My main thoughts that have nothing to do with any of the clues really, other than one the Final Hours App does nothing for me except suggest that IT is true. It says explicitly the scene they talk about was scrapped because of a GAMEPLAY MECHANIC, i.e. not because of the idea. Why would they dismiss the entire concept when it's clearly important to them to have Shepard overcome indoctrination (ME3's Ilos and Omega Relay, i.e. doing the 'impossible')
So to have people say this disproves the theory, rubbish it more or less says 'they couldn't do the in game mechanic so they extended it to the player' we are Shepard, s/he is the vessel of how we see the universe.
From a psychological perspective these are my ideas:
He doesn't realise he's being indoctrinated so we don't...not until we realise (i.e. post-game) do we see the fact that we were being indoctrinated all along, if we realise in game (e.g. something's up with this) so does Shepard and he becomes defiant and chooses destroy.
I'll explain why, Shepard is your vessel, the most engaging and immersive vessel in gaming history. You only see what Shepard sees, hear what Shepard hears, feels (emotive in this case) what Shepard feels. You
won't see you're being indoctrinated because Shepard doesn't.
Not until the end - this is crucial to have the impact they want.The two main things about the endings is enough to show this, it's so obviously wrong the TIM - being Control and Paragon (a renegade character), Synthesis = Saren and Destroy is Renegade and is your plan
all along represented by Anderson a Paragon character and your mentor with the same ideology. That's odd in itself and is supposed to be enough to show the gamer even if they haven't picked up on all the subtle hints already outlined in this theory. I.e. even if you're not paying attention enough, the ending is enough to make you go blimey this is just wrong.
If you (and thus Shepard) realise you are being indoctrinated you select destroy and are rewarded with Shepard breathing. If you don't realise (like Shepard) you choose Control or Synthesis and succumb (both you and
Shepard) to the indoctrination.
Once you realise you've been indoctrinted (like Shepard) you suddenly realise all the things that should have been so obvious before (like in this thread) e.g. the child, the dreams, the headaches, the growls, the humming, all the in game conversations such as Javik saying the VI didn't notice the 'sleeping agents', Thane's poem, the fact the final 10 mins is based on Shepard's memories, the whole 10 mins full stop, conversations with your crew making out something's different about you and they're worried, the Prothean VI shutting down after a few conversations we assume it's because of Kai Leng could be because of us etc. All the clues are there but we ignore them assuming they're meaning something else at the time
UNTIL WE LOOK AGAIN IN A NEW LIGHT and thus Shepard remains defiant and chooses destroy.
The way the options are presented are odd as well. Destroy first, it's what Shepard wants but throw in the Geth, Relays and himself as suffering to steer himself away from that option. Second option - what the Reapers
want him to do like TIM so they can control you select control and merge with the reapers (in reality they will control you, just like with TIM, his 'yes' when Shepard asks if they will control the reapers is very subtley a hesitation, why hesitate? because it's not true). Then he provides the magical third option, a compromise, merge synthetic and organic, this in reality is just merging with the Reapers just like Saren who until you show him otherwise thought synthesis was a good thing because it was neither control or destroy, a huge hint).
This is basic psychology, present the options using what they want first but make it so it seems like a bad choice, give your option and when they're still not convinced give them the magical compromise that really makes you happier than the other person because the person changed their mind and won't go with the option you don't want. Simple psychology.
Put it this way, indoctrination is subliminal messaging and making people susceptible to influence and suggestion (just like in the codex). Harbinger can't outright control you, no indoctrination does that not until you become a husk, Saren says you have to keep your mind or you're useless as an ally. Harbinger has to do the only thing he can, make you susceptible to the idea that destroying the Reapers is wrong so he veers you away from that and if you still won't accept control of the reapers because it's wrong he gives you his magic 'compromise' which in reality just makes you just as easy to influence to do what he wants (just like Saren with Sovereign). Indoctrination isn't outright control, never has been (in Mass Effect or in real life), it's impossible until they become husks (or willing husks in terms of collectors, assuming control etc).
In real world terms:
Someone else pointed out this isn't pinned under fan fiction - odd in itself.
In real world terms, EA lose nothing keeping the speculation going, tweets to this thread, cryptic clues etc that all's not what it seems.
if it was true the 'clarification content' is based on IT so already budgeted for.
People who traded their games in might still be inclined to get it again and have their fath restored. Most probably kept their games in the belief that Bioware had a trick up their sleeve because the 10 mins just didn't make sense.
'no such thing as bad publicity' they all say.
I would bet after the reveal (if true) it would go down in media, entertainment and more importantly gaming history. If nothing says what the twist was just that it was beautiful, amazing and brilliantly executed people otherwise not bothered would maybe go and buy all three games to find out just what the fuss was.
People who love the series, and thus the twist continue to invest in the series in new dlc and other merchandise, short term loss, long term gain.
Modifié par greywardencommander, 24 mars 2012 - 11:26 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
