57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Candidate 88766]

redBadger14 wrote...

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.

So, if he didn't wake up in London, I guess he just woke up in a pile of rubble being held down in space, in which no gravity exists. 

You're going to have to do better than that.

Whats clear is that while the pile of rubble is in London, its not where Shepard was initially shot at by Harbinger. The area around the Conduit is devoid of any buildings or rubble - it is a ruined patch of ground. Yet when Shepard wakes up, he is very clear on a massive pile of rubble with pipes and brickwork. Thus we can assume that this is not the same place he collapsed when he was shot at by Harbinger, which is what this thead's theory relies on.

[Fledgey]

NICKjnp wrote...

How about we follow the color scheme. Blue (synthesis) is paragon and everyone gets along. Red (renegade) is organics wiping out synthetics. Neutral (white) is Reapers reprogrammed to not destroy but being brainwashed themselves. The endings make sense but how they are reached does not.
And what is the point of any of the cutscenes afterwards? If Shepard gives in then why continue to show events afterwards? Sorry...everyone seems to be reading too much into the ending. Just accept that it was an ending that you didn't like.

This has been covered and covered and covered and covered. All of the counter points that have been brought up are brought up about every 30 pages or so and we have a refutation for every single one.I have not seen a new counter argument for a long time.

[Capeo]

Fledgey 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.

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.

They are not clever writers.  This whole idea that the writers of ME are anything more than below average pulp sci-fi writers has to stop.  If you actually look at any of the stories, taking the character interactions out, they've always been substandard and derivative.  The only reason the ridiculous theory even exists is because people are giving them far more credit than they deserve.

[Hurricane Brad]

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?

Shepard and the Alliance are confident that the Crucible is a weapon to destroy the reapers.  If space kid tells him that it can't, he will be more suspicious and less inclined to believe it.  With the expected option available, Shepard is more likely to believe the space kid and is thus more inclined to choose the other options that space kid favours.   

[killnoob]

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Fledgey wrote...

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

In case if you've missed the ending, Joker's eye are also glowing like the illusive man in the synthesis ending.

Just because you've got that eye dont mean your indoctrinated.

It means you're part synthetics.

I think he means the Blue eyes.....

And that's exactly what I mean.



4.15, Jokers eyes.

Is Joker also indoctrinated?

[Fledgey]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

redBadger14 wrote...

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.

So, if he didn't wake up in London, I guess he just woke up in a pile of rubble being held down in space, in which no gravity exists. 

You're going to have to do better than that.

Whats clear is that while the pile of rubble is in London, its not where Shepard was initially shot at by Harbinger. The area around the Conduit is devoid of any buildings or rubble - it is a ruined patch of ground. Yet when Shepard wakes up, he is very clear on a massive pile of rubble with pipes and brickwork. Thus we can assume that this is not the same place he collapsed when he was shot at by Harbinger, which is what this thead's theory relies on.

It doesn't rely on this, it's simply our best guess. It's entirely possible that the dream sequence starts earlier and just comes to a pitch after the harby beam. That would explain why the conduit sequence mirrors the first game so exactly.

[njfluffy19]

Capeo wrote...

Fledgey 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.

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.

They are not clever writers.  This whole idea that the writers of ME are anything more than below average pulp sci-fi writers has to stop.  If you actually look at any of the stories, taking the character interactions out, they've always been substandard and derivative.  The only reason the ridiculous theory even exists is because people are giving them far more credit than they deserve.

Shh, you're an ignoramous! I can understand why you prefer space magic. 

[killnoob]

Hurricane Brad wrote...

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?

Shepard and the Alliance are confident that the Crucible is a weapon to destroy the reapers.  If space kid tells him that it can't, he will be more suspicious and less inclined to believe it.  With the expected option available, Shepard is more likely to believe the space kid and is thus more inclined to choose the other options that space kid favours.   

I'm not saying the Space kid should tell him he "Cant" destroy the reapers.

I'm saying why is the space kid telling him anything at all?

Think about it. If he doesnt' say a word, Shepard won't have a frigging clue what to do.

[Earthborn_Shepard]

kent80082006 wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

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?

Because the blueprints were there all along! They never finished building it doesn't mean they never finished designing it.

The crucible was originally designed without the catalyst, the use of the citadel was implemented by a civilization of a cycle before the Protheans as stated by the Prothean VI, why would they add it to the blueprints if they don't know what it is? If they don't have any sort of magic crystal ball then there's no way they know about Shpeherd and naturally he can't be the catalyst. 

So if you'll agree with me on that I'd like to state a new perspective to view the ID theory.

It's safe to presume that the use of catalyst alters the crucible's function to some extent, if the previous civilizations don't know about the god child, then the crucible is definitely not doing what it's supposed to do, that is, the function intended by original designers or by those who implemented the use of citadel.

This somehow proofs that the current three choices are not the intended function of the crucible but proposal of the god child as an indoctrination attempt.

I agree that it fits to the indoctrination theory. But I still think Shepard could be the Catalyst. Remember, Hackett said that the Crucible wasn't firing, and only then Shepard acted and the whole thing started. The Catalyst allows the Crucible to work correctly.

[killnoob]

njfluffy19 wrote...

Capeo wrote...

Fledgey 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.

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.

They are not clever writers.  This whole idea that the writers of ME are anything more than below average pulp sci-fi writers has to stop.  If you actually look at any of the stories, taking the character interactions out, they've always been substandard and derivative.  The only reason the ridiculous theory even exists is because people are giving them far more credit than they deserve.

Shh, you're an ignoramous! I can understand why you prefer space magic. 

+100000

[Noob451]

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Fledgey wrote...

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

In case if you've missed the ending, Joker's eye are also glowing like the illusive man in the synthesis ending.

Just because you've got that eye dont mean your indoctrinated.

It means you're part synthetics.

I think he means the Blue eyes.....

And that's exactly what I mean.



4.15, Jokers eyes.

Is Joker also indoctrinated?

looks pretty green to me....

[cobnut]

Killnoob, I think you are trolling us. Nobody could possibly be so ignorant and beside the point you pretend to be. You just didn't understand any of the arguments given to you and still blame the theory stupid. =.=

[Novouto]

BrotherWarth wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

BrotherWarth wrote...

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.

What? Sovereign and Harbinger are basically the same, and the Destroyers are all the same. So how do the races of thousands of cycles all equate to 2 types of identical Reapers, but all of a sudden a COMPLETELY different type of Reaper emerges that looks EXACTLY like a giant human? It makes no sense. And where is it said in ME2 that the Collector's were just failed Reapers? They were indoctrinated and extensively genetically modified specifically to serve the Reaper's whims.

Um, actually the human reaper was going to serve as the core of the typical reaper shell, until Shepard came and blew it up.

[njfluffy19]

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Fledgey wrote...

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

In case if you've missed the ending, Joker's eye are also glowing like the illusive man in the synthesis ending.

Just because you've got that eye dont mean your indoctrinated.

It means you're part synthetics.

I think he means the Blue eyes.....

And that's exactly what I mean.



4.15, Jokers eyes.

Is Joker also indoctrinated?

Please read. Are any husk eyes green? No. Are husk eyes blue? Yes. Were Saren's eyes blue? Yes. Were TIM's eyes blue? Yes. Joker's eyes are glowing because you merged synthetics with organics, not because he is "indoctrinated." How about you read the thread before posting.

[Fledgey]

Capeo wrote...

Fledgey 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.

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.

They are not clever writers.  This whole idea that the writers of ME are anything more than below average pulp sci-fi writers has to stop.  If you actually look at any of the stories, taking the character interactions out, they've always been substandard and derivative.  The only reason the ridiculous theory even exists is because people are giving them far more credit than they deserve.

Show me another game that has this level of depth in how the universe, characters, and plots are told. This is not substandard writing. This is a deep, incredibly fleshed out universe full of people that they actually make you care about. Just because you're mad at them doesn't mean you can trash them. I went through that stage too, but I got over it.

[BlackDragonBane]

If you'd like to continue the discussion in a neutral, relaxed, and controlled environment free from the constant theory loops, trolls, and fan-hating from other community members, many of us theorists have migrated to a new base of operations to continue in peace.

Byne has kindly linked the thread to their top post or you can PM me if interested in joining us.

[redBadger14]

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Fledgey wrote...

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

In case if you've missed the ending, Joker's eye are also glowing like the illusive man in the synthesis ending.

Just because you've got that eye dont mean your indoctrinated.

It means you're part synthetics.

I think he means the Blue eyes.....

And that's exactly what I mean.



4.15, Jokers eyes.

Is Joker also indoctrinated?

No.

The synthesis of organic and synthetic life would mean organics would all have some form of Reaper tech infused in their body, explaining why Joker's eyes are like that.

Edit: Actually, hard to explain whether or not Joker is indoctrinated. Being infused with Reaper tech may actually allow some form of indoctrination.

Modifié par redBadger14, 14 mars 2012 - 04:07 .

[byne]

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Fledgey wrote...

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

In case if you've missed the ending, Joker's eye are also glowing like the illusive man in the synthesis ending.

Just because you've got that eye dont mean your indoctrinated.

It means you're part synthetics.

I think he means the Blue eyes.....

And that's exactly what I mean.



4.15, Jokers eyes.

Is Joker also indoctrinated?

Shepard wakes up after the crash-landed Normandy scene in the Destroy ending though, so the indoctrination/hallucination theory is assuming everything after Harbinger's blast and up to and including the crash landing didnt actually happen

[ArkkAngel007]

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

kent80082006 wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

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?

Because the blueprints were there all along! They never finished building it doesn't mean they never finished designing it.

The crucible was originally designed without the catalyst, the use of the citadel was implemented by a civilization of a cycle before the Protheans as stated by the Prothean VI, why would they add it to the blueprints if they don't know what it is? If they don't have any sort of magic crystal ball then there's no way they know about Shpeherd and naturally he can't be the catalyst. 

So if you'll agree with me on that I'd like to state a new perspective to view the ID theory.

It's safe to presume that the use of catalyst alters the crucible's function to some extent, if the previous civilizations don't know about the god child, then the crucible is definitely not doing what it's supposed to do, that is, the function intended by original designers or by those who implemented the use of citadel.

This somehow proofs that the current three choices are not the intended function of the crucible but proposal of the god child as an indoctrination attempt.

I agree that it fits to the indoctrination theory. But I still think Shepard could be the Catalyst. Remember, Hackett said that the Crucible wasn't firing, and only then Shepard acted and the whole thing started. The Catalyst allows the Crucible to work correctly.

Remember though, this all really didn't happen...it may be some subconscience message telling Shepard that he/she is the catalyst (would that be so surprising given what Shep accomplishes and changes in the galaxy and all the exposure to the Reapers and Prothean tech?).  

[Sheparded]

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Fledgey wrote...

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

In case if you've missed the ending, Joker's eye are also glowing like the illusive man in the synthesis ending.

Just because you've got that eye dont mean your indoctrinated.


It means you're part synthetics.

I think he means the Blue eyes.....

And that's exactly what I mean.



4.15, Jokers eyes.

Is Joker also indoctrinated?

looks pretty green to me....

EDI's visor also changed to green

[Pelleran]

[quote]killnoob wrote...

[quote]Noob451 wrote...

[quote]killnoob wrote...

[quote]Noob451 wrote...

[quote]killnoob wrote...

[quote]byne wrote...

[quote]killnoob wrote...

[quote]Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

[/quote]

[/quote]

[/quote]

[/quote]

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?

[/quote]

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?

[/quote]

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

Has he been inside the crucible before?

[/quote]

Also, even if we do not actually know what the Crucible does. We know what the three people who are primarily interacting with the Reapers would do.

1. We have Saren. He was all about the Synthesis. "The best of both worlds. The advantages of both. No disadvantages," or something along these lines in ME 1. Shepard knows that.

2. We have TIM. He was all about controlling the Reapers. He made that abundantly clear in his speeches and behaviour. In both, ME 2 and 3. Shepard knows that, too.

3. We have our Bruce Willis. Shepard wants to destroy the Reapers. In fact, that is the one thing that keeps him from bending over to the brute force the Reapers can exert.

So, even if he does not know what the Crucible is all about. These are the three options known to him. Although the following still bugs me...

[quote]Pelleran wrote...

(h) Lastly, there is the Synthesis option. This is an oddball in several ways. For one, this is what Saren proposed. What he believed in. Indoctrination or not, I think this is actually Saren's belief and not the whispers of Sovereign in his ears. However, unlike with the other two options, we are not shown Saren doing anything. This might be due to the fact that Saren is already dead and gone by that point. But if this is Shepard's hallucination, would it not make sense for him to associate the Synthesis option with Saren?[/quote]

[Earthborn_Shepard]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

kent80082006 wrote...

Earthborn_Shepard wrote...

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?

Because the blueprints were there all along! They never finished building it doesn't mean they never finished designing it.

The crucible was originally designed without the catalyst, the use of the citadel was implemented by a civilization of a cycle before the Protheans as stated by the Prothean VI, why would they add it to the blueprints if they don't know what it is? If they don't have any sort of magic crystal ball then there's no way they know about Shpeherd and naturally he can't be the catalyst. 

So if you'll agree with me on that I'd like to state a new perspective to view the ID theory.

It's safe to presume that the use of catalyst alters the crucible's function to some extent, if the previous civilizations don't know about the god child, then the crucible is definitely not doing what it's supposed to do, that is, the function intended by original designers or by those who implemented the use of citadel.

This somehow proofs that the current three choices are not the intended function of the crucible but proposal of the god child as an indoctrination attempt.

I agree that it fits to the indoctrination theory. But I still think Shepard could be the Catalyst. Remember, Hackett said that the Crucible wasn't firing, and only then Shepard acted and the whole thing started. The Catalyst allows the Crucible to work correctly.

Remember though, this all really didn't happen...it may be some subconscience message telling Shepard that he/she is the catalyst (would that be so surprising given what Shep accomplishes and changes in the galaxy and all the exposure to the Reapers and Prothean tech?).  

Exactly my point, actually.

Also, this:

michael donahoe [/b]
‏
@CooTweetBroI'm really pissed off people have spoiled that @masseffect 3 has an ending. OMG! IT ENDS? SPOILARZ!


Mass Effect[/b]
‏
@masseffect@cootweetbro We've never said so~


dafuq?

Modifié par Earthborn_Shepard, 14 mars 2012 - 04:07 .

[Turran]

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Fledgey wrote...

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

In case if you've missed the ending, Joker's eye are also glowing like the illusive man in the synthesis ending.

Just because you've got that eye dont mean your indoctrinated.

It means you're part synthetics.

I think he means the Blue eyes.....

And that's exactly what I mean.



4.15, Jokers eyes.

Is Joker also indoctrinated?

I have only really seen it happen in Synthesis, and that is clearly to show that DNA has been mixed with AI stuff to create a super-race. I don't think it has to do with indoctrination.

[killnoob]

Fledgey wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

redBadger14 wrote...

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.

So, if he didn't wake up in London, I guess he just woke up in a pile of rubble being held down in space, in which no gravity exists. 

You're going to have to do better than that.

Whats clear is that while the pile of rubble is in London, its not where Shepard was initially shot at by Harbinger. The area around the Conduit is devoid of any buildings or rubble - it is a ruined patch of ground. Yet when Shepard wakes up, he is very clear on a massive pile of rubble with pipes and brickwork. Thus we can assume that this is not the same place he collapsed when he was shot at by Harbinger, which is what this thead's theory relies on.

It doesn't rely on this, it's simply our best guess. It's entirely possible that the dream sequence starts earlier and just comes to a pitch after the harby beam. That would explain why the conduit sequence mirrors the first game so exactly.

Actually no.

Shepard started hallucinating when the Defense committee got blown up.
Everything he did afterward all happened in his head.

[killnoob]

Turran wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

killnoob wrote...

Fledgey wrote...

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

In case if you've missed the ending, Joker's eye are also glowing like the illusive man in the synthesis ending.

Just because you've got that eye dont mean your indoctrinated.

It means you're part synthetics.

I think he means the Blue eyes.....

And that's exactly what I mean.



4.15, Jokers eyes.

Is Joker also indoctrinated?

I have only really seen it happen in Synthesis, and that is clearly to show that DNA has been mixed with AI stuff to create a super-race. I don't think it has to do with indoctrination.

Right.

Since we agree that blue eye has nothing to do with indoctrination,
what that guy was saying about Shepard's eye change when he made the choice to control or synergy is completely irrelevant.