57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Legion109]

CLB17 wrote...

hey noticed something the last time i played the ending. The god-child says to Shepard "I control the reapers, they are my solution."

This is strange because it has been established that "Reapers" is not the Reapers true name as Sovereogn pointed out in the first game.

"Reaper a label created by the Protheans to give voice to their destruction. In the end what they choose to call us is irrelevant, we simply are."

This could just be oversight by the writers but still...

Legion addresses this in ME2 also saying Reaper was a superstitious title given to the Old Machines by the Protheans, he also led me to believe Reapers had some sort of society as Sovereign calls itself Nazara.

- We dont hold lines in Las Vegas we do lines -

Indoception - the belief it was an Indoctrination in a Hallucination caused by the Indoctrination in the Dreams.

[Icinix]

Dein Justin wrote...

Abram730 wrote...

Bioware : we are going to bring this to a conclusions and destroy all the rEApers!!
EA: no, fighting reapers is epic
Bioware: But weee(zap)
EA: you were saying
Bioware: 3 more games sounds great. It will be epic.

Personally I'd like 3 more games.. nerf the crucible a bit.

I really don't hope you mean that...waiting for another trilogy happening...just to get answers for this trilogy..BW would be better just developing Jade Empire universe, less DA (DA2 killed it for me..really wanted an option to kill Anders to stop him from whining)..sigh~

Imagine...after 6 games, finding your decisions doesn't matter at all in the end, needing to replay 6 games of each completion takes 30 hours...sigh~

I did hear wind of a rumour that the intention of ME3 was to kill of Shepard and key characters - reset the galaxy without fleets etc - Shep was indoctrinated and died, as did his crew and the Normandy.

Then we would get future games in the ME galaxy against the Reapers in new spin offs etc. In affect being able to create new 'canon' games.

I don't put any stock in it and I don't think anyone should - but from a big companies point of view - that train of thought sure would be tempting.

[Veuneurs]

That would be so awesome that this theory would be what really happens to the end. All the plothole will be not exist anymore, and it will be a really great twist for the real ending and for the players.

[Lasiewicz]

I think this was the plan from the start, and Bioware just kept quiet to gain publicity. There is way to much evidence to support it.

[krobinson_3232]

sure it has been posted 50 times but just in case http://ps3.ign.com/a.../1221273p1.html

[ArkkAngel007]

 Hey guys, glad to see the cogs still at work.  I want to point out, if it hasn't already, a very well put together thread by GBGriffin, who some of you know is one of the more mature opponents to this theory:

http://social.biowar.../index/10412259

Now, our purpose isn't to set up for follow-up DLC.  Shepard being alive at the end of the best Destroy ending already does that.  However, IT does leave the ending without any conclusion to ME3, and that is what a lot of people take issue with.  So how could this issue be resolved in DLC, without dipping into fan-fiction?

Here is how I responded to GBGriffin, who genuinely enjoyed it and felt that it would allow BioWare to successfully pull off IT with the supplement of DLC:

[Edit: these are about how to make it possible to not alienate players who chose Synthesis and Control from experiencing post-ending DLC with IT being the backdrop]

“There are possible ways IT can expound on the an indoctrinated Shepard. He may wake up and you can carry out the same plot as you do in what someone would in the Destroy ending, with an ending where Shepard may have to make a choice that is now influenced by him being compromised by indoctrination. That is the only solution I can see to the issues IT presents in an abstract manner.


But IT was never meant to carry past the ending in the beginning. Shepard being alive did that alone.”



My follow up-response when someone else asked how it would affect the actual gameplay:

“I'm not going to go too far into speculation where it's purely fan-fiction, but that sounds interesting.  I'm going to leave the actual conclusion to BioWare, but I'm seeing some awesome suggestions on both sides on how to deal with the endings.  Keep up the awesome work!


Following up in an IT ending, gameplay-wise, it would be the same.  The only differences you would see might be in active and passive dialogue and in "cutscenes".  There's no need to have your weapon being jerked around or your controls being inverted (though that last bit would be cool).


It would allow minimal level-design cost, while leaving the bulk of the work to the cinematic and gameplay departments (for dialogue), which would be much more cost-friendly when looking at the pricing for DLC.  Plus, it would offer greater variation to expression of the consequences of your choices in the ending with minimal effort on BioWare's part, which again would lower the cost than having 2-3 completely different levels.”

Anyways, I thought I should hear some feedback from you guys still discussing it here.  Plus, if you wish to in a civil manner, can carry-on to GBGriffin's thread and provide any additional thoughts, though the discussion seems to be turning into what is/isn't proof to IT, for some odd reason.

Modifié par ArkkAngel007, 22 mars 2012 - 03:30 .

[Dein Justin]

Icinix wrote...

Dein Justin wrote...

Abram730 wrote...

Bioware : we are going to bring this to a conclusions and destroy all the rEApers!!
EA: no, fighting reapers is epic
Bioware: But weee(zap)
EA: you were saying
Bioware: 3 more games sounds great. It will be epic.

Personally I'd like 3 more games.. nerf the crucible a bit.

I really don't hope you mean that...waiting for another trilogy happening...just to get answers for this trilogy..BW would be better just developing Jade Empire universe, less DA (DA2 killed it for me..really wanted an option to kill Anders to stop him from whining)..sigh~

Imagine...after 6 games, finding your decisions doesn't matter at all in the end, needing to replay 6 games of each completion takes 30 hours...sigh~

I did hear wind of a rumour that the intention of ME3 was to kill of Shepard and key characters - reset the galaxy without fleets etc - Shep was indoctrinated and died, as did his crew and the Normandy.

Then we would get future games in the ME galaxy against the Reapers in new spin offs etc. In affect being able to create new 'canon' games.

I don't put any stock in it and I don't think anyone should - but from a big companies point of view - that train of thought sure would be tempting.

that's what i thought too. in creating a canon universe, the ending where Shep just died after harbinger's beam would have been it, and the sequence after that is just in Shep's head. Even if people got the Shep breathing ending, Shep will just be that legend, and that's that.

but how can Shep end there, when they also included Stargazer's "The Other Tales of Shepard" ending..<_<..unless if it was Shep's kid....weird..

[CLB17]

In the end during the scene with Shepard, Anderson and the Illusive Man; how was TIM able to faltout control shepard and Anderson? It has been shown that even the Reapers can't flat out control people unless they've had reaper tech in them, like the Collectors.

Or am I mistaken?

Modifié par CLB17, 22 mars 2012 - 03:33 .

[Totally Not Swaggacide]

@CLB17
Magic

[Cucobr]

CLB17 wrote...

In the end during the scene with Shepard, Anderson and the Illusive Man; how was TIM able to faltout control shepard and Anderson? It has been shown that even the Reapers can't flat out control people unless they've had reaper tech in them, like the Collectors.

Or am I mistaken?

see this video

 

[Dwailing]

Totally Not Swaggacide wrote...

@CLB17
Magic

Not just magic, SPACE MAGIC :wizard::wizard:!!!!  It's the explanation for everything.

[ZerebusPrime]

CLB17 wrote...

In the end during the scene with Shepard, Anderson and the Illusive Man; how was TIM able to faltout control shepard and Anderson? It has been shown that even the Reapers can't flat out control people unless they've had reaper tech in them, like the Collectors.

Or am I mistaken?

We are meant to believe from the Sanctuary mission that the Illusive Man knows how to mimic the Reaper control signals.  We are further meant to believe that he is seeking a way to amplify them so that he can turn them back upon the Reapers and control them.

But really, it seems to be more symbolic than anything else (see above youtube video).  The real Illusive Man should be too smart to try to carry an indoctrination device on his person..

[llbountyhunter]

 Ok, so I finished a replay of the game, looking out for indoctrination signals. And I hit gold...maybe


Now I think the indoctrination starts as soon as the shuttle "crashes," because here the game cuts of abruptly (a little too abruptly)and as soon as the black fades your suddenly outside safely with the shuttle mangled on its side. (I realize this sounds completely normal, but the game makes it feel really awkward and weird, especially when you’re looking for clues....)


But the biggest thing (really big) was the reaper that came down to protect the beam. It has anyone noticed it was harbinger? it didnt have the typical red reaper eye, but harbingers eye.

 Now here I’m speculating but I think you can also see his eyes when your first arrive at the citadel, you’re walking
out of the dark room and the door shifts, you get blinded by some rays of light (that are really part of the citadel) but also kind of look like eyes, and you hear whispers at this point (though I may be stretching it on this one).

 
Of course “the run” could have been real, and the reaper was actually THE harbinger (I don’t think we ever saw him), and those “beams” were in fact “indoctrination rays” or something like that…. 

Modifié par llbountyhunter, 22 mars 2012 - 04:14 .

[Catreina-JTV]

RorickHuon wrote...

Beware of trolls like this >.<

That guy claims evidence as fact, and when confronted with this notion he resorts to name calling and straw man arguments.

He also claims we are assuming the evidence we are pointing out is "fact" when I have yet to see anyone here claim it as such.  Trolls being trolls are .... trollololol

[CLB17]

@Cucobr...

Yea i watched that video. The original is what introduced me to the Indoctrination Theory. But it did answer my question. Thanks.

[Arian Dynas]

ShadowTheInsane wrote...

jedsithor wrote...

I think my biggest problem with the Indoctrination Theory is that it forces you to choose Destroy in order to keep playing. And how far does it go? Do you only get to keep playing if you got enough EMS to get the "Shepard lives" scene?

If Bioware do release DLC that makes use of Indoctrination, I don't think it can be just for those who chose Destroy. Imagine downloading this DLC, possibly even paying for it, only to receive a message saying "You failed! Please go back and choose Destroy to keep playing!" It's ridiculous.

For that reason, I believe the theory needs to be looked at again. I've no problem believing the theory as a whole but let's say it's true. It means that if you chose synthesis or control, your Shepard is still alive, just indoctrinated. Right? So I guess you could play through the new endgame as indoctrinated Shepard, fighting for the enemy or struggling to break free of indoctrination.

It's not unprecedented in Bioware games. In KOTOR you can turn to the Dark Side but at the very end, Carth shows up and gives you one last chance to redeem yourself. Something like that could work I guess.

The problem with such a scenario in Mass Effect though is that your choices were never really about right and wrong, good and evil. Shepard was never the "bad" guy. You can make him to some rotten things like shoot Mordin in the back, but Renegade Shepard would say it was for the greater good. The choices were about saving the galaxy and what you would do to achieve that. Even the choices at the end of the game, as poorly thought out as they appear to be, are about saving the galaxy from the Reaper threat. Control them, join them or destroy them. Whichever you choose, the threat is over. It's a matter of deciding which is better for the individual player. As it turns out, they're all terrible and make no sense.

Indoctrination, while a cool idea, takes that away. It suggests that there really is only one choice. Can you really play as an indoctrinated Shepard for the final part of the game? If the player chooses synthesis, is he then punished for wanting an ending where organics and synthetics are the same, thus no more wars? Do you then force the player to start gunning down squad members? You've saved the galaxy a couple of times but now you have to play as the villain? It just feels wrong and it goes against the Mass Effect concept just as much as the current endings do.

Maybe it can work, but Bioware need to be really careful about how they implement it should they choose to. Having 3 poor choices is bad enough. But having 1 "real" choice is arguably worse.

I agree in principle with what you're saying about ME not being about good path/evil path so much as taking the same path but as a nice guy or a bad-ass. But then again in a game that ultimately boils down to "did you save the galaxy or not", does there not have to be a way to fail and lose the war? Otherwise doesn't it make your choice (or your "failure" to see through the indoctrination attempt) artificial? I'd be disappointed if your decision of control/synthesis/destroy didn't bear some kind of consequence in the ending DLC.

That being said, if choosing destroy lets you immediately rejoin the fight, while control/synthesis required you to go through some kind of extra/side plotline in order to fight off the indoctrination and link up with the story at the same point as if you chose destroy, then I think that could work.

*Coughs and points at the ending of Neverwinter Nights 2* *cough*sidewithkingofshadows*cough*

[ShepGep]

With the announcement of the DLC to address the ending...I've got to say...I really hope it incoporates this indoctrination theory.

[AidanTk5]

Cucobr wrote...
see this video

 

That made a believer out of me, I highly recommend it.

[Totally Not Swaggacide]

@Dwailing
Yes SPACE MAGIC is everything!!!

[T16skyhopp]

Is it alright that I imagine everyone doing "jazz hands" when they say "space magic?" It just fits, right?


...Space Magic... *Jazz hands

[CLB17]

Currently replaying the ending again and i just noticed something i don't think anyone has addressed. Does anyone notice the strange music it starts playing after you get blasted by harbinger. It sounds almost exactly like the strange music during the dream sequences. just louder

[Dein Justin]

Arian Dynas wrote...

ShadowTheInsane wrote...

jedsithor wrote...

I think my biggest problem with the Indoctrination Theory is that it forces you to choose Destroy in order to keep playing. And how far does it go? Do you only get to keep playing if you got enough EMS to get the "Shepard lives" scene?

If Bioware do release DLC that makes use of Indoctrination, I don't think it can be just for those who chose Destroy. Imagine downloading this DLC, possibly even paying for it, only to receive a message saying "You failed! Please go back and choose Destroy to keep playing!" It's ridiculous.

For that reason, I believe the theory needs to be looked at again. I've no problem believing the theory as a whole but let's say it's true. It means that if you chose synthesis or control, your Shepard is still alive, just indoctrinated. Right? So I guess you could play through the new endgame as indoctrinated Shepard, fighting for the enemy or struggling to break free of indoctrination.

It's not unprecedented in Bioware games. In KOTOR you can turn to the Dark Side but at the very end, Carth shows up and gives you one last chance to redeem yourself. Something like that could work I guess.

The problem with such a scenario in Mass Effect though is that your choices were never really about right and wrong, good and evil. Shepard was never the "bad" guy. You can make him to some rotten things like shoot Mordin in the back, but Renegade Shepard would say it was for the greater good. The choices were about saving the galaxy and what you would do to achieve that. Even the choices at the end of the game, as poorly thought out as they appear to be, are about saving the galaxy from the Reaper threat. Control them, join them or destroy them. Whichever you choose, the threat is over. It's a matter of deciding which is better for the individual player. As it turns out, they're all terrible and make no sense.

Indoctrination, while a cool idea, takes that away. It suggests that there really is only one choice. Can you really play as an indoctrinated Shepard for the final part of the game? If the player chooses synthesis, is he then punished for wanting an ending where organics and synthetics are the same, thus no more wars? Do you then force the player to start gunning down squad members? You've saved the galaxy a couple of times but now you have to play as the villain? It just feels wrong and it goes against the Mass Effect concept just as much as the current endings do.

Maybe it can work, but Bioware need to be really careful about how they implement it should they choose to. Having 3 poor choices is bad enough. But having 1 "real" choice is arguably worse.

I agree in principle with what you're saying about ME not being about good path/evil path so much as taking the same path but as a nice guy or a bad-ass. But then again in a game that ultimately boils down to "did you save the galaxy or not", does there not have to be a way to fail and lose the war? Otherwise doesn't it make your choice (or your "failure" to see through the indoctrination attempt) artificial? I'd be disappointed if your decision of control/synthesis/destroy didn't bear some kind of consequence in the ending DLC.

That being said, if choosing destroy lets you immediately rejoin the fight, while control/synthesis required you to go through some kind of extra/side plotline in order to fight off the indoctrination and link up with the story at the same point as if you chose destroy, then I think that could work.

*Coughs and points at the ending of Neverwinter Nights 2* *cough*sidewithkingofshadows*cough*

You do have to remember NWN2 is not BioWare's doing..it's Obsidian. Obsidian has tried some complex stuff in many of its games, only to leave most content out and games buggy e.g. KOTOR2, NWN2, Alpha Protocol, Fallout NV..

[Legion109]

T16skyhopp wrote...

Is it alright that I imagine everyone doing "jazz hands" when they say "space magic?" It just fits, right?


...Space Magic... *Jazz hands

You've ruined my mind Jazz hands are going to be stuck in my head every time I hear/see space magic -shivers-


- We dont hold lines in Las Vegas we do lines -
Indoception - the belief it was an Indoctrination in a Hallucination caused by the Indoctrination in the Dreams.

[Totally Not Swaggacide]

@T16skyhopp
JAZZZZZZ HANDS!!!!!!!!!! SPAAAAAAAAACE MAAAAAAAAAAGIC!!!!!!

[RADIUMEYEZ]

CLB17 wrote...

Currently replaying the ending again and i just noticed something i don't think anyone has addressed. Does anyone notice the strange music it starts playing after you get blasted by harbinger. It sounds almost exactly like the strange music during the dream sequences. just louder

Good find I just watched a video of it on youtube and it does sound an awful lot like it so I am going to agree with you on this.