80611 réponses à ce sujet

[demersel]

BatmanTurian wrote...

demersel wrote...

zigamortis wrote...

Anything big come of leviathan?

Yes. IT is true. 

IT is slightly more likely. Nothing has been proven.

Or what you said. Whatever. 

[BatmanTurian]

Ithurael wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

demersel wrote...

zigamortis wrote...

Anything big come of leviathan?

Yes. IT is true. 

IT is slightly more likely. Nothing has been proven.

Logically,

What would it take for IT to be proven/disproven absolutly?

I see a lot of debate on the validity or some issues as well as discussion on 'proof' but in all, what would it take for IT to be true?

Word of God, whether directly from the writers or by proxy with in-game events and dialogue.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 04 septembre 2012 - 07:10 .

[RavenEyry]

Rifneno wrote...

I've still yet to see any literalist explanation for the eye change that isn't dumber than a vorcha with syphilis.

Best I've heard is that Shep's eye implants have the blue pattern below the red one.

[BatmanTurian]

Ithurael wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

demersel wrote...

zigamortis wrote...

Anything big come of leviathan?

Yes. IT is true. 

IT is slightly more likely. Nothing has been proven.

Logically,

What would it take for IT to be proven/disproven absolutly?

I see a lot of debate on the validity or some issues as well as discussion on 'proof' but in all, what would it take for IT to be true?

Also, proof is definitive. Evidence is gathered to support a theory. We don't have proof, just evidence. Until disproven, the theory is legitimate if it has a decent amount of evidence to back it up, and we went far beyond decent months ago.

[BatmanTurian]

RavenEyry wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I've still yet to see any literalist explanation for the eye change that isn't dumber than a vorcha with syphilis.

Best I've heard is that Shep's eye implants have the blue pattern below the red one.

They speculate as much or more than we do.

[Norlond]

Found another one

"Confusion
To
dream that you are confused, may reflect your true confused state of mind and
the nonsensical events of your dream.  Isolate the single element in your
dream that is confusing to you and analyze the meaning of that particular
symbol. Alternatively, dreams of confusion signifies that you are being pulled
in opposite directions or do not know which viewpoint is right"

[demersel]

Techically, IT is true until it is 100% proven that it isn't. Which really would require some post ending DLC where you are explicitly told that the crucible really did what you chose it to do, and that your squadmates were indeed stranded on some planet for some time. Or a full game that takes these exact facts as its initial premise.

and since bbioware explicitly said there would be no post ending DLCs....

Modifié par demersel, 04 septembre 2012 - 07:15 .

[Iconoclaste]

demersel wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...
***snip***

I would like to remind you, that we are not in any sort of court, niether is it a thesis defence, or something. 
You not any sort of authority, that any sort of evidence is presented to, that passes the final judgment on it. 
I do owe you anything, and neither does anyone here. 
This is a discussion forum for discussing plot of as video game. 
Your entitelments and rights start and end at reading what others have to say, decide for yourself whether or not you agree with whhat they have to say,and you also has the right to express your thoughts and opiniuns on the subject discussed in each particular topic. 

Demanding anything to PROVEN to you, reffering to fictional lore in video game as EVIDENCE.  means your got too cought up in the discussion, and really becoming delusional.

You are inferring things I am not asking for, and maybe you are doing this to avoid the crux of the subject? I can understand that.

In any discussion, there will be freedom from any part to point out the fact that opposing arguments rely on false premisses or assumptions. Your arguments regarding "re-used assets" are implying that Bioware did this to support IT, but your "evidence" for that is strictly "circumstancial", if any. But even putting a gazillion of circumstancial, indirect "hints" to prove that Bioware did this or that on purpose will not amount to one, single proof. It's called "speculation". And if these notions are foreign to you, then you could still read a bit on these things, that are applied as much in courts as in logic. There are simple rules for a "discussion" to be a "discussion". If you want to create a private forum for IT, there is a function for that on the BSN. The fact that IT is still being discussed on a public, open forum will be associated with the will to conduct a civilized discussion with any participant. I don't like trolls, But sometimes I have the feeling that what mostly happens here some days is done in the deliberate intent to attract these trolls, so everyone present will have a good time collectively reuniting around an easy target.

You are on a public forum, open for anyone to come in, discuss, comment, and you should bear in mind that they are not all morons that will oppose to your opinion.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 04 septembre 2012 - 07:18 .

[Rifneno]

RavenEyry wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I've still yet to see any literalist explanation for the eye change that isn't dumber than a vorcha with syphilis.

Best I've heard is that Shep's eye implants have the blue pattern below the red one.

The best one I've heard is that the method for Shepard taking control of the Reapers, Shepard making every tree in the galaxy have printed circuitry in its leaves, and the Arca Monolith enslaving someone for the Reapers all look exactly the same.

[Rifneno]

demersel wrote...

Techically, IT is true until it is 100% proven that it isn't. Which really would require some post ending DLC where you are explicitly told that the crucible really did what you chose it to do, and that your squadmates were indeed stranded on some planet for some time. Or a full game that takes these exact facts as its initial premise.

and since bbioware explicitly said there would be no post ending DLCs....

BW has said a lot of stuff.  I'm not saying I wouldn't take their word on lore tidbits or canon or whatever, but there isn't enough salt on Earth for me to take with what they say about future content.  I can't think of anything offhand that they haven't lied about.

[BatmanTurian]

Iconoclaste wrote...

demersel wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...
***snip***

I would like to remind you, that we are not in any sort of court, niether is it a thesis defence, or something. 
You not any sort of authority, that any sort of evidence is presented to, that passes the final judgment on it. 
I do owe you anything, and neither does anyone here. 
This is a discussion forum for discussing plot of as video game. 
Your entitelments and rights start and end at reading what others have to say, decide for yourself whether or not you agree with whhat they have to say,and you also has the right to express your thoughts and opiniuns on the subject discussed in each particular topic. 

Demanding anything to PROVEN to you, reffering to fictional lore in video game as EVIDENCE.  means your got too cought up in the discussion, and really becoming delusional.

You are inferring things I am not asking for, and maybe you are doing this to avoid the crux of the subject? I can understand that.

In any discussion, there will be freedom from any part to point out the fact that opposing arguments rely on false premisses or assumptions. Your arguments regarding "re-used assets" are implying that Bioware did this to support IT, but your "evidence" for that is strictly "circumstancial", if any. But even putting a gazillion of circumstancial, indirect "hints" to prove that Bioware did this or that on purpose will not amount to one, single proof. It's called "speculation". And if these notions are foreign to you, then you could still read a bit on these things, that are applied as much in courts as in logic. There are simple rules for a "discussion" to be a "discussion". If you want to create a private forum for IT, there is a function for that on the BSN. The fact that IT is still being discussed on a public, open forum will be associated with the will to conduct a civilized discussin with any participant. I don't like trolls, But sometimes I have the feeling that what mostly happens here some days is done in the deliberate intent to attract these trolls, so everyone present will have a good time collectively reuniting around an easy target.

You are on a public forum, open for anyone to come in, discuss, comment, and you should bear in mind that they are not all morons that will oppose to your opinion.

Still, you are expecting something that cannot be given until Bioware gives it. Evidence is all that can be gathered, even if it is circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence shows a pattern but doesn't prove anything definitivey.

[demersel]

Iconoclaste wrote...

demersel wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...
***snip***

I would like to remind you, that we are not in any sort of court, niether is it a thesis defence, or something. 
You not any sort of authority, that any sort of evidence is presented to, that passes the final judgment on it. 
I do owe you anything, and neither does anyone here. 
This is a discussion forum for discussing plot of as video game. 
Your entitelments and rights start and end at reading what others have to say, decide for yourself whether or not you agree with whhat they have to say,and you also has the right to express your thoughts and opiniuns on the subject discussed in each particular topic. 

Demanding anything to PROVEN to you, reffering to fictional lore in video game as EVIDENCE.  means your got too cought up in the discussion, and really becoming delusional.

You are inferring things I am not asking for, and maybe you are doing this to avoid the crux of the subject? I can understand that.

In any discussion, there will be freedom from any part to point out the fact that opposing arguments rely on false premisses or assumptions. Your arguments regarding "re-used assets" are implying that Bioware did this to support IT, but your "evidence" for that is strictly "circumstancial", if any. But even putting a gazillion of circumstancial, indirect "hints" to prove that Bioware did this or that on purpose will not amount to one, single proof. It's called "speculation". And if these notions are foreign to you, then you could still read a bit on these things, that are applied as much in courts as in logic. There are simple rules for a "discussion" to be a "discussion". If you want to create a private forum for IT, there is a function for that on the BSN. The fact that IT is still being discussed on a public, open forum will be associated with the will to conduct a civilized discussin with any participant. I don't like trolls, But sometimes I have the feeling that what mostly happens here some days is done in the deliberate intent to attract these trolls, so everyone present will have a good time collectively reuniting around an easy target.

You are on a public forum, open for anyone to come in, discuss, comment, and you should bear in mind that they are not all morons that will oppose to your opinion.

I agree completely. And If you are under the impresion i ever called you a moron, I would like to apologize, because it wasn't my intent. 

However. This is a public forum. A section of it dedicated to discussing everything related to the IT. 
It is a very long discussion. Some people participate in it continuesly, some just pop in from time to time.

Whe you ask question that has been already discussed literaly millions and millions of times, just popping in out of the blue, AND reciece a polite and thoughtfull answer from those who are here all the time - you really expieriencing us being extremely nice to you. Because a common courtesy from you to participate in the ongoing discussion would be to read the thread from the very first post and ONLY THEN post anything. That is acttually one of basic rules of behavior on an internet forum. 

So you have really no place in defending your right of free speach, and calling it a public forum, without getting up to speed on the ongoing disscussion on your own before you participate in it. It is impolite. 

[Iconoclaste]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Still, you are expecting something that cannot be given until Bioware gives it. Evidence is all that can be gathered, even if it is circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence shows a pattern but doesn't prove anything definitivey.

I am not "expecting" this "evidence", and not asking for it either: you can't provide it. But I surely expect some credible connection between "fresh discoveries" (or even old) with the IT. Like the meme says : "How does this relate to IT?". If it's moot, I wonder why ITers waste time on it...

Anyway, I have to get my kid at school now.

Later, keep calm!

[Ithurael]

BatmanTurian wrote...


Word of God, whether directly from the writers or by proxy with in-game events and dialogue.

Well that is a very impressive burden of proof. I, myself need in-game DLC to know for sure that IT was the intended and accepted canon story for Bioware. (Even if they didn't plan on it, they could still have adopted the IT and implemented it as canon).

Sadly, Bioware has stated that they will no longer release any post-breath content. It has been beaten to death but Merizan's own tweet states that if your version of IT requires future content we will be disappointed. Or if Your version of IT relies on future DLC, that interpretation was not the intent of bioware. Chris Priestly stated they are done with the endings and consider the EC the ending of Mass Effect 3.

So, yes, you can believe that the reapers are trying to indoctrinate shep at the end - which I actually believe they are, TIM is trying to indoc shepard but shep takes him out. But if you expect or are hoping for something post-breath which continues and completes the story then you will be very unhappy as that will not happen.

The best we can all hope for is to play more mid-game DLC which will expand the story of Cmdr Shepard. Besides, the EC and Leviathan did kinda make the endings passable. There are plotholes and inconsistancies, but it is passable at least.

[BatmanTurian]

Iconoclaste wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Still, you are expecting something that cannot be given until Bioware gives it. Evidence is all that can be gathered, even if it is circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence shows a pattern but doesn't prove anything definitivey.

I am not "expecting" this "evidence", and not asking for it either: you can't provide it. But I surely expect some credible connection between "fresh discoveries" (or even old) with the IT. Like the meme says : "How does this relate to IT?". If it's moot, I wonder why ITers waste time on it...

Anyway, I have to get my kid at school now.

Later, keep calm!

No, you are expecting "proof" which is definitive.

Does anybody who comes in here read anything I write at all besides the usual suspects?
It often feels like I am talking to a wall.

[Iconoclaste]

demersel wrote...

I agree completely. And If you are under the impresion i ever called you a moron, I would like to apologize, because it wasn't my intent. 

However. This is a public forum. A section of it dedicated to discussing everything related to the IT. 
It is a very long discussion. Some people participate in it continuesly, some just pop in from time to time.

Whe you ask question that has been already discussed literaly millions and millions of times, just popping in out of the blue, AND reciece a polite and thoughtfull answer from those who are here all the time - you really expieriencing us being extremely nice to you. Because a common courtesy from you to participate in the ongoing discussion would be to read the thread from the very first post and ONLY THEN post anything. That is acttually one of basic rules of behavior on an internet forum. 

So you have really no place in defending your right of free speach, and calling it a public forum, without getting up to speed on the ongoing disscussion on your own before you participate in it. It is impolite. 

I've been readin' that thread (and previous 2) from the start, so cheer up, I won't spend my life here chit chatting about multiplayer and mental disorders of the Trolling species...

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 04 septembre 2012 - 07:30 .

[Rifneno]

IT without additional content is worse than the literal endings because it means the Reapers were never beaten.

[Iconoclaste]

BatmanTurian wrote...

No, you are expecting "proof" which is definitive.

Aren't you?

Later...

[BatmanTurian]

Ithurael wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...


Word of God, whether directly from the writers or by proxy with in-game events and dialogue.

Well that is a very impressive burden of proof. I, myself need in-game DLC to know for sure that IT was the intended and accepted canon story for Bioware. (Even if they didn't plan on it, they could still have adopted the IT and implemented it as canon).

Sadly, Bioware has stated that they will no longer release any post-breath content. It has been beaten to death but Merizan's own tweet states that if your version of IT requires future content we will be disappointed. Or if Your version of IT relies on future DLC, that interpretation was not the intent of bioware. Chris Priestly stated they are done with the endings and consider the EC the ending of Mass Effect 3.

So, yes, you can believe that the reapers are trying to indoctrinate shep at the end - which I actually believe they are, TIM is trying to indoc shepard but shep takes him out. But if you expect or are hoping for something post-breath which continues and completes the story then you will be very unhappy as that will not happen.

The best we can all hope for is to play more mid-game DLC which will expand the story of Cmdr Shepard. Besides, the EC and Leviathan did kinda make the endings passable. There are plotholes and inconsistancies, but it is passable at least.

Our version of IT has been revised. You are referring to the old IT.

Also, "by proxy with in-game events and dialogue" = in-game DLC.
And believing anything Bioware says they will or will not do is doomed to failure.

[BatmanTurian]

Iconoclaste wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

No, you are expecting "proof" which is definitive.

Aren't you?

Later...

I don't care either way. It's an interesting interpretation and it has some evidence to lean on. I keep an open mind.

[Ithurael]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Our version of IT has been revised. You are referring to the old IT.

Also, "by proxy with in-game events and dialogue" = in-game DLC.
And believing anything Bioware says they will or will not do is doomed to failure.

Another revision!! God I am behind the times

What is the 'current' IT? IT Waking nightmare? Con? or is it still that the entire ending is happening in sheps head - Dream?

My apologies for ignorance. I only pop in once in a while

[BatmanTurian]

Ithurael wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Our version of IT has been revised. You are referring to the old IT.

Also, "by proxy with in-game events and dialogue" = in-game DLC.
And believing anything Bioware says they will or will not do is doomed to failure.

Another revision!! God I am behind the times

What is the 'current' IT? IT Waking nightmare? Con? or is it still that the entire ending is happening in sheps head - Dream?

My apologies for ignorance. I only pop in once in a while

It's been revised since EC and then again after Leviathan. A theory adapts to new information and incorporates or is disproved by new information.

I, myself, don't have all the details and I don't have a website to point you to. We try to come to a concensus before we publish. I'm sure others around here could sate your curiosity. I've been away myself for about a month.

[RavenEyry]

Ithurael wrote...

Another revision!! God I am behind the times

Well there's new stuff and old stuff occasionally gets debunked, but I hate the idea that there's only one theory to be revised. Everyone has their own personal interpretation of events and I dislike when it's implied we all think the same way.

This is not an attack on you by the way, just a general comment.

[demersel]

As far as the proofs are concerned - I already got everything i'd ever need. For me - IT is canon, even if it means that the reapers have not yet been defeated. (which they will be eventually and immenently, which we know from a stargazer scene).
You know why? Because it is a much cooler story that way and I enjoy it more. That is all the proof i need.

All i needed i got out from ME3 vanilla. If anything is added via DLC that destroyes my personal story - i could just say to myself that the DLC are optional and go all LaLALALITDIDNTHAPPENLALAlalal with hands over my ears.
Just as i did with normandy pick up scene in the EC.

Modifié par demersel, 04 septembre 2012 - 07:47 .

[byne]

Ithurael wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Our version of IT has been revised. You are referring to the old IT.

Also, "by proxy with in-game events and dialogue" = in-game DLC.
And believing anything Bioware says they will or will not do is doomed to failure.

Another revision!! God I am behind the times

What is the 'current' IT? IT Waking nightmare? Con? or is it still that the entire ending is happening in sheps head - Dream?

My apologies for ignorance. I only pop in once in a while

I still think everything after the transport crash is in Shepard's head.