57139 réponses à ce sujet

[aslivewire]

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

But his syntehtics aren't alive. The child specifically said all Synethetic life! That's the Geth, Edi, those types not the machines keeping Shepard going they'd be unaffected. As would Biotics with implants etc. They weren't saying all TECH would be dead just all synthetic AI. And Shepards implants aren't like Saren or Illusive man he used organic tech they used reaper tech HUGE difference. 

The child specifically says that Shepard- who counts as synthetic life- would die.

So are you picking and choosing which of his statements to believe? Because it's all the more likely that he's a lying liar who lies- as opposed to you picking and choosing what he's honest about and just stumbling upon the right parts to believe.

And you actually don't know specifically which tech is used on Shepard, to just play devil's advocate- all you know is that it was a TIM-funded project. You don't know if it was 'organic' in anyway.

[greywardencommander]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

Lots of haters of this theory... what else do they want BioWare to do? Completley retcon everything that happened? That to me would be even WORSE than what they're saying about this "theory."

exactly isn't it better to just lead on from the harbinger beam and waking up and having it realised that it hadn't happened because of indoctrination if it's destroy (in whatever way Bioware see fit) or have you suffering from indoctrination in some form because of choosing control (blue eyes like TIM) and synthesis (green eyes like in Overlord)

than have them come out and go, yeah guys we're deleting the entire last bit of the game and having something else put over, it would look so sloppy in game too.

They're not going to have a completely different ending (i.e. what's happened in ME3 happened and they won't change that or because it was planned) to save face, who wants to go sorry guys it was rubbish let's pretend it never happened so using this theory is an 'altering' which they said they may do without changing anything that has actually happened in game.

Here's how I would lead on using IDT

http://social.biowar...ndex/10350970/1 

[Dap Brannigan]

I just noticed something -- I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before.

Most people have noticed that there is a small sign next to the vent at the beginning of the game that says WARNING, with an image of a lightning bolt striking someone's head.

In the first conversation with Garrus after recruiting him, you have a conversation with him to the side of the gun battery. If you pick the paragon option and choose to mention the little boy you saw on Earth, there are two WARNING signs in the background. Well, one and a half (one of them cuts off). Anyone else noticed this?

[cavs25]

uh-oh0331 wrote...

does anyone else feel like the community saved the Ending/Bioware by coming up with the indoctrination theory.

If the indoctrination theory was correct why hasnt Bioware hinted at it? Is it because they want to make DLC and more money? Good PR?

I watched the videos and the Indoctrination theory makes sense based on the the information presented, but at the same time I wonder if we are looking too far into it and creating something out of nothing.

After watching the videos I felt like "CRAP!!! I picked the wrong ending....I knew I should have just killed the SOB's" I didnt want to wipe out all AI though.

This will be great PR for Bioware especially if they tricked(indoctrinated) nearly the entire ME community. That would be truly legendary. I dont know if there is really any way to prove that this was Bioware's actual initial intention or if they just took the indoctrination theory and ran with it after the fact.

Honestly this is how I feel, Bioware needs to thank their fans who came up with an ending 200 times better than their own.  Go Bioware jump on it and act as if it was your plan all along.  Ill still be happy.

[greywardencommander]

Dap Brannigan wrote...

I just noticed something -- I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before.

Most people have noticed that there is a small sign next to the vent at the beginning of the game that says WARNING, with an image of a lightning bolt striking someone's head.

In the first conversation with Garrus after recruiting him, you have a conversation with him to the side of the gun battery. If you pick the paragon option and choose to mention the little boy you saw on Earth, there are two WARNING signs in the background. Well, one and a half (one of them cuts off). Anyone else noticed this?

another good spot to do with the warning signs whenever you see the boy

[Dauw]

Honestly this is how I feel, Bioware needs to thank their fans who came up with an ending 200 times better than their own.  Go Bioware jump on it and act as if it was your plan all along.  Ill still be happy.

Haha, this, pretty much.

I would totally accept the "and it was all a horrible dream" thing this once, but just this once. And once more as far as ME: Deception is concerned.

[I Soya I]

This has probably been mentioned so it is more of a question than evidence. Was it raining before you woke up from the beam?
EDIT: Answered own question. Feel stupid -.-

Modifié par I Soya I, 23 mars 2012 - 03:01 .

[CLB17]

aslivewire wrote...

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

But his syntehtics aren't alive. The child specifically said all Synethetic life! That's the Geth, Edi, those types not the machines keeping Shepard going they'd be unaffected. As would Biotics with implants etc. They weren't saying all TECH would be dead just all synthetic AI. And Shepards implants aren't like Saren or Illusive man he used organic tech they used reaper tech HUGE difference. 

The child specifically says that Shepard- who counts as synthetic life- would die.

So are you picking and choosing which of his statements to believe? Because it's all the more likely that he's a lying liar who lies- as opposed to you picking and choosing what he's honest about and just stumbling upon the right parts to believe.

And you actually don't know specifically which tech is used on Shepard, to just play devil's advocate- all you know is that it was a TIM-funded project. You don't know if it was 'organic' in anyway.

Why should we believe anything the god-child says when it specifically tells us that he controls the Reapers, the guys who have been trying to destroy all sentient life in the galaxy over the course of three games. Don't trust anything that little bastard says.

[legaldinho]

the first thing we see is the boy. but before that, we hear the sound of a ship moving about. Then the camera pans out, and the ship you see turns out to be in his hand. First 2 secs of the game. The boy controls the ship. Can't confirm it's the normandy.

The doors on the normandy all say "8-M-8". Really don't know what to make of that.

[greywardencommander]

cavs25 wrote...

uh-oh0331 wrote...

does anyone else feel like the community saved the Ending/Bioware by coming up with the indoctrination theory.

If the indoctrination theory was correct why hasnt Bioware hinted at it? Is it because they want to make DLC and more money? Good PR?

I watched the videos and the Indoctrination theory makes sense based on the the information presented, but at the same time I wonder if we are looking too far into it and creating something out of nothing.

After watching the videos I felt like "CRAP!!! I picked the wrong ending....I knew I should have just killed the SOB's" I didnt want to wipe out all AI though.

This will be great PR for Bioware especially if they tricked(indoctrinated) nearly the entire ME community. That would be truly legendary. I dont know if there is really any way to prove that this was Bioware's actual initial intention or if they just took the indoctrination theory and ran with it after the fact.

Honestly this is how I feel, Bioware needs to thank their fans who came up with an ending 200 times better than their own.  Go Bioware jump on it and act as if it was your plan all along.  Ill still be happy.

THIS

I don't care by this point if it was intended or not all I know going this way would be much better than retconning or creating an entirely different ending. If it is purely the fans that have created it then I would personally be hiring the first person who posted it on these forums and gave all the evidence, that level of attention to detail is a must surely even if it's just making sure there are no glaring plot holes in a story etc.

This theory makes too much sense for them to completely ignore it and have a different ending. I also think it would still be better than them trying to come out and justify the current endings and just give us an epilogue (for example) because they incorrectly think the backlash purely about the closure (to be honest leaving an entire galaxy to die is pretty final lol) or happy endings (both those points just don't help in a final 10 minutes with more plotholes than a piece of swiss cheese.

Modifié par greywardencommander, 23 mars 2012 - 02:59 .

[ShepardTheHopeful]

And they never said he would actually die they mentioned he was very clear on the GETH being destroyed but he only mentioned that Shepard was part synthetic there was no specification that he would just plain out die. If anything the synthetics being destroyed in him somehow revived him with help of the crucible. It's just as believable this is a billions year old machine design.

[greywardencommander]

CLB17 wrote...

aslivewire wrote...

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

But his syntehtics aren't alive. The child specifically said all Synethetic life! That's the Geth, Edi, those types not the machines keeping Shepard going they'd be unaffected. As would Biotics with implants etc. They weren't saying all TECH would be dead just all synthetic AI. And Shepards implants aren't like Saren or Illusive man he used organic tech they used reaper tech HUGE difference. 

The child specifically says that Shepard- who counts as synthetic life- would die.

So are you picking and choosing which of his statements to believe? Because it's all the more likely that he's a lying liar who lies- as opposed to you picking and choosing what he's honest about and just stumbling upon the right parts to believe.

And you actually don't know specifically which tech is used on Shepard, to just play devil's advocate- all you know is that it was a TIM-funded project. You don't know if it was 'organic' in anyway.

Why should we believe anything the god-child says when it specifically tells us that he controls the Reapers, the guys who have been trying to destroy all sentient life in the galaxy over the course of three games. Don't trust anything that little bastard says.

which in itself is my problem, why the hell would I accept that I'd say well screw you and you can later prove me wrong if the Geth rise up

[Needsnewending]

They realy shoul consider this theory, i would love it:)

[Dein Justin]

greywardencommander wrote...

Dap Brannigan wrote...

I just noticed something -- I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before.

Most people have noticed that there is a small sign next to the vent at the beginning of the game that says WARNING, with an image of a lightning bolt striking someone's head.

In the first conversation with Garrus after recruiting him, you have a conversation with him to the side of the gun battery. If you pick the paragon option and choose to mention the little boy you saw on Earth, there are two WARNING signs in the background. Well, one and a half (one of them cuts off). Anyone else noticed this?

another good spot to do with the warning signs whenever you see the boy

http://social.biowar...23/821#10485370 what I said here...the kid is a LIE.

[HunterKYA]

SwiftSlash wrote...

I've played since Mass Effect 1 and have put (between the 3) about 15 entire game plays in.
I believe this theory 100%
I'm the kind of person who hates to go all in, but there is just way too much proof.

At first, I bought the ending. Ranging myself in the range of content/satisfied. The more I thought about it, the more it didn't make sense. after hours and hours of discussion with my friends that are in the same situation as me, we realized this more than likely wasn't the ending. However, we didn't know what was, or why. All we knew was a company that is this intricate about EVERYTHING wouldn't finish their trilogy like this.

Upon reading this post, the doubt disappeared. It was on purpose. But how would they continue. Would it D.L.C. When? They wouldn't charge, right? They wouldn't wait to develop a whole new game would they?

I am excited to see how they finish, but I do agree: they way underestimated the backlash.

Think about the power of making this free. Everyone would accept that, but think of how much MORE revenue they would make. You charge for DLC, and the most bitter people won't download it. You make it free, and the controversy & "corrected ending" would certainly sell at least a few more brand new copies. But the kicker: Online Pass. People who will/have bought it used will want/need this ending. And it's free, as soon as you buy a pass. Brilliant, but risky.

I know any way they release it, be it free D.L.C., paid D.L.C., or new game, I will own it. BioWare is one of the greatest developers of all. They will not disappoint.

They may have expected backlash like this with the present endings, but not to this magnitude, not to the point where the company's co-founder states that measures have been taken that will help resolve the problem.

As to whether they should charge for DLC, my opinion would be 'no.'  The DLC for the ending should be free, as a gesture of good faith to their fans, to show they're not in it entirely for the money.

Modifié par HunterKYA, 23 mars 2012 - 03:05 .

[Cucobr]

Needsnewending wrote...

They realy shoul consider this theory, i would love it:)

put our signature and welcome a board soldier! Hold the Line!

[Dein Justin]

aslivewire wrote...

Dein Justin wrote...

it would be ironic though...if somehow Shepard was spaced again from the Citadel explosion...put in stasis mode (like how it was in ME:Redemption) and somehow revived in the midst of rubbles (somewhere along the century war against the Reapers)...kinda like how Javik gasped upon waking up after 50,000 years of stasis.

That wouldn't be ironic that would be further bad writing.

There comes a point where repeating a plot ceases being a parallel and starts being lazy writing...

[oh god i'm saying that sentence about mass effect not glee i think i'm going to cry blood tears now]

haha..but well, they could be doing it..if they can do it once, why not twice..only to have Shepard waking up to a losing war. lol. Whatever it will be, BioWare, 2 more weeks..DO GIVE US GOOD NEWS..pretty please~

[Denvian]

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

And they never said he would actually die they mentioned he was very clear on the GETH being destroyed but he only mentioned that Shepard was part synthetic there was no specification that he would just plain out die. If anything the synthetics being destroyed in him somehow revived him with help of the crucible. It's just as believable this is a billions year old machine design.

I never tursted the little jerk anyway... that was my biggest problem with the end is the supposed "good" sythesis ending means you have to give into the reapers.

[InnerTurmoil]

I don't know is this is a big deal or not, but I ran into something interesting while playing the ending.  I was interested in the idea of the trees and/or shrubs that appear after the beam knocks shepard of her feet.  I thought that I would be able to get more definitive pictures if I were able to use flycam, so I looked up how to modify the coalesced folder.  I copied and pasted the needed lines into the bindings part of the sfx area.  After alot of copy and pasting, I decided that I didn't need to use flycam for the dream sequences, so I did not add the needed key bindings.  After loading up the ending run towards the beam, I freecam flew to the base of the beam and took a picture of the path infront of the beam, then proceeded down the path.  Once shepard got back on her feet I realized quickly that though there may not be any new trees,  there were obviously new shrubs where they could not be before.  I decided that I would take a picture from freecam anyway, to make the comparison easier.  When I tried, the commands would not work.  I thought this was odd at first, but I remembered that I had not binded the freecam to the sfxgamemodedreamsequence.

tl;dr     The sequence at the end is using the part of the game designed for dream sequences.

Could this just be for ease of programming the ending... possibly.
Has this been brought up before... probably.

I just thought that I would try to contribute in some way, since I had been stalking this thread for days...

[greywardencommander]

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

And they never said he would actually die they mentioned he was very clear on the GETH being destroyed but he only mentioned that Shepard was part synthetic there was no specification that he would just plain out die. If anything the synthetics being destroyed in him somehow revived him with help of the crucible. It's just as believable this is a billions year old machine design.

I'm pretty sure destroying a part of him (the part keeping him alive because they presumably control his vital organs) would kill him. He says 'even you are partly synthetic' is because HE IS SYNTHETIC LIFE, part synthetic, part organice JUST LIKE THE REAPERS. If they wanted him to survive in that easter egg ending just don't mention that at all and we would have all assumed he survived because he destroyed the Reapers, the original purpose yay.

(btw I don't believe a word he says but without the indoctrination theory you have to assume everything he says is true because they don't provide an alternative in game, but he somehow survives so that's a pretty big clue in my opinion, not even accounting for the reversed Paragon-Renegade in Anderson and TIM and other plot holes I won't bore you with because you don't bother reading)

Modifié par greywardencommander, 23 mars 2012 - 03:14 .

[greywardencommander]

InnerTurmoil wrote...

I don't know is this is a big deal or not, but I ran into something interesting while playing the ending.  I was interested in the idea of the trees and/or shrubs that appear after the beam knocks shepard of her feet.  I thought that I would be able to get more definitive pictures if I were able to use flycam, so I looked up how to modify the coalesced folder.  I copied and pasted the needed lines into the bindings part of the sfx area.  After alot of copy and pasting, I decided that I didn't need to use flycam for the dream sequences, so I did not add the needed key bindings.  After loading up the ending run towards the beam, I freecam flew to the base of the beam and took a picture of the path infront of the beam, then proceeded down the path.  Once shepard got back on her feet I realized quickly that though there may not be any new trees,  there were obviously new shrubs where they could not be before.  I decided that I would take a picture from freecam anyway, to make the comparison easier.  When I tried, the commands would not work.  I thought this was odd at first, but I remembered that I had not binded the freecam to the sfxgamemodedreamsequence.

tl;dr     The sequence at the end is using the part of the game designed for dream sequences.

Could this just be for ease of programming the ending... possibly.
Has this been brought up before... probably.

I just thought that I would try to contribute in some way, since I had been stalking this thread for days...

which is why we say this is the last, biggest and most important, of all those dreams

[Rob Psyence]

Did I seriously just read four or five pages where someone continuously maintains that it is logical for someone to survive a massive explosion, the vaccum of space, cosmic radiation, super hot re-entry (which gets to nearly 5000 degrees farenheit), then survive an impact into concrete at terminal velocity WITHOUT shield generators, full armor, and a helmet?

Nanites and cybernetic implants does not make Shepard turn into Wolverine

[Dwailing]

Rob Psyence wrote...

Did I seriously just read four or five pages where someone continuously maintains that it is logical for someone to survive a massive explosion, the vaccum of space, cosmic radiation, super hot re-entry (which gets to nearly 5000 degrees farenheit), then survive an impact into concrete at terminal velocity WITHOUT shield generators, full armor, and a helmet?

Nanites and cybernetic implants does not make Shepard turn into Wolverine

It would be cool if they did though. 

[Either.Ardrey]

legaldinho wrote...

the first thing we see is the boy. but before that, we hear the sound of a ship moving about. Then the camera pans out, and the ship you see turns out to be in his hand. First 2 secs of the game. The boy controls the ship. Can't confirm it's the normandy.

The doors on the normandy all say "8-M-8". Really don't know what to make of that.

#M# is mainly seen on items of human manufacture, so that would lead to suggest that it is a code for "Made by Humans." M is also used in vehicle and weapon names of human manufacture, I think, but I'm not entirely certain.

[greywardencommander]

Rob Psyence wrote...

Did I seriously just read four or five pages where someone continuously maintains that it is logical for someone to survive a massive explosion, the vaccum of space, cosmic radiation, super hot re-entry (which gets to nearly 5000 degrees farenheit), then survive an impact into concrete at terminal velocity WITHOUT shield generators, full armor, and a helmet?

Nanites and cybernetic implants does not make Shepard turn into Wolverine

you did indeed now he's arguing the fact that destroying synthetic life wouldn't kill Shepard despite Shepard being part synthetic life just like the Reapers. Based on the fact we're not given an alternative but to trust the little brat (why would you if he controls the very thing you're trying to defeat), that's a pretty big thing to just have him wake up when he should be dead by the star child's own logic and hint.