80611 réponses à ce sujet

[MegumiAzusa]

BleedingUranium wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Why do people ignore EDI calling the Collectors synthesis in ME2?

Why do people ignore the difference between opt out and the other endings which IT as of now cannot explain?

Refuse? Bill would suggest it's because you've been beaten into inaction/tricked into not using the crucible.

She's specifically talking about the star gazer scene being different, thinking it disproves IT.

The star gazer scene is not part of the narrative, it's a non-canon, fourth wall-breaking message to the player, nothing more. It's different in Refuse because it would be highly suspicious otherwise. And we've always viewed the scene like this, why would EC change that view?

You BELIEVE it to be that. That is not scientific.

[RavenEyry]

smokingotter1 wrote...
I wasn't just complaining just about me but how trolls in general are starting to dominate the discussion here. Seems like we should rename this forum from "Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark III!" to "Hanar and friends"

Sounds like a comedy actually.

It certainly can be hilarious to watch at times. Just a pity when there's actually something worth talking about getting ignored.

[BleedingUranium]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Why do people ignore EDI calling the Collectors synthesis in ME2?

Why do people ignore the difference between opt out and the other endings which IT as of now cannot explain?

Refuse? Bill would suggest it's because you've been beaten into inaction/tricked into not using the crucible.

She's specifically talking about the star gazer scene being different, thinking it disproves IT.

The star gazer scene is not part of the narrative, it's a non-canon, fourth wall-breaking message to the player, nothing more. It's different in Refuse because it would be highly suspicious otherwise. And we've always viewed the scene like this, why would EC change that view?

You BELIEVE it to be that. That is not scientific.

Do the terms symbolism and metaphor mean nothing to you?

[hukbum]

RavenEyry wrote...

smokingotter1 wrote...
I wasn't just complaining just about me but how trolls in general are starting to dominate the discussion here. Seems like we should rename this forum from "Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark III!" to "Hanar and friends"

Sounds like a comedy actually.

It certainly can be hilarious to watch at times. Just a pity when there's actually something worth talking about getting ignored.

Sad but true ...

[The Heretic of Time]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Laecraft....that's your opinion. And indoctrination is one of the best parts of Mass Effect, why shouldn't it be used?

(laughs)

Indoctrination one of he best parts of Mass Effect? Ow please. Indoctrination has totally become a cop-out in ME3. It's always used as a weak excuse to turn unliked characters such as Udina into badguys so the Paragon kiddies can metaphorically drop their loads on them.

Indoctrination is absolutely a shallow cop-out that turns characters with potential and interesting motivations into dumb reaper slaves.

Indoctrination would have been awesome if character we love also became indoctrinated villains. Except this doesn't happen. Only characters that were already hated by the Paragon kiddies became indoctrinated. It's totally a cop-out, a horrible horrible cop-out.


If BioWare would add a DLC where your LI becomes indoctrinated and turns against you and then you have to kill/him her, then  we'll talk about how awesome indoctrination is. Until then, indoctrination is and remains a cheap cop-out.

[demersel]

It amuses me, how people claiming ME3 to be badly written, explain shepard's survival in the breath scene via clinging to ingame lore things such as quantum shilding and such. It only proves that 1- they are not consistent, 2 - they suck at reading.

[dorktainian]

OK thinking on the way home from work (listening to SSSS by VCMG) i was trying to get it all together in my head. I got thinking....at the beginning of the game....

Shep is seeing things. Even more so after the reaper blows the commitee to hell.

So my guess is the kid at the beginning is the part of shepards mind that still retains free will. it is running away from indoctrination. shepard finds the kid in the vent. the kid tells shepard he can't help him. imo this is a suggestion that shepard is already undergoing indoctrination and cannot help himself. The kid disappears (he was never there) and boards the shuttle where he dies. This signifies the impending death of shepards free will.

The dream sequences are a progression of this. The Kid is shepards free will. It is hiding from you. You are indoctrination. You chase him and eventually corner him - where he catches fire....in the final one you both catch fire. signifying the end of shepards free will and his fall to reaper indoctrination.

[RavenEyry]

MegumiAzusa wrote...
You BELIEVE it to be that. That is not scientific.

The funny thing about a thread focused on speculating is you shouldn't have to put 'this is just speculation' at the start of every post. You're acting like someone who must explain the joke after every line in a comedy.

[spotlessvoid]

Otter....yeah. If this thread could just ignore all of them. Megumi's antagonism aside, she at least believes what she says, but the rest? Pure trolls. Best to just not respond but can't seem to get many on board with it.

[AresKeith]

paxxton wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

@paxxton I also heard that Thane's ME2 writer actually had a treatment for his disease for ME3

This is starting to sound like ME3 was going to be an opportunity to desperately close all the threads. Just to finally finish the story.

Thane would probably still die for some players

[MegumiAzusa]

BleedingUranium wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Why do people ignore EDI calling the Collectors synthesis in ME2?

Why do people ignore the difference between opt out and the other endings which IT as of now cannot explain?

Refuse? Bill would suggest it's because you've been beaten into inaction/tricked into not using the crucible.

She's specifically talking about the star gazer scene being different, thinking it disproves IT.

The star gazer scene is not part of the narrative, it's a non-canon, fourth wall-breaking message to the player, nothing more. It's different in Refuse because it would be highly suspicious otherwise. And we've always viewed the scene like this, why would EC change that view?

You BELIEVE it to be that. That is not scientific.

Do the terms symbolism and metaphor mean nothing to you?

Right, everything that doesn't make sense for IT is actually a symbol and metaphor for something completely different. Does the term "multiple layers" mean nothing to you? A scene isn't restricted to convey only one message, but you are easy to ignore the messages that tell you "you don't make any sense".

[demersel]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

smokingotter1 wrote...
I wasn't just complaining just about me but how trolls in general are starting to dominate the discussion here. Seems like we should rename this forum from "Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark III!" to "Hanar and friends"

Sounds like a comedy actually.

This winter on BSN, it's Hanar and Friends!

They'll be here all week, folks! 

[umadcommander]

anyone want to talk about the upcoming DLC? no? nobody?

[The Heretic of Time]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

hukbum wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Why do people here keep comparing the Synthesis ending with the reapers turning organics into goo? IT'S NOT THE SAME THING!

So what does Shep have to do to make it happen?
Spend some fingernail, or get gooed?

Does it matter? Synthesis still isn't the same thing as reaperfication, which we can clearly see in the Synthesis epilogue.

You can't counter IT with stuff that happens between the beam run and the breath scene.

That goes both ways. You can't use IT to counter what happens in the epilogues, because in the IT the epilogues don't happen. You can't use IT logic on the literal epilogues.

I think I understand you intention, but what you're saying doesn't make any sense.

Except it does. Synthesis doesn't happen if the IT is true. Therefor you can't argue what Synthesis is or isn't from an IT perspective, as in your IT reality, Synthesis never happened.

Synthesis can only be argued about from a literal perspective. And from a literal perspective we can clearly see Synthesis is totally not the same as reaperfication.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

BleedingUranium wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

Why do people ignore EDI calling the Collectors synthesis in ME2?

Why do people ignore the difference between opt out and the other endings which IT as of now cannot explain?

Refuse? Bill would suggest it's because you've been beaten into inaction/tricked into not using the crucible.

She's specifically talking about the star gazer scene being different, thinking it disproves IT.

The star gazer scene is not part of the narrative, it's a non-canon, fourth wall-breaking message to the player, nothing more. It's different in Refuse because it would be highly suspicious otherwise. And we've always viewed the scene like this, why would EC change that view?

You BELIEVE it to be that. That is not scientific.

Do the terms symbolism and metaphor mean nothing to you?

Symbolism: the practice of representing things by symbols, or of investing things with a symbolic meaning or character.

Metaphor: a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblence.

[RavenEyry]

umadcommander wrote...

anyone want to talk about the upcoming DLC? no? nobody?

Being optimistic about the DLC was what started this whole mud slinging competition.

[The Heretic of Time]

umadcommander wrote...

anyone want to talk about the upcoming DLC? no? nobody?

There is nothing to talk about friend. Just be patient and wait until BioWare reveals more about it.

[MegumiAzusa]

demersel wrote...

It amuses me, how people claiming ME3 to be badly written, explain shepard's survival in the breath scene via clinging to ingame lore things such as quantum shilding and such. It only proves that 1- they are not consistent, 2 - they suck at reading.

It amuses me you think Hanar and me are the same people.

[paxxton]

In the Literal sense Synthesis is not gooification. But if you viewed the ending figuratively, you could put an equals sign between them.

[MaximizedAction]

RavenEyry wrote...

umadcommander wrote...

anyone want to talk about the upcoming DLC? no? nobody?

Being optimistic about the DLC was what started this whole mud slinging competition.

Some users just want to watch the hopes burn.

[smokingotter1]

umadcommander wrote...

anyone want to talk about the upcoming DLC? no? nobody?

They seem to be putting a lot of resources into this next one. Some of the comments on the IGN article on it were basically "if we know how the story ends what's the point of DLC?"

If IT is true there might be a very good reason to get this one. The whole idea of my modular theory of each DLC adding to the ending was that it would give people extra incentive to try the DLC to see how it affects the ending.

Omega was a major blow to that idea since nothing changed in the end. I'm hoping this will be the big reveal.

[umadcommander]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

umadcommander wrote...

anyone want to talk about the upcoming DLC? no? nobody?

There is nothing to talk about friend. Just be patient and wait until BioWare reveals more about it.

have you never heard of

[demersel]

umadcommander wrote...

anyone want to talk about the upcoming DLC? no? nobody?

Let's talk. You're on. 

I think what this game lacks is the attack and combat inside the normandy itself. 

[BleedingUranium]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

hukbum wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Why do people here keep comparing the Synthesis ending with the reapers turning organics into goo? IT'S NOT THE SAME THING!

So what does Shep have to do to make it happen?
Spend some fingernail, or get gooed?

Does it matter? Synthesis still isn't the same thing as reaperfication, which we can clearly see in the Synthesis epilogue.

You can't counter IT with stuff that happens between the beam run and the breath scene.

That goes both ways. You can't use IT to counter what happens in the epilogues, because in the IT the epilogues don't happen. You can't use IT logic on the literal epilogues.

I think I understand you intention, but what you're saying doesn't make any sense.

Except it does. Synthesis doesn't happen if the IT is true. Therefor you can't argue what Synthesis is or isn't from an IT perspective, as in your IT reality, Synthesis never happened.

Synthesis can only be argued about from a literal perspective. And from a literal perspective we can clearly see Synthesis is totally not the same as reaperfication.

That... is not true at all.

[The Heretic of Time]

paxxton wrote...

In the Literal sense Synthesis is not gooification. But if you viewed the ending figuratively, you could put an equals sign between them.

Nope, you only ASSUME it is.

Even if I were to accept IT, I still wouldn't know what choosing Synthesis really does with Shepard & Co. I could merely speculate on it.

Please, don't present speculations as facts. Even if one where to believe in IT, your view on Synthesis is still merely a speculation.