I figure if Bio was ever going to pretend that they intended IT, that would have happened many months ago.
I was always under the impression that BioWare already gave its answers. The minutia of each decision doesn't really matter, like, what's the difference if Synthesis was god particles or fairies or nanites?
I figure if Bio was ever going to pretend that they intended IT, that would have happened many months ago.
"Lots of speculation for everyone", Bioware isn't going to tell one way or the other, because there is nothing to be gained by that. Especially at this point when sequel of somekind is coming out in the near future and answer to either direction might be a major story spoiler. The ending for ME 3 was meant to be open ended and up to the player's interpretation, whether that openess has a shelf life or not remains to be seen.
That being said, going with something like IT would leave writers a lot of wiggle room to continue or branch out story (likely from other POV than Shepard's or even his/her associates'). And it wouldn't invalidate other endings either, just some players' naive perception of the events.
Do frogs bump their asses a-hoppin'?
I wouldn't know, as I've never spent time looking at a frog's backside.
back to topic... or at least a near-miss.
if bioware was going to add comments about ME3's ending I think it would have been done a year or two ago.
as for IT...
I never really took IT seriously, there seemed to be too many holes, and the explaining away or trying to, by taking the stance that IT's plot holes don't matter because it's not real... that just doesn't hold water for me. as for the EC, well it only seemed to make IT extra crispy as opposed to just dead, imho.
also, if I actually took IT seriously, I'd have to come to the conclusion that BW sold me a game that didn't have an ending. and that I can't accept.
(though I think I've stated these things elsewhere)
Retour en haut