57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Ravax]

Just pointing out something...

Even on 1, or even 2 year old threads, I have NEVER seen 280 pages... and this is in only 3 DAYS...

[BadlyBrowned]

lavosslayer wrote...

Lambchopz wrote...

Auresta wrote...

Catreina-JTV wrote...

I wanted to bring something up that I have not seen in the 150+ pages of this massive thread I have read. It is more evidence pointing towards the indoctrination theory that I personally have embraced fully:

When you are about to make your choice, notice that going towards Control you never move faster - in fact, you get weaker as evidenced by you FALLING DOWN when trying to actually connect to the control interface. Nevermind the GC smirking, the context, or the conversation - you fall down, weaker for the choice.

Now look at what happens when you choose Destroy - you stop limping, you get your resolve back, the GC disappears the INSTANT that the Destroy device shields/barrier is penetrated (the third or fourth bullet if I recall) - you practically run to the thing, stronger for the choice.

When in the world does this happen? Getting weaker from making one choice, or stronger from making another? Let me refresh your memories - Saren does this exactly when he kills himself. TIM does this exactly when he kills himself.

Just something I have yet to see in this thread (admittedly I have only read 60% of the posts or so)

Someone just said this on this page and I don't think it's strong evidence. If you've seen control and synthesis, you'd know what I mean. 

SYNTHESIS: HE RUNS. AS IF HE WAS NEVER HURT.
CONTROL: HE FIGHTS AGAINST THE PAIN TO GET A HOLD OF THE CONTROLS.

Resolve is in all endings.

edit: I believe you are citing only slightly nuanced differences. Again, in all endings Shepard acts with great resolve and energy.

Yeah. At this point this thread has analyzed every possible proof for this theory. If it is true, then it makes plenty of sense. If not, and BioWare decides to wing it, well, here you go. Free material.

People are REALLY starting to stretch though. Maybe some us are getting TOO into this.

some of us (like myself) have done nothing but read this thread all day for the last 4 days almost...(apart from the 1 hour a day I spend in multiplayer)...I so want this to really be the real deal...Bioware tore me to pieces with the original ending...I must know if I need to prepare my headcannon or begin my worship prep for the greatest game story ever!

Yeah, I find myself having to sort of take a step back. I was rather devestated by the endings and did not want to ever touch Mass Effect again. I do agree that the general principles of the OP make more sense than taking what we were given at face value.

This has sort of given me hope and I do feel like replaying through the game again. Like Shepard says, "without hope, we may as well be machines." 

Modifié par BadlyBrowned, 13 mars 2012 - 07:52 .

[jhubbard9516]

I read this idea, thought about, it, read it again, thought about it some more, realized how insanely awesome it would be if this was biowares plan all along, then had to pick my laptop up off the floor because my nerdboner knocked it off. Please let it be so.

[Urumashi]

For now, i say we've really gone as far as we need to, for those of you who have been at this for days, we thank you. Now someone needs to compile all of this, put it in an easy to read format and post it somewhere so we can all mass email the hell out of bioware and say "either get to work, or pack your bags"

[silentdante]

just wanted to point out to everyone saying you wear N7 armour in the "live" scene, thats actualy your dog tags hanging with the N7 logo on it. well thats what it looks like to me more then a certain set of armour. they probly do this because i wasn't wearing N7 armour when i would have "died" so they just decimate your armour and show you wearing whats underneath.

i would also like to point out this type of ending has been done once before to my knowledge and it was in a comic book series. That Yellow Bastard by frank miller (part of the sin city series) had an ending that stoped with a character death about 3/4 the way through the single issue comic, he ends, has letters pages for about 3-4 pages, then all the sudden after that starts up the comic again with the character defying the death with the word "NO" and then continues on to actualy end the comic. this effect is lost in the trade papaerback, and is a real shame cause at the time that happened, i was taken aback by how excellent that was as a storytelling tool.

i can't think of a movie thats run credits and then had the hero kind of say, NO it doesnt go down like this and then restarts the movie with an epic ending. no game that i know of and no book either, so if someone at bioware read that comic and said to themselves, wow i must do this someday and really create an epic ending to something, then kudos to them, because i would even pay for that DLC.

the ending we have now is fine, it can end with no sense indoctrination or just synthisizing, so people that traded the game in or dont have internet will have an ending to the game, and those that care and will pay or not pay will also have an ending based on shepard waking up and saying, NO! this is not how we go out.

i think in disgust for making me pay for the real ending (if they do go that way) though is that i would make it a point to never buy an EA game new, always either rent or buy used so they never see my money again, because i have no power then with my money and hwile 2 million people may buy the next game anyways, i would not have, and just like shepard standing up for morals or for principle, so will i, even if it doesnt effect things in the long run, it effects my own views.

[krystalevenstar]

lavosslayer wrote...

Lambchopz wrote...

Auresta wrote...

Catreina-JTV wrote...

I wanted to bring something up that I have not seen in the 150+ pages of this massive thread I have read. It is more evidence pointing towards the indoctrination theory that I personally have embraced fully:

When you are about to make your choice, notice that going towards Control you never move faster - in fact, you get weaker as evidenced by you FALLING DOWN when trying to actually connect to the control interface. Nevermind the GC smirking, the context, or the conversation - you fall down, weaker for the choice.

Now look at what happens when you choose Destroy - you stop limping, you get your resolve back, the GC disappears the INSTANT that the Destroy device shields/barrier is penetrated (the third or fourth bullet if I recall) - you practically run to the thing, stronger for the choice.

When in the world does this happen? Getting weaker from making one choice, or stronger from making another? Let me refresh your memories - Saren does this exactly when he kills himself. TIM does this exactly when he kills himself.

Just something I have yet to see in this thread (admittedly I have only read 60% of the posts or so)

Someone just said this on this page and I don't think it's strong evidence. If you've seen control and synthesis, you'd know what I mean. 

SYNTHESIS: HE RUNS. AS IF HE WAS NEVER HURT.
CONTROL: HE FIGHTS AGAINST THE PAIN TO GET A HOLD OF THE CONTROLS.

Resolve is in all endings.

edit: I believe you are citing only slightly nuanced differences. Again, in all endings Shepard acts with great resolve and energy.

Yeah. At this point this thread has analyzed every possible proof for this theory. If it is true, then it makes plenty of sense. If not, and BioWare decides to wing it, well, here you go. Free material.

People are REALLY starting to stretch though. Maybe some us are getting TOO into this.

some of us (like myself) have done nothing but read this thread all day for the last 4 days almost...(apart from the 1 hour a day I spend in multiplayer)...I so want this to really be the real deal...Bioware tore me to pieces with the original ending...I must know if I need to prepare my headcannon or begin my worship prep for the greatest game story ever!

Yeah, aside from sleeping (which I'm about to do.. soon) I've spent the last 4 or so days in this thread too XD

[Gamingtrek12025]

Ravax wrote...

Just pointing out something...

Even on 1, or even 2 year old threads, I have NEVER seen 280 pages... and this is in only 3 DAYS...

Yeah, and the views are through the roof.

[Hedera]

AlphaDormante wrote...

I love the Indoctrination theory a lot, but this has been bothering me. ...if Destroy is the "break free" option, and Control is the "succumb" option, what is Synthesis construed as? More specifically, if Destroy lets you overcome indoctrination and Control lets you submit to it, what are Synthesis' consequences for real Shepard?

Presumably, Synthesis allows the Reapers to indoctrinate EVERYONE.
Real Shepard would probably just become the lead indoctrinatee.  The one who allowed the rest of the galaxy to crumble.  It's really sad, actually.

[JediNg]

You know what else is odd? And this is a minor detail: destroy/red is on the right whilst control/blue is on the left

[Lambchopz]

To clarify, I do want this theory to be true, I just want people to try and stay realistic and rational with the evidence presented.

I certainly don't want anybody to splinter off now that it's gotten so far.

The intention of this thread from the get go has pretty much been to discuss, debate, and at the end of the day "prove" if the ending works and so on and so forth.

But yeah, if it's tiding you over until we get official word to speculate wildly, go for it.

[Auresta]

Omilophile wrote...

Auresta wrote...

My advice to EVERYONE is this:

When you find evidence, find counter evidence and present both sides. It is not enough to say that Shepard gains strength in Destroy. He does, but he also does so in Control and Synthesis. It is not enough to say that the presence of trees on the run down are straight from the dream and thus must mean he is dreaming/hallucinating/indoctrinated. It could be simple oversight AND the presence of ****ed up trees is always in devastated areas.

Presenting both sides reminds us to keep things in perspective and strengthen our argument. I'm tired of seeing people post "evidence" without presenting the other side to look at. If you don't, people bandwagon on the evidence without ever considering the counterargument.

Someone presents the counterargument, it just gets buried.

THIS

Thanks. And quoting because everything gets buried so fastly in here.

[Auresta]

JediNg wrote...

You know what else is odd? And this is a minor detail: destroy/red is on the right whilst control/blue is on the left

Addressed throughout the thread and my BF mentioned this as well. Thanks for bringing it up again for those who missed it, though.

[The Bridgeburner]

Auresta wrote...

My advice to EVERYONE is this:

When you find evidence, find counter evidence and present both sides. It is not enough to say that Shepard gains strength in Destroy. He does, but he also does so in Control and Synthesis. It is not enough to say that the presence of trees on the run down are straight from the dream and thus must mean he is dreaming/hallucinating/indoctrinated. It could be simple oversight AND the presence of ****ed up trees is always in devastated areas.

Presenting both sides reminds us to keep things in perspective and strengthen our argument. I'm tired of seeing people post "evidence" without presenting the other side to look at. If you don't, people bandwagon on the evidence without ever considering the counterargument.

Someone presents the counterargument, it just gets buried.

It depends... not everyone can respond to everything, and most level-headed folk are more apt to chew it over first, or just disregard implausibilities. I due think it's an awesome theory, Indoctrination. But is it what's actually happening... I don't know. But at least I can muddle through some more playthroughs and not feel total disgust at the endings now. That, in and of itself, is something.

[JediNg]

Auresta wrote...

JediNg wrote...

You know what else is odd? And this is a minor detail: destroy/red is on the right whilst control/blue is on the left

Addressed throughout the thread and my BF mentioned this as well. Thanks for bringing it up again for those who missed it, though.

BLAST!

[lavosslayer]

Auresta wrote...

Omilophile wrote...

Auresta wrote...

My advice to EVERYONE is this:

When you find evidence, find counter evidence and present both sides. It is not enough to say that Shepard gains strength in Destroy. He does, but he also does so in Control and Synthesis. It is not enough to say that the presence of trees on the run down are straight from the dream and thus must mean he is dreaming/hallucinating/indoctrinated. It could be simple oversight AND the presence of ****ed up trees is always in devastated areas.

Presenting both sides reminds us to keep things in perspective and strengthen our argument. I'm tired of seeing people post "evidence" without presenting the other side to look at. If you don't, people bandwagon on the evidence without ever considering the counterargument.

Someone presents the counterargument, it just gets buried.

THIS

Thanks. And quoting because everything gets buried so fastly in here.

I agree too...sadly though most people that come in and criticize the idea never provide counterarguements of their own...to be quite honest we need more objective people that can provide solid counters and not come off like a total d-bag when they present them...

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

FIRST!

Edit: Damn... almost 

Modifié par SomeoneStoleMyName, 13 mars 2012 - 07:56 .

[Urumashi]

God this all makes so much sense now, one of the bioware employees before launch was quoted on something to the tune of "The ending will make a lot of people angry" and this was most definitely the case, people like...hatequoted this guy after finishing the game but now its just awesome. The guy was saying that they wanted us to get angry, they wanted us to question the reality set before us. If this stuff turns out to be true, my faith in bioware is going to come back 10 fold.

[Auresta]

The Bridgeburner wrote...

Auresta wrote...

My advice to EVERYONE is this:

When you find evidence, find counter evidence and present both sides. It is not enough to say that Shepard gains strength in Destroy. He does, but he also does so in Control and Synthesis. It is not enough to say that the presence of trees on the run down are straight from the dream and thus must mean he is dreaming/hallucinating/indoctrinated. It could be simple oversight AND the presence of ****ed up trees is always in devastated areas.

Presenting both sides reminds us to keep things in perspective and strengthen our argument. I'm tired of seeing people post "evidence" without presenting the other side to look at. If you don't, people bandwagon on the evidence without ever considering the counterargument.

Someone presents the counterargument, it just gets buried.

It depends... not everyone can respond to everything, and most level-headed folk are more apt to chew it over first, or just disregard implausibilities. I due think it's an awesome theory, Indoctrination. But is it what's actually happening... I don't know. But at least I can muddle through some more playthroughs and not feel total disgust at the endings now. That, in and of itself, is something.

We're becoming a hivemind. We have to keep this in mind regardless. Bandwagoning on the theory just to comfort yourself is flawed. I love this theory, I really do and I really do believe in it, but I always try to present both sides or try to attack "evidence" because if this is true, it needs equal consideration from both sides.

[matchboxmatt]

cgrimm54 wrote...

AlphaDormante wrote...

I love the Indoctrination theory a lot, but this has been bothering me. ...if Destroy is the "break free" option, and Control is the "succumb" option, what is Synthesis construed as? More specifically, if Destroy lets you overcome indoctrination and Control lets you submit to it, what are Synthesis' consequences for real Shepard?

Presumably, Synthesis allows the Reapers to indoctrinate EVERYONE.
Real Shepard would probably just become the lead indoctrinatee.  The one who allowed the rest of the galaxy to crumble.  It's really sad, actually.

Synthesis is basically what Saren did - he accepted the "upgrades" of the Reapers thinking he was advancing his species. Either way, to choose Control or Synthesis is to willingly allow the Reapers to live, and therefore completing the process of indoctrination. 

[AlphaDormante]

cgrimm54 wrote...

AlphaDormante wrote...

I love the Indoctrination theory a lot, but this has been bothering me. ...if Destroy is the "break free" option, and Control is the "succumb" option, what is Synthesis construed as? More specifically, if Destroy lets you overcome indoctrination and Control lets you submit to it, what are Synthesis' consequences for real Shepard?

Presumably, Synthesis allows the Reapers to indoctrinate EVERYONE.
Real Shepard would probably just become the lead indoctrinatee.  The one who allowed the rest of the galaxy to crumble.  It's really sad, actually.

Ouch...but you know, keeping in mind with this theory, it makes sense. That stupid Guardian McStarChild praised the Synthesis option quite a bit.

[Tallis Lucienis]

AlphaDormante wrote...

I love the Indoctrination theory a lot, but this has been bothering me. ...if Destroy is the "break free" option, and Control is the "succumb" option, what is Synthesis construed as? More specifically, if Destroy lets you overcome indoctrination and Control lets you submit to it, what are Synthesis' consequences for real Shepard?

Acceptance of the " Salvation through annhilation" Saren Arterius mindset. aka Harvesting.

[CreepingGeth]

Urumashi wrote...

God this all makes so much sense now, one of the bioware employees before launch was quoted on something to the tune of "The ending will make a lot of people angry" and this was most definitely the case, people like...hatequoted this guy after finishing the game but now its just awesome. The guy was saying that they wanted us to get angry, they wanted us to question the reality set before us. If this stuff turns out to be true, my faith in bioware is going to come back 10 fold.

Someone find this quote.

[Sl4sh3r]

Gamingtrek12025 wrote...

Ravax wrote...

Just pointing out something...

Even on 1, or even 2 year old threads, I have NEVER seen 280 pages... and this is in only 3 DAYS...

Yeah, and the views are through the roof.

Have you guys seen the 900 page thread to change the ending? o_O

[cubie_hole7]

Elidor109 wrote...

cubie_hole7 wrote...

Elidor109 wrote...

Didn't seem to work properly, click this and zoom in for Gibbed's view.

http://imageshack.us...8/66456249.png/

For those that can't read/see the image.  It shows were a 'finished' game save file has three categorizations:

1. Not finished
2. Out in a blaze of glory
3. Lived to fight again   <<<<<=======

It's rather telling that there is such a designation for a final game.  Seems like all that would be needed for the new game+ is either a 'not finished' or 'finished' designation.  Of course, if dlc is going to finish the ending, the dlc needs to know how the indoctrination went.  Good find.

Yeah, I think it's pretty daming evidence.

I agree.  It's literally in the game code.  No need to be vague and mysterious there.  It's basically a smoking gun that the game isn't over.

[Tygur]

silentdante wrote...

just wanted to point out to everyone saying you wear N7 armour in the "live" scene, thats actualy your dog tags hanging with the N7 logo on it. well thats what it looks like to me more then a certain set of armour. they probly do this because i wasn't wearing N7 armour when i would have "died" so they just decimate your armour and show you wearing whats underneath.

I distictly remember a white/silver suit with the red shoulder stripe and a big N7 on it on my living Shep scene. Looked like the suit was in pretty dang good condition, not beat up at all. I don't remember seeing any dog tags at all. When I saw the ones posted in the thread with dark armor I was very confused.