Aller au contenu

Photo

Was the ending a hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory


57139 réponses à ce sujet

#11051
Sheparded

Sheparded
  • Members
  • 40 messages

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

I gotta say, the only thing that bothers me is the "kid was never real" argument. Yeah, the soldiers don't help him get on the shuttle, nor does Anderson see the kid or realize Shepard was talking to it, but that one is a huge stretch. Those could be explained by the troops helping the injured and rushing to dust-off, and Anderson being in the other room and fiddling with the door.

It could be an apparition, but highly doubtful in that aspect. It makes more sense that the kid was real and affected Shepard enough that it resonated with him/her on the situation on Earth and his/her failings, to where it becomes a suitable projection of his/her subconscience. My thought anyways. Doesn't really make it fact in any way.



The ship waited for the kid to get in before takeoff aswell. So i dont believe he was an iluision the whole time.

#11052
Fledgey

Fledgey
  • Members
  • 141 messages

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

I gotta say, the only thing that bothers me is the "kid was never real" argument. Yeah, the soldiers don't help him get on the shuttle, nor does Anderson see the kid or realize Shepard was talking to it, but that one is a huge stretch. Those could be explained by the troops helping the injured and rushing to dust-off, and Anderson being in the other room and fiddling with the door.

It could be an apparition, but highly doubtful in that aspect. It makes more sense that the kid was real and affected Shepard enough that it resonated with him/her on the situation on Earth and his/her failings, to where it becomes a suitable projection of his/her subconscience. My thought anyways. Doesn't really make it fact in any way.

I see your point, but the writers clearly go out of their way to make sure shepard is the only one who ever interacts with the child. Everyone else walks away before you see him. That in itself is a bit suspicious. Clever writers like this don't do things like that by accident.
Plus the fact that he basically teleports to different buildings and is in a building when it's hit by reaper laser and then teleports back to ground level.

#11053
killnoob

killnoob
  • Members
  • 856 messages

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

byne wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

I already said it and I'll say it again, if the indoctrination theory is NOT what BioWare had in mind, they managed to miss the most awesome explanation.


Naw,

the indoctrination theory make almost as little sense as the endings we have.

No theory will work unless the Cataylst is gone.





Coincidentally, according to the indoctrination theory, the catalyst kid is all just in your head, so he never actually existed. ;)


And why would the kid be in here?

If Shepards indoctrinated, it means the reapers put him there.

And why would the kid give Shepard the option to destroy reapers if the reapers put him there?

I don't wanna be mean, but can you srsly connect the dots on your own please?


because it's an ATTEMPT at indoctrination, that part about destroying the reapers is SHEPARD FIGHTING IT  the other options are put there to guide him away.... control.. the illusive man wanted this guess what?  he was indoctrinated! 

and synthesis, is eerily close to what Saren proposed, guess what?  Indoctrinated!     and something is said along the lines of "Synthesis will cause all organics to ASCEND to the last stage of evolution"    what does harbinger say in ME2 about the colonists?  oh right... "prepare the humans for ascension"


Right.

Think about this.

How will Shepard know what options there are if not for the space kid?

And if the space kid is reapers attempt at indoctrination, why does he tell him about the destroy option?

#11054
BigBubbaBacon

BigBubbaBacon
  • Members
  • 104 messages
Can anyone who reads Game Informer confirm or deny this quote? If so it sort of points towards the idea of indoctrinating the player, doesn't it? Sorry of this has already been brought up.


http://www.gamefaqs....2225565?page=11

"Here's a Casey Hudson quote from January (game informer interview) that actually fits pretty well with the indoctrination theory... A few of us argue that a "breaking the 4th wall" type of intention is at work here, and that the ending sequence is actually a kind of indoctrination of THE PLAYER (not just Shepard) into believing that synergy (an idea we hated when Saren presented it) and control (an idea we hated when TIM presented it) are actually a good idea all of a sudden...

"We end up exploring some spaces that maybe have never been done before. Because interactive storytelling is still kind of new, there are neat things to try. One of the things we’re trying in Mass Effect 3 is the idea that we can let you feel something that is part of that character’s experience versus strictly getting you to react to things that you see and experience. We’re trying to tell a little bit of the story Shepard would feel and seeing if the player feels that as well. You saw that on the Earth mission, and you see it throughout the game. It’s insight into how Shepard feels. I think that’s going to be one of the things people remember."[/i] "

Modifié par BigBubbaBacon, 14 mars 2012 - 03:49 .


#11055
JulienJaden

JulienJaden
  • Members
  • 313 messages
I may repeat myself here, but again: As of now, Hudson hasn't said anything about what he's promised pre-release (that is, an ending that's more complex than A, B, C, and shows just how your choices have affected the galaxy, races and individuals). As it stands, the choices are Destruction Red, Mindcontrol Blue and Pistachio Ice Crea-, I mean, Organic-Synthetic-Merging Green. The only way in which your choices affect it are variations of availability, destruction and whether you survive what seems to be the worst possible outcome (which is to destroy all your synthetic allies), if it was the definitive ending.

Now, unless Mr Hudson manages to make me believe that A, B and C is, in fact, NOT A, B and C (*prepares tin foil hat*) and explains to me how we actually see how that affected the galaxy other than destroying everything and killing most everyone (according to Arrival, which is canon, the detonation of a Mass Relay kills everything in its star system), this is not over.
Either they fix it to be what they promised or they, at the very least, admit that they lied so that more people would buy it, but they'll still stand by the badly executed ending because it's "controversial". And in case of the latter, they might lose a good bunch of loyal customers.

#11056
Fledgey

Fledgey
  • Members
  • 141 messages

Sheparded wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

I gotta say, the only thing that bothers me is the "kid was never real" argument. Yeah, the soldiers don't help him get on the shuttle, nor does Anderson see the kid or realize Shepard was talking to it, but that one is a huge stretch. Those could be explained by the troops helping the injured and rushing to dust-off, and Anderson being in the other room and fiddling with the door.

It could be an apparition, but highly doubtful in that aspect. It makes more sense that the kid was real and affected Shepard enough that it resonated with him/her on the situation on Earth and his/her failings, to where it becomes a suitable projection of his/her subconscience. My thought anyways. Doesn't really make it fact in any way.



The ship waited for the kid to get in before takeoff aswell. So i dont believe he was an iluision the whole time.

Incorrect. The ship was waiting for the trooper to close the door and give them the go-ahead.

#11057
byne

byne
  • Members
  • 7 813 messages

BrotherWarth wrote...

Don Ravan wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

savionen wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

Why are so many people suing the fact that the ending is so stupid as a reason for it not being real? When you see a really lousy movie do you assume the filmmakers were just trolling you and are going to release their real masterpiece at a later date?


Because the other 99.9% of the trilogy was high quality. It seems fair to give Bioware the benefit of the doubt, at least for now.


Reaper baby. ME2 had a stupid ending as well.


Dude, id understand it being a stupid ending if, when you found the human reaper, Shep decided to adopt it. Then, the rest of the series is you rushing around trying to find reaper food and diapers.

Otherwise, it was a good ending.


How was it a good ending? It makes so little sense. They were stealing humans to turn them into goo to make a human-shaped Reaper? Why? No other races from previous cycles have their very own Reapers. And it seemed like they were foreshadowing the abducted humans being turned into the next cycle's Collectors, so that Reaper baby came way out of left field.



I recall reading somewhere that the inner core of every Reaper seems to take on the shape of the race that it was made from, and that the cuttlefish sort of shape every other Reaper tends to have is just the outer shell / armor.

I dont remember where I read it though, so it could just be someone making stuff up.

#11058
Ingaroo

Ingaroo
  • Members
  • 2 messages
I think I may have been indoctrinated slowly throughout my whole life. :alien:

After almost 30 years of playing more or less mindless games with little or no story in them, I have become so used to things not necessarily making sense that my mind just refused to notice all the hints all the way through this, especially from arriving in London and onwards, dismissing them as bugs or bad writing.

If this whole thing turns out to be the beginning of a different ending, I will buy a hat and take it off to Bioware for being so damn clever and also, for the first time, to EA for listening to Bioware and going with it...

...although this does mean I will have to pay for the REAL ending, which does annoy me a little.

#11059
Goikiu

Goikiu
  • Members
  • 483 messages

Noob451 wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

I gotta say, the only thing that bothers me is the "kid was never real" argument. Yeah, the soldiers don't help him get on the shuttle, nor does Anderson see the kid or realize Shepard was talking to it, but that one is a huge stretch. Those could be explained by the troops helping the injured and rushing to dust-off, and Anderson being in the other room and fiddling with the door.

It could be an apparition, but highly doubtful in that aspect. It makes more sense that the kid was real and affected Shepard enough that it resonated with him/her on the situation on Earth and his/her failings, to where it becomes a suitable projection of his/her subconscience. My thought anyways. Doesn't really make it fact in any way.


how do you explain the kid running into the builing through a locked door and seconds later a reaper destroys the building and then the kid is somehow in the vents of ANOTHER building, making lots of noise getting your attention, and then when anderson gets your attention, you hear a reaper growl and the kid is gone without a sound?


The Kid is Kasumi child ? :ph34r:

#11060
redBadger14

redBadger14
  • Members
  • 1 881 messages

killnoob wrote...

Bobrzy wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Elenterx wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Why the hell would people even consider this a viable theory?

If Shepard's hallucinating/indoctrinated, why would the space god gives him the option to destroy reapers?

To make him give up/give in, obviously.


So....

He says to him: 'hey this button destroy the reapers but don't touch it you should just give up?'


 That's why they give him a choice, and make the ultimately good choice seem as the most evil one


Play this two scenrio out in your head.

Scenrio 1

Shepard: Mannn where the hell am I? Looks like im in something big...

God Child: You're in the crucible, and you have now 3 options. You can control reapers, create synergy, or you can destroy them, which will destroy all that good synthetics. You don't really want that right?


Shepard: I'm okay with that.

God Child; .... WAIT NEVERMIND I TAKE THAT BACK DONT DO IT I DONT WANNA DIE


Scenrio 2:

Shepard: Mann where the hell am I?

God Child: I donno.  (Troll face)


-------------------------------

Get it?

If the purpose of indoctrination is to stop Shepard from killing the reapers, then it makes no sense why the reapers would plant a haullcination in his head which "guide' him towards destroy the reapers.

Also,

If he's indoctrinated, what makes you think choosing the destroy option will make him wake up?
And if that would happen, why would the space god "TELL HIM " about the destroy option? To help me wake up?

Srsly that make no sense.




Harbinger needs to make the indoctrination seem genuine to Shepard by appealing to his interests in destroying the Reapers, but pointing out that it will also destroy all synthetic life (of which Shepard is part synthetic, EDI is synthetic, Geth are synthetic, etc.) plus the symbolic "red" hue of the choice is made to make Shepard believe that it is the wrong choice, and instead control or synthesis are the "better" options, with the symbolic "blue" hue being used on the Control side. What part of that are you not understanding? Harbinger suggests destroying the Reapers to make the events seem genuine to Shepard, while providing the other choices challenges Shepard's willpower.

Also, why would, on the Control and Synthesis endings, Shepard's eyes become indoctrinated just like Illusive Man's and Sarens?

Modifié par redBadger14, 14 mars 2012 - 03:50 .


#11061
kent80082006

kent80082006
  • Members
  • 173 messages

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Shepard being the Catalyst would definately make a hundred percent more sense than that little brat. It would fit the actual meaning of the word, meaning Shep's ability to inspire and encourage people. All other civilisations just didn't have some kind of leader like that, so they perished.


The catalyst cannot be shepherd, the use of the catalyst was implemented
a few cycles ago and it has always been the citadel according to the
Prothean VI, just maybe without the god child in it

#11062
Don Rabello

Don Rabello
  • Members
  • 11 messages

Monochrome Wench wrote...

The Sanctuary mission states that Adrenaline can be used as a catalyst in indoctrination. Shepard is running down the hill dodging harbys red beam of death attempting to reach the conduit. Shepard gets knocked out cold by the red beam of death. Shepards body is full of adrenaline leaving them in a very very suseptable state for indoctrination. Harbinger being only a few hundreds metres away attempts to fully indoctrinate Shepard. Success or failure is your, the players, choice. You just don't know it.


Good point. And as Joker said earlier on the Normandy (when you talk to him after the second f'd up nightmare) "your stress level is higher than it has ever been; higher than during the Skylian Blitz" and as we all know, stress makes your brain go all ape**** and produce huge amounts of adrenaline.

As I played the game for the first time I didn't really like the ending, but I was willing to accept it. But now after reading about the indoctrination theory it is starting to make sense. First of all I'm not going to list of all the previously said points, but just some I came up with. They might have been said before, might not be (best case scenario)... Still, here they are:

Firstly I'd like to point out on the mission where you were with legion inside the geth code, re-seeing the memories Geth have of the Creators. At some point Shepard questioned why all the creators were using masks when they were on their homeworld and didn't need their suits. To this Legion replies, and this is important, "you project the Quarians through your own memories. How many Creators have you seen without their mask on?"

Now if the Indoctrination Theory is correct, I would see the entire process being much similar to this one. The indoctrination gives you a frame in which your mind then fills up WITH the wanted results. Like for example you are indoctrinated to eat the pie made for your friend. Now the ending result is that the pie will be eaten by you, resoning behind this is created by your "own free will" (dictated by the indoctrination) and you would start to think that your friend is fat enough without the pie, so you would actually be helping him/her by making sure the pie doesn't make her fatter. And now the points I found:

1. Shepard goes through the beam of light and is on the collector ship and after the initial talk Anderson remarks that "This ship looks much like the Collector ship you described". Now this is one of the key factors. Anderson is actually saying that this is the collector ship that he himself hasn't seen, but suprisingly reminded him of it. Why would the ship look anything like the collector ship inside? To me it feel that Shepard is actually creating a world out from his own memories. Also the "room" right before TIM (the one with the moving parts) looked a lot like the Shadow Broker base on ME2 LotSB DLC (but this might be that they just liked the design and wanted to use it again)

2. Anderson came from some other place. What place? There are no other paths to the console other than the one Shepard used. I just can't see this being overlooked by Bioware as a mistake. It's so clear that even Anderson said it! "I'm going to find another way"! I saw this as something the indoctrination created as well. Only those things Shepard needed to see. TIM, the room, console and Anderson.

3. Anderson hasn't changed a bit. Now this is possible, but unlikely. We are shown that before Shepard ever stepped in to the light, everyone was dead. Why hasn't Anderson taken a single hit? Was he hiding behind a rock until he tought "ok, now is my chance to be the Spectre I always wanted to!"...? Just can't see it being so. I rationalize this by the fact that this is the way Shepard saw him the last time. Not dead, not injured, just alive and kicking balls. Again, this is something indoctrination created.

4. When you get TIM to shoot himself, it much looks like the situation of the first ME with Saren. It was the same hand and the same closeup shot. Might have been the same gun as well? There could be other similarities as well if you look hard enough. Memory of Saren replaced with TIM?

5. the God Kid... I just... What the hell?

6. And this is the final one, also being the what I'd call the most important. Shepard waking up at the end. Yes, yes, cliche, but it's not the fact that he woke up but from where he woke up. That stuff around him wasn't metal or any other kind of alien-y material. That was congrete. As in destroyed London concrete. Shepard was transported up to the citadel as he blew the thing sky high and I'm not saying that I'm a rocket scientist, but I don't think creating a spacegunthingy supreme enough to destroy reapers would be made out of concrete. And even if he was transported back to earth, why would it transport him under the rubble?

Well here they are. My small little contribute to our growing speculation. I hope even one of these made someone think about the theory. As for myself, even if Bioware said that this was the official ending and there is no DLC planned ahead I would still think this happened, because damnit. I'm not going to let 10 minutes ruin what I've seen as the best saga ever created under the title "Gaming".

#11063
ArkkAngel007

ArkkAngel007
  • Members
  • 2 514 messages

BrotherWarth wrote...

Don Ravan wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

savionen wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

Why are so many people suing the fact that the ending is so stupid as a reason for it not being real? When you see a really lousy movie do you assume the filmmakers were just trolling you and are going to release their real masterpiece at a later date?


Because the other 99.9% of the trilogy was high quality. It seems fair to give Bioware the benefit of the doubt, at least for now.


Reaper baby. ME2 had a stupid ending as well.


Dude, id understand it being a stupid ending if, when you found the human reaper, Shep decided to adopt it. Then, the rest of the series is you rushing around trying to find reaper food and diapers.

Otherwise, it was a good ending.


How was it a good ending? It makes so little sense. They were stealing humans to turn them into goo to make a human-shaped Reaper? Why? No other races from previous cycles have their very own Reapers. And it seemed like they were foreshadowing the abducted humans being turned into the next cycle's Collectors, so that Reaper baby came way out of left field.


Um...yeah, races before have their own Reapers.  Dreadnaughts in particular.  Sovereign was a race, Harbringer was a race, and so on and so forth.  Destroyers are made from "lesser" races, though I don't know if they mix the races together into goo stew or it's individual races.  And nowhere were they said or even hinted that they were turning humans into Collectors...by the time you find out what Collectors are, you know they were failed to be assimilated into Reapers.

#11064
Noob451

Noob451
  • Members
  • 387 messages

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

byne wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

I already said it and I'll say it again, if the indoctrination theory is NOT what BioWare had in mind, they managed to miss the most awesome explanation.


Naw,

the indoctrination theory make almost as little sense as the endings we have.

No theory will work unless the Cataylst is gone.





Coincidentally, according to the indoctrination theory, the catalyst kid is all just in your head, so he never actually existed. ;)


And why would the kid be in here?

If Shepards indoctrinated, it means the reapers put him there.

And why would the kid give Shepard the option to destroy reapers if the reapers put him there?

I don't wanna be mean, but can you srsly connect the dots on your own please?


because it's an ATTEMPT at indoctrination, that part about destroying the reapers is SHEPARD FIGHTING IT  the other options are put there to guide him away.... control.. the illusive man wanted this guess what?  he was indoctrinated! 

and synthesis, is eerily close to what Saren proposed, guess what?  Indoctrinated!     and something is said along the lines of "Synthesis will cause all organics to ASCEND to the last stage of evolution"    what does harbinger say in ME2 about the colonists?  oh right... "prepare the humans for ascension"


Right.

Think about this.

How will Shepard know what options there are if not for the space kid?

And if the space kid is reapers attempt at indoctrination, why does he tell him about the destroy option?


like i just said, the entire destroy option could be the part of shepard's mind that is still intact, and as said before the "space kid"  is shepard's mind giving him all the options before him. His mind has not been dominated yet, so why would the destroy option NOT be there?  and why did the kid try to make that option seem the least appealing?

#11065
killnoob

killnoob
  • Members
  • 856 messages

Syphirr wrote...



As so many of us have already asserted, Shepard is shown waking up amongst the rubble in London, on Earth. unless we bring more space magic into this, the 3 choices cannot physically have been real. You're either trolling, or just aren't taking the time to listen to what the comunity has pretty much reached consensus on. regardless, you're entitled to your opinion, there's just no need to act so aggressively with it. Just my opinion.


Exactly.

Those three choice are messed up.

So is the indoctrination theory.

The endings suck and no matter how hard you explain them they just dont make sense.

As for Shepard waking up in London, how do you get that idea?

All we saw was him waking up from a pile of rubble.

#11066
Rinji the Bearded

Rinji the Bearded
  • Members
  • 3 613 messages

killnoob wrote...

Right.

Think about this.

How will Shepard know what options there are if not for the space kid?

And if the space kid is reapers attempt at indoctrination, why does he tell him about the destroy option?


The option is presented because the Magic Space Kid wants to paint it as the worst option.  Listen to him talk about the consequences of it.  It will kill all synthetic life, he even suggests it will kill Shepard.  Then he says that the cycle will continue anyway.  It's an attempt to push the idea of destroying the Reapers out of his/her mind completely by painting it as the worst solution.

Then listen to him talk about the Control and Synthesis endings.  He doesn't harp on them nearly as much, in fact he praises the Synthesis ending.  If you listen to the kid, there really isn't any other good choice besides synthesis.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 14 mars 2012 - 03:52 .


#11067
IhateEA-Mask

IhateEA-Mask
  • Members
  • 232 messages
It could be symbolic double meaning in that sense that while Citadel IS the catalyst, Shepard is sort of "catalyst" in second meaning of the word.*shrugs*

#11068
mr.surv

mr.surv
  • Members
  • 180 messages
What about daltonists ?
Their reaction will be like " wtf?.... WTF?!?!"

#11069
Fledgey

Fledgey
  • Members
  • 141 messages

redBadger14 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Bobrzy wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Elenterx wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Why the hell would people even consider this a viable theory?

If Shepard's hallucinating/indoctrinated, why would the space god gives him the option to destroy reapers?

To make him give up/give in, obviously.


So....

He says to him: 'hey this button destroy the reapers but don't touch it you should just give up?'


 That's why they give him a choice, and make the ultimately good choice seem as the most evil one


Play this two scenrio out in your head.

Scenrio 1

Shepard: Mannn where the hell am I? Looks like im in something big...

God Child: You're in the crucible, and you have now 3 options. You can control reapers, create synergy, or you can destroy them, which will destroy all that good synthetics. You don't really want that right?


Shepard: I'm okay with that.

God Child; .... WAIT NEVERMIND I TAKE THAT BACK DONT DO IT I DONT WANNA DIE


Scenrio 2:

Shepard: Mann where the hell am I?

God Child: I donno.  (Troll face)


-------------------------------

Get it?

If the purpose of indoctrination is to stop Shepard from killing the reapers, then it makes no sense why the reapers would plant a haullcination in his head which "guide' him towards destroy the reapers.

Also,

If he's indoctrinated, what makes you think choosing the destroy option will make him wake up?
And if that would happen, why would the space god "TELL HIM " about the destroy option? To help me wake up?

Srsly that make no sense.




Harbinger needs to make the indoctrination seem genuine to Shepard by appealing to his interests in destroying the Reapers, but pointing out that it will also destroy all synthetic life (of which Shepard is part synthetic, EDI is synthetic, Geth are synthetic, etc.) plus the symbolic "red" hue of the choice is made to make Shepard believe that it is the wrong choice, and instead control or synthesis are the "better" options, with the symbolic "blue" hue being used on the Control side. What part of that are you not understanding? Harbinger suggests destroying the Reapers to make the events seem genuine to Shepard, while providing the other choices challenges Shepard's willpower.

Also, why would, on the Control and Synthesis endings, Shepard's eyes become indoctrinated just like Illusive Man's and Sarens?

This. Also "So the illusive man was right?" . No. He was not right. You just convinced him to kill himself because he realized he was wrong. Weird inconsistency for something they just showed us 30 seconds ago.

#11070
killnoob

killnoob
  • Members
  • 856 messages

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

byne wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

I already said it and I'll say it again, if the indoctrination theory is NOT what BioWare had in mind, they managed to miss the most awesome explanation.


Naw,

the indoctrination theory make almost as little sense as the endings we have.

No theory will work unless the Cataylst is gone.





Coincidentally, according to the indoctrination theory, the catalyst kid is all just in your head, so he never actually existed. ;)


And why would the kid be in here?

If Shepards indoctrinated, it means the reapers put him there.

And why would the kid give Shepard the option to destroy reapers if the reapers put him there?

I don't wanna be mean, but can you srsly connect the dots on your own please?


because it's an ATTEMPT at indoctrination, that part about destroying the reapers is SHEPARD FIGHTING IT  the other options are put there to guide him away.... control.. the illusive man wanted this guess what?  he was indoctrinated! 

and synthesis, is eerily close to what Saren proposed, guess what?  Indoctrinated!     and something is said along the lines of "Synthesis will cause all organics to ASCEND to the last stage of evolution"    what does harbinger say in ME2 about the colonists?  oh right... "prepare the humans for ascension"


Right.

Think about this.

How will Shepard know what options there are if not for the space kid?

And if the space kid is reapers attempt at indoctrination, why does he tell him about the destroy option?


like i just said, the entire destroy option could be the part of shepard's mind that is still intact, and as said before the "space kid"  is shepard's mind giving him all the options before him. His mind has not been dominated yet, so why would the destroy option NOT be there?  and why did the kid try to make that option seem the least appealing?


And how would Shepard know what options he's got, if the space kid is Shepards Mind?


Has he been inside the crucible before?

#11071
Elendstourist

Elendstourist
  • Members
  • 79 messages

BigBubbaBacon wrote...

Can anyone who reads Game Informer confirm or deny this quote? If so it sort of points towards the idea of indoctrinating the player, doesn't it? Sorry of this has already been brought up.


http://www.gamefaqs....2225565?page=11

"Here's a Casey Hudson quote from January (game informer interview) that actually fits pretty well with the indoctrination theory... A few of us argue that a "breaking the 4th wall" type of intention is at work here, and that the ending sequence is actually a kind of indoctrination of THE PLAYER (not just Shepard) into believing that synergy (an idea we hated when Saren presented it) and control (an idea we hated when TIM presented it) are actually a good idea all of a sudden...

"We end up exploring some spaces that maybe have never been done before. Because interactive storytelling is still kind of new, there are neat things to try. One of the things we’re trying in Mass Effect 3 is the idea that we can let you feel something that is part of that character’s experience versus strictly getting you to react to things that you see and experience. We’re trying to tell a little bit of the story Shepard would feel and seeing if the player feels that as well. You saw that on the Earth mission, and you see it throughout the game. It’s insight into how Shepard feels. I think that’s going to be one of the things people remember."[/i] "


If he really said that. Mother of God.

As least it sounds like delevoper talk.

#11072
Noob451

Noob451
  • Members
  • 387 messages

killnoob wrote...

Syphirr wrote...



As so many of us have already asserted, Shepard is shown waking up amongst the rubble in London, on Earth. unless we bring more space magic into this, the 3 choices cannot physically have been real. You're either trolling, or just aren't taking the time to listen to what the comunity has pretty much reached consensus on. regardless, you're entitled to your opinion, there's just no need to act so aggressively with it. Just my opinion.


Exactly.

Those three choice are messed up.

So is the indoctrination theory.

The endings suck and no matter how hard you explain them they just dont make sense.

As for Shepard waking up in London, how do you get that idea?

All we saw was him waking up from a pile of rubble.




where else would it be?  the citadel certainly isn't made of concrete.

#11073
Fledgey

Fledgey
  • Members
  • 141 messages

killnoob wrote...

Syphirr wrote...



As so many of us have already asserted, Shepard is shown waking up amongst the rubble in London, on Earth. unless we bring more space magic into this, the 3 choices cannot physically have been real. You're either trolling, or just aren't taking the time to listen to what the comunity has pretty much reached consensus on. regardless, you're entitled to your opinion, there's just no need to act so aggressively with it. Just my opinion.


Exactly.

Those three choice are messed up.

So is the indoctrination theory.

The endings suck and no matter how hard you explain them they just dont make sense.

As for Shepard waking up in London, how do you get that idea?

All we saw was him waking up from a pile of rubble.



You can see concrete rubble and re-bar. This is not what the citadel is made out of.
Why are we even answering this guy anymore? He's just trolling us.

#11074
Earthborn_Shepard

Earthborn_Shepard
  • Members
  • 1 306 messages

kent80082006 wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

Shepard being the Catalyst would definately make a hundred percent more sense than that little brat. It would fit the actual meaning of the word, meaning Shep's ability to inspire and encourage people. All other civilisations just didn't have some kind of leader like that, so they perished.


The catalyst cannot be shepherd, the use of the catalyst was implemented
a few cycles ago and it has always been the citadel according to the
Prothean VI, just maybe without the god child in it


But apparently the Crucible has never been used before because the other cycles didn't finish it. So how would they know what the Catalyst actually is?

#11075
Monochrome Wench

Monochrome Wench
  • Members
  • 373 messages
The child lies through its teeth.

It says that it has to come up with a new solution to the AI problem.

Control is apparently a solution. Reapers still exist and can be used again if needed. You wouldn't think Shepard would need to use them... but if the child is right and synthetics rise again would Shepard not want to raise a hand and fix a problem. Of course the child could also be telling lies here, the child does say Shepard would die and lose everything they have. Incidently, how can Shepard control the reapers if Shepard loses *everything* they have. How long does this control last? 5 seconds till you die? Just enough time to say get the **** away from earth?

Synthesis is apparently a solution. No idea how the logic works though. All life becomes biosynthetic. Not much different from pure organic really. Whats to stop someone from creating pure synthetic life again... noone... no wait, the reapers cause they are still around and Shepard is dead.

Destroy is apparently a solution... no wait it isn't. The child says it wont work, "The peace wont last." The implication is that synthetics will again rise up in the future killing all organics. Yet the child still lets Shepard do this anyway destroying the 'old' solution to the problem, and destroys the citadel too, which would also destroy the child, meaning the child can not come up with an actual solution if you are allowed to do this. Why would you be ALLOWED to do this if you were actually on the citadel. Why would this non solution be a solution. It isn't.

Modifié par Monochrome Wench, 14 mars 2012 - 03:55 .