57139 réponses à ce sujet

[MordiMoro]

Have you noticed that on the Citadel, there is a picture of the StarChild and the written "last soon of earth?"

[VvAndromedavV]

Capeo wrote...

fieryace wrote...

So I was wondering what other people thought of this. People have been repeatedly posting that the Synthesis and Control endings both end with Shep dead or indoctrinated. But, if you assume that this is planned and the there will be more happening after the current ending, wouldn't Shep have to survive all three endings? I'm curious to see how people think that could happen (that shep could survive all "3" endings).

Being logical... not wanted here.

Here's some logic for you: "Shepard can die in the suicide mission in ME2. But, if you assume this is planned and there will be more to Shepard's story in ME3, wouldn't Shepard have to survive the suicide mission? I'm curious to see how people think that could happen."

So basically even though one possible outcome was for Shepard to die in ME2, they still made an ME3. You can apply this same logic to the ending of ME3---if it was meant to represent indoctrination.

The indoctrination theory is just that: a theory. I am of the opinion that there is some good and logical evidence to support it (but I do feel some of the so-called "evidence" is a reach).

There are also some good counter-arguements against the indoctrination theory, but I don't think "wouldn't Shepard have to survive" is a counter-argument just based on what they did with ME2.

Modifié par VvAndromedavV, 16 mars 2012 - 07:22 .

[Vandicus]

jackncoke28 wrote...

I really don't see the point in buying any DLC if indoctrination ending is not true and you cant continue the fight. As it stands dont you need multiplayer to get your EMS high enough to get shep lives ending after destroy? DLC could help with this, adding more opportunities for EMS, but why would I care about that if all I get is a quick video of shep possibly being alive and yet still no closure? Its not some fanboy threat that I wont buy the DLC, its just that i wont have any real motivation to buy any.

I've heard that if you get TIM to shoot himself the Andersen lives for a few seconds longer(which I've seen), and that the EMS requirement for Shepard living in destroy goes down to 4000(i haven't personally confirmed this), which would be in line with their statement that multiplayer isn't necessary to get the best single player ending, its just on the difficult side.

[ArkkAngel007]

Sammuthegreat wrote...

I really like this theory and think it holds a whole lot of water. There's just one thing that doesn't quite add up for me though.

If the whole sequence on the Citadel was a hallucination, how come it had actual, tangible effects? Because whichever choice you made, something genuine happened in the real world. If you chose blue, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose synthesis, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose red, then the reapers were all actually destroyed.

Surely none of those consequences could have happened if the whole sequence only occurred in Shepard's mind? Or maybe that's what the Catalyst was - a means of converting Shepard's mental choice into a real-world action?

EDIT for clarity: what I'm saying is that if it all happened in Shep's mind, how come the reapers actually died/mass relays actually exploded/Normandy actually crash-landed on some random planet?

I can get my head around the fact that Shepard "dying" in the blue and synthesis endings is just a metaphor for him succumbing to indoctrination rather than physically dying in the real world (at the point of full indoctrination maybe he loses all sense of who he was before and control over his body - similar in effect to dying?). I just can't quite rationalise how the galaxy was ACTUALLY saved if the red choice took place in the realms of Shepard's imagination, because that way no actual physical action was taken to cause the reapers' death.

That all happened in Shepard's mind too, at least that is where the theory stands at that moment.  That was Shepard's mind, using information from what he/she has been told and from memories, creating closure to the situation.  That is why Shepard, in the Awake ending, sees all this before waking up.

[blooregard]

hmm I just realized the planet the normandy crashed on looks alot like zorya the tropical plants the two moons just about everything resembles zorya so if the ending really is as bad as it is currently I find it fully possible that the normany landed fairly close to another colony

[MatthewGold]

Hannah Morton ‏ @HanKhar
@masseffect pretty please say that its not over and there's some magical DLC ending on the way you wizards I need closure & Kaidan hug

Mass Effect ‏ @masseffect
@hankhar We have no information about this at the time but please stay tuned!

[ArkkAngel007]

Noob451 wrote...

Giskler wrote...

Havent followed the thread for a while, so I dont know if this has already been mentioned, but I just watched the last nightmare sequence again and noticed the following: When you watch dream-Shepard hug the god-child theres an ominous sound when he/she opens his/her eyes and the iris of dream-Shepards eyes are black instead of the iris color you picked.

I know its mentioned all the time that asari eyes turn black when they get indoctrinated, not sure if its the same for humans, but it might be another clue for the theory.

asari eyes turn black when they "embrace eternity"

It's also what happens to Asari that are severely indoctrinated.  The Tiptree invasion told by the PTSD-suffering Asari commando and the events at the monestary tell of this.

[blueboxblues]

MordiMoro wrote...

Have you noticed that on the Citadel, there is a picture of the StarChild and the written "last soon of earth?"

I was looking for this yesterday. Do you know offhand where it is? I was looking on the memorial wall, to no avail.

[jackncoke28]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Sammuthegreat wrote...

I really like this theory and think it holds a whole lot of water. There's just one thing that doesn't quite add up for me though.

If the whole sequence on the Citadel was a hallucination, how come it had actual, tangible effects? Because whichever choice you made, something genuine happened in the real world. If you chose blue, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose synthesis, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose red, then the reapers were all actually destroyed.

Surely none of those consequences could have happened if the whole sequence only occurred in Shepard's mind? Or maybe that's what the Catalyst was - a means of converting Shepard's mental choice into a real-world action?

EDIT for clarity: what I'm saying is that if it all happened in Shep's mind, how come the reapers actually died/mass relays actually exploded/Normandy actually crash-landed on some random planet?

I can get my head around the fact that Shepard "dying" in the blue and synthesis endings is just a metaphor for him succumbing to indoctrination rather than physically dying in the real world (at the point of full indoctrination maybe he loses all sense of who he was before and control over his body - similar in effect to dying?). I just can't quite rationalise how the galaxy was ACTUALLY saved if the red choice took place in the realms of Shepard's imagination, because that way no actual physical action was taken to cause the reapers' death.

That all happened in Shepard's mind too, at least that is where the theory stands at that moment.  That was Shepard's mind, using information from what he/she has been told and from memories, creating closure to the situation.  That is why Shepard, in the Awake ending, sees all this before waking up.

Could also be used as a story device to throw player/viewer off. If shep takes that breath emediately after choosing destroy then the indoctrination answer is too obvious, eliminating all this wonderfull press caused by the speculation

[Capeo]

VvAndromedavV wrote...

Capeo wrote...

fieryace wrote...

So I was wondering what other people thought of this. People have been repeatedly posting that the Synthesis and Control endings both end with Shep dead or indoctrinated. But, if you assume that this is planned and the there will be more happening after the current ending, wouldn't Shep have to survive all three endings? I'm curious to see how people think that could happen (that shep could survive all "3" endings).

Being logical... not wanted here.

Here's some logic for you: "Shepard can die in the suicide mission in ME2. But, if you assume this is planned and there will be more to Shepard's story in ME3, wouldn't Shepard have to survive the suicide mission? I'm curious to see how people think that could happen."

So basically even though one possible outcome was for Shepard to die in ME2, they still made an ME3. You can apply this same logic to the ending of ME3---if it was meant to represent indoctrination.

The indoctrination theory is just that: a theory. I am of the opinion that there is some good and logical evidence to support itm while I feel some of the so-called "evidence" is a reach.

There are also some good counter-arguemnts, but I don't think "wouldn't Shepard have to survive" is a counter-argument just based on what they did with ME2.

For one, killing Shepard is near impossible in ME2 and yes, obviously he must live if you want to import him.  You can't apply the same logic to 3 because the series is over.  BW would have to of had shipped an incomplete game with two fake endings and one real one.  They would never, ever do that.  That would also force people who took other choices to replay the destroy choice to continue.  Again, the would never do that.  Not to mention the script is clear that destroy is the selfish and least desirable option.  Hence it's the only one that can destroy the Earth if you screw up.

[Sammuthegreat]

jackncoke28 wrote...

Sammuthegreat wrote...

I really like this theory and think it holds a whole lot of water. There's just one thing that doesn't quite add up for me though.

If the whole sequence on the Citadel was a hallucination, how come it had actual, tangible effects? Because whichever choice you made, something genuine happened in the real world. If you chose blue, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose synthesis, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose red, then the reapers were all actually destroyed.

Surely none of those consequences could have happened if the whole sequence only occurred in Shepard's mind? Or maybe that's what the Catalyst was - a means of converting Shepard's mental choice into a real-world action?

The theory speculates that everything tha you see happen between harbinger blasting shepard and him/her taking a breath after destroy sequence, was going on inside his/her mind.

Yeah, that's the other possibility - but that doesn't make sense, given that if the whole sequence didn't happen, then the reapers would still be a threat, which you wouldn't be able to face if you took the blue or synthesis endings because Shepard is dead/indoctrinated.

[Capeo]

MordiMoro wrote...

Have you noticed that on the Citadel, there is a picture of the StarChild and the written "last soon of earth?"

Uh, that would be "last seen on Earth".  Again, proving it was a real child.

[fieryace]

VvAndromedavV wrote...

Capeo wrote...

fieryace wrote...

So I was wondering what other people thought of this. People have been repeatedly posting that the Synthesis and Control endings both end with Shep dead or indoctrinated. But, if you assume that this is planned and the there will be more happening after the current ending, wouldn't Shep have to survive all three endings? I'm curious to see how people think that could happen (that shep could survive all "3" endings).

Being logical... not wanted here.

Here's some logic for you: "Shepard can die in the suicide mission in ME2. But, if you assume this is planned and there will be more to Shepard's story in ME3, wouldn't Shepard have to survive the suicide mission? I'm curious to see how people think that could happen."

So basically even though one possible outcome was for Shepard to die in ME2, they still made an ME3. You can apply this same logic to the ending of ME3---if it was meant to represent indoctrination.

The indoctrination theory is just that: a theory. I am of the opinion that there is some good and logical evidence to support it (but I do feel some of the so-called "evidence" is a reach).

There are also some good counter-arguements against the indoctrination theory, but I don't think "wouldn't Shepard have to survive" is a counter-argument just based on what they did with ME2.

Are you assuming that I'm arguing against the Indoctrination theory? You'd be wrong. I'm just wondering why people think that 2 of 3 endings HAVE to screw over the player when there are perfectly acceptable ways to continue the story. I'm assuming that any following DLC would actually have gameplay segments and not just extended cutscenes.

[Dap Brannigan]

I don't know if this means anything, but it's just something I noticed.

When I first got access to the Normandy in ME3, I thought it was actually sort of weird that there were so many red-tinted tubes around. I know that the Alliance was retrofitting the ship, but it was still aesthetically strange to me and didn't feel like it fit with the Normandy.

But now that I think about it, the tubes are reminiscent of the derelict reaper. The color red is also associated with reapers. EDI at some point makes a comment that the SR2 was built partly with reaper tech (Sovereign).

Reaching? Or is there something to the design choice.

Modifié par Dap Brannigan, 16 mars 2012 - 07:28 .

[AdmiralsJack]

Sammuthegreat wrote...

jackncoke28 wrote...

Sammuthegreat wrote...

I really like this theory and think it holds a whole lot of water. There's just one thing that doesn't quite add up for me though.

If the whole sequence on the Citadel was a hallucination, how come it had actual, tangible effects? Because whichever choice you made, something genuine happened in the real world. If you chose blue, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose synthesis, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose red, then the reapers were all actually destroyed.

Surely none of those consequences could have happened if the whole sequence only occurred in Shepard's mind? Or maybe that's what the Catalyst was - a means of converting Shepard's mental choice into a real-world action?

The theory speculates that everything tha you see happen between harbinger blasting shepard and him/her taking a breath after destroy sequence, was going on inside his/her mind.

Yeah, that's the other possibility - but that doesn't make sense, given that if the whole sequence didn't happen, then the reapers would still be a threat, which you wouldn't be able to face if you took the blue or synthesis endings because Shepard is dead/indoctrinated.

that's the point if you choose blue or green and not red the reapers won and the galaxy is lost

[jackncoke28]

Sammuthegreat wrote...

jackncoke28 wrote...

Sammuthegreat wrote...

I really like this theory and think it holds a whole lot of water. There's just one thing that doesn't quite add up for me though.

If the whole sequence on the Citadel was a hallucination, how come it had actual, tangible effects? Because whichever choice you made, something genuine happened in the real world. If you chose blue, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose synthesis, then the reapers left and the galaxy was saved. If you chose red, then the reapers were all actually destroyed.

Surely none of those consequences could have happened if the whole sequence only occurred in Shepard's mind? Or maybe that's what the Catalyst was - a means of converting Shepard's mental choice into a real-world action?

The theory speculates that everything tha you see happen between harbinger blasting shepard and him/her taking a breath after destroy sequence, was going on inside his/her mind.

Yeah, that's the other possibility - but that doesn't make sense, given that if the whole sequence didn't happen, then the reapers would still be a threat, which you wouldn't be able to face if you took the blue or synthesis endings because Shepard is dead/indoctrinated.

Which adds to the consiquences of your decisions. I speculate destroy ending has you getting up and ready to fight. Other 2 choices hamper that fight, with one of them actually resulting in your failure. We dont know how much time has passed while shepard has been knocked out, we also dont know what the crucible can really do, since as theory dictates shep never made it in to actually use it. So there can still be hope of winning battle after shep is revived

Modifié par jackncoke28, 16 mars 2012 - 07:30 .

[kaotician]

fieryace wrote...

So I was wondering what other people thought of this. People have been repeatedly posting that the Synthesis and Control endings both end with Shep dead or indoctrinated. But, if you assume that this is planned and the there will be more happening after the current ending, wouldn't Shep have to survive all three endings? I'm curious to see how people think that could happen (that shep could survive all "3" endings).

I think that's why with those endings you end up back on the Citadel - so you can replay the end, effectively. As well as , I dare say, extra dlc.

[jackncoke28]

We have to keep in mind, reaper wars don't just last a couple of days, Protheans fought them for centuries. So shepard taking a couple more hours to get back in the fight doesnt change much. I figure high EMS doesnt just save shepard, but it protects crucible as well

[Sammuthegreat]

Not to mention the script is clear that destroy is the selfish and least desirable option.  Hence it's the only one that can destroy the Earth if you screw up.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I just wanted to pick on this. I only completed the game a few hours ago, picking the synth ending (because I failed to notice that you had to go right to pick the destroy ending, I was expecting a dialogue choice). I went back immediately after researching my mistake and redid the mission, picking the destroy option this time and listening closely to the kid's dialogue.

The OP in this thread has it near enough spot on. The child really does seem to glaze over the outcome of the destroy choice, and assumes that humans making more synthetics further down the line, and the whole reaper cycle repeating, is an inevitability. Shepard even questions this inevitability with his response - "Maybe." It really seemed to me that the scripting was geared to make the kid mislead you into thinking the destroy option had far more negative consequences than it actually did.

It was also very noticeable to me - and apologies if I'm mistaken, but I'm fairly certain I'm not - that the description of the destroy option was the only description that DIDN'T necessarily involve Shepard dying. He said Shepard would certainly die in the control and synthesise options, but he didn't say anything about dying in the destroy option. Perhaps another string to the bow of this thread's argument - the child is aware that (for the purposes of the hallucination sequence) "die" means "become fully indoctrinated."

[Sammuthegreat]

 

AdmiralsJack wrote...
that's the point if you choose blue or green and not red the reapers won and the galaxy is lost

 

jackncoke28 wrote...
Which adds to the consiquences of your decisions. I speculate destroy ending has you getting up and ready to fight. Other 2 choices hamper that fight, with one of them actually resulting in your failure. We dont know how much time has passed while shepard has been knocked out, we also dont know what the crucible can really do, since as theory dictates shep never made it in to actually use it. So there can still be hope of winning battle after shep is revived

I agree - but the trouble is, this REQUIRES that BioWare release a game-extension DLC or patch, because as it stands (if this theory holds true), the reaper threat is in no way over. And I don't personally think that's going to happen, which means I have trouble entirely getting behind the theory. I think we may well get a full explanation, but a DLC to finish off the existing ending? I doubt it very much.

[Mythrael]

blueboxblues wrote...

MordiMoro wrote...

Have you noticed that on the Citadel, there is a picture of the StarChild and the written "last soon of earth?"

I was looking for this yesterday. Do you know offhand where it is? I was looking on the memorial wall, to no avail.

Near the bottom right hand side of the memorial wall

[ArkkAngel007]

Capeo wrote...
 Not to mention the script is clear that destroy is the selfish and least desirable option.  Hence it's the only one that can destroy the Earth if you screw up.

How does the script imply that?  Just curious.  You only have the lines of the Guardian to go by, and the results you see in the game from what I remember.

[jackncoke28]

Sammuthegreat wrote...

 

AdmiralsJack wrote...
that's the point if you choose blue or green and not red the reapers won and the galaxy is lost

 

jackncoke28 wrote...
Which adds to the consiquences of your decisions. I speculate destroy ending has you getting up and ready to fight. Other 2 choices hamper that fight, with one of them actually resulting in your failure. We dont know how much time has passed while shepard has been knocked out, we also dont know what the crucible can really do, since as theory dictates shep never made it in to actually use it. So there can still be hope of winning battle after shep is revived

I agree - but the trouble is, this REQUIRES that BioWare release a game-extension DLC or patch, because as it stands (if this theory holds true), the reaper threat is in no way over. And I don't personally think that's going to happen, which means I have trouble entirely getting behind the theory. I think we may well get a full explanation, but a DLC to finish off the existing ending? I doubt it very much.

I see what you are saying, from a buisiness stand point its a tougher thing to sell, but we cant really argue about what business decision BW, or EA will make, who can really say? Logic would've dicatated a better ending in the first place. All we have to go on is these giant plot holes that this theory seems to fill rather well.

[VvAndromedavV]

Capeo wrote...

For one, killing Shepard is near impossible in ME2 and yes, obviously he must live if you want to import him.  You can't apply the same logic to 3 because the series is over.  BW would have to of had shipped an incomplete game with two fake endings and one real one.  They would never, ever do that.  That would also force people who took other choices to replay the destroy choice to continue.  Again, the would never do that.  Not to mention the script is clear that destroy is the selfish and least desirable option.  Hence it's the only one that can destroy the Earth if you screw up.

How would Shepard ending up indoctrinated be a "fake" ending? And why would a future DLC "force" people to choose destroy? I can think of numerous ways to expound upon the "indoctrinated Shepard" scenario.

And speaking of "forced" decisions, you didn't feel as if all 3 (of the supposed 16) endings basically "forced" you to destroy all the Mass Relays? And "forced" you to strand all those aliens who had joined you in your fight on Earth? Where some would starve to death (Turians and Quarians)?

This, of course, is somehow overlooking the fact that, based on Arrival (DLC), a Mass Relay explosion should have wiped out all life in its respective system?

How is it clear that destroy is selfish and the least desirable option? If that truly was the intention then why is "destroy" the only choice that actually changes when you have 4,000 - 5,000 EMS? What you're saying is that BW went out of their way to make it very difficult to reach over 4,000 EMS in single player because... Uh... It would slightly alter the selfish and least desirable option?

I mean I have no idea what BW was thinking. I'm not saying I have the answers to these questions. I am saying that, any way you look at it, things just don't make sense:

1. The ending is to be taken at face-value: God Child, space magic, gaping plot holes, and all. 99% of the game (across the entire series) was so well written that while screwing up this badly is possible, I find it hard to believe.

2. The ending is meant to be an indoctrination attempt, in which case they either planned to tell more in a DLC and shipped a game without a complete ending (hard to believe) or they intended that to be the ending and you are simply meant to understand that if you choose "destroy" and have enough EMS the scene with Shepard waking up in the rubble is meant to show that she has resisted indoctrination and will win.

[tatortodd22]

fieryace wrote...

So I was wondering what other people thought of this. People have been repeatedly posting that the Synthesis and Control endings both end with Shep dead or indoctrinated. But, if you assume that this is planned and the there will be more happening after the current ending, wouldn't Shep have to survive all three endings? I'm curious to see how people think that could happen (that shep could survive all "3" endings).

What if the next game/DLC is from the perspective of another character. Assassin's Creed has shown that several different main characters can still have flow.

They said that Shepard's story ends with Mass Effect 3, but that doesn't mean the Mass Effect story is over. What if we play as an Alliance officer or alien character who plays a story that reflects Shepard's choice. Like if Shepard fails against indoctrination, what if you fight him? Or if Shepard defeats indoctrination, he becomes an asset in your fight that helps a ton.

That's what I'd like to see in an ideal world. A continued story where your choice DID make a huge difference.