288 réponses à ce sujet

[Fawx9]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Arguably it should've been in fan creations in the first place.

It kinda goes against the spirit of interpretation to say " Interpret, but only the way we want".

[chemiclord]

Holy hell, folks. It was a topic that went over 3000 pages, by the end meandering chatter that had little to do with the topic. That's pretty much the only reason it was locked, and why (astonishingly) nothing else. The only thing that amazes me is that it was allowed to get THAT long.

No one has been banned or had topics locked for bringing up IT in other discussions. IT, as a topic in and of itself, has played itself out with little to add to the theory itself. Christ, relax.

[ziloe]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Me1mN0t wrote...

Do you understand the concept of "lurkers" Chris? Just look at the number of page views. The IT following is not anywhere near as small as you are making it out to be. I really hope BW is not as out of touch with their fanbase as you seem to be.

Your post is a classic example of what I was saying before. At some point IT will need clarified for ME to continue.

"Yep, I know exactly how many unique accounts post AND/OR just read the IT thread.

As to whether IT is ever confirmed, I may be, but it does not have to be."

Did you just admit to being indoctrinated?

[TJBartlemus]

chemiclord wrote...

Holy hell, folks. It was a topic that went over 3000 pages, by the end meandering chatter that had little to do with the topic. That's pretty much the only reason it was locked, and why (astonishingly) nothing else. The only thing that amazes me is that it was allowed to get THAT long.

No one has been banned or had topics locked for bringing up IT in other discussions. IT, as a topic in and of itself, has played itself out with little to add to the theory itself. Christ, relax.

Correction. Overall there is more than 7000 pages. 2000 or so each from the first 2 and then 3000+ for the third.

[Iakus]

chemiclord wrote...

Holy hell, folks. It was a topic that went over 3000 pages, by the end meandering chatter that had little to do with the topic. That's pretty much the only reason it was locked, and why (astonishingly) nothing else. The only thing that amazes me is that it was allowed to get THAT long.

No one has been banned or had topics locked for bringing up IT in other discussions. IT, as a topic in and of itself, has played itself out with little to add to the theory itself. Christ, relax.

It does have a rather chilling effect on what else might get locked and moved to groups though.  I mean  it wasn't just locked, it was locked and told "you can't start this topic up again"

Modifié par iakus, 08 janvier 2013 - 03:09 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

Really?

No one called bull**** on this?

Because I do.

Most epic troll ever, Mr. Priestly.

[TheRealJayDee]

iakus wrote...

It does have a rather chilling effect on what else might get locked and moved to groups though.  I mean  it wasn't just locked, it was locked and told "you can't start this topic up again"

I'd still like to know how the process of making a decision like this looks and who is involved in it. 

Anyways, I'm off to bed. Let's see if this is still going when I wake up again...

[3DandBeyond]

dreaming_raithe wrote...

I think IT was completely ridiculous. But I think closing the thread was the wrong thing to do. It's not directly being censored, but it's kind of like saying that the only people that should be exposed to the idea of IT are people that already know about it.

I even read the thread a few times (usually after new DLC) to check out new interpretations. Hiding it away in groups like that is just...I don't know. It bothers me on an ethical level (in a minor way, of course, but it still does).

This so much.  I'm not an ITer but if people were using it and having some fun discussing it as a possible ME3 aspect that was not a part of what BW sees as toxic, how does locking it down help?  Still sure it's their choice, just seems to create more issues than it solves.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 08 janvier 2013 - 03:56 .

[3DandBeyond]

Chris Priestly wrote...

I was in 3 other meetings, so have been away from BSN (lots to catch up on post 8 week vacation).

Answering questions:
1 - My PMs were shut off during my vacation. It is now reactivated by the web team .

2 - Discussion of the Indoctrination theory is moved to Groups. We did with the the character/romance forum as well and it has worked well for those people who want to discuss their preferred topics. This is how discussion on the Indoctrination theory will work.

3 - Some people were banned a few hours ago for deliberately spamming the forums and deliberately disregarding the instruction to use groups to discuss the IT. We do not enjoy temporarily banning people, but if they break the rules, they are met with the same results that any person who breaks the rules.

4 - Discussing topics that involve indoctrination is fine. HOWEVER simply calling the thread a different title and turning into an IT thread is not ok. If that happens, the thread will be closed and directed to use Groups.

5 - This thread would have been closed earlier, but I was on vacation for the past 8 weeks. It has nothing to do with any upcoming DLC or timing.

6 - Closing this thread does not validate or invalidate the Indoctrination Theory. As both Jessica and I have said many times, we will never (as far as I know) ever confirm or deny wether the IT is real or not as that is up to the individual playing the game to determine for themself. I personally have some playthroughs where the IT theory is impossible. I also have playthroughs where it could very well be valid.

Any more questions?

Yeah, but no one will ever answer them to any satisfactory degree.  :innocent:

Glad to see you have different playthroughs that validate the character you played.  I'd like to be able to have one that validates the one I played and the dialogue BW created.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 08 janvier 2013 - 03:58 .

[Renmiri1]

You say this approach worked with the Character and Romance forum. It did not. What it did was to silence a lot of users who then gave up on ME and possibly on BSN. Myself included

Groups do not work as well as forum threads, old posts get deleted w/o any explanation, it is hard to find the correct area to discuss something specific, people get lost and give up.

If this was not the intended result then please restore the IT thread and the Character and Romance forum, because what you did was silence people. It wasn't a "move" it was a "stfu"

Modifié par Renmiri1, 08 janvier 2013 - 04:05 .

[3DandBeyond]

lex0r11 wrote...

IC-07 wrote...

Restrider wrote...

Does anybody think that CP is on lunchbreak right now?

Yeah, maybe celebrating the end of nonsense. I would personally buy him a drink for it.

It's kind of sad to see you revelling in the ban of a mass effect related topic from an open board.

I am constantly in wonder of those who feel that a topic that existed in its own thread that they would never have to read was somehow ruining their world.  It can only be nonsense if you insist on viewing it.  It was never nonsense or at the very least no more so than the official pile of craptastical endings we originally paid for and then the new ones that are the same with more colors and dialogue from the thing people wanted to be gone (the kid)-the new EC endings we had to wait months for in order to learn that we were just too stupid to understand the Normandy evac scene happened and Joker didn't just run away-he ran away under orders to do so.  People are told to head canon the endings to suit their own Shepard when no ending that fits the kind of Shepard they were allowed to create exists and yet, when people do something that is chalked up to head canoning by many who think it's nonsense, they get accused of too much head canoning.  And I thought the kid made no sense.

I can't count the number of times I've been told to get an imagination and head canon an ending (though I do already have a good imagination).  But IT people have too much of an imagination so people can't stand the "nonsense" they discuss in a thread only people interested in IT might well visit.  And some are cheering the lockdown of a thread they'd never care to visit.  God help us all.  Please do explain what is just the right amount of head canoning that is now authorized and open for discussion.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 08 janvier 2013 - 04:34 .

[Dlive]

I may not completely agree but i do understand Priestly position.He is just doing his job but who knows it my have been an upstairs decision to close the thread as well,see the responds in a more closed organized setting of groups of different voices.I do not believe the next dlc a likely January release is the last and perhaps it may tease the theory.
Most important statement to take from that is they neither confirm nor deny the Theory,its not good for business to answer the biggest cliffhanger questions of all,especially if its true only in the end rather it be in March or later because they later said there was no end date set in stone. This Should be a interesting few days or months of news updates.

[3DandBeyond]

Paulomedi wrote...

Construcive criticism?

Here you go:


Paulomedi wrote...

drayfish wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

This kinda leads to another question that I'm reticent to ask, but it's related:

This kind of sentiment is brought up quite a bit, and more power to you for doing so. But for people who claim to be huge fans who had faith in the company and trusted them to release product that you wouldn't be disappointed in, sometimes all it takes is one bad product to make you change your mind.

I know I won't get a complete answer right now, but if the next Mass Effect game does what the marketing claims, is as good as the hype says it is, receives many top marks, and is said by fans to be pretty darn good, would that be enough to change your mind and restore that trust you once had? Would ME3 (and maybe DA2, if you lean that way) then be seen as statistical anomalies in BioWare's gameography, or has the trust been well and truly severed and each good, worthy game becomes but a stepping stone to restoring that faith?




@Ninja Stan's several questions:

Considering the substantial, and rather worrying cognitive dissonance many fans (myself included) perceived between the numerous pre-release promises and what was actually delivered; considering the disparity between the near-universally gushing review scores and what actually appeared in the game (the bugs, the narrative railroading, the utterly required multiplayer despite repeated assurances to the contrary, and the muddled, obscure ending – almost none of which was addressed in reviewer analysis); and taking into account the near industry-wide condemnation of any fans who dared voice their displeasure at the game; I would argue that the confidence you place in any future alignment between the press and customer satisfaction is a little fantastical.

I have many issues with Bioware and Mass Effect 3 (which I will get to in a moment), but a good deal of other worrying issues extend into the 'games journalism' field itself, and the uncomfortable relationship that developers such as Bioware have with those people who should be holding publishers to greater account. The fact that your equation for future player satisfaction still relies upon some alignment between review scores and player experience, without anyone actually bothering to examine and correct what created such a glaring discrepancy this time around, suggests that very little – if indeed nothing – has been learned from this experience.

As for Bioware itself, although I am not sure I would categorise the sensation as the 'destruction' of some blind 'trust' I had in the company (they are, after all, a business, and I a consumer), what I did have faith in was a certain standard of product – both mechanically and narratively. Previous to ME3, every Bioware game I had played impressed me as a work of depth and expanse. Characters were well-rounded, plots (for the limitations of an RPG structure) were branching and surprising, design and programming were impeccable, all of which created an immersive world that the player could invest in. From the freedom to explore of ME1, to the multiplicity of choice and backstory and endgame in Dragon Age: Origins, to the depth of character and emotional resonance of ME2. There seemed to be a ratio of developer care to player investment that always suggested this was a team that would not cynically rush a product to market.

And so, what rather shocked me at first about ME3 was the lack of polish.

As I said, one of the traits of Bioware games I had put faith in was a level of presentational and structural finesse. It probably goes without saying at this point that I had (and have) not played Dragon Age 2 – so when I started ME3, the animation glitches, face import failure, and frequent dismissals of major choices from the previous games rather took me by surprise. It struck me as the kind of rushed work I attributed to other developers – not Bioware.

That the game was suddenly dismissing major decisions from the previous games (who was councillor; the death of the Racchni; the Collector Base; Shepard's entire character backstory, etc), a central component of the RPG elements continuously touted by Bioware to be at the centre of this experience for half a decade; that the game was suddenly dictating who the character of Shepard was to me, contrary to my personal input (she cares so much about 'random kid in the universe' that she will be haunted by him in naff dreams; she loved Kaiden and lamented his death, apparently); that the game severely truncated the speech options and had whole swaths of uninterrupted auto-dialogue; that it stripped away legitimate side-missions in favour of obscure, unfulfilling fetch-quests and a wholly linear narrative with little to no variation in level progression – all indicated that this game operated very differently from those that had come before it. Indeed, this was so evident that despite the frequent narrative call-backs presented, it was difficult to align this with the two games that had preceded it; with the exceptions of the Genophage arc and a good portion of the Rannoch missions, this entry seemed streamlined and narrowed to the point of losing all of the qualities that define a reactive, immersive Mass Effect experience entirely. (That there was an 'Action mode' only cemented this feeling further.)

But all of this only disappointed me. What horrified me was the ending.

And I am not talking about the cut corners, the deus ex machina, the illogical narrative leaps that needed to be spackled over in the EC, or the ham-fistedly on the nose religious metaphor of Shepard's sacrifice. I am talking about the moment in which it was made clear that Bioware – I presume in some misguided attempt to load an artless gravitas into the final decision tree – advocated the application of either an act of genocide, eugenic purgation, or becoming a totalitarian god.

And it is not enough to argue, as some people have, that 'the player did not have to do any of those things – they were choices', because the game was engineered so that it could only be completed if one of those choices was made. The conflict of the entire Mass Effect sage has been about racial conflict – metaphorically presented in the violence between synthetic and organic – and the only way to end it is to employ one of three war crimes. There is no way to work together, no way to have faith in your fellow allies, no way to talk the enemy of the game down from their intolerant hate-screed. You just have to do what they ask: exterminate a race of beings because their lives are worth less than yours; ascend to the arrogant position of an unstoppably dictatorial monster; or mutate every life in the universe to have the same DNA - because that's the only way to 'peace'.

Bioware decided to use their trilogy to send a nihilistic message about to futility of struggle and hope: you can't win by believing in stupid things like diversity and inclusivity. War can only be overcome by being the one to employ the war crime for your agenda (whatever that might be). Bigotry can only be overcome by forcing your will upon others: wiping them out, forcing them to get along, or violating them to become all genetically the same.

I have literally never seen a more horrifying message offered by a piece of popular entertainment in my life. And the fact that Bioware not only published such a hateful world-view in their fiction (perverting an otherwise hopeful and wondrous narrative in the process), but then after the fact became so aggressively protective of it – announcing themselves bewildered that fans could not appreciate their cynical vision and conceding only to expand the point they had made without explanation or compromise, has led me to believe that either Bioware is so blinded by hubris that they are incapable of actually taking responsibility for the implications of their fiction, or truly do have a vision of the world that stands fundamentally and profoundly opposed to my own.

Either way though, it is near impossible to see that gaping fissure being overcome by a few good reviews from fans and press next time (they were hardly indicative this time around anyway). To me the company Bioware is either narcissistically blind or so filled with a need to spout angsty, intolerant drivel, that their future texts will ultimately have little I want to engage with to say anyway.



Quoting one of the most important posts in this thread. A must read for newcomers.

And re-quoted for truth.

[Freestate2nd]

If i want to read again the topic forum and add more what? Censorship whatever!

[3DandBeyond]

Dlive wrote...

I may not completely agree but i do understand Priestly position.He is just doing his job but who knows it my have been an upstairs decision to close the thread as well,see the responds in a more closed organized setting of groups of different voices.I do not believe the next dlc a likely January release is the last and perhaps it may tease the theory.
Most important statement to take from that is they neither confirm nor deny the Theory,its not good for business to answer the biggest cliffhanger questions of all,especially if its true only in the end rather it be in March or later because they later said there was no end date set in stone. This Should be a interesting few days or months of news updates.

The problem comes from how this has all played out.  The idea now that they are actually closing the thread because they are going to release content related to it is just like my wish that they'd actually release a good ending-something not to be wished for or expected at all.

BW tends to say one thing and do another and it would be fun, if they actually knew how to make it fun.  Create a trail of bread crumbs and then don't treat fans as if they kicked your puppy when they think the crumbs lead to something.  If they don't lead to anything, say that they don't and mean it.  If they do lead to something, don't get all cute and say "it could be this or maybe it isn't" and then finally, LOCKDOWN.  It doesn't end up being fun.  They do not know how to do fun.  Shepard's gasp is or is not Shepard dying-it's closure that is ambiguous which is closure.  Ok, WTF?  This theory may or may not be true, but it's up to the player, no wait it isn't.  It will never exist, but it might.  Not fun.  Synthesis will happen.  Ok we really think it should happen.  No, wait that's only a personal assessment.  There is no canon-hey there Liara, can I help you find something in my pants?  You will get to the end and it will be like no two players will be playing the same game-hello red, green, or blue.  Wonder what endings other people got?  Nof fun.

You won't need MP to get all the endings for SP.  No, you really won't.  Must be a technical issue because you don't need MP.  The threshold for getting all the endings has been lowered so you no longer have to play MP to get them.  Not fun.

Leviathan will change the endings (ok, why would IGN say that if that was just a guess).  No it won't change the endings, but it will change the context of the endings.  No, really it will only change some dialogue the kid says.  Screw it, Omega won't even do that. 

Honestly, the littany of things that seem to be someone's fun hint of what's to come that gets squashed as never happening is mind-boggling.  I've never seen this before in gaming.  I've participated in closed/private beta testing of games (not ME games or any BW or EA game), have modded for forums, including one dev's forum, and have participated in game discussions before with dev input.  I've never seen fans teased so much and then let down when promises (teasers) are not kept, or fans that have been told some very negative things will happen that most don't like (and that seems like a teaser). 

In other forums, they sponsor giveaways and fun events and they include fans in release dates and countdowns for DLC. They do let fans in on content hints for content that ends up being real.  I think someone needs help in learning how to have fun and in sharing that fun.  Other devs do it-they even hold tournaments for real prizes and not just in game equipment packs for MP-meant to encourage you to buy more, spend more.  I am not asking BW to give stuff away-I just think they need to take a look at how other fans are treated by other devs, even when they don't like something. 

[sr2josh]

IC-07 wrote...

Restrider wrote...

Does anybody think that CP is on lunchbreak right now?

Yeah, maybe celebrating the end of nonsense. I would personally buy him a drink for it.

Do you have a framed picture of his avatar and kiss it before going to bed at night?  I'm not an IT believer(Puzzle Theory is intriguing to me) but your brown nosing of an internet forum moderator is amusing.  It's like kissing up to the guy delivering your pizza.

Modifié par Makai81, 08 janvier 2013 - 05:10 .

[TheRealJayDee]

Paulomedi wrote...

I'd like to see the devs or the mods rebuttal for drayfish comment posted above.

I would pay a lot of money to witness an in-depth discussion of ME3 between drayfish and 3DandBeyond and Casey Hudson and Mac Walters...!

(why oh why am I not  ?)

[DoomsdayDevice]

Listen, this makes no damn sense.

I mean seriously, you have ONE topic that houses any and all discussion of THE most popular theory about the ending of the game, which is despite all its off-topicness still the single most productive thread on all of BSN, and its contributors are mostly people who genuinely think Bioware may be geniuses for implementing indoctrination in the ending.

And you're going to close that, because that's somehow a bad thing?

SEEMS. LEGIT.

Epic trolling. Seriously.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 08 janvier 2013 - 05:38 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Paulomedi wrote...

Construcive criticism?

Here you go:


Paulomedi wrote...

drayfish wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

This kinda leads to another question that I'm reticent to ask, but it's related:

This kind of sentiment is brought up quite a bit, and more power to you for doing so. But for people who claim to be huge fans who had faith in the company and trusted them to release product that you wouldn't be disappointed in, sometimes all it takes is one bad product to make you change your mind.

I know I won't get a complete answer right now, but if the next Mass Effect game does what the marketing claims, is as good as the hype says it is, receives many top marks, and is said by fans to be pretty darn good, would that be enough to change your mind and restore that trust you once had? Would ME3 (and maybe DA2, if you lean that way) then be seen as statistical anomalies in BioWare's gameography, or has the trust been well and truly severed and each good, worthy game becomes but a stepping stone to restoring that faith?




@Ninja Stan's several questions:

Considering the substantial, and rather worrying cognitive dissonance many fans (myself included) perceived between the numerous pre-release promises and what was actually delivered; considering the disparity between the near-universally gushing review scores and what actually appeared in the game (the bugs, the narrative railroading, the utterly required multiplayer despite repeated assurances to the contrary, and the muddled, obscure ending – almost none of which was addressed in reviewer analysis); and taking into account the near industry-wide condemnation of any fans who dared voice their displeasure at the game; I would argue that the confidence you place in any future alignment between the press and customer satisfaction is a little fantastical.

I have many issues with Bioware and Mass Effect 3 (which I will get to in a moment), but a good deal of other worrying issues extend into the 'games journalism' field itself, and the uncomfortable relationship that developers such as Bioware have with those people who should be holding publishers to greater account. The fact that your equation for future player satisfaction still relies upon some alignment between review scores and player experience, without anyone actually bothering to examine and correct what created such a glaring discrepancy this time around, suggests that very little – if indeed nothing – has been learned from this experience.

As for Bioware itself, although I am not sure I would categorise the sensation as the 'destruction' of some blind 'trust' I had in the company (they are, after all, a business, and I a consumer), what I did have faith in was a certain standard of product – both mechanically and narratively. Previous to ME3, every Bioware game I had played impressed me as a work of depth and expanse. Characters were well-rounded, plots (for the limitations of an RPG structure) were branching and surprising, design and programming were impeccable, all of which created an immersive world that the player could invest in. From the freedom to explore of ME1, to the multiplicity of choice and backstory and endgame in Dragon Age: Origins, to the depth of character and emotional resonance of ME2. There seemed to be a ratio of developer care to player investment that always suggested this was a team that would not cynically rush a product to market.

And so, what rather shocked me at first about ME3 was the lack of polish.

As I said, one of the traits of Bioware games I had put faith in was a level of presentational and structural finesse. It probably goes without saying at this point that I had (and have) not played Dragon Age 2 – so when I started ME3, the animation glitches, face import failure, and frequent dismissals of major choices from the previous games rather took me by surprise. It struck me as the kind of rushed work I attributed to other developers – not Bioware.

That the game was suddenly dismissing major decisions from the previous games (who was councillor; the death of the Racchni; the Collector Base; Shepard's entire character backstory, etc), a central component of the RPG elements continuously touted by Bioware to be at the centre of this experience for half a decade; that the game was suddenly dictating who the character of Shepard was to me, contrary to my personal input (she cares so much about 'random kid in the universe' that she will be haunted by him in naff dreams; she loved Kaiden and lamented his death, apparently); that the game severely truncated the speech options and had whole swaths of uninterrupted auto-dialogue; that it stripped away legitimate side-missions in favour of obscure, unfulfilling fetch-quests and a wholly linear narrative with little to no variation in level progression – all indicated that this game operated very differently from those that had come before it. Indeed, this was so evident that despite the frequent narrative call-backs presented, it was difficult to align this with the two games that had preceded it; with the exceptions of the Genophage arc and a good portion of the Rannoch missions, this entry seemed streamlined and narrowed to the point of losing all of the qualities that define a reactive, immersive Mass Effect experience entirely. (That there was an 'Action mode' only cemented this feeling further.)

But all of this only disappointed me. What horrified me was the ending.

And I am not talking about the cut corners, the deus ex machina, the illogical narrative leaps that needed to be spackled over in the EC, or the ham-fistedly on the nose religious metaphor of Shepard's sacrifice. I am talking about the moment in which it was made clear that Bioware – I presume in some misguided attempt to load an artless gravitas into the final decision tree – advocated the application of either an act of genocide, eugenic purgation, or becoming a totalitarian god.

And it is not enough to argue, as some people have, that 'the player did not have to do any of those things – they were choices', because the game was engineered so that it could only be completed if one of those choices was made. The conflict of the entire Mass Effect sage has been about racial conflict – metaphorically presented in the violence between synthetic and organic – and the only way to end it is to employ one of three war crimes. There is no way to work together, no way to have faith in your fellow allies, no way to talk the enemy of the game down from their intolerant hate-screed. You just have to do what they ask: exterminate a race of beings because their lives are worth less than yours; ascend to the arrogant position of an unstoppably dictatorial monster; or mutate every life in the universe to have the same DNA - because that's the only way to 'peace'.

Bioware decided to use their trilogy to send a nihilistic message about to futility of struggle and hope: you can't win by believing in stupid things like diversity and inclusivity. War can only be overcome by being the one to employ the war crime for your agenda (whatever that might be). Bigotry can only be overcome by forcing your will upon others: wiping them out, forcing them to get along, or violating them to become all genetically the same.

I have literally never seen a more horrifying message offered by a piece of popular entertainment in my life. And the fact that Bioware not only published such a hateful world-view in their fiction (perverting an otherwise hopeful and wondrous narrative in the process), but then after the fact became so aggressively protective of it – announcing themselves bewildered that fans could not appreciate their cynical vision and conceding only to expand the point they had made without explanation or compromise, has led me to believe that either Bioware is so blinded by hubris that they are incapable of actually taking responsibility for the implications of their fiction, or truly do have a vision of the world that stands fundamentally and profoundly opposed to my own.

Either way though, it is near impossible to see that gaping fissure being overcome by a few good reviews from fans and press next time (they were hardly indicative this time around anyway). To me the company Bioware is either narcissistically blind or so filled with a need to spout angsty, intolerant drivel, that their future texts will ultimately have little I want to engage with to say anyway.



Quoting one of the most important posts in this thread. A must read for newcomers.

<3

[CmdrShep80]

byne wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Any more questions?

Will it  be possible at any time to ever start a new IT thread? We took it to group discussions, but it doesnt work well for such an active topic. It kind of stifles discussion.

you may have already answered this but I have to agree with byne. We often post close to 50 pages a day and it's a bit hard to read that much in a group versus a forum. That same 50 pages turned into 1085 new posts

also I'm sure others would agree but I would love to hear the differences between your It is possible versus your IT just didn't happen playthroughs. If you can't I understand but would be a great read if you could

[CrutchCricket]

Chris Priestly wrote...

The IT thread was closed specifically (as opposed to the other theory threads) because it was a huge discussion by a small number of people who were very passionate about that specific topic.

I'm sorry, Mr. Priestly but out of all the things you've said, this one has stood out the most for me and not in a good way.

Am I to understand that there is an upper limit on how big the discussion can be or how "passionate" we are allowed to get about a particular topic? What topic should we next fear is getting "too popular" and thus risks banishment to the groups?

You say it's not censorship because you don't outright "forbid" discussion. But censorship isn't just about total blockage, it's about supression. And with the way things stand right now, being sent to the groups is supression. Groups are not as visible, their discussion boards are technically inferior (no formatting without direct BB coding) and they are not as efficient for organizing discussion. Internally they are, but across groups is another matter. Multiple groups can pop up without ever being aware of each other, further limiting discussion by dividing the member base. I find it strange that you condemn the size of the group discussing the topics you close and yet your solution dramatically lowers the probability of new members joining the discussion.

I apologize for any unintended offense, but it seems quite clear to me from the character/romance situation and now this, that these closures are less about improving and facilitating forum discussion and more about simply removing discussions moderators aren't too fond of, at least on an "out of sight, out of mind" basis.

Modifié par CrutchCricket, 08 janvier 2013 - 05:52 .

[CmdrShep80]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Listen, this makes no damn sense.

I mean seriously, you have ONE topic that houses any and all discussion of THE most popular theory about the ending of the game, which is despite all its off-topicness still the single most productive thread on all of BSN, and its contributors are mostly people who genuinely think Bioware may be geniuses for implementing indoctrination in the ending.

And you're going to close that, because that's somehow a bad thing?

SEEMS. LEGIT.

Epic trolling. Seriously.

DD!  Nice to see ya!  

Though you know the closing of the thread might raise the popularity of what we've been discussing. You know the whole why close some 7-8000 pages of content might cause more people to ininvestigate though I don't know how they will keep up with the group discussions in the style it's in