57139 réponses à ce sujet

[n00bsauce2010]

I have a hard time believing that the KID at the start of the game is real... as well as Shepard surviving 2 explosions, the space magic wave and the fall back to Earth.

[Rifneno]

OdanUrr wrote...

1) Not what I meant. What I'm saying is that if we cannot deduce this naturally as we play the game, then it's highly unlikely it'll be true, particularly considering ME3 was marketed as the "natural entry point" of the franchise. Mass Effect is not, by any means, a detective story. If we're meant to deduce things, there has to be enough foreshadowing.

2) Logical explanation to what exactly?

3) I don't support IT. I've tried to explain why and when someone asks me on a particular piece of evidence I've tried to provide an alternate explanation. This is not meant to say my explanation is the right explanation as you apparently believe I'm saying, but that it is also a possible explanation. That is why I say it comes down to interpretation, because there can be any number of possible explanations.

1) Some peopld did deduce it naturally. And no, I was not one of them. If everyone deduces it naturally, then it's not a plot twist.

2) So many thing it's hard to remember or list them all. Shepard getting TIM's eyes (which is established canon to be from a Reaper indoctrination device) in both control & synthesis endings. The strange "bolt to the head" warning label next to the vent the kid is on Earth, a warning label we haven't been able to find anywhere else in the game, meaning it was unique to that vent. TIM going from "I don't expect you to understand and I'm certainly not looking for your approval" on Mars to "Because... I need you to believe" on the Citadel. Shepard surviving that ridiculously powerful explosion if the ending was real. The sheer ridiculousness of the synthesis ending from a game with a history of using real science whenever possible and not resorting to nonsensical space magic. If the Reapers' controlling AI part of the Citadel, what the hell was the entire point of Mass Effect 1? I could go on, but...

3) If Sixth Sense was a two-parter and halfway through some people thought Bruce Willis' character was dead and others just thought his wife was a **** for never acknowledging him, it wouldn't just be different valid interpretations. The first group would be right and the second would be wrong. But, re: psychology. You wrote off the dreams as PTSD. You do realize there's more symptoms to PTSD than just nightmares, right? One of the chief symptoms is strong aversion to the thing that traumatized you. That's why the asari that killed Joker's family doesn's want to be around humans and refuses to bathe. That's why Kelly Chambers refuses to come back to the Normandy. So tell me this: when has Shepard ever shied away from Reapers? On that subject, why are the dreams riddled with known indoctrination symptoms, right after Arrival (which was made at the same time as ME3) firmly cemented symptoms manifest in dreams?

byne wrote...

And turning Shepard, who knows all the plans of the allied fleets, and is basically the leader of the entire galaxy at that point, wouldnt be?

QFT. Anderson, Hackett, and Coates all specifically say how Shepard is pretty much the only thing holding people together. The morale of the galaxy is on his shoulders.

byne wrote...

If theres a dirty thought to be had, you can bet I'm having it.

DangerousPuddy wrote...

Question for all IT go'ers.

One thing that confuses me is you're saying Shep is Indoc'd even when on Thessia when the thing says "indoctrinated presence detected" to Kai Leng?

Go back and read the multiple responses for the last time you asked that and quit wasting our time.

EpyonX3 wrote...

-snip stuff about mako wheels & ramp at catalyst scene-

Woah. I applaud you for that. I can definitely see that as a real alternative to the IT interpretation. My only question is why would the cable bundled end there like that? Wouldn't that mean they're not really attached to anything?

That isn't to say I don't believe IT anymore of course. Just that I do recognize a good counterpoint for a piece of IT evidence.

Remember this game has to run smoothly on three platforms. The PS3 doesn't use memory very well and requires extra work. From what I've read, the PS3 version suffers from framerate issues and stuttering.

And all versions suffer from One Ring Button to rule them all, One Ring Button to find them, One Ring Button to bring them all and in the darkness bind them. Cover, storm, revive, interact. Does BW even realize that controllers, let alone keyboards, have more than one button? It's like they made this thing for the NES controller. Maddening!

byne wrote...

So, off topic, but I was playing multiplayer, and I just died, and I didnt know why, so when I looked at the thing that normally says 'Bunster was taken down by X' it was all 'Bunster committed suicide.'

idk how I even managed that

Caustic ravager/swarmer goo.

... Okay, this thread is growing too fast. I can't catch up, let alone respond to all I want to. Screw it, skipping 10~ pages now.

[KevShep]

Proof that the Crucible was for the Reapers and not us!......

The crucible HAD to connect to he citadel in a way that was to perfect to be thought up by organics alone since its part of the citadel.

What I mean is, The citadel fires a beam FROM the crucible and my thought was how did they get the citadel to fire a beam without RE-DESIGNING the citadel to do it? Its as if the citadel was designed to use the crucible!...And before you say it was the crucible that was designed to use the citadel I will stop you right there and tell you that is not possible. The reason that its not possible is because its the citadel that is shooting out...not the crucible! Also the control/synthesis/destroy options are all on the citadel side and not on the crucible.

Modifié par KevShep, 18 avril 2012 - 01:49 .

[n00bsauce2010]

KevShep wrote...

Proof that the Crucible was for the Reapers and not us!......

The crucible HAD to connect to he citadel in a way that was to perfect to be thought up by organics alone since its part of the citadel.

What I mean is, The citadel fires a beam FROM the crucible and my thought was how did they get the citadel to fire a beam without RE-DESIGNING the citadel to do it? Its as if the citadel was designed to use the crucible!...And before you say it was the crucible that was designed to use the citadel I will stop you right there and tell you that is not possible. The reason that its not possible is because its the citadel that is shooting out...not the crucible! Also the control/synthesis/destroy options are all on the citadel side and not on the crucible.

Another plot hole that needs explaining. Are you an IT supporter?

[KevShep]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Proof that the Crucible was for the Reapers and not us!......

The crucible HAD to connect to he citadel in a way that was to perfect to be thought up by organics alone since its part of the citadel.

What I mean is, The citadel fires a beam FROM the crucible and my thought was how did they get the citadel to fire a beam without RE-DESIGNING the citadel to do it? Its as if the citadel was designed to use the crucible!...And before you say it was the crucible that was designed to use the citadel I will stop you right there and tell you that is not possible. The reason that its not possible is because its the citadel that is shooting out...not the crucible! Also the control/synthesis/destroy options are all on the citadel side and not on the crucible.

Another plot hole that needs explaining. Are you an IT supporter?

Yes!

[Big Bad]

If IT turns out to be false, and we are stuck with a literal interpretation of the ending, I think the non-star brat thing that will ****** me off the most is TIM's death scene. It's a total rehash of ME1, and I would be extremely disappointed if that's really how he goes out.

[n00bsauce2010]

KevShep wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Proof that the Crucible was for the Reapers and not us!......

The crucible HAD to connect to he citadel in a way that was to perfect to be thought up by organics alone since its part of the citadel.

What I mean is, The citadel fires a beam FROM the crucible and my thought was how did they get the citadel to fire a beam without RE-DESIGNING the citadel to do it? Its as if the citadel was designed to use the crucible!...And before you say it was the crucible that was designed to use the citadel I will stop you right there and tell you that is not possible. The reason that its not possible is because its the citadel that is shooting out...not the crucible! Also the control/synthesis/destroy options are all on the citadel side and not on the crucible.

Another plot hole that needs explaining. Are you an IT supporter?

Yes!

^ There are just way too many plotholes that need explaining... Indoctrination is the best way to do it.

[Gormane01]

Big Bad wrote...

If IT turns out to be false, and we are stuck with a literal interpretation of the ending, I think the non-star brat thing that will ****** me off the most is TIM's death scene. It's a total rehash of ME1, and I would be extremely disappointed if that's really how he goes out.

Agreed, I think their original idea of him being a giant reaper monster thing would be a bit cooler. (see the art book)

[balance5050]

KevShep wrote...

Proof that the Crucible was for the Reapers and not us!......

The crucible HAD to connect to he citadel in a way that was to perfect to be thought up by organics alone since its part of the citadel.

What I mean is, The citadel fires a beam FROM the crucible and my thought was how did they get the citadel to fire a beam without RE-DESIGNING the citadel to do it? Its as if the citadel was designed to use the crucible!...And before you say it was the crucible that was designed to use the citadel I will stop you right there and tell you that is not possible. The reason that its not possible is because its the citadel that is shooting out...not the crucible! Also the control/synthesis/destroy options are all on the citadel side and not on the crucible.

Well, that's why the Protheans put anti reaper security on on their VI's, it's no strech that over the cycles someone knew that the citadel was a relay, and thought "that's how we'll power this weapon." That's why they were so quick to destroy cerberus after that... they were using him for information.

If the reapers thought of the crucible then all hope is lost...

[KevShep]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Proof that the Crucible was for the Reapers and not us!......

The crucible HAD to connect to he citadel in a way that was to perfect to be thought up by organics alone since its part of the citadel.

What I mean is, The citadel fires a beam FROM the crucible and my thought was how did they get the citadel to fire a beam without RE-DESIGNING the citadel to do it? Its as if the citadel was designed to use the crucible!...And before you say it was the crucible that was designed to use the citadel I will stop you right there and tell you that is not possible. The reason that its not possible is because its the citadel that is shooting out...not the crucible! Also the control/synthesis/destroy options are all on the citadel side and not on the crucible.

Another plot hole that needs explaining. Are you an IT supporter?

Yes!

^ There are just way too many plotholes that need explaining... Indoctrination is the best way to do it.

I think that it IS actually true since I have heard shepards voice in catalysts own voice as the kid is talking shepard is saying the same thing through the catalyst! At that point I stopped hoping for it to be true and I then knew it was!

[winterkoko]

I also thought the ending had a very strange feel; Shephard just didn't seem her usual self. I understand that she's tired and wounded, but she seemed almost passive... too ready to accept what the child/catalyst is telling her, and too readily resigned to the fates outlined by it. This seems very unlike Shepard, wounded or not. Part of me does feel that the ending would make more sense as a hallucination...

[OdanUrr]

KevShep wrote...

BTW, why would it make since to end it like it is if it was the I.T.?

Because everything that happens after Shepard makes his choice is for the benefit of the player and not Shepard. It's there to tell us (the player) what the outcome of our choice was. If indoctrination is complete upon choosing, there's no reason why Harbinger should show Shepard things that he couldn't possibly see anyway. It defeats the purpose of the illusion.

[n00bsauce2010]

winterkoko wrote...

I also thought the ending had a very strange feel; Shephard just didn't seem her usual self. I understand that she's tired and wounded, but she seemed almost passive... too ready to accept what the child/catalyst is telling her, and too readily resigned to the fates outlined by it. This seems very unlike Shepard, wounded or not. Part of me does feel that the ending would make more sense as a hallucination...

All of me feels that way,

I'm sorry but I refuse to accept the bull**** in the last 15 minutes of the game.

My actual first reaction when I'm hit by hardbinger's beam and wake up is "WTF.... GAY.. this must be some kind of dream or something" hopefully it is a dream.. because it makes no sense otherwise.

[OdanUrr]

Rifneno wrote...

2) So many thing it's hard to remember or list them all. Shepard getting TIM's eyes (which is established canon to be from a Reaper indoctrination device) in both control & synthesis endings. The strange "bolt to the head" warning label next to the vent the kid is on Earth, a warning label we haven't been able to find anywhere else in the game, meaning it was unique to that vent. TIM going from "I don't expect you to understand and I'm certainly not looking for your approval" on Mars to "Because... I need you to believe" on the Citadel. Shepard surviving that ridiculously powerful explosion if the ending was real. The sheer ridiculousness of the synthesis ending from a game with a history of using real science whenever possible and not resorting to nonsensical space magic. If the Reapers' controlling AI part of the Citadel, what the hell was the entire point of Mass Effect 1? I could go on, but...

3) If Sixth Sense was a two-parter and halfway through some people thought Bruce Willis' character was dead and others just thought his wife was a **** for never acknowledging him, it wouldn't just be different valid interpretations. The first group would be right and the second would be wrong. But, re: psychology. You wrote off the dreams as PTSD. You do realize there's more symptoms to PTSD than just nightmares, right? One of the chief symptoms is strong aversion to the thing that traumatized you. That's why the asari that killed Joker's family doesn's want to be around humans and refuses to bathe. That's why Kelly Chambers refuses to come back to the Normandy. So tell me this: when has Shepard ever shied away from Reapers? On that subject, why are the dreams riddled with known indoctrination symptoms, right after Arrival (which was made at the same time as ME3) firmly cemented symptoms manifest in dreams?

2) It's a bit selective about what it tries to explain. For instance, it would explain Shepard having TIM's eyes in the end, but it wouldn't explain how the Catalyst fits into ME1, it just writes him off entirely. And I agree, synthesis is downright ridiculous, how can an energy pulse re-write DNA and instantaneously trigger mutations that don't result in the subject's death? Worse, how can it turn a synthetic into a hybrid?

3) I know there's more to PTSD than that, but is it so difficult to believe that Shepard is having these dreams as a result of everything he's been through? The whispers are dialogue lines from fallen comrades, and the kid represents someone he couldn't save. It's not a stretch to assume Shepard feels guilty about everyone he's not been able to save. As for Arrival, Shepard never comes into contact with Object Rho if you start a new game without importing a save. What happens then?

[n00bsauce2010]

OdanUrr wrote...

KevShep wrote...

BTW, why would it make since to end it like it is if it was the I.T.?

Because everything that happens after Shepard makes his choice is for the benefit of the player and not Shepard. It's there to tell us (the player) what the outcome of our choice was. If indoctrination is complete upon choosing, there's no reason why Harbinger should show Shepard things that he couldn't possibly see anyway. It defeats the purpose of the illusion.

One could argue that those "scenes" are being manifested in Shepards own mind. A hopefulness that his crew/squad is safe... because you know they were just apparently blown to bits. I would also argue that Shep has the biggest attachment to Joker.... and then Liara and Anderson. The reason why we always see them in the slideshow at the end. And then of course Joker being the one to step off the ship first...

[KevShep]

OdanUrr wrote...

KevShep wrote...

BTW, why would it make since to end it like it is if it was the I.T.?

Because everything that happens after Shepard makes his choice is for the benefit of the player and not Shepard. It's there to tell us (the player) what the outcome of our choice was. If indoctrination is complete upon choosing, there's no reason why Harbinger should show Shepard things that he couldn't possibly see anyway. It defeats the purpose of the illusion.

They (Bioware) cant indoctrinate YOUR Shepard without indoctrinating YOU as well! Remember that Mass Effect is a series that is about you and Shepard being the same person.

[dreamgazer]

Rifneno wrote...

1) Some peopld did deduce it naturally. And no, I was not one of them. If everyone deduces it naturally, then it's not a plot twist.

I'm one of the people who picked up on probably a third of the clues on some secondary, non-indoctrination level upon my first playthrough.  I decided right away that the kid was never there, as soon as he vanished from the vent. The dreams seemed more than recurring nightmares to me; the shadows and voices really added to that, as well as what the kid himself represents in Shep's mind. Shepard's growing agitation in the dialogue that we cannot control was another.  

And all the surreal elements of the conclusion itself -- the child-who-was-never-there appearing as the catalyst; Anderson's wound appearing on Shepard at the same spot; the way that Anderson and The Illusive Man move; Shep's perfect face-plant onto the ascending altar; and the flip-flopping of paragon/renegade colors for the final decision -- all tipped me off that something was off-kilter about everything going down in th ending, even without direct indoctrination in my mind.  Some of these things are familiar tropes, like damaging a person inside your mind is like damaging a part of your own mentality. Or seeing an evil force take on the image of something meaningful to the hero, in order to cloud his perception of a situation. We've seen these things before, just not in this context.

The only time I actively thought about Shepard being indoctrinated was during the gunshot at Anderson, obviously, and the ghostly sides of the screen. It was enough of a tipoff to lead me here (though I've been a BioWare fan for a very long time, I didn't really know about the BSN until this). 

That's all stuff I landed on without knowing a thing about the theory, or, for that matter, what anybody else was thinking about the conclusion.  Maybe it's because I'm a movie geek who thrives on hunting down symbolism and hints towards an answer -- especially in science-fiction or paranormal/mind-screw mysteries -- but my perception arrived at "intentionally surreal" once Shepard started talking with the catalyst. Some of the elements of the theory are too much for me to digest as intended by the writing, but I love the full sprawl of how the elements in the game and the universe's lore latch onto the idea. 

[KevShep]

winterkoko wrote...

I also thought the ending had a very strange feel; Shephard just didn't seem her usual self. I understand that she's tired and wounded, but she seemed almost passive... too ready to accept what the child/catalyst is telling her, and too readily resigned to the fates outlined by it. This seems very unlike Shepard, wounded or not. Part of me does feel that the ending would make more sense as a hallucination...

There is a reason that the last 10 minutes of the game seems "out of place" from the whole series like...a dream... Thats because it is a dream! In a dream you will believe anything...like flying cats, and you will not question it at all! Not to mention that there is NO explanation to the catalyst being the kid or hearing shepards voice in the catalysts voice!

[OdanUrr]

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

One could argue that those "scenes" are being manifested in Shepards own mind. A hopefulness that his crew/squad is safe... because you know they were just apparently blown to bits. I would also argue that Shep has the biggest attachment to Joker.... and then Liara and Anderson. The reason why we always see them in the slideshow at the end. And then of course Joker being the one to step off the ship first...

Actually, you get Liara, Ashley, or Kaidan, depending on who's your LI. Yeah, I know, whatever happened to every other LI in the game?

Remember the undertones of the scene depicting Shepard's crew making it in one piece (if your EMS is high enough), particularly the undertone to synthesis. If you chose that one, when Joker and EDI come out of the ship they have this green cybernetic-looking glow (which is funny considering EDI is already a synthetic). Why put that detail into the scene if not to account for your choice of Synthesis? Or even the colours... but let's not talk about those.

We're also shown other scenes of what happens down on Earth, to the Reapers in the immediate vecinity, to the relays, and to the galaxy as a whole. What do those mean? Those scenes further disconnect the player from the character.

[KevShep]

OdanUrr wrote...

 Those scenes further disconnect the player from the character.

Being "disconnected" is what indoctrination does to a person. This is there "artistic integrity" that Bioware is supporting.

[Golferguy758]

OdanUrr wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

One could argue that those "scenes" are being manifested in Shepards own mind. A hopefulness that his crew/squad is safe... because you know they were just apparently blown to bits. I would also argue that Shep has the biggest attachment to Joker.... and then Liara and Anderson. The reason why we always see them in the slideshow at the end. And then of course Joker being the one to step off the ship first...

Actually, you get Liara, Ashley, or Kaidan, depending on who's your LI. Yeah, I know, whatever happened to every other LI in the game?

Remember the undertones of the scene depicting Shepard's crew making it in one piece (if your EMS is high enough), particularly the undertone to synthesis. If you chose that one, when Joker and EDI come out of the ship they have this green cybernetic-looking glow (which is funny considering EDI is already a synthetic). Why put that detail into the scene if not to account for your choice of Synthesis? Or even the colours... but let's not talk about those.

We're also shown other scenes of what happens down on Earth, to the Reapers in the immediate vecinity, to the relays, and to the galaxy as a whole. What do those mean? Those scenes further disconnect the player from the character.

I think he's referring to the little greyed out slideshow. It shows Liara in front of the monitors, Joker tipping his hat, and Anderson smiling. you always get those three regardless of your LI.

I'd also point out that synthesis made Joker's hat synthetic. I laughed so hard at that. It's alive! 

Modifié par Golferguy758, 18 avril 2012 - 02:32 .

[n00bsauce2010]

OdanUrr wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

One could argue that those "scenes" are being manifested in Shepards own mind. A hopefulness that his crew/squad is safe... because you know they were just apparently blown to bits. I would also argue that Shep has the biggest attachment to Joker.... and then Liara and Anderson. The reason why we always see them in the slideshow at the end. And then of course Joker being the one to step off the ship first...

Actually, you get Liara, Ashley, or Kaidan, depending on who's your LI. Yeah, I know, whatever happened to every other LI in the game?

Remember the undertones of the scene depicting Shepard's crew making it in one piece (if your EMS is high enough), particularly the undertone to synthesis. If you chose that one, when Joker and EDI come out of the ship they have this green cybernetic-looking glow (which is funny considering EDI is already a synthetic). Why put that detail into the scene if not to account for your choice of Synthesis? Or even the colours... but let's not talk about those.

We're also shown other scenes of what happens down on Earth, to the Reapers in the immediate vecinity, to the relays, and to the galaxy as a whole. What do those mean? Those scenes further disconnect the player from the character.

Could also be manifestations within Shepard. If a "god-like" being told you the potential results of your decisions...it isn't ludicrous to think those results could manifest in one's mind as a prediction.

But.. you could argue that  Harbinger could be "implanting" these ideas into Shepards mind. Obviously the control idea had to be planted into TIMs head. And I'm sure he had some kind of thoughts/predictions about how that would be to the benefit of humanity (even though it is a fallacy.)

[OdanUrr]

KevShep wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

KevShep wrote...

BTW, why would it make since to end it like it is if it was the I.T.?

Because everything that happens after Shepard makes his choice is for the benefit of the player and not Shepard. It's there to tell us (the player) what the outcome of our choice was. If indoctrination is complete upon choosing, there's no reason why Harbinger should show Shepard things that he couldn't possibly see anyway. It defeats the purpose of the illusion.

They (Bioware) cant indoctrinate YOUR Shepard without indoctrinating YOU as well! Remember that Mass Effect is a series that is about you and Shepard being the same person.

Yes, yes, but what I'm saying is that there are certain scenes in the game that are not meant for Shepard to see but for the player. For instance, back in ME1, Sovereign and the Geth attack the Citadel while Shepard was still on Ilos. There are times when Shepard and the player are the same person, and times when there's a disconnect so the player can understand the overarching story. In ME3, we are Shepard up to the point we choose but after that, when the .bik movies start playing, we're back to being the player/spectator as opposed to being the player/Shepard.

Am I making any sense?

[Big Bad]

OdanUrr wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

2) So many thing it's hard to remember or list them all. Shepard getting TIM's eyes (which is established canon to be from a Reaper indoctrination device) in both control & synthesis endings. The strange "bolt to the head" warning label next to the vent the kid is on Earth, a warning label we haven't been able to find anywhere else in the game, meaning it was unique to that vent. TIM going from "I don't expect you to understand and I'm certainly not looking for your approval" on Mars to "Because... I need you to believe" on the Citadel. Shepard surviving that ridiculously powerful explosion if the ending was real. The sheer ridiculousness of the synthesis ending from a game with a history of using real science whenever possible and not resorting to nonsensical space magic. If the Reapers' controlling AI part of the Citadel, what the hell was the entire point of Mass Effect 1? I could go on, but...

3) If Sixth Sense was a two-parter and halfway through some people thought Bruce Willis' character was dead and others just thought his wife was a **** for never acknowledging him, it wouldn't just be different valid interpretations. The first group would be right and the second would be wrong. But, re: psychology. You wrote off the dreams as PTSD. You do realize there's more symptoms to PTSD than just nightmares, right? One of the chief symptoms is strong aversion to the thing that traumatized you. That's why the asari that killed Joker's family doesn's want to be around humans and refuses to bathe. That's why Kelly Chambers refuses to come back to the Normandy. So tell me this: when has Shepard ever shied away from Reapers? On that subject, why are the dreams riddled with known indoctrination symptoms, right after Arrival (which was made at the same time as ME3) firmly cemented symptoms manifest in dreams?

2) It's a bit selective about what it tries to explain. For instance, it would explain Shepard having TIM's eyes in the end, but it wouldn't explain how the Catalyst fits into ME1, it just writes him off entirely.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.  Are yout talking about that one or two sentence reference to "beings of light" that is found in the ME1 codex?  If so, I don't think there is any good reason to believe that this is a reference to the Catalyst.

[OdanUrr]

Golferguy758 wrote...

I think he's referring to the little greyed out slideshow. It shows Liara in front of the monitors, Joker tipping his hat, and Anderson smiling. you always get those three regardless of your LI.

I'd also point out that synthesis made Joker's hat synthetic. I laughed so hard at that. It's alive! 

Nope, there are also .bik movies for Ashley and Kaidan.