80611 réponses à ce sujet

[estebanus]

lex0r11 wrote...
*snip*

Hello Lex0r!

[Rifneno]

I don't know why you guys bother debating with "lul bad riteing"ers. They don't even bother trying to refute the petabytes of evidence gathered, they just come in and puke their ignorance. Let them stew in it, don't mop it up for them.

[Dwailing]

lex0r11 wrote...

LOL, what's sad about that is that's what most Literalists that come to the thread sound like.

[Restrider]

estebanus wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

estebanus wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

But este, some literalists think control/synthesis are actually good choices that would save everyone...and not make you a mindless slave. They are the same people who sometimes wave their hand and say "bad writing" or whatever

Nope, the people who tend to scream around that it's bad writing tend to be those that picked destroy. Controllers and synthesizers consist almost only of pro-enders. You can easily see that in their threads.

I'm speaking from personal experience. Namely Hanar who was Control, also very anti-ending, and two Synthys I know in real life who have the most vitriol about the ending - almost on par with Hanar. 

You were quite dismissive of my point even though I had evidence which made me sad

If you look around on the forums, and at the people who chose what ending, it's easy to see that most of the anti-enders chose destroy. and control and synthesis are very small minorities, not to mention that those are the 2 endings that are complained about the most. 

I can't speak out of personal experience, though. I'm one of the only people who plays video games at my workplace, and as far as I know, the only one who plays Mass Effect. My friends don't tend to play games either.

I'll provide you with some number:

[Dwailing]

Rifneno wrote...

I don't know why you guys bother debating with "lul bad riteing"ers. They don't even bother trying to refute the petabytes of evidence gathered, they just come in and puke their ignorance. Let them stew in it, don't mop it up for them.

I remember a good description of debating with those guys.  Like playing chess with a pidgeon.  It'll knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and then fly back to its flock claiming that it won.

[Eryri]

I've just noticed this thread with a theory that Harbinger deliberately missed Shepard and the Normandy on the beam run, because he wanted to use Shepard as a pawn to help him usurp the Catalyst. The theory entails that Harby retains some memory of his former existance as the Leviathans, and is looking for revenge on the Catalyst - though not necessarily for altruistic reasons.

It's an interesting theory, but my major gripe is that it implies that the effects of the ending choices are real - which is something I will never be able to stomach in the case of synthesis. It also doesn't explain the breath scene, or the weirdness with the kid and the dreams.

Modifié par Eryri, 28 décembre 2012 - 10:43 .

[Dwailing]

Restrider wrote...

estebanus wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

estebanus wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

But este, some literalists think control/synthesis are actually good choices that would save everyone...and not make you a mindless slave. They are the same people who sometimes wave their hand and say "bad writing" or whatever

Nope, the people who tend to scream around that it's bad writing tend to be those that picked destroy. Controllers and synthesizers consist almost only of pro-enders. You can easily see that in their threads.

I'm speaking from personal experience. Namely Hanar who was Control, also very anti-ending, and two Synthys I know in real life who have the most vitriol about the ending - almost on par with Hanar. 

You were quite dismissive of my point even though I had evidence which made me sad

If you look around on the forums, and at the people who chose what ending, it's easy to see that most of the anti-enders chose destroy. and control and synthesis are very small minorities, not to mention that those are the 2 endings that are complained about the most. 

I can't speak out of personal experience, though. I'm one of the only people who plays video games at my workplace, and as far as I know, the only one who plays Mass Effect. My friends don't tend to play games either.

I'll provide you with some number:

I would like to note that there are Pro-Enders who claim bad writing and Anti-Enders who love the writing.  I hate the endings, but love the writing in the game.

[Andromidius]

cyrexwingblade wrote...

You realize that for IT to be true and the most accurate representation of the ending, that Bioware would have had to put more work into the planning phase? And a great deal of detail-work throughout the game.

Yep.

And that's exactly what they've done.  Go read up on all the compiled examples we've collected, and you'll see for yourself.  There's a deliberate pattern.

[BansheeOwnage]

Eryri wrote...

I've just noticed this thread with a theory that Harbinger deliberately missed Shepard and the Normandy on the beam run, because he wanted to use Shepard as a pawn to help him usurp the Catalyst. The theory entails that Harby retains some memory of his former existance as the Leviathans, and is looking for revenge on the Catalyst - though not necessarily for altruistic reasons.

It's an interesting theory, but my major gripe is that it implies that the effects of the ending choices are real - which is something I will never be able to stomach in the case of synthesis. It also doesn't explain the breath scene, or the weirdness with the kid and the dreams.

Hmm. Agreed.

[Rifneno]

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I don't know why you guys bother debating with "lul bad riteing"ers. They don't even bother trying to refute the petabytes of evidence gathered, they just come in and puke their ignorance. Let them stew in it, don't mop it up for them.

I remember a good description of debating with those guys.  Like playing chess with a pidgeon.  It'll knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and then fly back to its flock claiming that it won.

As a bird lover, I find comparing pigeons with literalists to be downright slanderous to pigeons.

[Rifneno]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Eryri wrote...

I've just noticed this thread with a theory that Harbinger deliberately missed Shepard and the Normandy on the beam run, because he wanted to use Shepard as a pawn to help him usurp the Catalyst. The theory entails that Harby retains some memory of his former existance as the Leviathans, and is looking for revenge on the Catalyst - though not necessarily for altruistic reasons.

It's an interesting theory, but my major gripe is that it implies that the effects of the ending choices are real - which is something I will never be able to stomach in the case of synthesis. It also doesn't explain the breath scene, or the weirdness with the kid and the dreams.

Hmm. Agreed.

Yeah, synthesis can't be real.  Not because I loathe the idea of it (which I do), but because it's dumber space magic than Shepard surviving the Citadel explosion.

[estebanus]

Restrider wrote...

estebanus wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

estebanus wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

But este, some literalists think control/synthesis are actually good choices that would save everyone...and not make you a mindless slave. They are the same people who sometimes wave their hand and say "bad writing" or whatever

Nope, the people who tend to scream around that it's bad writing tend to be those that picked destroy. Controllers and synthesizers consist almost only of pro-enders. You can easily see that in their threads.

I'm speaking from personal experience. Namely Hanar who was Control, also very anti-ending, and two Synthys I know in real life who have the most vitriol about the ending - almost on par with Hanar. 

You were quite dismissive of my point even though I had evidence which made me sad

If you look around on the forums, and at the people who chose what ending, it's easy to see that most of the anti-enders chose destroy. and control and synthesis are very small minorities, not to mention that those are the 2 endings that are complained about the most. 

I can't speak out of personal experience, though. I'm one of the only people who plays video games at my workplace, and as far as I know, the only one who plays Mass Effect. My friends don't tend to play games either.

I'll provide you with some number:

Pretty much what I thought, yes.

[Restrider]

Dwailing wrote...

I would like to note that there are Pro-Enders who claim bad writing and Anti-Enders who love the writing.  I hate the endings, but love the writing in the game.

Oh, this is just a little excerpt of the BSN Census (clicky on my signature). I tried to really sort out the varying groups of players here. Of course, the amount of voters and the way the data has been acquired does not qualify for scientific usage, but in general it is a good indicator.

Modifié par Restrider, 28 décembre 2012 - 10:46 .

[Rifneno]

How the hell are there pro-ending refusers?

[Dwailing]

Rifneno wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I don't know why you guys bother debating with "lul bad riteing"ers. They don't even bother trying to refute the petabytes of evidence gathered, they just come in and puke their ignorance. Let them stew in it, don't mop it up for them.

I remember a good description of debating with those guys.  Like playing chess with a pidgeon.  It'll knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and then fly back to its flock claiming that it won.

As a bird lover, I find comparing pigeons with literalists to be downright slanderous to pigeons.

Ah, good point.  Um, what animals do you not like that would fit the metaphor?

[401 Kill]

Anti ending doesn't necessarily mean anti IT.

[401 Kill]

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I don't know why you guys bother debating with "lul bad riteing"ers. They don't even bother trying to refute the petabytes of evidence gathered, they just come in and puke their ignorance. Let them stew in it, don't mop it up for them.

I remember a good description of debating with those guys.  Like playing chess with a pidgeon.  It'll knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and then fly back to its flock claiming that it won.

As a bird lover, I find comparing pigeons with literalists to be downright slanderous to pigeons.

Ah, good point.  Um, what animals do you not like that would fit the metaphor?

Batarians.

[Rifneno]

401 Kill wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I don't know why you guys bother debating with "lul bad riteing"ers. They don't even bother trying to refute the petabytes of evidence gathered, they just come in and puke their ignorance. Let them stew in it, don't mop it up for them.

I remember a good description of debating with those guys.  Like playing chess with a pidgeon.  It'll knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and then fly back to its flock claiming that it won.

As a bird lover, I find comparing pigeons with literalists to be downright slanderous to pigeons.

Ah, good point.  Um, what animals do you not like that would fit the metaphor?

Batarians.

[Restrider]

Rifneno_The_Honey_Badger_DoesnT_Give_A_Crap wrote...
How the hell are there pro-ending refusers?

I have no idea.
Maybe they like bittersweet endings that lack 99% of the standard sweet part?
Personally I think it is better than Synthesis in a literal POV and better than Control/Synthesis in IT. I can see where these pro-ending Refuse lovers are coming from. Btw, in that specific chart it is not really explained if they believe in something like IT and/or PT.

401 Kill wrote...

Anti ending doesn't necessarily mean anti IT.

And another excerpt;):

[Dwailing]

401 Kill wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I don't know why you guys bother debating with "lul bad riteing"ers. They don't even bother trying to refute the petabytes of evidence gathered, they just come in and puke their ignorance. Let them stew in it, don't mop it up for them.

I remember a good description of debating with those guys.  Like playing chess with a pidgeon.  It'll knock over the pieces, crap on the board, and then fly back to its flock claiming that it won.

As a bird lover, I find comparing pigeons with literalists to be downright slanderous to pigeons.

Ah, good point.  Um, what animals do you not like that would fit the metaphor?

Batarians.

Nah, I don't hate batarians.  I hate some of the batarians I've met, but I don't hate the whole species.  I think Church puts it best: (15:12)

[MaximizedAction]

Rifneno wrote...

How the hell are there pro-ending refusers?

Read that in a Col. Tigh voice.

I guess they liked the endings with the additional choice to refuse. I don't remember the poll, does IT support belong to pro-ending?

edit: 'd cold blooded.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 28 décembre 2012 - 10:53 .

[Restrider]

I wonder who thinks that the endings are not literal and chooses Synthesis/Control without any hesitation?
That bothers me more than the pro-ending refusers actually.

Modifié par Restrider, 28 décembre 2012 - 11:00 .

[Eryri]

Restrider wrote...

Rifneno_The_Honey_Badger_DoesnT_Give_A_Crap wrote...
How the hell are there pro-ending refusers?

I have no idea.
Maybe they like bittersweet endings that lack 99% of the standard sweet part?
Personally I think it is better than Synthesis in a literal POV and better than Control/Synthesis in IT. I can see where these pro-ending Refuse lovers are coming from. Btw, in that specific chart it is not really explained if they believe in something like IT and/or PT.

I suppose Refuse does feature the least space magic, and it has the best speech. Also some feel that it is the one that most totally rejects the Catalysts philosophy, by claiming that Synthetics are actually no threat, and don't need to be destroyed.

Perhaps they feel that Refuse is Bioware's rebuke to the fans for not liking the original three endings, so they pick that one out of contraryness to subvert it as their own insult right back to Bioware? I remember reading a lot of comments along the lines of "Well everyone dies horribly, but it's still better than RGB magic". It's more a case of the ending they hate the least, perhaps.

[Dwailing]

Restrider wrote...

Rifneno_The_Honey_Badger_DoesnT_Give_A_Crap wrote...
How the hell are there pro-ending refusers?

I have no idea.
Maybe they like bittersweet endings that lack 99% of the standard sweet part?
Personally I think it is better than Synthesis in a literal POV and better than Control/Synthesis in IT. I can see where these pro-ending Refuse lovers are coming from. Btw, in that specific chart it is not really explained if they believe in something like IT and/or PT.

401 Kill wrote...

Anti ending doesn't necessarily mean anti IT.

And another excerpt;):

Keelah Se'lai!  I would have thought that Synthesis would be the main Literal ending.  But it's Control?  By an overwhelming margin?  Keelah, people really ARE indoctrinated.

Edit: Banshee and estebanusister, who's on top now?

Modifié par Dwailing, 28 décembre 2012 - 11:01 .

[DaveTheRave05]

For me personally, the ending isn't the strongest evidence to IT; it's the dreams.

All the scientists in Arrival complain of having bad dreams before becoming indoctrinated.
The whispers you keep hearing, and the Reaper noises
Evidence of ultrasonic noise being used in each dream sequence
'Oily shadows'
The music and sound being obscure and distorted
The fact that they seem all out of place, especially for pure Renegade playthroughs.

These all strengthen the IT more than what happens in the ending for me.