Modifié par pirate1802, 08 août 2012 - 01:04 .
Now why is the IT so unbelievable to some?
Débuté par
KneeTheCap
, août 08 2012 12:13
#26
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:01
DirtyPhoenix
-
- Members
- 3 938 messages
Yes and the EC too. There was nothing dream-like in the EC, but if we are taking all those to be a dream/hallucination, might as well consider the whole game a dream, hell the entire trilogy a dream; Shepard wakes up at the med-bay after being zapped by the Eden Prime beacon and it was all an elaborate dream.
Retour en haut
#27
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:05
legion999
-
- Members
- 5 315 messages
Pitznik wrote...
Actually not answering questions like that is most authors' usual stance. They prefer their work to speak for itself, and let people speculate, instead of cutting it. I am personally more annoyed and surprised by the BS known as Twitter canon.legion999 wrote...
Because the ending is just badly written. Their refusal to confirm or deny indoctrination theory shows that they don't have the ability to write it and instead are taking the coward's way out.
Also laziness/being rushed.
Some speculation is fine. An entire ending along with other points throughout the trilogy? No thanks.
And yeah Twitter canon is bull****.
#28
Guest_magnetite_*
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:09
Guest_magnetite_*
Guest_magnetite_*
-
- Guests
Bioware indoctrinated their own fan base. It's even said in the final phases, they just stop thinking for themselves and have to believe whatever Bioware tells them. Anything other theory is not true unless it has Bioware's official stamp of approval. In this case, them making some official statement saying that's what happened. Otherwise, they won't believe it.
Not just the fans though, I see this a lot with society. They can't think for themselves, thus they rely on others to tell them what to think. They need to be spoon fed.
Not just the fans though, I see this a lot with society. They can't think for themselves, thus they rely on others to tell them what to think. They need to be spoon fed.
Modifié par magnetite, 08 août 2012 - 01:14 .
#29
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:10
dorktainian
-
- Members
- 4 424 messages
Hope IT is true. Not holding my breath tho. I don't think Bioware are intelligent enough.
#30
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:14
AlexMBrennan
-
- Members
- 7 002 messages
Given the rest of ME3, yes. YES. YEEEEEEEEES.Is it that hard to believe that video game writing can be that in-depth?
How about basic common sense? Why should I believe it? Why should I believe that IT, in particular, is true? You've given me no reason to*. You pick one possible explanation from a vast number of conceivable but far fetched and implausible explanations, and then want me to believe it *unless I can prove it wrong*. That's called privileging the hypothesisOr do you have a another reason?
Further, it's a violation of basic common sense - sure, me sitting at my desk writing this post could be a dream/hallucination/Matrix-style simulation, but you'll agree that the smart thing is to assume that it is, in fact, real.
Unless there is compelling evidence to do otherwise (e.g. a pink unicorn flying past my window), then that's the smart decision.
* If you don't agree, get an understanding of logic and hypothesis testing.
Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 08 août 2012 - 01:14 .
#31
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:20
pseudonymic
-
- Members
- 370 messages
legion999 wrote...
Some game writing can be that deep. Not from Bioware though.
NinthGeorgesw wrote...
Because it's basically "It was all a dream" and Biowares not stupid enough to try that.
......... contradiction.
#32
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:25
BSpud
-
- Members
- 1 086 messages
pseudonymic wrote...
legion999 wrote...
Some game writing can be that deep. Not from Bioware though.NinthGeorgesw wrote...
Because it's basically "It was all a dream" and Biowares not stupid enough to try that.
......... contradiction.
.......... two different people.
#33
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:27
pseudonymic
-
- Members
- 370 messages
BeefheartSpud wrote...
.......... two different people.
i know. just happen to find it funny that in the same thread bioware is virtually called smart and not quite so smart.
#34
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:31
shepdog77
-
- Members
- 2 634 messages
pirate1802 wrote...
Yes and the EC too. There was nothing dream-like in the EC, but if we are taking all those to be a dream/hallucination, might as well consider the whole game a dream, hell the entire trilogy a dream; Shepard wakes up at the med-bay after being zapped by the Eden Prime beacon and it was all an elaborate dream.
Nope, It goes back even farther than that. You wake up as Teenager Shepard, living in your background profile timeline. (Earthborn, Colonist, Spacer). Shepard wakes up in his bed after a night of heavy partying, says "What the f*ck did I do last night?", then goes about his daily buisiness. You control him while he eats his breakfast, watches TV, and takes a sh*t.
Welcome to "The Sims Effect".
#35
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:47
ppeters77
-
- Members
- 118 messages
pseudonymic wrote...
......... contradiction.
Being in the vast space between stupid and smart isn't a contradiction....
@topic
IT is a nice concept, but to believe it is the intended ending from Bioware is far-fetched, if not totally stupid.
Imagine: You got a lots of fans who really love your product, even more than those Apple-Fanboys love thier iPods. And than you intentionally break all your promises, deliver something which incites anger and irritation, gets your publisher a price as the worst company on the planet and leads to the development of the Extended Cut which was free and thus costs your company money, when the time could've been used to program paid DLC.
And all this just to make an ending with a hidden agenda which only could be discovered by your most loyal disappointed fans.
Yeah, of course... IT is the intended ending.... sure....
#36
Posté 08 août 2012 - 01:58
DirtyPhoenix
-
- Members
- 3 938 messages
shepdog77 wrote...
pirate1802 wrote...
Yes and the EC too. There was nothing dream-like in the EC, but if we are taking all those to be a dream/hallucination, might as well consider the whole game a dream, hell the entire trilogy a dream; Shepard wakes up at the med-bay after being zapped by the Eden Prime beacon and it was all an elaborate dream.
Nope, It goes back even farther than that. You wake up as Teenager Shepard, living in your background profile timeline. (Earthborn, Colonist, Spacer). Shepard wakes up in his bed after a night of heavy partying, says "What the f*ck did I do last night?", then goes about his daily buisiness. You control him while he eats his breakfast, watches TV, and takes a sh*t.
Welcome to "The Sims Effect".
Mind = Blown!
#37
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:08
CheeseWithMold
-
- Members
- 19 messages
NinthGeorgesw wrote...
Because it's basically "It was all a dream" and Biowares not stupid enough to try that.
Stupid? This is an amazing coincidence for BioWare. They could capitalize on this like crazy, and get a hell of a lot of publicity for it too. You'd be crazy NOT to go with the IT. It makes sense (more so than the original endings at least), and if it were confirmed to be true, BioWare practically tricked their fans for the span of three games. Not a small feat.
They would probably sell a few more copies of the game as well. The whole "Bad Endings" issue was huge,
probably made itself into a few newspapers. It was covered in pretty much all gaming magazines and gaming websites anyways.
It definetly wasn't their intention, and I'm not saying the IT is true or anything, but it'd be good for marketing.
Modifié par CheeseWithMold, 08 août 2012 - 02:11 .
#38
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:13
sonicphoto
-
- Members
- 123 messages
I used to believe in it but the reject ending change me to "I wish it was IT".
#39
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:13
comrade gando
-
- Members
- 2 554 messages
NinthGeorgesw wrote...
Because it's basically "It was all a dream" and Biowares not stupid enough to try that.
Well it was all a dream anyway thanks to space grampa. Or bed time story whatever
#40
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:17
ThaDPG
-
- Members
- 370 messages
CheeseWithMold wrote...
NinthGeorgesw wrote...
Because it's basically "It was all a dream" and Biowares not stupid enough to try that.
Stupid? This is an amazing coincidence for BioWare. They could capitalize on this like crazy, and get a hell of a lot of publicity for it too. You'd be crazy NOT to go with the IT. It makes sense (more so than the original endings at least), and if it were confirmed to be true, BioWare practically tricked their fans for the span of three games. Not a small feat.
They would probably sell a few more copies of the game as well. The whole "Bad Endings" issue was huge,
probably made itself into a few newspapers. It was covered in pretty much all gaming magazines and gaming websites anyways.
It definetly wasn't their intention, and I'm not saying the IT is true or anything, but it'd be good for marketing.
I agree, I don't think BW intended this at all, but I do believe they could capitalize big time just by releasing DLC related to the IT. It pretty much fell into their lap, and IMO they'd be dumb not to use this way out of the mess they got themselves into. Do I think this will ever actually happen? probably not, but BW has a very easy way out of the whole ending debacle
#41
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:21
macrocarl
-
- Members
- 1 762 messages
People were mostly mad that any one liked the pre- EC endings and wanted to think about them. Terms like 'Fanfic' was thrown around even though all the clues of IT being a solid theory was all based on in game info.
#42
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:23
MegaSovereign
-
- Members
- 10 794 messages
Because Bioware's writing style is not that subtle.
#43
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:26
AnsinJung
-
- Members
- 247 messages
Mass Effect's main story was about Shepard. The plot, which was largely a background story, was about the Reaper threat. The story needed to stay focused on Shepard and let us find resolution through Shepard, just as every other resolved problem throughout the series.
IT doesn't solve this problem, but it opens a door to solving it later. It also demonstrates a way in which the Reapers win, which we mostly thought was a possible ending in the first place.
Many of us expected some sort of twist on the endings, but naturally assumed they would make sense. Star child and the destruction of relays didn't make sense: they had no build-up. Control was something we were stopping half the game by fighting Cerberus. It wasn't seen as a good thing at any point in the series by anyone not a villain. Synthesis is ugly and demeaning to the diverse characters Bioware created. Why would they choose to destroy that? Inconceivable. Destroy is basically a "meh, these other endings suck, sorry Geth."
Unfortunately, the only endings that make sense also require the Reapers to be taken down a notch or two. Crucible disables shields and high EMS conventional victory possible? That would have been much better, but if it was there in the first place, there would be a fair amount of complaining about how it was too easy and felt cheap.
I think before this debacle, a lot of us under-appreciated happy Hollywood endings. That's not to say Destroy isn't happy on the face of it, but it certainly lacks the satisfaction of ME1 and ME2's endings.
If there's one thing Deus Ex did reasonably well, it was creating divergent lines of thought throughout the game. You could feel these warring philosophies while playing the game, and when you arrived at the end, multiple choices were a pleasant surprise that didn't feel out of place.
There was only one solution given to us by Mass Effect, all the way up until the fail, which was "Dead Reapers." As others have pointed out, Hackett says as much.
The endings were unexpected, but it wasn't a matter of whether the audience was surprised. That is a desirable goal when you can show the bread crumb trail in reverse, and how everything falls in place. KotoR did exactly that to some of the greatest nerd chills I've experienced.
If Bioware did something really poorly, even before writing the fail endings, it was planning for them. They never crafted a bread-crumb trail. Without it, it was far easier to believe that Shepard would win because that's what Shepard has been doing, and that's generally how video games play out. They only allowed Shepard to win in the ugliest ways possible, where we have to embrace the "truth" of our enemies, which is a load of garbage. We were fine with sacrifice, but the endings themselves required that the audience accept the truth of what's happening.
When what happens in the endings is so offensive to any intelligence, much less a supposedly advanced AI beyond human comprehension, after our path here has unfolded in a relatively logical way, IT appears as a door of escape where it makes sense after all.
It's not "all just a dream" in IT. The dream itself is real to Shepard, as a real indoctrination attempt. Furthermore, IT doesn't actually require that it be a dream from the beam. Maybe the dream begins when you choose an ending, that is, where Shepard chooses to do the Reapers' bidding, up until the platform to fail kid, it appeared real but like Shepard was pretty out of it, even before TIM showed up.
IT doesn't solve this problem, but it opens a door to solving it later. It also demonstrates a way in which the Reapers win, which we mostly thought was a possible ending in the first place.
Many of us expected some sort of twist on the endings, but naturally assumed they would make sense. Star child and the destruction of relays didn't make sense: they had no build-up. Control was something we were stopping half the game by fighting Cerberus. It wasn't seen as a good thing at any point in the series by anyone not a villain. Synthesis is ugly and demeaning to the diverse characters Bioware created. Why would they choose to destroy that? Inconceivable. Destroy is basically a "meh, these other endings suck, sorry Geth."
Unfortunately, the only endings that make sense also require the Reapers to be taken down a notch or two. Crucible disables shields and high EMS conventional victory possible? That would have been much better, but if it was there in the first place, there would be a fair amount of complaining about how it was too easy and felt cheap.
I think before this debacle, a lot of us under-appreciated happy Hollywood endings. That's not to say Destroy isn't happy on the face of it, but it certainly lacks the satisfaction of ME1 and ME2's endings.
If there's one thing Deus Ex did reasonably well, it was creating divergent lines of thought throughout the game. You could feel these warring philosophies while playing the game, and when you arrived at the end, multiple choices were a pleasant surprise that didn't feel out of place.
There was only one solution given to us by Mass Effect, all the way up until the fail, which was "Dead Reapers." As others have pointed out, Hackett says as much.
The endings were unexpected, but it wasn't a matter of whether the audience was surprised. That is a desirable goal when you can show the bread crumb trail in reverse, and how everything falls in place. KotoR did exactly that to some of the greatest nerd chills I've experienced.
If Bioware did something really poorly, even before writing the fail endings, it was planning for them. They never crafted a bread-crumb trail. Without it, it was far easier to believe that Shepard would win because that's what Shepard has been doing, and that's generally how video games play out. They only allowed Shepard to win in the ugliest ways possible, where we have to embrace the "truth" of our enemies, which is a load of garbage. We were fine with sacrifice, but the endings themselves required that the audience accept the truth of what's happening.
When what happens in the endings is so offensive to any intelligence, much less a supposedly advanced AI beyond human comprehension, after our path here has unfolded in a relatively logical way, IT appears as a door of escape where it makes sense after all.
It's not "all just a dream" in IT. The dream itself is real to Shepard, as a real indoctrination attempt. Furthermore, IT doesn't actually require that it be a dream from the beam. Maybe the dream begins when you choose an ending, that is, where Shepard chooses to do the Reapers' bidding, up until the platform to fail kid, it appeared real but like Shepard was pretty out of it, even before TIM showed up.
#44
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:32
Mahrac
-
- Members
- 2 624 messages
Occam's Razor, combined with people looking too hard for proof with too much desperation.
#45
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:39
KneeTheCap
-
- Members
- 580 messages
MegaSovereign wrote...
Because Bioware's writing style is not that subtle.
Has their writing style remained the same through all the games? I'm sure it has evolved. What if this time they did something subtle? Is it too far-fetched?
#46
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:52
The_Shootist
-
- Members
- 480 messages
Now why is the IT so unbelievable to some?
Because it was pulled out of the fanbois' collective butt?
Because it was pulled out of the fanbois' collective butt?
#47
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:54
ThaDPG
-
- Members
- 370 messages
The_Shootist wrote...
Now why is the IT so unbelievable to some?
Because it was pulled out of the fanbois' collective butt?
and yet still makes more sense than BW's artistic endings
#48
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:54
Baa Baa
-
- Members
- 4 209 messages
Fixedlegion999 wrote...
Some game writing can be that deep. Not from Mac Walters though.
Modifié par Baa Baa, 08 août 2012 - 02:55 .
#49
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:55
SubAstris
-
- Members
- 1 721 messages
First, BW haven't really shown that they would be up to the task of doing such a thing, and second, IT leaves the game without an ending. It's not impossible, but most people who are against it see that their alternative explanations for everything considered evidence for IT
#50
Posté 08 août 2012 - 02:56
ThaDPG
-
- Members
- 370 messages
Baa Baa wrote...
Fixedlegion999 wrote...
Some game writing can be that deep. Not from Mac Walters though.
makes better sense now
