1917 réponses à ce sujet

[Taboo]

You do realize a theory needs reliable evidence. Like observable? Like in the real world?

Like I could test evidence for gravity by jumping.

What test are you performing here?

[Seival]

o Ventus wrote...

Seival wrote...

My theory is just a theory. We will see if it's true or not in EC

Believe me, no we won't.

...But right now I prefer to support Normandy crash scene.

You must be lonely.

I prefer to trust BioWare instead of believing confused players... No offense.

[nos_astra]

Taboo-XX wrote...

You do realize a theory needs reliable evidence. Like observable? Like in the real world?

Like I could test evidence for gravity by jumping.

What test are you performing here?

And why are you using a state-of-the-art warship for a test run that can possibly end in a crash? (Especially when failure means little to no chance of return?)

Why does it have Shepard's ground team on board?

Modifié par klarabella, 06 juin 2012 - 11:07 .

[o Ventus]

Seival wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Seival wrote...

My theory is just a theory. We will see if it's true or not in EC

Believe me, no we won't.

...But right now I prefer to support Normandy crash scene.

You must be lonely.

I prefer to trust BioWare instead of believing confused players... No offense.

Bioware doesn't exist in your head.

And like Taboo said, a theory needs a basis, coupled with plausible evidence. EVERYTHING you've said so far can be subverted.

[Taboo]

klarabella wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

You do realize a theory needs reliable evidence. Like observable? Like in the real world?

Like I could test evidence for gravity by jumping.

What test are you performing here?

And why are you using a state-of-the-art warship for a test run that can possibly end in a crash?

Why does it have Shepard's ground team on board?

As I said.

The amount of seat of our pants flying that is going on with these "theories" is just ridiculous.

[Vox Draco]

ArikadOdakirA wrote...
Suck on that, IT supporters. Seival's speculations are better than yours, deal with it.

This thread is comedy gold.

Yep, I think after Seival has told us the one and only truth..I should go over to the 500-pages IT thread and tell the lazy folks there its over...

But this time for real!

[Joe Del Toro]

This thread should have died the moment it was obvious the OP was making up pure conjecture to back this up. It's not worthy of discussion anymore.

[alec1898]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

This thread should have died the moment it was obvious the OP was making up pure conjecture to back this up. It's not worthy of discussion anymore.

It's worthy of being made fun of.

[Joe Del Toro]

alec1898 wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

This thread should have died the moment it was obvious the OP was making up pure conjecture to back this up. It's not worthy of discussion anymore.

It's worthy of being made fun of.

....Proceed.

[Vox Draco]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

This thread should have died the moment it was obvious the OP was making up pure conjecture to back this up. It's not worthy of discussion anymore.

But...it amuses me greatly! I am in dire need of some fun...*pouts* .. those synthesis-threats...I mean threads have become so boring by now...

[Jenonax]

Seival wrote...


I prefer to trust BioWare instead of believing confused players... No offense.

We're confused?

Bioware are the ones who thought synthetics had DNA.

And that you could cross the solar system in under twenty minutes.

And that the Reapers were actually saving us all the time murdering quintilians of us just to handpick a minute few to ascend!

But I must be confused, obviously. 

Now to go and butter my shoes.

[Taboo]

In New York they have people called **** artists. And they do just that. They **** on a canvas and spread it around. They label it "natural art" and consider it deep and profound.

I call it "you took a dump and spread it around with your fingers and made a dog".

It isn't deep or thought provoking. It's just crap.

[Seival]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

This thread should have died the moment it was obvious the OP was making up pure conjecture to back this up. It's not worthy of discussion anymore.

Stay on topic and it will be worthy. Don't let the confusion blind you.

...I will support Normandy crash scene till EC. And EC will explain everything... If the scene will require support even after EC, well, I can do that.

[Taboo]

All interpretations are valid. I can't take that away from you. It's better than what Walters gave me.

But it isn't a theory.

Remember, an interpretation in art is more powerful than ANY theory.

Bioware can't do diddly poop to take it away from you.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 06 juin 2012 - 11:16 .

[Joe Del Toro]

Seival wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

This thread should have died the moment it was obvious the OP was making up pure conjecture to back this up. It's not worthy of discussion anymore.

Stay on topic and it will be worthy. Don't let the confusion blind you.

...I will support Normandy crash scene till EC. And EC will explain everything... If the scene will require support even after EC, well, I can do that.

You're supporting it by declaring it a different scene entirely. That's like me being Conservative because in my head 'Conservatives' are the names I give to Dragons and I happen to like Dragons. Or whatever. I'm going.

[Jenonax]

Seival wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

This thread should have died the moment it was obvious the OP was making up pure conjecture to back this up. It's not worthy of discussion anymore.

Stay on topic and it will be worthy. Don't let the confusion blind you.

...I will support Normandy crash scene till EC. And EC will explain everything... If the scene will require support even after EC, well, I can do that.

Why, though?  

Why is that scene in particular of such great worth?

Why are you diving into the sinking wreck of the ending and pulling out a dead rat when you could have gone straight for the chest of gold?  

There are a lot more scenes in the ending worthy of being saved, not that piece of crap.

[mauro2222]

Well it's certainly lazy when they say that Synthesis is the same as to what the Reapers do (because that means they didn't understood nothing), and Control to be... I don't know what the hell they consider it to be.

Their crusade to find signs for the IT is not lazy, the real lazyness is the meaning they put to that research.

Modifié par mauro2222, 06 juin 2012 - 11:24 .

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

I prefer to trust BioWare instead of believing confused players... No offense.

You're terribly confused, my sweet. Let me tell you one more story about "the Shepard" and his wondrous, unrelated Mass Relay test jumps...

Modifié par Sauruz, 06 juin 2012 - 11:37 .

[Vox Draco]

mauro2222 wrote...

Well it's certainly lazy when they say that Synthesis is the same as to what the Reapers do (because that means they didn't understood nothing), and Control to be... I don't know what the hell they consider it to be.

Their crusade to find signs for the IT is not lazy, the real lazyness is the meaning they put to that research.

Yet not to forget that the crusade AGANST IT is also greatly based on just laziness, as well as...lack of imagination, as far as I am concerned...and synthesis...oh well, not touching that, it might be sticky...

But back to topic...so...ahem....no, I'd rather go to bed...

[RocketManSR2]

Taboo-XX wrote...

In New York they have people called **** artists. And they do just that. They **** on a canvas and spread it around. They label it "natural art" and consider it deep and profound.

I call it "you took a dump and spread it around with your fingers and made a dog".

It isn't deep or thought provoking. It's just crap.

If that's art, then I turn into frickin' Picasso after eating too much Taco Bell.

[o Ventus]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

In New York they have people called **** artists. And they do just that. They **** on a canvas and spread it around. They label it "natural art" and consider it deep and profound.

I call it "you took a dump and spread it around with your fingers and made a dog".

It isn't deep or thought provoking. It's just crap.

If that's art, then I turn into frickin' Picasso after eating too much Taco Bell.

I'm da Vinci. I think I win.

[SackofCat]

I had another possible explanation for this interpretation that is a little better.

In 2148, humanity found the Mars archive left by an alien species that would come to be called the Protheans. It was "the most significant discovery in human history, a singular event that changed everything forever". The archive contained data on mass effect fields, terraforming, clean and efficient energy sources. My point is it was a big deal.

In 2149 "an even more amazing discovery to open up the vastness of space beyond their own sun." A research team that was exploring in the area came to discover that Pluto's satellite Charon was no moon but an enormous piece dormant technology; a mass relay. My point here is that it was a bigger deal.

Humanity knew about the existence and function of the mass relay from the protean data. The principle was that these relays existed throughout the galaxy and served as linked gates, allowing instantaneous travel across thousands of light years. Once they activated, they started sending probes through the relay. Unsurprisingly, the probes dropped out of contact as soon as they passed through the mass relay.

The only way to learn if it worked was to send someone through. They chose a crew and a strong, courageous captain, John Grissom. When he came back, he became a big deal.

This was borrowed from Mass Effect: Revelation, the first Mass Effect book.

Sending a living crew makes sense and has a precedent. The last time humanity conducted a test of a mass relay, the crew had to be brave and resourceful and when they succeeded, they became big goddamn heroes and received props. Perhaps humanity is confident in this new relay's success. Being the first to travel through the first human-built relay is probably an honor and humanity wanted to honor your crew.

[Seival]

Jenonax wrote...

Seival wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

This thread should have died the moment it was obvious the OP was making up pure conjecture to back this up. It's not worthy of discussion anymore.

Stay on topic and it will be worthy. Don't let the confusion blind you.

...I will support Normandy crash scene till EC. And EC will explain everything... If the scene will require support even after EC, well, I can do that.

Why, though?  

Why is that scene in particular of such great worth?

Why are you diving into the sinking wreck of the ending and pulling out a dead rat when you could have gone straight for the chest of gold?  

There are a lot more scenes in the ending worthy of being saved, not that piece of crap.

Not "saved", but "explained"... I believe that each and every part of ME Trilogy ending worth the supporting. Even through I don't like some of these parts. For example, I'm a fan of Control ending. But that doesn't mean that Destroy and Synthesis shouldn't make sense.

[Jenonax]

Seival wrote...

Not "saved", but "explained"... I believe that each and every part of ME Trilogy ending worth the supporting. Even through I don't like some of these parts. For example, I'm a fan of Control ending. But that doesn't mean that Destroy and Synthesis shouldn't make sense.

B-b-but why?

I'm sorry dude but having a big time jump just makes it all worse.  That means years worth of content has been scrapped and they just can't do that.

Therefore, why do you want a scene to be saved where your crew abandons you?  Or Hackett gives up and orders a whole one ship to retreat?  Why do you want them all to give up on you?

And I repeat.  The Normandy physically can't be where they say it will be.