80611 réponses à ce sujet

[masster blaster]

Home ML Mike Gamble said Leviathan is a rogue Reaper, and it's in the EC files of the Leviathan of dis.

[Iconoclaste]

masster blaster wrote...

Was talking about speaking nonsense to unicorn so he can get a head ack and leave.

lol

For a teenager, you are funny, I have to admit that!

[Dam0299]

Home run MF wrote...

Who said Leviathan is a Reaper?

The Leviathan of Dis, A Organic starship believed to have been made nearly a billion years ago. Balak a batarian from one of the mission on the Citadel states that it was in fact a reaper and it indoctrinated a bunch of scientists.

[masster blaster]

Icon I mean it and I will but in an IT way so that he can leave. He has no right to attack byne, who just got here, and I wanted to say " Let me go MB on his ***."

[sonicphoto]

I kinda agree, Chris contradicted himself bigly on that, the DLC won't add to the ending but later says, it will add dialogue and stuff. I believe in IT but the reject ending felt like a way to deny the theory in all honesty.

[Iconoclaste]

masster blaster wrote...

Icon I mean it and I will but in an IT way so that he can leave. He has no right to attack byne, who just got here, and I wanted to say " Let me go MB on his ***."

And I mean it too, you're just too natural. Great quality, you know, it will serve you well in years to come. Don't lose that. Many older people tend to get frustrated as soon as some comment puts one of their "qualities" on the spot, but you just don't care and rush forward like a bull. Sometimes you're hilarious.

[masster blaster]

And we do have evidnce to support IT, but you will only see it as bad writing. As you always have and if you don't believe me. I will go back in part 2 of this thread find what you have told us alreay, and prove that you got your answer already.

[Home run MF]

Dam0299 wrote...

Home run MF wrote...

Who said Leviathan is a Reaper?

The Leviathan of Dis, A Organic starship believed to have been made nearly a billion years ago. Balak a batarian from one of the mission on the Citadel states that it was in fact a reaper and it indoctrinated a bunch of scientists.

It's not the same thing for what I made out of the leaked script Leviathan is a member of the species that created the Reapers not a Reaper.

Modifié par Home run MF, 05 août 2012 - 03:27 .

[I_eat_unicorns]

TJBartlemus wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

Keep in mind that I'm arguing why it's impossible to apply the IT to the series at this point. Some IT supporters may get mad and then go back to the "evidence" of the IT, then tell me I lose credibilty if I can't prove them wrong. It would never work that way as it's not worth going into every single detail and arguing back and forth over it when IT supporters at this point are delusional and will dismiss every claim to contrary to what they want to believe. 

As if Chris' post the other day wasn't enough to show that Bioware is not going to add/change anything to the endings. Ever. That they are done working on the endings and that the ec dlc was the end of the endings. 

www.youtube.com/watch
This video is from the Bioware panel at SDCC 2012. You can see the work they've done to expand on the original endings. Why would any company spend 3 months of time/money/resources to make such endings, then make an ending that goes against that work? Would you make a "false" ending, then expand on that "false" ending to prepare for the "real" ending?

Hoping that the IT will be implemented in the future is both selfish and childish: selfish in the sense that IT supporters don't appreciate the author's work, and would rather have their own ending that goes against Bioware's work. Childish in that you're waiting for an announcement from Bioware that "IT is wrong", when they put a lot of effort to make the ec dlc to clarify the original endings and show their intent of the endings, not tell. That's what writers do. They show, not tell. And why would any writer write a fan-made ending to appease a small minority of people when that fan theory goes against the writers own established work? 

There is also the degree of professionality. Bioware will never say the words "IT was wrong" in the same sentence as it makes them looked upon as unproffessional. Most writers do not dismiss I know some IT supporters will say "Bioware said IT IS a valid ending" which is true, but how do you know if they just said that to appease to everyone as much as possible since at that time, they were in a "public damage control mode" and had enough angry people as it was?

http://www.beyondhog...chosen-one.html 

This fan-theory is from harry potter. It speculates taht neville was actually the chosen one, and that harry was just a cover-up to confuse voldermort. It had a lot of supporters at its time and had lots of "evidence" to back it up. When the 7th book came out, it was shut down. (jk rowling actually turned the theory down in an interview, but I can't find the link)

http://www.cracked.c...than-movie.html 

Here are some more fan theories. Notice how in each section there is the "fan-theory" and "what we got". Same case applies here to the IT. The IT was the "fan-theory", the ec dlc was what we got.
Can you believe in the IT? Sure. Does that make it better than the original endings? For some people, yes.
Is it true? No. We're not getting anything more than the ec dlc, and the IT would make the ec dlc useless. 

If you're still bent on getting "evidence" debunking the IT, then why does Bioware write a message at the end of the game reading: "Commander Shepard has ended the reaper threat"?

Did you even read my posts? In those I have already responded to 1/2 of your post even before you posted it.  No offense, but all a read was BLAH BLAH BLAH OPINION BLAH BLAH BLAH. IT people are surprisingly better listeners than you think, and I am sure what I have written so far doesn't help your opinion of IT'ers or theorists. We actually DO listen and debate details but not because we are delusional. We consider many things literalists point out and we reasonably respond if we haven't been attacked.

Have you even considered that BioWare won't say cause they want speculation on the endings to continue it's play life? If they just went out and said it was right speculation would die and the game would quickly disappear as news. Always remember this...Speculation=hype=news=money 

Why are you even attacking IT? It's not going to prove anything, and your not going to convince people by attacking them. If you want to attack something at least wait for something to provoke you to attack. Really all I have done so far in my post is defense. So maybe I now should go on the attack and go as far as to say that literalists have been disproven. A BioWare mod clearly states that parts of ME3 are not to be taken literally and are up for interpretation. (And that is rock solid evidence there...)

Taken from Taboo-XX from another thread I created:

I don't. The scene with the Catalyst is absolutely ludicrous. You aren't supposed to take everything at face value, the devs have said this.

The endings are symbolic.

You grabs the reigns of Control

You leap into the unknown in Synthesis

You blow **** up in Destroy

It's more a bad implementation of surrealism than it is anything else. And that's why it's AWFUL.

If you actually read my post, you would know that I never said you can stop believing in IT, I only say it's just not true, like fan-theories are. They aren't true. The fact that you dismiss my posts with "opinion opinion blah blah" shows how little capacity you have for others who hold against your own beliefs. Which parts of my posts are opinions? What makes my post "blah blah"? How did you respond to 1/2 of my post before I posted?

Try to form a contstructive argument before raging and yelling at me. 

[TSA_383]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
For some reason people in this thread won't read what I write, they just dismiss everything that goes against his/her beliefs. 

You won't get a debate out of people by launching off with "You're all wrong" and then never really developing your point beyond attacking our intelligence.

But allow me to rise above you on this one and be a little constructive:

We have endings that are intended to be "open to interpretation" - how do you interpret what went on, and why?

[masster blaster]

I act to stop this from happening but it fails in the end, and this could also be my faul Icon. Not fully analzying the state that I am in and just go with my gut, and not my head.

[Iconoclaste]

sonicphoto wrote...

I kinda agree, Chris contradicted himself bigly on that, the DLC won't add to the ending but later says, it will add dialogue and stuff. I believe in IT but the reject ending felt like a way to deny the theory in all honesty.

Like someone said in another post, so what?

The problem arises if you compare endings with each other. Bioware made them on quite different "thematics", and I believe it wouldn't make sense, if one prefers "synthesis" for example, to look into "control" and " destroy" to try to see if he made the "best" choice. So IT goes hand in hand with "destroy", it doesn't have to rely on something "outside" of that "theme", in my sense.

[StElmo]

byne wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

You think that is me angry? No that is frustrated. You have yet to see me angry. The reason I'm frustrated is cause he continues to ignore my posts. Since he does that he either can't argue against my points and/or he is purely trolling. 

He's purely trolling. He looked at this quote and told us we were delusional for claiming Chris contradicted himself:

Chris Priestly wrote...

 I answered this. There will be no more new endings. I used the "quotes" as we consider the Extended Cut the ending, the finale, the stop whatever you want to call it of the ending of Mass Effect 3. We do not plan to make new endings, give more closure to the endings, adding or subtracting to or from the endings, etc. We are done with the endings.

That said, we are working on some very cool downloadable story based single player content. In these DLCs there will certainly be elements that will effect the end of the game. As Mike Gamble already said, depending on what you do in Leviathan there will be new dialog with the Catalyst at the end of the game. These sorts of elements are definitely possible for future DLC as well.

If he really sees no contradiction there, he's either dense or just ignoring things so he can continue to troll, and based on his writing ability, he doesnt seem dense.

Just ignore him and he'll leave.

Dont bother replying to this, I_eat_unicorns, as you may remember from yesterday, I am no longer responding to what you say.

There is no contradiction, it is simply Chris stating that the endings are not going to be changed or added to in any way that will add anything that we are asking for. Instead, it will just add more token exposition, rather then proivide answers on anything substantial. If you can't read what he is trying to say without being cruel, then, I think this thread will be dissapoint for years.

[Lyria]

Leviathan DLC and IT.

Is it possible that Leviathan of Dis DLC was cut from the game, not unlike the Retake Omega mission, and would shed light on the nature of Shepard's indoctrination? After all, we're possibly going to come across the first/prototype reaper. It could be the point in which Shepard becomes more obviously indoctrinated.

I look forward to seeing what will happen.

[Dam0299]

Home run MF wrote...

Dam0299 wrote...

Home run MF wrote...

Who said Leviathan is a Reaper?

The Leviathan of Dis, A Organic starship believed to have been made nearly a billion years ago. Balak a batarian from one of the mission on the Citadel states that it was in fact a reaper and it indoctrinated a bunch of scientists.

It's not the same thing for what I made out of the leaked script Leviathan is a member of the species that created the Reapers not a Reaper.

 It seems that the LOD is in fact a reaper, and its probably just called the leviathan for short.

[StElmo]

sonicphoto wrote...

I kinda agree, Chris contradicted himself bigly on that, the DLC won't add to the ending but later says, it will add dialogue and stuff. I believe in IT but the reject ending felt like a way to deny the theory in all honesty.

He means add anything that will change the tone of the endings, but it will add exposition, which to most people who know about narrative, means very little.

[byne]

StElmo wrote...

byne wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

You think that is me angry? No that is frustrated. You have yet to see me angry. The reason I'm frustrated is cause he continues to ignore my posts. Since he does that he either can't argue against my points and/or he is purely trolling. 

He's purely trolling. He looked at this quote and told us we were delusional for claiming Chris contradicted himself:

Chris Priestly wrote...

 I answered this. There will be no more new endings. I used the "quotes" as we consider the Extended Cut the ending, the finale, the stop whatever you want to call it of the ending of Mass Effect 3. We do not plan to make new endings, give more closure to the endings, adding or subtracting to or from the endings, etc. We are done with the endings.

That said, we are working on some very cool downloadable story based single player content. In these DLCs there will certainly be elements that will effect the end of the game. As Mike Gamble already said, depending on what you do in Leviathan there will be new dialog with the Catalyst at the end of the game. These sorts of elements are definitely possible for future DLC as well.

If he really sees no contradiction there, he's either dense or just ignoring things so he can continue to troll, and based on his writing ability, he doesnt seem dense.

Just ignore him and he'll leave.

Dont bother replying to this, I_eat_unicorns, as you may remember from yesterday, I am no longer responding to what you say.

There is no contradiction, it is simply Chris stating that the endings are not going to be changed or added to in any way that will add anything that we are asking for. Instead, it will just add more token exposition, rather then proivide answers on anything substantial. If you can't read what he is trying to say without being cruel, then, I think this thread will be dissapoint for years.

>no plans on adding to the endings
>will add new dialogue to the endings
>no contradictions

Ok then.

Anyhow, I'm tired as hell. Going to bed now.

[Salient Archer]

You know what; I read over what Priestly said [about the endings being final] and maybe several months ago I would have given a crap and been up in arms. But now, I honestly just don't care.

I still believe Shepard is being indoctrinated; the evidence is there... I mean c'mon the whole Object Rho "we want Shepard alive/Your mind is mine" incident isn't enough?... but regardless I'm far more interested and intrigued by the contradictions and sinister plots that "Catalyst" sprouts out of his mouth.

His words alone are clear evidence that either 1). BioWare wanted us to dig deeper and explore the older games for evidence that contradicts it's claims (which are even more so abundant after the EC) or 2). they [BioWare] have the worst possible writers in the world. And considering I thoroughly felt that everything prior to the endings was fine, I'm more inclined to believe the first option.

[masster blaster]

So I ask everyone this do you play me for the action, or for the storyline it'self?

[I_eat_unicorns]

StElmo wrote...

sonicphoto wrote...

I kinda agree, Chris contradicted himself bigly on that, the DLC won't add to the ending but later says, it will add dialogue and stuff. I believe in IT but the reject ending felt like a way to deny the theory in all honesty.

He means add anything that will change the tone of the endings, but it will add exposition, which to most people who know about narrative, means very little.

Good to see someone can read

[Home run MF]

Dam0299 wrote...

Home run MF wrote...

Dam0299 wrote...

Home run MF wrote...

Who said Leviathan is a Reaper?

The Leviathan of Dis, A Organic starship believed to have been made nearly a billion years ago. Balak a batarian from one of the mission on the Citadel states that it was in fact a reaper and it indoctrinated a bunch of scientists.

It's not the same thing for what I made out of the leaked script Leviathan is a member of the species that created the Reapers not a Reaper.

 It seems that the LOD is in fact a reaper, and its probably just called the leviathan for short.

I know the LOD is a Reaper, I'm saying the LOD and Leviathan are not the same thing.

[TSA_383]

Salient Archer wrote...

You know what; I read over what Priestly said [about the endings being final] and maybe several months ago I would have given a crap and been up in arms. But now, I honestly just don't care.

I still believe Shepard is being indoctrinated; the evidence is there... I mean c'mon the whole Object Rho "we want Shepard alive/Your mind is mine" incident isn't enough?... but regardless I'm far more interested and intrigued by the contradictions and sinister plots that "Catalyst" sprouts out of his mouth.

His words alone are clear evidence that either 1). BioWare wanted us to dig deeper and explore the older games for evidence that contradicts it's claims (which are even more so abundant after the EC) or 2). they [BioWare] have the worst possible writers in the world. And considering I thoroughly felt that everything prior to the endings was fine, I'm more inclined to believe the first option.

Thanks SA - How's that Jet of yours working out by the way? You were looking into it when I bought my speedwing, which has been fantastic 

Also, a quick "How to explain the ending to an agressive troll" guide, using Excel:

protognosis wrote...

Leviathan DLC and IT.

Is it possible that Leviathan of Dis DLC was cut from the game, not unlike the Retake Omega mission, and would shed light on the nature of Shepard's indoctrination? After all, we're possibly going to come across the first/prototype reaper. It could be the point in which Shepard becomes more obviously indoctrinated. 

I look forward to seeing what will happen.

There's no evidence of any pre-existing attempt to have the Leviathan missions as part of the original ME3 storyline. 

[Jadebaby]

Dam0299 wrote...

Home run MF wrote...

Who said Leviathan is a Reaper?

The Leviathan of Dis, A Organic starship believed to have been made nearly a billion years ago. Balak a batarian from one of the mission on the Citadel states that it was in fact a reaper and it indoctrinated a bunch of scientists.

1,000,000,000 BCE

The Leviathan of Dis, a Reaper corpse, comes to rest on the planet Jartar and remains undisturbed for over one billion years.

masster blaster wrote...

So I ask everyone this do you play me for the action, or for the storyline it'self?

storyline in every ME. If i want action I'd play Gears of War, who do it much better anyway.

[masster blaster]

I eat oh I can read and that's just it. Making comments like that it's no wonder why you come back here.

The way I see it if IT is ever proven wrong we will create IT as a noval and if you ever dair pick on us for that then you have lost all sense.

And so what if we believe in IT. So long as we are happy then you should respect IT and move on. You should move on, but you are not. And what if one day IT is no more, then what. Keep telling everyone that does not agree with you that Bioware are bad writers and they suck. Hell no.

Maybe we iters give Bioware to much creadet but at least we respect them unlike some people that call Bioware bad writers and worst.

You need to get your facts trait and try again tommorrow because you are not thinking strait either so

This exchange is over.

[TSA_383]

StElmo wrote...

sonicphoto wrote...

I kinda agree, Chris contradicted himself bigly on that, the DLC won't add to the ending but later says, it will add dialogue and stuff. I believe in IT but the reject ending felt like a way to deny the theory in all honesty.

He means add anything that will change the tone of the endings, but it will add exposition, which to most people who know about narrative, means very little.

Oh good, it's nice to have one of the writers here.
Oh wait, you're not one of the writers? Guess you're just speculating then.

Modifié par TSA_383, 05 août 2012 - 03:40 .