80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Davik Kang]

Could someone post a link to IT Con thread please? Cos my interpretation of the ending has been said to be very similar, so I'd like to read what those guys said.

[401 Kill]

Restrider wrote...

Lol, I didn't see that coming.
Someone must be pissed about our responses in the Control Support Thread.
Edit: Lol, I just realized that this is a zombie thread someone reactivated.

It's okay, no rational person would listen to that.

[MegumiAzusa]

Restrider wrote...

Usually he edits the OP and adds new stuff, but the name of the thread was always:
"The Indoctrination Theory: A logical look at the Catalyst Con"
Now it is:
"The Deception Theory: A logical look at the Catalyst Con"
I think that had to happen sooner or later since both theories became too different lately.

Hmm last time I read the op of that thread and it was in no way logical but based on morality.

[Restrider]

Davik Kang wrote...

Could someone post a link to IT Con thread please? Cos my interpretation of the ending has been said to be very similar, so I'd like to read what those guys said.

IT Con does not exist anymore. There is only one Indoctrination Theory left.
IT Con is now Deception Theory.
TTG's posts are well written and structured I have to give him that, but as I pointed out earlier, his theory is flawed.
And to reason/discuss with TTG is exhausting sometimes.

Modifié par Restrider, 30 septembre 2012 - 02:45 .

[plfranke]

That person is the one I was telling you guys about who believes that all human beings are really being controlled. Doesn't surprise me they would make another stupid thread.

[Eryri]

Restrider wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...

Could someone post a link to IT Con thread please? Cos my interpretation of the ending has been said to be very similar, so I'd like to read what those guys said.

IT Con does not exist anymore. There is only one Indoctrination Theory left.
IT Con is now Deception Theory.
TTG's posts are well written and structured I have to give him that, but as I pointed out earlier, his theory is flawed.
And to reason/discuss with TTG is exhausting sometimes.

His theory would make a bit more sense if we assume the Crucible to be a Leviathan design, and the star brat to be a Leviathan, rather than a Reaper, projection. I have a little pet theory that the Levis designed the Crucible with 3 stages of complexity as they couldn't be sure of the level of development of a particular cycle. So they made destroy as the basic option for a thicko cycle, control for a slightly more developed one which would enable them to dominate the Reapers through a thrall, and finally synthesis to allow them to dominate everyone, organic and synthetic alike through green magic / nanites or whatever.

That would explain why they would risk showing Shepard the destroy option - it wouldn't harm Leviathans, although its not their preferred option as they lose the chance to enslave the Reapers as their personal enforcers.

I know Twighlight's argument is that the Reapers have to offer Shep the option to kill them to maintain believability, but it just seems like too much of a risk - they're not that stupid or reckless.

However it still wouldn't account for Shepard surviving the massive red fireball of death at the centre of the Citadel, if he actually is there and not in a coma in London - which is why I prefer the complete hallucination version.

Modifié par Eryri, 30 septembre 2012 - 03:14 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

Eryri wrote...

*snip*

... control for a slightly more developed one which would enable them to dominate the Reapers through a thrall, and finally synthesis to allow them to dominate everyone, organic and synthetic alike through green magic / nanites or whatever.

Yeah, that is the theory from the "I think I have figured it out" thread.

The main problem with that is, when Shep picks control, (s)he dies. His mind is 'preserved' in an AI, but it ceases to be organic. Leviathans wouldn't be able to control the Shepard AI.

I don't believe this could actually be the case, especially because Leviathan is optional content.

Would make no sense for the game to have a plot that revolves around beings that are only mentioned in passing at the very end of the game, without knowing anything else about them.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 30 septembre 2012 - 03:17 .

[Dwailing]

401 Kill wrote...

Restrider wrote...

Lol, I didn't see that coming.
Someone must be pissed about our responses in the Control Support Thread.
Edit: Lol, I just realized that this is a zombie thread someone reactivated.

It's okay, no rational person would listen to that.

That's Seival for you.  He almost makes waldstr18 look rational.  Almost.

[estebanus]

plfranke wrote...

That person is the one I was telling you guys about who believes that all human beings are really being controlled. Doesn't surprise me they would make another stupid thread.

You mean Seival?

EDIT: Lol, you should try looking at a few other of his threads. It seems my brother had a helluva time trolling that guy.

Modifié par estebanus, 30 septembre 2012 - 03:29 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

I have been posting in Seival's control support thread since yesterday. Not to troll, just to challenge his views.

[Davik Kang]

Restrider wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...

Could someone post a link to IT Con thread please? Cos my interpretation of the ending has been said to be very similar, so I'd like to read what those guys said.

IT Con does not exist anymore. There is only one Indoctrination Theory left.
IT Con is now Deception Theory.
TTG's posts are well written and structured I have to give him that, but as I pointed out earlier, his theory is flawed.
And to reason/discuss with TTG is exhausting sometimes.

Not true.  My interpretation is massively dependent on indoctrination, but doesn't fit with IT at all.

I doubt I'm the only one either.

EDIT: ah thanks for the links btw!!

Modifié par Davik Kang, 30 septembre 2012 - 03:31 .

[Eryri]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Eryri wrote...

*snip*

... control for a slightly more developed one which would enable them to dominate the Reapers through a thrall, and finally synthesis to allow them to dominate everyone, organic and synthetic alike through green magic / nanites or whatever.

Yeah, that is the theory from the "I think I have figured it out" thread.

The main problem with that is, when Shep picks control, (s)he dies. His mind is 'preserved' in an AI, but it ceases to be organic. Leviathans wouldn't be able to control the Shepard AI.

I don't believe this could actually be the case, especially because Leviathan is optional content.

Would make no sense for the game to have a plot that revolves around beings that are only mentioned in passing at the very end of the game, without knowing anything else about them.

Yes those are good counter arguments too. I didn't realise someone else had their own thread on the idea.

I prefer the total hallucination theory anyway - I don't want synthesis to be real in any way, shape or form in the ME universe - it's just too unbelievable and immersion breaking.

[plfranke]

There was a time when I cared about doing stuff like that, but sometimes there is no room for debate it's just right and wrong. This is one of those times and arguing with someone who is clearly wrong with no wishes to enlighten themselves is just a waste of time.

[Restrider]

Davik Kang wrote...

Restrider wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...

Could someone post a link to IT Con thread please? Cos my interpretation of the ending has been said to be very similar, so I'd like to read what those guys said.

IT Con does not exist anymore. There is only one Indoctrination Theory left.
IT Con is now Deception Theory.
TTG's posts are well written and structured I have to give him that, but as I pointed out earlier, his theory is flawed.
And to reason/discuss with TTG is exhausting sometimes.

Not true.  My interpretation is massively dependent on indoctrination, but doesn't fit with IT at all.

I doubt I'm the only one either.

EDIT: ah thanks for the links btw!!

Yeah, I was more refering to the threads known on this forums. Of course there are several sub-theories and interpretations.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Davik Kang wrote...

Not true.  My interpretation is massively dependent on indoctrination, but doesn't fit with IT at all.

I doubt I'm the only one either.

The problem with your interpretation is the breath scene.

Shepard could never survive at the heart of that explosion. The arms of the Citadel are 45 kilometers long, the explosion, by comparison, is at least 10 kilometers in diameter. Remember, Shep's armour is already gone before that blast.



Shepard could never survive re-entry into Earth's atmosphere, with no helmet and a charred armour without any shields. It's just not possible.

Concrete on the citadel? Really?
Mako in the background? On the Citadel? Really?
Wind? On the Citadel? Really?



I can't see anything in that but a flipped Mako on its back.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 30 septembre 2012 - 03:43 .

[Davik Kang]

Restrider wrote...
Yeah, I was more refering to the threads known on this forums. Of course there are several sub-theories and interpretations.

Ah yeah sorry, now you say it, it's kind of obvious, whoops :innocent:

Modifié par Davik Kang, 30 septembre 2012 - 03:42 .

[Davik Kang]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...
The problem with your interpretation is the breath scene.

There are loads of problems with my interpretation, and the breath scene is the biggest, absolutely.  It definitely looks like Shep wakes up on Earth to me, and for now, I have no logical answer.

[masster blaster]

Good morning everyone, what have I missed, and who is ready to go to the Synthesis Thread? We won't Troll, but challenge them to see what they can use to back it up. Since most of the time we are the ones who have to back up IT most of the time.

[szkasypcze]

I find myself an open minded person who is eager to analyse other people's opinions and arguments rather than rejecting them just because they are not mine. But I can't understand, though I'm trying really, really hard, those who follow so blindly Bioware's logic given in the endings. They just don't fit. The endings as they are now are a hoax, a deception and not real. There are so many unexplainable, weird non-selfsufficient elements that you have to be blind, stupid or bad-willed not to see them. Just one simple example out of dozens: the freaking explosion or the Harb's beam. Shepard could not survive them. There is no freaking way. But noooooooo. IT opposers somehow skip this cricial element and not talk about it. WTF??? Has this forum reached so low level of intelligence??

[masster blaster]

Szkasypcze that is why am an asking people to challenge IT, and I will be keeping record of how many times they will use the same answers they always use, and you know what I am talking about.

[Dendio1]

masster blaster wrote...

Szkasypcze that is why am an asking people to challenge IT, and I will be keeping record of how many times they will use the same answers they always use, and you know what I am talking about.

Im open minded as well, but it seems there are certain pieces of speculation that many in this thread refuse to reconsider, even hypothetically.

Still you guys have interesting vids and are not mindlessly bashing the game, so you get respect for that.

[masster blaster]

Thanks Dendio, and like I said " To find out were we are strong at, and were we are weak at, so we can make it our streanth.

[Davik Kang]

szkasypcze wrote...

I find myself an open minded person who is eager to analyse other people's opinions and arguments rather than rejecting them just because they are not mine. ..

IT opposers somehow skip this cricial element and not talk about it. WTF??? Has this forum reached so low level of intelligence??

I don't see many people in this thread skipping anything.  I've been talking with these guys over the last few days, even though I don't agree with everything they claim, because they're basically very reasonable and always have valid points, and address counter-arguments logically.  Where is the "low intelligence"?  That just seems like a random insult.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 30 septembre 2012 - 04:46 .

[masster blaster]

King it deepends on where you are on the forums, and what there arguments are to.

[Davik Kang]

masster blaster wrote...

King it deepends on where you are on the forums, and what there arguments are to.

Sorry I meant thread.  I got the impression that the previous poster was specifically attacking posters in this thread.

EDIT: edited 

Modifié par Davik Kang, 30 septembre 2012 - 04:46 .