Ce sujet est fermé
Tsantilas wrote...
Ok so since people prefer to dismiss my arguments as trolling, I'm going to put aside for a moment that this is all just theory and has no hard proof showing that it's in any way plausible. Here are some questions for you:
If you are the catalyst, and you finally manage to indoctrinate Shepard, why give him the option to destroy the reapers? "Oh but if he didn't present the option, Shepard wouldn't buy his scheme". This whole theory is based upon the principle that the Catalyst is lying to Shepard in order to deceive him and make him choose synthesis or control right? Those are the supposed "bad endings". So if the Catalyst is lying to him, the logical thought is that the option to destroy the reapers is also a lie, and instead causes some other event to happen that is part of the catalyst's plans. If you have your enemy captured in a trap, you don't give him the option to escape it. It makes more sense to say "If you choose door number 1, you can escape this place and win" but in fact door number 1 leads him right into your trap. I doubt some super intelligent god AI wizard is so stupid to give Shepard the option to "win".
Indoctrination takes place inside Shepard's mind. Shepard's main focus is to destroy the Reapers so this option will ALWAYS be there. Presenting the Synergy and Control option is the Reapers' attempt to fully indoctrinate Shepard. And they are rather tempting compared to the main goal Shepard has had all along which was destruction of the Reapers. Not giving in to the temptation, resisting it and going through with the original plan to destroy the Repers, is how Shepard breaks free from the indoctrination attempt.
Then there's also the issue of it being indoctrination from a storytelling point of view. Nowhere in the game has it explicitly stated that Shepard has ever been indoctrinated or partially indoctrinated. In fact it is stated several times by the Prothean VI that he is NOT indoctrinated. To this you guys are saying "well he might not be fully indoctrinated" or "Cerberus disabled the detection protocol". As far as plot devices go, there's no point in the Prothean VI saying "You are attempting to recover me from indoctrinated forces" unless it means that it can still detect indoctrination but has just been hacked/bypassed so that Cerberus can extract information, and that Shepard hasn't himself been indoctrinated.
We encounter this VI on Thessia for the first time, where it is hidden in the Prothean beacon. We uncover it and Cerberus takes it from us (Kai Leng, the guy who's indoctrinated) The second and LAST time we meet the VI is on the Cerberus station where it has been hacked already and all information has gotten extracted. Even at this point Shepard is not fully indoctrinated.
The Indoctrination theory doesn't say that Shepard has been indoctrinated all along. It says that the end was an indoctrination attempt.
This whole theory makes no sense, because it would mean that the narrative has be based on lies and withholding information from the player. When you tell a story you can't leave out important information and then expect the player/reader/viewer/whatever to understand something based on nothing. Why is Shepard breathing at the end of the "Destroy" ending? Because he was vaporized in the other 2 endings. How can you assume "oh it is indoctrination" without the game actually saying it is, or at least leaving solid clues leading to that kind of understanding.
As an analogy: You're watching a movie, and there's a bar scene. In the scene you see 3 glasses on the bar, and then there's a cut to a different angle but there are only 2 glasses shown. Everyone here is going "A ghost moved the 3rd glass!" rather than "they goofed while filming this scene."
no one forces you to believe this theory but if you want to bring counter arguments, you should do so without constantly repeating yourself.
Retour en haut
