57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Sammuthegreat]

Golferguy758 wrote...

At Pax it'll be a 30s presentation. They will say that the endings are going to stand as is. And on the big screen behind them they'll just put this gif up:

Sounds about right.

[Golferguy758]

Sammuthegreat wrote...

Golferguy758 wrote...

At Pax it'll be a 30s presentation. They will say that the endings are going to stand as is. And on the big screen behind them they'll just put this gif up:

Sounds about right.

I'd laugh and cry at the same time. Primarily since this is easily one of my top 5 gifs.

Seriously though, Bioware is beign too teasing nowadays to not have a trick up their sleeve

[Slaiyer]

waldstr18 wrote...

im not one of the retake guys. i really like what they are doing, cause i dont like the ending either. yet, i dont want them to change the ending. just add something that explains a little more. now for the idt, told you: dont like it, dont believe it. and i told you the reaons why a few times, which you countered with things that dont make any sense in my eyes. thats why i gave up on convince you.

Could you re-post or give me a page number? Would love to hear some counter-arguments. I love IDT and all, but all I hear is stuff for it, and unless I get some "against" theories, it all feels a bit bias.

[waldstr18]

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Modifié par waldstr18, 29 mars 2012 - 10:14 .

[waldstr18]

oh, and the new thing from kotaku, where someone found things in the planet descriptions in me1 and 2 about beings of light.

[Spiderman_2028]

First up, I have to admit to being a PS3 jockey, and I've yet to play through ME1. I completed Me2 and finished ME3 a week ago. I avoided all reports regarding the ending until I reached it and experienced it myself.

This is long, and very Meta, and I know most will deride it/me, because at face value, it's weird and a bit silly, and uncomfortable. But please bear with it. It's what Garrus would do...

As I went through my ending, More and more things started standing out as weird, as not fitting with my experiences prior... The main thing I remember smashing me in the brain was when Anderson says "Listen to yourself man! You're indoctrinated!" - it never occurred to me he was talking to TIM- I assumed he was talking to Shep... But then I figured that was stupid, and maybe the ending WAS terrible, like all those headlines I'd avoided had suggested...

Then comes Space-Child and the Space Magic (I went with synthesis- seemed like the lesser of three evils... Didn't want to kill the Geth)... The ending cinematics... And when it was all over, I admit, I muttered "WTF?"

I started obsessing over the articles I'd avoided- and reading the 'ending sucks' press and op-Ed's, I began thinking that no-one, especially BIOWARE could be THAT incompetent. I played KOTOR- bought an Xbox (first one) just to play it... How could the bunch that gave me the Revan reveal do such a crap job? There had to be more to it- the arguments I read for this ending being all there was didn't add up. I felt like I'd missed something. A word that was commonly used was 'incomplete' in relation to the game. "Bioware sold me an incomplete game! Wahhhh!" and so on...

I thought alot about that word, and about why so many people felt betrayed, and why the ending of the game left a lot to be desired. Like... Everything. The game finished, so it was complete in a sense, but SOMETHING was definitely missing. Everything I saw, from the synthesis wave (Surfs up), Normandy fleeing, destruction of the Mass Relays, tarzan-World... Why would anyone introduce so much poorly extrapolated garbage and leave it at that?

Needless to say i found this thread... I noticed a lot of people asking why you cant question the Space-Child. I realized that once you 'Ascend the space-magic floaty platform of destiny', Shep had very little emotion. He goes from yelling at TIM, desperately trying to fix the whole mess, to acting a little like a zombie. He takes everything at face-value, accepts the explanations and consequences, no problem. Where was the heart? Where was the rage? Where was the questioning?

Then it hit me. 

The missing piece of the puzzle could, in fact, be YOU.

Why doesn't Shep argue with the space-kid? Why does he just clarify what he's being told? Why isn't he pointing and yelling or SOMETHING? Why doesn't he ask the most obvious question- "WHAT THE ---- is going on?!?!"

I think it's because that's what YOU, as the player, are meant to be doing. I think that the scene is a reaper-induced hallucination, taking place in Shep's mind, as per the Indoctrination Theory. I dont think that the intention is limited to in-game. The effect (the Mass Effect?), as I suspect it was intended, is that the Reaper influence has left the game, and expanded further, and outwards, to you. The characteristics and behaviors you, as the player have come to expect from Shep during your journey, are made 'Real' by their on screen lack- Shep is like a Zombie, being spoon-fed info and swallowing every bit of it,. Why isn't he conflicted? Why isnt he outraged like he was at the Collector base? Why doesn't he ask the obvious question - "Is there another way, because this sucks!" im starting to think that Shep doesn't do it, because Bioware wanted YOU doing it instead.

You aren't just a passive observer- you play a real role in those scenes. You listen to the dialogue, you choose responses, but the words aren't what you would expect from Shep. Unless you are completely disconnected from the experience of playing through the game (bearing in mind a lot of emphasis was placed on immersion in the build-up to release), your mind is flipping out, trying to make sense of what you are seeing. Stopping a murder was a renegade act downstairs (TIM Shooting Anderson), which I questioned in my mind at the time. Every question I asked myself during those scenes, every thought that ran through my mind, I think may have been Bioware REALLY putting me in Shepards shoes. Looking back, and applying IT to my experiences, a part of me suspects that Bioware had me play that scene as Shep's "true-self", desperately trying to fight off Harby's mind-rape.

I'm not saying this is fact- its a vibe I'm picking up on. And with IT applied, it not only makes some sense of the endings "from a certain point of view", but makes some sense of the back-lash from players, as well.

*IF* something like this was Bioware's intention (Let's call it the Meta-Indoctrination-Theory, or MIT), Peoples resistance to possible alternative explanations of the last 10 minutes have a whole new flavor.

The anger could come from people physically resisting the manipulation Bioware is attempting. A flight or fight response to outside stimuli that the player has encountered. Our psychologically-knowledgable friends may be able to expand more on the ins and outs of that, but I know that when people encounter things they don't understand, or understand on some level but don't completely comprehend it, anger is a common result. That's not saying some people aren't as smart as others or that dumb people don't get it- I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm saying that some reactions are a completely natural response to being manipulated or positioned in subtle ways- and  a stimulus can be developed/constructed/presented in a way to INDUCE that response. 

Bioware may be a week away from pulling off one of the most expensive and effective social behavior experiments of all time.

Again- I'm not saying IT is fact, or that my take on it is definitive. Not by a long shot. Bioware hold all the cards, and will offer their explanation in the near future, which I'm looking forward to, for good or Ill. 

What I am saying that what I was left with post-game was a feeling I'd missed something, because of all the holes and non-sensical things I'd heard and seen. IT, or most aspects of it, offers a possible explanation for those gaps, and im enjoying exploring the possibilities. MIT takes it further, and suggests Bioware's attempt was to immerse the player to a greater degree than anyone has attempted before.

Am I right? Probably not. But the thought is interesting...

[kilgorek]

Topsider wrote...

kilgorek wrote...

Topsider wrote...

People do realize that if the indoc theory is true, you'd basically have to repeat the last section? Assuming the whole game isn't a dream, the Reapers still need to be stopped, right? So that means do exactly the same as you did before except this time it is real. Get to the Citadel, activate the Catalyst/Crucible, and boom, reapers die.
 
Yawn.

By all means expand the current endings, but pretending they never existed outside of Shepard's mind would be the lamest thing ever.

What? This is a ridiculous assumption.

Obviously, if there is more to the story, then it won't be that simple. And obviously it won't be the EXACT same sequence, since the whole theory states that the Citadel is put together through Shepard's subconcious during the dream.

Why is it ridiculous? Because you are convinced the Indoc theory is true? You actually think Bioware is going to tear up the current endings and start from scratch? If indoc is true, the Reapers still need to be stopped and would obviously require an entirely new conclusion, or it's just a repeat... That stuff takes time and money... and admitting that you screwed up in the first place.

Learn to read. I said IF there is more to the story, it won't be that simple. That doesn't imply that accept IDT as fact, though I do believe it's most likely the case. And IF there is more to the story (i.e. more gameplay that leads to the proper ending) then it's not going to be a cut and paste of the "dream sequence." That much is obvious, and you're assumption that it would be the exact same is what I was stating was ridiculous. You have no idea what Bioware has planned. You are obviously ignoring the argument that if IDT is real then Bioware had it planned from the get go. Therefore, they had stuff in development or possibly even closed to finished before the game was released.

And I don't know how many times someone has to say it, but it's not meant to be an actual ending according to the IDT. It's merely a plot twist and the game is meant to be continued on from the ruins of London. Read the thread you're posting in.

[The Interloper]

Hey haven't read the entire thread and not going to look through all of it

Not sure if this has been posted or not but doesn't shepard at one point complain about having a headache when hes on the normandy? almost positive its around one of the dream scenes but I'm not certain. Has anyone mentioned this or think this also

[BleedingUranium]

Spiderman_2028 wrote...

First up, I have to admit to being a PS3 jockey, and I've yet to play through ME1. I completed Me2 and finished ME3 a week ago. I avoided all reports regarding the ending until I reached it and experienced it myself.

This is long, and very Meta, and I know most will deride it/me, because at face value, it's weird and a bit silly, and uncomfortable. But please bear with it. It's what Garrus would do...

As I went through my ending, More and more things started standing out as weird, as not fitting with my experiences prior... The main thing I remember smashing me in the brain was when Anderson says "Listen to yourself man! You're indoctrinated!" - it never occurred to me he was talking to TIM- I assumed he was talking to Shep... But then I figured that was stupid, and maybe the ending WAS terrible, like all those headlines I'd avoided had suggested...

Then comes Space-Child and the Space Magic (I went with synthesis- seemed like the lesser of three evils... Didn't want to kill the Geth)... The ending cinematics... And when it was all over, I admit, I muttered "WTF?"

I started obsessing over the articles I'd avoided- and reading the 'ending sucks' press and op-Ed's, I began thinking that no-one, especially BIOWARE could be THAT incompetent. I played KOTOR- bought an Xbox (first one) just to play it... How could the bunch that gave me the Revan reveal do such a crap job? There had to be more to it- the arguments I read for this ending being all there was didn't add up. I felt like I'd missed something. A word that was commonly used was 'incomplete' in relation to the game. "Bioware sold me an incomplete game! Wahhhh!" and so on...

I thought alot about that word, and about why so many people felt betrayed, and why the ending of the game left a lot to be desired. Like... Everything. The game finished, so it was complete in a sense, but SOMETHING was definitely missing. Everything I saw, from the synthesis wave (Surfs up), Normandy fleeing, destruction of the Mass Relays, tarzan-World... Why would anyone introduce so much poorly extrapolated garbage and leave it at that?

Needless to say i found this thread... I noticed a lot of people asking why you cant question the Space-Child. I realized that once you 'Ascend the space-magic floaty platform of destiny', Shep had very little emotion. He goes from yelling at TIM, desperately trying to fix the whole mess, to acting a little like a zombie. He takes everything at face-value, accepts the explanations and consequences, no problem. Where was the heart? Where was the rage? Where was the questioning?

Then it hit me. 

The missing piece of the puzzle could, in fact, be YOU.

Why doesn't Shep argue with the space-kid? Why does he just clarify what he's being told? Why isn't he pointing and yelling or SOMETHING? Why doesn't he ask the most obvious question- "WHAT THE ---- is going on?!?!"

I think it's because that's what YOU, as the player, are meant to be doing. I think that the scene is a reaper-induced hallucination, taking place in Shep's mind, as per the Indoctrination Theory. I dont think that the intention is limited to in-game. The effect (the Mass Effect?), as I suspect it was intended, is that the Reaper influence has left the game, and expanded further, and outwards, to you. The characteristics and behaviors you, as the player have come to expect from Shep during your journey, are made 'Real' by their on screen lack- Shep is like a Zombie, being spoon-fed info and swallowing every bit of it,. Why isn't he conflicted? Why isnt he outraged like he was at the Collector base? Why doesn't he ask the obvious question - "Is there another way, because this sucks!" im starting to think that Shep doesn't do it, because Bioware wanted YOU doing it instead.

You aren't just a passive observer- you play a real role in those scenes. You listen to the dialogue, you choose responses, but the words aren't what you would expect from Shep. Unless you are completely disconnected from the experience of playing through the game (bearing in mind a lot of emphasis was placed on immersion in the build-up to release), your mind is flipping out, trying to make sense of what you are seeing. Stopping a murder was a renegade act downstairs (TIM Shooting Anderson), which I questioned in my mind at the time. Every question I asked myself during those scenes, every thought that ran through my mind, I think may have been Bioware REALLY putting me in Shepards shoes. Looking back, and applying IT to my experiences, a part of me suspects that Bioware had me play that scene as Shep's "true-self", desperately trying to fight off Harby's mind-rape.

I'm not saying this is fact- its a vibe I'm picking up on. And with IT applied, it not only makes some sense of the endings "from a certain point of view", but makes some sense of the back-lash from players, as well.

*IF* something like this was Bioware's intention (Let's call it the Meta-Indoctrination-Theory, or MIT), Peoples resistance to possible alternative explanations of the last 10 minutes have a whole new flavor.

The anger could come from people physically resisting the manipulation Bioware is attempting. A flight or fight response to outside stimuli that the player has encountered. Our psychologically-knowledgable friends may be able to expand more on the ins and outs of that, but I know that when people encounter things they don't understand, or understand on some level but don't completely comprehend it, anger is a common result. That's not saying some people aren't as smart as others or that dumb people don't get it- I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm saying that some reactions are a completely natural response to being manipulated or positioned in subtle ways- and  a stimulus can be developed/constructed/presented in a way to INDUCE that response. 

Bioware may be a week away from pulling off one of the most expensive and effective social behavior experiments of all time.

Again- I'm not saying IT is fact, or that my take on it is definitive. Not by a long shot. Bioware hold all the cards, and will offer their explanation in the near future, which I'm looking forward to, for good or Ill. 

What I am saying that what I was left with post-game was a feeling I'd missed something, because of all the holes and non-sensical things I'd heard and seen. IT, or most aspects of it, offers a possible explanation for those gaps, and im enjoying exploring the possibilities. MIT takes it further, and suggests Bioware's attempt was to immerse the player to a greater degree than anyone has attempted before.

Am I right? Probably not. But the thought is interesting...

I reeeeaaaaaallllllly like this, never thought about it like that before

[Slaiyer]

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Thanks! Now I have something to go off of. Will respond with a well informed rebuttal or accept IT is flawed

As per the ME1 foreshadow thing, it's already been said that during the books the volus that stated that was indoctrinated  (possibly through a similar hallucination?).

EDIT: Grammar

Modifié par Slaiyer, 29 mars 2012 - 10:29 .

[waldstr18]

enjoy! .. i guess?

[Golferguy758]

Slaiyer wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Thanks! Now I have something to go off of. Will respond with a well informed rebuttal or accept it is flawed

As per the ME1 foreshadow thing, it's already been said that that during the books the volus that stated that was indoctrinated  (possibly through a similar hallucination?).

So the Volus is indoctrinated and after that he talks about little starkids saving them form reapers?

[Slaiyer]

Golferguy758 wrote...

Slaiyer wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Thanks! Now I have something to go off of. Will respond with a well informed rebuttal or accept it is flawed

As per the ME1 foreshadow thing, it's already been said that that during the books the volus that stated that was indoctrinated  (possibly through a similar hallucination?).

So the Volus is indoctrinated and after that he talks about little starkids saving them form reapers?

From what I've gathered on the situation (have not actually read the books - purely say the Volus was indoc'd by word from those that have read them) the myth is something like "spirits of light", not specifically DeusEx Machina Kid.

[llbountyhunter]

Slaiyer wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Thanks! Now I have something to go off of. Will respond with a well informed rebuttal or accept it is flawed

As per the ME1 foreshadow thing, it's already been said that that during the books the volus that stated that was indoctrinated  (possibly through a similar hallucination?).

Maybe the red ending just serves as a paragon ending, like if you choose destroy you automatically get back in the action. For.control its COULD be a dead end (like getting a dead shhepard in me2). And for synthesis you might have to go through a bit more cutscenes or reamain indoctrinated for while the get back in the action.

[waldstr18]

llbountyhunter wrote...

Slaiyer wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Thanks! Now I have something to go off of. Will respond with a well informed rebuttal or accept it is flawed

As per the ME1 foreshadow thing, it's already been said that that during the books the volus that stated that was indoctrinated  (possibly through a similar hallucination?).

Maybe the red ending just serves as a paragon ending, like if you choose destroy you automatically get back in the action. For.control its COULD be a dead end (like getting a dead shhepard in me2). And for synthesis you might have to go through a bit more cutscenes or reamain indoctrinated for while the get back in the action.

so what you are saying is, i get punished for playing more of the game? just opposite to me2 where i could only die if i havent played enough of it. - again, makes no sense to me.

Modifié par waldstr18, 29 mars 2012 - 10:35 .

[Golferguy758]

Slaiyer wrote...

Golferguy758 wrote...

Slaiyer wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Thanks! Now I have something to go off of. Will respond with a well informed rebuttal or accept it is flawed

As per the ME1 foreshadow thing, it's already been said that that during the books the volus that stated that was indoctrinated  (possibly through a similar hallucination?).

So the Volus is indoctrinated and after that he talks about little starkids saving them form reapers?

From what I've gathered on the situation (have not actually read the books - purely say the Volus was indoc'd by word from those that have read them) the myth is something like "spirits of light", not specifically DeusEx Machina Kid.

Eh spirit of light, would be analogous to starkid in my eyes. Either way that's interesting. What caused people to assume the volus is indoctrinated?

[n00bsauce2010]

So bioware is really on vacation now? can anyone confirm with news or an article or something

[Golferguy758]

waldstr18 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

Slaiyer wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Thanks! Now I have something to go off of. Will respond with a well informed rebuttal or accept it is flawed

As per the ME1 foreshadow thing, it's already been said that that during the books the volus that stated that was indoctrinated  (possibly through a similar hallucination?).

Maybe the red ending just serves as a paragon ending, like if you choose destroy you automatically get back in the action. For.control its COULD be a dead end (like getting a dead shhepard in me2). And for synthesis you might have to go through a bit more cutscenes or reamain indoctrinated for while the get back in the action.

so what you are saying is, i get punished for playing more of the game? just opposite to me2 where i could only die if i havent played enough of it. - again, makes no sense to me.

You aren't punished though. You get to see more of an attempt to coerce you out of your original goal. Also, to get the 2nd ending, since 1st ending changes on whether or not you saved the colelctor base, I don't think you really need much beyond not screwing everything up.

[Slaiyer]

Golferguy758 wrote...

Slaiyer wrote...

From what I've gathered on the situation (have not actually read the books - purely say the Volus was indoc'd by word from those that have read them) the myth is something like "spirits of light", not specifically DeusEx Machina Kid.

Eh spirit of light, would be analogous to starkid in my eyes. Either way that's interesting. What caused people to assume the volus is indoctrinated?

The Volus had contact with Sovereign

[Ayanna Thalis]

If the Indoctrination theory is in fact the case, then I would have no problem with it, in fact it is pretty cool. But Bioware should have allowed the player to continue after (if) Shepard awakened, to see the ACTUAL ending. I don't mind replaying if I made a 'bad' choice, but when every single choice is identical no matter what you do or who you save, it is a little ridiculous. But no matter what, there's never going to be a good ending to this....

If Indoctrination Theory is true then...

1.) It was not obvious enough for some (most, let's be honest)
2.) It leaves an open ending that is unsatisfying to play or replay.
3.) If the 'actual' ending is going to be released as DLC then this is the most inconsiderate, greedy action Bioware has taken. If you sell people a game, it's only fair to give them the ending.


If the Indoctrination Theory is not true then...

1.) Shepard's journey was entirely pointless (If Luke Skywalker destroyed the Empire by eradicating the galaxy and putting technology back by thousands of years... Yeah... You know where I'm going with that one...)
2.) Again as above, leaves an ending that is unsatisfying to play or replay, with no real closure.
3.) We were given an ending 15 mins that lacks true ME quality


Everything said concerning artistic integrity etc is irrelevant. This is an interactive game that has presented multiple choices and promoted that throughout the series. It's not a movie, or a book, or an album, and it cannot be compared to those. But I do think it is wrong for people to 'demand' an ending. I am more curious about whether this was meant to be the ending or not, or if we were going to be forced to buy DLC to make that mess of an ending make sense.

But in truth, what surprises me the most is that not one person during the production of this game ever sat back and realized that people were not going to be happy with how it ended. If we really have seen the complete ending, then I am baffled. The ending comes off as a rush job. And if we haven't seen the real ending? Well sorry Bioware but you have no right doing that to people. Even if you released the 'real ending' as free DLC (which I sincerely doubt) there are people who do not have internet access. Just all around bad judgment.

[Golferguy758]

Slaiyer wrote...

Golferguy758 wrote...

Slaiyer wrote...

From what I've gathered on the situation (have not actually read the books - purely say the Volus was indoc'd by word from those that have read them) the myth is something like "spirits of light", not specifically DeusEx Machina Kid.

Eh spirit of light, would be analogous to starkid in my eyes. Either way that's interesting. What caused people to assume the volus is indoctrinated?

The Volus had contact with Sovereign

Interesting! Thanks for that. I never read the books, so I was always curious when people brought that up.

[Golferguy758]

Ayanna Thalis wrote...

If the Indoctrination theory is in fact the case, then I would have no problem with it, in fact it is pretty cool. But Bioware should have allowed the player to continue after (if) Shepard awakened, to see the ACTUAL ending. I don't mind replaying if I made a 'bad' choice, but when every single choice is identical no matter what you do or who you save, it is a little ridiculous. But no matter what, there's never going to be a good ending to this....

If Indoctrination Theory is true then...

1.) It was not obvious enough for some (most, let's be honest)
2.) It leaves an open ending that is unsatisfying to play or replay.
3.) If the 'actual' ending is going to be released as DLC then this is the most inconsiderate, greedy action Bioware has taken. If you sell people a game, it's only fair to give them the ending.


If the Indoctrination Theory is not true then...

1.) Shepard's journey was entirely pointless (If Luke Skywalker destroyed the Empire by eradicating the galaxy and putting technology back by thousands of years... Yeah... You know where I'm going with that one...)
2.) Again as above, leaves an ending that is unsatisfying to play or replay, with no real closure.
3.) We were given an ending 15 mins that lacks true ME quality


Everything said concerning artistic integrity etc is irrelevant. This is an interactive game that has presented multiple choices and promoted that throughout the series. It's not a movie, or a book, or an album, and it cannot be compared to those. But I do think it is wrong for people to 'demand' an ending. I am more curious about whether this was meant to be the ending or not, or if we were going to be forced to buy DLC to make that mess of an ending make sense.

But in truth, what surprises me the most is that not one person during the production of this game ever sat back and realized that people were not going to be happy with how it ended. If we really have seen the complete ending, then I am baffled. The ending comes off as a rush job. And if we haven't seen the real ending? Well sorry Bioware but you have no right doing that to people. Even if you released the 'real ending' as free DLC (which I sincerely doubt) there are people who do not have internet access. Just all around bad judgment.

To your first point since it's important. The IDT theory is about having more stuff to come after the choices. That way you do see what happens when you wake up.

[Thomas Shepard]

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Let me take a swing

1. I think that the whole point of the IT is that the final sequence of the game is an inner battle with the Reapers' indoctrination. There isn't much action. Instead the entire sequence revolves around the dialogue. That to me seems to be more of a logical problem. The red options aren't really meant to be Paragon or Renegade, but rather aggressive or passive. If you resist at every turn, it's actually more likely to see Shepard take a breath (with  Renegade interrupting TIM, the Breath Scene requires 4000 EMS, while without the interrupt - 5000 EMS).

2. I don't think that the argument is that there was not enough time to properly finish the game with indoctrination. It's rather that the point was to  indoctrinate the player as well as the character.

3. Indoctrination is a signal that is constantly being emitted by the Reapers, if you don't mind checking your codecs. Even when inactive the derelict one was still creating husks out of people. The signal influences the lymbic system and makes the subject submissive, but the exact process of submission actually takes part in the subject's mind.

4. I think that the whole discussion that has gone viral all over the Internet and the 75+ perfect scores are pretty much a PR campaign better than the one even Jesus had. I want to see me some sales figures, but I think that the decision was actually great business wise. So much free advertising is a very rare thing.

5. The "too difficult for the average player to grasp" reason is kind of weird for me. It's like saying that they shouldn't make movies like Inception, Shutter Island, Revolver etc. because people might not get them. I think that this type of movies and game is meant to engage you and make you think about the story and the characters in depth to understand things such as symbolism and so on.

Also, I haven't really been tracking the retake movement, so you would have to provide me with those again or tell me what page of the thread they are on. Hope this helps you out

[n00bsauce2010]

Thomas Shepard wrote...

waldstr18 wrote...

it all has been discussed to death already.

the cliffnotes:
me:
possiblity of only red ending (which is the right one in idt)
you:
not enough time for indoctrination (play time)
reaper lost interest, but started it anyway to keep shepard occupied.

and the one from grey something, that it can work with all 3 answer, which i still havent completely read. but what ive read so far i can recomment, its quite interesting.

oh, and i also listed some business reasons, like unfinished game or making it too difficult for the average player to grasp. also the things they replied to the retakers.

by the way. the three kinds of cupcake thing was also trolling. right?

edited it twice already.. i should really proof read my stuff

Let me take a swing

1. I think that the whole point of the IT is that the final sequence of the game is an inner battle with the Reapers' indoctrination. There isn't much action. Instead the entire sequence revolves around the dialogue. That to me seems to be more of a logical problem. The red options aren't really meant to be Paragon or Renegade, but rather aggressive or passive. If you resist at every turn, it's actually more likely to see Shepard take a breath (with  Renegade interrupting TIM, the Breath Scene requires 4000 EMS, while without the interrupt - 5000 EMS).

2. I don't think that the argument is that there was not enough time to properly finish the game with indoctrination. It's rather that the point was to  indoctrinate the player as well as the character.

3. Indoctrination is a signal that is constantly being emitted by the Reapers, if you don't mind checking your codecs. Even when inactive the derelict one was still creating husks out of people. The signal influences the lymbic system and makes the subject submissive, but the exact process of submission actually takes part in the subject's mind.

4. I think that the whole discussion that has gone viral all over the Internet and the 75+ perfect scores are pretty much a PR campaign better than the one even Jesus had. I want to see me some sales figures, but I think that the decision was actually great business wise. So much free advertising is a very rare thing.

5. The "too difficult for the average player to grasp" reason is kind of weird for me. It's like saying that they shouldn't make movies like Inception, Shutter Island, Revolver etc. because people might not get them. I think that this type of movies and game is meant to engage you and make you think about the story and the characters in depth to understand things such as symbolism and so on.

Also, I haven't really been tracking the retake movement, so you would have to provide me with those again or tell me what page of the thread they are on. Hope this helps you out

It's a lost cause. We've told this guy the very thing you're trying to convey like 10 times now. If it hasn't sunk in yet, it never will.