57139 réponses à ce sujet

[rvgifford]

FugitiveMind wrote...

I certainly hope it was a hallucination...

Otherwise I just basically played "3 Card Monte" with a dream kid who glows in the dark and lost 200 hours of my life...

Yeah, nicely worded.

[GaryTheHand]

I just want BW to say something. Even if I was just told "deal with it thats the ending you get" at least I would have closure of a sort. As it stands I guess I'll just have to wait to see what the official statement is. Until then I guess its just MP for me.

[Madkipz]

lookingglassmind wrote...

rogueagent6 wrote...

lookingglassmind wrote...

In defense of the Hallucination/Indoctrination theory: the BioWare/Player Indoctrination Theory

With the assistance of my peers throughout the rest of this thread, I have collated a series of facts that I would like to present to the community as being evidence for a a priori intention for the endings of ME3. Some of this information will not be new to a lot of you, and it may seem downright strange to a lot of you. It does require a strong and disorienting amount of suspension of disbelief, so if you cannot engage in this type of thought process, I encourage you to skip over this post. It will hurt your brain. Or make you think that I'm crazy. Likely both. (I'm okay with either.)

With the assistance of countless others' highly important observations in this thread, I sumbit to you that possibility the endings of ME3 represent the highest form of the metagaming experience. The highest form of BioWare's "giving the player choice that matters, from ME1 to ME3". The highest form of player interaction that we have yet seen from a video game. This has never before been attempted by a company, and it represents the ballsiest dedication to story and lore that may exist.

I believe that the endings may be indicative of BioWare attempting to allow the player the real-time experience of what indoctrination would be like. This theory explains (in a highly weird, impossible, and completely insane way) all of the missing pieces in the hallucination sequence, and also explains BioWare's real-world actions (such as complete silence since the fan sh*tstorm broke in response to the endings).

If you have not been keeping up with the thread, or if you have not read Byne's/Kitten Tactics/Turtlicious' amalgamation of all of the evidence we have accumulated for the originial hallucination theory on page 1, then I would urge you to do so before you read any more of this post. Due to time constraints, I won't be posting all of the evidences that we have located in this post to confirm or contradict this theory: I leave it in your capable and self-aware hands to attain this information yourself. I am posting this as an add-on to page 1, as I don't think it was properly represented there in its entire grand scope.

So, to the meat of the issue:

We have already established as much evidence as we can that 'proves' that Shepard is either hallucinating/dreaming just prior to/immediately after he runs into Harbinger's beam/Conduit. The hallucination/dream sequence has been quite well fleshed out, with a lot of compelling environmental evidence to support it (again, please see page 1 for further analysis). I am going to use this particular vehicle of suspension of disbelief to propose that BioWare's intention during this sequence is to flag the player with as many markers as they can: This current reality playing before your eyes (the Citadel, the Catalyst, TIM, Anderson) is a reflection of Shepard. It is the product of his/her mind. The meeting with the Catalyst may or may not be rooted in reality; they may meet in some metalphysical dimension, or Shepard may just hallucinate the entire thing. Either way, this theory would argue that it essentially doesn't matter, because what truly matters is the role of the player in this sequence. Your role. The scene is set in a way that urges the player to become aware of things just not being right, of being a place that mirrors (literally) Shepard's experiences throughout the game. The reality presented on the Citadel is an amalgamation of archetypes of every thing Shepard has seen in the series, which this theory challenges the player to understand as being a direct prompt from BioWare to understand that what is truly happening during this scene is all within Shepard's mind. His/her reality. Under her/his control.

Understanding that the reality on the Citadel as being a cerebral concoction that is entirely of Shepard's creation is important when we arrive upon the Crucible. It becomes a vital understanding when we are faced with these three, seemingly bizarre and unexpected choices that the Catalyst gives us. This theory submits that BioWare is asking the player to actively question EVERYTHING that happens once Shepard runs into Harbinger's beam. The cost of not questioning, or making the right choice even if you do?

Real-time player indoctrination. Shepard's literal death.

Think about it carefully. We arrive on the Crucible, and are faced with an archetype of manipulation, the Catalyst. Taking the form of a child that has come to represent everything that is horrendous about the Reapers to Shepard, the Catalyst/Harbinger provides Shepard with three strange and disorienting choices. He first presents Shepard with the option of Destroy, making swift and empty assertations about how it is the wrong choice because it would kill all synthetic life and Shepard herself/himself. At its surface, this seems like the renegade/chaos option, and is even insidiously portrayed in Renegade Red, a direct nod to the Player himself/herself. Directly appealing to your experiences with how the game works. He then goes on at great length about the Control and Synthesis options, portraying Control as the blue paragon/order option. Again, directly appealing to the Player. He argues that Control is the best option, implies that Shepard is the new Catalyst, and leaves us to contemplate the possibility that we could use it to try and save the people we love; after all, we are Shepard, and we would never become like TIM. Synthesis is the last option explored, and it is portrayed as a compromise or as being the Brave New Hope for the galaxy. I have a suspicion that Synthesis may actually  be the 'perfect' choice, but that is for another theory. (If you're curious, read about the tech-singularity lore within the game, and research humes spork's posts about the singularity within this thread.) Either way, Synthesis smacks of strangeness because it seems so inherently Reaper-oriented. As though it were servicing the Reapers' philosophy more strongly than the other two options.

This moment, when you are standing there, agonizing over your choice? This is your indoctrination moment. This is where, it could be (fantastically and insanely) argued that this is the moment when indoctrination and all of its insidious power becomes as real as it possibly CAN be to the Player. Think about it! We stand there. We agonize. We freak out about the ridiculous choices, and we wonder (like Shepard would) why we just can't ARUGE with the Catalyst (like Shepard would). And then, as this reality seems to be the only way forward (much like how indoctrination presents a version of reality to the indoctrinated that he/she sees as being the ONLY REAL OPTION -- echoes of TIM, Kai Leng, Saren here), we begin to accept it. Tremulously, we start to make our choice.

If you choose Control, then you, the player -- the one who moves through the game though Shepard's eyes; every choice s/he has ever made in the game has been directly because of you -- have been indoctrinated. It may have been because you thought you could save your crew, your LI, or that you really could gain perfect Control over the Reapers because you are Shepard. Regardless, you have been duped. Indoctrinated by the game. Your slow exposure to the Reapers in 2007 culminates to this final choice -- complete and free player agency and determination.

If you choose Synthesis, you face a fate similar to that of Control. It's debatable to me at this point as to whether or not you have chosen to fulfill the Reapers' purpose, but indoctrination is still a heavy possibility with this one. The only reason that I state this with any certainty is because, like the ending we see with Control, Shepard is dead at the final credits.

If you choose Destroy, then the Player Indoctrination Theory submits that this is you, the player, deciding whether or not Shepard overcomes the indoctrination attempt being rained upon him/her by Harbinger/the Catalyst. If you decide this option, and if you have enough EMS to ensure that Shepard has enough real-world time to get through the indoctrination attempt/hallucination -- Shepard lives. We see him/her breathing in the rubble of London streets at the end of the game. Shepard has defied indoctrination. You, yourself, have defied indoctrination.

Does this theory make sense? Maybe not. When we consider BioWare's real-world motivations and risks (profit, losing a large fanbase over the disgusting wretchedness of the endings as they currently exist), then the theory is hard to support. But if, for just one moment, we can let ourselves believe that BioWare may just have lived up to their celebrated philiosophy of Player Choice and Player Acutalization, then this theory becomes awe-inspiring. Is it possible? Could BioWare have sacrificed the potential for safe profits in order to bring the most insane and beautiful gaming experience of all time to its fans? The most unprecedented example of player immersion of our times? Would BioWare have truly allowed the risk for profit and angering a serious amount of their fan population in pure deference to the story, and its lore?

It may explain BioWare's silence on the matter, until "more people have played the game", or until all regions have the game. It may explain Jess M.'s twitter about fans "reacting before having all of the facts". It may.... just may explain these super sh*tty endings in a way that would make BioWare the God of RPGs.

Is it likely? No. Am I reaching, insanely? Yes.

But is it possible?

Yes.

Wonderfully articulated! Wish I was half as elloquent with words as you are. Anyways, I'm holding on to this theory. I've got far too much invested to give up so easily.

Here's to seeing what the next few days bring.

rogueagent6! Hai!  

And thank you for your kind words and support. May insane and implausible headcanon outlive us all!

This makes a lot of sense. However what about the thing at the end of the credits?  About the old man and the kid? and the message from the game itself saying that the story is concluded and you can "Build upon the legacy"? If this indoctrination thing was true why do we get a scene with Joker and the normandy crashlanding?

[BlackDragonBane]

humes spork wrote...

BlackDragonBane wrote...

The point still remains Shepard would have died as soon as the elevator reach the top if it was real.

Unless there are kinetic barriers in use strong enough to maintain atmo, oh yeah.

Which by the way, the Citadel already has and uses. That's how everybody in the Wards doesn't die.

Sorry to burst your bubble guys. But it was an interesting theory.

I dunno where you're getting kinect barriers on the Citadel from. Would you mind linking your source because from what I've found, the Citadel has no barrier system. The hull alone is enough defense for it when the arms are closed, considering it is likely built from material similar to what the Reapers are made of.

[sjrskl]

What i find interesting is that indoctrination can also lead to the synchronizing of thoughts and characters experience things like shifting walls and strange angles also hearing voices and seeing ghosts all of which happen or are mentioned by Anderson in the ending, it supports the theory that Shepard is being indoctrinated.

The entire first sequence with the kid seems off and at first i believed it to be a projection of Shepard as a kid that has to face the brutal reality that is the reapers.In the dreams we also hear the voices of the dead (so to speak) these could either be simply Shepard's way of dealing with the loss of earth/humanity/friends, or it could be part of the indoctrination which happens throughout the game instilling a sense of impending doom.

The ending suggests to me that they the reapers use the image of the young boy to further manipulate shepard into chosing to save the reapers or rather for shepard to embrace the reapers solutions, mixing organic with synthetic and/or control others via the control ending. also the offhand references that the VS makes on mars how do we know we are not being controlled by (Cerberus/reapers) is a nice foreshadowing thought and works in the narrative.

Another small clue is that you only see Shepard live and inhale after the crew crashes on a random planet, meaning that that ending could possibly never have happened. biggest clue about the live/inhale thing being the true victory are the fact that it is harder to achieve than synthesis ending and you only get to see shepard live/breathe in one ending. The descision seems to run counter-intuitive seeing as it's a red choice and the implications of that choice are not really paragon (who would actively choose to kill both the geth and edi when playing a full paragon ?)

Also the Uncanny ability of Cerberus to show up every time when they are the most annoying and dangerous to shepard could suggest a link with shepard himself to cerberus that i am not aware of. the dreams also happen before major story events which could just be shepard being exhausted and having stress related dreams or are the reapers actively searching Shepard's mind. On sur'kesh a crew member randomly states every war has it's traitors but why do we never see that plot resolved ? (either that or i missed it and am trying to hard to justify the endings).

Or all of these things are simply Bioware totally unable to come up with a decent ending deciding to just shove a random sci-fi ending in there to end the game, and the Shepard lives ending is only there as an Easter egg for players who have the drive to get 4000/5000 ems.

in the end most if not all of it is unfound conjecture on a game that might not be nearly deep as i had hoped or it could be that the small nudges in dialogue and images in the ending are really trying to say something more.

all in all the game is great, brilliant if this theory proves to be true but as it stands right now i simply want answers and that is the one thing bioware could have done better with all the endings: give true closure to Shepard's story.

[segfaulthunter]

lookingglassmind wrote...

MoarToast4U wrote...

Also, notice that Shepard is surrounded by "oily shadows" in these dreams, which could be the Reapers themselves whispering to him/her. This mirrors what the Rachni Queen described the indoctrination of her people as, "songs the color of oily shadows." From what we learned from the derelict Reaper, early indoctrination seems to be characterized by strange recurring dreams.

Oh, snap.

I've noticed that too, but actually  that fades as soon as you take the platform up, so I'm not sure. I'm also confused, if it's a hallucination, what all the cinematic cutscenes are supposed to represent, because they are not washed out greyish the way his memories to Anderson and Joker are.

EDIT: Ad dreams, the Prothean VI on Thessum doesn't see Shepard as 'Indoctrinated Presence' (unlike KL), so that's either a small plothole or a wrong lead here.

Modifié par segfaulthunter, 11 mars 2012 - 06:01 .

[Goddy10]

I didn't even stop to think about my choice; I had made it there, through hellfire and brimstone, to destroy the Reapers, so that's exactly what I did.

No joke, as I was about to shoot the Pipe or whatever it is, I said to myself "No fate but what we make."

[Elenterx]

VerdantSF wrote...

lookingglassmind wrote...

MoarToast4U wrote...

Also, notice that Shepard is surrounded by "oily shadows" in these dreams, which could be the Reapers themselves whispering to him/her. This mirrors what the Rachni Queen described the indoctrination of her people as, "songs the color of oily shadows." From what we learned from the derelict Reaper, early indoctrination seems to be characterized by strange recurring dreams.

Oh, snap.

I forgot about the oily shadows line!  This makes a lot of sense.  People against the indoctrination theory have stated that it's way too fast for Shepard to be indoctrinated by Harbinger right after the beam attack.  But what if he's been slowly succumbing to indoctrination this whole time?  

I mentioned this in an earlier post, In every dream he's trying to save/get to the boy but is always too late.
The fact that the VI at the end is the boy is very odd, it just doesn't actually make any sense considering how old the reapers are. I'm pretty sure it was happening very slowly and harbinger was the one doing it.

It would explain Harbingers absence throughout the game, Why would he be such a huge role in the second but hardly even be in the the third?

[lookingglassmind]

Madkipz wrote...

lookingglassmind wrote...

rogueagent6 wrote...

lookingglassmind wrote...

In defense of the Hallucination/Indoctrination theory: the BioWare/Player Indoctrination Theory

With the assistance of my peers throughout the rest of this thread, I have collated a series of facts that I would like to present to the community as being evidence for a a priori intention for the endings of ME3. Some of this information will not be new to a lot of you, and it may seem downright strange to a lot of you. It does require a strong and disorienting amount of suspension of disbelief, so if you cannot engage in this type of thought process, I encourage you to skip over this post. It will hurt your brain. Or make you think that I'm crazy. Likely both. (I'm okay with either.)

With the assistance of countless others' highly important observations in this thread, I sumbit to you that possibility the endings of ME3 represent the highest form of the metagaming experience. The highest form of BioWare's "giving the player choice that matters, from ME1 to ME3". The highest form of player interaction that we have yet seen from a video game. This has never before been attempted by a company, and it represents the ballsiest dedication to story and lore that may exist.

I believe that the endings may be indicative of BioWare attempting to allow the player the real-time experience of what indoctrination would be like. This theory explains (in a highly weird, impossible, and completely insane way) all of the missing pieces in the hallucination sequence, and also explains BioWare's real-world actions (such as complete silence since the fan sh*tstorm broke in response to the endings).

If you have not been keeping up with the thread, or if you have not read Byne's/Kitten Tactics/Turtlicious' amalgamation of all of the evidence we have accumulated for the originial hallucination theory on page 1, then I would urge you to do so before you read any more of this post. Due to time constraints, I won't be posting all of the evidences that we have located in this post to confirm or contradict this theory: I leave it in your capable and self-aware hands to attain this information yourself. I am posting this as an add-on to page 1, as I don't think it was properly represented there in its entire grand scope.

So, to the meat of the issue:

We have already established as much evidence as we can that 'proves' that Shepard is either hallucinating/dreaming just prior to/immediately after he runs into Harbinger's beam/Conduit. The hallucination/dream sequence has been quite well fleshed out, with a lot of compelling environmental evidence to support it (again, please see page 1 for further analysis). I am going to use this particular vehicle of suspension of disbelief to propose that BioWare's intention during this sequence is to flag the player with as many markers as they can: This current reality playing before your eyes (the Citadel, the Catalyst, TIM, Anderson) is a reflection of Shepard. It is the product of his/her mind. The meeting with the Catalyst may or may not be rooted in reality; they may meet in some metalphysical dimension, or Shepard may just hallucinate the entire thing. Either way, this theory would argue that it essentially doesn't matter, because what truly matters is the role of the player in this sequence. Your role. The scene is set in a way that urges the player to become aware of things just not being right, of being a place that mirrors (literally) Shepard's experiences throughout the game. The reality presented on the Citadel is an amalgamation of archetypes of every thing Shepard has seen in the series, which this theory challenges the player to understand as being a direct prompt from BioWare to understand that what is truly happening during this scene is all within Shepard's mind. His/her reality. Under her/his control.

Understanding that the reality on the Citadel as being a cerebral concoction that is entirely of Shepard's creation is important when we arrive upon the Crucible. It becomes a vital understanding when we are faced with these three, seemingly bizarre and unexpected choices that the Catalyst gives us. This theory submits that BioWare is asking the player to actively question EVERYTHING that happens once Shepard runs into Harbinger's beam. The cost of not questioning, or making the right choice even if you do?

Real-time player indoctrination. Shepard's literal death.

Think about it carefully. We arrive on the Crucible, and are faced with an archetype of manipulation, the Catalyst. Taking the form of a child that has come to represent everything that is horrendous about the Reapers to Shepard, the Catalyst/Harbinger provides Shepard with three strange and disorienting choices. He first presents Shepard with the option of Destroy, making swift and empty assertations about how it is the wrong choice because it would kill all synthetic life and Shepard herself/himself. At its surface, this seems like the renegade/chaos option, and is even insidiously portrayed in Renegade Red, a direct nod to the Player himself/herself. Directly appealing to your experiences with how the game works. He then goes on at great length about the Control and Synthesis options, portraying Control as the blue paragon/order option. Again, directly appealing to the Player. He argues that Control is the best option, implies that Shepard is the new Catalyst, and leaves us to contemplate the possibility that we could use it to try and save the people we love; after all, we are Shepard, and we would never become like TIM. Synthesis is the last option explored, and it is portrayed as a compromise or as being the Brave New Hope for the galaxy. I have a suspicion that Synthesis may actually  be the 'perfect' choice, but that is for another theory. (If you're curious, read about the tech-singularity lore within the game, and research humes spork's posts about the singularity within this thread.) Either way, Synthesis smacks of strangeness because it seems so inherently Reaper-oriented. As though it were servicing the Reapers' philosophy more strongly than the other two options.

This moment, when you are standing there, agonizing over your choice? This is your indoctrination moment. This is where, it could be (fantastically and insanely) argued that this is the moment when indoctrination and all of its insidious power becomes as real as it possibly CAN be to the Player. Think about it! We stand there. We agonize. We freak out about the ridiculous choices, and we wonder (like Shepard would) why we just can't ARUGE with the Catalyst (like Shepard would). And then, as this reality seems to be the only way forward (much like how indoctrination presents a version of reality to the indoctrinated that he/she sees as being the ONLY REAL OPTION -- echoes of TIM, Kai Leng, Saren here), we begin to accept it. Tremulously, we start to make our choice.

If you choose Control, then you, the player -- the one who moves through the game though Shepard's eyes; every choice s/he has ever made in the game has been directly because of you -- have been indoctrinated. It may have been because you thought you could save your crew, your LI, or that you really could gain perfect Control over the Reapers because you are Shepard. Regardless, you have been duped. Indoctrinated by the game. Your slow exposure to the Reapers in 2007 culminates to this final choice -- complete and free player agency and determination.

If you choose Synthesis, you face a fate similar to that of Control. It's debatable to me at this point as to whether or not you have chosen to fulfill the Reapers' purpose, but indoctrination is still a heavy possibility with this one. The only reason that I state this with any certainty is because, like the ending we see with Control, Shepard is dead at the final credits.

If you choose Destroy, then the Player Indoctrination Theory submits that this is you, the player, deciding whether or not Shepard overcomes the indoctrination attempt being rained upon him/her by Harbinger/the Catalyst. If you decide this option, and if you have enough EMS to ensure that Shepard has enough real-world time to get through the indoctrination attempt/hallucination -- Shepard lives. We see him/her breathing in the rubble of London streets at the end of the game. Shepard has defied indoctrination. You, yourself, have defied indoctrination.

Does this theory make sense? Maybe not. When we consider BioWare's real-world motivations and risks (profit, losing a large fanbase over the disgusting wretchedness of the endings as they currently exist), then the theory is hard to support. But if, for just one moment, we can let ourselves believe that BioWare may just have lived up to their celebrated philiosophy of Player Choice and Player Acutalization, then this theory becomes awe-inspiring. Is it possible? Could BioWare have sacrificed the potential for safe profits in order to bring the most insane and beautiful gaming experience of all time to its fans? The most unprecedented example of player immersion of our times? Would BioWare have truly allowed the risk for profit and angering a serious amount of their fan population in pure deference to the story, and its lore?

It may explain BioWare's silence on the matter, until "more people have played the game", or until all regions have the game. It may explain Jess M.'s twitter about fans "reacting before having all of the facts". It may.... just may explain these super sh*tty endings in a way that would make BioWare the God of RPGs.

Is it likely? No. Am I reaching, insanely? Yes.

But is it possible?

Yes.

Wonderfully articulated! Wish I was half as elloquent with words as you are. Anyways, I'm holding on to this theory. I've got far too much invested to give up so easily.

Here's to seeing what the next few days bring.

rogueagent6! Hai!  

And thank you for your kind words and support. May insane and implausible headcanon outlive us all!

This makes a lot of sense. However what about the thing at the end of the credits?  About the old man and the kid? and the message from the game itself saying that the story is concluded and you can "Build upon the legacy"? If this indoctrination thing was true why do we get a scene with Joker and the normandy crashlanding?

I think the Stargazer and the child is real. The first real thing that you see after Shepard is shown  breathing in the rubble. I think it's several hundred years in the future, where Shepard has become a legend to the people on that planet.

And, this forum argues that the Normandy scenes are either:

1: A hallucination by Shepard's dying mind to placate himself/herself. Trying to envision a happy ending for those s/he loves.

2. Real, and imply the veracity of the outcomes of the three choices. (I support this one less and less as time goes by).

[Zhuinden]

segfaulthunter wrote...

lookingglassmind wrote...

MoarToast4U wrote...

Also, notice that Shepard is surrounded by "oily shadows" in these dreams, which could be the Reapers themselves whispering to him/her. This mirrors what the Rachni Queen described the indoctrination of her people as, "songs the color of oily shadows." From what we learned from the derelict Reaper, early indoctrination seems to be characterized by strange recurring dreams.

Oh, snap.

I've noticed that too, but actually  that fades as soon as you take the platform up, so I'm not sure. I'm also confused, if it's a hallucination, what all the cinematic cutscenes are supposed to represent, because they are not washed out greyish the way his memories to Anderson and Joker are.

EDIT: Ad dreams, the Prothean VI on Thessum doesn't see Shepard as 'Indoctrinated Presence' (unlike KL), so that's either a small plothole or a wrong lead here.

Guys, all of this makes a huge amount of sense.
Carry on.

[humes spork]

BlackDragonBane wrote...

I dunno where you're getting kinect barriers on the Citadel from. Would you mind linking your source because from what I've found, the Citadel has no barrier system. The hull alone is enough defense for it when the arms are closed, considering it is likely built from material similar to what the Reapers are made of.

From the ME1 codex entry on the Citadel:

The Wards are open-topped, with skyscrapers rising from the superstructure. Towers are sealed against vacuum, as the breathable atmosphere envelope is only maintained to a height of about seven meters. The atmosphere is contained by the centrifugal force of rotation and a "membrane" of dense, colorless sulphur hexafluoride gas, held in place by carefully managed mass effect fields.

Sources:

http://masseffect.wi...ion:_Statistics 
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Citadel 

Modifié par humes spork, 11 mars 2012 - 06:04 .

[MPSai]

Madkipz wrote...

This makes a lot of sense. However what about the thing at the end of the credits?  About the old man and the kid? and the message from the game itself saying that the story is concluded and you can "Build upon the legacy"? If this indoctrination thing was true why do we get a scene with Joker and the normandy crashlanding?

Shepard is imagining (or being shown) her/his friends somewhere safe, peaceful and far away from the conflict. 

[Goddy10]

segfaulthunter wrote...

lookingglassmind wrote...

MoarToast4U wrote...

Also, notice that Shepard is surrounded by "oily shadows" in these dreams, which could be the Reapers themselves whispering to him/her. This mirrors what the Rachni Queen described the indoctrination of her people as, "songs the color of oily shadows." From what we learned from the derelict Reaper, early indoctrination seems to be characterized by strange recurring dreams.

Oh, snap.

I've noticed that too, but actually  that fades as soon as you take the platform up, so I'm not sure. I'm also confused, if it's a hallucination, what all the cinematic cutscenes are supposed to represent, because they are not washed out greyish the way his memories to Anderson and Joker are.

EDIT: Ad dreams, the Prothean VI on Thessum doesn't see Shepard as 'Indoctrinated Presence' (unlike KL), so that's either a small plothole or a wrong lead here.

The theory doesn't suggest that Shephard was fully indoctrinated on Thessia, only after Harbinger hits him with the laser.

humes spork wrote...

BlackDragonBane wrote...

I
dunno where you're getting kinect barriers on the Citadel from. Would
you mind linking your source because from what I've found, the Citadel
has no barrier system. The hull alone is enough defense for it when the
arms are closed, considering it is likely built from material similar to
what the Reapers are made of.

From the ME1 codex entry on the Citadel:

The
Wards are open-topped, with skyscrapers rising from the superstructure.
Towers are sealed against vacuum, as the breathable atmosphere envelope
is only maintained to a height of about seven meters. The atmosphere is
contained by the centrifugal force of rotation and a "membrane" of
dense, colorless sulphur hexafluoride gas, held in place by carefully
managed mass effect fields.

Sources:

http://masseffect.wi...ion:_Statistics 
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Citadel 

Shephard isn't on the Wards at the end of the game, he's standing in the middle of the Centre ring, possibly even actually on the Crucible.

Modifié par Goddy10, 11 mars 2012 - 06:06 .

[segfaulthunter]

In fact the thing that, in my opinion, most supports this theory is that you get an automated save back before the point of no return; how would that make sense if all endings are pretty much the same?

[comrade gando]

Oh dang! strange recurring dreams a symptom of indoctrination?? Shepard been having dreams all through mass effect 3! this makes perfect sense now

[Shortstuff820]

Even if the hallucination theory is true (which I believe it is), the ending is still confusing and doesn't make sense due to the lack of explanation.

Mass Effect 3 = 2001: A Space Odyssey

[segfaulthunter]

Goddy10 wrote...

segfaulthunter wrote...

lookingglassmind wrote...

MoarToast4U wrote...

Also, notice that Shepard is surrounded by "oily shadows" in these dreams, which could be the Reapers themselves whispering to him/her. This mirrors what the Rachni Queen described the indoctrination of her people as, "songs the color of oily shadows." From what we learned from the derelict Reaper, early indoctrination seems to be characterized by strange recurring dreams.

Oh, snap.

I've noticed that too, but actually  that fades as soon as you take the platform up, so I'm not sure. I'm also confused, if it's a hallucination, what all the cinematic cutscenes are supposed to represent, because they are not washed out greyish the way his memories to Anderson and Joker are.

EDIT: Ad dreams, the Prothean VI on Thessum doesn't see Shepard as 'Indoctrinated Presence' (unlike KL), so that's either a small plothole or a wrong lead here.

The theory doesn't suggest that Shephard was fully indoctrinated on Thessia, only after Harbinger hits him with the laser.

But all the people you meet in the other games that are fully indoctrinated show signs of, well, insanity, while all KL shows is arrogance.
EDIT: On a sidenote, he's even more annoyingly obnixious than Harbinger in ME2, I think.

Modifié par segfaulthunter, 11 mars 2012 - 06:08 .

[lookingglassmind]

sjrskl wrote...

Another small clue is that you only see Shepard live and inhale after the crew crashes on a random planet, meaning that that ending could possibly never have happened. biggest clue about the live/inhale thing being the true victory are the fact that it is harder to achieve than synthesis ending and you only get to see shepard live/breathe in one ending. The descision seems to run counter-intuitive seeing as it's a red choice and the implications of that choice are not really paragon (who would actively choose to kill both the geth and edi when playing a full paragon ?)

This is the crux of it all. Synthesis seems to be the most Paragon: allowing species to live and self-determinate. It also explains the tech-singularity problem beautifully. But, it also has the potential to be the one choice that completely serves the Reapers.

My instincts tell me that Synthesis is the most important option out of the three, even if only in understanding why it is there, and what it's implications mean.

It could be the Catalyst seeing that Shepard truly does represent the avatar that allows for the unification of organics and synthetics. Shepard is given the choice to unite, proving to the Catalyst that its logic no longer applies to reality. This cycle will have been the first to unite synthetics and organics (potentially). If Shepard chooses this option, it may also effectively destroy Harbinger/Catalyst because Harbinger would have no reason left to exist.

Its whole reason for existing would be negated by Shepard's running into the synthesis beam.

Modifié par lookingglassmind, 11 mars 2012 - 06:08 .

[BlackDragonBane]

humes spork wrote...

BlackDragonBane wrote...

I dunno where you're getting kinect barriers on the Citadel from. Would you mind linking your source because from what I've found, the Citadel has no barrier system. The hull alone is enough defense for it when the arms are closed, considering it is likely built from material similar to what the Reapers are made of.

From the ME1 codex entry on the Citadel:

[color=rgb(255, 255, 255)">The Wards are open-topped, with skyscrapers rising from the superstructure. Towers are sealed against vacuum, as the breathable atmosphere envelope is only maintained to a height of about seven meters. The atmosphere is contained by the centrifugal force of rotation and a "membrane" of dense, colorless sulphur hexafluoride gas, held in place by carefully managed ].[/color] 

Sources:

http://masseffect.wi...ion:_Statistics 
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Citadel 

Ok, that makes sense for the Wards since they are a habitable area but nowhere does it says that the same circumstances exists on the OUTSIDE of the Citadel. Shepard is standing on the exterior of the Citadel Tower, right under the Crucible itself and nowhere near the Wards to make this plausible. Unleses you can quote the exact codex data that says this atmosphere exists on the exterior of the Citadel as well, you've disproven nothing.

[ynh]

segfaulthunter wrote...

In fact the thing that, in my opinion, most supports this theory is that you get an automated save back before the point of no return; how would that make sense if all endings are pretty much the same?

Nice name (/programmer here)  

Occham's Razor. DLC. 

That's probably why. The theory here in this thread is definitely valid imo, but we honestly don't know what Bioware is planning. At this stage, I am going to assume we were given the final endings (which were unfortunately bad).

[humes spork]

Goddy10 wrote...

Shephard isn't on the Wards at the end of the game, he's standing in the middle of the Centre ring, possibly even actually on the Crucible.

The point isn't where Shepard is or is not. The point is the Citadel is capable of producing mass effect fields that maintain a breathable atmosphere. That fact alone gives credibility to Shepard's ability to breathe and speak in the final scene, and while it's not a complete disproof of that facet of the theory certainly demonstrates it's far from airtight.

Modifié par humes spork, 11 mars 2012 - 06:11 .

[VerdantSF]

As for the Prothean VI not recognizing Shepard as an indoctrinated subject, of course not. The dreams with oily shadows are the slow descent into indoctrination, but he still has free will. It isn't until Harbinger is physically close to Harbinger that the reaper can really push everything to fruition.

Modifié par VerdantSF, 11 mars 2012 - 06:10 .

[Goddy10]

Let Spock be the wisdom we need here:

"If you take away the impossible, whatever's left, however improbable, must be the truth".

The impossible here is Bioware releasing a game with an ending with such glaring potholes, and evidence in the ending that perfectly coincides with Codex data. There is no way in hell that was an accident. If it was, it is a very convenient accident.

Here is something everyone should think about: WHEN in the game are Shephards nightmares explained? When does he even tell anybody about them in detail? I can't remember any such moment.

Modifié par Goddy10, 11 mars 2012 - 06:13 .

[Ludcirum]

I have a question, in arrival in mass effect 2, it was made clear that a mass relay blowing up was a death sentence to the solar system it was in, so I ask, how in gods name is there even a planet left after the whole RELAY NETWORK BLOWS UP!