(XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Page 20 of 20 Previous  1 ... 11 ... 18, 19, 20

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: (XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Post by TerramineLightvoid on Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:04 pm

Rifneno wrote:What the fuck are you on about?  You say that like MEA is related to ME3 in anything other than EA trying to squeeze more money of the franchise name.  The only person we know of that was involved with the original trilogy that was involved with MEA was Mack The Hack.  Which is literally worse than no one at all.  MEA not only wasn't produced by a different team, it was produced by an entirely different fucking studio!  It's one step above fan fiction.  The American Super Mario Brothers 2 of sci fi.
Nah I'm gonna call bullshit Rif. This is the same sorry ass cop out I hear every time a series takes a turn people don't like. It's not just a thing with Mass Effect, you see this shit across the board.

Take Life is Strange for instance. People often try to use the fact that it was made by a completely separate studio from the original creators, to say it's not canon. But you'd have to be clinically retarded to not see that it clearly is exactly what the original team would have made if they had decided to make a prequel themselves. But they want to take a completely different direction, focus their time and resources on EXPANDING the Life is Strange brand. This motivation is the ONLY reason they are "against" making a prequel, in other words... they aren't actually against it at all, they just don't want to have to do the work. So if someone else comes along and asks if they can do all the work for them, of course they agree. From there it's obvious the BtS team basically is just running purely off what the original team told them.

Yet again you see the same thing with the Dragonball series. For a long time now, people have been saying that Dragonball GT is not canon. They point to how it was made by a completely different team, and wasn't officially written by Akira Toriyama himself. Despite the fact that the studio that made DBGT had claimed that Toriyama had been guiding them in the creation of a sequel to DBZ. They dismissed that fact for no reason, they just claimed that the studio paid Akira off so they could make that claim so people would be more interested to watch it. In other words, they were dismissive of it outright simply because they did not like what DBGT presented.

Low and behold some years later Akira himself comes back to write an official and 100% canon sequel to DBZ. Called Dragonball Super. Of all things that could possibly render GT completely noncanon, you'd think an official work by the original creator that takes place at the same time/overlaps when GT took place, would do it. But instead, there is unfathomable levels of twinism going on between the 2 series. Literally Dragonball Super is no more than a fresh coat of paint over the orignal GT storyline. Everything from entire characters, to plotlines, to new lore, etc. Are the same. Proving what that separate studio had claimed to be true all along. Proving all those ideas in GT were obviously Akira's ideas if he felt like keeping them around in Dragonball GT 2.0(aka DBS).

That's the fatal flaw with what you are saying. You make a sarcastic reference to the Mario Bros action live film. But the irony is that movies like that are exactly why no new live action movies differ all that relevantly from the source material. Both movie makers and video game makers have learned the hard way about ports. Be it live action ports, or studio/franchise ports. That people just wanna see the same old shit with better graphics or with real life actors. They have developed a downright, phobia, of changing ported material. Especially when we are talking about games being ported over to completely new crews. It's much worse in this regard because game makers have never even tried "spicing things up" the way Live Action films started off doing right off the bat.

Which is actually my primary complaint about Andromeda. Because in reality it feels like they just copied everything from the original trology. In the trilogy things changed over the span of games. New places, characters, and lore were revealed in each new game. Andromeda is filled with detail, for a game that is supposedly just a rushed hack job like you guys are claiming. It's just that a lot of the detail seems like "filler" most of the time. At least when it comes to anything to do with the Milky Way. The only real new stuff is the Andromeda stuff. But at the same time, this "flaw" is what helps prove my case that they aren't "headcanoning" a whole lot. Maybe Andromeda itself but even then, not as much as one may think. There's a lot going on here that intertwines with deeper facets of the original trilogy. Hints at what was meant in the original trilogy when we were told there was some sort of pattern in the galaxy that the Reapers were made aware of because they tried directing the development of life.

You see "patterns" ermerging in Andromeda, left and right. For all intents and purposes Andromeda has no connection whatsoever to Milky Way. Even the Milky Way inhabitants in Andromeda should diverge drastically from those still in the milky way, the same way Angarans have just by being secluded across planets. But in general, in every factor, Andromeda is following nearly the exact same patterns as the Milky Way. Sans the AI conflict, but really it's strongly hinted that Andromeda is the precursor to something like the Reapers. Remnant tech is near the same as Reaper tech.

Then there's the 2 incredibly suspicious galaxy map situations in the original trilogy. It's completely unexplained, but the Leviathan/Reapers are seen studying a "corrupted" galaxy map. In the same facility that they are inexplicably studying Turian physiology. There's no explanation for this AT ALL, and while there are some immediate ideas that stand out. None of them explain why the map is "corrupted". The Milky Way has already been well fleshed out by galactic civilization. We have a perfectly full map in the original trilogy, and this makes sense given the level of technology and residing inside said galaxy in the first place. So it makes no sense why Leviathans/Reapers wouldn't have a fully functional map. There is 1 explanation that explains the whole thing perfectly: The leviathans/reapers aren't observing a map of the milky way, but rather a map of Andromeda.

The other completely unexplained and previously completely nonsensical situation I mentioned. Is when Liara shows Shepard something at the end of the game. When she mind melds with Shep, and Shep and Liara are floating towards some galaxy. Before being able to see what is inside said galaxy we are blinded by it's light, and then the sequence ends. Again let me stress how random, how unexplained, how out of place, how absurd, etc this is. At the time it was sheer absurdity even though nobody called it into question. But now it makes sense if Liara knew about the Andromeda Initiative and was essentially showing Shepard. It's a bit convenient that there is a scene in ME3 that can be directly and explicitly interpreted as foreshadowing MEA. A scene that otherwise isn't all that ambiguous, a scene that could barely even be interpreted in terms of the original trilogy. Almost the only alternative is "Liara is helping the Reapers indoctrinate Shepard".

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
TerramineLightvoid
Pod Crab

Posts : 25
Join date : 2017-03-25
Age : 24
Location : Type 7, Omniverse

Back to top Go down

Re: (XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Post by Rifneno on Wed Jan 03, 2018 10:16 pm

Just skimmed through most of that.  Because I don't know anything about LiS or animu or any of that.  And frankly, it doesn't matter.  You can't judge Brand A, made by Company Y, by something Brand B, made by Company Z does.  That's fucking stupid.  That's what Swoby used to do.

I didn't reference the awful SMB movie.  I reference SMB2.  You don't seem to be aware of the reference, so an explanation: back in the NES days, SMB got its first of ten trillion sequels.  As was the thing at the time, it was released in Japan quite a ways ahead of American and European releases.  The thing is, SMB2 was quickly deemed "too hard" for non-Japanese audiences.  Or, you know, sane people.  It was a fucking terrible game that played like a shitty fan edit of a SMB ROM.  The graphics were exactly the same as SMB1, only the levels were different.  And again, they were terrible.  Not challenging in a good way, challenging in a "fuck you for playing" kind of way.  But they had already set release dates across the globe for SMB2.  They frantically came up with a solution: another newish game at the time, Doki Doki Panic, was rebranded as SMB2.  They stuck Mario characters in it and changed a few themes to make it fit.  It still didn't fit the Mario theme, and why would it?  It wasn't a real SMB game.  It was Doki Doki Panic with Mario characters hammered in at the last minute.  But it was the lesser evil compared to releasing the pile of shit that was the real SMB2.

And thus my comparison.  SMB2 wasn't SMB2, it was Doki Doki Panic.  ME:A isn't ME4, it's some random generic space shooter branded as ME.

But I digress.  You can complain all you want about not liking people brushing off ME:A, but they have every right to do so.  Different writers, different studio, different everything.  One notoriously bad writer is the only thing carried over from ME.  Why would the garbage game have anything significantly IT related when the writers who made it don't know anymore than we do what the original intent of the real ME team was?  Even back in ME3, the team doing multiplayer content didn't know the significance of the vent-lightning warning sign since they reused it in the Vancouver map.  You really think they had a big meeting and let the ME:A team in on the tightly kept secret despite the game having nothing to do with it?  Get real.

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2629
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 36
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

Re: (XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Post by TerramineLightvoid on Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:13 am

Rifneno wrote:*snip*
But I digress. You can complain all you want about not liking people brushing off ME:A, but they have every right to do so. Different writers, different studio, different everything. One notoriously bad writer is the only thing carried over from ME. Why would the garbage game have anything significantly IT related when the writers who made it don't know anymore than we do what the original intent of the real ME team was?  Even back in ME3, the team doing multiplayer content didn't know the significance of the vent-lightning warning sign since they reused it in the Vancouver map.  You really think they had a big meeting and let the ME:A team in on the tightly kept secret despite the game having nothing to do with it? Get real.
Ah well now I get what you mean... kind of. Except Doki Doki Mario Bros 2 was loved by most fans of the series... so? Despite it seeming completely nonsensical and absurd, but it worked because Mario was already ridiculous 10 ways to sunday. But I dunno Rif, have you even played Andromeda? Because I know just how absurd that idea is. That you of all people, tried it. I own it, and I will call your bullshit out right there. It is virtually just ME3 combat on stereoids. Everything, the weapons, the cover system, the biotics. It's all there and perfectly polished, at least on console(PC has always been buggier for virtually every game ever). I don't get how you can compare MEA to Doki Mario, when it's literally the same exact gameplay mechanics. That's exactly what DM WASN'T.

As far as rationalizing how a completely different team could even know what they were doing: It's not about secrets. Not if Andromeda was the true original ending to the trilogy. It's "there" written in the details. From what I already mentioned, to the fact that the whole problem with the Crucible was that it made it seem like there was no actual way to beat the Reapers despite countless mentions of "an unconventional strategy". What exactly were the writers thinking the solution to the Reapers was gonna be? They must've had SOMETHING legit. Not even what was originally leaked actually answers this question. We just know Shepard was gonna be offered to "join the Reapers", and he was going to be able to reject. What that rejection lead to, is unknown.

But if you look at all the pieces, especially the ones towards the ending. You kinda see something. The Crucible blueprints being sourced from a species that traveled from Andromeda to the Milky Way using the Arks. Which is why the Crucible tech and the Ark tech is so similar to Remnant tech. If the Crucible is actually Reaper tech, that makes things worse. Because there is a lot of evidence to suggest "The Remnant" are the true evolutionary origins of the Reapers. I'm not trying to convince you, and I can understand people THINKING the way they do. But what I don't like is people acting so prevelantly like it's just cut and dry "this is not canon because it left the original creator's hands". It actually reminds me all too well of a similarly all-pervasive mentality we ITers have dealt with for so long. Which is the vast amount of people claiming "you're putting to much thought into it". Yet again something I hear whenever I try to "theorize" about ANY work of fiction, not just Mass Effect.

Ultimately, even if I were to agree that MEA is basically just one big shit show. I still have to hold the viewpoint that it's a shitshow that makes some more semblence of sense than people wish to believe. Because there's too much hinting at it. Maybe those colored binders weren't nothing. If they weren't, those binders were written by the original Mass Effect crew and handed over to the new one. Which actually, we have plenty of evidence for and all you have to say otherwise is just... "they lied". With no proof that they did.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
TerramineLightvoid
Pod Crab

Posts : 25
Join date : 2017-03-25
Age : 24
Location : Type 7, Omniverse

Back to top Go down

Re: (XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Post by Rifneno on Sat Jan 06, 2018 1:28 am

TerramineLightvoid wrote:Ah well now I get what you mean... kind of. Except Doki Doki Mario Bros 2 was loved by most fans of the series... so?

Holy shit, no. In hindsight it looks that way because gamers are some kind of hyperretarded when it comes to nostalgia. If it's old, it's great. The older it is, the greater it is. Ask any intelligent MMORPGer. I've seen people wax nostalgic about Hell Levels in EQ. This was a glitch where they accidentally added an extra digit or two to the exp requirements. Better yet, the penalty for death was losing a percentage of exp to level. So you could play for 8 hours, then die once because of someone else's mistake and lose the entire day's work. Those numbers aren't an exaggeration, one death could really set you back an entire day's work. They were called "hell levels" for a fucking reason. And retarded retards talk fondly of their memories of them. Gamers don't just have rose tinted glasses, they have an IV drip of heroin.

So yeah. The release did NOT go as well as it's portrayed in this era. It wasn't a total trainwreck like ME3 or No Man's Lie, but it was met with almost universal confused disappointment. Even the defenders of the game at the time only defended it from a stance of "it's a fun game if you don't look at it as SMB2 and just take it on its own merits." No one thought it was worthy of the name it was given.

Of course, this was before the Internet was even in its infancy so there's no 20 year old posts to dig up to prove my point. All I can say is that I don't have a reputation as a liar. If that's not enough, oh well.

But I dunno Rif, have you even played Andromeda?



No.

Because I know just how absurd that idea is. That you of all people, tried it. I own it, and I will call your bullshit out right there. It is virtually just ME3 combat on stereoids. Everything, the weapons, the cover system, the biotics. It's all there and perfectly polished, at least on console(PC has always been buggier for virtually every game ever). I don't get how you can compare MEA to Doki Mario, when it's literally the same exact gameplay mechanics. That's exactly what DM WASN'T.

Because they're different kinds of games. SMB was about gameplay. It entertained through the fun of playing it. ME could certainly be fun, but first and foremost it was about story. It entertained through a compelling tale, like a good book does. Both these examples deviated from that. DDP was a huge disappointment compared to SMB's incredibly well crafted gameplay. Andromeduh followed up the trilogy's deep and interesting story that above all made sense with a story that's literally based off nonsense. I've already written volumes on why going to Andromeda is the dumbest bullshit ever, but that's hardly all. Pretty much everything I read about MEA's lore was nonsensical gibberish. Geth are welding together mass relays to make FTL telescopes? What the fuck drivel is that?

As far as rationalizing how a completely different team could even know what they were doing: It's not about secrets. Not if Andromeda was the true original ending to the trilogy.

LOL.

It's "there" written in the details.

Just... LOL.

From what I already mentioned, to the fact that the whole problem with the Crucible was that it made it seem like there was no actual way to beat the Reapers despite countless mentions of "an unconventional strategy". What exactly were the writers thinking the solution to the Reapers was gonna be? They must've had SOMETHING legit. Not even what was originally leaked actually answers this question. We just know Shepard was gonna be offered to "join the Reapers", and he was going to be able to reject. What that rejection lead to, is unknown.

IMO, the Reapers were going to be beaten by weaponizing FTL ships. The setup was all already there. The entire Taetrus thing showed us that while it's very difficult to bypass the safeties, it IS possible. And the codex outright tells us that were the "lesser" races able to weaponize FTL, the Reapers would be all kinds of fucked. Even a simple shuttle could easily one-shot a capital ship. And the Reapers would have no way of even defending themselves because even they can't track objects moving faster than light. Taetrus was the setup. Like a few other things, they planted the seeds for a coming twist in the Cerberus Daily News.

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2629
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 36
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

Re: (XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Post by dorktainian on Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:00 am

Rifneno wrote:

But I dunno Rif, have you even played Andromeda?




Brilliant.

_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3508
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

Re: (XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Post by dorktainian on Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:01 am

I thought we beat the reapers by choosing destroy? That was certainly the impression I got on first playthrough, and even more so when they rejigged the endings with the extended cut.


_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3508
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

Re: (XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Post by magnetite on Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:16 am

dorktainian wrote:I thought we beat the reapers by choosing destroy?  That was certainly the impression I got on first playthrough, and even more so when they rejigged the endings with the extended cut.

That's what the game files say.
avatar
magnetite
Brute

Posts : 714
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 34
Location : Calgary, AB, Canada

Back to top Go down

Re: (XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 20 of 20 Previous  1 ... 11 ... 18, 19, 20

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum