Hackulator wrote...
TheJiveDJ wrote...
Hackulator wrote...
There isn't enough concrete knowledge to know whats going on. There ARE unquestionable holes in whats going on, not necessarily things that invalidate the ending, but things that are just not explained. Therefore, the only option is to attempt to hypothesize different scenarios, and then checking them against what things we DO know to see if we can disprove them or show that they are incredibly unlikely. I put it to you all that nobody has managed to do so with my concept, and that it also fits in with basically all aspects of the EC.
Burden of proof is on you to prove your claims, not the other way around. Also, it's impossible to prove your claims as they are wild conjecture and nothing more. Those parts of the Mass Effect story/universe have not even been written yet (to our knowledge).
The burden of proof is on me for a real world theory. That is because, in the real world, all the evidence is out there. The evidence exists, so you must find it. However, in a fictional world where things have gone unsaid. Therefore, the evidence does NOT exist and all we can do is attempt to interpret what data we are given and build some sort of logical framework. I have built a framework which fits all currently available data, however there is no possibility of "proof" as the data simply DOES NOT EXIST.
This is the difference between a court case or scientific proof and literary interpretation.
Um dude, there is a difference between literary interpretation (e.g. I think Julius Caesar meant X when he said X line) and writing in entirely new plot points to fit your theory (e.g. I think Julius Caesar meant X when he said X line because he was abused as a child). That is the realm of fan-fiction, not literary interpretation.
Again, this is why we are using concepts and ideas which have already been written or shown to be true in the Mass Effect universe. Your ideas cannot be proven true unless BioWare writes something explicitly referring to your claims. Your ideas are good for a fan fiction but that's about it. If you want to argue your ideas about the ending then your arguments must remain cemented in established lore and plot points, not wild conjecture.
Example: I think the Star Child was actually created by a time traveling Michael Jackson 5 billion years ago. He moonwalked his way up to the first two warring races and said, "uh HEE HEE heeeee, shamoonneee guys I think I found a solution to your organic/synthetic problem!"
How can I prove that? Well, I can't. BioWare COULD (theoretically) come out of left field and say this is how it happened, just as much as they could say that the first reapers were a race of butt scratching monkeys. The point is that it's irrelevant to use any of this as a valid argument because it has nothing to do with Mass Effect lore unless BioWare says it does.
This means that we should avoid making up entirely new plot points of Mass Effect's story that conveniently fit our theories (what you are doing) and stay with what we know so far. It's pretty simple really.
Modifié par TheJiveDJ, 03 juillet 2012 - 01:30 .
Retour en haut
