57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Elendstourist]

Wuyunk wrote...

Where do you guys get the "Indoctrination Theory" signature from?

Yes, I'd like to have one too

[mxfox408]

Well this was something I had been thinking at first I was thinking "is this the best bioware has?" But it makes sense. And I would give them credit for it if and when they come out. Till then its an amazing game, the ending made no sense but after this I can see that it indeed does make sense. Till then I will wait patiently until they respond ;-)

[Lambchopz]

AscendBaldur wrote...

Obviously you guys getting pissy about Devs being cryptic on Twitter, have never been behind an NDA (Non Disclosure Agreement) before. I have, when I was in multiple SWTOR betas. The Devs are under an NDA ATLEAST until the 15th Asian release. They CAN'T say anything. To do so would be committing career suicide.

Right. That's why I think it's foolish for people to analyze twitters from BioWare right now.

Whether this whole theory is right or not, BioWare won't comment about any of this directly until AT LEAST after it's been officially released globally.

[Bigdoser]

As garrus said as long as 1 person is standing after the war thats a win everyone set out to destroy the reapers and not doing that to me is betrayal. If there is a heaven and you picked control or synthesis I bet javik would be really pissed off at shepard and everyone else who died fighting. 

I followed legion advice at the end of me2 when I destroyed the collector base. As legion said "An interesting choice shepard commander. Your species was offered everything geth aspire to. True unity, understanding and Transcendence. You rejected it.. you even refused the possibility of using the old machines gifts to achieve it on your own species terms. You are more like us than we thought.

This is why I support the indoctrination theory because the catalyst implies that the destroy ending will kill Shepard yet he/she is alive lying in rubble and the background looks like london. As my renegade Shepard said "Trying to comprimise or understand the reapers is a sure fire way to get yourself indoctrinated!, I am going to send the reapers straight to hell!".

I don't know why some people would want to comprimise with the thing that kills civilisations and if everyone dies on earth? so be it as long as the reapers are gone that means future cycles don't have to live in fear of the reapers. Remember crucible means severe test or trial and I think the ending is a test of shepard's resolve does shepard faulter and comprimises with the thing she/he has been fighting all this time or attempt to control them?(remember how that turned out for TIM and Saren) Or does he/she keep pushing to the original goal?

Modifié par Bigdoser, 13 mars 2012 - 05:12 .

[AnthonyUK]

Tsantilas wrote...

Ona Demonie wrote...

Full Comprised List of Evidence for New Comers:
***SNIP***

And not a single fact was given that day.  This whole thread is based on vague interpretations and conjecture at best.  Maybe it's just me, but I'm really not seeing it.  Harbinger shoots Shepard with a red ray of indoctrination?  The catalyst is Harbinger?  Everything he tells shepard is a lie to trick him?  There are 3 trees? What?  How does your pistol having infinite ammo prove anything?  It's obviously programmed that way so you don't run out of ammo from shooting that idiot kid out of frustration because of the terrible writing.  The only "bad ending" is if you dont pick an ending fast enough and the crucible explodes.  The rest is player choice.

How does shepard end up back on earth in london  in rubble in the "perfect" ending then? Thats the only solid evidence the theory has and thats yet to be explained.

[kent80082006]

Rafe34 wrote...

Ainyan42 wrote...

https://twitter.com/...611387641856000

@masseffect The ending to ME3 is so sad though beautiful. But i'm left with so many questions that need answers.

@sebastianmetto Hang in there...

o_O!

That's... very, very interesting. Seems almost cruel to tell him that if that's he gets.

Hang in there as in:
1. Hang in there! A patch will be available soon to solve all your problems!
2. Hang in there! There's more to life than mourning over a video game character, move on!

I sure hope it's 1

[Rob_K1]

Heh... someone else posted the first quote below, but I haven't seen the second one posted yet:

Mass Effect Twitter

Quote 1: @masseffect The ending to ME3 is so sad though beautiful. But i'm left with so many questions that need answers.

@sebastianmetto Hang in there.

Quote 2:

@masseffect Do you think fans can become indoctrinated by Bioware

@reibback_flam Shhh.... Absolutely not! *shifty eyes*

(Those quotes were within 30 minutes of posting this.)

Edit: Heh, Kent... at least you didn't post the other quote I did though.

Modifié par Rob_K1, 13 mars 2012 - 05:09 .

[Dessalines]

I am not sure if this helps the theory or hurts the theory.
If the AI-Kid is the Catalyst, and the Catalyst controls the Reapers, then why does the IM have tell the Reapers that the Catalyst is the citadel. First, the Reapers would know that the catalyst is not the Citadel, but lives in the Citadel, because Catalyst controls the Reapers. . I thought the Reapers can move their conciousness from construct to construct.. Why would catalyst just move his conciousness to another Reaper or defunct relay?

[Elanor]

FrostByte-GER wrote...

Fattness132 wrote...

I find this very fitting music for reading this thread hehe.

http://www.youtubere.../?v=qtF5nlQraog

Dude, I'm hearing this music since sunday. This fits perfectly to this thread too

I don't know why but I really don't like this music.
It makes me depressed. xD

[MDT1]

David Bergsma wrote...

Stealthy Cake wrote...


@maseffect Do you think fans can become indoctrinated by Bioware

Mass Effect‏@
@reibback_flam Shhh.... Absolutely not! *shifty eyes*


trolololololol

I don't get it, so we're right about this theory?

Could as well mean they prefere seeing us make new theoies instead of starting rant threats, so the don't step in and let us the illusion as long as possible ...

[IhateEA-Mask]

I'm kind of depressed since fan theories are never right and this one is awesome.

[Milvushina]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Golferguy758 wrote...

Reiterating why you can get a crucible has been destroyed ending and how it supports the hallucination/indoctrination theory. You are supposedly right next to the crucible at the end. If it was destroyed you would see it being destroyed as it is you dont because you aren't there. Point 2. The crucible is near the battle at the time of the charge. Taking too long to snap out of the hallucination/indoctrination means the crucible is destroyed while you are in lala land. The fleets can't defend it indefinitely.

Or just chalk it up to bad writing/design..[jk]

That seems to be the case though (that the Crucible is being destroyed while you're in creep-land).  Supporting to keep it relevent to the discussion.

Well, I guess the Reapers want to destroy the crucible, and if you take too long to make your decision it's like they've delayed you long enough to blow it up.  Obviously they would rather Shepard be killed since that's what TIM does if you don't stop him, but then if Shep does make it past TIM they make a last ditch attempt to stop him, which is the trick to get him to stop wanting to destroy the Reapers.

Maybe.  Not saying it's not a reach just it could be possible.

[Tsantilas]

savionen wrote...

A lot of it is circumstancial and conjecture.

But, for example, why would they show Shepard in London at the end of the game, under rubble? (If you pick the Destroy option). It's very obviously London. They wouldn't just copy-paste the beginning of ME2 with Shepard re-entering the atmosphere, he'd burn up, and even by their sci-fi video game logic he'd still burn up.

He's protected by the mass effect fields of the citadel? Space magic? I don't know.  At this point anything is possible, but I think people are reading too much into things.  Not everything is meant to be interpreted as some super deep symbolism.  The writers are clearly not that good, and even if every small tiny detail is meant to have some greater meaning in the plot, it's all too vague to draw any solid conclusions.  The bigger issue is that none of these scenarios or interpretations offer any closure, which is what we were supposed to be getting out of ME3.

[Ona Demonie]

Jedib2 wrote...

There is something I noticed in the Destroy ending....

Shepard survives. So, if the Citadel/Crucible really exploded, wouldn't he have burn up in reentry, Suffocated to death with no helmet, died on impact or just been incinerated in the explosion?

We addressed this: Shepard never left Earth. During the entire hallucination, Shepard is lying in rubble until he wakes up.

[Fattness132]

Jedib2 wrote...

There is something I noticed in the Destroy ending....

Shepard survives. So, if the Citadel/Crucible really exploded, wouldn't he have burn up in reentry, Suffocated to death with no helmet, died on impact or just been incinerated in the explosion?

Please fully read the OP next time, but i will explain it. The whole sequence after getting hit by harbinger is playing out in shepard's mind. He/she never went into the citadel at all - they are still in london presumably unconcious from the reaper laser. The destroy 'secret' ending shows that he/she is still there underneath rubble.

[savionen]

Jedib2 wrote...

There is something I noticed in the Destroy ending....

Shepard survives. So, if the Citadel/Crucible really exploded, wouldn't he have burn up in reentry, Suffocated to death with no helmet, died on impact or just been incinerated in the explosion?

I think this is the biggest piece of evidence. Especially since they show Shepard burn up in the atmosphere in ME2. He/she's not wearing some super-high-tech armor like on Halo that would make re-entry possible.

The options are:
A) Shepard never left London.
 More space magic.

[Golferguy758]

Also my employees have me a strangee look when I laughed at the thought of shepard surfing an exploding citadel down to earth. Crashing uncontrollably, burying himself in rubble, somehow not burning up in the atmosphere and then taking a gasping breath like is often the case when you wake up from an intense dream

[Kioux]

And, I just noticed a lot of people coming up again with "If my Squad mates died in the run to the Cruicable, why are they on the Normandy?"
Well, if they did die (due to low EMS) and show up on the Normandy, it certainly does support the indoctrination/hallucination theme, no? The idea that Shepard sees it in his head only, maybe to reassure himself, or maybe an induced picture to make sure he is ready to lay down his life.
So that (semi) perfect picture of the crew being safe on a very pretty and utterly perfect planet (obviously they can breathe, there is no sign of Reapers aso.) has to be some kind of fabrication.
I don't even see the timing adding up. Even if they survived and somehow managed to crawl of the battlefield, Joker returned to the spearhead of the flotilla. So in those 10 minutes, he would have to survive the battle, return to earth, locate the squadmates, decide to abandon Shepard again, pick them up without a shuttle and bring them to the only Mass Effect Relay in the system? Don't get me wrong, I very much like and insist on the idea that my Squad is alive - but this specific outcome just doesn't seem very possible.

Ah well, in my own version, Shepard is the key element to making the Cruicable work, sends out his victory over indoctrination through the Citadel, which reacts and kills the Reapers due to their main weapon being totally destroyed. Much later, our armies arrive on site and find Shepard near death, the squad alive and take them somewhere to help. I haven't decided yet if the relays are truly destroyed, especially considering the impact this had in Arrival.

Amazing what wishful thinking can create...


*Edit*
Now -just one question: the "breather scene" - does Shepard wear the deafult ME1 armor? I'm just not sure if it was my modified one from ME3 or not. 
And if it the ME1 armor - maybe Shepard is still in the rubble of the Citadel after Sovereign attacked and ME2 and 3 is either a coma or input of the indoctrination. Urgh... I really need to stop coming up with more ideas.

Modifié par Kioux, 13 mars 2012 - 05:18 .

[jw1089]

May have been mentioned, but you get dialogue from Ashley in the docking bay, to the effect of, 'how do you fight an enemy that can control your mind; how would you know you were being manipulated?'. Anecdotal to be sure, but it reminds me of the points in KOTOR's dialogue where it was hinted that you were Revan; of course, that was definitively laid down well before the end of that game. Also, when talking with TIM on Thessia, and you choose the renegade persuasion option, he says you could just as easily be indoctrinated, continuing to fight a war that appears to be hopeless ( and in the process, possibly screwing over other sentient species depending on choices, further weakening the potential fighting power of the galaxy).

[MaroonMoore93]

Tsantilas wrote...

Ona Demonie wrote...

Full Comprised List of Evidence for New Comers:
***SNIP***

And not a single fact was given that day.  This whole thread is based on vague interpretations and conjecture at best.  Maybe it's just me, but I'm really not seeing it.  Harbinger shoots Shepard with a red ray of indoctrination?  The catalyst is Harbinger?  Everything he tells shepard is a lie to trick him?  There are 3 trees? What?  How does your pistol having infinite ammo prove anything?  It's obviously programmed that way so you don't run out of ammo from shooting that idiot kid out of frustration because of the terrible writing.  The only "bad ending" is if you dont pick an ending fast enough and the crucible explodes.  The rest is player choice.

I think some people have looked a little too far into this. The thread was originally about the end being a dream/hallucination/ZOMGHARBYALMOSTKILLEDMETIMETOGOTOLALALAND, which I can agree with. This indoctrination business, however, I am less inclined to believe.
2 cents

[Radioflyer3]

After reading about all this, it seems believable, however why not just do the whole 'wake up' thing after the breathe scene instead of an entirely separate DLC that they risk people not buying because of the current endings. The player thinks its over but then, huzzah! you wake up (if you chose destroy) and then you actually complete the game, having avoided indoctrination. Secondly, they could have made it slightly more clear so that we don't have to grasp for straws in order to justify the ending as it stands.

Also just a strange thing I noticed, after getting fried by the beam, when you wake up and see what Shepard is seeing (while they are talking about nobody making it) look at the top left of your screen, there are a couple of circular blue lines. Seems odd to me, what do you think?
BTW I chose mostly paragon options, if it makes a difference.

[RobT2012]

savionen wrote...

Tsantilas wrote...

Ona Demonie wrote...

Full Comprised List of Evidence for New Comers:
***SNIP***

And not a single fact was given that day.  This whole thread is based on vague interpretations and conjecture at best.  Maybe it's just me, but I'm really not seeing it.  Harbinger shoots Shepard with a red ray of indoctrination?  The catalyst is Harbinger?  Everything he tells shepard is a lie to trick him?  There are 3 trees? What?  How does your pistol having infinite ammo prove anything?  It's obviously programmed that way so you don't run out of ammo from shooting that idiot kid out of frustration because of the terrible writing.  The only "bad ending" is if you dont pick an ending fast enough and the crucible explodes.  The rest is player choice.

A lot of it is circumstancial and conjecture.

But, for example, why would they show Shepard in London at the end of the game, under rubble? (If you pick the Destroy option). It's very obviously London. They wouldn't just copy-paste the beginning of ME2 with Shepard re-entering the atmosphere, he'd burn up, and even by their sci-fi video game logic he'd still burn up.

Just a thought...... even if the citadel has some sort of spooky science magic, that would allow a person to freefal from space and survive..... what the hell are the chances of you falling all the way from that distance back to london streets? 

[Evil_medved]

savionen wrote...

Jedib2 wrote...

There is something I noticed in the Destroy ending....

Shepard survives. So, if the Citadel/Crucible really exploded, wouldn't he have burn up in reentry, Suffocated to death with no helmet, died on impact or just been incinerated in the explosion?

I think this is the biggest piece of evidence. Especially since they show Shepard burn up in the atmosphere in ME2. He/she's not wearing some super-high-tech armor like on Halo that would make re-entry possible.

The options are:
A) Shepard never left London.
 More space magic.

Seeing how all ending made of space magic, it easily can be just it. <_<

[Lambchopz]

Tsantilas wrote...

savionen wrote...

A lot of it is circumstancial and conjecture.

But, for example, why would they show Shepard in London at the end of the game, under rubble? (If you pick the Destroy option). It's very obviously London. They wouldn't just copy-paste the beginning of ME2 with Shepard re-entering the atmosphere, he'd burn up, and even by their sci-fi video game logic he'd still burn up.

He's protected by the mass effect fields of the citadel? Space magic? I don't know.  At this point anything is possible, but I think people are reading too much into things.  Not everything is meant to be interpreted as some super deep symbolism.  The writers are clearly not that good, and even if every small tiny detail is meant to have some greater meaning in the plot, it's all too vague to draw any solid conclusions.  The bigger issue is that none of these scenarios or interpretations offer any closure, which is what we were supposed to be getting out of ME3.

You don't think expanding the story past the current end in this way allows for closure?

Sure, in the barebones theory right now it's not, but that's because nobody is saying what happens after. The theory as it stands is only meant to explain why the current ending isn't the actual ending.

What happens after that could easily offer the closure, reflection of choices, and so on that everybody seems to want.

This theory just opens that door without needing to completely throw out and remake the current ending.

[blah64]

Wuyunk wrote...

Where do you guys get the "Indoctrination Theory" signature from?

Hovering over the sig came up with this link.

http://i748.photobuc...octrination.jpg