57139 réponses à ce sujet

[GuiltySource]

The whole game with the kid at the start, then the dreams. Seems like it's leading up to an indoctrination confrontation ending. Then it's like they did a complete 180 a the last possible second. For no real reason at all.

[Lugaidster]

There's one part of contention in the script though, here it is:

CONVERSATION:

Once Shepard reaches the top of the elevator he begins a conversation with GUARDIAN where all the mysteries of the universe are revealed.

ACTION:

Shepard must now make his final decision - to control the Reapers, to destroy the Reapers, or if they had a perfect game to become one with the Reapers.

To me this implies that the synthesis ending is the be all end all of the reaper menace and what we got is the best ending possible...

[Gowienczyk]

Because forced "unity" is completely of Shepards ideals and standards..

[ShdwFox7]

SomeBug wrote...

ShdwFox7 wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

Nope. Occam's Razor means that without any definitive, conclusive fact to support any theory, you should assume the simplest one is true. Not only because it is far, far more likely to be true, thus avoiding yet more disappointment down the road, but that you will never be satisfied if you are willing to believe a complicated solution.

Because what if that complicated solution turns out to be false. Unless you abide by Occam's Razor, you'll invent an even more complicated solution instead of accepting that you were wrong all along.

There is a small chance that all this hallucination/indoctrination theory is true. I guess it would be pretty awesome if it was true. But it isn't true. There is no 'evidence' that supports it. Just co-incidence.

You've invented a story that fits some of the facts rather than a story that fits ALL of the facts. That's the definition of religious delusion. It is illogical, flawed thinking.

We're getting to that part. Just sit back and watch

So you're willing to believe something that is categorically untrue based upon what we DO know, because you believe that it will make sense later on by what we WILL know?

I mean, do you really not see what you're doing here.

'Don't worry, once the Messiah has his second coming I'll be proven right'.

Logical thinking dictates that you believe something based upon facts presented to you. Then modify that belief if new facts emerge. You don't believe something that might happen because you want it to.

I'm just trying to temper your hopes. You are setting yourself up for disappointment.

No, what I'm saying is you've shot down a theory before it has been made.
Right now I can say for a lot of us we're just throwing ideas out there;
brainstorming if you will. If you give us some time, we just may be able to fill
in the plot holes.

[Doctor Quinn]

Well it may be wishful thinking on my part, but given the body of work these writers have produced, I'd hate to think that they found a magic beam button that either destroys all synthetic life, makes everyone a cyborg, or makes all the Reapers listen to me a good idea for a climax. It's just so shoddy considering that that the Citadel is an active Reaper construct. How can it just be co-opted so easily by the Galactic Alliance to be used against it's builders? They have intelligent defenses on all their other creations. You can't just hack a dead Reaper, What makes it likely you can hack a live one?

[Yuzna75]

Lugaidster wrote...

There's one part of contention in the script though, here it is:

CONVERSATION:

Once Shepard reaches the top of the elevator he begins a conversation with GUARDIAN where all the mysteries of the universe are revealed.

ACTION:

Shepard must now make his final decision - to control the Reapers, to destroy the Reapers, or if they had a perfect game to become one with the Reapers.

To me this implies that the synthesis ending is the be all end all of the reaper menace and what we got is the best ending possible...

Yeah I saw that too, although it the only line where it says shepard survives is if you detroy the reapers so go figure  The script it a mess to read through though, and it actually doesn't say anything about the ending other then that the child is refered to as the GUARDIAN and that there were several ways for shepard to get into the beam. As for what actually happens after he makes his choice closure wise is absent.

[Sindrop]

Mr Massakka wrote...

I came across a flaw in the theory:
Why would Harbinger let Shepard hallucinate about all that? The best way to ensure the Reapers' success would be to simply let Shepard die.

Well, if I recall correctly, Harbringer told the collectors on Horizon in ME2 to leave Shepard alive, if possible.

[Doctor Quinn]

Yeah they are clearly interested in him.

[SomeBug]

Turtlicious wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

So you're willing to believe something that is categorically untrue based upon what we DO know, because you believe that it will make sense later on by what we WILL know?

I mean, do you really not see what you're doing here.

'Don't worry, once the Messiah has his second coming I'll be proven right'.

Logical thinking dictates that you believe something based upon facts presented to you. Then modify that belief if new facts emerge. You don't believe something that might happen because you want it to.

I'm just trying to temper your hopes. You are setting yourself up for disappointment.

That's now what he said, we're still collecting facts. OJ Simpson wasn't arrested in a day, you need to allow us time to disect the game more, look at screenshots and vids see if there is anything we missed. We will change our theory as new information comes up, or completely throw it away and start again if it doesn't fit, but honestly, it's not religious fanatacism, and to be frank, I find you constantly comparing us to religious people rude and insulting.

I'm not burning the Qu'ran, I'm not preaching against gays. I'm trying to see if there's a hidden meaning in the video game because I'm bored and dissappointed, and it seemed like fun.

I don't care if you find it rude or insulting. I'm presenting a perfectly reasonable explanation. One that doesn't require leaps of logic or the collation of 'facts'.

The ending is so vague you could construct anything you wanted around it. None of the points in your arguments favor are conclusive. They're just confusing snippets of a bad ending that you've lashed to the skeleton of a better one for your own peace of mind.

When you have some of the information but not all, and not enough to make a definitive explanation. You don't say 'this is what's happened, if more evidence comes to light that contradicts it, then I'll change'.

You say 'I simply don't know. How can we investigate this further'. With an open mind, without any pre-determined explanation. If you form in your mind a solution and then go looking for evidence, all you will find is evidence to support it. Because you've tainted your investigation with predictions.

For every 'thing' that supports the indoctrination theory, there is another that contradicts it.

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

[TheRevanchist]

Mr Massakka wrote...

I came across a flaw in the theory:
Why would Harbinger let Shepard hallucinate about all that? The best way to ensure the Reapers' success would be to simply let Shepard die.

"Preserve Shepards body if possible."

[Polat995]

Also, Collectors made a deal with Shadow Broker to acquire the corpse of Shepard after his death.

[Mhgasa]

kylecouch wrote...

Mr Massakka wrote...

I came across a flaw in the theory:
Why would Harbinger let Shepard hallucinate about all that? The best way to ensure the Reapers' success would be to simply let Shepard die.

"Preserve Shepards body if possible."

 
isnt that line from back when "dark energy" was the reaper motivation? they wanted to keep shepard because he was unique mong humans whom they believed was the answer to stopping the spread of dark energy

[Turtlicious]

SomeBug wrote...

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

I like...

Just answered that.

5 seconds ago.

It's answered right above this post.

[SomeBug]

Turtlicious wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

I like...

Just answered that.

5 seconds ago.

It's answered right above this post.

'Because Harbinger said he wanted Shepard alive' is not an answer to my question.

Why does Harbinger want Shepard alive?

[Rheinlandman]

SomeBug wrote...

Turtlicious wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

I like...

Just answered that.

5 seconds ago.

It's answered right above this post.

'Because Harbinger said he wanted Shepard alive' is not an answer to my question.

Why does Harbinger want Shepard alive?

I had always assumed Harbinger wanted to make Shepard the core of the human reaper, s/he was the best of humanity.

[Sindrop]

SomeBug wrote...

Turtlicious wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

I like...

Just answered that.

5 seconds ago.

It's answered right above this post.

'Because Harbinger said he wanted Shepard alive' is not an answer to my question.

Why does Harbinger want Shepard alive?

Perhaps he saw that he's unique and wanted to make him some kind of uber reaper-agent?

[Stalker]

Lugaidster wrote...

There's one part of contention in the script though, here it is:

CONVERSATION:

Once Shepard reaches the top of the elevator he begins a conversation with GUARDIAN where all the mysteries of the universe are revealed.

ACTION:

Shepard must now make his final decision - to control the Reapers, to destroy the Reapers, or if they had a perfect game to become one with the Reapers.

To me this implies that the synthesis ending is the be all end all of the reaper menace and what we got is the best ending possible...

That's quoted from the script?

Hearing that the sythesis ending is supposed to be the "perfect ending" they talked about, makes it even worse.

[Yuzna75]

SomeBug wrote...

Turtlicious wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

I like...

Just answered that.

5 seconds ago.

It's answered right above this post.

'Because Harbinger said he wanted Shepard alive' is not an answer to my question.

Why does Harbinger want Shepard alive?

I was always under the impression that Shepard was very resistant to indoctrination and therefore of great intresst to the reapers.

[Turtlicious]

SomeBug wrote...

Turtlicious wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

I like...

Just answered that.

5 seconds ago.

It's answered right above this post.

'Because Harbinger said he wanted Shepard alive' is not an answer to my question.

Why does Harbinger want Shepard alive?

I don't know to be honest, but if he wants shepard alive, he's going to do everything in his power to get what he wants. How many reapers do you think can handle being told "No you can't have that" It's a **** argument, and I wish I had a better answer, but if for some reason there's an errant codex entry or something like that. I'll find it, until then I simply have to say it's a flaw in our theory, and if we can't plug it we may have to change it.

[TheRevanchist]

Mhgasa wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Mr Massakka wrote...

I came across a flaw in the theory:
Why would Harbinger let Shepard hallucinate about all that? The best way to ensure the Reapers' success would be to simply let Shepard die.

"Preserve Shepards body if possible."

 
isnt that line from back when "dark energy" was the reaper motivation? they wanted to keep shepard because he was unique mong humans whom they believed was the answer to stopping the spread of dark energy

For all we know Dark Energy was NEVER the main movtavation. Do we actually know with 100% certenty that -that- was the original plan? I think it was just another possability.

[SomeBug]

Yuzna75 wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

Turtlicious wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

I like...

Just answered that.

5 seconds ago.

It's answered right above this post.

'Because Harbinger said he wanted Shepard alive' is not an answer to my question.

Why does Harbinger want Shepard alive?

I was always under the impression that Shepard was very resistant to indoctrination and therefore of great intresst to the reapers.

So the Reapers indoctrinate Shepard to think he's won so that they can use him to build a Reaper because he's so resistant to indoctrination.

Yep. That's just what happened.

[joe1852]

lol @ people clinging to hope with this stupid theory

[Turtlicious]

SomeBug wrote...
So the Reapers indoctrinate Shepard to think he's won so that they can use him to build a Reaper because he's so resistant to indoctrination.

Yep. That's just what happened.

Maybe the Reaper's are that arrogant, but like I said, I don't have an answer for you right now.

joe1852 wrote...

lol @ people clinging to hope with this stupid theory

Stupider then space magic?

Modifié par Turtlicious, 11 mars 2012 - 01:56 .

[Deltateam Elcor]

SomeBug wrote...

Turtlicious wrote...

SomeBug wrote...

So you're willing to believe something that is categorically untrue based upon what we DO know, because you believe that it will make sense later on by what we WILL know?

I mean, do you really not see what you're doing here.

'Don't worry, once the Messiah has his second coming I'll be proven right'.

Logical thinking dictates that you believe something based upon facts presented to you. Then modify that belief if new facts emerge. You don't believe something that might happen because you want it to.

I'm just trying to temper your hopes. You are setting yourself up for disappointment.

That's now what he said, we're still collecting facts. OJ Simpson wasn't arrested in a day, you need to allow us time to disect the game more, look at screenshots and vids see if there is anything we missed. We will change our theory as new information comes up, or completely throw it away and start again if it doesn't fit, but honestly, it's not religious fanatacism, and to be frank, I find you constantly comparing us to religious people rude and insulting.

I'm not burning the Qu'ran, I'm not preaching against gays. I'm trying to see if there's a hidden meaning in the video game because I'm bored and dissappointed, and it seemed like fun.

I don't care if you find it rude or insulting. I'm presenting a perfectly reasonable explanation. One that doesn't require leaps of logic or the collation of 'facts'.

The ending is so vague you could construct anything you wanted around it. None of the points in your arguments favor are conclusive. They're just confusing snippets of a bad ending that you've lashed to the skeleton of a better one for your own peace of mind.

When you have some of the information but not all, and not enough to make a definitive explanation. You don't say 'this is what's happened, if more evidence comes to light that contradicts it, then I'll change'.

You say 'I simply don't know. How can we investigate this further'. With an open mind, without any pre-determined explanation. If you form in your mind a solution and then go looking for evidence, all you will find is evidence to support it. Because you've tainted your investigation with predictions.

For every 'thing' that supports the indoctrination theory, there is another that contradicts it.

Why would Harbinger indoctrinate Shepard when he could just kill him? What is gained by doing that and risking it all in a battle for Shepard's mind? 

Why are you even doing this anyway?

Everyone knows that its only a possiblity due to the apparent evidence, not just in ME3 but across the entire trilogy, you should realise also that within the game itself, it always states that the hardest conclusions are usually the best ones.

Hell Shepard could just shoot himself at the start of ME1, thats simpler isnt it, wouldnt really make a good game.

Either way, even if the ending was what its supposed to be, they left in just enough space to move out of it if they choose, we would be none the wiser, its completely within bioware.

[Lugaidster]

Mr Massakka wrote...

Lugaidster wrote...

There's one part of contention in the script though, here it is:

CONVERSATION:

Once Shepard reaches the top of the elevator he begins a conversation with GUARDIAN where all the mysteries of the universe are revealed.

ACTION:

Shepard must now make his final decision - to control the Reapers, to destroy the Reapers, or if they had a perfect game to become one with the Reapers.

To me this implies that the synthesis ending is the be all end all of the reaper menace and what we got is the best ending possible...

That's quoted from the script?

Hearing that the sythesis ending is supposed to be the "perfect ending" they talked about, makes it even worse.

Yeah, it's quoted from the script, but the script is a mess, that's actually in the middle, and the whole mission happens differently. I'm not sure though, the "catalyst" is no longer the "catalyst" in the script. The god kid is refered to as the guardian.

However, if the "ultimate perfect ending"  is synthesis, then the writters had a brainfart to be honest. It's established in the lore that forced evolution is not the way (heretics vs geth and salarians uplifting krogans). However, I'm still hoping.