57139 réponses à ce sujet

[greywardencommander]

waldstr18 wrote...

what? wasnt the red choice the destroy option, which stands for not being indoctrinated in the end? now you are saying you are indoctrinated no matter what?

maybe im not as smart as i thought, but i really cant follow you. and there is no need to rubb in my not reading everything, i already accepted that and said i was sorry.

yet, if its an indoctrination, why does the ems play into the choice you get, when you are indoctrinatd no matter what? oh.. im doing it again. sorry. i just dont buy it.

the point i'm saying is the theory is based no matter what you choose in the end hence why I decided to say what if all along they want us to choose synthesis because it's not destroy (because Harbinger veers you away from it deliberately with the geth and ai even shepard himself) and it's not control (because it's obviously TIM idea and it plays right into their hands, why would I trust someone who says he controls the reapers my enemy saying yeah you'll control the reapers)

re. reading I was referring to my thread (in my signature) which I mentioned many times and that the whole point of it is regardless if it's true IT can work and not punish the person by making all decisions re. colour matter.

I apologise if that wasn't clear and take back everything I said re. not reading when I thought you were ignoring me saying go read what I say properly in my link in my signature because as someone who's doubting the theory or that it can work even if it's not true to fix the endings I would be genuinely interested what you think.

So i retract everything I said regarding you personally and hope you accept my apology that I was thinking you were ignoring me.

It's worth pointing out I don't care if I.T was intended or not I think it's the best 'quick-fix' no matter what. I just use the same basic psychology I apply to the endings to the last 10 minutes alone (because everything else is speculation)

[Dwailing]

 I just noticed something.  After the blast from Harbinger's beam, Shepard's scars are glowing.  I only noticed this because I had the upgrade that removed my scars.

[Rifneno]

Kyzee wrote...

Ah, yes--that. I don't really put much stock in that, myself. Logically, the first relay the beam would have to go through is the Sol relay because of the Citadel's location, i.e. Earth. The cutscene showing the first relay firing and exploding gives no visual clues as to its location (nor would it be possible, I think), but again, logical deduction says Sol. The fact that in the galatic cutscene, the first relay trigger you see happens in the Viper Nebula I think is (1) coincidental or (2) more likely just fan speculation--there's no conclusive evidence that it is, in fact, the Viper Nebula; it could just be roughly in the same location. In either event, it has no bearing on the integrity of IT in of itself.

If, however, the galatic cutscene does in fact start in the Viper Nebula (after going through the Sol relay--sorry, physics is physics, folks), then that would simply be another neat touch/hint by the developers, I think. It'd simply lend credence to IT, that's all. 

It's impossible to be sure which arm is which and what angle we're seeing the Milky Way from.  So no, it might not be the Viper Nebula.  One thing is certain though.  It is not from the Sol relay.  We can't be sure which arm is which but we can still figure the distance from the galactic core.  Sol is roughly halfway between the center and the edge.  The explosion begins near the edge.  WAY too far to be coming from Sol.

[Kyzee]

Dwailing wrote...

 I just noticed something.  After the blast from Harbinger's beam, Shepard's scars are glowing.  I only noticed this because I had the upgrade that removed my scars.

Yeah, I never got that with my FemShep. It may have to do with how Paragon you are (whether you were totally Paragon, or just healed your scars, or made Renegade choices and healed your scars.)

I'm playing my MaleShep now. I don't see why gender would make a difference, but it'll be interesting to see if there's a change.

[Ziggeh]

greywardencommander wrote...

THAT'S EXACTLY how it would be perceived by the collective media and gamers maybe not straight away but pretty soon it becomes the group norm amongst everybody and people eventually conform to that belief.

Sorry, but there's not even a chance of that. Getting your game review bombed isn't a marketing
coup. As I say, this a massively optomistic
view. People will call them dicks. It would be remembered in the long
run as a good game with a dodgy ending in which they did some wierd PR thing

greywardencommander wrote...
I study social psychology and everything in my thread is based on the last 10 mins alone being off and the psychology of it in the real world as well (including real life indoctrination and in ME and monetary and integrity terms re. EA) deliberately being off and why it COULD (I never say this theory is true) be true.

I'm not speculating (I do in this thread but that's because I believe in the theory) in terms of things before the final (e.g. stuff in ME1, ME2 and rest of ME3) 10 mins based on the fact everything prior to that can be interpreted both ways.

I'm not sure how that relates to any of my points...

[Ziggeh]

NikolaiShade wrote...

@Ziggeh

Sorry, I didn't make myself as clear as I wanted.

IF the Indoctrination Theory is right and you choose Control or Synthesys it does not mean you can't continue to play (as I said before, theese are just my speculations)

Example: after the Catlyst scene you keep fighting but in a critical point you have to chose if you want to surrender to full indoctrination or fight against it. First case, renegade interrupt, Shepard takes down his squadmates or they kill him; second case, Shepard kills himself, via a paragon interrupt maybe, but he will be remembered as a hero nonetheless.

Again, chances are 50/50 for the Indoctrination Theory, either way we'll have to wait to know what happens next.

I'm not saying they can't continute and offer other choices, I'm saying that they would be offering you to make a choice that doesn't happen. If I ask if you want tea or coffee, and then bring you a steaming hot mug of bacon and tell you that you didn't actually get to choose between tea and coffee, you would a) be greatful for the bacon and confused.

[Ziggeh]

greywardencommander wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...
Everything you say is addressed

Mind pointing me in the general direction?

It's in my signature with a link to my thread it's a place I put everything I post into one big long place so people can read it all in one go. It originally started as a 'if I.T ended up happening regardless here's how I would make all decisions matter'

Hmm. That only addresses one of the points, and I entirely disagree with the conclusion.

[Denvian]

Ziggeh wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

THAT'S EXACTLY how it would be perceived by the collective media and gamers maybe not straight away but pretty soon it becomes the group norm amongst everybody and people eventually conform to that belief.

Sorry, but there's not even a chance of that. Getting your game review bombed isn't a marketing
coup. As I say, this a massively optomistic
view. People will call them dicks. It would be remembered in the long
run as a good game with a dodgy ending in which they did some wierd PR thing

There is a precedent you know.  When they released the trailer for Mass Effect 2 they showed shepard dying and there was outrage and weird PR around that as well.  Not saying it is to the same scale though.  And there is a major gap between professional game reviewers and actual gamer reviews.

They have mislead us in the past for story telling purposes... I see no reason why they wouldn't do it again

Modifié par Denvian, 25 mars 2012 - 05:44 .

[Kyzee]

Rifneno wrote...

Kyzee wrote...

Ah, yes--that. I don't really put much stock in that, myself. Logically, the first relay the beam would have to go through is the Sol relay because of the Citadel's location, i.e. Earth. The cutscene showing the first relay firing and exploding gives no visual clues as to its location (nor would it be possible, I think), but again, logical deduction says Sol. The fact that in the galatic cutscene, the first relay trigger you see happens in the Viper Nebula I think is (1) coincidental or (2) more likely just fan speculation--there's no conclusive evidence that it is, in fact, the Viper Nebula; it could just be roughly in the same location. In either event, it has no bearing on the integrity of IT in of itself.

If, however, the galatic cutscene does in fact start in the Viper Nebula (after going through the Sol relay--sorry, physics is physics, folks), then that would simply be another neat touch/hint by the developers, I think. It'd simply lend credence to IT, that's all. 

It's impossible to be sure which arm is which and what angle we're seeing the Milky Way from.  So no, it might not be the Viper Nebula.  One thing is certain though.  It is not from the Sol relay.  We can't be sure which arm is which but we can still figure the distance from the galactic core.  Sol is roughly halfway between the center and the edge.  The explosion begins near the edge.  WAY too far to be coming from Sol.

Again, there's still the cutscene prior to the galatic cutscene which shows the first firing of the beam from a relay and the subsequent explosion. To conclude that it is the same explosion as the first one seen in the galatic cutscene is, I think, a leap in logic. It can simply be showing the subsequent spread of the beam throughout the systems. The Citadel is the starting point; the closest relay is the Sol relay. It makes no sense for the Citadel's beam to bypass it and head for the Viper Relay.

Of course, I'm operating on logic here. Given IT, this may be a mistake on my part. However, I really don't put much stock in this particular aspect. I find it plausible if the Viper relay is the second relay after the Sol relay (from Shepard's physical mind in Sol to his/her metaphoric mind in Viper), but otherwise, I don't factor it into my list of evidence in favor of IT. Rather, it's a possible delightful cherry on top.

[greywardencommander]

Ziggeh wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

THAT'S EXACTLY how it would be perceived by the collective media and gamers maybe not straight away but pretty soon it becomes the group norm amongst everybody and people eventually conform to that belief.

Sorry, but there's not even a chance of that. Getting your game review bombed isn't a marketing
coup. As I say, this a massively optomistic
view. People will call them dicks. It would be remembered in the long
run as a good game with a dodgy ending in which they did some wierd PR thing

greywardencommander wrote...
I study social psychology and everything in my thread is based on the last 10 mins alone being off and the psychology of it in the real world as well (including real life indoctrination and in ME and monetary and integrity terms re. EA) deliberately being off and why it COULD (I never say this theory is true) be true.

I'm not speculating (I do in this thread but that's because I believe in the theory) in terms of things before the final (e.g. stuff in ME1, ME2 and rest of ME3) 10 mins based on the fact everything prior to that can be interpreted both ways.

I'm not sure how that relates to any of my points...

That's why I say read my thread (i.e. my signature) everything there is based purely on basic psychology regarding the endings

You telling me the fact all the reviews are positive (75 according to bioware) and if this is true and the real endings come out and the large amount of fan stuff (going on to every ME3 post)  will have died down say in a year that all this negative stuff will still be around? that further reviews will be like this twist and marketing ploy was amazing because it's about indoctrination in the game and then they made it into real world i.e. the player making them think it was an amazing plot twist (story wise I always focus on story) 

Like I say I keep talking about my thread I refer to the basic psychology in a years time story wise (i.e. not the morals of ending dlc just the twist and story) a vast majority of people will have conformed to the idea that the game's twist and ending was amazing. Just like 8 years on so many WoW players act as though all the initial issues with Vanilla never happened and base every new game on flaws that WoW has since corrected. Will there be people who still troll everything me3 based to go on about that particular aspect but that happens with lots of amazing games and films, people who decide they don't like it will do so and won't hear any different.

Edit: Just to clarify I don't care if I.T. is true or not it doesn't matter by this point, it's the easiest way to 'fix' the endings which is what so many people want without changing anything in the endings and comes under 'expansion, explanation and clarification' because the stuff has happened and it starts when Harbinger's beam knocks you out thus nothing when you wake up is 'post-ending dlc'.

Modifié par greywardencommander, 25 mars 2012 - 05:41 .

[tomhagen27]

http://i39.tinypic.com/1gnlw2.jpg

probably already in this thread but if it isn't have a look. be warned, red part is spoiler-free, the blue parts show the future of the mass effect series (from what i have heard, will no read. i hate spoilers)

[Denvian]

Kyzee wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Kyzee wrote...

Ah, yes--that. I don't really put much stock in that, myself. Logically, the first relay the beam would have to go through is the Sol relay because of the Citadel's location, i.e. Earth. The cutscene showing the first relay firing and exploding gives no visual clues as to its location (nor would it be possible, I think), but again, logical deduction says Sol. The fact that in the galatic cutscene, the first relay trigger you see happens in the Viper Nebula I think is (1) coincidental or (2) more likely just fan speculation--there's no conclusive evidence that it is, in fact, the Viper Nebula; it could just be roughly in the same location. In either event, it has no bearing on the integrity of IT in of itself.

If, however, the galatic cutscene does in fact start in the Viper Nebula (after going through the Sol relay--sorry, physics is physics, folks), then that would simply be another neat touch/hint by the developers, I think. It'd simply lend credence to IT, that's all. 

It's impossible to be sure which arm is which and what angle we're seeing the Milky Way from.  So no, it might not be the Viper Nebula.  One thing is certain though.  It is not from the Sol relay.  We can't be sure which arm is which but we can still figure the distance from the galactic core.  Sol is roughly halfway between the center and the edge.  The explosion begins near the edge.  WAY too far to be coming from Sol.

Again, there's still the cutscene prior to the galatic cutscene which shows the first firing of the beam from a relay and the subsequent explosion. To conclude that it is the same explosion as the first one seen in the galatic cutscene is, I think, a leap in logic. It can simply be showing the subsequent spread of the beam throughout the systems. The Citadel is the starting point; the closest relay is the Sol relay. It makes no sense for the Citadel's beam to bypass it and head for the Viper Relay.

Of course, I'm operating on logic here. Given IT, this may be a mistake on my part. However, I really don't put much stock in this particular aspect. I find it plausible if the Viper relay is the second relay after the Sol relay (from Shepard's physical mind in Sol to his/her metaphoric mind in Viper), but otherwise, I don't factor it into my list of evidence in favor of IT. Rather, it's a possible delightful cherry on top.

I don't really see this as compelling evidence for either side.  It seems like one of the more minor concerns.

[NikolaiShade]

tomhagen27 wrote...

http://i39.tinypic.com/1gnlw2.jpg

probably already in this thread but if it isn't have a look. be warned, red part is spoiler-free, the blue parts show the future of the mass effect series (from what i have heard, will no read. i hate spoilers)

If I'm not mistaken this comes from the same source (4chan) as "The Truth" DLC.
There are some minor and major inconsistencies but, at this time, all is possible.
To quote a wise vampire: the coin is still turning.

[Jaze55]

Don't mean to intrude but I posted this and it got lost in 5 secs.

http://social.biowar...ndex/10595227/1 - check the OP

I think you should check that out. Again, sorry to intrude I know I am not welcome here by a few people.

[greywardencommander]

Ziggeh wrote...

NikolaiShade wrote...

@Ziggeh

Sorry, I didn't make myself as clear as I wanted.

IF the Indoctrination Theory is right and you choose Control or Synthesys it does not mean you can't continue to play (as I said before, theese are just my speculations)

Example: after the Catlyst scene you keep fighting but in a critical point you have to chose if you want to surrender to full indoctrination or fight against it. First case, renegade interrupt, Shepard takes down his squadmates or they kill him; second case, Shepard kills himself, via a paragon interrupt maybe, but he will be remembered as a hero nonetheless.

Again, chances are 50/50 for the Indoctrination Theory, either way we'll have to wait to know what happens next.

I'm not saying they can't continute and offer other choices, I'm saying that they would be offering you to make a choice that doesn't happen. If I ask if you want tea or coffee, and then bring you a steaming hot mug of bacon and tell you that you didn't actually get to choose between tea and coffee, you would a) be greatful for the bacon and confused.

you seem to miss the point that I.T has long gone past whether it's intended I merely wanted to address what you said re. media. I.T. is now the easiest way to fix or 'clarify' the endings without retconning the end (by making you have to choose destroy or whatever) and can incorporate all endings.

I have said again and again in this thread that it has long gone past 'this is deliberate' to this is how the endings issue should be addressed to save face (again read the thread in my signature) some of my point are copied and pasted from my thread so may not make direct relevance to something you said exactly thus I apologise for that but when you repeat yourself so much (as I have over about the last 300 pages over the last few days) I start just using what I say in my very long post. A lot of us (including myself) will believe it's deliberate until told otherwise because to us the endings don't fit the brilliance that is by and large a beautifully constructed trilogy.

I don't care if I.T. is true anymore I see it as basing ending dlc on it fixes the endings without saving face because it becomes almost essentially 'the last 10 minutes didn't happen' without actually making it that way (thus saving face, they don't have to outright change anything.

Again I apologise if none of this was clear in my messages but like I said I was just posting stuff pasted from my thread on the topic.

If you ever do read my thread a lot of is 'this is why it's true' admittedly because I will believe it (I edited the top to say that's what it is just now) but the point of the thread in the first place r.e. the endings (near the bottom) is HOW i would make it work regardless of choice in the end i.e. you can choose destroy, control, synthesis it doesn't matter.

I've said repeatedly any clarification re. the endings such as saying 'this is how Joker got there when it seems he couldn't even if it's because Shepard told him too' is more than enough for me to say ok well I still don't like the endings but heck I can appreciate what they were trying to do and I might still maintain that this idea (in principle) is the best ending they could have done even if it was never true.

Modifié par greywardencommander, 25 mars 2012 - 05:52 .

[JTP117]

tomhagen27 wrote...

http://i39.tinypic.com/1gnlw2.jpg

probably already in this thread but if it isn't have a look. be warned, red part is spoiler-free, the blue parts show the future of the mass effect series (from what i have heard, will no read. i hate spoilers)

I believe this originated on 4chan. It's an interesting read but I doubt it's legit.

[greywardencommander]

NikolaiShade wrote...

tomhagen27 wrote...

http://i39.tinypic.com/1gnlw2.jpg

probably already in this thread but if it isn't have a look. be warned, red part is spoiler-free, the blue parts show the future of the mass effect series (from what i have heard, will no read. i hate spoilers)

If I'm not mistaken this comes from the same source (4chan) as "The Truth" DLC.
There are some minor and major inconsistencies but, at this time, all is possible.
To quote a wise vampire: the coin is still turning.

not sure I trust anything that originates off 4chan lol

[Hunter_Wolf]

Rifneno wrote...

Kyzee wrote...

Ah, yes--that. I don't really put much stock in that, myself. Logically, the first relay the beam would have to go through is the Sol relay because of the Citadel's location, i.e. Earth. The cutscene showing the first relay firing and exploding gives no visual clues as to its location (nor would it be possible, I think), but again, logical deduction says Sol. The fact that in the galatic cutscene, the first relay trigger you see happens in the Viper Nebula I think is (1) coincidental or (2) more likely just fan speculation--there's no conclusive evidence that it is, in fact, the Viper Nebula; it could just be roughly in the same location. In either event, it has no bearing on the integrity of IT in of itself.

If, however, the galatic cutscene does in fact start in the Viper Nebula (after going through the Sol relay--sorry, physics is physics, folks), then that would simply be another neat touch/hint by the developers, I think. It'd simply lend credence to IT, that's all. 

It's impossible to be sure which arm is which and what angle we're seeing the Milky Way from.  So no, it might not be the Viper Nebula.  One thing is certain though.  It is not from the Sol relay.  We can't be sure which arm is which but we can still figure the distance from the galactic core.  Sol is roughly halfway between the center and the edge.  The explosion begins near the edge.  WAY too far to be coming from Sol.

Well it's also at this point impossible to say that everytime a relay is destroyed, the result in catastrophic. Rho was destroyed under different circumstances so the same experiment cannot be replicated from what we see. 

Not to mention the Citadel is a giant relay therefore housing the physiology. When the signal sends out, Earth is consumed by it but depending on your EMS rating, the result can leave the Earth just fine as is. With Rho, the Batarians were ultimately wiped out from the supernova created from it. So can't say we know for a fact that all relays go through this same process because Rho was destroyed in an entirely different manner.

[Ziggeh]

Denvian wrote...

There is a precedent you know.  When they released the trailer for Mass Effect 2 they showed shepard dying and there was outrage and weird PR around that as well.  Not saying it is to the same scale though.  And there is a major gap between professional game reviewers and actual gamer reviews.

They have mislead us in the past for story telling purposes... I see no reason why they wouldn't do it again

That's a fairly innocent bit of misdirection though. This the end of a multi million dollar trilogy.

And again, it would still be a twist if the ending was strong and then turned out to be false. Having people think your story sucked and turning round and going "hey, not as much as you might have thought!" seems a wild and bizarre way to end a franchise.

[JTP117]

greywardencommander wrote...

NikolaiShade wrote...

tomhagen27 wrote...

http://i39.tinypic.com/1gnlw2.jpg

probably already in this thread but if it isn't have a look. be warned, red part is spoiler-free, the blue parts show the future of the mass effect series (from what i have heard, will no read. i hate spoilers)

If I'm not mistaken this comes from the same source (4chan) as "The Truth" DLC.
There are some minor and major inconsistencies but, at this time, all is possible.
To quote a wise vampire: the coin is still turning.

not sure I trust anything that originates off 4chan lol

I agree, Bioware has already had to discredit other "Leaks" from 4chan in the last few weeks that turned out to be complete fan fabrication

[nyrocron]

tomhagen27 wrote...

http://i39.tinypic.com/1gnlw2.jpg

probably already in this thread but if it isn't have a look. be warned, red part is spoiler-free, the blue parts show the future of the mass effect series (from what i have heard, will no read. i hate spoilers)

If that is true I think indoc. would be better but it sounds realistic. It does not make that much sense but it could be true.
It does not explain the plotholes. At least I do not think that it does in an adequate way. Is there a thread to discuss it? Is there any proof that it is legit?

[Kyzee]

Denvian wrote...

I don't really see this as compelling evidence for either side.  It seems like one of the more minor concerns.

Me neither. As I said, it's not something I factor in. It's really a supremely minor detail compared to everything else. I was just debating the point because I think people put too much weight in it (which is their right; I simply disagree, that's all.)

[thePredator50]

JTP117 wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

NikolaiShade wrote...

tomhagen27 wrote...

http://i39.tinypic.com/1gnlw2.jpg

probably already in this thread but if it isn't have a look. be warned, red part is spoiler-free, the blue parts show the future of the mass effect series (from what i have heard, will no read. i hate spoilers)

If I'm not mistaken this comes from the same source (4chan) as "The Truth" DLC.
There are some minor and major inconsistencies but, at this time, all is possible.
To quote a wise vampire: the coin is still turning.

not sure I trust anything that originates off 4chan lol

I agree, Bioware has already had to discredit other "Leaks" from 4chan in the last few weeks that turned out to be complete fan fabrication

4Chan had its share of spot-on rumors as well.

[JTP117]

nyrocron wrote...

tomhagen27 wrote...

http://i39.tinypic.com/1gnlw2.jpg

probably already in this thread but if it isn't have a look. be warned, red part is spoiler-free, the blue parts show the future of the mass effect series (from what i have heard, will no read. i hate spoilers)

If that is true I think indoc. would be better but it sounds realistic. It does not make that much sense but it could be true.
It does not explain the plotholes. At least I do not think that it does in an adequate way. Is there a thread to discuss it? Is there any proof that it is legit?

I've been looking but I can't find anything. I doubt it's real, if it were it would have been redacted long ago by EA to avoid lost profit

[nyrocron]

Is it realistic that someone that worked at BioWare could talk about that stuff legally? I don't really think so. Why would any NDA not apply anymore just because you are no longer employed?
If he was the only one working on the lighting stuff he could at least easily be identified.

Modifié par nyrocron, 25 mars 2012 - 06:01 .