238 réponses à ce sujet

[Apocaleepse360]

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

I've seen both sides calling each other morons.

No, one side of the argument isn't "better than the other", as I've seen an equal amount of insults being thrown around this forum and other Mass Effect related discussion pages on both sides.

Lot's of ITists aren't very vocal.  I don't dare venture into the Anti-IT realms, but they seem to be the most vocal in general.  Like a bunch of peope holding picket signs.

In all fairness, the first ones I saw doing the insulting were IT believers. Common insults were "you're obviously stupid to not see what Bioware intended" and "wake up", followed by huge amounts of details on why everyone should believe in the IT.

So again, both sides can be jerks in equal measure.

For the record, I do not believe Bioware's original intentions were to make Shepard become indoctrinated. I do however, think that it could potentially be a good idea for an extended ending. So I guess I'm sort of a neutral ground between believers and non-believers.

Modifié par Apocaleepse360, 19 juin 2012 - 02:17 .

[UrgentArchengel]

@Apocaleepse

Yeah, but does acting like a jerk make you any better then the jerks themselves? I mean, those IT guys are trolls, clearly, don't insult the whole group just because a few IT's decided to troll those that didn't pick destroy, or don't think IT was intended. It's the Internet, trolls are everywhere, and they are not worth getting worked up over. I've been called trash to my face by the Anti-IT, so maybe I'm just a little more bias, like some others. Anyway, I split the non-IT folks into 2 groups. Haters=Anti-IT. Nice Folks that just don't believe, but don't insult=Literalist. So when I mean Anti-IT, I mean the haters.

[Apocaleepse360]

UrgentArchengel wrote...

@Apocaleepse

Yeah, but does acting like a jerk make you any better then the jerks themselves? I mean, those IT guys are trolls, clearly, don't insult the whole group just because a few IT's decided to troll those that didn't pick destroy, or don't think IT was intended. It's the Internet, trolls are everywhere, and they are not worth getting worked up over. I've been called trash to my face by the Anti-IT, so maybe I'm just a little more bias, like some others. Anyway, I split the non-IT folks into 2 groups. Haters=Anti-IT. Nice Folks that just don't believe, but don't insult=Literalist. So when I mean Anti-IT, I mean the haters.

By saying "can be jerks" I was meant to imply that both sides had the potential to be, but that might not be the case. Sort of like how if I met a Christian, they could have the potential to force their beliefs on me and damn me to hell simply because of different religious beliefs. However, they could actually be really nice people who respect other people's beliefs, no matter how different they are. Same goes for other religions or Atheists and Agnostics. But that's a whole other matter, and I'd rather not start the whole religious debate on here, so I'll just stop there by saying every country, idea and religion will have their good and bad people.

I apologize if it looked like I was saying "both sides are jerks", as while I've seen people throwing insults at each other, I have also seen both sides discussing the IT in a civil and polite way, so it's not all as bad as I accidentally implied it to be in my previous posts.

Modifié par Apocaleepse360, 19 juin 2012 - 02:51 .

[OdanUrr]

Why do people ask questions they know will lead to more insults and bickering?<_<

[UrgentArchengel]

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...

@Apocaleepse

Yeah, but does acting like a jerk make you any better then the jerks themselves? I mean, those IT guys are trolls, clearly, don't insult the whole group just because a few IT's decided to troll those that didn't pick destroy, or don't think IT was intended. It's the Internet, trolls are everywhere, and they are not worth getting worked up over. I've been called trash to my face by the Anti-IT, so maybe I'm just a little more bias, like some others. Anyway, I split the non-IT folks into 2 groups. Haters=Anti-IT. Nice Folks that just don't believe, but don't insult=Literalist. So when I mean Anti-IT, I mean the haters.

By saying "can be jerks" I was meant to imply that both sides had the potential to be, but that might not be the case. I apologize if it looked like I was saying "both sides are jerks".

Nah, I understood.  I am just trying to prove how pointless the insults are getting.  First there is simple trolling, but now it's just sad.  Yeah, both sides can be very cruel, but on the Non-IT side of things, it just feels like there is more hate.

Just wish we could just play nice:(

[Rafe34]

It's very easy.

According to IT, anyone who picked control or synthesis lost. People who picked control or synthesis don't like this, thus they are immediately put on the defensive, and everything proceeds from there.

[UrgentArchengel]

Rafe34 wrote...

It's very easy.

According to IT, anyone who picked control or synthesis lost. People who picked control or synthesis don't like this, thus they are immediately put on the defensive, and everything proceeds from there.

At this point, we're just looking for stuff in the game.  I think ITist has refuted losing with Control/Synthesis.  I personally believe the game still continues, but whatever happens next depends on your final choice, and EMS.

[wantedman dan]

While I hardly count the OP as giving a strong defense for why people shouldn't label IT believers as stupid or delusional, those who do are usually trolls or cannot craft better arguments than those riddled with ad hominem logical fallacies.

[BatmanTurian]

Rafe34 wrote...

It's very easy.

According to IT, anyone who picked control or synthesis lost. People who picked control or synthesis don't like this, thus they are immediately put on the defensive, and everything proceeds from there.

That's true and Saren, Harbinger, and TIM all represent Synthesis and Control, so naturally some people believe Control and Synthesis are Reaper ideologies. This means we're fundamentally fighting over ideologies, choosing which ending makes sense to each of us.

ITer's believe destroy makes sense in their head canon because the other two, like I said, are Reaper ideologies at their core. However, even in the best ending it messes up the galaxy a little. It's still up in the air whether EDI and the Geth are actually dead.

Control people believe that Control is paragon, that Starchild has no reason to lie, that the Reapers will listen to them. Arguably it involves some head canon but that's understandable because it's not like Bioware explained how it was going to work. The same goes for Synthesis and there has to be some head canon made up for that too.

In the end, none of this actually matters. This is a fictional universe and Bioware will decide what happens, or arguably they will torture us and keep us in limbo. At the end of the day, we have to remember that this is just a game and we're not actually deciding the fate of our own true reality nor do we have the right to condemn others for their head canon. At some point, we should stand up like adults and say enough is enough and police ourselves. We can be better than this and treat each other with more dignity and respect. Then maybe some actual constructive conversation could happen.

[tomcplotts]

Barsomo92 wrote...

 Bioware likes that we are talking about the indoctrination theory one guy in the bioware team even said so 

 Wow, some great theorizing going on in this thread. I'm really enjoying it, it intrigues me. Keep it up. This is quoted from the, Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark II!
 
 So please stop calling us stupid or delusional. 



Thanks

For me, I never took it even remotely seriously because the core requirement for IT is to have played a game intentionally released without an ending. Not even EA would do something this hideous. Occam's Razor is definitely in effect for IT. 

On the other hand, given how essential Javik turns out to be for the ending we got, and that they pitched him as DLC optional (which might actually be the biggest of the lies told to date), maybe you guys are on to something. Maybe EA is that reprehensible.

[Aiyie]

jijeebo wrote...

Because people who believe IT call those who don't stupid idiots who didn't pay attention?


Seriously, I've never seen an IT thread in all my life where each side is insulted at least once.

lets at least be fair here...

the insults typically start on the anti-IT side of things.  most of the time, not all, but most, its usually just returning what is given.

you got IT'rs who are so devoted to IT that they refuse to see any other option.

and you got Anti-IT'rs who are so devoted to the concept that Bioware just screwed the pooch that they refuse to entertain any other option.

its like politics... just safer not to say which side you support at this point.

[Nightwriter]

I have not seen any opinion on this forum that has not been held with an air of superiority by a margin of members, or that has not been used to call contradicting opinions stupid or delusional.

[Erield]

Aiyie wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

Because people who believe IT call those who don't stupid idiots who didn't pay attention?


Seriously, I've never seen an IT thread in all my life where each side is insulted at least once.

lets at least be fair here...

the insults typically start on the anti-IT side of things.  most of the time, not all, but most, its usually just returning what is given.

you got IT'rs who are so devoted to IT that they refuse to see any other option.

and you got Anti-IT'rs who are so devoted to the concept that Bioware just screwed the pooch that they refuse to entertain any other option.

its like politics... just safer not to say which side you support at this point.

Right now, that statement is true.  A month or so ago, from what I remember, that statement would be false.  So, no, you aren't "being fair."  You are issueing a statement of fact, when it's really subjective, and also ignoring the history of the argument.

I don't think IT, at its core, is stupid.  I think that people who demand it to be true are.  I feel that IT is a worse ending than what we got.  I think that IT is a horrible, horrible precedent for future games, especially given EA's track record of wanting to milk as much money from a customer as humanly possible.  If here is someone who is preaching about how awesome and unique and wonderful and original IT is, then there's a decent chance I'll call that person delusional--but I'll also back up why.  (Which I've touched on briefly here.)

IT could have made for a good story if done well and intended.  If done now, it will appear to me (subjective, of course) as slapping a band-aid on something that fails to address some core issues within the narrative while also setting the possibility for future paid "real ending" DLC.  No responsible consumer should allow any company to blatantly lie to them the way that the concept of IT forces Bioware to lie.  This is especially true for the third game in a trilogy that had exactly zero previous experience of exploring, in detail, such meta concepts as being Indoctrinated, the afterlife, concepts of perception vs. reality, etc.  If they were to create a new IP, and have that as their end-game, then it might become justifiable--as it is, then no.  Just no.

[TiminatorT2000]

BatmanTurian wrote...

..
wrong. The IT offers a longer ending, which is becoming more and more likely since the EC has dragged on this long. It will offer an ending for each choice. What that will be is up to Bioware. I won't speculate further than that.

IT is the belief that everything after being hit by the lazer is delusion created to indoctrinated you correct?

If so then what we have cannot possibly be called an ending.


EC being "dragged out" dose not convince me of anything, Likely a very small poportion of Biowares staff is working on EC which is why it's taking long.

BatmanTurian wrote... 

yeah but it also says expanding meaning there will be more than the current ending.

It says expanding on the ending, which means there's already an ending there. Which is not the case in most interperations of IT I've heard.

If your talking about some different version IT then I've heard please explain it to me.

BatmanTurian wrote... 


She's just a voice actor. She knows probably less than we do honestly. Justifying the ending goes toward the IT because the IT works within the ending and if you don't understand IT they need to explain it. Also there is no change  necessary with the endings as they currently are for IT, since they are not the actual endings. Also, she's under an NDA so she'll say whatever Bioware wants her to say.

  

She has a script , yes an isolated part of it probably but she has lines and a script which automatically makes her more informed then us.

Justifying and explaining is not the same thing, the language is clear that there justifying what is already there not what EC could possibly add.

If she is just being told what to say by Bioware then I don't see the problem it's just another statement by them .

BatmanTurian wrote...


Oh no, it's perfectly applicable. You're in denial that it could ever be possible or that the endings could get better. Again, two-way street.

WHAT? When did I ever say IT isn't possible or that the endings couldn't get better?

Modifié par TiminatorT2000, 19 juin 2012 - 01:06 .

[TiminatorT2000]

jules_vern18 wrote...

No more questions, no more theories - a definitive answer.  I think that's what people on both sides want, but I don't think that's what we're going to get.

Sadly your right.

 

They Basically say that there not going to confirm or deny anything just distract people with bull****.

Modifié par TiminatorT2000, 19 juin 2012 - 01:13 .

[Soultaker08]

Aiyie wrote...

jijeebo wrote...

Because people who believe IT call those who don't stupid idiots who didn't pay attention?


Seriously, I've never seen an IT thread in all my life where each side is insulted at least once.

lets at least be fair here...

the insults typically start on the anti-IT side of things.  most of the time, not all, but most, its usually just returning what is given.

Nah, what i saw very often was , when an Anti-IT proposed something against IT, like bioware statements, contradictions or critizising "evidences" which were highly speculative

the reaction was often not very mature by the Pro-ITs, often coming up with even MORE highly speculative "evidence" to refuse the Anti-IT proposal

And then i often saw that Anti-IT started to insult
and even if i am against breaking up discussions by insulting the other faction as "stupid", etc ,
i understood WHY the Anti-IT started to insult.

If you want to discuss and all your arguments are only answered by "wishy-washy" speculations you come to a point you start to go mad.

I want to come up with an example and i think the best one is the Bioware statements about the EC.

When they said "no additional endings, only expanding, no altering endings" many Anti-IT said :

"Well thats it, here you go , now back to business as usual"

Even i thought "well discussion is over, fine" , but no , the Pro-IT camp instantly came up with "IT is not altering the ending, it is just expanding the ending, IT is in the ending so they are just using it now"

And here comes the problem why some Anti-IT go mad and start insulting:

You can speculate in discussions and you can try to back up obersvations with speculations.
But if you start interpreting EVERYTHING so it fits ONLY your idea/theory/plan/cookies
you gonna have a bad time discussing with people that DO NOT follow your ideas.

You cannot come up with speculations, supported by speculations, based on speculated evidences, without even considering other peoples opinion.

This is the point when other people will likely start insulting you

[Humakt83]

jules_vern18 wrote...

No more questions, no more theories - a definitive answer.  I think that's what people on both sides want, but I don't think that's what we're going to get.

EC will provide answer. Do not expect anything before it.

[shodiswe]

This won't end as long as there are IT people jumping into other discussions advertising the one and only truth to everything, discouraging all other ideas.

It takes a lot of signs, loose contexts and innuendo. All of which can be found in the game and be interpreted in any way you want. Then they piece it together looking for a meaning in a similar way as Astrology. Looking for clues into starts, planetary inclinations orbits and positions, as a methaphor.. Then they weave a compelling story that they like to think is true.
If someone asks them about the proof thenthey point as the "signs" in game.
If someone questions the interpretation or claims it to be impossible to read something that specific into the "signs" they are called stupid by IT people.

If someone questions the interpretation then they are automatically too stupid or ignorant or need to read more from the IT threads to gain sufficient understanding. It's stonewalling and denial.

As such IT people will keep jumping int threads that have noting to do with IT just to protect their interpretation of the IT. There for if someone mentions soemthing that touches one of the signs they are immediately there to correct and make sure there is only one truth and one interpretation.

It's like the Catholic church's fear of scientists like Galileo who claimed that the simplest explanation to the movements of the plants in our star system is that the move around the sun and not around the earth.
He didn't renounce god but still the old ideas of how the universe was working, the universe "created by god" could possibly be different to what people had been taught... It was a threat that had to be dismantled.

IT people usualy acts like the Catholic church. Some IT people might want to reverse that, but non-IT people hasn't got anything major to pretect, no grand theory, other than the freedom of speech maybe and getting tired fo geting assaulted on every thread. IT people are protecting their faith or their Baby, and nothing will ever convince them that it isn't worth protecting so they will go to any length to do so.

There is absolutely no hope what so ever that this will ever end, until the day when IT people actualy fold their idea completely due to Bioware, though no matter what hapens I find it unlikely they will drop it until they turn their back on the game and forums completely. A lot of IT people are thankfully less fanatical and are just hoping to get a better ending, hopefully they will get a better ending from Bioware.

The only hope would be that Bioware releases something so good that most IT people forget about IT because the new gift is so much more appealing. Looking forward to the EC.

Here's to hoping this ends soon.

[BatmanTurian]

shodiswe wrote...

This won't end as long as there are IT people jumping into other discussions advertising the one and only truth to everything, discouraging all other ideas.

It takes a lot of signs, loose contexts and innuendo. All of which can be found in the game and be interpreted in any way you want. Then they piece it together looking for a meaning in a similar way as Astrology. Looking for clues into starts, planetary inclinations orbits and positions, as a methaphor.. Then they weave a compelling story that they like to think is true.
If someone asks them about the proof thenthey point as the "signs" in game.
If someone questions the interpretation or claims it to be impossible to read something that specific into the "signs" they are called stupid by IT people.

If someone questions the interpretation then they are automatically too stupid or ignorant or need to read more from the IT threads to gain sufficient understanding. It's stonewalling and denial.

As such IT people will keep jumping int threads that have noting to do with IT just to protect their interpretation of the IT. There for if someone mentions soemthing that touches one of the signs they are immediately there to correct and make sure there is only one truth and one interpretation.

It's like the Catholic church's fear of scientists like Galileo who claimed that the simplest explanation to the movements of the plants in our star system is that the move around the sun and not around the earth.
He didn't renounce god but still the old ideas of how the universe was working, the universe "created by god" could possibly be different to what people had been taught... It was a threat that had to be dismantled.

IT people usualy acts like the Catholic church. Some IT people might want to reverse that, but non-IT people hasn't got anything major to pretect, no grand theory, other than the freedom of speech maybe and getting tired fo geting assaulted on every thread. IT people are protecting their faith or their Baby, and nothing will ever convince them that it isn't worth protecting so they will go to any length to do so.

There is absolutely no hope what so ever that this will ever end, until the day when IT people actualy fold their idea completely due to Bioware, though no matter what hapens I find it unlikely they will drop it until they turn their back on the game and forums completely. A lot of IT people are thankfully less fanatical and are just hoping to get a better ending, hopefully they will get a better ending from Bioware.

The only hope would be that Bioware releases something so good that most IT people forget about IT because the new gift is so much more appealing. Looking forward to the EC.

Here's to hoping this ends soon.

Again, continuing to insult each other will not make this better. We need to stop the religious innuendo and ad hominem. This forum could be a lot more mature if people showed respect and kept an open mind to other people's interpretations and that goes for both sides. Your post is highly inflammatory and shows you have no intent to make this situation any better.

[Creston918]

Because they're inferring things that aren't there. Yes, a lot of the scenery in the post-beam stuff looks familiar. This isn't Shepard hallucinating, it's an art team having to re-use assets to get the ending done at the last possible moment. (THANKS, MAC WALTERS!)

Inferring things that aren't there is by its very definition considered to be delusional.

That said, hey, if believing the ending isn't real helps you deal with it, more power to all you guys. Some people choose that, others write essays about synthesis, and more others go to different websites to get a better ending. You know an ending TRULY sucked if thousands of fans are coming up with other ways of making the story end, or try their damndest to explain it in a way so that it makes SOME sort of sense.

It takes a special level of incompetence to write an ending THAT bad, and Bioware did it.

[gmboy902]

My problem with IT is that it is over-analytical to the point where the IT theorists are thinking more about the story more than BioWare even did. It just makes more sense to think that BioWare removed reloading in the last "fight" to focus more on Shepard and the story and less on gameplay mechanics, or that Shepard easily takes that stupid explanation for the Reapers because the ending was rushed and not thought out, or that the boy that everyone has grown to hate was just a forced and poorly done excuse to give Shepard some emotion.

It's quite like seeing a bit of dirt on a sidewalk and assuming a body is buried in the yard beside it.

[Vox Draco]

shodiswe wrote...
It's like the Catholic church's fear of scientists like Galileo who claimed that the simplest explanation to the movements of the plants in our star system is that the move around the sun and not around the earth.
He didn't renounce god but still the old ideas of how the universe was working, the universe "created by god" could possibly be different to what people had been taught... It was a threat that had to be dismantled.

IT people usualy acts like the Catholic church. Some IT people might want to reverse that, but non-IT people hasn't got anything major to pretect, no grand theory, other than the freedom of speech maybe and getting tired fo geting assaulted on every thread. IT people are protecting their faith or their Baby, and nothing will ever convince them that it isn't worth protecting so they will go to any length to do so.
.

The funny thing is: I always get the exact opposite impression of this, with Anti-IT often fanatical members of the "Church of Bad Writing" and ITlers the voice of reason and science actually trying to look at the "book", I mean "game of truth" from every different angle to find other valid interpretations than just the "Bad Writing"-mantra...

that being said...I also get tired of these "cultist"-insults that keep popping up all the time. Most IT-lers are reasonable people, and their point of view is just as valid as the other ones, at least at this moment. And on every "side" there are the fanatics that think Bioware spoke to them in their dreams and told them the entire truth about everything...

The answer to all of this of course will only be revealed in the EC, and I already know it. 42. Thank you.

Modifié par Vox Draco, 19 juin 2012 - 06:00 .

[Carlthestrange]

I have nothing against those who choose to believe in IT.

I just feel its clutching at straws. I stray from being polite sometimes, I admit, but this is the internet. Harden up or it'll eat you alive.

[shodiswe]

BatmanTurian wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

This won't end as long as there are IT people jumping into other discussions advertising the one and only truth to everything, discouraging all other ideas.

It takes a lot of signs, loose contexts and innuendo. All of which can be found in the game and be interpreted in any way you want. Then they piece it together looking for a meaning in a similar way as Astrology. Looking for clues into starts, planetary inclinations orbits and positions, as a methaphor.. Then they weave a compelling story that they like to think is true.
If someone asks them about the proof thenthey point as the "signs" in game.
If someone questions the interpretation or claims it to be impossible to read something that specific into the "signs" they are called stupid by IT people.

If someone questions the interpretation then they are automatically too stupid or ignorant or need to read more from the IT threads to gain sufficient understanding. It's stonewalling and denial.

As such IT people will keep jumping int threads that have noting to do with IT just to protect their interpretation of the IT. There for if someone mentions soemthing that touches one of the signs they are immediately there to correct and make sure there is only one truth and one interpretation.

It's like the Catholic church's fear of scientists like Galileo who claimed that the simplest explanation to the movements of the plants in our star system is that the move around the sun and not around the earth.
He didn't renounce god but still the old ideas of how the universe was working, the universe "created by god" could possibly be different to what people had been taught... It was a threat that had to be dismantled.

IT people usualy acts like the Catholic church. Some IT people might want to reverse that, but non-IT people hasn't got anything major to pretect, no grand theory, other than the freedom of speech maybe and getting tired fo geting assaulted on every thread. IT people are protecting their faith or their Baby, and nothing will ever convince them that it isn't worth protecting so they will go to any length to do so.

There is absolutely no hope what so ever that this will ever end, until the day when IT people actualy fold their idea completely due to Bioware, though no matter what hapens I find it unlikely they will drop it until they turn their back on the game and forums completely. A lot of IT people are thankfully less fanatical and are just hoping to get a better ending, hopefully they will get a better ending from Bioware.

The only hope would be that Bioware releases something so good that most IT people forget about IT because the new gift is so much more appealing. Looking forward to the EC.

Here's to hoping this ends soon.

Again, continuing to insult each other will not make this better. We need to stop the religious innuendo and ad hominem. This forum could be a lot more mature if people showed respect and kept an open mind to other people's interpretations and that goes for both sides. Your post is highly inflammatory and shows you have no intent to make this situation any better.

A religious phenomena is the closest theoretical comparison I can't come up with to explain the theory and it's followers reasoning. It's based more on belief, assumptions and a personal need for an explanation than “hard fact’s” and logic. for example writing on walls, vega talking about noises things taken out of it's context then forged together to a theory that shepard is indoctrinated or dreaming and therefor the "real ending will be released later" because the current ending is too horrible to be true and can't possibly be the real ending.
The way pieces are pieced together and the meaning imprinted on each piece can be derived from the desires of the people piecing it together. Each piece of evidence is given the meaning that suits the IT the best just to make it seem plausible.

I'm ok with people saying they wish it was this way, but most IT people are saying it's the one and only truth and everyone who doesn't agree with it are idiots. Can you truly expect people to respect you when you run around treating people that way? When people complain about your behavior you start complaining about their objections or their attempts to understand you.

There are two descriptions that fit well into this kind of behavior, "religious belief" you have faith in your idea and anything that goes against your beliefs is bad and must be blocked and pushed away.
Or it's the the mother whos defending her childs behaviour, who can't for any reason can't see that the child did anything wrong because it's her little baby!

One could just aswell reason that the reaper invasion is Armageddon and that the catalyst is god, and that shepard can't object because no one can object in the face of god.... That would be the Biblical theory or something. Then point out Ashley Williams as a central figure explaining how the universe works and thus guiding Shepard through ME1, then telling Shepard Cerberus is wrong in ME2 and in ME3. Aswell as numerous biblical references names and inspiration.. well... whatever... the thing is any theory can be spun using the in game material and can be used to create any kind of story for the ending.
It's not what I belive though, just want to make that clear.. Just in case. So please don't start anything..
I'm ok with people having their own endings and fanfiction, but people are trying so hard to sell this idea to the point where they start posting inflammatory posts all over the board, I've keept my mouth shut for months, it hasn't helped.

And considering the way people relate to this "theory" nothing can stop it from becoming an inflammatory.
Even you should be able to admit that the theory is based on fan speculation and assumptions, not hard facts. You should also be able to admitt that some IT people are taking it too far with the "truth" point of view and trying to push it on people like Jehovah witnesses booksellers, only with even more colorful language and condescending remarks.
Also those who arn't the pushy bookseller types will immediately jump on the bandvagon starting more inflamatory posts if people complain about the agressive IT people and see the complaint as an all out attack on IT and all IT people.. Like overprotective mothers or religious people protecting their beliefs... Pick which ever you prefer.
This is imo a very accurate decription of the IT and it's social mechanics.

Modifié par shodiswe, 19 juin 2012 - 06:43 .

[shodiswe]

Vox Draco wrote...

shodiswe wrote...
It's like the Catholic church's fear of scientists like Galileo who claimed that the simplest explanation to the movements of the plants in our star system is that the move around the sun and not around the earth.
He didn't renounce god but still the old ideas of how the universe was working, the universe "created by god" could possibly be different to what people had been taught... It was a threat that had to be dismantled.

IT people usualy acts like the Catholic church. Some IT people might want to reverse that, but non-IT people hasn't got anything major to pretect, no grand theory, other than the freedom of speech maybe and getting tired fo geting assaulted on every thread. IT people are protecting their faith or their Baby, and nothing will ever convince them that it isn't worth protecting so they will go to any length to do so.
.

The funny thing is: I always get the exact opposite impression of this, with Anti-IT often fanatical members of the "Church of Bad Writing" and ITlers the voice of reason and science actually trying to look at the "book", I mean "game of truth" from every different angle to find other valid interpretations than just the "Bad Writing"-mantra...

that being said...I also get tired of these "cultist"-insults that keep popping up all the time. Most IT-lers are reasonable people, and their point of view is just as valid as the other ones, at least at this moment. And on every "side" there are the fanatics that think Bioware spoke to them in their dreams and told them the entire truth about everything...

The answer to all of this of course will only be revealed in the EC, and I already know it. 42. Thank you.

Bad/rushed writing and running out of time before the ending seems to be the most likely reasons. It simply doesn't requier a lot of proof, guess works, assumptions and immagination to fill the blanks, aswell as an untold story to make it feel better.
The simple explanations are usualy right.
Also I don't need bioware to speak to me to recognize a rushed ending. The closest thing to that would be them saying they didn't think we needed more than we got. They actualy thought the ending was enough as it was. I don't know why they would lie about that either.
They still don't want to admit it was bad writing admittedly, they prefer to say they are proud of their art and that the fans wanted more than they expected.
Tbh I havn't thought about it much but Biowares statement there pretty much confirms that the ending we had was the ending they had planned. I think someone mentioned that the ending was in line with what Drew had in mind aswell even though he hadn't played ME3 yet. No source for that though.. can't remember where that was from. Not that important I guess, he wasn't writing for ME3 anyway.

Also imo it's clear the IT applies more the the chatolic church protecting it's views and influence than the people who say the ending was bad, they are more like the people taking a look at the nightsky noticing that the planets are indeed circling the sun.

Heliocentrism model        Vs      Geocentric model

Simple explanations         Vs      complicated explaining, assumptions, guesswork and centralistic elitisms.
Badwriting and rushed ending due to time constraints   Vs     IT 

The Geocentric model had milenia of measurements and observation but that didn't meen it's description of planetary orbits were overly complex to the point where one must wonder why took them so mcuh time to experiment with different ideas to build an easier to follow model. Maybe the "inteligencia" were just too fond of their beliefs to consider other possibilites that were simpler and thus made more sense.

The Geocentric model can still be linked to Creationism and biblical astronomers...
http://en.wikipedia....ern_geocentrism

Heliocentric model with the sun in the middle.
http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Sol_system
Anyway... enough with the comparisons on how and why different ideas emerge, and why people choose to belive different things.

It feels of topic but since you wanted to talk about it I've answered and explained how I see things.