The most pathetically astonishing contribution that this community has granted to the Internet is one of the most detestable gathering of unrelated ideas, speculations, non sequiturs, fallacies, optimistic guesses, and genuine idiocies ever assembled among humankind. It is the most vile, repugant denial of apparent truth, being, of course, the ending of the Mass Effect series, which is (quite apparently) meant to be taken at a literal, face value. Therefore I ask, I demand, that each person reevaluate his interpretation of the ending. Do so long, and hard. Finally, realize the delusion of your ways and the fallacy of the Indoctrination Delusion and reject is as it is and as it always has been--the fan fiction of a mentally disturbed 10 year old child which has reached the very levels of religion. It is delusion. It is a lie.
So, just because i don't want to accept a fatalistic, nihilistic, dark, and dessesperate vision of life i'm pathetic?
I think that i have the right to do with my beliefs and ideals what i want, and that's why i will never surrender to the obscurity produced by the Mass effect 3 ending.
Seboist wrote... Yes, ME2 should have been about preparing for war against the Reapers(no "ah yes reapers" stupidity) with the reaper proxies trying to soften the galaxy up for their evential arrival by sowing division amongst the council races(human abductions could factor into this) and trying to provoke a war against the Terminus.
With Cerberus, I would have had them become co-belligerents with the Council who would have agreed to turn a blind eye to them in exchange for their being able to act against the reaper proxies due to them being preoccupied with preparing for war against the Reapers and not wanting to risk political instability.
Shepard would then be assigned by the Council to work with them for the official reason of aiding them against the proxies but secretly to spy on them and undermine any non-mission critical activities of theirs. Now, whether Shepard decides to go through with the council's plan or fully endorse Cerberus would be up to the player.
All this would have respected contuniuity and player choice.
That sounds good. ME politics are pretty interesting (with far too much of it being exclusive to the codex) and the devs could have used the break between Sovy and the arrival of the rest of the Reapers to explore that. I appretiated the character-driven approach that ME2 did and enjoyed it, but something like this would have benefited the series better in the long-run.
The proxies could be additional indoctrinated agents Sovereign recruited. It would have given it a lasting influence beyond Saren. Giving the Council more characterization would have been nice, too. The only thing about them is how corrupt they are in the codex and passive mentions of their questionable acts.. also them being ignorant jerks to Shepard. TIM got the opportunity to justify his harmful acts, why not them?
Also I always like my lore and more fantastical and mysterious elements so exploring unknown and mysterious worlds to find out more about the Reapers and previous civilizations would be essential to keep my interest... politics can only carry me so far lol. More places like Ilos would have been great.
IT is a great fan created headcanon. It is not canon. the devs are releasing clarification, not priority,earth part 2 shepards awakening.
See, it's posts like this that I find amusing.
Well, one can't help but notice that the devs are really not responding in a way that suggests IT is correct. They have defended the ending as if it is quite real. They give you a "you beat the Reapers, you're a legend, buy DLC!" popup message at the end of the game, which is really taking things a bit far if the ending was indeed a hallucination and the Reapers haven't truly been defeated yet.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
Jade8aby88 wrote... That's humankind for you, there are extremists in all walks of life. On one hand you have the IT extremists (The only truth) while on the other you have people like the OP (I'm right, you're stupid). The fact is, both these views are stupid because they are both wrong. Only one of them will be correct and that will only be proved once Bioware release EC DLC. Until then it's all and .
Yep, the "zealots" of IT are often just as irritating, but they seemed to have calmed down unless provoked...which sadly happens quite often recently...but that's the I-net for you, it is open for everybody and their mother's opinion, and everybody thinks he is right (though of course, I am the only one who rightfully claims this! Ha!)
I am really curious if the EC is worth all the fuss we make here...but at least people aren't mugging old ladies on the streets as long as they rage around here...always look on the bright side of things, I say!
IT is a great fan created headcanon. It is not canon. the devs are releasing clarification, not priority,earth part 2 shepards awakening.
See, it's posts like this that I find amusing.
Well, one can't help but notice that the devs are really not responding in a way that suggests IT is correct. They have defended the ending as if it is quite real. They give you a "you beat the Reapers, you're a legend, buy DLC!" popup message at the end of the game, which is really taking things a bit far if the ending was indeed a hallucination and the Reapers haven't truly been defeated yet.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
It will make fans like you - angrier. But IT believers - fans for life
What about IT are you attacking. The interpretation of the ending itself, or the belief that the ending was intended to be incomplete?
All of it. The whole thing and everyone who believes in it. I'm attacking all of them.
You nor anyone has the right to attack anyone for what they want to perceive for the ending, what makes you the most influentual speaker of this topic or anyone for that matter. The ending was garbage plain and simple, now I'm a full believer of the IT simply because the current ending lacks closure as well as information and the IT has very compelling arguments, however everyone has the right to believe in the IT or not and shouldn't be harassed about an opinion that everyone has a right to. I read in here that people who believe in IT are stupid. Well since when does an opinion have any effect to my intelligence? Now I may not work for bioware nor do I represent them in any way. But I'm pretty sure attacking people about this is against the updated site rules & code of conduct and as a bioware community member I feel ashamed to be in a community with such negligent and inappropriate people like you being so high strung against people over a video game ending. Also I believe in IT because let's face it, Space magic and last minute god childs with inaccuracies that make no sense is more "weak minded" than IT.
My problem with IT is that it seems like a form of denial. The ending wasn't bad it's very deep with symbolical meaning and we really have to dig deep to find it. If we dig deep enough we will find something that proves that the ending was great with more to come. The ending isn't terrible, it's genious on a level that we have yet to discover. Bioware works in mysterious ways!
I think it's just bad and rushed writing with a lack of review. Hopefully the EC will amend some of these issues.
Im not saying you can't have your own theory and build a huge conspirace theory out of it, but I think I have the right to say what I think about the theory. Sorry if it doesn't "conform" with your beliefs.
Oterwise I would have to say, I don't agree but I can't say why since it could possibly offend you if im too truthful, therefor I will hide it "where the sun doesn't shine". Because my opinions don't matter.
I stated my opinion into this topic and I believe you have the right to an opinion but you missed the message in my post. Catamantaloedis has a right to an opinion but he has no right to attack people over their belief in IT, adding onto that. It was a bad ending, because of lack of information and closure with alot of plot holes. IT exists to perceive an understanding into the ending through research and educational inquiries into this theory and to deny a theory this detailed is false, IT doesn't exist as a form of denial rather it's to find meaning and understanding of the ending with possibilities to look into. IT is an example of a passionate group of people who want to find meaning in this topic by looking into small details and see if there are clues to the truth hidden in the trilogy storyline, an interlocked storyline with small clues that act as puzzle pieces to form a bigger picture. That's how a good plot that is linked to a trilogy works and I think some of you missed that, as much as you and others dislike the IT I haven't heard a theory to counter it better because all I see instead is bitter neglect and denial on the subject. It all sounds like hate and IT needs to be viewed and examined thoroughly with an open mind rather than shutting yourselves down to the possibility that it all may or may not be true to the integral plot. Bioware has niether confirmed or denied the IT and they won't comment about it due to spoiling the Extended Cut and that is proof that IT could be true or be false and it depends on Bioware. You can have a symbolic tone in the ending but that's not the point of a Mass Effect Ending, while symbolic the ending has to make sense and the current ending makes none. Some good links to check out with an open mind:
EDIT: Also it's possible the entire IT could be true for half of the Extended Cut but who knows that's just a thought that came to me.
I'm not trying to insult anyone but from my point of view IT peopel are disceting Mass effect like cults are disecting and finding their own mening into religious texts that are also a kind of fiction. Looking for meaning in a work of fiction is doomed to failure since you havn't got the insight into the mind of the orriginator of said fiction. IT people have more and more started to remind me of Jehovas Vitnesses. I like makign up theories and speculating but to speculate ona fictional work and the consider it a truth.. a lot of IT people approach other peoples ideas or theories and phuns as "No, because I say so and because the IT says otherwise".
Charles Taze Russell (1852–1916) In 1870, Charles Taze Russell and others formed an independent group in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to study the Bible.[23][24] During the course of his ministry Russell disputed many beliefs of mainstream Christianity including immortality of the soul, hellfire, predestination, the fleshly return of Jesus Christ, the Trinity, and the burning up of the world.[25] In 1876 Russell met Nelson H. Barbour; later that year they jointly produced the book Three Worlds, which combined restitutionist views with end time prophecy. The book taught that God's dealings with mankind were divided dispensationally, each ending with a "harvest", that Christ had returned as an invisible spirit being in 1874[26] inaugurating the "harvest of the Gospel age", and that 1914 would mark the end of a 2520-year period called "the Gentile Times".[27] Beginning in 1878 they jointly edited a religious journal, Herald of the Morning. In June 1879 the two split over doctrinal differences and in July Russell began publishing the magazine Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence,[28] stating that its purpose was to demonstrate the world was in "the last days", and that a new age of earthly and human restitution under the invisible reign of Christ was imminent.[29] As early as 1876, Russell taught that "the Gentile Times" would end in October 1914, at which time world society would be replaced by the full establishment of God's kingdom on earth.[30][31][32]As a personal side note related to mass effect, wold society didnt get replaced by a kingdom of god on earth in 1914.. Though Johovas witnesses still exists... Does that meen IT supporters will exist even after their time has passed and they turned out to be wrong?
Eschatology Main article: Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses A central teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses is that the current world era, or "system of things", entered the "last days"[195] in 1914 and faces imminent destruction through intervention by God and Jesus Christ, leading to deliverance for those who worship God acceptably.[196] They consider all other present-day religions to be false, identifying them with "Babylon the Great", or the "harlot", of Revelation 17,[197] and believe that they will soon be destroyed by the United Nations, which they believe is represented in scripture by the scarlet-colored wild beast of Revelation chapter 17. This development will mark the beginning of the "great tribulation".[198] Satan will subsequently attack Jehovah's Witnesses, an action that will prompt God to begin the war of Armageddon, during which all forms of government and all people not counted as Christ's "sheep", or true followers, will be destroyed. After Armageddon, God will extend his heavenly kingdom to include earth, which will be transformed into a paradise similar to the Garden of Eden.[199] After Armageddon, most of those who had died before God's intervention will gradually be resurrected during "judgment day" lasting for one thousand years. This judgment will be based on their actions after resurrection rather than past deeds. At the end of the thousand years, a final test will take place when Satan is released to mislead perfect mankind. The end result will be a fully tested, glorified human race. Christ will then hand all authority back to God.[200] Watch Tower Society publications teach that Jesus Christ began to rule in heaven as king of God's kingdom in October 1914, and that Satan was subsequently ousted from heaven to the earth, resulting in "woe" to mankind. They believe that Jesus rules invisibly, from heaven, perceived only as a series of "signs". They base this belief on a rendering of the Greek word parousia—usually translated as "coming" when referring to Christ—as "presence". They believe Jesus' presence includes an unknown period beginning with his inauguration as king in heaven in 1914, and ending when he comes to bring a final judgment against humans on earth. They thus depart from the mainstream Christian belief that the "second coming" of Matthew 24 refers to a single moment of arrival on earth to judge humans.[201][202]
Sociological analysis See also: Sociological classifications of religious movements Sociologist James A. Beckford has classified the organizational structure of Jehovah's Witnesses as Totalizing, characterized by an assertive leadership, specific and narrow objectives, control over competing demands on members' time and energy, and control over the quality of new members. Other characteristics of the classification include likelihood of friction with secular authorities, reluctance to co-operate with other religious organizations, a high rate of membership turnover, a low rate of doctrinal change, and strict uniformity of beliefs among members.[289] Beckford identified the religion's chief characteristics as historicism (identifying historical events as relating to the outworking of God's purpose), absolutism (conviction that the Watch Tower Society dispenses absolute truth), activism (capacity to motivate members to perform missionary tasks), rationalism (conviction that Witness doctrines have a rational basis devoid of mystery), authoritarianism (rigid presentation of regulations without the opportunity for criticism) and world indifference (rejection of certain secular requirements and medical treatments).[290] Sociologist Bryan R. Wilson, in his consideration of five religions including Jehovah's Witnesses, noted that each of the religions:[291]
"exists in a state of tension with the wider society;"
"imposes tests of merit on would-be members;"
"exercises stern discipline, regulating the declared beliefs and the life habits of members and prescribing and operating sanctions for those who deviate, including the possibility of expulsion;"
"demands sustained and total commitment from its members, and the subordination, and perhaps even the exclusion of all other interests."
Suppression of free speech and thought Critics have described the religion's leadership as autocratic and totalitarian because of Watch Tower Society requirements for loyalty and obedience by Witnesses,[147][308][309] intolerance of dissent about doctrines and practices,[310] and the practice of expelling and shunning members who cannot conscientiously agree with all the religion's teachings.[6][232][311] Sociologist Andrew Holden says those who choose to leave the religion "are seldom allowed a dignified exit. Not only is their disfellowshipping announced from the platform, they are also condemned as ‘mentally diseased’ or ‘apostates’."[312] Historian James Irvin Lichti has rejected the description of the religion as "totalitarian".[313] Sociologist Rodney Stark states that while Jehovah's Witness leaders are "not always very democratic" and members are expected to conform to "rather strict standards," enforcement tends to be informal, sustained by close bonds of friendship and that Jehovah's Witnesses see themselves as "part of the power structure rather than subject to it."[101] The Watch Tower Society's publications strongly discourage followers from questioning its doctrines and counsel, reasoning that the Society is to be trusted as "God's organization".[310][314][315][316] It warns members to "avoid independent thinking", claiming such thinking "was introduced by Satan the Devil"[317][318] and would "cause division".[319] Critics charge that by disparaging individual decision-making, the Watch Tower Society cultivates a system of unquestioning obedience[153][320] in which Witnesses abrogate all responsibility and rights over their personal lives.[321][322] Critics have accused the Watch Tower Society of exercising "intellectual dominance" over Witnesses,[323] controlling information[232][324][325] and creating "mental isolation",[326] which former Governing Body member Raymond Franz argued were all elements of mind control.[326] Holden, however, says the tabloid depiction of members as "brainwashed" is inaccurate, and that most members who join millenarian movements such as Jehovah's Witnesses have made an informed choice.[327]
****************** "end of vikipedia Quites"***
[*] This is from Wikipedia so is it accurate? maybe maybe not, what's important is that it gives a good picture of absolute faith derived from the studdy of and careful examination of a fictional work of "art" where you can't ask the author what the true meaning is, there for "authority figures claims to know the truth that suits their egos and "needs". One such need would be to deny the horrible possibility that the ending to Mass effect 3 is bad writing. Therefor careful examination is needed to find loopholes and anomalies that are never explained so that you can superimpose a new meaning to those and give new ( likely false) hope that the true artists will eventualy prove you right. Meanwhile anyone opposing or sugesting otherwise is a painful Troll that deserves no rights or consideration, it's the mission of the IT follower to set those people right or at least let everyone else know they arn't reliable and not as elaborate or knowledgable as the IT's supporters. I must congratulate Bioware and the Mass effect team for creating a fictional piece of art that has inspired such strong fandom among several of it's patrons. Too bad about the ending to ME3 though, I know you could have done a better ending. It was a great game and a really well painted universe, unfortunately the ending wasn't up to par with the rest of the series. Point being, a fictional work can't be discted like the IT does and then expect to arrive at a truth, as entertaining as the theory itself might be with all it's nitpicking.
This quote is archetypical for IT cultists, and proves my point, no offense meant. IT exists to perceive an understanding into the ending through research and educational inquiries into this theory and to deny a theory this detailed is false, IT doesn't exist as a form of denial rather it's to find meaning and understanding of the ending with possibilities to look into. IT is an example of a passionate group of people who want to find meaning in this topic by looking into small details and see if there are clues to the truth hidden in the trilogy storyline, an interlocked storyline with small clues that act as puzzle pieces to form a bigger picture. That's how a good plot that is linked to a trilogy works and I think some of you missed that, as much as you and others dislike the IT I haven't heard a theory to counter it better because all I see instead is bitter neglect and denial on the subject. It all sounds like hate and IT needs to be viewed and examined thoroughly with an open mind rather than shutting yourselves down to the possibility that it all may or may not be true to the integral plot. Bioware has niether confirmed or denied the IT and they won't comment about it due to spoiling the Extended Cut and that is proof that IT could be true or be false and it depends on Bioware. You can have a symbolic tone in the ending but that's not the point of a Mass Effect Ending, while symbolic the ending has to make sense and the current ending makes none.
You asked for a comprehensive theory to support my point of view, here it is. as for research and educational iquiries, the theory can't be tested and educational inquries into a fictional work where no answers can be expected to come from the source seems futile. Maybe the EC will give us more but that's just like any other fiectional work open for interpretation. Different Artcritics will have different opinions, not one truth. This is not to offend anyone it's just a clarification of my view and how some anti-IT people might see the IT people. Im not anti-IT, it's a fun theory wven thoguh Itihnk it went too far... Also I certainly can't subscribe to a "One truth" when it makes no sense to do so.
That sounds good. ME politics are pretty interesting (with far too much of it being exclusive to the codex) and the devs could have used the break between Sovy and the arrival of the rest of the Reapers to explore that. I appretiated the character-driven approach that ME2 did and enjoyed it, but something like this would have benefited the series better in the long-run.
The proxies could be indoctrinated agents Sovereign recruited. It would have given it a lasting influence beyond Saren. Giving the Council more characterization would have been nice, too. The only thing about them is how corrupt they are in the codex and passive mentions of their questionable acts.. also them being ignorant jerks to Shepard. TIM got the opportunity to justify his harmful acts, why not them?
I've always lamented since ME1 how the Council is portrayed as one dimensional "angry police chief" archetypes with little purpose other than to facilitate inane hero worship and player ego stroking(we don't even know their names in ME1 for FFS). The Turian councilor in particular is just some clown meant to be hated and used as a verbal punching bag for the player. That and the fact that Shepard can cut them off in the middle of a debriefing was a bad omen of what was to come with things like "ah yes reapers" and how the Alliance officials were portrayed in ME3.
TIM in ME2 left a lot to be desired as well. There's an appalling lack of him trying to promote his ideals or defending it to Shepard due to the later being such an emotional brick dullard. The best analogue to how the relationship should have been like is the one between Adam Jensen and David Sarif in Human Revolution. Instead what we have is some shady guy doing shady things for some vague notion of human dominance without much context(I still havent' a clue what the point of Akuze was).
TIM being a womanizer on top of being a manipulative magnificent bastard presented an opportunity for a more unique relationship with femshep as well and could have made her something more than just Shepard with boobs.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
It will make fans like you - angrier. But IT believers - fans for life
Sooo, you're happy when people give you double-speak and lies, just because you saw through it to what they were attempting to hide? That's...that's really as positive a spin as I can fathom for what you said, and it took me a bit to even get that. I don't care who you are; if you deliberately mislead and attempt to deceive me, then the entire process has to be well done to keep me from being pissed off. Sadly, that's essentially what we've been getting from Bioware.
IT is a great fan created headcanon. It is not canon. the devs are releasing clarification, not priority,earth part 2 shepards awakening.
See, it's posts like this that I find amusing.
Well, one can't help but notice that the devs are really not responding in a way that suggests IT is correct. They have defended the ending as if it is quite real. They give you a "you beat the Reapers, you're a legend, buy DLC!" popup message at the end of the game, which is really taking things a bit far if the ending was indeed a hallucination and the Reapers haven't truly been defeated yet.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
That's why they can't say anything, all those irritated grumbling people would lessen if they didn't find out it was a ruse until they have the truth right infront of them.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
It will make fans like you - angrier. But IT believers - fans for life
Sooo, you're happy when people give you double-speak and lies, just because you saw through it to what they were attempting to hide? That's...that's really as positive a spin as I can fathom for what you said, and it took me a bit to even get that. I don't care who you are; if you deliberately mislead and attempt to deceive me, then the entire process has to be well done to keep me from being pissed off. Sadly, that's essentially what we've been getting from Bioware.
But that's what the theme of indoctrination is about.. trickery and deception. Because it has the largest development cycles of any ME dlc while still being free dlc, that's strange in itself.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
It will make fans like you - angrier. But IT believers - fans for life
Sooo, you're happy when people give you double-speak and lies, just because you saw through it to what they were attempting to hide? That's...that's really as positive a spin as I can fathom for what you said, and it took me a bit to even get that. I don't care who you are; if you deliberately mislead and attempt to deceive me, then the entire process has to be well done to keep me from being pissed off. Sadly, that's essentially what we've been getting from Bioware.
Well, some people enjoy a psych out, as I understand it.
IT is a great fan created headcanon. It is not canon. the devs are releasing clarification, not priority,earth part 2 shepards awakening.
See, it's posts like this that I find amusing.
Well, one can't help but notice that the devs are really not responding in a way that suggests IT is correct. They have defended the ending as if it is quite real. They give you a "you beat the Reapers, you're a legend, buy DLC!" popup message at the end of the game, which is really taking things a bit far if the ending was indeed a hallucination and the Reapers haven't truly been defeated yet.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
You will find that games like Asura's Wrath and Prince of Persia did the same thing when it comes to the real ending being dlc so why not me3, it's possible as bull as it can be.
IT is a great fan created headcanon. It is not canon. the devs are releasing clarification, not priority,earth part 2 shepards awakening.
See, it's posts like this that I find amusing.
Well, one can't help but notice that the devs are really not responding in a way that suggests IT is correct. They have defended the ending as if it is quite real. They give you a "you beat the Reapers, you're a legend, buy DLC!" popup message at the end of the game, which is really taking things a bit far if the ending was indeed a hallucination and the Reapers haven't truly been defeated yet.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
That's why they can't say anything, all those irritated grumbling people would lessen if they didn't find out it was a ruse until they have the truth right infront of them.
When I say the truth^ I mean it hypothetically.
The arguments for IT are too weak and BioWare's defense of the ending too strong for that to be the case. They've gone to the moon and back defending their "artistic integrity." They've said they didn't know there was a demand for the things we wanted from the ending but didn't get. "Bittersweet," "speculations," "clarification" -- everything we've heard from them sounds like nothing more than the clumsy stuttering defense of a company reeling from a fan backlash they utterly failed to anticipate. The voice actors themselves have stated that BioWare is not changing the endings, just "justifying" them.
Believing that all of this is a clever act to make us that much more surprised when the EC validates IT is stretching things quite far for the sake of a comforting interpretation. No grumbling caused by an IT reveal could be greater than the shrieking caused by the literal interpretation.
Well, some people enjoy a psych out, as I understand it.
I appreciate a good fakeout, but...that's not quite what I was meaning.
There's a difference between in-game stuff and out-of-game.
For instance, in-game everything could be a lie, an illusion, a battle at the center of the mind, a hallucination, drugs, whatever you want. If the set-up is done well, then maybe on the first playthrough you think maybe something's up but maybe not. On a second playthrough, you see a whole bunch more details, and how they all fit in at the end and come together so that you can be in on the lie, psych-out, fake-out, whatever. That would be potentially good.
Telling me you sold me a finished product when you didn't would be a bad way to do it. Always bad. No exceptions; just. Bad.
I don't think that IT was implemented well (if true), but it could have been. If IT was intended to be canon, and they wanted to lie and say the product was finished and then have a DLC ready a few weeks after launch--well, [i]that/i] would have been pretty epic. Time it for two weeks after the Asia markets got the game, so all your hardcore fanbase would have finished it and be going 'wtf? hey, wait a minute...' and then BAM!
But they didn't. So, it was done poorly, if it was done. So, they get no forgiveness from me for lying, if they are. If that makes sense.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
It will make fans like you - angrier. But IT believers - fans for life
Sooo, you're happy when people give you double-speak and lies, just because you saw through it to what they were attempting to hide? That's...that's really as positive a spin as I can fathom for what you said, and it took me a bit to even get that. I don't care who you are; if you deliberately mislead and attempt to deceive me, then the entire process has to be well done to keep me from being pissed off. Sadly, that's essentially what we've been getting from Bioware.
But that's what the theme of indoctrination is about.. trickery and deception. Because it has the largest development cycles of any ME dlc while still being free dlc, that's strange in itself.
Exactly. From my point of view, as an artist - new things, which were never done before are very interesting in art and social perspective. Art in general is trying to give vivid emotions, sometimes even rage or dissapointment. I am not saying Mass effect is art, I am saying if IT is true - they are trying to cross the line of art. If IT will be true, they did a social thing with a computer game, which never happened before. Such deep analysis by fans, the ongoing interest for so long and the people (like me) who never go to forums after finishing games are attracted here and share the experiences, thoughts. Such impact previously could be done only by the best films or books by best authors. I don't see why people get so angry if some fans believe bioware might be so ambitious to make it with a game And all that ongoing flame and provocations is just a lack of culture or inner teenage fights. They are on both sides and clever people know that while ignoring the trolls.
IT is a great fan created headcanon. It is not canon. the devs are releasing clarification, not priority,earth part 2 shepards awakening.
See, it's posts like this that I find amusing.
Well, one can't help but notice that the devs are really not responding in a way that suggests IT is correct. They have defended the ending as if it is quite real. They give you a "you beat the Reapers, you're a legend, buy DLC!" popup message at the end of the game, which is really taking things a bit far if the ending was indeed a hallucination and the Reapers haven't truly been defeated yet.
And if IT is true and they intend to release the real conclusion via DLC, why lie about it? Why say the EC is merely clarification? Double talk is only going to make fans angrier. On the other hand, coming out and revealing that it was all a ruse would probably settle a lot of people down, even if it did provoke a lot of irritated grumbling. We'd resent being jerked around, but the greater reaction would be, "Thank God, I knew they weren't really that inept."
You will find that games like Asura's Wrath and Prince of Persia did the same thing when it comes to the real ending being dlc so why not me3, it's possible as bull as it can be.
I'm not familiar with those instances so I can't really say. But to be valid parallels, the endings of those games would need to have caused great upset, and the developers would need to have announced a clarification DLC that turned out to be a psych-out reveal instead, contrary to the reports of the voice actors working on the DLC and the word of the game developers putting it together.
I don't think that IT was implemented well (if true), but it could have been. If IT was intended to be canon, and they wanted to lie and say the product was finished and then have a DLC ready a few weeks after launch--well, [i]that/i] would have been pretty epic. Time it for two weeks after the Asia markets got the game, so all your hardcore fanbase would have finished it and be going 'wtf? hey, wait a minute...' and then BAM!
But they didn't. So, it was done poorly, if it was done. So, they get no forgiveness from me for lying, if they are. If that makes sense.
If IT was intended they would have made use of Object Rho and/or reveal Lazarus was done using Reaper derived technology instead of them being mere plot devices to fast forward time and as plot resets.
If Call of Duty: Black Ops of all things was able to pull off a decent indoctrination plot then I could see the ME writers being able to do it(despite my low opinion of them) but the fact remains that they didn't and judging by their amaterish attempts at schock value (kid dying in the intro) would have made it far more obvious than what the ITers are claiming.
Well, some people enjoy a psych out, as I understand it.
I appreciate a good fakeout, but...that's not quite what I was meaning.
There's a difference between in-game stuff and out-of-game.
For instance, in-game everything could be a lie, an illusion, a battle at the center of the mind, a hallucination, drugs, whatever you want. If the set-up is done well, then maybe on the first playthrough you think maybe something's up but maybe not. On a second playthrough, you see a whole bunch more details, and how they all fit in at the end and come together so that you can be in on the lie, psych-out, fake-out, whatever. That would be potentially good.
Telling me you sold me a finished product when you didn't would be a bad way to do it. Always bad. No exceptions; just. Bad.
I don't think that IT was implemented well (if true), but it could have been. If IT was intended to be canon, and they wanted to lie and say the product was finished and then have a DLC ready a few weeks after launch--well, [i]that/i] would have been pretty epic. Time it for two weeks after the Asia markets got the game, so all your hardcore fanbase would have finished it and be going 'wtf? hey, wait a minute...' and then BAM!
But they didn't. So, it was done poorly, if it was done. So, they get no forgiveness from me for lying, if they are. If that makes sense.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
