CoolioThane wrote...
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
Modifié par Andromidius, 06 décembre 2012 - 06:25 .
MegumiAzusa wrote...
To find a new solution.CoolioThane wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
The problem here is that with the EC they introduced logical flaws in the argumentation of the Guardian and with the new epilog it shows that there are only two states in the long run, which is the crucible is fired or not. IT has to accommodate for the latter in order to make sense. But saying stuff like "there is a feedback and then all Reaper forces are just defeated" doesn't make any sense. The point is I do not know anything that could fix it, which results in my opinion that BW messed up.DoomsdayDevice wrote...
But Megumi, if you thought IT was intended pre-EC, how can you conclude it is otherwise post-EC?
That would mean they would compromise their artistic vision.
People make mistakes. One mistake does not make the entire IT invalid. You can't ignore all the points in favour of it, because of one particular flaw.
Any suggestions on how to adapt the IT to post-EC?
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
Modifié par CoolioThane, 06 décembre 2012 - 06:15 .
The problem here is we even look for stuff in savegames or files to find a solution, savegames say in control/synthesis everyone lives while everyone dies in opt out.DoomsdayDevice wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
Or it's mindscrew to think it ends this way, but in fact it's literal and you doomed EDI, the Geth, etc for nothing, which is one of the questions you should ask yourself at the end when making your choice. Ignoring BW saying both is valid while claiming BW saying IT is valid for the truth is kinda self-contradictory, wouldn't you agree?DoomsdayDevice wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
Yeah, or they just do what the fans want instead of their original intentions.DoomsdayDevice wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
Word of god in this case says both are valid which you also ignore. I also said BW made a mistake with the EC, which IT doesn't account for.DoomsdayDevice wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
You people do fall under the second category as you try to avoid using logic to connect things but believes.Andromidius wrote...
CoolioThane wrote...
I don't really get the outside view of IT. We believe Bioware have made a fantastic ending worthy of Mass Effect, but people say we hate them. It's ignorant and pathetic
Its a reversal technique of criticism. Giving someone you disagree with the opposite attibutes that they actually have. Example:
Intellectually open minded = Close minded crazies
Logical debaters = Religious zealots
Admirers of high art = Haters of 'low art'
Etc.
Yes, 'you people'. All of us!
Look, the scientific method is all fine and dandy, but go ahead and try to use it to interpret literature or cinema. At some point you're going to have to take a look at symbology, foreshadowing, analogies, metaphors. Science says you can't take any of that into account, because you can't be sure of the artist's intentions without word of god.
I'm looking forward to you having something positive to contribute for a change.
Also I contributed much more "positive" stuff then most people here so I see no need to justify my view with more "positive" stuff.
You have contributed a lot in the past. That doesn't change the fact that nowadays, whenever you come into the thread, you are being all negative towards almost everyone and cause the entire thread to fall into pointless argument.
And I don't 'ignore' what word of god says, I don't believe it. For good reasons. They've been completely unreliable so far, and if what I'm taking away from the game is correct, they have a good reason to lie to us.
They want us to go through the experience that Shepard is dead. "No more Shepard", says the PR. It's all just strategy to blow us away when they finally pull the curtain and reveal the return of Shepard in ME4.
If you don't believe that, I can understand it. I won't hold it against you at all.
I'm just saying, if you think you're helping by acting the way you do: you're not.
I suppose I could point you towards the massive amounts of foreshadowing and hints they included in the game (which will be obvious in hindsight, when we all know how this will play out). I made a thread about it, but you'll probably go 'confirmation bias'. Just say the word if you're interested.
If I were to fool people with two game-over endings, that's what I would do.
I still believe the Eden Prime datapads are a real clue towards this. If people knew these choices would play out in a negative way, nobody would pick them. They want to trick players. The whole point of it is simply to illustrate how deceptive the Reapers actually are.
Logic dictates that there's no way the Reaper AI is legit in only wanting to save organics. Sovereign said organics are chaos and the Reapers are order. He was full of contempt of us lowly organics. Not to mention Harbinger. It doesn't jive at all with the 'Reapers are only trying to save organics' story.
Like Javik says: "Only the foolish mourn the loss of innocence. It is inevitable. The galaxy has never rewarded the naive."
I don't believe trusting the Reaper AI will be rewarded. It is entirely inconsistent with what we learned in the games, namely that over millions of years, countless cycles of organics were brainwashed to the point of 'begging to be harvested'.
I agree. If anything, having opposition will improve your own arguments.dreamgazer wrote...
CoolioThane wrote...
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
Probably for the same reasons as the other partly-rational IT opponents: to provide a counterpoint and use rational logic to prevent stagnant thinking.
ITers really should stop with that knee-jerk reaction. A few deserve it, but every opponent shouldn't be run off. That's what private groups are for, if you're not wanting opposition.
LDS Darth Revan wrote...
I agree. If anything, having opposition will improve your own arguments.dreamgazer wrote...
CoolioThane wrote...
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
Probably for the same reasons as the other partly-rational IT opponents: to provide a counterpoint and use rational logic to prevent stagnant thinking.
ITers really should stop with that knee-jerk reaction. A few deserve it, but every opponent shouldn't be run off. That's what private groups are for, if you're not wanting opposition.
The point of a theory is to have it fit, if it doesn't fit it gets adjusted to fit again. By refusing to adjust IT to fit what we have you refuse any merit.CoolioThane wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
To find a new solution.CoolioThane wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
The problem here is that with the EC they introduced logical flaws in the argumentation of the Guardian and with the new epilog it shows that there are only two states in the long run, which is the crucible is fired or not. IT has to accommodate for the latter in order to make sense. But saying stuff like "there is a feedback and then all Reaper forces are just defeated" doesn't make any sense. The point is I do not know anything that could fix it, which results in my opinion that BW messed up.DoomsdayDevice wrote...
But Megumi, if you thought IT was intended pre-EC, how can you conclude it is otherwise post-EC?
That would mean they would compromise their artistic vision.
People make mistakes. One mistake does not make the entire IT invalid. You can't ignore all the points in favour of it, because of one particular flaw.
Any suggestions on how to adapt the IT to post-EC?
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
But this is the IT thread. For IT.
IT...Indoctrination Theory
It's a THEORY, it's not going to be 100% right. Not everyone subscribes to an IT doctrine. Everyone has bits and pieces they believe. Demersel thinks the whole game is a dream, I personally don't. I am not busting his, or anybody else's chops for having a different view of IT than me.
You don't agree with certain bits, fine. But stop trying to lessen our views just because you dont agree with them. I accept you don't agree with what I believe, but I take issue to you not accepting anyone else have an opinion that is different to yours/
Wem sagst'e das ...MaximizedAction wrote...
hukbum wrote...
Oh, time for the next 50 pages of sandbox-fighting?
It's funny, it's like a curse, once the page reached a certain page number no long ongoing discussion is possible, either the trolls derail it or ITers themselves by fighting eachother.
Is scho seltsam.
)
If it isn't constructive, don't respond to it.CoolioThane wrote...
LDS Darth Revan wrote...
I agree. If anything, having opposition will improve your own arguments.dreamgazer wrote...
CoolioThane wrote...
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
Probably for the same reasons as the other partly-rational IT opponents: to provide a counterpoint and use rational logic to prevent stagnant thinking.
ITers really should stop with that knee-jerk reaction. A few deserve it, but every opponent shouldn't be run off. That's what private groups are for, if you're not wanting opposition.
Yes, though it needs to be in some way constructive. Damn
MegumiAzusa wrote...
The point of a theory is to have it fit, if it doesn't fit it gets adjusted to fit again. By refusing to adjust IT to fit what we have you refuse any merit.CoolioThane wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
To find a new solution.CoolioThane wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
The problem here is that with the EC they introduced logical flaws in the argumentation of the Guardian and with the new epilog it shows that there are only two states in the long run, which is the crucible is fired or not. IT has to accommodate for the latter in order to make sense. But saying stuff like "there is a feedback and then all Reaper forces are just defeated" doesn't make any sense. The point is I do not know anything that could fix it, which results in my opinion that BW messed up.DoomsdayDevice wrote...
But Megumi, if you thought IT was intended pre-EC, how can you conclude it is otherwise post-EC?
That would mean they would compromise their artistic vision.
People make mistakes. One mistake does not make the entire IT invalid. You can't ignore all the points in favour of it, because of one particular flaw.
Any suggestions on how to adapt the IT to post-EC?
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
But this is the IT thread. For IT.
IT...Indoctrination Theory
It's a THEORY, it's not going to be 100% right. Not everyone subscribes to an IT doctrine. Everyone has bits and pieces they believe. Demersel thinks the whole game is a dream, I personally don't. I am not busting his, or anybody else's chops for having a different view of IT than me.
You don't agree with certain bits, fine. But stop trying to lessen our views just because you dont agree with them. I accept you don't agree with what I believe, but I take issue to you not accepting anyone else have an opinion that is different to yours/
CoolioThane wrote...
LDS Darth Revan wrote...
I agree. If anything, having opposition will improve your own arguments.dreamgazer wrote...
CoolioThane wrote...
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
Probably for the same reasons as the other partly-rational IT opponents: to provide a counterpoint and use rational logic to prevent stagnant thinking.
ITers really should stop with that knee-jerk reaction. A few deserve it, but every opponent shouldn't be run off. That's what private groups are for, if you're not wanting opposition.
Yes, though it needs to be in some way constructive. Damn
Because each theory has to conform to what the game gives us.CoolioThane wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
The point of a theory is to have it fit, if it doesn't fit it gets adjusted to fit again. By refusing to adjust IT to fit what we have you refuse any merit.CoolioThane wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
To find a new solution.CoolioThane wrote...
MegumiAzusa wrote...
The problem here is that with the EC they introduced logical flaws in the argumentation of the Guardian and with the new epilog it shows that there are only two states in the long run, which is the crucible is fired or not. IT has to accommodate for the latter in order to make sense. But saying stuff like "there is a feedback and then all Reaper forces are just defeated" doesn't make any sense. The point is I do not know anything that could fix it, which results in my opinion that BW messed up.DoomsdayDevice wrote...
But Megumi, if you thought IT was intended pre-EC, how can you conclude it is otherwise post-EC?
That would mean they would compromise their artistic vision.
People make mistakes. One mistake does not make the entire IT invalid. You can't ignore all the points in favour of it, because of one particular flaw.
Any suggestions on how to adapt the IT to post-EC?
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
But this is the IT thread. For IT.
IT...Indoctrination Theory
It's a THEORY, it's not going to be 100% right. Not everyone subscribes to an IT doctrine. Everyone has bits and pieces they believe. Demersel thinks the whole game is a dream, I personally don't. I am not busting his, or anybody else's chops for having a different view of IT than me.
You don't agree with certain bits, fine. But stop trying to lessen our views just because you dont agree with them. I accept you don't agree with what I believe, but I take issue to you not accepting anyone else have an opinion that is different to yours/
THE IT IS NOT ONE PURE THEORY.
EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN MINI-THEORY UNDER ONE OVERARCHING THEME: SHEPARD IS INDOCTRINATED
Why don't you just think about what your specific theory is and find gaps. Then talk about them civilly rather than dismissing anything anyone says? JESUS CHRIST
Yeah, I'm out now. Going to go into town and get pissed with some friends. I hope you everyone has a good night and Megumi...just stop being so narrow-minded please.
Yes.Arashi08 wrote...
So...has anyone considered that Megumi HASN'T necessarily gone literal? That maybe she just wan't to try to fix a flaw in IT as we understand it?
Please correct me if I'm wrong Megumi, but from what she's been saying it seems like she still geniunely likes the idea of IT, she just wan't to make it work for the EC, primarily the part where people can choose Refuse and we get that alien version of Stargazer.
So whether if it's real or not, you still were right. That is only...logical.AresKeith wrote...
The reason I'm on the fence with IT is because of the possibility of it not happening
dreamgazer wrote...
CoolioThane wrote...
LDS Darth Revan wrote...
I agree. If anything, having opposition will improve your own arguments.dreamgazer wrote...
CoolioThane wrote...
In that case you don't agree with the IT...so why are you here?
Probably for the same reasons as the other partly-rational IT opponents: to provide a counterpoint and use rational logic to prevent stagnant thinking.
ITers really should stop with that knee-jerk reaction. A few deserve it, but every opponent shouldn't be run off. That's what private groups are for, if you're not wanting opposition.
Yes, though it needs to be in some way constructive. Damn
Deconstruction is often times just as important for an interpretation as construction.
A lot of people don't like the term, but you can get in a microcosm of confirmation bias if you're not careful.
Andromidius wrote...
Its a daily ritual at this stage.
Anyway. Back to my thoughts on when the hallucination or altered reality began. We have to think about what happened before things started getting weird.
Thessia. The 'beacon', and more close proximity to Reaper capital ships. If we're supposing Shepard has been undergoing slow indoctrination and that it is accelerated by Reaper influence, this could be a 'flashpoint' moment where it advanced more rapidly. This would make sense with the small emotional breakdown post-Thessia, something that didn't even happen after Earth fell with even less of a fight.
Sanctuary. A facility dedicated to researching methods of indoctrination and Reaper control. Combined with potential accelerted indoctrination on Thessia, any number of booster signals being experimented upon in the facility may have triggered another rapid flashpoint for Shepard - culminating either in hallucinations creeping into reality, or full blown coma-like dreaming after the third dream occurs. I prefer the former explaination.
Finally we have Earth, which is undoubtably a weird place in many regards. If we assume the last two events triggered waking hallucinations, we can deduce that the Reaper's hold on Shepard is tightening. Having Harbinger itself interceed during the final push, being mere hundreds of meters from Shepard, could finally finish the trap and drag Shepard into the dream-like hallucination that is the final sequence of events.
...pure speculation, with some coresponding facts from in-game, but there we have it.
Allright then, tell me what's wrong with it. Maybe as a fence-sitter, I can help find a middle ground.MegumiAzusa wrote...
Yes.Arashi08 wrote...
So...has anyone considered that Megumi HASN'T necessarily gone literal? That maybe she just wan't to try to fix a flaw in IT as we understand it?
Please correct me if I'm wrong Megumi, but from what she's been saying it seems like she still geniunely likes the idea of IT, she just wan't to make it work for the EC, primarily the part where people can choose Refuse and we get that alien version of Stargazer.
RussianZombeh wrote...
What has this thread come to? What happened to intelligent conversation about the IT?
I see no discussion on the IT, just bickering between trolls and ITers. Sometimes even ITers fight eachother.
Come on guys, let's try and get back on track before the thread gets locked.
Modifié par archangel1996, 06 décembre 2012 - 06:26 .
There. See? Problem over. So can we stop fighting one another plz?MegumiAzusa wrote...
Yes.Arashi08 wrote...
So...has anyone considered that Megumi HASN'T necessarily gone literal? That maybe she just wan't to try to fix a flaw in IT as we understand it?
Please correct me if I'm wrong Megumi, but from what she's been saying it seems like she still geniunely likes the idea of IT, she just wan't to make it work for the EC, primarily the part where people can choose Refuse and we get that alien version of Stargazer.
archangel1996 wrote...
RussianZombeh wrote...
What has this thread come to? What happened to intelligent conversation about the IT?
I see no discussion on the IT, just bickering between trolls and ITers. Sometimes even ITers fight eachother.
Come on guys, let's try and get back on track before the thread gets locked.
I think.. i think... the mods are our salvation through destruction...a new cycle has to begin
****...today i am ****ing reaper-ish
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut