57139 réponses à ce sujet

[bo_7md]

Refara wrote...

Babyberry wrote...

Sorry if this has been posted/answered before:

If this theory is true, I wonder how those who chose the Green and Blue ending will break their Shepard's Indoctrination. Would they have to replay that part of the game?

Well, the "post-game" save is right before the final mission, however that can easilly be countered with the statement that BioWare wanted to make DLC before the game ended, but technically it makes sense if the IT was true as well.

That is the thing with I.T it requires a post ending DLC, and I don't think this is the case here.

[Babyberry]

greywardencommander wrote...

Babyberry wrote...

Sorry if this has been posted/answered before:

If this theory is true, I wonder how those who chose the Green and Blue ending will break their Shepard's Indoctrination. Would they have to replay that part of the game?

My thread discusses that very idea (in my signature) you have to read the big long post why I think it's true using basic psychology for the in game ramifications of the last scene (i.e I don't really care about the in game clues it's all in the last scene) and why psychology means EA lose nothing by keeping the speculation going and why doing it this way is good business. Once you get through all that I talk about all the possibilities based on your final choice, EMS and previous choice (mainly geth vs quarian outcome)

If you like what I've said so far and enjoy it I'd encourage everyone to have a read

Thanks!  I'll give it a read.

[masster blaster]

Well maybe Bioware forgot about the IT. It's possible that they forgot because they were trying to plug in all the data from ME and ME2 to ME3 so it's no surprise that they haven't menchend the IT at all.

[greywardencommander]

Martukis wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

As anyone noticed that when you talk to the Illusive man during one of your encounters that if you chose the renegade choice Shepard say ' your being indoctrinated' and the Illusive Man replies to Shepard " and so are you".

 
Unfortunately, there is nothing so direct - Shep says "Don't you see, you're being manipulated!" and TIM responds along the lines of "And you're no better, fighting a war you have no hope of winning, against a threat no one will acknowledge."

As to save games, there is actually a "NewGamePlus.pcsav" generated at the end of the crucible (when the choice is made) which cannot be loaded by the game, but is used when a new game plus is started.

To me it also means the same as in ME2 with the collectors i.e you can see how all three decisions can effect the end (and thus any future DLC), like in ME2 if you muck everything up with the team you can have half of them die. Meaning they could be incorporating the final decision at the minute

[Golferguy758]

Both blue and green endings can just lead to a separate set of endings. Not necessarily bad ones, but can be more bittersweet. For example, Blue would lead you to a guaranteed bad ending. Green can lead to a bad ending and bittersweet endings. Red can lead to a bad, bittersweet, or good ending.

Depends on what BW would decide to do

[blueboxblues]

Mr. Mistake wrote...

So what the hell is this PAX thing, and when is it gonna happen?

Penny Arcade Expo, big gaming expo. April 6-8 in Boston, there's a ME3 panel on the 6th at 430.

[Denvian]

estebanus wrote...

Exactly my point. For a sci-fi game that puts a lot of emphasis on space battles, sound is a necessity.
Anyway, let's focus on the indoctrination theory instead, lest this thread is closed down because of too much off-topic talk here, all right?

I think Firfly did a pretty good job... The explosions in space were pretty awesomly eerie but I think in the movie serenity they actually added sounds to the large space battles but I forget.

Modifié par Denvian, 25 mars 2012 - 04:00 .

[masster blaster]

Has anyone other than me see that Bioware may be turning in to the other game company's that have been making the same games just adding better combat systems. What I mean is that most of the other game compny's have the same game series going on for most of them20 or more years, and now Bioware is planing continuing the ME franchise just without Commander Shepard like many other game company's are doing with thier games.

Modifié par masster blaster, 25 mars 2012 - 04:04 .

[masster blaster]

Also to make my statement true think about Assassins Creed, Resident Evil, Halo, Street Fighter, Mortal Combat, Mario, and so many more games that have a story but it has no effect on the original story plot anymore. Also be honest do most of you buy games for the story plot or for the action/Multiplayer. And that's what the other game companies have been doing is by making the game series all about action/ multiplayer, and not the story at hand. That is what Bioware is starting to do to Mass Effect. All about multiplayer but no story like the ME3 endings.

Modifié par masster blaster, 25 mars 2012 - 04:13 .

[masster blaster]

But I still support Bioware so I hope they stop making more mass effect games unless it's with Shepard because it would be weird to start new trilogy with the same galaxy that has been discover by the players and not to menchen that the Relays were destroyed so that means every thing in that Galaxy is dead plus all of the Planets would no longer be there if the Relays blow up.

[greywardencommander]

bo_7md wrote...

Refara wrote...

Babyberry wrote...

Sorry if this has been posted/answered before:

If this theory is true, I wonder how those who chose the Green and Blue ending will break their Shepard's Indoctrination. Would they have to replay that part of the game?

Well, the "post-game" save is right before the final mission, however that can easilly be countered with the statement that BioWare wanted to make DLC before the game ended, but technically it makes sense if the IT was true as well.

That is the thing with I.T it requires a post ending DLC, and I don't think this is the case here.

IT and the last 869 pages is all about how the only way the endings are good is I.T and picking up the game where you wake up hit by Harbinger and carry on in the DLC based on your choice in the crucible.
Read my thread in the signature (which to everyone else I've edited by the way to add a couple more points and tidy it up because my formatting keeps getting screwed up) to see how just using simple psychology on the last scene IT can be true and how psychology means EA's current strategy both with the end and future dlc based on I.T loses them nothing in the long term.
More importantly I explain (after all that potentially boring stuff) how they can use all three endings at the minute in future dlc to make hugely different endings based on colour choice, EMS and previous decision regarding the geth and quarians.
If I.T isn't true and not deliberate they really should make it and everything I say regarding future DLC delves into what they can do to use your final decision.

[Cobra's_back]

greywardencommander wrote...

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.

Thanks for writing this. It's really a good read.

[JTP117]

masster blaster wrote...

Also to make my statement true think about Assassins Creed, Resident Evil, Halo, Street Fighter, Mortal Combat, Mario, and so many more games that have a story but it has no effect on the original story plot anymore. Also be honest do most of you buy games for the story plot or for the action/Multiplayer. And that's what the other game companies have been doing is by making the game series all about action/ multiplayer, and not the story at hand. That is what Bioware is starting to do to Mass Effect. All about multiplayer but no story like the ME3 endings.

At least they're bringing the Chief back to Halo now.

[Cobra's_back]

masster blaster wrote...

Also to make my statement true think about Assassins Creed, Resident Evil, Halo, Street Fighter, Mortal Combat, Mario, and so many more games that have a story but it has no effect on the original story plot anymore. Also be honest do most of you buy games for the story plot or for the action/Multiplayer. And that's what the other game companies have been doing is by making the game series all about action/ multiplayer, and not the story at hand. That is what Bioware is starting to do to Mass Effect. All about multiplayer but no story like the ME3 endings.

Yes, I like a good story while I'm playing.

[greywardencommander]

masster blaster wrote...

Also to make my statement true think about Assassins Creed, Resident Evil, Halo, Street Fighter, Mortal Combat, Mario, and so many more games that have a story but it has no effect on the original story plot anymore. Also be honest do most of you buy games for the story plot or for the action/Multiplayer. And that's what the other game companies have been doing is by making the game series all about action/ multiplayer, and not the story at hand. That is what Bioware is starting to do to Mass Effect. All about multiplayer but no story like the ME3 endings.

ME3 does have story, just the endings that's the issue (unless DLC picks up based on I.T and your final decision and you wake up after being hit by Harbinger) they tie up everything else nicely so 'no story' is an insult to the rest of the game.

As for you initial point I WILL NOT play a game unless I like the story idea and would never buy a game based on MP, I'm happy to play a SP game but if there's not good SP why on earth would I play MP, why on earth would I buy a game based on that?

As for AC that has a story. An excellent one at that. Technically AC3 hasn't happened yet and Brotherhood and Revelations are expansions and excellent story and gameplay wise in their own right. It's also an another example of why 'Bioware are clever enough to do this' because AC2, AC:B and AC:R all have codes, clues and subtle hints that help the player and in the case of AC2 and AC:B reward the player by giving them clues to do with the story. In AC2 the Truth video after you complete all the codes, in AC2:Brotherhood you get the clues about Subject 16. Not crucial to the story admittedly but it stands to reason that Bioware are clever enough to deliberately put clues in, just like Ubisoft in AC.

People who say 'Bioware are not clever enough' clearly underestimate just how clever a lot of these people can be.

As for why simple psychology applied to the last scene and why EA won't lose anything by this strategy (even now) of a cliffhanger ending clarified with DLC (again if I.T is correct and the endings were always meant to come later) read my thread in my signature. I also discuss possible ramifications based on your decisions in the current endings and how they can also incorporate previous decisions and EMS.

[fastenator]

Sorry of this has been brought up before, but has anyone noticed TIM's eyes after you shoot him, in the moment where he says 'Earth, if only you could see it the way I do'? They turn NORMAL again! Not exactly sure what this implies, but I thought it was very interesting...

[greywardencommander]

ghostbusters101 wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

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.

Thanks for writing this. It's really a good read.

Thank you I've put a lot of effort into it (and my thread, of which that's the first half the second is how the current three choices could impact in the end DLC when you wake up either indoctrinated or not.
I am a psychologist (and MA student interested in social psychology to be more exact) so I approached it in that way and the stuff I say with regards to the colour is a very simple stroop task to impact (and to pick destroy we need to rely on it) our conditioning and think about the three choices not just in colour but the deeper meaning re. TIM and Anderson.

[Admiral-Hackett]

I've noticed more and more- people who discount the Indoctrination Theory avidly either no nothing about it, or refuse to. And when they do found out, they just realize how it makes SO MUCH sense. People need to be more open minded, and have a little more faith in Bioware. I've been hoping since the beginning of this theory about this, and with all these things popping up, such as the whole 'starchild' song, they are starting to provide MORE evidence, not LESS. People just think it's ridiculous to think that they have a trick up their sleeves, or they refuse to believe in this for some other reason.

[JTP117]

fastenator wrote...

Sorry of this has been brought up before, but has anyone noticed TIM's eyes after you shoot him, in the moment where he says 'Earth, if only you could see it the way I do'? They turn NORMAL again! Not exactly sure what this implies, but I thought it was very interesting...

I knew there was something off about how he looked. I had TIM kill himself, didn't notice a change there but if you shoot him you are totally right.

[ZerebusPrime]

It occurs to me that IT does not require a post game DLC.

The Reapers could win.

[fastenator]

JTP117 wrote...

fastenator wrote...

Sorry of this has been brought up before, but has anyone noticed TIM's eyes after you shoot him, in the moment where he says 'Earth, if only you could see it the way I do'? They turn NORMAL again! Not exactly sure what this implies, but I thought it was very interesting...

I knew there was something off about how he looked. I had TIM kill himself, didn't notice a change there but if you shoot him you are totally right.

Could be more evidence that taking the renegade route (shooting TIM) as opposed to the paragon route (he kills himself) is the right choice. Not to mention shooting him is almost more of an act of breaking free, whereas talking him down is just a replay of the saren encounter.

[JTP117]

fastenator wrote...

JTP117 wrote...

fastenator wrote...

Sorry of this has been brought up before, but has anyone noticed TIM's eyes after you shoot him, in the moment where he says 'Earth, if only you could see it the way I do'? They turn NORMAL again! Not exactly sure what this implies, but I thought it was very interesting...

I knew there was something off about how he looked. I had TIM kill himself, didn't notice a change there but if you shoot him you are totally right.

Could be more evidence that taking the renegade route (shooting TIM) as opposed to the paragon route (he kills himself) is the right choice. Not to mention shooting him is almost more of an act of breaking free, whereas talking him down is just a replay of the saren encounter.

He dies either way so it makes no difference to me lol

[someone else]

@Admiral_Hackett & OP

Agree wholeheartedly. And the magic is that even if BW intended none of this, thought the ending was peachy - there is nothing to prevent - lore, plot, or game mechanics - them doing just this, planned for or not. At the risk of repeating myself - : Instant Franchise. Which is a corporate achievement of the highest order, and a transition achieved by few games - i am in awe...

Modifié par someone else, 25 mars 2012 - 05:15 .

[greywardencommander]

Admiral-Hackett wrote...

I've noticed more and more- people who discount the Indoctrination Theory avidly either no nothing about it, or refuse to. And when they do found out, they just realize how it makes SO MUCH sense. People need to be more open minded, and have a little more faith in Bioware. I've been hoping since the beginning of this theory about this, and with all these things popping up, such as the whole 'starchild' song, they are starting to provide MORE evidence, not LESS. People just think it's ridiculous to think that they have a trick up their sleeves, or they refuse to believe in this for some other reason.

I know right take the person on the top of this page claiming the problem with IT is that it doesn't say you need post-ending DLC when the point of I.T is EXACTLY that.

The endings and I.T don't work without post ending DLC having you wake up after being knocked out bu Harbinger and dealing with your choice (or retconning destroy if they thought everyone would pick it based on the switcharoo of colour and Anderson and TIM alone)
The Starchild song you posted on my thread convinced me even more with those lyrics. They KNEW everyone would realise the Stargazer scene is based on that and the Starchild lyrics a foreshadowing of the current endings. Everything is deliberate...

The more people that realise EXACTLY what IT is and that it's not a 'the end is the end this is what makes it good' but a 'the end isn't the end and the DLC is an expansion and clarification that the last 10 mins are in the head'

[Hunter_Wolf]

bo_7md wrote...

Refara wrote...

Babyberry wrote...

Sorry if this has been posted/answered before:

If this theory is true, I wonder how those who chose the Green and Blue ending will break their Shepard's Indoctrination. Would they have to replay that part of the game?

Well, the "post-game" save is right before the final mission, however that can easilly be countered with the statement that BioWare wanted to make DLC before the game ended, but technically it makes sense if the IT was true as well.

That is the thing with I.T it requires a post ending DLC, and I don't think this is the case here.

Half Life 2.........