80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Andromidius]

Legion of 1337 wrote...
He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

There's no concrete on the Citadel, therefore there's no rubble.  Therefore Shepard isn't on the Citadel.

Next.

[desert_beagle]

Iconoclaste wrote...

desert_beagle wrote...

Rubble on the Citadel?  Really?  Concrete rubble in space.  The fact that the room Shepard is in is completely exposed to the vacuum of space and his suit is completely fried not to mention the fact that he has no helmet on this time completely obliterates any notion that he wakes up on the Citadel.  Shepard would be without a doubt deader than the Protheans.  How does he wake up on Earth?  He was never on the Citadel to begin with.  

That is the whole point of the Indoctrination Theory.  After Harby's beam, the entire sequence aftwards is an indoctrination attempt by the Reapers to get Shepard to choose one of their options Control or Synthesis.  The two options that were supported by the series two main alternate antagonists apart from the Reapers.  TIM wanted Control, and Saren wanted Synthesis.

Now you tell me, what kind of hero actually at the end falters and decides to pick one of the options that he was fighting against through the entire series?

What TIM and Saren wanted is quite different from what Shepard is offered at the end, because the Crucible didn't exist before.

I would go back and listen to TIM statements about control and compare them to the Shreaper's narration of the Control ending.  They sound oddly in line with each other.  Listen to Saren's statements about joining with the Reapers at the end of ME1 and it sounds an awful lot like the Catalysts Sysnthesis option.

True, the Crucible didn't exist, but that is the point.  No one knew what the Crucible was or what it even did.  In an attempt to indoctrinate Shepard, they basically put something into his head that would make those two "options" seem viable and that the Crucible was the only way to do it.

[Legion of 1337]

You all played ME2 right? And saw how little sense the plot of that game makes? Is it really so out there to think that all the inconsistencies and plot holes that supposedly point to IT being true are really just Bioware screwing up their writing? We already know the ending was a rushed mess so these kinds of things aren't unsurprising. Doesn't mean they're excusable, the're just unsurprising.

[Legion of 1337]

Andromidius wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...
He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

There's no concrete on the Citadel, therefore there's no rubble.  Therefore Shepard isn't on the Citadel.

Next.

Can't be on Earth, he'd have burned up in the atmosphere. If he was still on Earth due to IT, then he'd just get up and continue on the the beam and activate the Crucible anyway, making IT pointless. Also, there are quite clearly areas of the Citadel made of some kind of stoney material, probably not actual concrete since that's an Earth thing but something similar. Everything on the Citadel is shiny and glossed though so it's hard to tell exactly which parts are made of what.

[desert_beagle]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

desert_beagle wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

EC, from my perspective, destroyed IT. If IT were true, then you would need to go out on a limb and say that everything we are shown of the future of the ME universe as a result of Shepard's choice was also all in his head for. That all the rebuilding, and people going on with their lives, and even memorializing Shepard, was all in his head? That makes no sense.

It makes more sense that stuff happening in his head, than Shepard waking up on Earth after being blown to hell and gone on the Citadel after Destroy and only Destroy I might add.  How is this even remotely possible?  What?  Is Shepard actually Chuck Norris?  If that were the case they wouldn't have needed the Crucible at all.

He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

If IT theory stands true Shep never left earth.

Also one reason Bioware would go with IT if not doing so already. Money. They would make a fortune, increased sales, increased publicity, happier fans. The current literal endings suck. 

If he doesn't leave Earth, then that makes IT pointless, because even if he does "break free", he'd wake up on Earth, proceed to the beam, and activate the Crucible. Which is what happens already anyway.

Maybe, or maybe not.  You see, if Shepard never left Earth, then he never saw the Crucible or what it actually does. Activating it in the real world, and not some Reaper induced dream, would probably yield some very different results.  Plus I doubt that he would have as easy of a time activating the Crucible in the real world.

Modifié par desert_beagle, 02 septembre 2012 - 05:54 .

[desert_beagle]

double post

Modifié par desert_beagle, 02 septembre 2012 - 05:54 .

[Iconoclaste]

Andromidius wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...
He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

There's no concrete on the Citadel, therefore there's no rubble.  Therefore Shepard isn't on the Citadel.

Next.

Nowhere can you see the word "concrete" in the game files. You will see "Rubble" in many packages, and this piece of evidence alone is not enough to decide of the issue. The Citadel has glasses, bolts and nuts, alcohol, furniture, textile, food for all species, grass and plants, water, artificial atmosphere and gravity everywhere. The outer hull and main structures might well be near "indestructible", but not doors, apartments walls, decoration and secondary structures.

[Andromidius]

Iconoclaste wrote...
What TIM and Saren wanted is quite different from what Shepard is offered at the end, because the Crucible didn't exist before.

Who's to say they didn't know?  I mean TIM did have information on the Catalyst before Shepard did, and tried to seize the Citadel.  Saren was in league directly with Sovereign, so who's to say what he knew about the overall Reaper plans?

Not to mention you don't need to know the method to have the same agenda.  Pre-nuclear America wanted to end the war with Japan quickly, and their goal didn't change once they had the method to do so.  The means are different from the goals.

[XXIceColdXX]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

You all played ME2 right? And saw how little sense the plot of that game makes? Is it really so out there to think that all the inconsistencies and plot holes that supposedly point to IT being true are really just Bioware screwing up their writing? We already know the ending was a rushed mess so these kinds of things aren't unsurprising. Doesn't mean they're excusable, the're just unsurprising.

It is a possibility your right. Maybe the writing does suck. But with IT, it could bring alot of these inconsistencies and plot holes into line so they actually mean something. It could make the writing staff look good again. Whether you think IT will happen or not, what would you rather?

[Andromidius]

Legion of 1337 wrote...
Can't be on Earth, he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

Sigh.

That's.  The.  Point.

Also, stop this whole 'oh well IT is worthless anyway since Shepard would go do it anyway' nonsense.  If IT is correct then the Crucible is likely either a dud of a trap anyway, and Shepard is still bleeding out in a pile of rubble.  The fight isn't over, by a long shot.

Start thinking.  You might be suprised.  Or it might hurt, but hey.

[Andromidius]

Iconoclaste wrote...
Nowhere can you see the word "concrete" in the game files.

Wow, you're being pedantic.  Sorry, but I know concrete when I see it.  And you can't make rubble out of metal or polymers.  Only rocks, bricks or concrete.

Seriously.  Wow.  Do I have to spoonfeed?

[Legion of 1337]

desert_beagle wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

XXIceColdXX wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

desert_beagle wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

EC, from my perspective, destroyed IT. If IT were true, then you would need to go out on a limb and say that everything we are shown of the future of the ME universe as a result of Shepard's choice was also all in his head for. That all the rebuilding, and people going on with their lives, and even memorializing Shepard, was all in his head? That makes no sense.

It makes more sense that stuff happening in his head, than Shepard waking up on Earth after being blown to hell and gone on the Citadel after Destroy and only Destroy I might add.  How is this even remotely possible?  What?  Is Shepard actually Chuck Norris?  If that were the case they wouldn't have needed the Crucible at all.

He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

If IT theory stands true Shep never left earth.

Also one reason Bioware would go with IT if not doing so already. Money. They would make a fortune, increased sales, increased publicity, happier fans. The current literal endings suck. 

If he doesn't leave Earth, then that makes IT pointless, because even if he does "break free", he'd wake up on Earth, proceed to the beam, and activate the Crucible. Which is what happens already anyway.

Maybe, or maybe not.  You see, if Shepard never left Earth, then he never saw the Crucible or what it actually does. Activating it in the real world, and not some Reaper induced dream, would probably yield some very different results.  Plus I doubt that he would have as easy of a time activating the Crucible in the real world.

But we are not shown any of this. What would the point be of having Shepard be influecned by the Reapers into this dream-like state where how he decides to use the Crucible breaks him free of their control or indoctrinates him, then "wakes up" if he makes the right choice, and proceeds to to everything the same as we saw before ut in the real world, except with the Crucible simply blowing the Reapers up or something? There's no point to that. There is no hint of him waking up from anything. We're even shown what happens to the universe afterward. All that just so we could do the same damn thing but in the real world?

[Andromidius]

I'm out. The stupidity being leveled here is frustrating me.

[desert_beagle]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...
He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

There's no concrete on the Citadel, therefore there's no rubble.  Therefore Shepard isn't on the Citadel.

Next.

Nowhere can you see the word "concrete" in the game files. You will see "Rubble" in many packages, and this piece of evidence alone is not enough to decide of the issue. The Citadel has glasses, bolts and nuts, alcohol, furniture, textile, food for all species, grass and plants, water, artificial atmosphere and gravity everywhere. The outer hull and main structures might well be near "indestructible", but not doors, apartments walls, decoration and secondary structures.

Where is any of what you have mentioned where Shepard is standing or lying when the Citadel blows up?  To say that his body fell is to say that it fell through space because he is on the underside of the Presidium tower on the exterior of the Citadel in space.  I will grant that a forcefield is protecting the decision chamber but when the center blows that field is gone, and Shepard is at ground zero.

Did Shepard's unconcious barbequed body float through the vacuum of space with no helmet or life support system of any kind to land inside the wreckage of a SEALED portion of a Citadel ward arm?

Modifié par desert_beagle, 02 septembre 2012 - 06:05 .

[Hrothdane]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...
He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

There's no concrete on the Citadel, therefore there's no rubble.  Therefore Shepard isn't on the Citadel.

Next.

Can't be on Earth, he'd have burned up in the atmosphere. If he was still on Earth due to IT, then he'd just get up and continue on the the beam and activate the Crucible anyway, making IT pointless. Also, there are quite clearly areas of the Citadel made of some kind of stoney material, probably not actual concrete since that's an Earth thing but something similar. Everything on the Citadel is shiny and glossed though so it's hard to tell exactly which parts are made of what.

It would not be pointless because the first trip was a symbolic representation of Shepard overcoming indoctrination, and not actually representative of how the Crucible ACTUALLY works. Furthermore, it would have the thematic purpose of showing Shepard defeating the most potent and subversive weapon of the Reapers, one that has been developed since the very first mission of the first game.

Whether or not you personally think IT is a "good" ending is not an argument against the evidence that it actually IS the ending. If I were arguing that Charles Manson is guilty of the crime of murder, saying "but if he did murder those people it would be bad!" would be an incongruous argument against my stance.

BioWare dodges questions of whether or not there is concrete on the Citadel, so while it is conceivable that the Citadel does have concrete, their silence on the issue raises eyebrows amongst us here.

[Legion of 1337]

Andromidius wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...
Can't be on Earth, he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

Sigh.

That's.  The.  Point.

Also, stop this whole 'oh well IT is worthless anyway since Shepard would go do it anyway' nonsense.  If IT is correct then the Crucible is likely either a dud of a trap anyway, and Shepard is still bleeding out in a pile of rubble.  The fight isn't over, by a long shot.

Start thinking.  You might be suprised.  Or it might hurt, but hey.

Well, in that case, since we're not shown what happens after his indoctrination, according to IT, the game has no ending. And if we hypothesize, it means we're doomed in that case since the Crucible was our only hope because Hackett's fleet gets its ass kicked more or less.

Brilliant.

Is it really harder to accept that Bioware ****ed up?

[Iconoclaste]

desert_beagle wrote...

I would go back and listen to TIM statements about control and compare them to the Shreaper's narration of the Control ending.  They sound oddly in line with each other.  Listen to Saren's statements about joining with the Reapers at the end of ME1 and it sounds an awful lot like the Catalysts Sysnthesis option.

True, the Crucible didn't exist, but that is the point.  No one knew what the Crucible was or what it even did.  In an attempt to indoctrinate Shepard, they basically put something into his head that would make those two "options" seem viable and that the Crucible was the only way to do it.

I am not discussing of the validity of the choices, I am discussing the possibility of IT to be implemented in any kind of DLC. You might want to explain this  or that part of IT regarding the game context until doomsday comes, that will not give Bioware any incentive or hint on how to actually alter the content. Bioware will not make a "new" ending, but you are free to hope. I just don't think they would see the making of a huge final battle negating all the previous content of the endings an interesting and cost-effective option. There is a world of difference between wishing for a whole new level to be designed, and just tiny bits of actual content to be subtly tailored to support IT.

[desert_beagle]

Hrothdane wrote...

It would not be pointless because the first trip was a symbolic representation of Shepard overcoming indoctrination, and not actually representative of how the Crucible ACTUALLY works. Furthermore, it would have the thematic purpose of showing Shepard defeating the most potent and subversive weapon of the Reapers, one that has been developed since the very first mission of the first game.

Thank you.  

[Legion of 1337]

Hrothdane wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...
He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

There's no concrete on the Citadel, therefore there's no rubble.  Therefore Shepard isn't on the Citadel.

Next.

Can't be on Earth, he'd have burned up in the atmosphere. If he was still on Earth due to IT, then he'd just get up and continue on the the beam and activate the Crucible anyway, making IT pointless. Also, there are quite clearly areas of the Citadel made of some kind of stoney material, probably not actual concrete since that's an Earth thing but something similar. Everything on the Citadel is shiny and glossed though so it's hard to tell exactly which parts are made of what.

It would not be pointless because the first trip was a symbolic representation of Shepard overcoming indoctrination, and not actually representative of how the Crucible ACTUALLY works. Furthermore, it would have the thematic purpose of showing Shepard defeating the most potent and subversive weapon of the Reapers, one that has been developed since the very first mission of the first game.

Whether or not you personally think IT is a "good" ending is not an argument against the evidence that it actually IS the ending. If I were arguing that Charles Manson is guilty of the crime of murder, saying "but if he did murder those people it would be bad!" would be an incongruous argument against my stance.

BioWare dodges questions of whether or not there is concrete on the Citadel, so while it is conceivable that the Citadel does have concrete, their silence on the issue raises eyebrows amongst us here.

Ok. But if we're not shown what happens after the indoctrination sequence (which is apparently the existing ending), then the game has no ending. And you don't make a game with no ending, especially not one with two DLCs that essentially expand (EC) or explain (Leviathan) the ending. An ending that is apparently a dream-like sequence,  not the actual ending. In that case, why did they explain it further? Why not show us the "real" ending? That makes no sense.

Modifié par Legion of 1337, 02 septembre 2012 - 06:11 .

[Icinix]

Andromidius wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...
He's in the rubble of the Citadel. He can't be on Earth because he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

There's no concrete on the Citadel, therefore there's no rubble.  Therefore Shepard isn't on the Citadel.

Next.

Nah. He's still on the cidatel ..... only its just after ME1 when bits of Sovereign came crashing through the tower.

ME2 and ME3 haven't actually happened yet!

In all seriousness though, everything in the breathe scene screams Earth, the only thing is that shiny torpedo tube thing which is still unidentifiable.

[desert_beagle]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Ok. But if we're not shown what happens after the indoctrination sequence (which is apparently the existing ending), then the game has no ending. And you don't make a game with no ending, especially not one with two DLCs that essentially expand (EC) or explain (Leviathan) the ending. An ending that is apparently a dream-like sequence,  not the actual ending. In that case, why did they explain it further? Why not show us the "real" ending? That makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense if you want to milk your fans for every red cent they have to slowly satisfy their hope for an actual ending that not only makes sense, but conforms with what they have been fighting as Shepard for throughout three games now.

[Hrothdane]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...
Can't be on Earth, he'd have burned up in the atmosphere.

Sigh.

That's.  The.  Point.

Also, stop this whole 'oh well IT is worthless anyway since Shepard would go do it anyway' nonsense.  If IT is correct then the Crucible is likely either a dud of a trap anyway, and Shepard is still bleeding out in a pile of rubble.  The fight isn't over, by a long shot.

Start thinking.  You might be suprised.  Or it might hurt, but hey.

Well, in that case, since we're not shown what happens after his indoctrination, according to IT, the game has no ending. And if we hypothesize, it means we're doomed in that case since the Crucible was our only hope because Hackett's fleet gets its ass kicked more or less.

Brilliant.

Is it really harder to accept that Bioware ****ed up?

An argument against the consequences of something's existence is not an argument against its existence.

BioWare obviously plans on milking us for money for either epilogue DLC or ME4. If they just want us to headcanon the rest of the ending, then IT isn't exactly a great ending either, but at least it makes more thematic and structural sense than a literal reading. Tully Ackland already said "there are elements of ME3 that are intended to have non-literal interpretations."

[Legion of 1337]

desert_beagle wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Ok. But if we're not shown what happens after the indoctrination sequence (which is apparently the existing ending), then the game has no ending. And you don't make a game with no ending, especially not one with two DLCs that essentially expand (EC) or explain (Leviathan) the ending. An ending that is apparently a dream-like sequence,  not the actual ending. In that case, why did they explain it further? Why not show us the "real" ending? That makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense if you want to milk your fans for every red cent they have to slowly satisfy their hope for an actual ending that not only makes sense, but conforms with what they have been fighting as Shepard for throughout three games now.

So you actually think that's what's happening? In that case, the only real way to prove you 100% wrong (since most of your evidence is based on belief and interpretation) is for BW to stop making ME3 DLC. If they don't make ending DLC (which they've already said they won't), then IT is wrong. I would bet on that being the case. I would also bet people would keep believing in it anyway, since it is effectively a religion at this point.