Literalists say the darndest things

Master Blaster wrote:It will be a long process of offering an option and convincing people this is the right choice. First Synthesis may be applied on terminally ill people to cure them. Then - on some inevitable volunteers. Finally - in galactic scale, but not before moving refusers to some star cluster and disabling Relay there for Synthesis apply duration.- Sevial.

So?
Choosing Refuse is then the right choice. Case closed!
All others are synthesized.

Restrider wrote:

Master Blaster wrote:It will be a long process of offering an option and convincing people this is the right choice. First Synthesis may be applied on terminally ill people to cure them. Then - on some inevitable volunteers. Finally - in galactic scale, but not before moving refusers to some star cluster and disabling Relay there for Synthesis apply duration.- Sevial.

So?
Choosing Refuse is then the right choice. Case closed!
All others are synthesized.

oh dear god

Restrider wrote:

DoomsdayDevice wrote:

RavenEyry wrote:I personally doubt any continuation DLC.

However, IT will always remain my interpretation and I'm 100% sure at least some form of IT was intended, but they want to keep it vague. I can even guess their reasons for doing so, although I don't agree with them.

I always though that as well, until I went through the game looking for hints in the dialogue, and the game kept breaking my 4th wall by telling me over and over and over that Shepard isn't dead, the war isn't over, and the Reapers are still out there. The game is FULL of foreshadowing.

My personal view is that IT was 99% intended (for 100% my interpretation anyways).
The question remains, how/when they are going to follow it up?

I hope that the supposed IT DLC is like Arrival and only sets the scenery for a ME4, which would then be a sequel, since the main conflict would still be unresolved.
I just hope that it is not something like, Shepard wakes up and we (really/literally) win pushing a button in something like 2-3 hours DLC gameplay). I think we need more (at least I want mooooaaaar !)...

I could also live with an expansion pack.

Agreed. It would be extremely retarded if Shepard simply woke up and went up the beam for real, only to activate the Crucible for real. I would hate that. Crucible has to be a trap.

Restrider wrote:

Iggy Koopa wrote:

In all honesty, it was not Hanar who kept comparing the Citadel explosion with a nuclear explosion, but an ITer (I forgot who it was). It was an ITer who kept bringing up Hiroshima over and over again. In fact, several ITers seemed to compare the explosion on the Citadel with Hiroshima. I can't remember exact names though, but I'mm willing to look it up, if I can ever find it back (the IT thread is unstickied on the BSN ).
Heretic_Hanar said that IF the explosion on the Citadel is indeed of nuclear nature, than it would work like this and this and that.

I'm not physics expert, and I certainly don't want to defend Heretic_Hanar, but I do think you guys are being a little unfair here.

also, Heretic_Hanar is right about the fact that nuclear explosions behave differently in space than they do in an atmosphere. That's all I really know about this subject though.


So maybe Heretic_Hanar indeed made a dumb comparison, but in all honesty, he was not the one who originally brought it up, it was an ITer who did.

The comparison to Hiroshima has been made to illustrate the strength of the Citadel explosion. The point is that we compared the output of energy with each other.
The comparison in itself is not a problem.
And even Hanar pointing out that a nuclear explosion behaves differently in space (lack of any atmosphere for instance) was reasonable.
The stupidity started, when Hanar pointed out that the electromagnetic waves are harmless. Tell that to everyone with a sunburn, radioactive sickness etc.
The energy emitted in the end scene of ME would've been enough to leave Shepard only as a plasma (not even atoms!).
And to top it off, somehow there is still an atmosphere in the Decision Chamber...

That's not entirely true. electromagnetic radiation is not necessarily bad. It depends on the type of radiation. Only Ultra-Violet radiation causes sunburns or worse.

Like I said, I'm not physics expert, but I'm quite sure that the resulting EMP from a nuclear detonation in space is not Ultra-Violet in nature.


I'm not saying Heretic_Hanar is not a troll. He comes off as quite an asshole in fact. But I don't think he's stupid or dumb. Just saying.

DoomsdayDevice wrote:

Agreed. It would be extremely retarded if Shepard simply woke up and went up the beam for real, only to activate the Crucible for real. I would hate that. Crucible has to be a trap.

I disagree.

If the Crucible is a trap, than why would the reapers try to indoctrinate Shepard when he was in fact about to walk right into their trap? That doesn't make sense.


I think the Crucible is real. I just think that if the Indoctrination Theory is real, than the Crucible might do something different than we think it does. It might still be an important weapon, just not in the way the Catalyst presented it to us. Maybe the REAL Crucible is something the reapers might actually fear. They fear that thing so badly, that they'll do anything to stop Shepard from using it. That's why they tried to indoctrinate him before it's too late.

The crucible IMO has to be a trap. The reapers are even able to "discover" its being worked on if the player fucks up and saves the reaper made rachni queen, yet they do nothing to destroy it.

Iggy Koopa wrote:

If the Crucible is a trap, than why would the reapers try to indoctrinate Shepard when he was in fact about to walk right into their trap? That doesn't make sense.

Because its part of the trap. Shepard is the prize.

Iggy Koopa wrote:

That's not entirely true. electromagnetic radiation is not necessarily bad. It depends on the type of radiation. Only Ultra-Violet radiation causes sunburns or worse.

Like I said, I'm not physics expert, but I'm quite sure that the resulting EMP from a nuclear detonation in space is not Ultra-Violet in nature.


I'm not saying Heretic_Hanar is not a troll. He comes off as quite an asshole in fact. But I don't think he's stupid or dumb. Just saying.

The emitted radiation would be in a lot of wavelength regions. All from high-energy gamma rays down to radio waves.
And believe me, EM radiation can be very dangerous depending on the intensity (note: intensity =/= wavelength).

And bear this in mind:
People who tend to speak in absolutes (examples are Heretic_Hanar or Megumi) are not liked a lot, even if what they say is true or at least appears to be true.
However, once these people post something that is factually wrong, they are beyond any hope.
I figured out that Heretic was a moron quite early.
It was a different thing with Megumi. She usually posted that anything and everything others speculated about was unsure, but at the same time treated all of her assertion as facts. Her attitude did not help.
When she started posting obviously wrong stuff in her typical absolutistic (not sure if this adjective is correctly used here?) fashion she was nothing than a presumptuous troll.

To conclude:
Those people who come off as especially confident and do not allow any deviation from their beliefs are either fools or zealots.
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell

Restrider wrote:

To conclude:
Those people who come off as especially confident and do not allow any deviation from their beliefs are either fools or zealots.
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell

I agree. Though I've seen "zealous" people on both sides of the fence though. But among the "literalists" I see a special kind of hatred for the IT that really baffles me. How can one hate a fan theory so much? It doesn't make sense. You can either like or dislike the IT, but hate it? Why? I would like to ask people like Heretic_Hanar that question, but I haven't seen him around anymore on the BSN after he got that warning from the moderator named RaenIsmael (or something like that).

Yeah, IT evangelising always annoyed me as much as everyone else, but the way people who have never even looked up the theory joke about it is just sad.

Yeah, like you're the first person to mention the Thessia VI in nine months. You're so clever.

RavenEyry wrote:Yeah, IT evangelising always annoyed me as much as everyone else, but the way people who have never even looked up the theory joke about it is just sad.

Yeah, like you're the first person to mention the Thessia VI in nine months. You're so clever.

I kind of miss these posts...
Not the toxic trolls that would derail the thread for 20 pages or the subtle annoyances like Megumi.
But those guys, chiming in, posting their revolutionary find and being ridiculed for it.

Restrider wrote:Those people who come off as especially confident and do not allow any deviation from their beliefs are either fools or zealots.
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell

Be that as it may, things aren't always that clear cut either.

I am very convinced that (some form of) IT is true, and I am very convinced that Bioware will reveal it. I am also very convinced that destroy will be the right choice. However, I do not go around calling people with different opinions stupid. I will always make a reasoned argument, citing game lore to illustrate my beliefs. I always respect people's opinions, unless they're based on misinformation, and I will always admit that I could be wrong about what I believe, no matter how convinced I am. And I always understand that not everyone will share my point of view.

tl;dr: There's a difference between being convinced of something and being an ass about it.

DoomsdayDevice wrote:

Restrider wrote:Those people who come off as especially confident and do not allow any deviation from their beliefs are either fools or zealots.
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell

Be that as it may, things aren't always that clear cut either.

I am very convinced that (some form of) IT is true, and I am very convinced that Bioware will reveal it. I am also very convinced that destroy will be the right choice. However, I do not go around calling people with different opinions stupid. I will always make a reasoned argument, citing game lore to illustrate my beliefs. I always respect people's opinions, unless they're based on misinformation, and I will always admit that I could be wrong about what I believe, no matter how convinced I am. And I always understand that not everyone will share my point of view.

tl;dr: There's a difference between being convinced of something and being an ass about it.

That's the point. You can be convinced about something, but still be open to other's reasoning and - as you have said yourself - still at least be aware of the fact that you may be wrong.
Those I was referring to lack these traits. They think in absolutes and a differing opinion is not a part of their world view. Those are the people you have to be aware of and knowing what they are you should treat their assertions accordingly.

[quote="Iggy Koopa"]

Restrider wrote:
I agree. Though I've seen "zealous" people on both sides of the fence though. But among the "literalists" I see a special kind of hatred for the IT that really baffles me. How can one hate a fan theory so much? It doesn't make sense. You can either like or dislike the IT, but hate it? Why? I would like to ask people like Heretic_Hanar that question, but I haven't seen him around anymore on the BSN after he got that warning from the moderator named RaenIsmael (or something like that).

The literalists (especially those who support Control or Synthesis) hate IT so much because it effectively tells them they are wrong, that they have been tricked into doing something they didn't want to do.

No one likes to be fooled. When you have built up an extensive network of headcanon to support your decision, and someone else says you are wrong, well then, you're going to get angry. And supporting Control or Synthesis requires a LOT of headcanon.

Case in point:

Kataphrut94: "Object Rho is kind of discounted on account of it being optional. I mean, I never played Arrival, why should my Shepard be lumped in with the IT nutjobs?"

Uh-huh. so Arrival is optional because you personally didn't buy or install it, is it? So whatabout the EC? If I didn't install that, does that mean that it's optional and should be discounted? Or let's go one better: I sold Legion to Cerberus. Does that mean that the entire Geth "Number 5 Is Alive" story arc is optional, and should be discounted?

ElSuperGecko wrote:Case in point:

Kataphrut94: "Object Rho is kind of discounted on account of it being optional. I mean, I never played Arrival, why should my Shepard be lumped in with the IT nutjobs?"

Uh-huh. so Arrival is optional because you personally didn't buy or install it, is it? So whatabout the EC? If I didn't install that, does that mean that it's optional and should be discounted? Or let's go one better: I sold Legion to Cerberus. Does that mean that the entire Geth "Number 5 Is Alive" story arc is optional, and should be discounted?

Indeed. And even without Object Rho Shepard is being exposed to ridiculous amounts of Reaper tech.

I do like how we're rebuted by being called 'nutjobs', however. It just shows how strong our position is that the only avenue of attack is insults. Heck it wasn't even direct avenue, he had to veer off to the side to get that petty little jab in.

I've alread posted this in the main thread, just now realizing it would have been more sppropriate to post it here. Just a "little" overall observation concerning literalist/synthesis discussions.

1. Scientists believe that over one hundred synthesis/bad writing debates take place on the internet every day
2. They also believe that nearly all of those are completely retarded
3. This should be obvious to any one observing, or, God help you, participating in one.

Moderates are rare in those threads but crazy people, like genocide advocates are everywhere. Usually emerging after being laughed out of class by their first year ethics professors. 

These individiuals reply to common sense by showing off their "edgyness" for being able to embrace such a "beautiful" concept, the rest of the dull population seems to fail to understand. If, objectively, clearly disproven they refer to common evasion tactics like ignorance, insults, "bad ritetening" argumentations and once again try to play out the "edgy" card: "i'm not going to argue with a person of such a limited vision and mindset. I'm clearly better than that and furthermore have a life you clearly seem to lack. You have been arguing with me for the past three hours, don't you have anything else to do?"
The "get a life" argument as mentioned in the example before is also a beloved debate tactic and rather cheap trick of a defeated synthesizer BEWARE! Do not engage!
If confronted with the fact that the synthesizer was also arguing for the past three hours, answers usually consist of a slight variation of the following "it might seem that way, but i'm just waiting for my girlfriend to come home so we can have sex, while in the meantime crushing you in a senseless deabate. So, as i said, GET A LIFE"

Other "tactics" of "argumentation" are used by synthesisers, not realizing how useless they are.
Putting "Um" in front of thei posts:

What synthesisers think they are saying:

The opposition's post was wrong in so many ways, even their throbbing brain must struggle to organize them all.Dealing with the opposition's idiocy has become the moon mission of the internet: even these rocket scientists must work to understand the scale of this project before triumphing over it for the good of all mankind. The opposition is about to be schooled so hard, it will leave this comment with a Ph.D and have to spend the rest of its life known as Dr. Dumbass.

What they are actually saying:

Trying to show off how smart they are was a success, just not in the way they were hoping for.
In a real life conversation "um" is how people continue to make noise before their brains are ready. If one cannot come up with a sensible argument he or she shoul refrain from saying "um" for it only shows one is not equipped for this kind of conversation and should keep his/her noise-vent shot until the situation changes.Putting it in thext form is even worse. Posts are usually not created until they are ready so this informationless noise is now silent, and does less than nothing, it's pointless.

Having a good lol @ the "Why wasn't Shepard indoctrinated?" thread on BSN.

It's good to know that HYR 2.0's "evidence" against IT is based almost wholly on arguing semantics.

ElSuperGecko wrote:Having a good lol @ the "Why wasn't Shepard indoctrinated?" thread on BSN.

It's good to know that HYR 2.0's "evidence" against IT is based almost wholly on arguing semantics.

Well everyone knows that strawmen are the easiest opponant in an argument.

Ah yes, BSN the Pacified Regions... lots of lulz for everyone.

ElSuperGecko wrote:Having a good lol @ the "Why wasn't Shepard indoctrinated?" thread on BSN.

It's good to know that HYR 2.0's "evidence" against IT is based almost wholly on arguing semantics.

Sadly this sums up a good chunk of BSN pretty well.

Another one of those crazy people I linked earlier stated that they made Mass Effect 3's ending for people who are university graduate students. Said if the ending is so complicated it belongs in a university lecture hall and not in a video game. That Bioware has completely forgot who their game's audience actually is designed for. I think he believes that games can only be designed as an entertainment device for the mindless, and not something that is ever thought provoking. He stated that Mass Effect doesn't require any thought, it's a space opera. Said the codex spoon feeds us information, but at the same time claims it's "optional content".

All the stuff they're saying makes them sound like they've fallen victim to Bioware's master plan to indoctrinate their own fanbase judging by everything they're saying.

magnetite wrote:Another one of those crazy people I linked earlier stated that they made Mass Effect 3's ending for people who are university graduate students. Said if the ending is so complicated it belongs in a university lecture hall and not in a video game. That Bioware has completely forgot who their game's audience actually is designed for. I think he believes that games can only be designed as an entertainment device for the mindless, and not something that is ever thought provoking. He stated that Mass Effect doesn't require any thought, it's a space opera. Said the codex spoon feeds us information, but at the same time claims it's "optional content".

All the stuff they're saying makes them sound like they've fallen victim to Bioware's master plan to indoctrinate their own fanbase judging by everything they're saying.

Honestly, I want the reveal so these idiots are shown to be indoctrinated more than I want it for story reasons.

I must assume people who say 3 ruined cerberus have never played 1, because that's basically what they were like back then. They were only 'good' in 2, and the logs on cronus outright say the crew of Normandy 2 were purposely picked to hide the darker side from Shepard. Heck, half the crew were alliance quitters that joined on rebound and not human supremacists.

RavenEyry wrote:I must assume people who say 3 ruined cerberus have never played 1, because that's basically what they were like back then. They were only 'good' in 2, and the logs on cronus outright say the crew of Normandy 2 were purposely picked to hide the darker side from Shepard. Heck, half the crew were alliance quitters that joined on rebound and not human supremacists.

And even in ME2 Cerberus darker side creeps in at times. Overlord springs to mind as the most, but basically Jack's entire loyalty mission (yeah right TIM did not know about it) is this as well.