80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Rifneno]

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

After the EC will someone please give me a solid, evidence laden reason why this thread is still here? Or more specifically why this theory still matters as entertaining as it was?

Personally? Never had much interest in shiny bells

Then you haven't lived.

Are you going to answer my question or not?

I'm genuinely curious.

EC didn't really disprove much.  They took out some very minor evidence like that clipless keeper, but that's about it.  The slideshows are interesting until you realize that they take place before the breath scene (meaning if there ever was an illusion/hallucination/virtual reality/whatever, then they're also part of it) and that they didn't fix a lot of the nonsense like where the hell the Normandy wound up, or how they fixed it.  They even added some minor IT points.  Listen to Shepreaper's speech in control, then listen to Sovereign's on Virmire.  They're eerily similar, just Shep's is more sugar-coated.  Shepard's thinking like a Reaper now.  And they expanded the amount of time that you can see Shepard's eyes turn like TIM's (which he got from an indoctrination device in the comics) if you pick control or synthesis.  Overall, EC only provided minor boosts to either side of the debate.  It definitely didn't disprove IT.

[paxxton]

spotlessvoid wrote...

EC didn't disprove IT, but it's just a slide show to placate the fan rage. A shiny bell jingled in front of those who enjoy that sort of thing. The artistic integrity is coming

I hope you are right.

[masster blaster]

You know something I have been thinking. Shepard has a gun at the end, and we only can use it in Destroy. What if that gun breaks the illusion. I have notice ffor quite some time that. Saren, and TIM if you talk them into fighting Indoctrination use their guns to fight Indoctrination. Yes they took a bullet to the head, but that's besides the point.

What I am trying to say is that.The gun is symbolic. Saren used a Carfinex to kill himself. And look what gun we have at the end of the game. Next we have TIM who uses a Preditor to kill himself. When Shepard starts to fire his/her gun in Destroy. The Carfinex gun fire changes into a Preditors.

I am thinking that the gun symbolises breaking Indoctrination. Yet you have to use it.

Refuse Shepard does not use the Weapon resisted Indoctrination, but could not break the hold the Reapers have on him/her.
Reject Shepard uses the gun on the child, yet Shepard only shot at part of the source of the hold that the Reapers have on him/her. Does not break Indoctrination.

Control, and Synthetis Shepard drops the gun. Symbolising you are done fighting, and now it's time to join the Reapers.

Destroy. Shepard starts to fire the weapon. Regains his/her willpower, and breaks the hold on that the Reapers have on Shepard.

[spotlessvoid]

paxxton wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

EC didn't disprove IT, but it's just a slide show to placate the fan rage. A shiny bell jingled in front of those who enjoy that sort of thing. The artistic integrity is coming

I hope you are right.

Me too. Still...

To successfully tell a story that you intend to remain open to interpretation you need at least two plausible interpretations. If you think the literal ending is implausible nonsense yet think highly of Bioware's ability to tell a story, wouldn't it make sense that they don't intend to leave it open to interpretation because their is only one plausible interpretation?

I understand that because EA is first and foremost a business, Bioware may in turn make certain decisions from a business standpoint rather than an artistic one, but given the current state of Mass Effect's fan base, and the unsurprisingly low level of enthusiasm for future Mass Effect content, wouldn't EAs business interests and Bioware's artistic vision coincide?

[Rifneno]

That theory doesn't explain the most important question. Why the hell do I keep finding nests of slaughterfish eggs on land?!

[The Aesthetic Ghant]

Rifneno wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

After the EC will someone please give me a solid, evidence laden reason why this thread is still here? Or more specifically why this theory still matters as entertaining as it was?

Personally? Never had much interest in shiny bells

Then you haven't lived.

Are you going to answer my question or not?

I'm genuinely curious.

EC didn't really disprove much.  They took out some very minor evidence like that clipless keeper, but that's about it.  The slideshows are interesting until you realize that they take place before the breath scene (meaning if there ever was an illusion/hallucination/virtual reality/whatever, then they're also part of it) and that they didn't fix a lot of the nonsense like where the hell the Normandy wound up, or how they fixed it.  They even added some minor IT points.  Listen to Shepreaper's speech in control, then listen to Sovereign's on Virmire.  They're eerily similar, just Shep's is more sugar-coated.  Shepard's thinking like a Reaper now.  And they expanded the amount of time that you can see Shepard's eyes turn like TIM's (which he got from an indoctrination device in the comics) if you pick control or synthesis.  Overall, EC only provided minor boosts to either side of the debate.  It definitely didn't disprove IT.

Thank you.

Very interesting.

[spotlessvoid]

Rifneno wrote...

That theory doesn't explain the most important question. Why the hell do I keep finding nests of slaughterfish eggs on land?!

Anthropogenic global warming

[Bill Casey]

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

After the EC will someone please give me a solid, evidence laden reason why this thread is still here? Or more specifically why this theory still matters as entertaining as it was?

Personally? Never had much interest in shiny bells

Then you haven't lived.

Are you going to answer my question or not?

I'm genuinely curious.

The EC was specifically designed around neither confirming nor deny the indoctrination theory...
Two community managers and a writer have said as much...

[paxxton]

The problem is that one interpretation (literal) makes people hate BioWare so much and at the same time those "fans" openly refuse the possibility of another interpretation (IT). In the end BioWare will lose.

[masster blaster]

Another thing that I have thought about. If I am not mistaken if the cycle in refuse used the Crucible " Mike Gamble said they did", then what ending did they pick? Destroy. It makes logical sense. If the next cycle kill the Reapers, then hello that's Bioware telling the fan..

Bioware: Hey fans do you like Refuse, and how the cycle defeated the Reapers by using the crucible? Oh and do you know what ending they picked Destroy of course. Not like they had the same chocies you had about 5 minutes ago.....

[Red Panda]

Bill Casey wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

After the EC will someone please give me a solid, evidence laden reason why this thread is still here? Or more specifically why this theory still matters as entertaining as it was?

Personally? Never had much interest in shiny bells

Then you haven't lived.

Are you going to answer my question or not?

I'm genuinely curious.

The EC was specifically designed around neither confirming nor deny the indoctrination theory...
Two community managers and a writer have said as much...

Because obviously the epilogue slides don't exist right?

Here's my "public relations" theory:

Let's be real, the only reason they didn't say IT was flat out wrong was to keep customers loyal. They simply don't wish to alienate them.

[hukbum]

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

After the EC will someone please give me a solid, evidence laden reason why this thread is still here? Or more specifically why this theory still matters as entertaining as it was?

Personally? Never had much interest in shiny bells

Then you haven't lived.

Are you going to answer my question or not?

I'm genuinely curious.

You're not the first asking this today so I kinda understand the answer. It depends on how you see it. If you take EC as the end of all, sure it's reasonable to ask. If you think EC was used to "calm things down and proceed as planned" IT still has it's weight.
EC didn't add that much closure people saying here. It added some shiny pictures (or bells ) and that's it.


EDIT: Damnit I'm really slow ... writing one post and now there are all the other answers.

Modifié par hukbum, 10 décembre 2012 - 05:38 .

[Red Panda]

masster blaster wrote...

Another thing that I have thought about. If I am not mistaken if the cycle in refuse used the Crucible " Mike Gamble said they did", then what ending did they pick? Destroy. It makes logical sense. If the next cycle kill the Reapers, then hello that's Bioware telling the fan..

Bioware: Hey fans do you like Refuse, and how the cycle defeated the Reapers by using the crucible? Oh and do you know what ending they picked Destroy of course. Not like they had the same chocies you had about 5 minutes ago.....

I think Gamble said they pick Synthesis...

[spotlessvoid]

paxxton wrote...

The problem is that one interpretation (literal) makes people hate BioWare so much and at the same time those "fans" openly refuse the possibility of another interpretation (IT). In the end BioWare will lose.

A lot of people are angry at Bioware for ending ME3 this way. A DLC that makes sense of it all would rectify that. What else but IT does that?

[spotlessvoid]

Aesthetic Ghant... Just look to Operating Wookie's post to understand mine.

[masster blaster]

paxxton wrote...

The problem is that one interpretation (literal) makes people hate BioWare so much and at the same time those "fans" openly refuse the possibility of another interpretation (IT). In the end BioWare will lose.

Not really Pax.

If IT is not true, then Bioware will lose a lot more fans. Some ITers are okay with the endings, but some are not. Literalist either hate or love the endings. So Bioware if they don't do IT again will loose more fans.

If Bioware does IT, then ITers stay as their fans. ME fans that have moved on will come back, and see how it plays out. Literalist that hate the endings will see want to see if the IT dlc, or game, or expansion will play out. People that like the ending, can not down load the next dlc.

Thus in the end everyone wins.

Literalist get their ending, while we get ours. Of course some literalist will tell us " They did this to shut us up, or Shepard was not being Indoctrinated at the end, and Bioware only did this to please you whiners to shut up."

Yet again everyone wins.

[CmdrShep80]

CmdrShep80 wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

CmdrShep80 wrote...

I wish people would vote when they view polls. I would have 50 votes by now if they did

Joker is so screwed!

You should do Garrus VS Liara VS Tali

I just might after tomorrow rolls by

Well, tomorrow did roll by lol.  I finally got to it:

Garrus vs Liara vs Tali poll

I had a bit of fun writing for this.  Don't say it's bad writing LMAO.  We'll see if anyone comes up with a creative solution.  Looking forward to it.

[masster blaster]

OperatingWookie wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

Another thing that I have thought about. If I am not mistaken if the cycle in refuse used the Crucible " Mike Gamble said they did", then what ending did they pick? Destroy. It makes logical sense. If the next cycle kill the Reapers, then hello that's Bioware telling the fan..

Bioware: Hey fans do you like Refuse, and how the cycle defeated the Reapers by using the crucible? Oh and do you know what ending they picked Destroy of course. Not like they had the same chocies you had about 5 minutes ago.....

I think Gamble said they pick Synthesis...

Ummm I could have sworn he said the next cycle picked Destroy. Can somebody please link his tweet about The next cycle using the Crucible. I don't have a Twitter account.

[CmdrShep80]

@Paxxton and everyone else who asked about the symbol.  Here's another but from Omega.  I'm on a computer where I can get it to come out better:



And one more from Omega:



Those were the only two symbols I found on Omega.  My thinking is because of the symbol over the WRNG table to help signify every time we see anything on that table we would be thinking symbol

[CmdrShep80]

I have a feeling too many people are going to vote creative save without coming up with a way to do so LOL

[masster blaster]

OperatingWookie wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The Aesthetic Ghant wrote...

After the EC will someone please give me a solid, evidence laden reason why this thread is still here? Or more specifically why this theory still matters as entertaining as it was?

Personally? Never had much interest in shiny bells

Then you haven't lived.

Are you going to answer my question or not?

I'm genuinely curious.

The EC was specifically designed around neither confirming nor deny the indoctrination theory...
Two community managers and a writer have said as much...

Because obviously the epilogue slides don't exist right?

Here's my "public relations" theory:

Let's be real, the only reason they didn't say IT was flat out wrong was to keep customers loyal. They simply don't wish to alienate them.

Not really.

Think about it. If Bioware does nothing with IT, then a lost of ITers would not buy the next ME game. Heck that goes for a lot of people that hate the endings. A lot of people still hate the ending witch is about 3/4 of the fans. The 1/4 of the fans like the endings/ IT. So again if Bioware wants to make another ME game. They are going to have to get almost all of those fans back. Heck we were watching the gaming awards and when ever ME was nominated for an award everyone was quiet.

Now if Bioware does IT, then ITers are happy. Literalist that hate the ending will give IT a shot. Fans that moved on will come back, and see if IT goes well. People that like the endings can keep their ends, by not downloading the dlc, or not buy the IT/ME game. In this end if Bioware takes it. Everyone wins.

[hukbum]

@CmdrShep80: I voted for creative. Good thing I'm playing an engineer - my and Tali's drone to distract the brute to help out Garrus (why is that idiot using the SR? I totally leveled him vor AR dmg ... that guy is just helpless without me ...) Turret behind that Revanger. This should buy some time. Banshees are not that big of a problem anymore with the Punisher and AP ammo.
Don't know if this fits "creative" but it's 7:00 am and I haven't slept now.

EDIT: I forgot the prox-mine from garrus. Placed well in front of that brute and stops charge quite good.

Modifié par hukbum, 10 décembre 2012 - 06:01 .

[masster blaster]

Okay 50 credits says that Chris is going to close the IT thread when he get's back from his vacation. Also what else does Chris do? I mean other than evil Chris.

[Big_Boss9]

masster blaster wrote...

Okay 50 credits says that Chris is going to close the IT thread when he get's back from his vacation. Also what else does Chris do? I mean other than evil Chris.

Masquerade as Banshee

[Fur28]

@CmdrShep80 voted creative kill, and posted how in the comments