57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Elendstourist]

Wattoes wrote...

I just watched the "up at noon" thing on IGN with Casey Hudson.

He makes it pretty clear that all dlc they make in the future will just be "sugar on top" and they would never leave key details out of the main experience.

I hate to say it folks, but thats pretty much a nail in the coffin.

:-/

[garf]

I've finally calmed down enough to play the game again without just ... switching off ... at some random moment.

Anyway so... Assuming this is all some big deliberate mind **** to make us FEEL indoctrination or whatever. .. I just got through with trying to reason via blue hologram with the Asari ambassader. And thinking about how out of touch and uncooperative the descision makers and mouth peices for Bioware. I was thinking "I know how Shepherd feels" ... it's to bad we couldn't do rennegade interupts in real life. >bwong< "How's THAT for 'polarization"

[Wuyunk]

njfluffy19 wrote...

MintyCool wrote...

Almost 500 posts...Seriously, some of you should take a step back and rethink your priorities in life...

We already won, the terrific finally to the Mass Effect saga will not be changed. Accept that.

My suggestion, it's Spring, maybe take in a little sun.

Vocal minorities always lose. Always. social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9870213/1

Huh? Your post contradicts itself.

No way man. Those 4 pages totally outshine the 450 of this thread on this forum! 

[Capeo]

killnoob wrote...

Noob451 wrote...

please, PLEASE come up with actual evidence proving otherwise, other than repeating the same thing over and over.

where is YOUR actual evidence proving Hallucination theory is real?

I've already disproved every single possible arguements there are in support of the theory.

Unless you show me hard concrete evidence proving the hallucination theory is 100% correct, don't ask me to "prove that it isn't real" because just because you cant prove the REAL Santa Claus doesn't exist, doesn't mean he does.

Yeah, a lot of people in this thread don't seem to realize the burden of proof lies on those making outrageous claims such as this "theory". 

[lex0r11]

MintyCool wrote...

You're the political equivalent to the Occupy Movement. Poor unemployed liberals who feel that the world owes them something.

Unfortunately for you, the majority (Fans of the ending, the media, and Bioware) will just continue to walk on by as you beat you tin drum. lol.

Accept it. Minorites always lose.

we will se as more and more people finish the game.

[killnoob]

redBadger14 wrote...

killnoob wrote...



Facepalm.

Right so none of the three end cut scenes are real.

Even with the destroyer option, where you actually SEE reaper destroyed.
Shepard doesn't immediately wakes up - instead he dream some more about reapers getting destroyed and how normandy crushland and joker walk out with his best buddy and watch the sunset blah blah

Enough is enough. = =

Learn to type coherent, English sentences and I may consider taking that post seriously.

Err what part of it wasn't coherent?

And don't you mean "coherently"??

facepalm some more.*

Modifié par killnoob, 14 mars 2012 - 04:38 .

[njfluffy19]

Wattoes wrote...

I just watched the "up at noon" thing on IGN with Casey Hudson.

He makes it pretty clear that all dlc they make in the future will just be "sugar on top" and they would never leave key details out of the main experience.

I hate to say it folks, but thats pretty much a nail in the coffin.

If it's true then I will mourn Mass Effect's unique and diverse universe, but I will always keep this indoctrination theory as my own person headcanon. Until there that nail in the coffin is certain, I'll still hold steadfast onto this theory as being legitimate.

[blooregard]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

prag16 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

And while these points alone aren't enough to 100% disprove the theory for some people, they are surely enough to call it into serious doubt at least.

Most of that has already been shot down in the thread.  And for whatever semi valid points exist within that list... that's still far less "problems" and "holes" than the "face value" theory causes.

So I'm told, but no-one has actually provided the counter arguments - understandable given the size of the threat though.

Lets start with a couple of them:

-Why would Bioware, a company built on making story-based games, end ME3 - the conclusion to one of their most successful and popular stories ever - on a cliffhanger simply so they could end it later with DLC? 

-Why market everything about this game as being around the concept of taking Earth back if you don't actually get to do that? If this theory is correct, the game ends before you get the chance to 'take Earth back'. 

If anyone has counter-arguments ot these, I'd like to see them. This isn't meant to be confrontational, but to me these are two of the most logical arguments against the theory.

1) perhaps they thought a publicity stunt like this would get them alot of media atention...they would have been right. and my opinion is if they releas an ending DLC there will probably be one with all 3 endings

2) "take back earth" is a simple marketing campagn like when halo 3 talked about all those battles chief was a part of that we never get to play or see time for him to fight in

[Candidate 88766]

redBadger14 wrote...

killnoob wrote...



Facepalm.

Right so none of the three end cut scenes are real.

Even with the destroyer option, where you actually SEE reaper destroyed.
Shepard doesn't immediately wakes up - instead he dream some more about reapers getting destroyed and how normandy crushland and joker walk out with his best buddy and watch the sunset blah blah

Enough is enough. = =

Learn to type coherent, English sentences and I may consider taking that post seriously.

While I don't want to get into an argument with you, English isn't everyone's first language. Ignoring someone's post simply because of a handful of grammar/spelling errors seems a little petty to me.

He raises a good point:

If Shepard has somehow broken free of indoctrination, why does Bioware show the player a cutscene of the Reapers being destroyed and the Normandy crashing if this isn't actually happenning and Shepard is no longer indoctrinated?

And if Shepard is indoctrinated, why do the Reapers need to show Shepard an illusion of the Reapers leaving, the Relays blowing up and the Normandy crashing? He's already under their influence - they don't need to feed him random visions.

[HairyMadDog1010]

Wattoes wrote...

I just watched the "up at noon" thing on IGN with Casey Hudson.

He makes it pretty clear that all dlc they make in the future will just be "sugar on top" and they would never leave key details out of the main experience.

I hate to say it folks, but thats pretty much a nail in the coffin.

 
Dont have to be a DLC, just a patch that enables a few lines.

[Elendstourist]

njfluffy19 wrote...

Wattoes wrote...

I just watched the "up at noon" thing on IGN with Casey Hudson.

He makes it pretty clear that all dlc they make in the future will just be "sugar on top" and they would never leave key details out of the main experience.

I hate to say it folks, but thats pretty much a nail in the coffin.

If it's true then I will mourn Mass Effect's unique and diverse universe, but I will always keep this indoctrination theory as my own person headcanon. Until there that nail in the coffin is certain, I'll still hold steadfast onto this theory as being legitimate.

Same here. Even if the end is unchanged, I got enough evidence in this thread to believe, that the theory is true.

[Erethrian]

killnoob wrote...

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?

You're trolling/joking, right? Stop the rage and hate for now.

Shepard's already seen those options, not because he's been in the crucible before, but because he's already seen what Saren and what TIM wanted (Synergy/Control). Also if your choice was to keep the CB at the end of ME2, the only option is to CONTROL the reapers (with low EMS). So, actually, the indoctrination theory is the only thing that makes sense.

The reapers TRY to indoctrinate Shepard's mind, they try to keep him away from the DESTROY option, but it's still SHEPARD'S MIND, not HARBRINGER's mind, so it's his call. He is confused by the indoctrination but he's the only one who can free himself from the indoctrination by choosing the Destroy option.

Anyway, I think Shepard still survives whatever his choice is, but maybe (if a true ending is coming) his actions once he awakes are based or influenced by the choose he made.

That said, not trying to be offensive, it's just pissing me off all the hate you have...

[Capeo]

Wattoes wrote...

I just watched the "up at noon" thing on IGN with Casey Hudson.

He makes it pretty clear that all dlc they make in the future will just be "sugar on top" and they would never leave key details out of the main experience.

I hate to say it folks, but thats pretty much a nail in the coffin.

Gee, that's a shocker. 

[N7L4D]

MintyCool wrote...

Almost 500 posts...Seriously, some of you should take a step back and rethink your priorities in life...

We already won, the terrific finally to the Mass Effect saga will not be changed. Accept that.

My suggestion, it's Spring, maybe take in a little sun.

Vocal minorities always lose. Always. social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9870213/1

Your indoctrinated!!! Lol

[redBadger14]

MintyCool wrote...

You're the political equivalent to the Occupy Movement. Poor unemployed liberals who feel that the world owes them something.

Unfortunately for you, the majority (Fans of the ending, the media, and Bioware) will just continue to walk on by as you beat your tin drum. lol.

Accept it. Minorites always lose.

If you actually knew anything, you would know that in a poll about the endings, only around 1000 people liked them, the rest disliked them. 

And OWS is totally irrelevant here, nor does it correlate to anyone here. Stay on topic.

[IronSabbath88]

Anybody thinking the devs will confirm 100% that there's ending DLC coming is sorely mistaken. They're going to pretend it doesn't exist. The element of surprise and all.

That's IF it actually exists, and I'm a supporter.

[killnoob]

blooregard wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

prag16 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

And while these points alone aren't enough to 100% disprove the theory for some people, they are surely enough to call it into serious doubt at least.

Most of that has already been shot down in the thread.  And for whatever semi valid points exist within that list... that's still far less "problems" and "holes" than the "face value" theory causes.

So I'm told, but no-one has actually provided the counter arguments - understandable given the size of the threat though.

Lets start with a couple of them:

-Why would Bioware, a company built on making story-based games, end ME3 - the conclusion to one of their most successful and popular stories ever - on a cliffhanger simply so they could end it later with DLC? 

-Why market everything about this game as being around the concept of taking Earth back if you don't actually get to do that? If this theory is correct, the game ends before you get the chance to 'take Earth back'. 

If anyone has counter-arguments ot these, I'd like to see them. This isn't meant to be confrontational, but to me these are two of the most logical arguments against the theory.

1) perhaps they thought a publicity stunt like this would get them alot of media atention...they would have been right. and my opinion is if they releas an ending DLC there will probably be one with all 3 endings

2) "take back earth" is a simple marketing campagn like when halo 3 talked about all those battles chief was a part of that we never get to play or see time for him to fight in

By media attention, you mean "Negative" media attention?

I'm pretty sure one of the marketing prep would've stand up during the meeting and say:

"hey instead of doing that, why don't we give the fan some SOLID ending, and get good review, and then EXPAND the ME universe more?"

If none of them did that, then they need to hire someone who actually knows what he's doing.

[Candidate 88766]

blooregard wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

prag16 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

And while these points alone aren't enough to 100% disprove the theory for some people, they are surely enough to call it into serious doubt at least.

Most of that has already been shot down in the thread.  And for whatever semi valid points exist within that list... that's still far less "problems" and "holes" than the "face value" theory causes.

So I'm told, but no-one has actually provided the counter arguments - understandable given the size of the threat though.

Lets start with a couple of them:

-Why would Bioware, a company built on making story-based games, end ME3 - the conclusion to one of their most successful and popular stories ever - on a cliffhanger simply so they could end it later with DLC? 

-Why market everything about this game as being around the concept of taking Earth back if you don't actually get to do that? If this theory is correct, the game ends before you get the chance to 'take Earth back'. 

If anyone has counter-arguments ot these, I'd like to see them. This isn't meant to be confrontational, but to me these are two of the most logical arguments against the theory.

1) perhaps they thought a publicity stunt like this would get them alot of media atention...they would have been right. and my opinion is if they releas an ending DLC there will probably be one with all 3 endings

2) "take back earth" is a simple marketing campagn like when halo 3 talked about all those battles chief was a part of that we never get to play or see time for him to fight in

1. Not including the full ending to one of, if not their most anticipated game - one that has already received massive attention - just for a little more publicity is a daft idea. 

2. Halo 3's marketing tagline was Finish the Fight, and you do indeed finish the fight - the fight against the flood and the Covenant, which is what the games were about.

[redBadger14]

njfluffy19 wrote...

redBadger14 wrote...

killnoob wrote...



Facepalm.

Right so none of the three end cut scenes are real.

Even with the destroyer option, where you actually SEE reaper destroyed.
Shepard doesn't immediately wakes up - instead he dream some more about reapers getting destroyed and how normandy crushland and joker walk out with his best buddy and watch the sunset blah blah

Enough is enough. = =

Learn to type coherent, English sentences and I may consider taking that post seriously.

[Lemondish]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Fledgey wrote...
Now you're arguing semantics, bro. Here. Let me fix our theory for you. So the destroy option represents shepard's will to live, causing her to RESIST the indoctrination and wake up from being knocked unconscious. There. All patched up.

But Shepard is still so indoctrinated that the Reapers can cause him to imagine entire situations in his mind. There's no going back from that. The Reapers could just seize control of his mind again with no trouble. If they have indoctrinated him this much, willpower alone isn't going to stop them controlling Shepard.

You're assuming that Shepard is awake the entire time. The mind is much more prone to suggestion while unconcious.

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Why spend months, or maybe even years, harvesting people if you can indoctrinate them in the first few hours?

You're assuming that the indoctrination is complete. If so, there'd be no purpose for presenting a series of choices. The indoctrination theory rides on the concept that this is merely an ATTEMPT, and the evidence supports it. After all, this is presented to you by a dead kid you see in your dreams...dreams you only have after being in direct contact with a Reaper. The effect is shallow, unreliable, and completely left up to the player to recognize it.

MintyCool wrote...

Almost 500 posts...Seriously, some of you should take a step back and rethink your priorities in life...

We already won, the terrific finally to the Mass Effect saga will not be changed. Accept that.

My suggestion, it's Spring, maybe take in a little sun.

Vocal minorities always lose. Always. social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9870213/1

I'm posting on my veranda.

[Moshaaver]

This is a bit off topic but I have two things I wanted to go over. First, a lot of people are thinking that this theory of indoctrination is what's behind the Petition to Change the Ending. I've always viewed this thread as a discussion on what could possibly actually be happening and that the ending we saw wasn't the real one.... so there is no need to sign a petition.

Second, yeah we have two pretty fail trolls coming in here since last night (been following since page 1) it's a shame. Luckily they know as much about trolling as a vorcha knows about..... getting... a seat on the Citadel Council? Hurr Hurr

[killnoob]

redBadger14 wrote...

MintyCool wrote...

You're the political equivalent to the Occupy Movement. Poor unemployed liberals who feel that the world owes them something.

Unfortunately for you, the majority (Fans of the ending, the media, and Bioware) will just continue to walk on by as you beat your tin drum. lol.

Accept it. Minorites always lose.

If you actually knew anything, you would know that in a poll about the endings, only around 1000 people liked them, the rest disliked them. 

And OWS is totally irrelevant here, nor does it correlate to anyone here. Stay on topic.

Erm......

sorry, genius, but we're not talking about how bad the endings are.

We're talking about whether the hallucination theory is real or not.

Stay on topic?

Not sure if trolling.

Modifié par killnoob, 14 mars 2012 - 04:43 .

[kent80082006]

Recap of star child on destroy option

You can destroy all reapers if you like
Can you imagine your life without synthetics?
Even you are partly synthetics
Including the geth

It's obvious that the star child doesn't want you to choose the destroy option
However Shpeherd will only wake up if you choose the destroy option
So if you can't explain why the star child so subtly try to interfere with Shepher's choice with those unnecessary details you have to admit there's something more to the ending

[BlackDragonBane]

This thread has deterioated into another anger fan vent

If you'd like to continue in a more regulated, troll-free environment, many of us have already migrated to a new base of operations where sensible theorists and fans are welcome to come and participate the various theories we are currently debating, as well as having more relaxing, non-theoretical conversations.

If interested, Byne has kindly linked the site on the OP post or you can PM to be directed to our new home.

[Chipikowski]

redBadger14 wrote...

Chipikowski wrote...

I'm sorry, I'm a 100% positive this has been mentioned several times before, but i'm not planning on scouting through 400 pages...
But I saw my squadmates after I got hit by the laser. In a pool of blood. One of them my LI, and them coming out of the Normandy really messed with my feelings. Just saying, those that stated the squaddies were not there or standing somewhere in the back, maybe it's a bug?
Because mine were pretty dead. So I really, REALLY hope that all after the laser was a dream. Hallucination. Indoctrination. Whatever.

Come on, Bioware. Show us that you're not only the master of RPG's, but also the master of trolling. I'd salute you, get the DLC, and if it's good, I might not burn your headquarters down

You only see your squadmates dead if your EMS is too low. I believe over 5000 or 6000 and they "live" or are not shown to be dead.

Ah, I see! Thank you! It was confusing. It stll is, because I don't really now how the EMS could change the power of the laser, but that's another story.