1917 réponses à ce sujet

[M Hedonist]

The Angry One wrote...

Seival may be off in la la land with his theories, but Patrick Weekes didn't write the endings, and he's just trying last minute damage control to salve frustrations in the wake of Mac Walters' ultra nihilism.

I think we can safely assume by that time they had a vision in mind of what they will do in the EC. They officially announced EC a few days prior to PAX and by that time they already knew they wouldn't have to add new endings.

His statement is naive and doesn't fit with the universe. He makes the relays sound completely expendable. Also, the "cruising speed" remark makes no sense. If 12ly/day is the "cruising speed" then why are they constantly outrun by Reaper ships going at 30ly/day? Why not speed up? And 30ly/day has to be the Reaper limit because... why would the Reapers have a cruising speed? They're not limited by fuel or discharging cores.

Even if ships could go faster, how long are you going to redline your engines before you break them? Where are you going to fix them? This is going to be a Fallout society at best, replacements will be at a premium, people will be shooting each other over salvage.

If everything in ME3 followed numbers and logic, the Reapers would have been beaten conventionally.
If the devs want people to develop more efficient FTL drives, it will happen so. What's gonna stop them? They violated the lore beyond recognition already.

Stornskar wrote...

This is lunacy - not all "good stories" should force us to figure out the endings.

Insane Troll Logic.
'Nuff said.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

...The theory isn't disproved till new story in ME Universe. A story that will take place after ME3 events.

It has been disproven about sixty times now. 

You making yet another stupid assumption does not ential proof or even establish this as a possibility or a theory. It's all just nonsense. 

[Memnon]

I have an invisible stealth fighter in my back yard - you can't prove to me I'm wrong until you show me that it's not there

[Seival]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Seival wrote...

...The theory isn't disproved till new story in ME Universe. A story that will take place after ME3 events.

It has been disproven about sixty times now. 

You making yet another stupid assumption does not ential proof or even establish this as a possibility or a theory. It's all just nonsense. 

Maybe you better try to read FAQ and try to build some counter-counter arguments? At least it will be constructive.

[The Angry One]

Seival wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Seival wrote...

...The theory isn't disproved till new story in ME Universe. A story that will take place after ME3 events.

It has been disproven about sixty times now. 

You making yet another stupid assumption does not ential proof or even establish this as a possibility or a theory. It's all just nonsense. 

Maybe you better try to read FAQ and try to build some counter-counter arguments? At least it will be constructive.

Your FAQ is full of the same silly reasonings that have been debunked over and over.

[Joe Del Toro]

Jesus christ how is this still going? Stop talking to the silly bastard. 

[Erield]

Seival wrote...

Erield wrote...

I would like to present to you the following definitions of words.

logic: sensible rational thought and argument rather than ideas that are influenced by emotion or whim
sensible: having or demonstrating sound reason and judgment
sound: Thorough; complete
reason: a cause that explains a particular phenomenon

How does showing us Rebuilt Relay will make the logical conclusion hard to find? What you are suggesting will not require any logical analysis, it will just show us a fact.

I came to logical conclusions that were shown in OP. And it was not easy, believe me. Some time ago I also wanted the scene to be removed. But later I started to ask myself: why? And the answer was sudden and obvious: I just didn't want to try to understand it. And then I tried...

Please explain how coming to the conclusion that the Relays were rebuilt in the end-scene is in any way, shape, or form logical. 

[Erield]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

Jesus christ how is this still going? Stop talking to the silly bastard. 

No!  This is the thread that never ends!

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

And you are talking about unofficial interview with some thoughts, that might be just speculations about a future game's scenario that noone even started to write.

Let's just assume for a second that your theory actually is true. That would mean they always planned to have the Mass Relays be rebuilt. In turn, that would mean they would explain that in detail in the EC. That would parallel with their official announcement of the EC: "clarifying" the things people didn't understand about the endings.
So why would Patrick Weekes say at PAX (after they announced EC) that people don't need the Relays to survive and that people would develop more efficient FTL drives instead of that? Why would he say that if they already knew they would have the Mass Relays be rebuilt in the future? Why would he do that?

Again, your comparison doesn't work here.
Going with your Dark Energy plot comparison, the devs have purposefully foreshadowed the Dark Energy plot in ME2. While they're developing ME3, a dev says in an interview that they definitely will not use the Dark Energy plot.
There would be no reason to keep believing they will use the Dark Energy plot unless you're hoping they will inexplicably change their mind during development.
So: What is this thread then? Nothing more than a baseless assumption that the devs may change their mind during development. Which makes it even more pointless than it was before.

But I don't believe you get the point. Almost all of your FAQ "counter-arguments" only say that something could happen, not that something will happen because of some logical reason. That's why none of your arguments show that your theory is right, but rather that your theory simply is possible.
Of course, nobody will ever be able to prove that your theory is impossible. That isn't the point. There will always be a slim chance that all these baseless assumptions your theory makes turn out to be right - even the biggest one of your baseless assumptions that the devs just suddenly decide to change their mind. However, with each of these baseless assumptions, the probability that your theory turns out to be right decreases.
Since I've tried explaining this to you before and you just ignored me, let's try it with Math.
Assume that each of your assumptions is a red ball among many white balls in an urn. For each of your assumptions, there is another one of these urns. One after another, one ball is taken at random from each urn. Your theory is the event that happens if each ball chosen this way is red.
Your theory is the event that happens if the devs decided to intentionally botch up the narrative structure ("to make us think"), they chose to violate lore, characters and logic in multiple ways and they chose to suddenly change their mind after work on EC has already started. It is safe to say that the possibility for that event is virtually zero.
That is not an argument you can disagree with, Seival. You tried disagreeing with evidence, but you can't disagree with freaking Math.

[The Angry One]

Erield wrote...

Please explain how coming to the conclusion that the Relays were rebuilt in the end-scene is in any way, shape, or form logical. 

This is the same guy who thinks Deus Ex Machina are a legitimate literary device.
His logic does not resemble our Earth logic.

[Little Princess Peach]

Seival I like you're idea more than the IT bs I swear this is more realistic than the It garbage

[Joe Del Toro]

Erield wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

Jesus christ how is this still going? Stop talking to the silly bastard. 

No!  This is the thread that never ends!

AUUUUUUUUUUGH.

[M Hedonist]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

Jesus christ how is this still going? Stop talking to the silly bastard. 

I tried bringing this down with the help of Spiderman. It was glorious - eight pages of pure spam.
Then came the white knight brigade.
Look what they made me do. They forced me to use freaking Math.

[Erield]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

Erield wrote...

Joe Del Toro wrote...

Jesus christ how is this still going? Stop talking to the silly bastard. 

No!  This is the thread that never ends!

AUUUUUUUUUUGH.

And finally...finally! revenge is mine for your serial licking.  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Liber320]

This thread makes me happy

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Seival wrote...

...The theory isn't disproved till new story in ME Universe. A story that will take place after ME3 events.

It has been disproven about sixty times now. 

You making yet another stupid assumption does not ential proof or even establish this as a possibility or a theory. It's all just nonsense. 

Maybe you better try to read FAQ and try to build some counter-counter arguments? At least it will be constructive.

Funny, because I did that and you've ignored the post, and all you did was give an easily accessible list of your assumptions. 

Occam's Razor wins. 

[M Hedonist]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Occam's Razor wins.

Yes. Let's do that too, while we're at it.
Occam's Razor says that whichever theory has to make the least assumptions usually turns out to be right.
I think I've posted the link to my post listing all the assumptions this theory makes often enough, haven't I?
Seival:0 - Occam's Razor:1

Modifié par Sauruz, 15 juin 2012 - 06:12 .

[Fox544]

Seival wrote...

MarchWaltz wrote...

How do you explain the teleporting squaddies? Or Edi stepping out in the destroy ending?

There are no "teleporting squaddies" if I'm right about the scene happens much later than the Battle for Earth.

EDI stepping out in destroy is a bug (if it's really true). And we should report the bug to BioWare. 

Its confirmed not a bug. That was confirmed in April.

As for the rest sorry no. They look happy and all that from poor writing not some test launch.

[The Angry One]

All in all, I still like this thread. Because it's virtually the only topic in support of the Normandy crash scene, and even it wants to retcon the hell out of it.

[Joe Del Toro]

Sauruz wrote...
Seival:0 - Occam's Razor:1

Sadly not true.

Seival: 1 - Everyone else's sanity: 0

[Taboo]

Rebel rebel, youve torn your dress
Rebel rebel, your face is a mess
Rebel rebel, how could they know?
Hot tramp, I love you so!

[The Night Mammoth]

Joe Del Toro wrote...

Sauruz wrote...
Seival:0 - Occam's Razor:1

Sadly not true.

Seival: 1 - Everyone else's sanity: 0

But I was already insane! 

BLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Taboo]

And the cat's in the cradle and the silver spoon,
Little Boy Blue and The Man In The Moon.
"When ya comin' home Dad?"
"I don't know when, we'll get together then, son,
Ya know we'll have a good time then".

[Kurremurre]

Let me give you some perspective.

[Liber320]

And OP thinks IT is bad