264 réponses à ce sujet

[Ithurael]

KneeTheCap wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
...snip....

Basically, the IT is just a big fancy combination of the famous All Just A Dream trope and the Reset Button trope. The IT provides a 'Reset Button' through an 'A Just a Dream' retcon.

But if this is the case, would it not make sense to go with the IT and bask at the glory?

Because the EC, Chris Priestly's statement, and Mike Gamble's Tweet have all pointed to no more ending DLC. Ending in this case is everything that happens after explosions.

The IT Dream Theory is total fanfic and should be moved to the FanFiction section. The Dream IT indicates that there will be an addition to the game after we wake up upon choosing destroy.

The IT Con Theory (Or just Con Theory) is a rather legitimate way to interpret the endings.

IT gave people hope that something better was down the road. There is nothing better down the road. It is over.

That is why I do not believe in the IT Dream Theory (IT vanilla). Though i am partial and kinda liking the IT Con Theory that Twighlight God thought up.

[Little Princess Peach]

NinthGeorgesw wrote...

Because it's basically "It was all a dream" and Biowares not stupid enough to try that.

buut it was there original plan hence the  nightmears

[Soultaker08]

Ghost1017 wrote...

Soultaker08 wrote...

Me3 went gold in november 2011.

So in fact they had !!!!9 Months!!!! to create their "It was all a dream wtf" ending and instead they are wasting their time by even expanding the "Starjar wtf" ending ,
tell you over and over again that the EC represents the end of shepards journey and begin with making story-DLC

But no, there is a great hypothesis, thrown into the forum by some random player, backed up with giant evidence (*sigh*), which is backed up by 10 hours of documentary (*SIGH*), which you need to analyse,watch AND believe in.... (conspiracy here i come!)

and you dare to come here and ask me why i do not believe in IT?

*snip*

ME3 went gold in February 2012.

Ah messed that up, the script was finished/leaked in november 2011, and there was the beta leak on xbox, indicating that the game building was nearly finished, my bad

Modifié par Soultaker08, 09 août 2012 - 09:35 .

[DirtyPhoenix]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

It was one of the more compelling explanations before the EC, but afterwards, it's clearly not what the writers intended, and pursuing it is honestly a huge stretch at this point.

Look. Even this husk sees through it. What more do you want?

[Helios969]

NinthGeorgesw wrote...

Because it's basically "It was all a dream" and Biowares not stupid enough to try that.

As opposed to introducing a deus ex machina, space magic, and synthesis demonstrating them to be geniuses.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Because after the EC, it's clearly not true.

[Helios969]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Because after the EC, it's clearly not true.

Funny you should say that.  I find it more believeable since the EC than I ever did before when I look at the ridiculously idealic and utopic sequences of control and synthesis.  It's also funny how not a single BW writer has come out and said IDT is BS or the literal endings are absolute truth.  IDT is as valid as the green-glowing masses or Shep ascending to God-hood.

[chasemme]

I don't have trouble seeing why people disagree with IT, only why they're so dead-set on making sure everyone else disagrees with it, too.

Someone found an interesting concept in the ending? This must be stopped!

[Haiyato]

I just say let them believe in IT. If that's what they want then so be it. Nothing you really say is going to convince them other wise. Do I believe in IT. Not really but I think its an interesting topic none of the less along with a lot of the other crazy ideas I have seen on both the original and EC endings.

Ithurael wrote...

The IT Dream Theory is total fanfic and should be moved to the FanFiction section.

I was under impression regardless the endings were made to be speculative especially since there isn't a canon ending.  I recall a thread that exploded with someone requesting IT threads and such be moved ot the Fan Fic/Creations section which resulted in it being allowed to stay in the section of forums. I could be wrong and I am way too lazy to go back and hunt for it.

[chuckles471]

I see it the same way as conspiracy theorists see things. They don't want it to be the simplest explanation because that is more scary to them.

An Ex-sharpeshooter decided he wanted to kill a president.
A person probably had sex with a monkey.
A drugged up driver crashed a car and killed a princess.
A group of disgusting people hated a country's way of life, they crashed planes...


No way do I put a game at the same emotional value as these events but some people will believe anything other than the simplest explanation because that is a whole lot more scarier.


Bioware made a mess of an ending and some people who are highly invested in them can't except that. They found things that make it sound plausible but after EC and a tightening of the endings it seems highly unlikely.

[Sebby]

KneeTheCap wrote...

 I'm quite curious about that, to be honest. If you don't believe in it, why so? Is it that hard to believe that video game writing can be that in-depth? Or do you have a another reason?

Video game industry is still young, but the writing has risen from "The princess is in another castle", is it not? Why are we still regarding books and movies for instance, as superior? Are they truly? Just look at Planescape: Torment and tell me that it's not up to par with any book?

I'm not trying to provoke anyone, nor start any fights. I'm just genuinely curious that why you think IT is impossible?

And while we're at it, please don't fight. We are all in the same boat here, as bioware fans. Try to behave as such, okay?

"Depth" like having the death and the ressurection of the protaganist being nothing more than a cheap plot device to fast forward two years in what's supposed to be a science-fiction story?

[Sebby]

Haiyato wrote...

I was under impression regardless the endings were made to be speculative especially since there isn't a canon ending.  I recall a thread that exploded with someone requesting IT threads and such be moved ot the Fan Fic/Creations section which resulted in it being allowed to stay in the section of forums. I could be wrong and I am way too lazy to go back and hunt for it.

The endings are "speculative" in the sense that you just have to wonder what strong narcotics the writers were on while writing not only the endings but the entire god awful crucible plot the game revolves around.

[Shermos]

clarkusdarkus wrote...

IT's because it makes bioware seem genius's and clever when in fact walters/hudson's ego's got in the way of that

The IT is childish to put it politely. That's reason enough not to like it. Bioware even has a subtle dig at how silly it is with the reject option.

[The Heretic of Time]

KneeTheCap wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Soultaker08 wrote...

Me3 went gold in november 2011.

So in fact they had !!!!9 Months!!!! to create their "It was all a dream wtf" ending and instead they are wasting their time by even expanding the "Starjar wtf" ending ,
tell you over and over again that the EC represents the end of shepards journey and begin with making story-DLC

But no, there is a great hypothesis, thrown into the forum by some random player, backed up with giant evidence (*sigh*), which is backed up by 10 hours of documentary (*SIGH*), which you need to analyse,watch AND believe in.... (conspiracy here i come!)

and you dare to come here and ask me why i do not believe in IT?

Pretty much this.


BioWare specifically made the EC to give us closure. The EC did just that. Now the story is finally over, most people feel closure, some don't, whatever, you can't please everyone. The more important thing is that the EC expanded the current endings we have and goes to great lengths to show us the aftermath of our decision. Why do that if plan to retcon these endings later with an "amazing" indoctrination plottwist?


What the IT does is basically offering BioWare a fancy reset-button that waves off the whole (crappy) ending as "not real, didn't happen, just a dream", just to give BioWare a 2nd chance to write a new, better ending.


It seems that what the IT believes REALLY want, is just a completely new ending. The IT provides an in-game way of resetting the whole score and offering the option of a completely new ending, which is what they really want.


Basically, the IT is just a big fancy combination of the famous All Just A Dream trope and the Reset Button trope. The IT provides a 'Reset Button' through an 'A Just a Dream' retcon.

But if this is the case, would it not make sense to go with the IT and bask at the glory?

No, the IT is wishful thinking. I'm not convinced that this wishful thinking that you know as IT has any truth to it whatsoever.

[The Heretic of Time]

Helios969 wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Because after the EC, it's clearly not true.

Funny you should say that.  I find it more believeable since the EC than I ever did before when I look at the ridiculously idealic and utopic sequences of control and synthesis.  It's also funny how not a single BW writer has come out and said IDT is BS or the literal endings are absolute truth.  IDT is as valid as the green-glowing masses or Shep ascending to God-hood.

The reason why the EC endings are so ridiculous utopic and idealistic is because YOU ASKED FOR IT.

When ME3 was originally released, everybody screamed that they wanted a happier and brighter ending. People did not even complain about all the damn plotholes, the main thing they complained about was the lack of closure and the lack of a happy and bright ending.  

Well, guess what? The EC offered exactly that: Closure and happier brighter endings! Are you really that surprised?

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 09 août 2012 - 12:29 .

[Helios969]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Because after the EC, it's clearly not true.

Funny you should say that.  I find it more believeable since the EC than I ever did before when I look at the ridiculously idealic and utopic sequences of control and synthesis.  It's also funny how not a single BW writer has come out and said IDT is BS or the literal endings are absolute truth.  IDT is as valid as the green-glowing masses or Shep ascending to God-hood.

The reason why the EC endings are so ridiculous utopic and idealistic is because YOU ASKED FOR IT.

When ME3 was originally released, everybody screamed that they wanted a happier and brighter ending. People did not even complain about all the damn plotholes, the main thing they complained about was the lack of closure and the lack of a happy and bright ending.  

Well, guess what? The EC offered exactly that: Closure and happier brighter endings! Are you really that surprised?

Speak for yourself.  I wanted clarity and plothole correction.  The only closure I and (most other) people wanted was Shep reuniting with LI if he/she was to live.  Of course what people wanted was exactly what they didn't get.  If Shep was just gonna be killed off, then they should have just dropped the breathe scene.  It's just BW f***in with us.  False hope is not better than no hope.  There's no closure if Shep is lying half dead in a pile of rubble.

[Andy the Black]

Because BioWare would not have spent all the money, time, and resources on the Extended Cut if they just planned on reconing the whole thing with a post campaign indoctrination ending.

[Shoelesscomsonaut]

Two major issues that always kept me from believing in IT.

1. The implication that there is a "correct" choice.

Look back at all the major decisions in Mass Effect: Rachni Queen, Council, Genophage, Quarians vs Geth. Each of those choices are meant to cause debate and discussion between the fans because there is no right choice. Each person has their own Shepard and their own story and all those decisions they made along the way were right for them because it was right for their Shepard. With IT, you either pick Destroy or you "lose".

2. It's not even an ending.

Let's say IT is true: You've picked Destroy and beat Reaper indoctrination!

...then Shepard wakes up in London and still has a galaxy full of Reapers. That's less resolution than the original ending. This is why I don't understand why people can believe in it. Were they expecting more dlc down the line to wrap things up (meaning you would have had to pay for an actual ending)?

[Candidate 88766]

If the IT is true then there is no payoff at all. The game ends with Shepard and the Reapers still on Earth, with no indication whatsoever that Shepard actually wins. Even with the EC there is absolutely no payoff or closure. However, if you take the endings at face value you get a series of cutscenes followed by a series of slides showing you exactly what happened. It may be poorly explained on the whole, but there is at least closure.

[Brother Takka]

Before the EC, there was plenty of things in the game that supported IT. I even watched the vid made by clever noob. After the EC, bioware did enough to disprove IT, having Shepard acknowledge Hackket, the squad mates being picked up, joker leaving the battle. After these additions, IT was just not possible. IT is just fan fiction now in my eyes. To me Bioware have said with the EC that it is as much. Some people will cling to it "if bioware tell us its not true then I'll stop believing.". But then people believe in a god with out proof, so there you go........

[BD Manchild]

I quite liked the IT pre-EC; hell, it seemed a far better explanation for what was going on than the vague nonsense we got. At the time I just couldn't believe that Bioware would be so stupid as to leave things that way. I wanted to believe they were better than that, and the IT seemed to make a damn sight more sense. Sure, it seemed like I was giving Bioware way too much credit, but it was hope to hold onto, right?

Post-EC, however, while I still hate the endings (actually in some ways I think they're worse than the original ones), the IT doesn't really have a place anymore. Things are wrapped up, most of the plot holes are filled in (however half-heartedly), and Bioware have made it clear that there's no more to the endings than that. Turned out I was giving Bioware too much credit. Now, whenever I see the IT spring up, it just boils down to me as a fancier means of saying "Destroy is CLEARLY the right choice". Plus I seriously doubt Bioware are willing to work on any post-campaign DLC for the sake of proving the theory to be right.

Modifié par BD Manchild, 14 août 2012 - 11:10 .

[Jassu1979]

KneeTheCap wrote...

 I'm quite curious about that, to be honest. If you don't believe in it, why so?

It depends on what you mean by "believe in it".

I still consider it a valid interpretation, showing that the reader can contribute at LEAST as much to the story as the author.
I also consider it a pretty good narrative that manages to get rid of most of the elements that made the actual ending so atrocious, turning weaknesses and plot holes into strengths and hints.

"Of COURSE it makes no sense that your team mates are aboard the Normandy! They're only there because Shepard is imagining it all!"
"Of COURSE it makes no sense that Shepard wakes up closer to the beam, even though Harbinger's blast should have propelled her in the opposite direction! She does not wake up at that point at all!"

HOWEVER, with the advent of the EC it became pretty clear that no "Big Reveal" is coming, and that Bioware never intended anything even remotely resembling the IT with their version of the ending.
As far as authorial intent is concerned, the IT is as dead as a doornail. They really want us to take the Starkid and everything it says at face value. They really want us to see Synthesis as the best possible ending.
They really want us to accept that shooting a tube and walking into the resulting explosion makes perfect sense.

[Candidate 88766]

Shoelesscomsonaut wrote...

Two major issues that always kept me from believing in IT.

1. The implication that there is a "correct" choice.

Look back at all the major decisions in Mass Effect: Rachni Queen, Council, Genophage, Quarians vs Geth. Each of those choices are meant to cause debate and discussion between the fans because there is no right choice. Each person has their own Shepard and their own story and all those decisions they made along the way were right for them because it was right for their Shepard. With IT, you either pick Destroy or you "lose".

2. It's not even an ending.

Let's say IT is true: You've picked Destroy and beat Reaper indoctrination!

...then Shepard wakes up in London and still has a galaxy full of Reapers. That's less resolution than the original ending. This is why I don't understand why people can believe in it. Were they expecting more dlc down the line to wrap things up (meaning you would have had to pay for an actual ending)?

This guy (or gal) nails it - particularly the bit about the IT forcing a 'correct' choice. Having negative consequences for choices is something that should be desired and encouraged in a game about choice. Offering three relatively justifiable choices and then simply saying that two of them are wrong for entirely unrelated reasons is not something that should be encouraged. 

Its like offering a choice between a stale pizza, a stale burger, or a stale kebab, and then saying on the the stale pizza is the correct option because its the only one with the letter 'z' in it, and you should've known this because you were asleep earlier, and a universal representation of sleep is using 'z's, and because of this 'clue' the stale pizza was obviously the right choice, despite any of the three choices being justified to some extent.

[Jassu1979]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...
Basically, the IT is just a big fancy combination of the famous All Just A Dream trope and the Reset Button trope. The IT provides a 'Reset Button' through an 'A Just a Dream' retcon.

You do realize that the ending-as-is can be reduced to similarly tired tropes?