225 réponses à ce sujet

[Fauxnormal]

wantedman dan wrote...

Fauxnormal wrote...

The world's tiniest violin, let me play it for you.

Can't even come up with a coherent insult, now? Goodness. Logical fallacies seem to take their rather malicious toll rather quickly and severely with you.

Oh, you are cute. Clearly that delusion doesn't just extend to a video game.

[blueumi]

it's valid because Chris Priestly said so in the thread that was closed

[wantedman dan]

Fauxnormal wrote...

Oh, you are cute. Clearly that delusion doesn't just extend to a video game.

Okay. Running the risk that I'm flamebaiting again, I'll just leave you to your own devices.

Have fun, sweetheart.

[Haiyato]

I don't think the ending was suppose to be canon. IT is a valid ending as any others ending. Its pretty much use your own head canon. I cannot disprove IT, as there is too much information and events throughout game and story to suggest otherwise. Its just not my ending, though it would be an interesting ending to head canon.

[Fauxnormal]

blueumi wrote...

it's valid because Chris Priestly said so in the thread that was closed

it's called 'pandering'

It makes sure you don't all rage quit because he's laughing at you.

[WandySilva]

OP, Bioware says the endings are ambiguous, and IT is an interpretation of the endings. Why does an interpretation of an ambiguous ending bug you? Are you attacking its supporters because you think it might be right? Are you just opposed to diversity of thought?

[wantedman dan]

Haiyato wrote...

I don't think the ending was suppose to be canon. IT is a valid ending as any others ending. Its pretty much use your own head canon. I cannot disprove IT, as there is too much information and events throughout game and story to suggest otherwise. Its just not my ending, though it would be an interesting ending to head canon.

That's what's so disturbing about having a purposefully ambiguous ending to such a trilogy.

[RavenEyry]

It's a 'valid' form of the ending because Chris Priestly say's it is.

[legaldinho]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

 Would any writer make a "false" ending, then expand on that "false" ending, to make the "real" ending?

Where you go wrong is to assume indoctrination is a false ending. Maybe the average age of the bsn forums is on the low side, but y'all need to watch totall recall- quick the arnie version before the new one ruins everything.

[DirtyPhoenix]

TSA_383 wrote...

Because the Leviathan DLC is finished and due out very shortly, and a bunch of stuff from it got leaked which is quite interesting.

Its finished already?

[Fauxnormal]

WandySilva wrote...

OP, Bioware says the endings are ambiguous, and IT is an interpretation of the endings. Why does an interpretation of an ambiguous ending bug you? Are you attacking its supporters because you think it might be right? Are you just opposed to diversity of thought?

No. I'm opposed to a bunch of delusional nits running around shoving their inane, frankly idiotic opinion everywhere and trying to force everyone to agree with them.

Fire with fire.

[legaldinho]

are you 12?

[Fauxnormal]

Are you?

[TSA_383]

pirate1802 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Because the Leviathan DLC is finished and due out very shortly, and a bunch of stuff from it got leaked which is quite interesting.

Its finished already?

What d'you think the development team have been doing for the last 4 months?

Working on slides for the EC at a rate of 1 per person per quarter?

TSA_383 wrote...

I've not been following this thread, so stop me if this has already been pointed out.

We know Leviathan is the SP DLC they've been working on (given the leaks, the underwater screen at SDCC etc) right?

Well, it might be finished already:

From Chris Priestly on the 18th of July:

After I get to the office I read and respond to all the emails that came
though since I left work the day before. Emails happen throughout the
day along with IMs, drop by meetings, etc

I usually have meetings during the day that take up time. I always have a
chat window open with Jessica (she works in our Los Angeles studio and I
am in Edmonton) so we can talk about things.

I read through the BioWare Social Network threads, answering PMs,
working with moderators, replying in threads, enforcing the rules, etc

Jessica and I are currently planning our convention plans, so we send emails to vendors and partners while we get our plans set.

If the game is ready, I play through upcoming content (I am playing through the next SP DLC for example)

And I drink a lot of coffee.

[Applepie_Svk]

What if endings wasn´t about using Crucible but about Reapers trying to stop it from happening ?

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

IT is still neither valid nor incorrect because BioWare doesn't want to tread on anyone's head canon. One BW person says valid, another says no. Do they validate parking?

[ShepnTali]

WandySilva wrote...

OP, Bioware says the endings are ambiguous, and IT is an interpretation of the endings. Why does an interpretation of an ambiguous ending bug you? Are you attacking its supporters because you think it might be right? Are you just opposed to diversity of thought?

Paranoia?

[Alamar2078]

[IMHO] The reason that IT won't die is simply because that folks that don't like the Catalyst twist really do think a "dream" is better than the endings we got involving StarBrat.

There are still a few nuggets of IT that B/W added just to keep things going like Harby's garbled voice [Serve Us???] Having StarBrat speak in the Reaper voice didn't help [refusal]. Having Shep in concrete & rebar instead of "more citadel looking materials" didn't help either.

Really IT is still around because B/W doesn't want to squash it. BW seems to WANT these sorts of threads & discussions going on ...

YMMV.

[I_eat_unicorns]

ShepnTali wrote...

WandySilva wrote...

OP, Bioware says the endings are ambiguous, and IT is an interpretation of the endings. Why does an interpretation of an ambiguous ending bug you? Are you attacking its supporters because you think it might be right? Are you just opposed to diversity of thought?

Paranoia?

There's another thread that explains how saying "we made the endings ambiguous on purpose" is a cop out, that  it's easy for Bioware to say that to avoid admitting that the endings were bad. 

[ShepnTali]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

ShepnTali wrote...

WandySilva wrote...

OP, Bioware says the endings are ambiguous, and IT is an interpretation of the endings. Why does an interpretation of an ambiguous ending bug you? Are you attacking its supporters because you think it might be right? Are you just opposed to diversity of thought?

Paranoia?

There's another thread that explains how saying "we made the endings ambiguous on purpose" is a cop out, that  it's easy for Bioware to say that to avoid admitting that the endings were bad. 

I know this. Intended or not, we got ambiguity.

Modifié par ShepnTali, 20 juillet 2012 - 07:06 .

[Soultaker08]

After nearly 4 months of "IT IS REAL END, ANY OTHER WAY IS WRONG"-Trolls, when I , as a non IT-believer thought "wow its over now, no more rage discussions", now SUDDENLY IT is not Biowares intention, but a interpretation and we all should leave anyone alone with his interpretation.

The Intention of IT was to wait for a big reveal -> didnt happen

To hide now behind a "Interpretation", after great parts of the IT-cultists attacked anyone who had an other opinion before EC i find this insulting, really

[Samtheman63]

**** thread

[LadyMarisa]

To answer the thread title question only, because The endings are so open to player interpretation (according to staff comments) that anything we think up is as valid as anything anyone else comes up with for their own endings. They don't want to tell players how things do or do not turn out beyond a certain point. So if ITers think that's what is behind their games/playthroughs/endings, the devs have said that's ok too.