96 réponses à ce sujet

[Mcfly616]

Da fuq?!

[Franky Figgs]

I'll try to simplify it this way.

There are two points of views.
A Levitation point of view
A "anti" thrall point of view.

A Leviathan point of view is not distinct.
Its an evolutionary path to dominance in the Mass Effect lore. Thorian had it, Rackni had it and even the Ardak Yakshi who were worshipped as gods had it.
Its a complete disconnect from the way someone without this evolutionary mechanism would view the minds of others.

The starkid is coming a Leviathan point of view. If you accept it you are embracing the view of a thrall.

Modifié par Franky Figgs, 19 mars 2013 - 04:19 .

[Adoramei]

On a side note, if the developers/writers wanted something to be canon, especially something this big, I think that they would have made it known somehow. I just feel like there would not have been such an uplifting "ending", which they are not giving the consumers any more elaboration on. Personally, I don't like the synthesis ending. I feel like the only way to take away war is to take away free will. However, I think that this was more a matter of sloppy writing. The entire ending seems nonsensical to me, regardless.

While I do find the theories interesting, in the end, we only have what they gave us. Which isn't much, but apparently, they think that it's enough. I can't even have enough hope that they'd think up a deep, well-threaded plan, even for future installments of the series.

[NeonFlux117]

Franky Figgs wrote...

I'll try to simplify it this way.

There are two points of views.
A Levitation point of view
A "anti" thrall point of view.

A Leviathan point of view is not distinct.
Its an evolutionary path to dominance in the Mass Effect lore. Thorian had it, Rackni had it and even the Ardak Yakshi who were worshipped as gods had it.
Its a complete disconnect from the way someone without this evolutionary mechanism would view the minds of others.

The starkid is coming a Leviathan point of view. If you accept it you are embracing the view of a thrall.

So then what you say about the Prothean Empire, who the Asari worshiped? Are they a "leviathan" point of dominance?Because every Race wants to be dominate over the others only through mutual gain and compromise do they ever work together. 

[AlanC9]

Strangewrex wrote...

Heh, This should be good.

Nah. Mushy mysticism like this theory doesn't generate entertaining arguments. You watch. The OP will simply raise the vagueness level as high as he needs it to keep things going.

[Franky Figgs]

Adoramei wrote...

On a side note, if the developers/writers wanted something to be canon, especially something this big, I think that they would have made it known somehow. I just feel like there would not have been such an uplifting "ending", which they are not giving the consumers any more elaboration on. Personally, I don't like the synthesis ending. I feel like the only way to take away war is to take away free will. However, I think that this was more a matter of sloppy writing. The entire ending seems nonsensical to me, regardless.

While I do find the theories interesting, in the end, we only have what they gave us. Which isn't much, but apparently, they think that it's enough. I can't even have enough hope that they'd think up a deep, well-threaded plan, even for future installments of the series.

Does it seem nonsensical dispite everything I've tried to explain?
Consider the first warning on Eden Prime. Consider all of the warnings throughout the whole series.

I'll give some prime examples to you:

ME1
Begins with a premonition at the Prothean beacon on Eden Prime which gives Shepard nightmarish visions of synthesis. <-threat
Ends with Saren prophesying and embracing synthesis. He later loses his identity and becomes a husk because of it. <-threat

ME2
Begins with Shepard dieing due to a new Collector threat. Then quickly carries on to Shepard being brought back from the dead through Cerberus synthesis by the illusive man who is (as we later learn) a Reaper synthesized man. <-twist actually
Ends with showdown with a Reaper construction being made from synthesizing organic human DNA through a form of nightmarish human genocide. <-threat

ME3
Begins with Reaper invasion. Everything attacking us is an abomination of synthesis and this is for the duration of the game. <-threat
(For good measure. Shepard dreams willfully embracing the fire to save a child that is always in that fire. <--threat)
Suddenly! Several endings but the one concerning synthesis is presented with the highest esteem of all other options. <-guess it wasn't that bad this whole time

Tell me. How can you make sense of this better than what I've laid it out?

Modifié par Franky Figgs, 19 mars 2013 - 04:56 .

[Franky Figgs]

AlanC9 wrote...

Strangewrex wrote...

Heh, This should be good.

Nah. Mushy mysticism like this theory doesn't generate entertaining arguments. You watch. The OP will simply raise the vagueness level as high as he needs it to keep things going.

Honestly, I appreshiate your cynicism. I'm hedging my bets. We'll see were this goes. 

[EnvyTB075]

No.

[Reap_ii]

Franky Figgs wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

OP makes as much nonsense as the ending

I'll convince you if you care to try to debunk me.

im flattered but no thanks.

[Franky Figgs]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

Franky Figgs wrote...

I'll try to simplify it this way.

There are two points of views.
A Levitation point of view
A "anti" thrall point of view.

A Leviathan point of view is not distinct.
Its an evolutionary path to dominance in the Mass Effect lore. Thorian had it, Rackni had it and even the Ardak Yakshi who were worshipped as gods had it.
Its a complete disconnect from the way someone without this evolutionary mechanism would view the minds of others.

The starkid is coming a Leviathan point of view. If you accept it you are embracing the view of a thrall.

So then what you say about the Prothean Empire, who the Asari worshiped? Are they a "leviathan" point of dominance?Because every Race wants to be dominate over the others only through mutual gain and compromise do they ever work together. 

The Prothean had a unique evolutionary path of communicating whole experiences through reading genetic signatures. It could be used to explain some of the jubo with how Shepard synthesizes the whole galaxy. But it is not a Leviathain evolution which is to use the minds of others as extentions of oneself.

Modifié par Franky Figgs, 19 mars 2013 - 04:36 .

[Franky Figgs]

Reap_ii wrote...

Franky Figgs wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

OP makes as much nonsense as the ending

I'll convince you if you care to try to debunk me.

im flattered but no thanks.

I wasn't even trying. But cool. Thanks for the stimulating input.

[Adoramei]

That's if you consider being turned the same as synthesis. Technically, they share qualities, but it was written by human beings. I don't give the writing in 3 that much credit. I can't even get behind pragmatically to even begin to believe it within the context of the game. What would they gain by creating a deeply threaded ending without making it known to the fans? In the end, as a business, they gain nothing. What we are left with is headcanon or taking it at face value.

I respect the speculation, and as much as I, too, have my own ideas of what has actually played out, I do know that what my thoughts are are only ever going to be headcanon. No matter how much sense it might make.

[GreyLycanTrope]

[Wolfva2]

People keep on making the same mistake. That is, they fail to separate what Shepard, as a character inside of the narrative, experiences and what THEY as an onlooker OUTSIDE of the narrative perceive.

I just wanted to point that out, not that it will do any good. IT theorists are like 911 truthers, or any other conspiracy theorist. Logic does not, and never will, apply. Lords know I've had plenty of debates with truthers. Goes like this, "Oh yeah! If it was a plane that hit the Pentagon where were the PARTS?!?" <show multiple time stamped video footage as well as archived photos and live news reports showing the smoldering plane wreckage> "OH yeah?!? Well...what about the WINGS! That's a ROUND hole! ONLY a MISSILE could have done that! Where are the slotted holes the wings would have made!!!" <provide a lesson on physics showing what happens when thin aluminum and steel impacts hardened concrete walls, and point out this isn't Loony Toons> "Oh yeah! Well, if it was a plane, where were the PARTS?!?" <facepalm>

In other words, no matter how many times you debunk their claims, they'll just ignore it and go full circle. Because they don't care about truth, it's all about how it makes them feel. IT theorists feel good about IT theory. It makes them feel warm and fuzzy, and smarter then the rest of us lowly peons, that THEY were able to figure out the conspiracy while the rest of the sheeple blindly stumble about. In the end, it's all about them.

Personally, I'd love to see a psychoanalysis of IT theorists, and the amount of time they've put in to trying to 'prove' their belief of a freaking GAME. At least the Truthers are dealing with actual events. As opposed to imaginary ones in a game.

[TheProtheans]

I agree

[Franky Figgs]

Adoramei wrote...

That's if you consider being turned the same as synthesis. Technically, they share qualities, but it was written by human beings. I don't give the writing in 3 that much credit. I can't even get behind pragmatically to even begin to believe it within the context of the game. What would they gain by creating a deeply threaded ending without making it known to the fans? In the end, as a business, they gain nothing. What we are left with is headcanon or taking it at face value.

I respect the speculation, and as much as I, too, have my own ideas of what has actually played out, I do know that what my thoughts are are only ever going to be headcanon. No matter how much sense it might make.

I completely respect your nihilism to this story arc as the even the potential of a "truth to the matter" has not been commented on from the developer stand point. (to my understanding at least)
That being said - the pieces are falling in place for me and I'm here to see if I'm missing something. 

Modifié par Franky Figgs, 19 mars 2013 - 05:02 .

[Adoramei]

Ahh. So it's all still admittedly speculative. I understand, then. I honestly hadn't read too much of the thread. I was only working off of peoples' responses, assuming that you were stating this as a canon fact that you had "discovered" while nobody else could figure out. (Cue mad scientist laughter.) Sorry for my input.

[Franky Figgs]

Wolfva2 wrote...

People keep on making the same mistake. That is, they fail to separate what Shepard, as a character inside of the narrative, experiences and what THEY as an onlooker OUTSIDE of the narrative perceive.

I just wanted to point that out, not that it will do any good. IT theorists are like 911 truthers, or any other conspiracy theorist. Logic does not, and never will, apply. Lords know I've had plenty of debates with truthers. Goes like this, "Oh yeah! If it was a plane that hit the Pentagon where were the PARTS?!?" <show multiple time stamped video footage as well as archived photos and live news reports showing the smoldering plane wreckage> "OH yeah?!? Well...what about the WINGS! That's a ROUND hole! ONLY a MISSILE could have done that! Where are the slotted holes the wings would have made!!!" <provide a lesson on physics showing what happens when thin aluminum and steel impacts hardened concrete walls, and point out this isn't Loony Toons> "Oh yeah! Well, if it was a plane, where were the PARTS?!?" <facepalm>

In other words, no matter how many times you debunk their claims, they'll just ignore it and go full circle. Because they don't care about truth, it's all about how it makes them feel. IT theorists feel good about IT theory. It makes them feel warm and fuzzy, and smarter then the rest of us lowly peons, that THEY were able to figure out the conspiracy while the rest of the sheeple blindly stumble about. In the end, it's all about them.

Personally, I'd love to see a psychoanalysis of IT theorists, and the amount of time they've put in to trying to 'prove' their belief of a freaking GAME. At least the Truthers are dealing with actual events. As opposed to imaginary ones in a game.

I'm privy to the cognitive biases of "truthers". I used to be one for half a minute. If you think I'm headed that way call me out.

I'm not really about discussing the classic Indoctrination Theory. I'm really discussing points of views.
Indoctrination is a prime theme in the ME universe. It's hard to discuss the meaning of it without addressing how it plays it's part.
Im simply stating that Indoctrination is moving from one point of view to another. Specifically - a point of view of a free mind to a point of view to a controlled mind.

I admit I used the language of "Indoctrination Theory" and calling people out to hit some buttons.
Last time I tried this humbly and didn't get an audience. 

Modifié par Franky Figgs, 19 mars 2013 - 05:13 .

[Franky Figgs]

Adoramei wrote...

Ahh. So it's all still admittedly speculative. I understand, then. I honestly hadn't read too much of the thread. I was only working off of peoples' responses, assuming that you were stating this as a canon fact that you had "discovered" while nobody else could figure out. (Cue mad scientist laughter.) Sorry for my input.

Yes. It's speculative. But my balls are big. I'm here to challenge everyone.

[Kel Riever]

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

I'm not missing anything it just sucks.

[Zagardal]

<p></p>

Modifié par Zagardal, 19 mars 2013 - 06:26 .

[Ninja Stan]

IT should be discussed in BSN Groups. Thank you.

End of line.