57139 réponses à ce sujet

[balance5050]

Linus108 wrote...

XCMichael wrote...

Linus108 wrote...

I find hallucination/dream theories to be two things:

I. Fans trying to explain away a disappointing story, with hopes that it had a deeper meaning than it actually did. Or the hope that the real story will be told at a later time.

II. A terrible plot device. Even if people really think this is a viable theory (and it turned out to be true), it would be one of the worst writing decisions in game history. Okay, maybe that is overstating it. But how awful would it be, to with hold the ending from everyone, and give them a dream sequence instead.

Either way, I think it's wishful thinking.

That is a matter of perpective. I persoally love that idea, provided Bioware can justify it and not decide to charge us for it, which would ignite an inferno of fan rage. "What? So you already decided what the "real" ending was and was going to add it later? So does that mean you already decided to charge us extra for the ending before the game even came out?" or even worse "No, we thought of the ending later. It's an extra", basically taking the idea from the player and charging us for it. They just can't really justify charging for another ending if this hypothesis is true.

Again, like you said, it might just be (VERY) wishful thinking:bandit:

I dropped the ball on this one. I misread what a lot of people were talking about, and thought people were generally saying Shepard was knocked unconcious outside of the beam. And was having a dream. And that the game ends with him/her waking up from the dream in the rubble. 

But reading more closely, I see there is a big favor of the Indocriation theory, and that's what you guys mean by the hallucination. I actually like this theory. But again have some issues with it, from a logistical point of view. 

Plus I still feel the writers failed to convey this (if this is what they were going for). 

I like it, the game crushes your hopes several time in the process of trying to find the catalyst and the hopelessness of the ground war. It only makes sense that the indoctrination feels wrong and that only by getting the hidden ending will there be a glimmer of hope for a more satisfying conlusion (if you remember your true goal to destroy the reapers at all costs, and you have enough assets to keep you alive while your in dreamland.

Modifié par balance5050, 12 mars 2012 - 06:31 .

[aquaticidioticus]

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Even if they leave the ending open with out a DLC I'm good with that, I'll just make up my own ish'

Perhaps that what they meant originally by "getting the ending you wanted."  You have to supply everything yourself after the "ending."

I'm still in favor of DLC/patch personally.  I'm fine with open endings on a filler game or something that is in-between, but I want to know what (truly) happened if this is the last of Shepard's story.  Holding out hope... although I'm admittedly setting myself up for disappointment.  

Modifié par aquaticidioticus, 12 mars 2012 - 06:32 .

[OneWithTheAssassins]

Good God...
If the first post turns out to be true, then BioWare truly created the greatest RPG expirence ever. And I will forever praise the Mass Effect trilogy as the greatest game series ever.
And I would of coures take back all the nasty things I said about them as I silently cried over the ending.
In short: mind = blown.

[XCMichael]

lavosslayer wrote...

El Diablo wrote...

Im fine with the hallucination theory though from a gameplay technical perspective i have a problem with the Indoctrination theory quite a few put forth.

There is some sense in the whole idea that the Destroy ending is resisting indoctrination, however it isn't like this fact is at all clearly signalled. Now, most people, myself included, probaly aren't going to think that hard on the scene. It is handled as most of the Moral choices in the game are. Now if it is true that the destroy ending is the only path te resist indoctrination, The writers are pretty much saying to everyone who didn't choose that option: "Hah You fool, we tricked you. you should have been smarter, now you lose the game" (well unless you for some reason want the reapers to win)

This is a pretty unfair and unkind bit of game design. Unless they change it so that their is more of a warning that you are being tricked.

I think that would be the most amazing con ever! That the devs were able to indoctrinate that many of us...we would so be mindless husks if ME really was happening lol

Exactly, the attempt at indoctrination wasn't just meant for shepard, it was meant for the player as well (Is it just me, or is everyone here feeling a bit mind-****ed). 

[Lugaidster]

lavosslayer wrote...

El Diablo wrote...

Im fine with the hallucination theory though from a gameplay technical perspective i have a problem with the Indoctrination theory quite a few put forth.

There is some sense in the whole idea that the Destroy ending is resisting indoctrination, however it isn't like this fact is at all clearly signalled. Now, most people, myself included, probaly aren't going to think that hard on the scene. It is handled as most of the Moral choices in the game are. Now if it is true that the destroy ending is the only path te resist indoctrination, The writers are pretty much saying to everyone who didn't choose that option: "Hah You fool, we tricked you. you should have been smarter, now you lose the game" (well unless you for some reason want the reapers to win)

This is a pretty unfair and unkind bit of game design. Unless they change it so that their is more of a warning that you are being tricked.

I think that would be the most amazing con ever! That the devs were able to indoctrinate that many of us...we would so be mindless husks if ME really was happening lol

The devs made it clear during the time coming up to the release that decisions could have unforseen consequences. There's no way of actually making you feel that you were fooled without fooling you. Besides, this game is 18+. You'd have to be very childish to feel bad because your decision wasn't the right one.

[Sajuro]

rogueagent6 wrote...

Lugaidster wrote...

It is a 3v1 fight...

And like I replied before, Kai Lang is half reaper...

Technically it is 3 vs 11 fight counting the Cerberus troops.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

Think about this... If the "god child" really existed in the Citadel this whole time, then the crucible does nothing. Nothing at all. I refuse to believe that a deus ex machina like this is an ending worth defending.

[xDarkspace]

www.youtube.com/watch

[Dilandau3000]

krystalevenstar wrote...

I think the people saying that Bioware isn't good enough/couldn't pull this off

No, I'm actually saying the opposite. I'm saying they aren't stupid enough to pull this off. Because coming out after the fact and saying "haha, fooled you" would make me even more angry and would be the stupidest decision in writing history, even if it did improve the ending.

Such a manoeuvre would not be the most epic stunt in gaming history, it would be the most epic betrayal in gaming history.

[MissMaster_2]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

MissMaster_2 wrote...

magikbbg wrote...

Anyone notice The Child who claims to be the catalyst, his voice has reverb just like harbinger, listen very carefully.

(making sure im not crazy if anyone can confirm please do)

Yeah.

My theory is that he was a reaper. I think that millions of years ago, there was a war between synthetics and organics, and the synthetics won and annihilated their creators. They regretted that in hindsight, yet believed that ultimately every synthetic being would repeat their mistake (and probably feel vindicated in that belief by events witnessed during that time). They upgraded themselves to become reapers to prevent that from happening, and to preserve organic life to "atone" for their mistake. The starchild is simply an avatar (a VI if you will) speaking for these proto-reapers.

It explains why the reapers couldn't understand that organics can't accept the form of "salvation" offered by the reapers (they're reasoning it from a synthetic perspective). It explains why there is no contradiction in creating the reapers (who are synthetic life) to achieve this goal, because the creators of the reapers are the reapers and themselves synthetic. It explains pretty much everything except the Normandy crash landing WTF stuff.

I further believe that the starchild didn't want you to destroy the reapers, which is why that was painted as the worst option. It didn't want that because it was part of what the reapers were. It promotes synthesis because that's what the reapers wanted to achieve from the beginning: merging organic and synthetic life in order to preserve both. It's just that with the help of the crucible and shepard they can now achieve it in a more instantaneous fashion.

I also believe that the only reason the geth and EDI get destroyed in the destroy ending is because they incorporate reaper tech (wasn't Shepard's Project Lazarus rebuild also based on reaper tech?). The idea of destroying all synthetic life is impossible, because it's too vague what that even is. I can't believe that the geth, who were pure software constructs and not even a true AI, would've been destroyed if they had still been in their pre-reaper upgrade state. The idea that all technology gets destroyed is even more ludicrous.

Besides the Normandy crash landing my explanation makes as much sense as the hallucination thing.

I think the kid is part Sovereign too he say undertones of his voice too.

[Martukis]

The more I read regarding this theory, the more I hope it to be the case. That, and the good faith Bioware has earned from me up until this point, and GambleMike saying "If they knew the things we were planning to do with Mass Effect 3, they'd keep their saves forever" has me hoping for some sort of redemption here.

[XCMichael]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

krystalevenstar wrote...

I think the people saying that Bioware isn't good enough/couldn't pull this off

No, I'm actually saying the opposite. I'm saying they aren't stupid enough to pull this off. Because coming out after the fact and saying "haha, fooled you" would make me even more angry and would be the stupidest decision in writing history, even if it did improve the ending.

Such a manoeuvre would not be the most epic stunt in gaming history, it would be the most epic betrayal in gaming history.

I think it's a pretty epic stunt... Well trolled bioware, what a manoeuvre! I mean, if this is true, it's going down in history. I don't think any game, movie, novel has pulled off something quite like this.

Modifié par XCMichael, 12 mars 2012 - 06:45 .

[UKillMeLongTime]

Very good analysis and i hope it is true. it did have a dream vibe to it

dang sure gives them a lot they can do in a dlc release

fallout 3 did it in a way

[Aanlen]

krystalevenstar wrote...

I think the people saying that Bioware isn't good enough/couldn't pull this off should really take a look at what they're saying. We're talking about the same people that created this world, crafted each of the games, including this one which everyone pretty much agrees is utterly fantastic until the last 10 minutes. They have more invested in this than even we do. This is their baby. They wouldn't undermine everything they've accomplished with the lackluster ending we have now. All of the evidence we've compiled isn't 'just coincidence' anymore, and we're not scrambling to find things to make this fit. They're not going to say "Hey, look at what these people came up with, let's run with that!" This was planned. There's a clear, deliberate and methodical, cohesive way to follow it to this conclusion. It was easy to say that they might have just missed these things and since this makes so much sense they'd go with it in the beginning, but there is just too many things that fit now. If all the people in this thread have come up with this conclusion from what we've discovered, do you really think that after X amount of years of development, no one on the ME team noticed these things?

THIS IS DELIBERATE.

And it's brilliant.

It will go down not only as one of the greatest game series in history, but the greatest reveal for the ending of that series.

Mass Effect could never go out on a whimper, it's going to go out on an earthshattering bang. Just like it should.

This is exactly what I think too. There's no way what we have now is the true ending. And really, the ending where Shepard wakes up in London should be proof enough. I can't imagine them putting it in if it wasn't a hint towards indoctrination.

[Terraforming2154]

El Diablo wrote...

Im fine with the hallucination theory though from a gameplay technical perspective i have a problem with the Indoctrination theory quite a few put forth.

There is some sense in the whole idea that the Destroy ending is resisting indoctrination, however it isn't like this fact is at all clearly signalled. Now, most people, myself included, probaly aren't going to think that hard on the scene. It is handled as most of the Moral choices in the game are. Now if it is true that the destroy ending is the only path te resist indoctrination, The writers are pretty much saying to everyone who didn't choose that option: "Hah You fool, we tricked you. you should have been smarter, now you lose the game" (well unless you for some reason want the reapers to win)

This is a pretty unfair and unkind bit of game design. Unless they change it so that their is more of a warning that you are being tricked.

Idk, people have been complaining for awhile that the morality in Mass Effect is too simplistic. People seemed particularly upset with the introduction of physical appearance becoming less human through renegade choices - I remember people saying that they felt the game's moral choices were becoming on par with Fable with halos and demon horns.

I think this would be a fun shift in the gameplay. I know people who stated they picked the control option solely because it was blue, not because of the implications behind the choice. They did so because blue unequivocally equals paragon, or "good" choices. And just to clarify: I'm not saying that that type of decision making is wrong or bad -- hell I picked blue choices for most of the game because I play paragon. I agree that it is a bit of a screw tossed to players, but a fun one, I think.

I really don't think it is about the devs making players feel bad (if this scenario has any truth to it), but just using manipulation to almost make the player feel indoctrinated. It would be pretty clever, and even if I picked the blue or green endings, I would appreciate what they were going for.

Modifié par Terraforming2154, 12 mars 2012 - 06:45 .

[Lugaidster]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

Such a manoeuvre would not be the most epic stunt in gaming history, it would be the most epic betrayal in gaming history.

Because the current ending isn't a betrayal? After hearing "your decisions count" or "we won't pull a 'lost' on you" this wouldn't be a betrayal? Yeah...

A straight up ending would've been great, but we didn't get that. Not for the people that are posting in this thread at least. Claiming it isn't an indoctrination attempt and that what we saw is actually the end would be a real betrayal. But there are enough threads out there for that argument to be made.

[RabidChinaGirl]

aquaticidioticus wrote...

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Even if they leave the ending open with out a DLC I'm good with that, I'll just make up my own ish'

Perhaps that what they meant originally by "getting the ending you wanted."  You have to supply everything yourself after the "ending."

I'm still in favor of DLC/patch personally.  I'm fine with open endings on a filler game or something that is in-between, but I want to know what (truly) happened if this is the last of Shepard's story.  Holding out hope... although I'm admittedly setting myself up for disappointment.  

With you on this.  Normally, I'm not a fan of the whole "Hah it was all a dream!" scenario, but the last moments of the game just make less and less sense the more you think about it.  I'm not going to list these inconsistencies out, since I'm sure they've already been discussed in the 100+ previous pages under this thread.

Realistically, I don't think BioWare will come out with a "real" or alternate ending as DLC, but Bethesda did it for Fallout 3, so who knows.  

[Auresta]

http://www.nowgamer....in_bioware.html

Does this hold relevance now?

[Dilandau3000]

Lugaidster wrote...

Dilandau3000 wrote...

Such a manoeuvre would not be the most epic stunt in gaming history, it would be the most epic betrayal in gaming history.

Because the current ending isn't a betrayal?

It is, but putting a fake ending in the game without any real clues (because all we have is circumstantial evidence and a lot of speculation) would be a bigger betrayal in my opinion.

[El Diablo]

Lugaidster wrote...

lavosslayer wrote...

El Diablo wrote...

Im fine with the hallucination theory though from a gameplay technical perspective i have a problem with the Indoctrination theory quite a few put forth.

There is some sense in the whole idea that the Destroy ending is resisting indoctrination, however it isn't like this fact is at all clearly signalled. Now, most people, myself included, probaly aren't going to think that hard on the scene. It is handled as most of the Moral choices in the game are. Now if it is true that the destroy ending is the only path te resist indoctrination, The writers are pretty much saying to everyone who didn't choose that option: "Hah You fool, we tricked you. you should have been smarter, now you lose the game" (well unless you for some reason want the reapers to win)

This is a pretty unfair and unkind bit of game design. Unless they change it so that their is more of a warning that you are being tricked.

I think that would be the most amazing con ever! That the devs were able to indoctrinate that many of us...we would so be mindless husks if ME really was happening lol

The devs made it clear during the time coming up to the release that decisions could have unforseen consequences. There's no way of actually making you feel that you were fooled without fooling you. Besides, this game is 18+. You'd have to be very childish to feel bad because your decision wasn't the right one.

There is a difference between Unforseen concequences and fooling a player. Say you meet a character that is a jerk. you see the renegade Interrupt pop up as he talks and the cammera shows Shep balling up his fist. Naturally, you assume shep's gonna punch the guy if you take it. You press the button and instead of punching the guy, shepard suddenly pulls his gun and blasts him through the head. I'd be pissed and reload. The designer pretty much 'cheated' me. 

This is not the same as say, Rewriting the Geth heretics might have led to the quarians being weaker. Which is an Unforseen consequence.

[krystalevenstar]

I'll admit that my first playthrough I was tempted to choose control because I associated blue with being the Paragon choice, and probably for more selfish reasons (the child hadn't mentioned I'd die) than sticking to my convictions about destroying the reapers, I chose destroy. I also believe that showing Anderson destroying the tube during the explanation helped me pick that option.

[Linus108]

Can someone explain to me (if this theory is correct), how Shepard wakes up in London? If she was indoctrinated, wouldn't that be game over? How did she awake from the hallucination?

Also wouldn't the reapers have destroyed all of earth if she had failed...

[Jenaimarre]

Guys, here's a tweet by Jessica Merizan, it may not mean anything so take it with a grain of salt.

@o1striker that's kind of how I interpreted it as a dying hallucination, but I'm not a dev so I don't know what was intended.

http://twitter.com/J...692740471721985

[Lugaidster]

Auresta wrote...

http://www.nowgamer....in_bioware.html

Does this hold relevance now?

It certainly does, if you pick what we call indoctrinated endings, the reapers win.