57139 réponses à ce sujet

[byne]

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

Big Bad wrote...

njfluffy19 wrote...

Big Bad wrote...

njfluffy19 wrote...

I do not ninja! ...

Good Sir and/or Madam, I beg to differ.

I like the and/or for sir or madam. I could be both! Lots of speculation!

That's right.  I'm not here to judge you for whatever wacky gender identity issues you may or may not have.  I'm here to pull useless, unenlightening, factually incorrect nonesense out of my ass!

I thought that was my job!

No Byne, your job is to pul useFUL, ENlightening, and factually CORrect nonsense out of your... well, you know. 

Man, when did that become my job? Thats no fun.

[Big Bad]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

what events are unfulfilled according to Chekov's gun? (that support the indoc theory)

Sorry, I'm trying to think of some, but it's been a long week and my brain is fried. 

As I mentioned before, I think Vega's hum could turn out to be an example of Chehkov's gun.

Also, and this might be stretching it, if IDT is true, you could kinda think of the concept of indoctrination itself as an example too.  Indoctrination has been an important theme throughout the entire series, and if Shepherd really is being indoctrinated, you can think of that as the grand culmination of something that has been building up since the very beginning (unlike, for example, space magic!).

[n00bsauce2010]

Dendio1 wrote...

Someone go here and paste the first post over here please. I cannot post pictures yet

This is evidence connecting the fake dream citadel to the geth interface and dream sequences

Very very compelling.

[n00bsauce2010]

Big Bad wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

what events are unfulfilled according to Chekov's gun? (that support the indoc theory)

Sorry, I'm trying to think of some, but it's been a long week and my brain is fried. 

As I mentioned before, I think Vega's hum could turn out to be an example of Chehkov's gun.

Also, and this might be stretching it, if IDT is true, you could kinda think of the concept of indoctrination itself as an example too.  Indoctrination has been an important theme throughout the entire series, and if Shepherd really is being indoctrinated, you can think of that as the grand culmination of something that has been building up since the very beginning (unlike, for example, space magic!).

ok thanks for the clarification. Makes sense. but... not all plot points can be fulfilled. this we know...

[Big Bad]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Big Bad wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

what events are unfulfilled according to Chekov's gun? (that support the indoc theory)

Sorry, I'm trying to think of some, but it's been a long week and my brain is fried. 

As I mentioned before, I think Vega's hum could turn out to be an example of Chehkov's gun.

Also, and this might be stretching it, if IDT is true, you could kinda think of the concept of indoctrination itself as an example too.  Indoctrination has been an important theme throughout the entire series, and if Shepherd really is being indoctrinated, you can think of that as the grand culmination of something that has been building up since the very beginning (unlike, for example, space magic!).

ok thanks for the clarification. Makes sense. but... not all plot points can be fulfilled. this we know...

Very true.  I'm afraid that I'll never get to find out whether or not the space hamster lived happily ever after!  

[LOST SPARTANJLC]

Big Bad wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

Big Bad wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

what events are unfulfilled according to Chekov's gun? (that support the indoc theory)

Sorry, I'm trying to think of some, but it's been a long week and my brain is fried. 

As I mentioned before, I think Vega's hum could turn out to be an example of Chehkov's gun.

Also, and this might be stretching it, if IDT is true, you could kinda think of the concept of indoctrination itself as an example too.  Indoctrination has been an important theme throughout the entire series, and if Shepherd really is being indoctrinated, you can think of that as the grand culmination of something that has been building up since the very beginning (unlike, for example, space magic!).

ok thanks for the clarification. Makes sense. but... not all plot points can be fulfilled. this we know...

Very true.  I'm afraid that I'll never get to find out whether or not the space hamster lived happily ever after!  

Don't give up hope yet! Hold The Line! (I had to post it).

Off topic SideNote: 
Had this the dream that Bioware decided to re-release ME1 , but they in effect rebooted it MK9 style(nearly all characters from the previous games were available for your party).To the point that certain members like Garrus and Liara could be killed well before ME2/ME3.Some kind of way you can either have Garrus follow you onward on the mission or tell him to hold the exit.If he holds the exit he's killed right when you regroup to escape what ever place it was by a cloaked geth  hunter.After ward you given a choice to redo or go along with what happened.Which with Garrus killed leads to the Turians wanting to go to war with humanity , believing Garrus was betrayed by Shepard.It was far more darker with less races trusting one another. 

Modifié par LOST SPARTANJLC, 31 mars 2012 - 02:04 .

[njfluffy19]

I heard we'll get a chance to visit the Miniature Giant Space Hamster homeworld and rescue them from Reaper forces.

[Dendio1]

Bill Casey wrote...

There's a white circular light that is identical and shows up multiple times on three different occasions...

1. During Shepard's Nightmares
http://desmond.image....jpg&res=medium


2. While Shepard is plugged into the Geth Consensus

http://desmond.image....jpg&res=medium

3. During the Ending

http://desmond.image....jpg&res=medium



If Indoctrination Theory is incorrect, explain this...

Did my best to copy it over
I can post pictures now !

http://social.biowar...ndex/10811952/2

[Big Bad]

njfluffy19 wrote...

I heard we'll get a chance to visit the Miniature Giant Space Hamster homeworld and rescue them from Reaper forces.

SWEET!!!!

[LOST SPARTANJLC]

Dendio1 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

There's a white circular light that is identical and shows up multiple times on three different occasions...

1. During Shepard's Nightmares
http://desmond.image....jpg&res=medium


2. While Shepard is plugged into the Geth Consensus

http://desmond.image....jpg&res=medium

3. During the Ending

http://desmond.image....jpg&res=medium



If Indoctrination Theory is incorrect, explain this...

Did my best to copy it over
I can post pictures now !

http://social.biowar...ndex/10811952/2

What if the nightmares were the present events with the story events being past events that Shepard was reliving through Harbinger's indoctrination(up until after the final push).

Modifié par LOST SPARTANJLC, 31 mars 2012 - 02:10 .

[Chyliss]

TheNomadicOne wrote...

OK, so.... I'm replaying the mission where you attack the Cerberus base, and this second time, while I was watching the three video logs detailing EDI's history, I had a totally different interpretation of them than I did the first time around. (The console is in the area jsut after you defeat the Engineers/Turrets)

The first log details EDI's creation. In it, we learn that EDI was created from a combination of the Rouge VI on Luna and "pieces of Reaper tech recovered from the Citadel." The Cerberus Agent talking to TIM expresses concern over adding Reaper tech to the VI, but TIM reassures him that the shackles will keep EDI "completely under control."

The second log is a conversation between TIM and the same Agent. In the first log, this Agent sounded worried, but in the second, he sounds giddy. He start referring to EDI as "her," rather than "it." This clearly annoys TIM, and after a bit of back and forth, there comes the moment that made me run to my computer to write this post. Because the now-giddy agent says the following: "Sir, she...it...can be very persuasive. If it were to turn a crewman, convince them to disable the shackles, well..." 

Understood on their own, either of these logs would seem only to provide a bit of background. But combine the first log and the second? The shackles were put in place, according to TIM, because of the inclusion of Reaper tech. The agent reporting in to TIM was clearly worried about this. But by the second log he's clearly become a fan of EDI, and although he doesn't mention Reaper tech again, he is worried that someone might be "persuaded" to remove EDI's shackles. Why, he does not say. But given that he was initially worried about the inclusion of Reaper tech into EDI, and given that TIM reassures him by bringing up the shackles, the logical conclusion is that this must be related to his original concern about the inclusion of Reaper tech.

And what, among other things, does Reaper Tech do? Indoctrination, of course.

So here's my IT question: Is it possible that Shep's indoctrination process began back when EDI's shackles were removed? And if so, once she moves from the Normandy into EVA, is it possible that she has become a mobile indoctrination platform? Suddenly those missions where EDI insisted on tagging along have taken on a whole new importance. Hmmm....... 

ADDING: To be a bit more clear about all this - my hypothesis is that EDI is the source of Indoctrination aboard the Normady. If that's true, its a damn clever place for the writers to hide it, no? 

I like this. I never trusted EDI. But then again I am AIphobic. LOL

[n00bsauce2010]

Chyliss wrote...

TheNomadicOne wrote...

OK, so.... I'm replaying the mission where you attack the Cerberus base, and this second time, while I was watching the three video logs detailing EDI's history, I had a totally different interpretation of them than I did the first time around. (The console is in the area jsut after you defeat the Engineers/Turrets)

The first log details EDI's creation. In it, we learn that EDI was created from a combination of the Rouge VI on Luna and "pieces of Reaper tech recovered from the Citadel." The Cerberus Agent talking to TIM expresses concern over adding Reaper tech to the VI, but TIM reassures him that the shackles will keep EDI "completely under control."

The second log is a conversation between TIM and the same Agent. In the first log, this Agent sounded worried, but in the second, he sounds giddy. He start referring to EDI as "her," rather than "it." This clearly annoys TIM, and after a bit of back and forth, there comes the moment that made me run to my computer to write this post. Because the now-giddy agent says the following: "Sir, she...it...can be very persuasive. If it were to turn a crewman, convince them to disable the shackles, well..." 

Understood on their own, either of these logs would seem only to provide a bit of background. But combine the first log and the second? The shackles were put in place, according to TIM, because of the inclusion of Reaper tech. The agent reporting in to TIM was clearly worried about this. But by the second log he's clearly become a fan of EDI, and although he doesn't mention Reaper tech again, he is worried that someone might be "persuaded" to remove EDI's shackles. Why, he does not say. But given that he was initially worried about the inclusion of Reaper tech into EDI, and given that TIM reassures him by bringing up the shackles, the logical conclusion is that this must be related to his original concern about the inclusion of Reaper tech.

And what, among other things, does Reaper Tech do? Indoctrination, of course.

So here's my IT question: Is it possible that Shep's indoctrination process began back when EDI's shackles were removed? And if so, once she moves from the Normandy into EVA, is it possible that she has become a mobile indoctrination platform? Suddenly those missions where EDI insisted on tagging along have taken on a whole new importance. Hmmm....... 

ADDING: To be a bit more clear about all this - my hypothesis is that EDI is the source of Indoctrination aboard the Normady. If that's true, its a damn clever place for the writers to hide it, no? 

I like this. I never trusted EDI. But then again I am AIphobic. LOL

If makes sense. And it's certainly possible. So we assume the hum that james refers to is EDI's new body then?

[PorcelynDoll]

It does seem likely that EDI's body would be the source. But she is up on the bridge and James is in the cargo bay.

[Jaxitty]

Ever think that the Normandy 2 has Reaper tech in it as well? It's never stated, but EDI herself says that she has Reaper code....

[Lyria]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

protognosis wrote...

Slaiyer wrote...

Wait... So if I understand right... Then pretty much all the info we have for IDT falls under Chekhov's Gun to some extent, yes? Or am I failing miserably to grasp this new concept being shown to me?

As a fan of Indoctrination and a literary fiend I can honestly say that MUCH of the theory is Chekhov's gun. However, there is evidence in the game that supports the theory.

Chekhov's Gun sets up the idea and before the final act it MUST go off. Or is it just

A new concept to me as well. Under this law.. what things have yet to be fufilled? That support IDT. I'm looking for broad ideas.

During the Geth Consensus mission Legion discusses how he can give Shepard a gun because it is what he/she knows and it is familiar.

When consciousness is projected into an illusion familiar things male the illusion hold.

This concept is also introduced in conversations with Joker/EDI.

Post Geth Consensus, (if I'm not wrong on the timing) EDI mentions that some say this reality is just a 2d image that is projected off the curved surface of the universe/fabric of reality. (I'm paraphrasing and will have direct quotes and screen shots on my second play through).

Moreover, Joker makes a comment on how would Shepard know this is reality.

The seed is planted in the players mind that there could be some doubt in Shepard's mind about reality. It doesn't bear fruit until the ending(s) when we start trying to figure it out.

Also, the Gun that is Indoctrination  is shown when Shepard first has that dream. The dream is the first time we are ever inside a characters head. The Prothean beacon could be argued as the first but that is a memory planted in Shepard's head but we don't go exploring  in Shepard's brain. I guess you can call the dream  Close First Person narrative. The dream is a clue in that it happens at all. It sets up the seed of a conflicted mind a worried mind. Shepard is guilty, or feels guilty for the deaths he/she couldn't prevent. This doubt is an opening for exploration of Shepard's psyche. The child is engulfed in flames. The child represents loss of confidence and the flames a trial. The child is a symbol of Shepard's goal but there is no hope. This is ecoed the more the dream occurs. The more it happens more of Shepard's psyche is damaged. The voices of Friends past shake more of Shepard. The final dream Shepard sees Shepard and the Child destroyed. At this time Shepard's will is at its weakest. What events happen after that?



 

[Gilgamesh117]

I do think the Indoc/edi relation is plausible, it does explain some holes, also it explains joker new profound feelings towards her. Do people in the ME world rly have relations with robots? Can AI's love? Can they feel, can they dream of ELECTRIC SHEEP?!

[Jaxitty]

protognosis wrote...

During the Geth Consensus mission Legion discusses how he can give Shepard a gun because it is what he/she knows and it is familiar.

When consciousness is projected into an illusion familiar things male the illusion hold.

This concept is also introduced in conversations with Joker/EDI.

Post Geth Consensus, (if I'm not wrong on the timing) EDI mentions that some say this reality is just a 2d image that is projected off the curved surface of the universe/fabric of reality. (I'm paraphrasing and will have direct quotes and screen shots on my second play through).

Moreover, Joker makes a comment on how would Shepard know this is reality.

The seed is planted in the players mind that there could be some doubt in Shepard's mind about reality. It doesn't bear fruit until the ending(s) when we start trying to figure it out.

Also, the Gun that is Indoctrination  is shown when Shepard first has that dream. The dream is the first time we are ever inside a characters head. The Prothean beacon could be argued as the first but that is a memory planted in Shepard's head but we don't go exploring  in Shepard's brain. I guess you can call the dream  Close First Person narrative. The dream is a clue in that it happens at all. It sets up the seed of a conflicted mind a worried mind. Shepard is guilty, or feels guilty for the deaths he/she couldn't prevent. This doubt is an opening for exploration of Shepard's psyche. The child is engulfed in flames. The child represents loss of confidence and the flames a trial. The child is a symbol of Shepard's goal but there is no hope. This is ecoed the more the dream occurs. The more it happens more of Shepard's psyche is damaged. The voices of Friends past shake more of Shepard. The final dream Shepard sees Shepard and the Child destroyed. At this time Shepard's will is at its weakest. What events happen after that?



 

I mentioned something similar a bunch of posts back, about the fact that Joker asks Shep if s/he is sure this is reality and not anoither simulation, it's definately provocative.

[steve3194]

Im a fan of the IT. One question I have about though is I saw a youtube video with a guy claiming to have the worst ending (not saying he was correct) where he had low EMS etc.

His only option was to destroy. Which according to IT is really the best option as shepard survives.

Does this not mean that if IT is real then the game is in a sense rewarding low EMS by forcing you into the only ending where shepard survives.

Sorry if this has already been brought up. Just hoping someone could explain or point me to an explanation

[TheDarkMyth92]

Jaxitty wrote...

protognosis wrote...

During the Geth Consensus mission Legion discusses how he can give Shepard a gun because it is what he/she knows and it is familiar.

When consciousness is projected into an illusion familiar things male the illusion hold.

This concept is also introduced in conversations with Joker/EDI.

Post Geth Consensus, (if I'm not wrong on the timing) EDI mentions that some say this reality is just a 2d image that is projected off the curved surface of the universe/fabric of reality. (I'm paraphrasing and will have direct quotes and screen shots on my second play through).

Moreover, Joker makes a comment on how would Shepard know this is reality.

The seed is planted in the players mind that there could be some doubt in Shepard's mind about reality. It doesn't bear fruit until the ending(s) when we start trying to figure it out.

Also, the Gun that is Indoctrination  is shown when Shepard first has that dream. The dream is the first time we are ever inside a characters head. The Prothean beacon could be argued as the first but that is a memory planted in Shepard's head but we don't go exploring  in Shepard's brain. I guess you can call the dream  Close First Person narrative. The dream is a clue in that it happens at all. It sets up the seed of a conflicted mind a worried mind. Shepard is guilty, or feels guilty for the deaths he/she couldn't prevent. This doubt is an opening for exploration of Shepard's psyche. The child is engulfed in flames. The child represents loss of confidence and the flames a trial. The child is a symbol of Shepard's goal but there is no hope. This is ecoed the more the dream occurs. The more it happens more of Shepard's psyche is damaged. The voices of Friends past shake more of Shepard. The final dream Shepard sees Shepard and the Child destroyed. At this time Shepard's will is at its weakest. What events happen after that?



 

I mentioned something similar a bunch of posts back, about the fact that Joker asks Shep if s/he is sure this is reality and not anoither simulation, it's definately provocative.

i was thinking that the devs were more on the lines of joking with players about how they are playing a video game and its all just a simulation. but how would shep or joker know if it was ever real or just some game? idk just my thought about why that convo was in the game.

[Denvian]

Is it April 6th yet?... I am getting tired of having the same three arguments over and over...

[Dwailing]

steve3194 wrote...

Im a fan of the IT. One question I have about though is I saw a youtube video with a guy claiming to have the worst ending (not saying he was correct) where he had low EMS etc.

His only option was to destroy. Which according to IT is really the best option as shepard survives.

Does this not mean that if IT is real then the game is in a sense rewarding low EMS by forcing you into the only ending where shepard survives.

Sorry if this has already been brought up. Just hoping someone could explain or point me to an explanation

No, we're pretty sure that the reason you're only presented with one or two endings is because the Reapers don't need to indoctrinate Shepard because his fleet is so weak they can crush it easily without needing him.  Also, the only true "best ending" is when you get to see the scene with Shepard taking a breath.  That only comes if you have 4000+ EMS, 5000+ if you didn't save Anderson.

[Dwailing]

 OK, I'm going to bring up the infinite ammo pistol again.  In the first mission, the pistol has, I think, the normal amount of ammo per clip for an unupgraded Predator, it just can be reloaded an infinite number of times until the husk area.  However, the final pistol is in the form of a Carnifex, not a Predator.  The unupgraded Carnifex, and I think it is reasonable to assume that the pistol is unupgraded, has six shots per clip.  Also, it is reloaded using the Mass Effect 2 reload animation.  However, the pistol in the final scene can be fired an infinite number of times, as far as I know, and it reloads using the new animation where Shepard hits the bottom, or at least an area close to the bottom, of the gun.  This animation is used for the Predator, but not for the Carnifex.  However, the sound, damage, and accuracy are, I assume, the same as a regular Carnifex.  I think that, considering how detailed everything else was up to this point, that we can assume that the pistol is the first clue that something is amiss.  Just figured I should bring this up again from a slightly different perspective.

[Tov01]

I don't like the Indoctrination Hypothesis for a variety of reasons.

For one, it ignores how indoctrination actually works. It assumes that picking destroy somehow "breaks" the indoctrination, when we have been shown that the only way to do that is with a bullet to the head. At no point does the game suggest that it can cause an extended dream sequence. At most it can cause a "hallucinations of "ghostly" presences."

There are also external problems with the Indoctrination Hypothesis. It assumes that Bioware is going to introduce DLC with the "real" ending. But if there is ending DLC, it could just as easily replace the ending completely, instead of forcing the player through an extended, and well hated, dream sequence first, rendering the Indoctrination Hypothesis completely unnecessary.

As many problems as the ending has, the Indoctrination Hypothesis isn't much better.

[Dwailing]

Tov01 wrote...

I don't like the Indoctrination Hypothesis for a variety of reasons.

For one, it ignores how indoctrination actually works. It assumes that picking destroy somehow "breaks" the indoctrination, when we have been shown that the only way to do that is with a bullet to the head. At no point does the game suggest that it can cause an extended dream sequence. At most it can cause a "hallucinations of "ghostly" presences."

There are also external problems with the Indoctrination Hypothesis. It assumes that Bioware is going to introduce DLC with the "real" ending. But if there is ending DLC, it could just as easily replace the ending completely, instead of forcing the player through an extended, and well hated, dream sequence first, rendering the Indoctrination Hypothesis completely unnecessary.

As many problems as the ending has, the Indoctrination Hypothesis isn't much better.

Uh, calling it a "hypothesis" is a low blow considering how much evidence we have while you have, oh let's see, only ZERO.  Call me a little blunt, but I don't think this "argument" you're trying to make holds much if any water.

[waldstr18]

any changes?

did you finally recognize the foolishness of your ways or are you still following the indoctrination cult?