Ce sujet est fermé
Wallace West wrote...
Does anybody here read the posts and imagine it in the voice of the poster's image? I've read Wuyunk's posts in Thane's voice for the past few pages. Indoctrination Commence...
wombat_stalker wrote...
I'm perfectly willing to be on-board with everything after playing lazer tag being hallucination/indoctrination. (I'm a WoT fan, was part of the "Verin is purple Ajah" theorists all the way to the revelation, so old hand at outlandish theories)
Then, what does the Crucible actually *do*? If it isn't the star child and the Reaper on/off/new switch because that was in Shepard's mind. And what does it need the Citadel for? What were the ancient civilizations thinking when they started planning the Crucible without actually knowing what it was for?
I'd actually theorise that the 'indoctrination hallucination' is fairly close to the truth. It's generally easier to modify an idea than it is to think it up in the first place, and the star child using an image from Shepard's head backs it up. So the Citadel/Catalyst/Crucible actually can destroy the Reapers? (Willing suspension of disbelief doesn't let me believe the synthesis - too much 'magic' to just send out a beam of light to rewrite all living creatures everywhere, and I come up somewhat short on how 'destroy' would be able to figure out what's an actual machine and what's a living machine: what about people with pace makers?) It's not that far of a stretch, Citadel built by Reapers, intentionally designed for their use and comfort (Sovereign got a really nice parking space in ME1). Also supposed to respond to their commands, and share information with them, so the idea that Citadel has a transceiver instead of a receiver is solid.
Then, is it possible that the Crucible is a gigantically huge and powerful amplifier, that takes the Citadel's Reaper-communication and turns it up to 11, essentially overloading them? Or even emulates the Reaper's own indoctrination and turns it against *them*?
Modifié par Prince Keldar, 13 mars 2012 - 03:13 .
VyRianS wrote...
Tsantilas wrote...
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."
Erm no? Assuming the glasses are an integral part of the movie, I would try to interpret what the missing third glass meant. And no, your 'a ghost did something' is just lame and is hardly even close to what we have discussed in this thread.
In fact, most of us here are just clinging on to the small shred of hope that BW would fix the endings. No harm discussing what the finale meant or could have been. Doesn't it occur to you that your opinions are just the polar opposite of what we desire? Instead of us trying to discuss/repair the major plotholes you are just ignoring the disappointing end and convincing yourself that the failure of a finale is acceptable.
Was just going to say this. Shepard is seeing his friends escaping the blast and being in a better place, I mean...seriously... They crash land on the best looking planet in the whole Galaxy. He is comforting himself with the thought. But then in the control ending he wakes up, while in the other two he is gone in the illusion it's all over and the Reapers left Earth, which they wont.holyshock18 wrote...
Tsantilas wrote...
None of this explains why you get an ending cinematic for the control and synthesis choices. If choosing one of those options causes Shepard to be indoctrinated, and this is fully in your head, then why do we see the crucible firing, reapers leaving, joker cruising around on the Normandy and crash landing on a planet etc. The ending cinematic isn't shown from Shepard's point of view. It's shown as part of the narrative, meaning it's what actually happens.
It actuly does explain it with the idea of this is all Shepard hoping it will end like this. If he pick what ever he picks he is hoping is friend is gonna be safe. He is hoping he will be talked about in the future and about what happend so ppl dont forget the war. And if there will be a new cycle they will be prepared.
Liaras memory thingy could explain alot of it.
All that happening is what he is hoping will happen after he pick whatever he picks
jackncoke28 wrote...
Just wanted to comment about the argument on why would reapers give you the option to destroy them. The indoctrination argument stipulates that shepard never actually got to the citadel, the choices are in your head. I would argue that the choices aren't really between controling, synthesizing, or destroying. They are basically
1. Giving in to reaper idiology while maintaining some of who you are (control)
2. Completely giving in to reaper ideology (synthesis)
3. Not giving in, and continuing to fight. (Destroy)
And by reaper idiology I mean there idea about the need for order in the universe (put forth by the "catalyst") and the inevitability of the organic's destruction by the harbingers of that synthetic order, the catalyst uses this argument to creat a sense of how useless it will be to keep fighting, and using the image of the boy has the added effect of reminding Shepard that he won't be able to save every one if he does continue to fight, an attempt to break his will. The first 2 choices, IMO, are shepard giving in to the arguments the reapers have made in ME1,2,and most of 3, via indoctrinated Saren, Sovereign, Harbinger, and indoctrinated TIM.
The reason for the indoctrination I believe, is to break the resistance of the allied forces. Shepard represents their hope, their belief that they can win this fight. We learned from javik that the prothean reaper war lasted his entire life, and the major disadvantage was that they were a homogeneous empire. So even with that disadvantage the held out for at least a couple decades. This cycle has multiple races fighting in tandem, and it has the catalyst weapon. This cycle has the best chance of defeating them and they know it. Martyring Shepard does not help their cause, they need him broken.
Wow, I didn't intend to go this far lol, I guess that's what great stories do to someone
Tsantilas wrote...
Ok so... Shepard passes out while talking to Hackett... and then the elevator thing takes Shepard up to where he meets the catalyst. Why not just let Shepard die where he passed out? The Catalyst has already won if he's supposedly this evil reaper god thing that lies to Shepard. It just doesn't make sense to me that it's all an elaborate scheme to trick him and indoctrinate him. Letting him die is a much easier solution.
- If the scene after the elevator is all in his head, then how does the citadel fire and destroy the reapers and the relays etc? He must be awake during the conversation. As far as I understand, indoctrination just causes a different way of thinking that conforms with the reapers' plans. No other character that has been indoctrinated has been shown having hallucinations and weird dream sequences.
-If Shepard has been on earth all along and it's just a dream, then again how does the citadel fire? He must have reached the citadel at some point and used the crucible. Therefor, the scene showing him breathing under the rubble at the end of the cinematic just means that he crashed back to earth, or somehow got teleported back down with space magic, or the same way he went up or whatever.
-If the control and synthesis endings are "bad endings" meaning that Shepard has been indoctrinated, why have the whole ending cinematic thing? Shouldn't it just show critical mission error, or the child transforming into harbinger and doing an evil dance or something?
Modifié par Spherexius, 13 mars 2012 - 03:17 .
happy_diplomat wrote...
I think the reason no one lives in the red ending is due more to the fact that truly renegade shepard would've killed his crew if given just cause, so it makes the hallucination that much more believable. I know I played an alt that was very renegade/dark, and he really laid into every single person, as the "brass in charge" and "you are not useful anymore so you die now" type.
Prince Keldar wrote...
wombat_stalker wrote...
I'm perfectly willing to be on-board with everything after playing lazer tag being hallucination/indoctrination. (I'm a WoT fan, was part of the "Verin is purple Ajah" theorists all the way to the revelation, so old hand at outlandish theories)
Then, what does the Crucible actually *do*? If it isn't the star child and the Reaper on/off/new switch because that was in Shepard's mind. And what does it need the Citadel for? What were the ancient civilizations thinking when they started planning the Crucible without actually knowing what it was for?
I'd actually theorise that the 'indoctrination hallucination' is fairly close to the truth. It's generally easier to modify an idea than it is to think it up in the first place, and the star child using an image from Shepard's head backs it up. So the Citadel/Catalyst/Crucible actually can destroy the Reapers? (Willing suspension of disbelief doesn't let me believe the synthesis - too much 'magic' to just send out a beam of light to rewrite all living creatures everywhere, and I come up somewhat short on how 'destroy' would be able to figure out what's an actual machine and what's a living machine: what about people with pace makers?) It's not that far of a stretch, Citadel built by Reapers, intentionally designed for their use and comfort (Sovereign got a really nice parking space in ME1). Also supposed to respond to their commands, and share information with them, so the idea that Citadel has a transceiver instead of a receiver is solid.
Then, is it possible that the Crucible is a gigantically huge and powerful amplifier, that takes the Citadel's Reaper-communication and turns it up to 11, essentially overloading them? Or even emulates the Reaper's own indoctrination and turns it against *them*?
What if it does something to the reapers like what happened to Sovereign in ME1? When Saren died (for the second time), Sovereign sort of overloaded or something and kind of shut down, allowing the alliance fleet to destroy it.
What if that is what the Crucible does on a large scale?
Modifié par Evil_medved, 13 mars 2012 - 03:21 .
Rob_K1 wrote...
Wuyunk wrote...
Elendstourist wrote...
The last time I checked this thread about 15 hour ago it had 100 pages less. Could someone kindly give me a brief update? Last I read was the twitter post saying there was no ETA for the rubble in the ending scene to be removed. I dont have time to read the 100 pages
Did I miss something?
No major new news I don't think, we're still just brainstorming, but I missed the tweet about an ETA about the rubble scene being removed, what the hell was that about? :/ Why would they be removing the rubble scene? Don't get it.
Where exactly was it mentioned about the rubble scene being removed?
Wuyunk wrote...
Question irrelevant to this whole theory: Is Conrad Verner anywhere in the game? Did I miss him?
Spherexius wrote...
My problem with it is that there's a huge portion of the story missing if it was all a dream (actually defeating the Reapers, or be defeated by them), but at the same time I hope that it was a dream so that there's a small chance that it can be 'fixed'.
njfluffy19 wrote...
Tsantilas wrote...
None of this explains why you get an ending cinematic for the control and synthesis choices. If choosing one of those options causes Shepard to be indoctrinated, and this is fully in your head, then why do we see the crucible firing, reapers leaving, joker cruising around on the Normandy and crash landing on a planet etc. The ending cinematic isn't shown from Shepard's point of view. It's shown as part of the narrative, meaning it's what actually happens.
Because it wants you to believe it's the end. The Stargazer thing, I have no idea wth that could mean, but the rest is understandable. Shepard knows from experience that if the relays explode, the systems near them will go boom. So I believe it is Shepard holding hope that her team escapes the blast radius.
Wuyunk wrote...
Question irrelevant to this whole theory: Is Conrad Verner anywhere in the game? Did I miss him?
Some side quest with some medigel
Wuyunk wrote...
Question irrelevant to this whole theory: Is Conrad Verner anywhere in the game? Did I miss him?
JulienJaden wrote...
You know, I'm not sure if I wanna get my hopes up and get disappointed later on, but the more I think about it, taking every bit of information and interpretation available into consideration, especially with comments by Bioware staff along the lines of "calm down, you don't know everything yet" (but nothing else to react to the uproar) and with the worldwide release only a few days away, it seems like they might actually have done something along those lines. Controversy about the ending raises awareness. There's loads of additional publicity and word-to-mouth advertising. Hell, I told my girlfriend and my mother about the ending because it depressed me so much, and neither of them ever heard about Mass Effect before. And it's true that especially those Normandy sequences seem off, like, at the very least, something's missing that explains why Joker's making a run for it and why the crew's suddenly back on board.
Well, I guess we'll know more in a few days. Bioware has to react to this one way or another, and if it's not by announcing a patch that will unlock the final endings/alternative endings after worldwide release, they will definitely announce DLC or stuff like that which offers the additional info and closure we seek. I actually don't think that it's anything less than that (well, other than announcing a sequel that's set during the battle for Earth that explains just how all of that stuff happened), given that Gamble told us to hold on to our copies and the previously mentioned "hold on, there's more stuff you just don't know about yet" tweet.
Wuyunk wrote...
Question irrelevant to this whole theory: Is Conrad Verner anywhere in the game? Did I miss him?
Tsantilas wrote...
Spherexius wrote...
My problem with it is that there's a huge portion of the story missing if it was all a dream (actually defeating the Reapers, or be defeated by them), but at the same time I hope that it was a dream so that there's a small chance that it can be 'fixed'.
Exactly. If a huge part of the story is missing it means we payed full price for an incomplete product. If it's all an intricate marketting ploy by EA/Bioware to sell dlc with a real ending, it won't be well recieved by the fans. The whole point of ME3 is that it's the end of the series and you get to fight the reapers with this huge galactic army. What's the point if it was all a hallucination and you never actually finish the story?
Modifié par Rahabzu, 13 mars 2012 - 03:23 .
Rahabzu wrote...
Wuyunk wrote...
Question irrelevant to this whole theory: Is Conrad Verner anywhere in the game? Did I miss him?
You missed him.
Retour en haut
