57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Golferguy758]

 

[Doctoglethorpe]

OP just made it a good ending, omfg. 

[themidz]

Zaknaberrnon wrote...

All I can do is hope against hope. this tweet from michael Gamble fills me with just that:

Michael Gamble ‏ @GambleMike
Hardest. Day. Ever. Seriously, if you people knew all the stuff we are planning...you'd, we'll - hold onto your copy of me3 forever.

https://twitter.com/#!/GambleMike

he also said that, which can give us hope:

Michael Gamble ‏ @GambleMike 
"By the way... I am reading all of your thoughts. Just not ready to comment yet."

Modifié par themidz, 12 mars 2012 - 04:02 .

[kyrieee]

Fledgey wrote...

The biggest hint for me is those dream trees. All of the dream sequences feature that creepy forest with the weird, not-quite-right trees. As you careen down the hill towards the conduit, the path is filled with death and lasers and crazy **** but certainly not trees. And as soon as you wake back up from the hit, everything has changed somewhat. The scenery is not what it should be, bodies are in weird places, magic gun, weird noises, and TREES APPEARED OUT OF NOWHERE. The same damn trees from your dreams. Explain that.

The trees were there before
You can see them to the right at 2:10

[DrowNoble]

Well let's assume that it was all a hallucination. The Reapers won then and that would be an even worse ending than the mess we already have.

Shephard snaps out of it in the rubble since he didn't get to the beam, yet Harbinger is like 100 ft away and the Reapers are mauling the galactic forces. So even if Shephard isn't about to be squashed or shot by Harbinger, he's essentially down for the count. Catalyst didn't fire so the Reapers are going to finish mopping up the fleets and Earth is devastated.

It's a nice theory, yet doesn't make the ending any better. If anything, it makes more sense but it's more bleak.

[thenxtmarvlhero]

Ok, something else, has anybody noticed how the room's layout is strikingly similar to the layout of the Crew's Quarters floor on the Normandy? The layout almost matches up perfectly, with the destroy path heading to the Medbay/ AI core, the synthesize heading to the guns, and the control heading to the XO's quarters. I doubt it means anything, but it just seems a bit interesting.

[nranola]

 I'm buying in on this theory. It would explain why the Catalyst took form of the child, and why they had bothered to include all those dream sequences. Could have simply been for dramatic effect, but looking at all the evidence presented in the OP... there had to be a reason. It's just unbelievable thinking that BioWare would get sloppy with the endings.

Also, seeing a room filled with human remains "just like the Collector Base" another indication that it's all in Shepard's head?

If what we're speculating is true... my god. BioWare, you brilliant bastards.

[underthumb]

If this theory were true, why would the star child give Shepard an option that destroys the reapers? Why not just say that such an option does not exist, and tell Shepard to take synthesis or control?

Modifié par underthumb, 12 mars 2012 - 04:06 .

[LenabotSE]

If their strategy was to release a "proper" ending after the game had been release in all regions -- the only way to prevent a genuine ending leak -- then that was a massive gamble. Same if they had to push an unfinished game out due to EA's release schedule and figured they could do a proper ending later. Due to the endings, people could be trading in their games out of rage (which is an overreaction, but possible), or they could have canceled their orders.

Once traded in, they aren't getting that game back without dropping a bunch of cash again. Fury. And while a canceled order can be undone easily enough, it still involves people not getting the game when they originally intended to get it. And if this is the case, then they should have given players a BIG notice about something on the immediate horizon.

Something free, 'cause I ain't payin' for the actual end to my game. Youtube'd if that's the case.

[humes spork]

kyrieee wrote...

The trees were there before
You can see them to the right at 2:10

Hey, the screen gets whacky when the Reaper Destroyer speaks, too. Cool. I didn't notice that in my first playthrough.

And, I didn't see the trees in that sequence, nor on the YT video. At least, the one that's close to Shepard after s/he wakes up isn't there at all.

[Milvushina]

Fledgey wrote...

1. The indoctrinated theory states that everything after harby's laser doesn't actually happen.
2. Ditto^
3. Shepard isn't indoctrinated YET. She's just in the process of being indoctrinated. Star wizard land represents the last step, and the two left endings are very self righteous and I don't know about you, but my shep doesn't think she can make decisions for the entire galaxy. She's just a soldier. Those endings represent giving in to the motivations of saren and TIM and giving yourself to the reapers..
4. Like I said, shepard is not yet indoctrinated. They're just working on it.

Same here... If you destroy the Reapers, the galaxy gets a chance to learn and avoid the cycle of synthetic/organic conflict by its own free will.  The two left paths seems like following the steps of Saren or TIM.

I guess the thoery could be right if it says everything after the laser is an illusion.  It's just that didn't seem to fit in my game, since I think Shepard burned alive before I got that cutscene.  But I see what you mean.  I now know there is an ending where Shepard might survive.  Be nice if that Normandy crash scene was a hallucination. 

[thenxtmarvlhero]

underthumb wrote...

If this theory were true, why would the star child give Shepard an option that destroys the reapers? Why not just say that such an option does not exist, and tell Shepard to take synthesis or control?

Because it's not an option to destroy the Reapers. If it's all a hallucination from the indoctrination, then the option to "destroy" the Reapers is just Shep holding onto his/her last shred of him/herself and resisting. The other two options are there to complete the indoctrination, allowing the Reaper's to assume control of Shep.

[Rifneno]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

The amount of faith and belief in this theory is staggering to be honest. I've never seen straw grasping that literally suggesting any developer would leave the ending out of the game and then go "Haha, here's the real ending 3 months later" without prior warning. It's bad business and the reaction would be huge. What about players who don't connect their consoles to the internet for various reasons? No ending for them unless they want to buy a hard disc (would not be free, production costs).

As much as I'd like a better ending under the very slim chance this turned out to be true I'd have to do my first developer boycott. I can't support practices like that.

And let's not forget the scene with the grandfather/child plays in every single ending which implies very heavily the reapers are defeated or turned away in every single ending.

It's 2012.  Cannibals clad in loin cloths living in the Brazilian rainforests have streaming Netflix accounts that they use to watch Law & Order when they're preparing a sacrifice to the sun so it won't get angry.  I don't know about the console versions but the PC version states in bold print that you must have Internet.  I'm not saying that's proof of any DLC, Dragon Age 2 had the same thing and, like ME3, it was because the game would phone home and make sure the release date had passed.  I don't know if console versions do the same.  Doesn't matter I suppose, because it's mostly a legal issue and legally people ARE getting the game even if there's a twist to be delivered via DLC.

Heaven forbid they try something bold and give us a good twist by giving us all these subtle clues and letting us stew over it for a week or two.  People have always complained that the PC doesn't deal with things like indoctrination or demonic coercion in Dragon Age.  And the reason the PC is always "immune" to those things is because there's no good way to emulate them in a video game.  This, however, would be an excellent way of attempting it.  If we pick the wrong choice and it gives us a "game over" screen then we just reload and pick the right one.  No biggie and it's forgotten about in 5 seconds.  If they do it this way, and we think it's real only for them to tell us in a while "here's the rest of it, and anyone whose Shepard didn't pick destroy lost the battle of will to indoctrination" then it has some impact.  Granted it's still the same in the end: we go back and pick the right option, but now we get a much better experience of what it's like to fight off the indoctrination than simply picking "(Fight off indoctrination)" from a command menu.

[Fledgey]

humes spork wrote...

kyrieee wrote...

The trees were there before
You can see them to the right at 2:10

Hey, the screen gets whacky when the Reaper Destroyer speaks, too. Cool. I didn't notice that in my first playthrough.

And, I didn't see the trees in that sequence, nor on the YT video. At least, the one that's close to Shepard after s/he wakes up isn't there at all.

That is odd. I think it ocurred to me but it didn't stick because I wasn't in the right mindset. That visual effect isn't used anywhere else ever. It was fully intentional. Maybe to give a sense of scale? It seems way too fight-clubby to be just to make it look more impressive in size though.

[humes spork]

LenabotSE wrote...

Once traded in, they aren't getting that game back without dropping a bunch of cash again. Fury. And while a canceled order can be undone easily enough, it still involves people not getting the game when they originally intended to get it. And if this is the case, then they should have given players a BIG notice about something on the immediate horizon.

EA really doesn't like the resale market. Something like this would be perfectly in-line with their desire to curb it as much as possible, extended even to punishing players who participate in it.

[hismastersvoice]

underthumb wrote...

If this theory were true, why would the star child give Shepard an option that destroys the reapers? Why not just say that such an option does not exist, and tell Shepard to take synthesis or control?

There is no starpunk. All of this was Shepard's mind trying to cope with the indoctrination process. Control and synthesis options come from the Reaper infuence and the destruction option was Shepard's way out of it.

Modifié par hismastersvoice, 12 mars 2012 - 04:14 .

[Anthraxius Omega]

underthumb wrote...

If this theory were true, why would the star child give Shepard an option that destroys the reapers? Why not just say that such an option does not exist, and tell Shepard to take synthesis or control?

Becasue i belive this sequence is still a fight of deception... starchild tries to lure shepard away from his believes,... if Shepard is adamant with his belief system, he rejects star childs "paragon" and "synthesis" option... and turns renegade, as in rejecting star child.

[Dormin]

If it was Indoctrination then there should have been a fourth option ala Deus Ex which they were clearly influnenced by, where upon my shooting of the star child and attempt to walk away would also break indoctrination.

[underthumb]

But it's not clear how any but the most devoted of fans (a small minority) would piece it all together on their own. They would essentially be telling millions of fans "you failed, unless you spent a bunch of time piecing together this crazy ass theory!" That's not good design. That's trolling.

[DangerSandler]

Milvushina wrote...

I don't know. I can't decide. When I got there, my thought process was something like, "Dammit, I came all this way for some dead Reapers, and I'm not going to believe all our work and sacrifice was misguided!" I destroyed the Reapers and saved Earth, but Shep apparently died.

But I have to admit, I was very confused at the end and I didn't even know if it was me or Shepard that was confused. I felt like there was no concrete evidence of the "right" decision. It would have to be an act of faith. Do you believe that at the last moment, Shepard learned something that threw everything in a new light, and despite the fact that others before her had thought this, she was right? Or do you believe that you were on the right path all along and just need to stick it out till the end?

I'm leaning toward indoctrination, but perhaps because it gives me a sense of victory I wouldn't have otherwise. I did Control later, just to see it. The evidence for indoctrination:

1. It's odd that Shepard never had a problem with indoctrination...that we know of
2. According to the Codex, the ghost-child meets the description of a Reaper manipulating you
3. Appropriate for the Reapers to make a last ditch attempt to stop you
4. Destroying the Reapers is suddenly the short-sighted, "Renegade" option.
5. Doing what you've been fighting against all along is suddenly the altruistic, "Paragon" option.
6. Synthesis sounds strangely like Saren with his forging an alliance between synthetics and organics, and Control sounds like TIM's delusion. Both wrong paths as we have seen in 1 and 2.
7. It's possible to make both Saren and TIM see their delusions at the end. Nice touch if the thing that's so special about Shep is that she can do that on her own.

Arguments against it:
1. Apparently, Control does work for Shepard. The Reapers back off.
2. Synthesis makes the Reapers back off and we see our organic and synthetic friends safe.
3. Shepard doesn't really look indoctrinated.
4. The Prothean VI that it's so sensitive about "the indoctrinated" sees Shep as an ally.

Shepard DID have issues with indoctrination though. Remember after Arrival? He said that he was having nightmares/dreams/visions.

[lil_89]

Did anyone figure out what makes the GodChild say: "most of your technology, including the reapers" to some people and not to others?

[humes spork]

thenxtmarvlhero wrote...

Because it's not an option to destroy the Reapers. If it's all a hallucination from the indoctrination, then the option to "destroy" the Reapers is just Shep holding onto his/her last shred of him/herself and resisting. The other two options are there to complete the indoctrination, allowing the Reaper's to assume control of Shep.

Even by this theory, every ending has Shepard maintaining their will.

Control has Shepard not using the Reapers for personal ends like TIM and those who came before him in previous cycles -- Shepad sends them a singular order to GTFO, something an Indoctrinated individual would not do.

Merge has Shepard combining synthetic and organic life, but in doing so all life rather than 'sufficiently advanced civilizations'  as well as synthetics, and maintaining their individuality, uniqueness, and form. That directly subverts the Reapers' plans, and precludes their role in the cycle entirely because there is no longer a distinction between synthetic and organic life.

In all three of the endings the Reapers are defeated or their goals averted. None of them has an outcome pursuant to that which an Indoctrinated individual would will -- to continue the cycle one way or another.

[WizenSlinky0]

Rifneno wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

The amount of faith and belief in this theory is staggering to be honest. I've never seen straw grasping that literally suggesting any developer would leave the ending out of the game and then go "Haha, here's the real ending 3 months later" without prior warning. It's bad business and the reaction would be huge. What about players who don't connect their consoles to the internet for various reasons? No ending for them unless they want to buy a hard disc (would not be free, production costs).

As much as I'd like a better ending under the very slim chance this turned out to be true I'd have to do my first developer boycott. I can't support practices like that.

And let's not forget the scene with the grandfather/child plays in every single ending which implies very heavily the reapers are defeated or turned away in every single ending.

It's 2012.  Cannibals clad in loin cloths living in the Brazilian rainforests have streaming Netflix accounts that they use to watch Law & Order when they're preparing a sacrifice to the sun so it won't get angry.  I don't know about the console versions but the PC version states in bold print that you must have Internet.  I'm not saying that's proof of any DLC, Dragon Age 2 had the same thing and, like ME3, it was because the game would phone home and make sure the release date had passed.  I don't know if console versions do the same.  Doesn't matter I suppose, because it's mostly a legal issue and legally people ARE getting the game even if there's a twist to be delivered via DLC.

Heaven forbid they try something bold and give us a good twist by giving us all these subtle clues and letting us stew over it for a week or two.  People have always complained that the PC doesn't deal with things like indoctrination or demonic coercion in Dragon Age.  And the reason the PC is always "immune" to those things is because there's no good way to emulate them in a video game.  This, however, would be an excellent way of attempting it.  If we pick the wrong choice and it gives us a "game over" screen then we just reload and pick the right one.  No biggie and it's forgotten about in 5 seconds.  If they do it this way, and we think it's real only for them to tell us in a while "here's the rest of it, and anyone whose Shepard didn't pick destroy lost the battle of will to indoctrination" then it has some impact.  Granted it's still the same in the end: we go back and pick the right option, but now we get a much better experience of what it's like to fight off the indoctrination than simply picking "(Fight off indoctrination)" from a command menu.

It doesn't matter that it would be a better ending. I'm not disputing that. Consoles do not check for internet connection. You can play any single-player game offline without ever touching the internet, mass effect 3 included. It is not always feasible for people to connect their 360's or they may not even want to. If this was a PC only game I'd say it'd probably be a far more likely scenario. But consoles make up a big portion of sales and this theory that the ending is planned to come later...it's a terrible way to treat consumers. Bold? You're legitmately selling your product in an incomplete state that only a portion (no matter how large) will potentially have access to. Yeah I'd say screwing over consumers like that is certainly bold.

On top of that microsoft heavily discourages free DLC. I see developers talking about it all the time. The witcher 2 on 360 is likely to offer paid DLC when PC gets it for free. Which is fine when the DLC isn't the ACTUAL ENDING. It would be blatant exploitation of the fanbase.

[Anthraxius Omega]

hismastersvoice wrote...

underthumb wrote...

If this theory were true, why would the star child give Shepard an option that destroys the reapers? Why not just say that such an option does not exist, and tell Shepard to take synthesis or control?

There is no starpunk. All of this was Shepard's mind trying to cope with the indoctrination process. Control and synthesis options come from the Reaper infuence and the destruction option was Shepard's way out of it.

Agreed. I mentioned before, that if a Star child (Catalyst) existed in the Citadel, there would be no need to activate Sovereign in ME1. As such a powerfull being would for sure be able to open the Citadel relay.

[kyrieee]

humes spork wrote...

kyrieee wrote...

The trees were there before
You can see them to the right at 2:10

Hey, the screen gets whacky when the Reaper Destroyer speaks, too. Cool. I didn't notice that in my first playthrough.

And, I didn't see the trees in that sequence, nor on the YT video. At least, the one that's close to Shepard after s/he wakes up isn't there at all.

No, I don't see that specific tree either, but it's not like a whole forest.
I think it's a dream / hallucination but not because there's like 1 or 2 trees there.

They probably just built a new map that's different from the one where you're storming down the hill.