80611 réponses à ce sujet

[paxxton]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

paxxton wrote...

byne wrote...

I tried the custom avatar trick with the Mac version of DA:O, but it didnt work. Just as well, I might change my avatar to something awful like Paxxton's new avatar.

I mean, no offense or anything, Paxxton, but if you thought that avatar was a good choice, I kind of understand why you think control is a good idea too.

Ohhh, I worked tirelessly day and night for the last 3 weeks to bring you guys the most awesome, coolest, vividly-colored and standing-out avatar of all time.  It's not my fault Shepard decided to hallucinate just before I uploaded the pic.  If I find something equally oddsome, I'd be happy to change it.

There is definitely a "fear me, lesser creatures" missing

SubAstris has a volus. I need something original.

[byne]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

You're telling me the IT is a valid interpretation of the endings when you clearly dismiss the work and epilouge slides that was put into expanding and clarifying the original ending?

We're not telling you that. Chris Priestly is telling you that.

The IT thread remains here as it is a valid possibility for the end of the game.

Anyone who does not like the IT or thinks it not to be correct is STRONGLY enouraged to stay away from discussion on it.

I'd encourage you to take his advice.

Modifié par byne, 01 août 2012 - 09:38 .

[I_eat_unicorns]

Dwailing wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

I eat unicorns in a "my opinion is totally correct and you're wrong for definite" shocker.

Just **** off you miserable, arrogant git

No need to get hostile, but mister Unicorn is wrong in the IT not beeing valid.

A thread on this very forum, trying to move IT to fan creations was closed down on grounds of the IT beeing a perfectly valid Interpretation.

Ill try to find the exact quote for him.

Not just a perfectly valid interpretation.  Priestly's exact words, I believe, were that IT is, "A valid possiblity for the end of the game."  Note his usage of the word possiblity rather than interpretation.  An interpretation of the ending is merely one way of looking at it.  There can be many interpretations of the same thing.  A possibility means that it isn't just one way of looking at the ending, but rather actually what could be going on.

Edited to fix the quote.

That's to quell fans like yourselves who would rage if Bioware actually came out and said IT is wrong. No writer would do that, and Bioware would want delusional fans like yourselves to keep speculating on this theory. You'll be here next year still waiting for something that's not coming. 

I'm actually getting more ****ed off by BioWare refusing to come out and tell us whether IT is just an interpretation or whether it's actually possible.  I'd rather have them tell us that, while our interpretation of the ending is awesome, it isn't what they originally intended, than have them continue with this maybe it's real, maybe it isn't, crap.  They must know that's the overall feeling on this thread, so I'm pretty certain that for them to keep this up, they must have something up their sleeves.  Also, ad hominem attacks will get you nowhere on this thread.  Present a resonable, logical argument, or, and I usually don't use this phrase but I'm getting VERY annoyed with you people, GTFO!

At this point, currently believeing that the writers "secretly intended the IT to be correct" after the release of the EC DLC is exactly equal to believing that the thing in the box at the end of 'Seven ' was a ham sandwich, or that Obi Wan Kenobi was meant to be Luke Skywalker come back from the future to guide himself. 

No writer comes out and says "this fan theory is wrong", it doesn't give them a respectful image as writers want their fans to speculate and take their own ideas from the author's work. There is nothing wrong with that. 
 But if there can be a "truth" about the structure of a fictional work it is that that which the author intended is the actuality. ME's writers do not intend IT to be the valid end. 

There was a  "mind-blowing" fan theory of harry potter before the seventh book came out that Neville was the actual chosen one, and Harry was just a cover-up for him. Everyone pointed "evidence" in the prophecy and voldermort quotes.

www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry-potter/articles/neville-longbottom-the-other-chosen-one.html

But when the seventh book came out, those theories were put to rest. JK rowling commented on the theory in an interview, but didn't say "it was wrong"  herself as she believed her own work did the talking. (instead she said dumbledore was gay. why? idk). 

Point is, the IT is no different. It is a fan theory, and I don't think Bioware actually sat down on youtube and watched over 2 hours of IT videos. I don't think they even know the details of the IT as much as some people in this thread do. they would rather have some people do pointless speculation and say "yup keep on speculating" when they really don't have anything planned for the IT. I mean, they even said before the ec dlc was released that they would not introduce any further new endings. That means ever, not just "oh ok ec dlc= no new endings, future dlc = IT", no, they mean never ever any new endings. 

[paxxton]

Geez, slo-mo mode again.

Modifié par paxxton, 01 août 2012 - 09:48 .

[Galifreya]

byne wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

You're telling me the IT is a valid interpretation of the endings when you clearly dismiss the work and epilouge slides that was put into expanding and clarifying the original ending?

We're not telling you that. Chris Priestly is telling you that.

The IT thread remains here as it is a valid possibility for the end of the game.

Anyone who does not like the IT or thinks it not to be correct is STRONGLY enouraged to stay away from discussion on it.

I'd encourage you to take his advice.

I second that. Perhaps they should let us be? Why do the anti-ITers insist on coming in here just to try and tell us they think we're crackpots?

I say "us" because I lurk in this thread constantly. c.c I know I'm not extremely familliar to the regulars...

[Simon_Says]

@Unicornivore

What are you trying to prove exactly? And why?

'Cause to me you're trying to convince fools of their own foolishness and not realizing that for undertaking such a Sisyphean endeavour you're a fool yourself. If you have a problem with us, you're not obligated to stay. I don't want to waste time convincing you one way or the other about anything because frankly, that'd be hopeless too.

Considering the situation, I think everyone involved (you included) would be happier if you just left. You're not being constructive. We're not being gracious. The only sane solution for both sides is to leave the other alone.

For the record, I don't believe Bioware intends IT to be capital-C Canon either. And yet... I'm not uncomfortable with other people believing that to be the case. So why do you seem to be?

Modifié par Simon_Says, 01 août 2012 - 09:55 .

[I_eat_unicorns]

byne wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

You're telling me the IT is a valid interpretation of the endings when you clearly dismiss the work and epilouge slides that was put into expanding and clarifying the original ending?

We're not telling you that. Chris Priestly is telling you that.

The IT thread remains here as it is a valid possibility for the end of the game.

Anyone who does not like the IT or thinks it not to be correct is STRONGLY enouraged to stay away from discussion on it.

I'd encourage you to take his advice.

And I encourage you to read my posts in entirety as this is a discussion fourm. Read my post to dwailing about fan theories, I'm not going to copy and paste now, and read my other posts before you jump and say "chris priestly said so" when it's clearly a way to quell people like yourself from raging about the IT being wrong and leaving Bioware as the "loyal customers" you are. 

[paxxton]

Gallifreya wrote...

byne wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

You're telling me the IT is a valid interpretation of the endings when you clearly dismiss the work and epilouge slides that was put into expanding and clarifying the original ending?

We're not telling you that. Chris Priestly is telling you that.

The IT thread remains here as it is a valid possibility for the end of the game.

Anyone who does not like the IT or thinks it not to be correct is STRONGLY enouraged to stay away from discussion on it.

I'd encourage you to take his advice.

I second that. Perhaps they should let us be? Why do the anti-ITers insist on coming in here just to try and tell us they think we're crackpots?

I say "us" because I lurk in this thread constantly. c.c I know I'm not extremely familliar to the regulars...

LOL. I never understand long-time lurkers. How can you resist posting?

[I_eat_unicorns]

Gallifreya wrote...

byne wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

You're telling me the IT is a valid interpretation of the endings when you clearly dismiss the work and epilouge slides that was put into expanding and clarifying the original ending?

We're not telling you that. Chris Priestly is telling you that.

The IT thread remains here as it is a valid possibility for the end of the game.

Anyone who does not like the IT or thinks it not to be correct is STRONGLY enouraged to stay away from discussion on it.

I'd encourage you to take his advice.

I second that. Perhaps they should let us be? Why do the anti-ITers insist on coming in here just to try and tell us they think we're crackpots?

I say "us" because I lurk in this thread constantly. c.c I know I'm not extremely familliar to the regulars...

If you really are a true fan of Bioware, You'd stop believing in this fan theory and appreciate their own work through the ec dlc. Believing in the IT at this point and hoping Bioware would "secretly intend" to release it in a future dlc is insuliting to Bioware as it shows you would only be satisfied when you get your ending, not whatever they give you. 

[Galifreya]

paxxton wrote...

Gallifreya wrote...

I second that. Perhaps they should let us be? Why do the anti-ITers insist on coming in here just to try and tell us they think we're crackpots?

I say "us" because I lurk in this thread constantly. c.c I know I'm not extremely familliar to the regulars...

LOL. I never understand long-time lurkers. How can you resist posting?

I view a lot of this on my phone. It would take entirely too long to to type out big long posts on it.

[Galifreya]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
If you really are a true fan of Bioware, You'd stop believing in this fan theory and appreciate their own work through the ec dlc. Believing in the IT at this point and hoping Bioware would "secretly intend" to release it in a future dlc is insuliting to Bioware as it shows you would only be satisfied when you get your ending, not whatever they give you. 

Please do not presume to tell me what kind of fan I am. Nothing is more irritating. Off you go.

[paxxton]

Gallifreya wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Gallifreya wrote...

I second that. Perhaps they should let us be? Why do the anti-ITers insist on coming in here just to try and tell us they think we're crackpots?

I say "us" because I lurk in this thread constantly. c.c I know I'm not extremely familliar to the regulars...

LOL. I never understand long-time lurkers. How can you resist posting?

I view a lot of this on my phone. It would take entirely too long to to type out big long posts on it.

OK. That settles the case. Feel free to post here when you use a computer/console.

[byne]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

And I encourage you to read my posts in entirety as this is a discussion fourm. Read my post to dwailing about fan theories, I'm not going to copy and paste now, and read my other posts before you jump and say "chris priestly said so" when it's clearly a way to quell people like yourself from raging about the IT being wrong and leaving Bioware as the "loyal customers" you are. 

My good sir, if IT was proven to be false, I wouldnt rage. I dont think the majority of the people in this thread would either.

The pro-IT zealots, who would be the most likely to rage, dont actually seem to hang out in here, strangely enough, so if you're trying to speak to them, you're in the wrong place.

I also dont think the majority of us would stop purchasing BioWare products either, as we enjoyed the majority of ME3, and just dont like the endings.

You can either stop painting us as whiny little children who need placating from BioWare lest we turn into a horde of raging animals, and acknowledge that we are just regular people who happen to disagree with your interpreation of a video game ending, or you can get the **** out.

Now good day, sir.

[TJBartlemus]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

1: Way to dismiss everything I wrote because you don't want to face logic. You're telling me the IT is a valid interpretation of the endings when you clearly dismiss the work and epilouge slides that was put into expanding and clarifying the original ending? I think you and other IT supporters are just mad that you didn't get the ending you wanted, and you can't accept the fact that it was poor writing. 

2: I'll repeat what I said: 
You can believe anything you want if that's how you derive entertainment, and there's nothing wrong with it. But if there can be a "truth" about the structure of a fictional work it is that that which the author intended is the actuality. ME's writers do not intend IT to be the valid end.   

3: I don't need to disprove IT, the ec dlc makes it really clear that it's wrong. Bioware also stated themselves that they tried the whole indoctrination thing before, but it didn't work, so they scrapped it. It's impossible at this point to implement the IT without hurting the series as it would effectively render those 3 months of work useless and the entire series as useless since it makes player choice meaningless. A game like mass effect relies on player choice, and the ending options shouldn't be a roulette game, no rpg is like that, there are consequences for the decisions the player makes. The ec dlc shows that. How is the IT NOT a 180 to the franchise at this point? Are those scenes with the buzz aldrin and the slides dreams too?

First off. HOLD YOUR F***ING PANTS. I was building up a retort to your post before you just went on a rant. Be a little more patient and try not to be f***ing rude. 

1: I'll repeat what I SAID. IT is an interpretation. The EC expanded what we already knew and didn't change anything. Thus said, IT explains the endings as they were. Since nothing changed neither does the interpretation of IT. The creators clearified it in an attempt for those who didn't see IT before could see it more clearly. That's why they made the EC. They were surprised that many people didn't get what they were trying to subtly say in the game. 

2: You still forget what I said. YOU ARE NOT BIOWARE. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY INTENDED.

3: How does EC prove IT wrong? Also BioWare stated they dropped the "MECHANIC" not the IDEA. Chris Preistly even said that IT was a valid possibility for the end of the game. They already implimented the IT. That's the whole point. It's there in the game, but really subtle. The ending options AREN't a roulette game. It's pretty obvious on what happens when you choose which. You forget that Destroy is the only one where Shep survives and "breathes"? How does the IT make it a 180? Sure it would leave a hole spanning 15 minutes in the game, but that's not a lot in the 10-12 hours of a game. I could believe the WNT would fix that problem though. I personnally don't know if the end scenes are as well dreams cause I'M NOT BIOWARE, so I don't know.

Modifié par TJBartlemus, 01 août 2012 - 09:57 .

[ivenoidea]

I don't even get a single response?

[Ageless Face]

Simon_Says wrote...
I haven't seen a single shred of support for the idea that synthetics and organics were sufficiently more alien to each other than different alien organics are such that they will forever be incapable of understanding or harmonious coexistence. In fact, Shepard can have a connection with synthetics, by developing friendship and sympathy with synthetics. EDI develops a connection with Joker and Shepard. Legion develops a connection with Shepard and Tali.

The reapers on the other hand demonstrate complete disdain for organic/synthetic life and an unwillingness to explain or comprehend themselves. They spread madness just by their presence. They call the genocide of species ascension, a gift to be willingly accepted. Even if connection could be possible, the reapers don't have it, don't pursue it, and don't want to pursue it. That's the loss of connection I think Reaper!Shepard will face.

Come to think of it, the reapers were actively triyng to prevent mutual understanding between different species. They created the heretic geth faction, they later armed the geth against the quarians, they indoctrinate Saren and TIM and instead of using them as a speakers for the reapers they use them as an undercover agents to sabotage the cycle from within.

You're right, synthetics and organics can even build connections. But to gain a true understanding of each other's mind... is hard. If possible at all. My point is, that they have different minds, so they won't be connected to each other... in a physical way, so to speak. Loosing his/her organic parts, loosing his/her connection to the organics. Synthetics and organics have different minds, so they are obvously not connected in that aspect. Though it is only my interpretation, not absolute or anything.

 
Have any evidence to back that claim up? Are Shepard's motivations really strong enough if five minutes before being presented the option of Control Shepard was solely pursuing the reapers' destruction? Would Reaper!Shepard's methods really match up to what Shepard would do even if the motivations were transferred intact? Remember that the Catalyst said that the reapers were protecting organic life.

Face it. Control just can't be accepted as reliable with the information we got.

Yes, I have evidence.

  
Eternal. Infinite. Immortal. 

The man I was used these words, but only now do I truly understand them. And only now do I understand the full extent of his sacrifice.

Through his death, I was created. Through my birth, his thoughts are freed. They guide me now, give me reason, direction. Just as he gave direction to the ones who followed him, the ones who helped him achieve his purpose. Now my purpose.

To give the many hope for a future. To ensure that all have a voice in their future. The man I was knew that he could only achieve this by becoming something greater.

There is power in control. There is wisdom in harnessing the strengths of your enemy.

I will rebuild what the many have lost. I will create a future with limitless possibilities. I will protect and sustain. I will act as guardian for the many.

And throughout it all, I will never forget.I will remember the ones who sacrificed themselves so that the many could survive.And I will watch over the ones who live on.Those who carry the memory of the man I once was. The man who gave up his life to become the one who could save the many.

The words of AI ManShep himself in the epilouge. Pretty much the same for AI FemShep.

Also notice the fact if you are a renegade, some of the lines change, Shepard will use force instead of being "guardian for the many". So it means AI Shep's plans and actions will change according the person s/he was before. 

Modifié par HagarIshay, 01 août 2012 - 10:00 .

[paxxton]

If everybody only took what BioWare gave them, there would be no point in BSN. Even more, in the long run such attitude would stifle any progress and halt development of new ideas. Without innovation we might as well still leave in caves.
 
This thread has transcended a mere interpretation forum and became a brainstorming crucible.

Modifié par paxxton, 01 août 2012 - 10:01 .

[Simon_Says]

By the way, Unicorn Eater.
A link to a list of questions still left open (some introduced) by the EC. All of which leave Indoctrination Theory open for speculation.

Now we could reduce everything to bad writing. But maybe you missed the memo: that's not the point of this thread. If you just accept everything as bad writing, you're in the wrong forum entirely.

[TJBartlemus]

byne wrote...

I_eat_unicorns wrote...

And I encourage you to read my posts in entirety as this is a discussion fourm. Read my post to dwailing about fan theories, I'm not going to copy and paste now, and read my other posts before you jump and say "chris priestly said so" when it's clearly a way to quell people like yourself from raging about the IT being wrong and leaving Bioware as the "loyal customers" you are. 

My good sir, if IT was proven to be false, I wouldnt rage. I dont think the majority of the people in this thread would either.

The pro-IT zealots, who would be the most likely to rage, dont actually seem to hang out in here, strangely enough, so if you're trying to speak to them, you're in the wrong place.

I also dont think the majority of us would stop purchasing BioWare products either, as we enjoyed the majority of ME3, and just dont like the endings.

You can either stop painting us as whiny little children who need placating from BioWare lest we turn into a horde of raging animals, and acknowledge that we are just regular people who happen to disagree with your interpreation of a video game ending, or you can get the **** out.

Now good day, sir.

I second this. Unicorn you are allowed to have your opinion as much as I am to mine. 

[KneeTheCap]

Gallifreya wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Gallifreya wrote...

I second that. Perhaps they should let us be? Why do the anti-ITers insist on coming in here just to try and tell us they think we're crackpots?

I say "us" because I lurk in this thread constantly. c.c I know I'm not extremely familliar to the regulars...

LOL. I never understand long-time lurkers. How can you resist posting?

I view a lot of this on my phone. It would take entirely too long to to type out big long posts on it.

Shamefully hijacked the quote-thingie from Gallifreya, do excuse me (I hate quoting in forums, because I suck at 'em)

The "regulars" here is a tighly-woven pack, and as an outsider it feels both rude and uncomfortable to "meddle" or try to squeeze in. Hence I've been only lurking. You all are so much smarter than me, too, so I don't usually have that many new insights to share. And as this thread moves very fast, posters are often ignored. I don't like being ignored 

If you are willing to welcome me here, I can post more. I do however tend to stay in the sidelines when forums flares up, and sadly, this forum is not the friendliest one ('twas not directed to this thread, as it's quite civil. But I did make the mistake and looked the other threads...)

And thank you, Raven, for the list. It's greatly appreciated.

[Pacifien]

I_eat_unicorns wrote...
If you really are a true fan of Bioware, You'd stop believing in this fan theory and appreciate their own work through the ec dlc. Believing in the IT at this point and hoping Bioware would "secretly intend" to release it in a future dlc is insuliting to Bioware as it shows you would only be satisfied when you get your ending, not whatever they give you. 

I believe BioWare completely not secretely intended to blow up the mass relays for good and bugger all the consequences of what might have happened after that because Mass Relays = Gone, Reapers = Dealt With, Shepard = Dead, Game = Over.

But people weren't satisfied until they got their ending, so they gave them what they wanted within the realm of what they were willing to work. So sad for me, I preferred it when the mass relays were gone and no one was left to rebuild them ever.

Who cares, man? What BioWare originally said was to speculate. The IT perhaps lives in the truest fan spirit of BioWare's wishes.

[byne]

HagarIshay wrote...


Yes, I have evidence.

  
Eternal. Infinite. Immortal. 

The man I was used these words, but only now do I truly understand them. And only now do I understand the full extent of his sacrifice.Through his death, I was created. Through my birth, his thoughts are freed. They guide me now, give me reason, direction. Just as he gave direction to the ones who followed him, the ones who helped him achieve his purpose. Now my purpose.To give the many hope for a future. To ensure that all have a voice in their future. The man I was knew that he could only achieve this by becoming something greater.There is power in control. There is wisdom in harnessing the strengths of your enemy.I will rebuild what the many have lost. I will create a future with limitless possibilities.I will protect and sustain. I will act as guardian for the many.And throughout it all, I will never forget.I will remember the ones who sacrificed themselves so that the many could survive.And I will watch over the ones who live on.Those who carry the memory of the man I once was. The man who gave up his life to become the one who could save the many.

The words of AI Shep himself in the epilouge.

Also notice the fact if you are a renegade, some of the lines change, Shepard will use force instead of being "guardian for the many". So it means AI Shep's plans and actions will change according the person s/he was before. 

So the thoughts of Shepard only guide it? So it just uses what Shepard would do as a basic guideline, but is free to deviate from said guideline?

Well thats comforting. <_<

Also, 'Through my birth, his thoughts are freed' still sounds sinister to me, and no amount of monologuing will change that, Reaper!Shep.

[Ageless Face]

byne wrote...
So the thoughts of Shepard only guide it? So it just uses what Shepard would do as a basic guideline, but is free to deviate from said guideline?

Well thats comforting. <_<

Also, 'Through my birth, his thoughts are freed' still sounds sinister to me, and no amount of monologuing will change that, Reaper!Shep.

What do you mean "only guide it"? AI Shep follow Shepard's thoughts, ideas, moral, make them his/her. How would AI Shep walk from that guidline, if that's is a part of him/her? Those are codes who guide him/her.

And I'm gussing "his thoughts were freed" means that Shepard died and now rests in peace?

[CoolioThane]

Unicorn you are the worst kind of person. Leave before you make even more of a **** of yourself...or stay and let us all shake our heads at your ignorant arrogance

[Simon_Says]

HagarIshay wrote...

You're right, synthetics and organics can even build connections. But to gain a true understanding of each other's mind... is hard. If possible at all. My point is, that they have different minds, so they won't be connected to each other... in a physical way, so to speak. Loosing his/her organic parts, loosing his/her connection to the organics. Synthetics and organics have different minds, so they are obvously not connected in that aspect. Though it is only my interpretation, not absolute or anything.

As if perfect understanding between humans is the norm. Oh wait.

But I think we're not being clear about what connection means. I'm thinking that it means that R!Shep will be disconnected from the relationships and emotional connections/sympathies that Shepard developed throughout the trilogy. This much is supported by R!Shep, who mentions ruling/protecting the galaxy but not... oh, the friends or loved ones Shepard had. Things may be nice for a while, but it's only a matter of time before R!Shep goes all God Emperor and becomes a monster even for good intentions.

HagarIshay wrote...

Yes, I have evidence.

Eternal. Infinite. Immortal. 

The man I was used these words, but only now do I truly understand them. And only now do I understand the full extent of his sacrifice.

Through his death, I was created. Through my birth, his thoughts are freed. They guide me now, give me reason, direction. Just as he gave direction to the ones who followed him, the ones who helped him achieve his purpose. Now my purpose.

To give the many hope for a future. To ensure that all have a voice in their future. The man I was knew that he could only achieve this by becoming something greater.

There is power in control. There is wisdom in harnessing the strengths of your enemy.

I will rebuild what the many have lost. I will create a future with limitless possibilities. I will protect and sustain. I will act as guardian for the many.

And throughout it all, I will never forget.I will remember the ones who sacrificed themselves so that the many could survive.And I will watch over the ones who live on.Those who carry the memory of the man I once was. The man who gave up his life to become the one who could save the many.

The words of AI ManShep himself in the epilouge. Pretty much the same for AI FemShep.

Also notice the fact if you are a renegade, some of the lines change, Shepard will use force instead of being "guardian for the many". So it means AI Shep's plans and actions will change according the person s/he was before.

I wrote...

Have any evidence to back that claim up? Are Shepard's motivations really strong enough if five minutes before being presented the option of Control Shepard was solely pursuing the reapers' destruction? Would Reaper!Shepard's methods really match up to what Shepard would do even if the motivations were transferred intact? Remember that the Catalyst said that the reapers were protecting organic life. Look how well that went.

I wrote...

Face it. Control just can't be accepted as reliable with the information we got.

I'm not trying to say Control from a literalist perspective would be bad. But I'm not convinced that its more likely to be good than bad, becuase there are simply too many ways for it to go spectacularily wrong.

Modifié par Simon_Says, 01 août 2012 - 10:21 .