57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Miss Vader]

Just wanted people to keep in mind- to help support this theory- that at the very end, the child talking to the stargazer asks for another Shep story and the stargazer responds with an 'ok one more story'!

One more story people! Shep isn't done yet

[BlackDragonBane]

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 would be the most brilliant stunt a video game developer could ever pull if true and executed correctly. The devs have been strangely silent on their twitters the past couple of days and from what I've seen, not even active on the forum. This just doesn't feel right if they were just gonna go 'here's the end, hope you enjoyed cause we don't care'

Something is brewing and they're letting the fanbase stew. Everyday more and more people complete the game and jon the masses in either theorycrafting or raging. There's no way they couldn't have had some sort of prediction of the fanbase's reaction on this.

[humes spork]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Why EA wouldn't screw over its fanbase by forcing technological improvement upon them yadda yadda...

I play on a standard definition TV. Want to tell me that EA doesn't actively screw over people who are "behind the curve on technology and need to get with the times"?

[Milvushina]

underthumb wrote...

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.

I don't know.  Pulling the player into indoctrination like that is breaking down the fourth wall, which might not dawn on everyone, but it doesn't really require piecing together a detailed theory.  You're being told that your goal, destroying them, is actually the most harmful and that your indoctrinated enemies were on the right track with their ideas of control or teaming up.  I didn't think much further than that until I read other people's ideas later, but that was enough for me to wonder whether Shepard was thinking straight.   

[xeNNN]

if this actually true and they end up giving us the real ending with a DLC and it has a happy ending in it then i will be beyond happy.

[Milvushina]

DangerSandler wrote...

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

Was that only in the Arrival DLC?  I didn't play that one ...   :\\

[humes spork]

kyrieee wrote...

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

Why on Earth would they do that if they want to mimic Shepard just being shell-shocked by Harbinger's blast? Just add a blur filter and some "ringing ears" background audio and not waste time with making a new asset.

It's pretty obvious the white-out after Shepard's hit is a cunningly-disguised loading screen.

[BlackDragonBane]

Milvushina wrote...

DangerSandler wrote...

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

Was that only in the Arrival DLC?  I didn't play that one ...   :

My only problem with Arrival is the fact that not everyone, myself included, actually have played it yet, so headcanon for people using the indoctrination theory would be varied. Some Shepards would be more exposed to indoctrination than others.

[WizenSlinky0]

humes spork wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

Why EA wouldn't screw over its fanbase by forcing technological improvement upon them yadda yadda...

I play on a standard definition TV. Want to tell me that EA doesn't actively screw over people who are "behind the curve on technology and need to get with the times"?

*sigh* I'm not talking about EA regardless if they now own Bioware. Nor am I even debating whether or not being screwed over is possible or not. It's always possible.

I'm just outright suggesting this would not be a brilliant move. It would be a terrible, terrible move from a consumer perspective. Outright devious and deceptive bordering on cruel.

[vertibird1]

If it was a hallucination then what about the Normandy on the tropical planet? it kinda looks like Bioware intended it to be a real and final ending which sucks

[Milvushina]

humes spork wrote...

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.

Agree, but some say the successful Control and Merge endings are also a hallucination to make Shepard believe the Reapers are beaten.  While possible, to me that's really the weakest part of the indoctrination ending theory.

[Anthraxius Omega]

BlackDragonBane wrote...

My only problem with Arrival is the fact that not everyone, myself included, actually have played it yet, so headcanon for people using the indoctrination theory would be varied. Some Shepards would be more exposed to indoctrination than others.

I believe even if you didnt play the Arrival DLC, it is assumed you finished it nevertheless...

[Lugaidster]

underthumb wrote...

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.

It's not the first time a game has a convoluted and hard to get to ending. Granted this type of "trolling", if you will, is more associated with JRPGs, however, it's not unseen. The only thing new here is the delay.

Cheers.

[Daverid]

humes spork wrote...

Daverid wrote...

I have followed Unreality Mag for the last year or more ..

AND GOD BLESS YOU PAUL TASSI FOR WRITING FOR FORBES NOW AND WRITING THIS UP

www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/03/12/how-bioware-could-find-redemption-using-mass-effect-3/

I love him even more now (In a Non-Shepard/Cortez way of course )

I still don't quite understand with how everyone's up in arms about Javik's assets being on-disc.

Assets for both Zaeed and Kasumi were in the ME2 discs/installation too, the former of which was free DLC via Cerberus network and the latter paid. People had dug around in ME2's code and unlocked Kasumi before her DLC was even announced (in fact, that's what caused BW to announce her DLC early) -- her shadow strike and flash bang behavior were buggy, she had no voice and a placeholder model, but she was there and she worked. The same actually goes for Shale, who was originally intended to be a companion but when they couldn't work the bugs out of the character by the time the game went gold they decided to make her a DLC character free to retail purchasers (Shale's assets were also in the retail game files).

I don't really give 2 craps about the Day 1 DLC stuff ... It's not why I linked the Article .. More importantly it's to show that some of these Internet Sites and Reviewers have the Balls to not be paid off like IGN and release proper statements about how the series ended .. Their Opinions and Ours .. This is creating more publicity for us and it's an amazing thing to see happen.

[humes spork]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

I'm just outright suggesting this would not be a brilliant move. It would be a terrible, terrible move from a consumer perspective.

Well, so is forcing the game to run in high def even for players on standard def sets, so the game is either letterboxed or the left and right sides are cut off, or both, and causing on-screen text to be unreadable. Whether you're talking about EA or not, it's still true they forced that dook down their developers' throats, just like online passes. Since they have final say on matters like this, like it or not the publisher is still a necessary factor for discussion on marketing and release decisions like something like this would inevitably be.

[MilesNais]

I'll chime in with my two cents... For me, hallucination or ind had to begin way earlier than Earth deployment. Reason for it is BIG ( for me) hole in the finale of Cerberus HQ assault mission. I\\m no military strategist, esp. when in involves hell of unknowns in sci-fi, universe, but... what it takes to mobilize the fleet that is already in action? A day, two, week at max.From inside the game it seems like 5th fleet was already "on call" when Shep gives the word to begin. So... Shep arrives at HQ, crash-lands in hangars and so on. In going through the base S/he gave Hacket weapons-free for the fleet. Judging from how much of inside structure just ONE misderected fighter had devasted.. how much time the base can withstand simultaneous fire of WHOLE FLEET? Minutes, at best. Armor and shields, granted, but hell if Hackett was limiting fire than he knew that weapons-free would vaporize the station in minutes. NOT enough to go thorough remaining path to Ops fighting off scores of soldiers,, chat with Tim take down Leng, chat with Prothean VI and leave. NO damn way. Next. The whole operation in HQ HAD to be a haste, no more than a n hour. And someone (Prothean VI) telling me that Reapers just came over to the Citadel and just took it to Earth in their proverbial pocket? Within an hour? Really? I know that Alliance HQ is not on the Citadel but surely as political center and central node of ALL transportation lines the Citadel HAD to have a VERY strong military defence. Reapers came absolutely undetected ( during war, when any and all survelliance is on its fullest), came through the relays ( which citadel has the ability to lock out) and just took it away ( when it could close arms and simply shut down all systems - go open it from outside. I do understand that it is of Reaper making, but hey, take such an object over within such a short time with guaranteed militaary resistance is plainly impossible. Everyone remember, how big Citadel was compared to Sovereign? As far as I know, station has no thrusters or mass effect core to speak of. as engine, so it should be taken in tow by what- a hundred or so Reaper dreadnoughts? Is there enough in existence? And organics intel didnt noticed movement of such huge a force? I know TiM migh help them from inside but after Sarten and coup the Csec SHOULD\\ve been on non-stop red alert. Thats for Citadel. Plus. I didn\\t go through game yet, but. How the hell the ENTIRE squad arrived at Earth? Arrived with Hammer? Maybe, they weren\\t in the shuttle driven by Cortez. And how the hell they got back to Normandy if it hasn\\t touched down??!! That\\s all. Maybe it was already said, but still.

[WizenSlinky0]

Milvushina wrote...

humes spork wrote...

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.

Agree, but some say the successful Control and Merge endings are also a hallucination to make Shepard believe the Reapers are beaten.  While possible, to me that's really the weakest part of the indoctrination ending theory.

For you maybe. The weakest part for me would have to be the scene with the old man and the kid which plays for all three endings. If it was a hallucination to make shepard feel they had a future or some such then it wouldn't have played for the destroy ending.

It doesn't give the feeling of a dream sequence, either. At least Shepard's treck after waking up in london has a groggy what's going on feeling. The ending scene doesn't.

humes spork wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

I'm
just outright suggesting this would not be a brilliant move. It would
be a terrible, terrible move from a consumer perspective.

Well,
so is forcing the game to run in high def even for players on standard
def sets, so the game is either letterboxed or the left and right sides
are cut off, or both, and causing on-screen text to be unreadable.
Whether you're talking about EA or not, it's still true they forced that
dook down their developers' throats, just like online passes. Since
they have final say on matters like this, like it or not the publisher
is still a necessary factor for discussion on marketing and release
decisions like something like this would inevitably be.

What does this...have to do...with anything? I'm sorry they made the game terrible for your TV? 

I'm really not understanding the point here. The matters do not seem comparable to me.

Modifié par WizenSlinky0, 12 mars 2012 - 04:31 .

[humes spork]

Milvushina wrote...

While possible, to me that's really the weakest part of the indoctrination ending theory.

Yeah, that's what I'm getting at. The people pushing destroy as the only "correct" ending are making the assumption that self-sacrifice is an act of submission.

[Goddy10]

humes spork wrote...

Milvushina wrote...

While possible, to me that's really the weakest part of the indoctrination ending theory.

Yeah, that's what I'm getting at. The people pushing destroy as the only "correct" ending are making the assumption that self-sacrifice is an act of submission.

It is an act of submission if it is to guarantee the Reapers continued existence. They have never been a species that can be rationalised with.

[Bigdoser]

Goddy10 wrote...

humes spork wrote...

Milvushina wrote...

While possible, to me that's really the weakest part of the indoctrination ending theory.

Yeah, that's what I'm getting at. The people pushing destroy as the only "correct" ending are making the assumption that self-sacrifice is an act of submission.

It is an act of submission if it is to guarantee the Reapers continued existence. They have never been a species that can be rationalised with.

Yup as renegade shepard says to TIM comprimising or working with the reapers in any form is a sure fire way to get yourself indoctrinated. So I see control and synthesis as comprimising with them I think legion would actually approve of the destroy ending if you follow his reasoning if you blow up the collector base. 

Modifié par Bigdoser, 12 mars 2012 - 04:38 .

[Doctoglethorpe]

What if indoctrination has to be voluntary? What if its like an inception theory, for the indoctrination to truly take hold you have to accept it, to let it in. The ending scene could merely be entirely metaphorical put into a literal visualization for the sake of making it recognizable for a video game audience. It could be a visualization of the psychological moment where Shepard is being persuaded into accepting the indoctrination, but as the inception theory would works it cannot be forced it must be a choice you make that those trying to control you must not just try to trick you into believing, butto persuade you to truly believe it, which is what it seems to be doing with all the visual and spoken ques.

This could also possibly explain why it took so long for TIM to become fully indoctrinated. What if for the past years hes been struggling with that choice unable to make up his mind and doing every thing he can to create his own choice, but finally come ME3 his will breaks and he makes his choice, and that choice is control. The same choice we had.

Just more theoretical **** to add to this thread. Hah.

Modifié par Doctor Moustache, 12 mars 2012 - 04:40 .

[CrasVox]

One thing that crossed my mind:

If it is all hallucination, or the visual depiction of Shep's mind battling the attempt to indoctrinate him, wouldn't then the DESTROY option be the last unlocked? If you gather the highest war assets you can, you unlock the SYNTHESIS (garbage) option instead. A horrid idea, that never seemed like a viable choice in my first encounter with the ending. I would think DESTROY would be the last one.

Don't have enough war assets, then you ask "How do I destroy the reapers?" "You can't, you are not strong enough." Get enough, "Or you could destroy us, like you always wanted to."

[Dormin]

But why didn't I have the option which was my first thought, which was to reject the Star Child entirely?!

Modifié par Dormin, 12 mars 2012 - 04:41 .

[Devbo22]

I had a dream last night that I beat ME3 again and there were a lot more cutscenes at the end. Was I hallucinating the first time around?

[LenabotSE]

Arrival is canon - whether you played the DLC or not. That's why Shepard's on trial to begin with. The game references it a few times. Overlord and Shadow Broker are also canon if you didn't play them, just without Shepard's involvement.

Modifié par LenabotSE, 12 mars 2012 - 04:41 .