'll ever accept IT as an explanation is if it's made into an important plot point. I want IT to extend from the logic of the storyline, not because I think the literal ending is so badly written that I'd rather pretend it was all a dream. Crap vs. crap, at its core.

It is lifted right from the logic of the story line.  You are fighting an indoc'd TIM the entire game.

[Leafs43]

HagarIshay wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...




Shepard was right smack dab in the middle of:

*Snip*


Not on some other part of the citadel.  That is irrefutable evidence.

There are still flaoting parts from the heart of the Citadel. Shepard can be on one of them. I'm guessing the explosion on the catalyst's room was not the only place the citadel was exploded. Could be the explosion there was even considered little. The catalyst is maybe an idiot psychopath, but he has enough advanced technology and intellect to know to protect his room from huge explosions. 

It's not a room.


It's in space on the outside of the citadel.

[Leafs43]

xsdob wrote...

This is the thought process of the IT hardline believer,



Where t=truth, and v=everyone who doesn't agree being wrong, and finally equaling to R(t)= I am automatically right.

You're more than welcome to come up with your own theory.

But it is going to be put through the same review IT has received.  

And if it can't stand up logically, well you're SOL now ain't ya?



People have been trying to pick apart IT ever since it was theorized.  And guess what, no one has been able to disprove it.

Modifié par Leafs43, 04 juin 2012 - 05:49 .

[killage_wizard]

DieHigh2012 wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

I wish IT was real, but it obviously is not.

If it were true it *would* have been finished before the game shipped, and it *would* have been released already.

Bioware would have released it as soon as they saw the gigantic backlash wave crashing down on their heads.

Really?  Because Bioware hasn't denied it, and they have been asked.  And if they wanted the "true ending" to be a DLC add on it would not have necessarily been finished.

It's bad business. EA can be accused of many things but being bad at business is not one of them.

Bioware has not denied it because of the "much speculation" stance they took early on. It's a great idea and I tip my hat to the guys that thought it up, but it's just not possible that it's true at this late a date.

EA would have forced them to release it or to tell fans that the real ending is coming soon as soon as their stocks took a hit.

EA got named the worse comapny in the U.S.  They are the poster child for bad business.

[xsdob]

Leafs43 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

This is the thought process of the IT hardline believer,



Where t=truth, and v=everyone who doesn't agree being wrong, and finally equaling to R(t)= I am automatically right.

You're more than welcome to come up with your own theory.

But it is going to be put through the same review IT has received.  

And if it can't stand up logically, well you're SOL now ain't ya?

I do have my own theory, it's called shepard stopped the reapers theory, and it states that shepard stoped the reapers and brought their genocidal cycle to an end. And my evidence is the ending dlc screen which states in plain to understand text that shepard stopped the reapers.

[killage_wizard]

xsdob wrote...

This is the thought process of the IT hardline believer,



Where t=truth, and v=everyone who doesn't agree being wrong, and finally equaling to R(t)= I am automatically right.

troll

[RebelReya]

killage_wizard wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

RebelReya wrote...

Yes, but then they sold us a game without an end, and your choice doesn't matter.
And then why are their 3 choices, and not just 2?

The choices don't matter now.  No matter what you choose the you get a colored energy wave, the relays are destroyed (even in control the relays are destroyed), the fleet will starve to death, for some reason the normandy crash lands on a random planet, and Buzz Aldrin says he forgot the details.

No, I really don't think that's the case. (If your interested in what I think, check out the link in my sig.) But That's exactly how alot of IT carries itself. Even in the first post of this thread we are presented with a fake choice. Accept  ' IT control ' or have a slightly less awful ending. And that's bull. IT is not the ONLY way this could play out.

I read it, and that what you think is plausible too.  But even if what you say is true, the endings still don't have any real difference to them as far as where things end up.  No matter what you do there is still a colored wave, the planet, etc. 

Thank you for checking it out! But did you read the whole thing? Because the part about all of that taking place in the VR, and not the phycial world is kinda the point. We see their codes destoryed, not the structures themsleves. That's why the stars don't go Nova, they why they can be fixed, and why the Geth, who have their own consesus, should be fine. It's why the N7 scene (where the reapers shut own, not explode) was FILMED not animated.

[Ageless Face]

RebelReya wrote...


Or Shepard wasn't in the citadel, or indoctrinated, but inside the reaper consensus, and when he/she chooses destory, they are freed from Harbinger's hold and wakes up back in london. Just sayin, it could be a possiblity.

My speculation could be true as much as the IT, or anything else right now. I said it was only a speculation, didn't I?

[xsdob]

killage_wizard wrote...

xsdob wrote...

This is the thought process of the IT hardline believer,



Where t=truth, and v=everyone who doesn't agree being wrong, and finally equaling to R(t)= I am automatically right.

troll

Hey, If I were a troll I would have posted a spiderman pic instead.

[DieHigh2012]

Leafs43 wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

I wish IT was real, but it obviously is not.

If it were true it *would* have been finished before the game shipped, and it *would* have been released already.

Bioware would have released it as soon as they saw the gigantic backlash wave crashing down on their heads.

Really?  Because Bioware hasn't denied it, and they have been asked.  And if they wanted the "true ending" to be a DLC add on it would not have necessarily been finished.

It's bad business. EA can be accused of many things but being bad at business is not one of them.

Bioware has not denied it because of the "much speculation" stance they took early on. It's a great idea and I tip my hat to the guys that thought it up, but it's just not possible that it's true at this late a date.

EA would have forced them to release it or to tell fans that the real ending is coming soon as soon as their stocks took a hit.

If IT was always intended, that would be a good reason why EC is not out yet.  If EC was just a couple cutscenes and dialog,  it would be out by now to stem the backlash.


But it has been in development for at least 3 months now, if not longer.


If Bioware was going to rush it out asap to stem backlash why bother with multiplayer dlc?

Bioware knows that a lot is at stake. They are trying to make the EC well so that when people play it they can get some that are disapointed in the endings back on their side.

There was no more ending content planed that is why it is taking so long.

The multiplayer DLC was released *and* made free to try and get them the most amount of time to stem the bleeding.

Modifié par DieHigh2012, 04 juin 2012 - 05:57 .