Taboo-XX wrote...
Persephone wrote...
How does this "leak" even qualify as one? It doesn't provide anything NEW and is as vague as anything else.
So yeah, what gives?
People aren't going to calm down...
This is the truth unfortunately.
EVERYTHING is a conspiracy.
Modifié par xsdob, 11 juin 2012 - 08:59 .
Everybody says this, but you don't actually know it. We don't know how post-release content is really handled. (And Mike Gamble, in Edmonton, talks about how "everybody" is involved, which could imply one team spread across two groups or one and a half teams that still just work on all DLC.)Taboo-XX wrote...
MP and SP are separate studios.
Taboo-XX wrote...
Persephone wrote...
How does this "leak" even qualify as one? It doesn't provide anything NEW and is as vague as anything else.
So yeah, what gives?
People aren't going to calm down...
This is the truth unfortunately.
EVERYTHING is a conspiracy.
Persephone wrote...
So Bioware REALLY is the root of ALL EVILZ and all that, eh?
No it's Actavision, read the article on the founders of COD and their firing in the latest issue of Game Informer. Now thats E..V..I..L!!!!Vox Draco wrote...
Persephone wrote...
So Bioware REALLY is the root of ALL EVILZ and all that, eh?
Whut? I thought that was EA? They even received an award for this!
estebanus wrote...
I still don't see how this disproves anything. I guess I'll just dig out my earlier post.
"Uhm... Bioware said the exact same thing back in April. Why look at it differently now?
the ending is literal and there is no IT to reveal. (The horror!!!!!) <- at least to some of usModifié par Cecilia L, 11 juin 2012 - 09:12 .
Cecilia L wrote...
estebanus wrote...
I still don't see how this disproves anything. I guess I'll just dig out my earlier post.
"Uhm... Bioware said the exact same thing back in April. Why look at it differently now?
If this leak-person knew stuff and didn't leak stuff indicating whether or not IT was true, that would either mean that he is a good person who doesn't want to spoil that kind of thing, OR that the ending is literal and there is no IT to reveal. (The horror!!!!!) <- at least to some of us
I have however re-evaluated his reliability as a source.
estebanus wrote...
But he only displays the description of it! Why would Bioware reveal a huge plotpoint in the description of a product?
That would be like saying "Find out that the collectors were the protheans all along!" on the ME2 box!
Modifié par Cecilia L, 11 juin 2012 - 09:20 .
LinksOcarina wrote...
estebanus wrote...
macrocarl wrote...
estebanus wrote...
macrocarl wrote...
The thing is, IT says everything after the laser blast is not real/ in Shep's head. There's variation of that since there's several versions of IT. Anyway, if they're keeping the ending and fleshing out some stuff after the laser blast then pro-IT'ers can maintain that it's indoc. But what's sweet (if handled correctly) the longer epilogue at the end will flesh out the end for non IT'ers. BW can please both groups to some extent. Wouldn't that be nice? We could all be right still AND still argue! Kind of like now come to think of it.
There comes a time when the flame wars must end. I hope that the EC will be that end.
However, regardless if the IT is confirmed or not, I am fairly certain that another flame war will ignite on these forums.
It still remains to be seen if it will be the indoctrinationists or the literalists who will have the upper hand...
Yeah there will be more fighting........ It never ends here
As it stands now my problem with ME3's ending is that if you take it literally it doesn't quite make sense. It's very emotional, but there's some weird stuff going on and if one wants to take it literally, it looks like BW made some crazy mistakes. Honestly I hope the folks who take it literal get what they want so it's more even between the 2 'camps'. Light a candle!
"War... War never changes."
Personally, I'd prefer it if Bioware would let the player choose if it was indoctrination or not. Maybe something like a question after the end cinematic play out: "Would you like to see how Shepard's choices change the galaxy, Or would you like to see how Shepard fights indoctrination?" Then you either click on "indoctrination" or "current ending."
It would be awesome if they did that, but I seriously doubt it.
By not saying anything, they are letting fans choose if the indoctrination theory is real or not. Its the same thing as making a fan edit or fan made movie basically...its not canon, but there is no way to stop it because its part of the fandom now.
More like four months.Omega Torsk wrote...
So, it took Bioware Edmonton 2 months to make an "afterthought" that literally set these threads on fire for the past three months tacked on to a much larger and obviously more important MP dlc?
Please, Gamble or Priestly, tell us it isn't so!
Reptilian Rob wrote...
More like four months.Omega Torsk wrote...
So, it took Bioware Edmonton 2 months to make an "afterthought" that literally set these threads on fire for the past three months tacked on to a much larger and obviously more important MP dlc?
Please, Gamble or Priestly, tell us it isn't so!
Four months to throw in some cutscenes.
I remember when Bioware was a great dev.
Cecilia L wrote...
estebanus wrote...
But he only displays the description of it! Why would Bioware reveal a huge plotpoint in the description of a product?
That would be like saying "Find out that the collectors were the protheans all along!" on the ME2 box!
I was under the impression that he knew stuff about stuff, including Major Stuff and stuff.
EDIT: Knowledge about the product descriptions (those not made official yet) might indicate a certain degree of knowledge of the content as well.
macrocarl wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
estebanus wrote...
macrocarl wrote...
estebanus wrote...
macrocarl wrote...
The thing is, IT says everything after the laser blast is not real/ in Shep's head. There's variation of that since there's several versions of IT. Anyway, if they're keeping the ending and fleshing out some stuff after the laser blast then pro-IT'ers can maintain that it's indoc. But what's sweet (if handled correctly) the longer epilogue at the end will flesh out the end for non IT'ers. BW can please both groups to some extent. Wouldn't that be nice? We could all be right still AND still argue! Kind of like now come to think of it.
There comes a time when the flame wars must end. I hope that the EC will be that end.
However, regardless if the IT is confirmed or not, I am fairly certain that another flame war will ignite on these forums.
It still remains to be seen if it will be the indoctrinationists or the literalists who will have the upper hand...
Yeah there will be more fighting........ It never ends here
As it stands now my problem with ME3's ending is that if you take it literally it doesn't quite make sense. It's very emotional, but there's some weird stuff going on and if one wants to take it literally, it looks like BW made some crazy mistakes. Honestly I hope the folks who take it literal get what they want so it's more even between the 2 'camps'. Light a candle!
"War... War never changes."
Personally, I'd prefer it if Bioware would let the player choose if it was indoctrination or not. Maybe something like a question after the end cinematic play out: "Would you like to see how Shepard's choices change the galaxy, Or would you like to see how Shepard fights indoctrination?" Then you either click on "indoctrination" or "current ending."
It would be awesome if they did that, but I seriously doubt it.
By not saying anything, they are letting fans choose if the indoctrination theory is real or not. Its the same thing as making a fan edit or fan made movie basically...its not canon, but there is no way to stop it because its part of the fandom now.
I think you mean 'by leaving it open ended to player interpretation'? If so, then to keep the ending controversial and the conversation going it probably will be that way even with the EC. I mean it'll stay open to interpretation, which is pretty cool so long as it makes other players more happy with a literal view of events.
IT is not 'canon' but it's not 'fanfic' either. Nothing in IT is based on anything outside what's been published in books, the games or tweets from BW.
Well lets see...Persephone wrote...
Reptilian Rob wrote...
More like four months.Omega Torsk wrote...
So, it took Bioware Edmonton 2 months to make an "afterthought" that literally set these threads on fire for the past three months tacked on to a much larger and obviously more important MP dlc?
Please, Gamble or Priestly, tell us it isn't so!
Four months to throw in some cutscenes.
I remember when Bioware was a great dev.
Except, none of this is proven. Not by this "leak" or anything else.
Reptilian Rob wrote...
Well lets see...Persephone wrote...
Reptilian Rob wrote...
More like four months.Omega Torsk wrote...
So, it took Bioware Edmonton 2 months to make an "afterthought" that literally set these threads on fire for the past three months tacked on to a much larger and obviously more important MP dlc?
Please, Gamble or Priestly, tell us it isn't so!
Four months to throw in some cutscenes.
I remember when Bioware was a great dev.
Except, none of this is proven. Not by this "leak" or anything else.
Four months since Ray gave us that horribly written PR letter saying they were "starting" an EC for the game.
So either those four months were spent on the EC...Or they were spent on other things like MP content. You know what, you're right. No way BW took four months on the EC, probably like one or two at most.
Taboo-XX wrote...
EVERYTHING. IS. LIES.
LIES. LIES. LIES.
What have I become, my sweetest friend?
LinksOcarina wrote...
So all of that fan edits or fan interpretations from stuff like Star Wars was made up on the spot?
my point is that IT is fan interpretation of the canon, therefore, it is a fandom concept that is akin to a fan edit. And hell, some people have taken the extra step in making that a reality by making images, vidoes, and so forth to support the IT theory and making fan edits to the game to show that it exists.
In the end it doesn't, but it should be allowed ot be interpreted that way.
Reptilian Rob wrote...
Well lets see...Persephone wrote...
Reptilian Rob wrote...
More like four months.Omega Torsk wrote...
So, it took Bioware Edmonton 2 months to make an "afterthought" that literally set these threads on fire for the past three months tacked on to a much larger and obviously more important MP dlc?
Please, Gamble or Priestly, tell us it isn't so!
Four months to throw in some cutscenes.
I remember when Bioware was a great dev.
Except, none of this is proven. Not by this "leak" or anything else.
Four months since Ray gave us that horribly written PR letter saying they were "starting" an EC for the game.
So either those four months were spent on the EC...Or they were spent on other things like MP content. You know what, you're right. No way BW took four months on the EC, probably like one or two at most.
Reptilian Rob wrote...
Well lets see...Persephone wrote...
Reptilian Rob wrote...
More like four months.Omega Torsk wrote...
So, it took Bioware Edmonton 2 months to make an "afterthought" that literally set these threads on fire for the past three months tacked on to a much larger and obviously more important MP dlc?
Please, Gamble or Priestly, tell us it isn't so!
Four months to throw in some cutscenes.
I remember when Bioware was a great dev.
Except, none of this is proven. Not by this "leak" or anything else.
Four months since Ray gave us that horribly written PR letter saying they were "starting" an EC for the game.
So either those four months were spent on the EC...Or they were spent on other things like MP content. You know what, you're right. No way BW took four months on the EC, probably like one or two at most.
Guest_Opsrbest_*
Yes Taboo we get that your qouting Cash lyrics. Or alternatively NIN and Cash.Taboo-XX wrote...
IT BURNS, BURNS,BURNS THE RING OF FIRE.
Modifié par Opsrbest, 12 juin 2012 - 03:36 .
Taboo-XX wrote...
IT BURNS, BURNS,BURNS THE RING OF FIRE.
Retour en haut
