105 réponses à ce sujet

[The Twilight God]

yfullman wrote...

I think Shepard is starting to experience the first stages of indoctrination. remember the child from the ME3 demo? I personally don't think he was real

He shows up later in the mission. He's real.

[The Twilight God]

Smeelia wrote...

That's not strictly true, Saren didn't willingly serve the Reapers as such he just thought there was no alternative (partly because he was indoctrinated and that suppressed any thoughts of resistance). 

Saren served willingly. Whatever rational he had for willingly cooperating does not negate the fact that it was still willing cooperation.  There was no subterfuge involved. When his willingness buckled Sovereign "upgraded" him. If that fails, Saren kills himself. If not, Saren is compelled to fight Shepard.

There's a lot of evidence that shows indoctrination can be done without the subject realising and with little to no noticeable indications. The Codex even mentions the possibility of indoctrinating "sleeper" agents who don't seem indoctrinated at all until they're "activated".

When a person is indoctinated they willingly serve the reapers. Rather they realize that they are being swayed to deify the reapers is irrelevent. Regardless, they willingly serve them. They don't do things in favor of the reapers while thinking they are acting against the reapers.

Shepard did not blow up the relay and kill squads of indoctrinated soldiers because he was working for the reapers. He went to the asteroid in the first place to launch it into the relay. The idea that the reapers would try to stop him from doing what he came to do in the first play to "trick" him into doing what he was going to do anyway is... well, idiotic.  If he was indoctrinated and the reapers wanted a relay destroyed (which is a stupid idea in and of itself) he would just work with Kenson to destroy the relay without all the firefights. Besides, if you let the timer run out it becomes apparent that the reapers definitely did not want that relay destroyed.

Kenson, on the otherhand, who built the complex for the purpose of hurling it into the relay and then, after prolonged contact with the artifact, decided the repaers were galactic saviors and no longer wanted to destroy the relay... she was indoctrinated.

[Smeelia]

The Twilight God wrote...

Saren served willingly. Whatever rational he had for willingly cooperating does not negate the fact that it was still willing cooperation.  There was no subterfuge involved. When his willingness buckled Sovereign "upgraded" him. If that fails, Saren kills himself. If not, Saren is compelled to fight Shepard.

It's pretty strongly implied that he only comes to the conclusion that fighting the Reapers is impossible because he has been indoctrinated and is made incapable of thinking otherwise.  He doesn't realise this and when he does realise, and tries to resist, Sovereign needs to use stronger indoctrination.  Changing the way someone thinks until they help you is not them helping you willingly, even if they might think it is.

At the lowest levels, indoctrination is just a quiet suggestion that probably mostly goes to the sub-conscious and isn't necessarily noticed by the subject.  It's easier to resist a lower level indoctrination but it's also harder to detect (since the subject can seem perfectly normal) and allows the subject to retain most of their functions.  Higher level indoctrination makes the subject a slave to the will of the Reapers but at the cost of losing their ability to be creative and reducing their overall usefulness (it can also reduce the time that the subject will be useable at all).  That seems to be the case based on the way it's explained in the game.

The Twilight God wrote...

Shepard did not blow up the relay and kill squads of indoctrinated soldiers because he was working for the reapers. He went to the asteroid in the first place to launch it into the relay. The idea that the reapers would try to stop him from doing what he came to do in the first play to "trick" him into doing what he was going to do anyway is... well, idiotic.  If he was indoctrinated and the reapers wanted a relay destroyed (which is a stupid idea in and of itself) he would just work with Kenson to destroy the relay without all the firefights.

Shepard only intended to destroy the relay if it could be proved as necessary, exposing Shepard to Object Rho was probably an attempt to have Shepard indoctrinated.  In order to keep Shepard as useful as possible, lower level indoctrination would be preferable so the suggestions had to be something that would be acceptable along with what Shepard already believes (otherwise he'd resist).  Making out that the Reapers didn't want the project to go ahead would be the best way to have Shepard follow their orders while still believing they hadn't been indoctrinated.  The Reapers certainly wouldn't care about their other indoctrinated servants so losing them wouldn't be a concern.

The Twilight God wrote...

Besides, if you let the timer run out it becomes apparent that the reapers definitely did not want that relay destroyed.

Indeed, the meta-gaming argument is extremely strong.  I'd just like to clarify that, as I said in my first post in this thread, I don't really believe that Shepard is indoctrinated.  It's still an interesting idea though and from a story point of view there is evidence that makes it at least possible (if still improbable).

The Twilight God wrote...

Kenson, on the otherhand, who built the complex for the purpose of hurling it into the relay and then, after prolonged contact with the artifact, decided the repaers were galactic saviors and no longer wanted to destroy the relay... she was indoctrinated.

She had encountered Object Rho early enough that the project could have been a result of Reaper suggestion (possibly during lower level indoctrination, the idea made sense to stop the Reapers arriving so there'd be less resistance).  Once she reached the point of being a Reaper serving zealot she was at the higher level of indoctrination and probably wouldn't have lasted too much longer anyway but this was just what the Reapers needed to convince Shepard that the project had to go ahead.

Modifié par Smeelia, 01 juillet 2011 - 02:12 .

[MrFob]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

No, he wasnt. Simply because its DLC, and if you dont have the DLC, the Alliance brings you to Earth for trial for some other reasons, instead of mass murder.
Thus, if he was to be indoctrinated in the DLC, it means there will have to be some other mechanism in game to indoctrinated him so there isnt a "WTF BIOWARE?!?!?!" reaction from people who dont have Arrival.

Not really on the question of Shep being indoctrinated (I don't think he was, although it is an interesting idea) but anyway:
Casey Hudson says in one of the BW Pulse episodes (I think it was the one with the fan questions) that for the purposes of ME3, they will assume that certain things have happened, regardless of you having played the DLC or not (IIRC he mentions Arrival specifically).

[Skeebo06]

Saren was most definitely indoctrinated. If you make the right conversation choices, he'll admit it and use his last remaining free will to kill himself.

[The Twilight God]

Smeelia wrote...

It's pretty strongly implied that he only comes to the conclusion that fighting the Reapers is impossible because he has been indoctrinated and is made incapable of thinking otherwise.  He doesn't realise this and when he does realise, and tries to resist, Sovereign needs to use stronger indoctrination.  Changing the way someone thinks until they help you is not them helping you willingly, even if they might think it is.

It isn't implied. It is made perfectly clear that Saren was indoctrinated. And he willingly helped the reapers under the influence of indoctrination. The reapers did not have to trick him into helping them. You don't trick an indoctrinated person into performing your will. An indoctrinated person is under your control. You trick people who you do not have control over. I am arguing against the insane notion that Shepard is indoctrinated and destroying the alpha relay was what the reapers wanted.

Thorian control is an example of a person unwilling performing a task. Its victims were compelled by intense pain. An indoctrinated person believes in the cause of the reapers and wants to aid them. An indoctrinated person does not require coercion. Reapers changing the way someone thinks creates a new individual. Therefore, it is an act of willingness because indoctrination fundamentally changes who they are. If there ever was a person who would have opposed the reapers that person no longer exists.

Shepard only intended to destroy the relay if it could be proved as necessary, exposing Shepard to Object Rho was probably an attempt to have Shepard indoctrinated.  In order to keep Shepard as useful as possible, lower level indoctrination would be preferable so the suggestions had to be something that would be acceptable along with what Shepard already believes (otherwise he'd resist).  Making out that the Reapers didn't want the project to go ahead would be the best way to have Shepard follow their orders while still believing they hadn't been indoctrinated.  The Reapers certainly wouldn't care about their other indoctrinated servants so losing them wouldn't be a concern.

First of all, anyone at that station could have started that asteroid up and lauched it into the relay. They didn't need to wait for Shepard or for Kenson to get back. Shepard was completely unnecessary. I have to assume you believe Hackett is indoctrinated too, right? Because Shepard showing up was not a part of anyone on that bases's plans UNLESS Hackett was involved.

I'll say it again: You don't trick an indoctrinated person. What you are referring to is subterfuge, not indoctrination. Everyone in that facility, except Shepard, was indoctrinated. Why have Kenson overload the core? Why have hordes of his fellow indoctrinated throw away their lives trying to stop Shepard? The asteroid is on its way to the relay fairly early on. The entire fight throughout the base is to keep the indoctrinated people from stopping it. Why would Kenson kill herself? The relay's exist for a reason. Destroying them makes no sense whatsoever. If the reapers are arriving there, destroying it slows them down as they have to use FTL to get to the next relay. If they are going to enter at another cluster then now they have to take a long detour to wipe out the batarians in that cluster. It's a lose-lose situation for the reapers.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

probably not. theres no precidence for reapers causing such a wide hallucination. it wouldn't be good storytelling unless there was some established element of the story to allow for it.

not likely. why would amanda blow herself up?

[ThePwener]

I didn't see no "Critical Mission Failure".

[Mr. Gogeta34]

ThePwener wrote...

I didn't see no "Critical Mission Failure".

[pablodurando]

 It's possible that the Reapers could have wanted Shepard to destroy the relay as a military tactic.  They could have leaked info to the Alliance in an effort to lure Shepard to Object Rho.  This would all be so that Shepard would be indoctinated.  By leaving Shepard to destroy the relay they could of tricked Shepard into thinking he was not under indoctrination.  Their arrival would only be delayed by less than a year, and for a race that has lived possibly billions of years that'll go by like a breeze.  The effort would be so as to inflict the greatest weapon and insult among the Universe itself, it's own hero betraying everyone and helping the Reapers.  Not only would they defeat the greatest threat to their own success, but they could just clinch the moral victory needed to influence everyone into believing that they will win no matter what.

Another argument for this possible plan is Harbringer's insistence that Shepard be kept alive throughout the game.  For Shepards defeat would foreshadow the demise of the galaxy itself. 

Saying that though I find it unlikely, mainly because the persona of the Reapers is over confident and  almost omniscient.  Any personal attack against Shepard would be nothing more than an FU to him for foiling previous plots.

[The Twilight God]

pablodurando wrote...

 It's possible that the Reapers could have wanted Shepard to destroy the relay as a military tactic.  They could have leaked info to the Alliance in an effort to lure Shepard to Object Rho.  This would all be so that Shepard would be indoctinated.  By leaving Shepard to destroy the relay they could of tricked Shepard into thinking he was not under indoctrination.  

It's not some manchurian candidate deal where another personality is stored and is released on queue. Indoctrination has no on/off switch. Even a reaper sleeper agent is always aware of their loyalty to the reapers, just like a spy.

You do not trick indoctrinated people. If Shepard was indoctrinated he would want to help the reapers. For whatever reason popped into his head; ascension seems preferrable to mundane human existence, an overwhelming realization that victory is impossible, Shepard touches the mind of a god and realizes that the reapers are doing what they are doing for our own good -  it doesn't matter, Shepard would WANT to help them. Indoctrination is not a con, a trick, subterfuge, or a deception. Indoctrinated people do not think they are working against the reapers. You people don't seem to be able to differentiate between manipulation and mind control.

[Raven4030]

Actually, if you've read Retribution which I believe Bioware considers canonical as with the other books/comics written by members of their staff then you get to see how indoctrination works first hand, and manipulation is involved in addition to standard mind control because it leaves higher thought processes more or less intact. Basically: a manipulated agent acts according to the Reaper's will and might even think he is subverting the Reapers while doing so, or they can take direct control. With the manipulative aspects of indoctrination it leaves the agent capable of complex thought and reasoning thinking that he is not only fighting the good fight, but also winning. The mind control aspect results in the agent fighting against Reaper control, over time growing weaker and eventually just giving up as he realizes he cannot win, causing him to just stop thinking for himself and give himself over completely to the Reapers, who now must compel the agent to do even that which is necessary for survival (eat, drink, sleep, etc.)

That being said, using the project as an elaborate trap to lure Shephard and indoctrinate him would require so many millions of variables, most of which the Reapers would have little way of knowing. I don't think there is anything in game to suggest that Shephard's presence at the project was anything more than a happy accident. Given the time he spent there Shephard might be exposed to the initial effects of indoctrination, but I doubt the Reapers had any desire to have the Alpha Relay destroyed. Even they would realize that the additional time to fly to the next relay simply gives organics more time to prepare, something they would not want now that the element of surprise is lost and all attempts to regain it has failed.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

On the flip side, the antagonist lady of the Arrival DLC was for stopping the Reapers all the way up to Shepard seeing the vision from 'the marker.'

Apparently, indoctrination can still be in someone that's actively trying to fight the Reapers.

[The Twilight God]

Raven4030 wrote...

Actually, if you've read Retribution which I believe Bioware considers canonical as with the other books/comics written by members of their staff then you get to see how indoctrination works first hand, and manipulation is involved in addition to standard mind control because it leaves higher thought processes more or less intact. Basically: a manipulated agent acts according to the Reaper's will and might even think he is subverting the Reapers while doing so, or they can take direct control. With the manipulative aspects of indoctrination it leaves the agent capable of complex thought and reasoning thinking that he is not only fighting the good fight, but also winning. The mind control aspect results in the agent fighting against Reaper control, over time growing weaker and eventually just giving up as he realizes he cannot win, causing him to just stop thinking for himself and give himself over completely to the Reapers, who now must compel the agent to do even that which is necessary for survival (eat, drink, sleep, etc.)

If you are talking about Paul Grayson, he was NOT being indoctrinated. He was becoming a prisoner in his own body due to the reapers directly manipulating the cybernetics. He was more like a living husk than an indoctrinated servant. At no point did Grayson accept reaper domination and give in to their will.  They didn't need his cooperation. They were gaining direct control of the vessel. Grayson was just along for the ride. He could scream and shout all he wanted in his own mind, but he could only watch helplessly as his huskified body did the reaper's will. 

[The Twilight God]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

On the flip side, the antagonist lady of the Arrival DLC was for stopping the Reapers all the way up to Shepard seeing the vision from 'the marker.'

Apparently, indoctrination can still be in someone that's actively trying to fight the Reapers.

No, she was deceiving Shepard to lure him to the artifact.

[Smeelia]

The Twilight God wrote...

It isn't implied. It is made perfectly clear that Saren was indoctrinated. And he willingly helped the reapers under the influence of indoctrination. The reapers did not have to trick him into helping them. You don't trick an indoctrinated person into performing your will. An indoctrinated person is under your control. You trick people who you do not have control over...

An indoctrinated person does not require coercion. Reapers changing the way someone thinks creates a new individual. Therefore, it is an act of willingness because indoctrination fundamentally changes who they are. If there ever was a person who would have opposed the reapers that person no longer exists.

This isn't consistent with what's in the game.  Saren fears he has only come to the conclusion that there's no chance because he has been indoctrinated and he's studying indoctrination on Virmire for the same reason.  If he knew he was indoctrinated and was entirely loyal to the Reapers then he'd have no reason to study indoctrination and no concerns about being indoctrinated (he'd want what the Reapers want).

By using "weaker" indoctrination the Reapers gain more useful subjects that they don't need to control directly.  They prefer this in some cases because it means the subject can be prodded towards goals with suggestions and manipulation while still retaining the ability to be creative and adapt to achieve those goals.  Saren was such a case, Shepard could be one too without realising.

Indoctrination can give complete control but it's made pretty clear in the game that it doesn't have to and can be much more subtle.

Modifié par Smeelia, 02 juillet 2011 - 02:51 .

[Raven4030]

The Twilight God wrote...

If you are talking about Paul Grayson, he was NOT being indoctrinated. He was becoming a prisoner in his own body due to the reapers directly manipulating the cybernetics. He was more like a living husk than an indoctrinated servant. At no point did Grayson accept reaper domination and give in to their will.  They didn't need his cooperation. They were gaining direct control of the vessel. Grayson was just along for the ride. He could scream and shout all he wanted in his own mind, but he could only watch helplessly as his huskified body did the reaper's will. 

...


...


You're just trolling now, aren't you?

[The Twilight God]

Smeelia wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

It isn't implied. It is made perfectly clear that Saren was indoctrinated. And he willingly helped the reapers under the influence of indoctrination. The reapers did not have to trick him into helping them. You don't trick an indoctrinated person into performing your will. An indoctrinated person is under your control. You trick people who you do not have control over...

An indoctrinated person does not require coercion. Reapers changing the way someone thinks creates a new individual. Therefore, it is an act of willingness because indoctrination fundamentally changes who they are. If there ever was a person who would have opposed the reapers that person no longer exists.

This isn't consistent with what's in the game.  Saren fears he has only come to the conclusion that there's no chance because he has been indoctrinated and he's studying indoctrination on Virmire for the same reason.  If he knew he was indoctrinated and was entirely loyal to the Reapers then he'd have no reason to study indoctrination and no concerns about being indoctrinated (he'd want what the Reapers want).

By using "weaker" indoctrination the Reapers gain more useful subjects that they don't need to control directly.  They prefer this in some cases because it means the subject can be prodded towards goals with suggestions and manipulation while still retaining the ability to be creative and adapt to achieve those goals.  Saren was such a case, Shepard could be one too without realising.

Indoctrination can give complete control but it's made pretty clear in the game that it doesn't have to and can be much more subtle.

I see where you are coming from.  But even in the case of weak indoctrination the victim can overcome it, essentially un-indoctrinating themselves and taking a more conscious approach to their thought processes. Regardless of Saren's level of influence there was no inidcation that he was being deceived into working for the reapers. He was a willing participants nonetheless. It is a testament to his own will that Sovereign "upgraded" him with non-indoctrination backdoor cybernetics.

My main disagreement is the idea that indoctrination is an ellaborate deception that deceives people into working for the reapers unknowingly. Every single indoctrinated person ever encountered were in awe of the reapers and willingly did their bidding. It changes thoughts, not manipulate them via subterfuge. Hence, Saren questioned the validity of his own thoughts and conclusions.

[The Twilight God]

Raven4030 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

If you are talking about Paul Grayson, he was NOT being indoctrinated. He was becoming a prisoner in his own body due to the reapers directly manipulating the cybernetics. He was more like a living husk than an indoctrinated servant. At no point did Grayson accept reaper domination and give in to their will.  They didn't need his cooperation. They were gaining direct control of the vessel. Grayson was just along for the ride. He could scream and shout all he wanted in his own mind, but he could only watch helplessly as his huskified body did the reaper's will. 

...


...


You're just trolling now, aren't you?

Ah, the old "You disagree with me and I have no counter argument; therefore, I'll call you a troll" defense? Personally, I'd have used the Chewbacca defense.

I accept your acknowledgment of defeat.

[Raven4030]

Reread what you stated, read it CAREFULLY. Specifically the part where you say "he wasn't being indoctrinated, he was being controlled, like a husk!"

If you can't see the blatant self-contradiction, then you have no idea what you're talking about. If you can but stick doggedly to that self-contradiction, then you're a troll. Either way, I don't have time for you and need to move on to REAL arguments.

[The Twilight God]

Raven4030 wrote...

Reread what you stated, read it CAREFULLY. Specifically the part where you say "he wasn't being indoctrinated, he was being controlled, like a husk!"

If you can't see the blatant self-contradiction, then you have no idea what you're talking about. If you can but stick doggedly to that self-contradiction, then you're a troll. Either way, I don't have time for you and need to move on to REAL arguments.

Indoctrinated people aren't controlled like a remote control race car. They aren't trapped inside of their own bodies, helplessly watching like a passenger in an automobile. They willingly do the will of the reapers and believe in their cause. They are in awe of the reapers. There is no "assuming direct control" involved.

Paul Grayson was not indoctrinated to believe in the reaper's cause. He did not see them as deities or saviors. He was against them throughout the entire novel. All of the bad things his body did were not his doing. His body became a remote control robot. He fought for control of it, but as the cybernetic continued to expand and replace his organic tissue it became less and less his body and more and more a reaper construct.

 I take it you have not read the novel?

[Raven4030]

Actually, I have, and there were two methods the Reapers used to control Grayson:

1) Direct control in which the actively control his actions, acting as their 'avatar' of destruction.

2) Suggestion: if you recall there was one occasion where he attempted to kill himself, through the implants the Reapers altered brain chemistry ever so slightly to make Grayson reason that suicide would be a cowardly tactic. Through other subtle chemical manipulations they managed to convince Grayson to establish a meeting with Sanders, even though that same page he was afraid of what she might think or of getting her involved in all this, thus he worked entirely as the Reapers demanded whether he realized he wanted to or not.

We something similar with Saren:

Initially he acts through suggestion: "The Reapers are too powerful, their coming is inevitable, but they're machines, they do not discard what they can use. If make it more desirable for them to use us than kill us, then we will survive as slaves at the very least".

If you notice Saren didn't believe in the Reaper's cause, he believed that he was demonstrating to the Reapers that their cause is flawed and that there is a better option. He directly states the above to you several times in game. We also see the direct control aspect when he attempts to resist at the end (if you use persuade options) right before killing himself where he suddenly cries out in pain and declares Sovereign to be too strong. If at this point you go into a fight it is safe to assume he'd be the 'prisoner within his own body', however it would be foolish to say he is no longer 'indoctrinated'.

Based on all that was witnessed in the game and in the books, indoctrination is used as a 'catch-all' term for any control Reapers exert over the subject either directly or through suggestion.

Modifié par Raven4030, 03 juillet 2011 - 12:44 .

[TomY90]

yfullman wrote...

I think Shepard is starting to experience the first stages of indoctrination. remember the child from the ME3 demo? I personally don't think he was real

I think he is real because apparantly the child appears later in the ME3 demo as well (at the 1st part of earth of course)

[Mr. Gogeta34]

The Twilight God wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

On the flip side, the antagonist lady of the Arrival DLC was for stopping the Reapers all the way up to Shepard seeing the vision from 'the marker.'

Apparently, indoctrination can still be in someone that's actively trying to fight the Reapers.

No, she was deceiving Shepard to lure him to the artifact.

That's very possible... yet she was still telling the truth about them... about the Alpha Relay, everything.  It could've been deception, but that suggests a farther-reaching conspiracy since she was rescued by Shepard as a favor to Hackett.

[The Twilight God]

Raven4030 wrote...

Actually, I have, and there were two methods the Reapers used to control Grayson:

1) Direct control in which the actively control his actions, acting as their 'avatar' of destruction.

2) Suggestion: if you recall there was one occasion where he attempted to kill himself, through the implants the Reapers altered brain chemistry ever so slightly to make Grayson reason that suicide would be a cowardly tactic. Through other subtle chemical manipulations they managed to convince Grayson to establish a meeting with Sanders, even though that same page he was afraid of what she might think or of getting her involved in all this, thus he worked entirely as the Reapers demanded whether he realized he wanted to or not.

Grayson's situation is more akin to huskification than indoctrination. He was in direct communion with the reaper hive mind via his cybernetics. They were probing his thoughts and inserting their own. It's easy to just label anything involving reapers "indoctrination", but even if it was indoctrination it failed. He did not come to see them in awe, as deities nor saviors. He did not willingly help them or do anything with the intent of helping the reapers. His initial fault was not being self aware.  Human beings typically operate in a state of "sleep". For instance, I punch you in the face. You get agree and attack me. There is no moment where you make the decision to get angry. It's automated. There was no moment were you make a rational decision to strike back. It just happens. Action and reaction. It's software. Instinct. How often do you ever ask yourself why do I crave a certain food. Where did this craving come from seeing as you make no conscious effort to generate it? If I'm in control of my mind why can't I stopt it? Why can't I stop thinking if my mind is truly under my control?  If I could beam thoughts into your head you would have no means to differentiate what I insert from what you perceive are thoughts originating within you.

With that said, are you proposing that indoctrination is an active direct control? Where the reapers are actively in the minds of their thralls and constantly inserting thoughts. I wouldn't call that indoctrination because the subject isn't changed. Without direct reaper mental contact the person would cease to be indoctrinated. They would never lose their higher functioning as a result of "deep indoctrination" since a thrall directly controlled by the reaper hive mind would never be of limited use. It's intellect and capability would be that of the reapers themselves. Indoctrination in this case would be thought manipulation. And seeing as quantum entanglement implants aren't a requirement, can I assume that you believe reapers are some type of spiritual entities (and not AIs) that exist everywhere at once to be able to directly control all their thralls no matter the distance?

I propose that the indoctrinated do not necessarily receive direct thoughts from the reapers. The victims mind is simply made subceptable to suggestion. The suggestion is implimented by the artifacts or while in the direct presence of a reaper. But if the victim is far away from a reaper they are working on their own, by themselves. They have a new way of thinking and have been conditioned to willingly do the bidding of the reapers as most indoctrinated people don't have cybernetic implants for direct communion with the reaper hive mind.

We something similar with Saren:

Initially he acts through suggestion: "The Reapers are too powerful, their coming is inevitable, but they're machines, they do not discard what they can use. If make it more desirable for them to use us than kill us, then we will survive as slaves at the very least".

If you notice Saren didn't believe in the Reaper's cause, he believed that he was demonstrating to the Reapers that their cause is flawed and that there is a better option.

Saren was talking about forming alliances with the reapers and becoming greater beings by combining the strengths of both machines and organics and the weaknesses of neither. If they promised the turian race ascension to reaperhood he'd probably be all for it.

And to be fair, Saren was only mildly indoctrinated. But he is the one who named Nazara Sovereign. He clearly thought highly of the reaper. Seeing that Saren was the only person other than Shepard with the beacon data he could have stopped it right then and there. Sovereign would have had no avenue of victory without Saren. So Saren clearly wanted to help Sovereign. He wasn't trying to prove him wrong. His very presence as Sovereign's general showed that organics could be useful. The rachni, the keepers and the very fact that they developed indoctrination shows the machines agree. No need to prove anything to them. Having the Rachni queen or Thorian killed before any useful information could be obtained could have stopped Soveriegn. Saren was the reapers' ace in the hole. Without him they had no hope of gaining control of the Citadel.  His indoctrination keep him from exploiting that fact.

He directly states the above to you several times in game. We also see the direct control aspect when he attempts to resist at the end (if you use persuade options) right before killing himself where he suddenly cries out in pain and declares Sovereign to be too strong. If at this point you go into a fight it is safe to assume he'd be the 'prisoner within his own body', however it would be foolish to say he is no longer 'indoctrinated'.

In the end he has implants. He specifically said the implants are to strong.  Implants that were put there because Sovereign felt mild indoctrination wasn't enough and didn't completely trust Saren. Saren started to doubt his own rational. The implants go into Grayson territory and is no longer a matter of indoctrination, but forceful control. If Saren resisted without commiting suicide Sovereign would have fired up super hopper husk mode while Saren was still alive and he would indeed have been trapped in his own body helplessly watching as his body fought Shepard.

If EDI could take control of the Cerberus armor in ME2, would that mean EDI can indoctrinate Shepard since his bodily movements would be under her control?  By your logic, yes. That would be indoctrination. No need to reshape the victim's mind. Just the ability to make the body do what you want.

Based on all that was witnessed in the game and in the books, indoctrination is used as a 'catch-all' term for any control Reapers exert over the subject either directly or through suggestion.

Ah, the semantics defense. You say tomato. I say tomatoe. Sorry, but indoctrination is defined in the codex.

Altering/conditioning of the brain to be susceptable to suggestion? OK.

Direct manipulation of a person's body in an active assault against their will? No.