Any of you guys go back to BSN?

MovieMachine wrote:Go easy with the ultralarge quotes, please.

So much text.

I can bring Paxxton.

ofrankh wrote:

You just ignored everything to the contrary and made up your own ending. How can the catalyst "exist or not" when leviathan said its a real thing, and you even mention them to the catalyst, which acknowledges them.

Also what "hope" is there for IT? The citadel dlc was the last time we would get any action with shep and co. What, you think the next mass effect will start out with the beam run?

Bioware has made it pretty clear numerous times that there won't be any more shepard, that's enough to know there won't be a change to the ending.

If you want to make your own "happy ending", pretend you chose destroy, and use citadel dlc as the epilogue.

As Raistlin pointed out, there's nothing to reliably and irrefutably distinguish the Catalyst from the Intelligence (or to conclude that they're the same). I'm not saying IT denies the existence of the Catalyst, I'm saying that my interpretation of IT focuses on the use of the presence who identifies itself as the Catalyst as an indoctrination attempt. Does the Catalyst exist in a physical way? Still doesn't change the core of IT. Is the Catalyst a lie? Still doesn't change the core of IT.

I'll nix all hope of a reveal when people stop saying IT has been debunked while presenting little evidence other than "Bioware didn't explicitly say so." So, probably never.

Who said I wanted to make my own "happy ending?" I'm cool with sad ending as long as it makes sense, which it currently doesn't. Hence IT.

Raistlin Majere wrote:(Snip)

ofrankh wrote:

You just ignored everything to the contrary and made up your own ending. How can the catalyst "exist or not" when leviathan said its a real thing, and you even mention them to the catalyst, which acknowledges them.

Also what "hope" is there for IT? The citadel dlc was the last time we would get any action with shep and co. What, you think the next mass effect will start out with the beam run?

Bioware has made it pretty clear numerous times that there won't be any more shepard, that's enough to know there won't be a change to the ending.

If you want to make your own "happy ending", pretend you chose destroy, and use citadel dlc as the epilogue.

The Leviathans mentioned a "intelligence" not a "catalyst." It never gave a form or a place for this intelligence. For all the information provided Harbinger or any Reaper could as easily be the intelligence and the Catalyst acknowledging the Leviathans existence changes none of that.

Remember what the Leviathan says? That Shepard's memories give form to its words, to the mind prison it places Shepard in? The Reapers have perfected this mind ability of the Leviathans, as said by the Leviathan itself. The Reapers once they have a hold have perfect access to the subjects memory, this is even shown in a comic outside the games.

It is not peculiar that both the Leviathan mind scene and the Catalyst scene starts out in theexact same way, with Shepard on his hands and knees and beeing approached by a figure he recognizes? In fact the mere fact that the Catalyst takes the form of that child shows some level of access to Shepard's memories.

Yet you trust it unconditionally only on its words?

Wow. Are you kidding me? They obviously aren't going to say the catalyst so that the leviathan won't spoil the ending/ruin the flow of the game. It's obvious the catalyst is the intelligence when you get to tell it about the leviathan and it even acknowledges it, explaining how "they weren't ready"

Pfranke? It that you?

What is wrong with people supporting something that makes a sorce of entertainment enjoyable? It is more than you have, since you stated you hate the endings regardless. To answer the question in the title and opening post: only when I need to register new Bioware content. other than that, no. Too much negative aura there to be enjoyable anymore. This place is more positive so I stay.

PYB guys, IT is debunked. Again.

ofrankh wrote:

Wow. Are you kidding me? They obviously aren't going to say the catalyst so that the leviathan won't spoil the ending/ruin the flow of the game. It's obvious the catalyst is the intelligence when you get to tell it about the leviathan and it even acknowledges it, explaining how "they weren't ready"

I do believe those first 5 words are mine. Of my entire post you choose to address a part I already explained, namely that the Reapers can get access to a persons memory which would make knowing about Shepard's contact with Leviathan peace of cake.

But let us play a game, no IT involved here. It is a simple question really, why do you trust the Catalyst even in the literal ending?

Forget the fact that it takes the form of a child which has haunted Shepard's nightmares throughout the game for no explained reason, forget that it is the leader of the villain we have been fighting for three games and which is known for deception and mind control, even forget that it claims peace cannot be achieved between Organics and Synthetics despite the player possibly doing exactly that between Geth and Quarians.

No, the "Catalyst" outright lies to your face. It says that it preserves "ALL organic and synthetic" creatures in Reaper form. Had Shepard not interfered and possibly even if he/she interferes, at least one Organic or Synthetic race would have been lost as direct result of the Reapers actions.

The Reapers control the Geth and turn them on the Quarians. Without interference the Quarian race would have been wiped out, not preserved. This is not even mentioning the Rachni who were according to all hints controlled by the Reapers, sent to war and nearly wiped out prior to the invasion. This is entirely in the Reapers hands of whom the Catalyst supposedly is the leader yet it goes against the goals it stated...strange, right?

So I ask, how can the Catalyst be trusted?

Raistlin Majere wrote:

ofrankh wrote:

Wow. Are you kidding me? They obviously aren't going to say the catalyst so that the leviathan won't spoil the ending/ruin the flow of the game. It's obvious the catalyst is the intelligence when you get to tell it about the leviathan and it even acknowledges it, explaining how "they weren't ready"

I do believe those first 5 words are mine. Of my entire post you choose to address a part I already explained, namely that the Reapers can get access to a persons memory which would make knowing about Shepard's contact with Leviathan peace of cake.

But let us play a game, no IT involved here. It is a simple question really, why do you trust the Catalyst even in the literal ending?

Forget the fact that it takes the form of a child which has haunted Shepard's nightmares throughout the game for no explained reason, forget that it is the leader of the villain we have been fighting for three games and which is known for deception and mind control, even forget that it claims peace cannot be achieved between Organics and Synthetics despite the player possibly doing exactly that between Geth and Quarians.

No, the "Catalyst" outright lies to your face. It says that it preserves "ALL organic and synthetic" creatures in Reaper form. Had Shepard not interfered and possibly even if he/she interferes, at least one Organic or Synthetic race would have been lost as direct result of the Reapers actions.

The Reapers control the Geth and turn them on the Quarians. Without interference the Quarian race would have been wiped out, not preserved. This is not even mentioning the Rachni who were according to all hints controlled by the Reapers, sent to war and nearly wiped out prior to the invasion. This is entirely in the Reapers hands of whom the Catalyst supposedly is the leader yet it goes against the goals it stated...strange, right?

So I ask, how can the Catalyst be trusted?

I'd also add...

Forget that the Catalyst behaviorally shows preferences and biases toward certain choices (*cough*synthesis*cough*)
Forget that the Catalyst dodges certain questions (whobuiltthecrucible)
Forget that the Catalyst is vague and nebulous when "answering" certain questions

Also, the Catalyst's statement that Shepard will be targeted in Destroy contradicts a statement that EDI says earlier in the game: "You are fully human. Cerberus extensively reconstructed you, but your brain functions are organic."

Raistlin Majere wrote:

ofrankh wrote:

Wow. Are you kidding me? They obviously aren't going to say the catalyst so that the leviathan won't spoil the ending/ruin the flow of the game. It's obvious the catalyst is the intelligence when you get to tell it about the leviathan and it even acknowledges it, explaining how "they weren't ready"

I do believe those first 5 words are mine. Of my entire post you choose to address a part I already explained, namely that the Reapers can get access to a persons memory which would make knowing about Shepard's contact with Leviathan peace of cake.

But let us play a game, no IT involved here. It is a simple question really, why do you trust the Catalyst even in the literal ending?

Forget the fact that it takes the form of a child which has haunted Shepard's nightmares throughout the game for no explained reason, forget that it is the leader of the villain we have been fighting for three games and which is known for deception and mind control, even forget that it claims peace cannot be achieved between Organics and Synthetics despite the player possibly doing exactly that between Geth and Quarians.

No, the "Catalyst" outright lies to your face. It says that it preserves "ALL organic and synthetic" creatures in Reaper form. Had Shepard not interfered and possibly even if he/she interferes, at least one Organic or Synthetic race would have been lost as direct result of the Reapers actions.

The Reapers control the Geth and turn them on the Quarians. Without interference the Quarian race would have been wiped out, not preserved. This is not even mentioning the Rachni who were according to all hints controlled by the Reapers, sent to war and nearly wiped out prior to the invasion. This is entirely in the Reapers hands of whom the Catalyst supposedly is the leader yet it goes against the goals it stated...strange, right?

So I ask, how can the Catalyst be trusted?

Who said I liked the idea of the catalyst? Its a stupid thing implemented by the writers, with the whole i-robot bs synthetics vs organic thing. Synthesis is a stupid choice, and we just refused control to the illusive man like 10 seconds before we met the catalyst.

No you can't trust the catalyst, but that doesn't mean the whole thing is a hallucination.

It's all BAD WRITING. NO WAIT!!!

See, IT people tend to think "because the endings were so bad, IT must be true"

rather than thinking what everyone else felt "the endings were just bad". It shows from KAI LENG. What do you make of him? huh? (rhetorical question if you can't tell)

And it shows from other parts of the game, like how most of your choices had little impact

-choose Anderson as councilor in me1, doesnt matter udina becomes councilor
-Choose all human council in me1, doesnt matter alien race in me3
- Save the old council, they tell you you're on your own
- kill the old council, the new ones tell you you're on your own
- Saved the rachni queen? She gets captured by reapers and is forced to create a rachni army
- killed the rachni queen? Reapers make a fake one to create a rachni army

These things along with autodialogue, face import not working on RELEASE DAY (seriously, they didnt bother testing for it?) , talis face, and the fetch quests show how rushed this game really was. And people who want to go against the writing of bioware got the refusal option, which is what it is: refusing to use the crucible. It's like the fans saying "Bioware I don't like your ending" And Bioware responds with "SO BE IT!! F*** YOU!! YOU LOSE!!".

Sadly it is what it is. The IT was debunked from the extended cut, and more so with leviathan. You can pretend it all happens anyways, I don't blame you for the awful writing of the endings, but it's not true.

And if you say something like "oh but Bioware didn't tweet IT is false" or something like that, wake up. Any discussion of the IT is BANNED from the BSN. What more action do you need to understand from them?

Also don't try to handwave away everything I said in my post

ofrankh wrote:

Raistlin Majere wrote:

ofrankh wrote:

Wow. Are you kidding me? They obviously aren't going to say the catalyst so that the leviathan won't spoil the ending/ruin the flow of the game. It's obvious the catalyst is the intelligence when you get to tell it about the leviathan and it even acknowledges it, explaining how "they weren't ready"

I do believe those first 5 words are mine. Of my entire post you choose to address a part I already explained, namely that the Reapers can get access to a persons memory which would make knowing about Shepard's contact with Leviathan peace of cake.

But let us play a game, no IT involved here. It is a simple question really, why do you trust the Catalyst even in the literal ending?

Forget the fact that it takes the form of a child which has haunted Shepard's nightmares throughout the game for no explained reason, forget that it is the leader of the villain we have been fighting for three games and which is known for deception and mind control, even forget that it claims peace cannot be achieved between Organics and Synthetics despite the player possibly doing exactly that between Geth and Quarians.

No, the "Catalyst" outright lies to your face. It says that it preserves "ALL organic and synthetic" creatures in Reaper form. Had Shepard not interfered and possibly even if he/she interferes, at least one Organic or Synthetic race would have been lost as direct result of the Reapers actions.

The Reapers control the Geth and turn them on the Quarians. Without interference the Quarian race would have been wiped out, not preserved. This is not even mentioning the Rachni who were according to all hints controlled by the Reapers, sent to war and nearly wiped out prior to the invasion. This is entirely in the Reapers hands of whom the Catalyst supposedly is the leader yet it goes against the goals it stated...strange, right?

So I ask, how can the Catalyst be trusted?

Who said I liked the idea of the catalyst? Its a stupid thing implemented by the writers, with the whole i-robot bs synthetics vs organic thing. Synthesis is a stupid choice, and we just refused control to the illusive man like 10 seconds before we met the catalyst.

No you can't trust the catalyst, but that doesn't mean the whole thing is a hallucination.

It's all BAD WRITING. NO WAIT!!!

See, IT people tend to think "because the endings were so bad, IT must be true"

rather than thinking what everyone else felt "the endings were just bad". It shows from KAI LENG. What do you make of him? huh? (rhetorical question if you can't tell)

And it shows from other parts of the game, like how most of your choices had little impact

-choose Anderson as councilor in me1, doesnt matter udina becomes councilor
-Choose all human council in me1, doesnt matter alien race in me3
- Save the old council, they tell you you're on your own
- kill the old council, the new ones tell you you're on your own
- Saved the rachni queen? She gets captured by reapers and is forced to create a rachni army
- killed the rachni queen? Reapers make a fake one to create a rachni army

These things along with autodialogue, face import not working on RELEASE DAY (seriously, they didnt bother testing for it?) , talis face, and the fetch quests show how rushed this game really was. And people who want to go against the writing of bioware got the refusal option, which is what it is: refusing to use the crucible. It's like the fans saying "Bioware I don't like your ending" And Bioware responds with "SO BE IT!! F*** YOU!! YOU LOSE!!".

Sadly it is what it is. The IT was debunked from the extended cut, and more so with leviathan. You can pretend it all happens anyways, I don't blame you for the awful writing of the endings, but it's not true.

And if you say something like "oh but Bioware didn't tweet IT is false" or something like that, wake up. Any discussion of the IT is BANNED from the BSN. What more action do you need to understand from them?

Also don't try to handwave away everything I said in my post

Actually we don't know if IT is still Banned. CP is gone. Allen is in charge now.

And don't come in here and bash at IT. we gave you your answer, and it is a no. This site is much better, so either leave , or stay put.

Have you guys ever considered putting an IQ test of some sort on the signup page so that we can tell the trolls from the idiots?

Rifneno wrote:Have you guys ever considered putting an IQ test of some sort on the signup page so that we can tell the trolls from the idiots?

Sit down and study
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation

ofrankh wrote:

Rifneno wrote:Have you guys ever considered putting an IQ test of some sort on the signup page so that we can tell the trolls from the idiots?

Sit down and study
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation

Sit down and drink your juice.

Popcoorn time.

Night badger. P.S. I told the old storys back on the BSN to the younger ITers. Should have seen their comments on the chat. Take care man.

Yay, Rif comming back -> people get random attacks :3

Gummy wrote:Yay, Rif comming back -> people get random attacks :3

Oh look, skankerella is back to provoke people and then cry about the backlash. Want to help you nail yourself to that cross? I'm sure it's the first time a man has offered to put anything in you, so I'll understand if you're nervous.

I was just pointing out the obvious. First thing you did was attacking people. I would just ask you to stop, but I do think that would be quite a futile exercise.

Gummy wrote:I was just pointing out the obvious. First thing you did was attacking people. I would just ask you to stop, but I do think that would be quite a futile exercise.

Why would I stop? Did you stop pestering me all over BSN when I kept asking you to leave me the hell alone? No, you didn't. Which is exactly why you don't get to play the victim anymore.

Okay, please stop yo two. While that is true that the first thing Rif did after his month of absence was insult an Anti-IT person, you knew that would cause him to react Gummy. You even added the ":3" face to your post.

Uhm I just posted my opinions in the thread about the topics at hand. Unrelated to you but you seemed to feel attacked, even at the times I did respond to other people.
How about trying not to let your insecurities get over your head and stop attacking people to seemingly keep them into the defensive so you can feel in control?

Selim Bradley wrote:Okay, please stop yo two. While that is true that the first thing Rif did after his month of absence was insult an Anti-IT person, you knew that would cause him to react Gummy. You even added the ":3" face to your post.

This is an IT forum. If you come here and rant about how IT is debunked, you're either a retard or a troll. As for Gummy... it's Megumi. Need more be said?

Gummy wrote:Uhm I just posted my opinions in the thread about the topics at hand. Unrelated to you but you seemed to feel attacked, even at the times I did respond to other people.
How about trying not to let your insecurities get over your head and stop attacking people to seemingly keep them into the defensive so you can feel in control?

Oh I see, you're a pretend psychologist too. Bravo.

Selim Bradley wrote:Okay, please stop yo two. While that is true that the first thing Rif did after his month of absence was insult an Anti-IT person, you knew that would cause him to react Gummy. You even added the ":3" face to your post.

You're right, I should have at least left out the ":3". My amusement over that fact just got the better over myself.

Ofrankh:

You claim Bioware has indirectly debunked the Indoctrination Theory, yet they refuse to comment on the validity of it over a year after release. Curious right? All they would need to say is "yes" or "no" and this would be over, but they wont despite countless times being asked to.

As the things are Bioware have at best said they are leaving the ending open to interpretation and that the IT is a valid interpretation.

But whatever I am not going to argue any further with someone who does not even want to read up on what they are arguing against.