GethPrimeMKII wrote...
Dwailing wrote...
Hey, just poping by to share a crazy thought. I'm starting to wonder if BioWare DID mess up the ending, but not in the way the Literalists think. What I'm wondering is if they made IT too OBVIOUS. I mean, we've always said that the power of IT is in not knowing if we're right, and what better way to not know if we're right than to NOT SUSPECT THAT SOMETHING ELSE IS GOING ON IN THE FIRST PLACE? My thoughts are that they actually eanted IT to be MORE subtle at first, and THAT'S where they failed. I'm thinking that they released the EC to remove the more obvious oddities.
Maybe I'm wrong, but aren't IT supporters in the minority within the Mass Effect community? Wouldnt that mean Bioware is pretty much on point with making indoctrination really hard to detect in the end?
Yes, this is the case
now. But a lot, to be honest a huge part, of the community supported IT after the original endings (where it was quite obvious that there is something fishy). Alas, many expected that the EC would confirm IT and because of that not being the case, they started the whole "IT-debunked" campaign that has lead to a reduced number of IT supporters within the community. That's at least what I've experienced.
In any case, since in the original ending, literal POV was ludicrous and there was a
kind of canonical interpretation (IT), BW may have decided to cover it up and have a more mixed up melange of interpretations (IT Dream, IT Con, literal, which is still ludicrous to me).
Btw: Why did everyone expect the EC to be more than it actually was? I mean, it was not planned and I assume they did not stop their work on other projects (such as DLCs), just to redeem/redo the whole ending. I guess they did the EC in some overtime/sparetime to please the costumers. That's how we got a few cutscenes, a bit more dialogue, refusal ending (not that difficult to implement) and some slides.
BatmanTurian wrote...
I realize he's polite and I have no problem with him personally. It's
just that he jumps in, thinking he's found a dent in the armor when, in
actuality, he doesn't quite understand what exactly we're saying. It
seems to be a hallmark of all IT critics.
Restrider wrote...
I remember there was a Dilbert strip that was perfectly fitting for IT.
Sadly, I cannot find it anymore, but I can paraphrase the dialogue:
*Dilbert showing some co-worker a sheet of paper*
Dilbert:
"I made a perfect development plan. Each point on this list may seem
questionable and not thought through. BUT if you see the whole concept
each point contributes to, the plan will appear to be sophisticated and
brilliant!"
Co-Worker: "I think this first point is ill-conceived."
Dilbert: "There we go...." *Facepalm*
I
think that many IT critics nit-pick at a few hints and are not really
aware of the whole concept and the amount of data that is backing IT.
I'm out, see you tommorrow while I'm bored assembling diodes in my lab.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
