209 réponses à ce sujet

[Tuix]

I wonder why bioware cant say something like " You know guys, IT wasn't our idea but YOU guys made it alive- great job, it was pleassure to read all the things you found and how it "clicks" but now you know the truth"!

[OblivionDawn]

Ok but really now, give it a rest.

It's ok to always have that interpretation, but it's NEVER going to make it to consoles in a official sense, can't you guys keep it in your thread?

[Judas Bock]

Also a point for the epilogues being in Shepard's mind.

In every ending but the Shepard lives one, Shepard's LI puts Shepard's name plaque on the memorial wall.

In the Shepard lives ending, the LI is about to, but then doesn't, and instead it is implied that they go to try and find Shepard.

If it was literal Shepard's LI should act in the same way independently of whether Shepard lives or not.

However, if it's in Shepard's mind it makes sense. If he's dying he imagines that the LI will be able to move on and be okay. But if he's not dying he wouldn't want the LI to give up on him but to go and find him.

[keeveek2]

If IT was true, it wouldn't b e any better than original endings. It would mean that there is NO ending. They promised to close Shepard's story in trilogy long time ago. If IT was true, then it would mean that the only true ending to the game is Shepard taking his breath. It would be just BAD.

[aksoileau]

Judas Bock wrote...

Also a point for the epilogues being in Shepard's mind.

In every ending but the Shepard lives one, Shepard's LI puts Shepard's name plaque on the memorial wall.

In the Shepard lives ending, the LI is about to, but then doesn't, and instead it is implied that they go to try and find Shepard.

If it was literal Shepard's LI should act in the same way independently of whether Shepard lives or not.

However, if it's in Shepard's mind it makes sense. If he's dying he imagines that the LI will be able to move on and be okay. But if he's not dying he wouldn't want the LI to give up on him but to go and find him.

Grasping emergency induction ports.

[Tealjaker94]

kaotician wrote...

XxDarkTimexX wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

It just won't ****ing die will it?

Blame Bioware. They didn't definitively kill it enough with the EC, so it continues to exist.

if they were trying to kill it they would get rid of these plot holes

1. The dreams are still the same, with the affects of indoctriation still there. Why do everytime i get close to the boy he runs off and i hear reaper growls or sounds that reapers make.

2. The three beams that changes reapers are still there and if you look at the galaxy map and the three endings both ec and not ec still show it but its not the local cluster where the choices were made.

3. Why is Sheperd waking up if he is already dead. Also why does destroy ending the only ending that shepard lives.

4. Why does the camera still show the gun shot he got just seconds after anderson dies.

You've been answered on this exact quote multiple times on other threads. What's the matter with you?

The 5 Stages of Grief for ITers
1. Denial-No IT must be true!
2. Anger-Bioware you're stupid for not doing IT!
3. Bargaining- Bioware I will literally pay for IT DLC.
4. Depression- I'm done. I'm leaving BSN and making sure everyone knows by making a thread.
5. Acceptance- Wait a sec... who the **** cares?

[keeveek2]

Judas Bock wrote...


However, if it's in Shepard's mind it makes sense. If he's dying he imagines that the LI will be able to move on and be okay. But if he's not dying he wouldn't want the LI to give up on him but to go and find him.

Yeah, he imagine's that he's dead and sees what happens after he's dead but he doesn't realise that he can't be dead if he sees that things.

MAKES SENSE!

[Joedogg9999]

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

[Judas Bock]

keeveek2 wrote...

You can't kill something that was dead all the time.

The problem with conspiracy theories is that either they say "there is no conspiracy" or "there is a conspiracy" -> they both mean that there is a conspiracy, for the believers.

But that's just the thing. Bioware has never stated that "there is no conspiracy". They have specifically avoided confirming or denying IT. Could it be to keep the IT-ers from goin into rage mode? Sure. But could it not also be to avoid spoiling the big reveal when it is finally revealed to be the truth? Yes, it could.

[Merchant2006]

Oh god give it a rest. I liked the IT but it's been thrown out the window by EC. Just end it already, please.

[Tealjaker94]

Joedogg9999 wrote...

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

Hahahahahaha! The denial and desperation are hilarious!

[Cecilia L]

Joedogg9999 wrote...

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

 +1

[aksoileau]

Joedogg9999 wrote...

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

Except that Hackett confirms to everyone that Shepard made it aboard the Citadel.  If he is on the citadel your theory is dead.  Unless you want to say that Hackett sitting on his ship is a hallucination too.  Any time IT people see evidence of IT being wrong, the word "hallucination" is slapped on there like a cure all bandaid.

[suprhomre]

oh c'mon not this again, the theory has always been a theory. Now please let it rest. We wouldn't now until the next games come out.

[Jeremy Winston]

aksoileau wrote...

Joedogg9999 wrote...

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

Except that Hackett confirms to everyone that Shepard made it aboard the Citadel.  If he is on the citadel your theory is dead.  Unless you want to say that Hackett sitting on his ship is a hallucination too.  Any time IT people see evidence of IT being wrong, the word "hallucination" is slapped on there like a cure all bandaid.

While I haven't made up my own mind about IT, the above statement doesn't track.

If IT is true, then everything after the beam is a hallucination.  Thus the scene with Hackett is also a hallucination.

[aksoileau]

Jeremy Winston wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Joedogg9999 wrote...

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

Except that Hackett confirms to everyone that Shepard made it aboard the Citadel.  If he is on the citadel your theory is dead.  Unless you want to say that Hackett sitting on his ship is a hallucination too.  Any time IT people see evidence of IT being wrong, the word "hallucination" is slapped on there like a cure all bandaid.

While I haven't made up my own mind about IT, the above statement doesn't track.

If IT is true, then everything after the beam is a hallucination.  Thus the scene with Hackett is also a hallucination.

No, showing Hackett stating Shepard made it to the citadel is for the *player* to see, not for Shepard to hallucinate.  Hackett stating Shepard was there was to clarify the Coates statement of saying "no one made it."

[keeveek2]

I'm not here to defend the IT, but Hackett says that "someone" made it to the Citadel, not the Shepard himself.

[Jeremy Winston]

aksoileau wrote...

Jeremy Winston wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Joedogg9999 wrote...

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

Except that Hackett confirms to everyone that Shepard made it aboard the Citadel.  If he is on the citadel your theory is dead.  Unless you want to say that Hackett sitting on his ship is a hallucination too.  Any time IT people see evidence of IT being wrong, the word "hallucination" is slapped on there like a cure all bandaid.

While I haven't made up my own mind about IT, the above statement doesn't track.

If IT is true, then everything after the beam is a hallucination.  Thus the scene with Hackett is also a hallucination.

No, showing Hackett stating Shepard made it to the citadel is for the *player* to see, not for Shepard to hallucinate.  Hackett stating Shepard was there was to clarify the Coates statement of saying "no one made it."

You only say that because you don't believe in IT.

Why would that be for the player to see?  We already SAW him get to the Citadel.

[aksoileau]

keeveek2 wrote...

I'm not here to defend the IT, but Hackett says that "someone" made it to the Citadel, not the Shepard himself.

But he also goes "he did it."  Does it say "she did it" if you're femshep?  If it does Hackett is speaking about Shepard.

[aksoileau]

Jeremy Winston wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Jeremy Winston wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Joedogg9999 wrote...

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

Except that Hackett confirms to everyone that Shepard made it aboard the Citadel.  If he is on the citadel your theory is dead.  Unless you want to say that Hackett sitting on his ship is a hallucination too.  Any time IT people see evidence of IT being wrong, the word "hallucination" is slapped on there like a cure all bandaid.

While I haven't made up my own mind about IT, the above statement doesn't track.

If IT is true, then everything after the beam is a hallucination.  Thus the scene with Hackett is also a hallucination.

No, showing Hackett stating Shepard made it to the citadel is for the *player* to see, not for Shepard to hallucinate.  Hackett stating Shepard was there was to clarify the Coates statement of saying "no one made it."

You only say that because you don't believe in IT.

Why would that be for the player to see?  We already SAW him get to the Citadel.

You went through the beam in character through Shepard's movements.  Showing Hackett in his ship is not something that Shepard the character can see.  Its happening outside of the box.  Its for the player to see, not the character of Shepard.

[lerpumpkinzero]

Jeremy Winston wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Jeremy Winston wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Joedogg9999 wrote...

I really cant see how anyone xan say ec kills it. If anything it strengthens it. All of the evidence is still there and then some extra evidence

Except that Hackett confirms to everyone that Shepard made it aboard the Citadel.  If he is on the citadel your theory is dead.  Unless you want to say that Hackett sitting on his ship is a hallucination too.  Any time IT people see evidence of IT being wrong, the word "hallucination" is slapped on there like a cure all bandaid.

While I haven't made up my own mind about IT, the above statement doesn't track.

If IT is true, then everything after the beam is a hallucination.  Thus the scene with Hackett is also a hallucination.

No, showing Hackett stating Shepard made it to the citadel is for the *player* to see, not for Shepard to hallucinate.  Hackett stating Shepard was there was to clarify the Coates statement of saying "no one made it."

You only say that because you don't believe in IT.

Why would that be for the player to see?  We already SAW him get to the Citadel.

Because people were pointing out that Hackett shouldn't know Shepard is on the Citadel, and thus, should not try to reach Shepard at the console because he doesn't know anyone made it. Showing Hackett get a report that someone made it explains how he knows to try and contact someone at the console. He asks for Shepard because he's probably guessing that if anyone made it, it has to be Shepard.

[Megachaz]

Cecilia L wrote...

XxDarkTimexX wrote...

yes i saw it but it still doesn't answer why at the end of the EC ending they show shepard waking up, if i were to put that in real time that would be 1-9 months before he woke up that still doesn't make sense that he wakes up after, between1 month to 9 months he wakes up again. WHAT!!!!

Very interesting point!

NO IT'S NOT!  You ITers are so dense.  It is not chronological!

[Dusen]

I used to be a big believer in the possibility of the IT, and the catalyst's Harbinger-like voice got me the most excited when I chose the reject ending. . . only to be left with insult to injury and no indoctrination. Frankly, it was a huge missed opportunity for Bioware that IMO could have saved the franchise for me. . . we'll see what the SP DLC's hold in the future (I in no way believe Bioware that they are done with ending DLC's, they've lied about so much it's hard to take anything they say as truth anymore) but I do believe that IT is, sadly, totally debunked at this point.

[OnelShot]

So what was the sound from then?

[Mako SOLDIER]

iAFKinMassEffect3 wrote...

babachewie wrote...

iAFKinMassEffect3 wrote...

babachewie wrote...

hahaha! Keep f*ckin that chicken.

Just because you aren't intellect, don't be rude.

Re-read your sentence out loud and get back to me on intellect.

Just because you aren't intellect, don't be rude.

I'm going to point this out in as polite a way as possible, because I'm assuming that English isn't your first language. You can not be intellect. That's not the way it is written or spoken. Intellect is a noun, it's a thing. You can have intellect or intelligence and you can be intellectual or intelligent. 

Now, language aside, try not to claim that other people are unintelligent just because they don't agree with you. Doing so in the same sentence as telling them not to be rude is hypocritical. Also, there are people who fully understand the indoctrination theory and people who don't fully grasp it on both sides of the argument. By all means debate the issue, but the moment you start using personal insults as part of your argument you harm the reputation of the group you are trying to defend.