567 réponses à ce sujet

[shodiswe]

Awww.... Just let it go.... Don't bring that stuff into the Andromeda forum. It won't make anyone feel better.

[MoonblaDAI]

Awww.... Just let it go.... Don't bring that stuff into the Andromeda forum. It won't make anyone feel better.\

 

 

It had to be said...

[Hazegurl]

I like the IT and even use it in my canon but only concerning the dreams Shepard was having.  The oily shadows et al is exactly how the Rachni Queen described it.  But that's about as far as I go with it.  I chalk it up to my Shepard being so focused on killing the Reapers to the point where the "message" wasn't really getting through but it was still messing him up a bit.  Then I use MEHEM to bypass that long winded kid and the RGB choice anyway so IT remains as a background thing instead of something placed front and center.  I think it adds a bit more depth to the story I want to tell.

[DaemionMoadrin]

They call a writer's explanation Word of God for a reason. Within their own universe they are god and if they say there was no indoctrination, then you need to accept that. You are basically calling the writers liars with your continued insistence on the IT, so why are you surprised when BioWare closes your threads and bans people?

 

Even if it was true (and there is no evidence it is, obviously) why would you want to bring it into ME:A? The game needs a clear cut from the trilogy, it needs to start over to escape from the dead end of ME3. The less connections we have to the story and endings of ME1-3, the better.

 

Take the technology, the species, the combat... but leave the past in the past. Otherwise we'll just re-hash already exhausted topics and that's no fun.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 

It had to be said...

 

It is criminal how attractive they make cartoons look these days...

[Hazegurl]

I do agree that the writer is God of the world they created but also when a story is shared it can grow in multiple different ways.  If a person wants to head canon something different, what is the harm? This is how we get brand new stories.  I do agree that forcing people to think your head canon is real is extreme but I also don't understand the investment some have in proving them wrong. 

 

At the end of the day, it's an RPG.  It's our own game and our Shepard's story.  And yeah I do think it's stupid for the reapers to not at least try to indoctrinate Shepard.  Having Shepard on their side would have severely weakened nearly everyone's morale. So I like the idea that they at least were smart enough to try.

 

But yeah. ME:A should be far removed from most of the ME trilogy.  I'm ready for a fresh start.

[Br3admax]

Headcanon is supposed to stay, as the name suggests for some odd reason, in your head, where no one but you can see it or know about it. And sure places where you talk about it with a select group of friends who agree with your theories, such as a certain IT forum that exists, are fine. But when you come into every situation presented talking about how your dev-denied theory is canon, or hell even possible when contrary to all evidence provided, I think a little criticism is warranted. 

[Spacepunk01]

They call a writer's explanation Word of God for a reason. Within their own universe they are god and if they say there was no indoctrination, then you need to accept that. You are basically calling the writers liars with your continued insistence on the IT, so why are you surprised when BioWare closes your threads and bans people?

 

Many people don't see it that way:

 

All worthy work is open to interpretations the author did not intend. Art isn't your pet — it's your kid. It grows up and talks back to you.

 

      - Joss Whedon (and many others)

[Br3admax]

That quote is about the meanings and lessons that can be gained from viewing works of art or literature. But as changing the events of a story are similar in magnitude to making the Mona Lisa have a mustache, it's obviously no longer the same piece of "art." You're just trying to warp words to fit your argument. 

[WildOrchid]

Aw hell no, the IT is back.

[DaemionMoadrin]

Many people don't see it that way:

 

All worthy work is open to interpretations the author did not intend. Art isn't your pet — it's your kid. It grows up and talks back to you.

 

      - Joss Whedon (and many others)

 

So? He say it is open to interpretation... he didn't say that you should contradict the author or go against their intention.

[AlanC9]

OTOH, the writers could shut down IT really hard if they cared to. While they've made IT look ridiculous, they haven't made it flat-out impossible. IT is essentially a free-rider on Bio's decision to refuse to canonize any ending

[Spacepunk01]

That quote is about the meanings and lessons that can be gained from viewing works of art or literature. But as changing the events of a story are similar in magnitude to making the Mona Lisa have a mustache, it's obviously no longer the same piece of "art." You're just trying to warp words to fit your argument. 

 

I didn't warp words. I didn't even make an argument. I simply made a statement. I'm not an IT subscriber.

 

So? He say it is open to interpretation... he didn't say that you should contradict the author or go against their intention.

 

You don't need to go against the author publicly. This is more related to what we call headcanon. We can interprete the ending of ME3 in different ways, and we don't have to fight about it.

[DaemionMoadrin]

I didn't warp words. I didn't even make an argument. I simply made a statement. I'm not an IT subscriber.

 

 

You don't need to go against the author publicly. This is more related to what we call headcanon. We can interprete the ending of ME3 in different ways, and we don't have to fight about it.

 

So why do people try to bring their head canon into ME:A?

[In Exile]

Yes. If Person 1 says something like this:

"The gun has infinite ammo, the whole game must not be real!" - he is branded a crazy theorist. (and probably not without reason)

If Person 2 says something like this:

"Dreams with dark wispers and oily shadows are symptoms of reaper indoctrination as established by the lore." - he too is branded a crazy theorist in the same lot with Person 1, but his point will be ignored because Person 1's point is more easily debunked.

Just because one position us more ridiculous does not make the other position not ridiculous, so to speak. It is only less ridiculous by comparison.

[In Exile]

Many people don't see it that way:

All worthy work is open to interpretations the author did not intend. Art isn't your pet — it's your kid. It grows up and talks back to you.

- Joss Whedon (and many others)

Yeah, but that doesn't work when it comes to positing sequels.

[Hazegurl]

Headcanon is supposed to stay, as the name suggests for some odd reason, in your head, where no one but you can see it or know about it. And sure places where you talk about it with a select group of friends who agree with your theories, such as a certain IT forum that exists, are fine. But when you come into every situation presented talking about how your dev-denied theory is canon, or hell even possible when contrary to all evidence provided, I think a little criticism is warranted. 

If that were the case then we wouldn't have Mel Brooks movies which are comedic interpretations of other films or different re-tellings of Othello or Romeo and Juliet.  Heck nearly every story told today existed as a head canon to another work of fiction. Even Mass Effect itself. What does it matter if someone posts a thread asking for what they want in the game? We already have threads requesting gay alien LIs, modest armor designs, and a whole host of other stuff.  I personally don't think they (BW) should listen to anyone on this forum, and I doubt they are, but whether they are or not. I don't see the harm in a request nor is interpreting the story differently wrong. 

[Spacepunk01]

So why do people try to bring their head canon into ME:A?

 

We all know that'll never happen, but if some people want to incorporate IT into their Andromeda experience, so be it. I think BioWare wants to avoid locking this thread down, in the interest of protecting free speech, but BioWare is probably just as sick of this theory as you guys are.

 

The thread will eventually die 

[MoonblaDAI]

OTOH, the writers could shut down IT really hard if they cared to. While they've made IT look ridiculous, they haven't made it flat-out impossible. IT is essentially a free-rider on Bio's decision to refuse to canonize any ending

 

Quoting from somewhere else: When an unwelcome change occurs, a trauma of some sort, the first impulse to disbelieve begins the process of coping...

 

This process has a name (clicky clicky!):

 

Spoiler

It is called denial

[AlanC9]

They made it this way so that people can decide for themselves what is best. Bioware doesn't have to canonize an ending if they don't want to. Like any company, they choose what information they communicate with the customer and what they want to keep secret.

The message is clear. They don't want to tell you how it ends or which ending is correct, you are free to decide.

Sure, but that's not got much to do with IT. Like I said, it's a side-effect of the no-canon philosophy. Since there's not going to be any canon, messing with IT offers no benefit.

If Bio did decide to drop this policy -- I've been urging that since the runup to DA2, FWIW -- IT wouldn't be a factor in the decision.

[AtreiyaN7]

As interesting/entertaining as I found the original IT theory (I certainly give people credit for their creativity), I think the EC endings were pretty concrete and that IT never happened. It's fine to write fan fic if you like IT and have it your way in your world - enjoy it. Just don't expect it to be taken seriously by the majority of people in the forums at this point.

 

 

If that were the case then we wouldn't have Mel Brooks movies which are comedic interpretations of other films or different re-tellings of Othello or Romeo and Juliet.  Heck nearly every story told today existed as a head canon to another work of fiction. Even Mass Effect itself. What does it matter if someone posts a thread asking for what they want in the game? We already have threads requesting gay alien LIs, modest armor designs, and a whole host of other stuff.  I personally don't think they (BW) should listen to anyone on this forum, and I doubt they are, but whether they are or not. I don't see the harm in a request nor is interpreting the story differently wrong. 

 

 

On the subject of equating Mel Brooks comedies to a random fan's headcanon, I think it's an inappropriate analogy. Headcanon is something completely different from writing a parody, especially since headcanon basically equates to nothing more than a fan's wishful thinking about events that have taken place (or events that they want to see take place) in a fictional universe.

 

headcanon (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Headcanon)

Used by followers of various media of entertainment, such as television shows, movies, books, etc. to note a particular belief which has not been used in the universe of whatever program or story they follow, but seems to make sense to that particular individual, and as such is adopted as a sort of "personal canon". Headcanon may be upgraded to canon if it is incorporated into the program or story's universe.

 

 

Mel Brooks is not out there altering an existing fictional universe for the purpose of injecting his own beliefs/hopes/dreams into that universe in the way that a fan might do with their favorite fictional universe. He's just straight-up making fun of assorted movies (like how he mocks Star Wars with Spaceballs), stories, and people in the form of parodies and satirical comedy (like The Producers). I feel that what he does is completely different from a fan headcanoning a Wrex x Shepard OTP or a fan headcanoning that their Shepard survived ME3 and married Liara, etc.

 

Personal flights of headcanon-related fantasy really shouldn't be equated to works of parody or satire, neither of which is actually intended to supplant an original story or to add to that original story (or its universe) in the manner that a fan's headcanon is. Also, I think the difference between an IT thread and armor-related threads, etc., is that those other threads actually have a chance to influence aesthetics or character development in the game (the threads that aren't completely silly that is - I hope the sillier threads are summarily ignored).

 

IT won't ever actually impact the game itself, unless the writers decide to throw in a reference as a joke/Easter egg - which, by the way, is probably a horrible idea because hardcore IT proponents might take it seriously (don't do it, BW!).

[teh DRUMPf!!]

I do agree that forcing people to think your head canon is real is extreme but I also don't understand the investment some have in proving them wrong. 

 

Oh I can speak to that one, at least for myself...

 

Before EC I did not really pay IT much mind. I read it over, thought it was completely far-fetched but did not mind people believing it. Then after EC, every fan with an iota of sense abandoned it (which, naturally, left behind many senseless individuals). Before IT got mercifully banned, I got into it with their fans time and again, which just left this lasting bitter taste in my mouth.

 

Also, I tend to disdain things I believe to be overrated. The more people like something that I do not like, the more I do not like it. Vicious cycle. So yeah, that is another thing that sullies IT for me -- people gush over it so much. 'Gets annoying.

[KaiserShep]

Aw hell no, the IT is back.

 

IT is like the mighty cicada. It crazily chirps in the tree like some kind of unholy offspring of a cricket and a rattlesnake, then it disappears for a while, then it reappears to make more racket. 

[In Exile]

IT is like the mighty cicada. It crazily chirps in the tree like some kind of unholy offspring of a cricket and a rattlesnake, then it disappears for a while, then it reappears to make more racket. 

 

The cycle continues. IT proves itself.