57139 réponses à ce sujet

[masster blaster]

I think we should all present Bioware all the hard evidences that IT is real on PAX or before the end of March, because if we don't get it to at least to Casey Hudson then the IT theory maybe as good as dead.

[Kyzee]

Rifneno wrote...

byne wrote...

Goddamn beholders.  Can't even escape them hundreds of years in the future in the galactic core.

ROFL!! Oh, that was awesome, my friend! 

[DocJill]

Dear indoc theory experts:

If Shepard is hallucinating the safe escape of the Normandy, is he/she also hallucinating the destruction of the mass relays? Is the destruction of the mass relays necessary for the "destroy" ending to work, or is a ploy by GodChildReaper to keep you from picking the destroy option? So when Shepard wakes up in the London rubble, the mass relays may still be intact?

I need this resolved for my headcon, thank you.

[greywardencommander]

Ck213 wrote...

To the OP, another interesting thing about the choices is if you turn away from any of them and walk back down the path....GAME OVER. The Crucible is destroyed. It would have been very interesting if you could walk away from the Destroy choice, but no dice. Perhaps you can at low EMS, I haven't tested it.

Also, everything about the meeting with the Catalyst feels hyper-symbolic. So over the top that it takes you out of the story. I saw the pictures of the area on the original post, but no mention that the Control device looks like Geth Technology. The Destroy device looks likes Collector technology. The Synthesis device looks like the transporter beam. And of course there is the technology from the Shadow Broker's ship.

Ok, now Shepard's succes is supposed to be a surprise to the Catalyst, and the crucible has give it new insight and new ideas, but why is the Citadel already set up for the choices with a design aesthetic of technology that follows ages after its creation?

That's what really bugs me about the whole Catalyst scene. It looks like it's cobbled together from things Shepard has experienced. The character is symbolic, the set is symbolic, and the choices are symbolic. It's overloaded with symbolism and makes it jarring with all that's come before.

If I take this end plot at face value and assume this is the way things are supposed to be, the biggest "that-doesn't-make-sense" to me is the Destroy Choice. How is that a Solution for the Catalyst. It doesn't solve the problem and it takes the Catalyst out of the picture. Why would the Catalyst even offer it as choice? For that matter, how would giving Shepard control be a solution for the Catalyst? What does he expect Shepard to do differently that would satisfy itself and Shepard? The only solution that seems to work is Synthesis, There ya go, no more organics creating synthetics and requiring super synthetics to kill advanced organics.

There are too many things I woud have to ignore to accept this ending, and I haven't even touched  on the majority of it.

Ah but don't you see it's BAD WRITING everything else makes a damn bit of sense with SPACE MAGIC thus that's my answer. IDT is wrong because it's bad writing! I don't care what you say about all these subtle hints and the design of the last 10 mins alone deliberately different in tone, layout and the choices aren't weird enough the fact indoctrination is your enemy from ME1 onwards and it could the the complete opposite I'm going to blame BAD WRITING in the face of all hints it's SPACE MAGIC. The cryptic clues and direct links to this thread by Bioware community manager and cryptic hints on official page even by the devs and designers etc...BAD WRITING, the fact they say could be deliberate, it could be not real etc etc BAD WRITING

The fact every point made (the main one being the real world implication which just like BAD WRITING could be basic human error that backlash regarding plot twist + free dlc or something might have been a human error miscalculation)

The fact you account for multiple choices based on the current ending in future DLC SPACE MAGIC.
Nope I'm going to say you're wrong Mr Bioware are bad writers and the endings suck and that DLC based on this idea and the hints all the way through the trilogy it impacting on final choices and DLC based on that nope BAD WRITING SHOWN BY SPACE MAGIC. Nope you're still wrong because I want dixed endings even though either way this is what IDT can give me YOU'RE WRONG lol

The fact the feel of the final bit and it being the next of the dreams and the biggest and most crucial...I just don't see the issue

Do you ever feel our reason of providing evidence to back up everything against their pretty much 'one argument' based on Bad writing contradicts the idea of IDT that it's only a good ending if intentional is kind of like banging a head against a brick wall? It's never going to budge...

I'm sorry had to get that out there lol it just seems after 900 pages people still come on the page going 'but it can't work, why? the real life aspect and it's just bad writing' yet the effect of doing this in the first place goes along same principle = human error they thought idea of plot twist and breaking 4th barrier for indoctrination/hallucination was pretty awesome and we'd like it especially if real endings were free later or very cheap (didn't expect backlash to their day one DLC let alone something that's generally a very good plot twist being overall well received) and this is where the PR damage control comes in re. climate control

I.e It ends up being brilliant writing with real endings to come but the 'marketing aspect' fell down, happens with anything. Why is this so much less believable based on the rest of the series that's overall pretty beautifully created and a tribute to sci-fi in general (there's an article about why ME as interactive sci fi and essentially tributes to all sci-fi is what makes it so compelling, the fact it embodies all of those aspects, after all everything's a rip of these days re. Any idea's it's usually happened

[felipejiraya]

I have to admit: now that I had time to read the theory and view the videos about it I'm a believer of the indoc theory.

The evidences are too blatant to be ignored.

[n00bsauce2010]

DocJill wrote...

Dear indoc theory experts:

If Shepard is hallucinating the safe escape of the Normandy, is he/she also hallucinating the destruction of the mass relays? Is the destruction of the mass relays necessary for the "destroy" ending to work, or is a ploy by GodChildReaper to keep you from picking the destroy option? So when Shepard wakes up in the London rubble, the mass relays may still be intact?

I need this resolved for my headcon, thank you.

Yes. The child told him no matter what he chose "the mass relays would be destroyed in the process." Hence if it's all in his head, he is using hope to tell himself he made the right decision. The fact that the godchild tells you that they'll be destroyed in all cases and then shepard imagines. But according to the theory yes. Shepard wakes up in the london rubble to continue the fight, or possible try another attempt at warding off indoctrination (the relays are indeed still intact)

[DocJill]

Thanks for the reply DuskRose and NoobSauce!

Modifié par DocJill, 26 mars 2012 - 03:18 .

[n00bsauce2010]

felipejiraya wrote...

I have to admit: now that I had time to read the theory and view the videos about it I'm a believer of the indoc theory.

The evidences are too blatant to be ignored.

I think the evidence cannot be ignored. I too was skeptical. The thing I seem to find in the people who disregard it fully is that they tend to link all plot holes to bad writing and the indoctrination theory as a whole because a big neon sign isn't telling them they're indoctrinated during the sequence. God forbid anyone would have to sit down and think about the game they just played instead of being told in text form that they are indoctrinated. Haters gonna hate either way.

[masster blaster]

I know it may sound stupid about what I am saying but if they say "we listen to our fans feed back" then they should know we also listen to theirs as much as they listen to ours. We are also giving Bioware a last triumph card to redeem it's self by just adding the IT to the Mass Effect 3 ending.

If that's not enof then I don't now about Bioware any more, but I think everyone can be happy if they just give IT a chance to defend it's self, by use saying that you can keep the ending part the same but have Shepard awakes from the IT test, and that what went on in Shepard's mind will have a effect on how it will all end for the galaxy.

I also think that the fans will be happy with this because it keeps the games the same, but just adds on to the story,and it will have answered a lot of the plot holes that was left for the messed up/fantastic ending. If Bioware can't see we are offering our support without yelling at them I think they may consider the IT theory only if we present a well case to effect their mode on the IT theory.
And if they want more evidence then just come to the "Was the ending a hallucination" and the first page will already give them the evidence to support the IT theory,

So Kelaseli to all the fans and hope that Bioware comes to terms peacefully to IT theory and if not then we will see what they are planing.

[BleedingUranium]

JTP117 wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

JTP117 wrote...

byne wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

byne wrote...

ME3endingsucks2 wrote...

I see no one cares about my revelation lol

Well, I just generally try to pretend the epilogue with the old man and the child never even happened.

I like that even less than I like the endings, if that is possible.

If we assume the endings are true, people forgetting Shepard was just a regular person, and treating her like some kind of deity, calling her 'The Shepard' just really annoys me.

I'm wondering if that scene was an example of the Reapers appealing to Shepard's pride.

Man, if it was, they failed miserably there. My Shepard multiple times stated she didnt want soldiers looking at her as being any different from them. The Reapers trying to appeal to her by implying people would view her as basically a deity would be like their biggest miscalculation ever. Of all time.

Was that a Red vs Blue homage there at the end? I think agent Washington would be happy to see that.

It was indeed! I wondered if anyone would notice it.

Speaking of RvB, does anyone else think that after the blast from Harbinger's beam Shepard is thinking something to the effect of, "I can't feel my torso." 

"My body......is trying to die"

That first scene in RvB season 5 is my favourite! Putting together the IT is kind of like putting together that Church is the Alpha AI with the info up until the reveal episode; that's the kind of evidence we're dealing with.

[n00bsauce2010]

masster blaster wrote...

I know it may sound stupid about what I am saying but if they say "we listen to our fans feed back" then they should know we also listen to theirs as much as they listen to ours. We are also giving Bioware a last triumph card to redeem it's self by just adding the IT to the Mass Effect 3 ending.

If that's not enof then I don't now about Bioware any more, but I think everyone can be happy if they just give IT a chance to defend it's self, by use saying that you can keep the ending part the same but have Shepard awakes from the IT test, and that what went on in Shepard's mind will have a effect on how it will all end for the galaxy.

I also think that the fans will be happy with this because it keeps the games the same, but just adds on to the story,and it will have answered a lot of the plot holes that was left for the messed up/fantastic ending. If Bioware can't see we are offering our support without yelling at them I think they may consider the IT theory only if we present a well case to effect their mode on the IT theory.
And if they want more evidence then just come to the "Was the ending a hallucination" and the first page will already give them the evidence to support the IT theory,

So Kelaseli to all the fans and hope that Bioware comes to terms peacefully to IT theory and if not then we will see what they are planing.

If indoctrination wasn't their intended goal. Which I think it was. Then it is pretty safe to assume that almost all of the reps/devs over there know it or know of it. Tweets have been thrown to them so I think most of them are aware it exists. I think PAX was their intended twist reveal in my eyes. Before all the outrage from "fans"

[BleedingUranium]

Anyone else think the reason Bioware said they were suprised by the reaction was because they expected more people to understand it? (lol IT)

[DocJill]

I think indoc theory is true, and therefore I think the ending is brilliant. Unfortunately now the developers of any popular video game series will be terrified of fan backlash if they create an ending that requires thinking and interpretation.

[Streambeck]

DocJill wrote...

I think indoc theory is true, and therefore I think the ending is brilliant. Unfortunately now the developers of any popular video game series will be terrified of fan backlash if they create an ending that requires thinking and interpretation.

If the Indoctrination Theory is true, then the game never had an ending.

It would essentially be the equivalent of the game cutting to credits mid-Conduit run.

[Streambeck]

DuskRose wrote...

Streambeck wrote...

DocJill wrote...

I think indoc theory is true, and therefore I think the ending is brilliant. Unfortunately now the developers of any popular video game series will be terrified of fan backlash if they create an ending that requires thinking and interpretation.

If the Indoctrination Theory is true, then the game never had an ending.

It would essentially be the equivalent of the game cutting to credits mid-Conduit run.

Yes, but as using games as storytelling devices evolves, so does medium awareness.

If the theory is true, it's brilliant, to be sure, and represents a marked evolution in video game storytelling...

...under the explicit condition that the game still has an outright ending.

It would be a remarkably clever ruse, but absent any kind of follow-up, it would effectively just be a fancy way of releasing a story-driven game that completely and utterly lacks an ending.

Citing artistic integrity (again, under the condition the theory is true) would be the same as defending the ending if it just cut to black the second you land in London.

[DocJill]

Streambeck wrote...

DocJill wrote...

I think indoc theory is true, and therefore I think the ending is brilliant. Unfortunately now the developers of any popular video game series will be terrified of fan backlash if they create an ending that requires thinking and interpretation.

If the Indoctrination Theory is true, then the game never had an ending.

It would essentially be the equivalent of the game cutting to credits mid-Conduit run.

Very true.  The "real" ending will come in some type of DLC.  If the DLC is free, then I have no problem with that.  Bioware is taking an incredible risk with this type of "gotcha!" ending, and judging by the response it has backfired to a degree they did not anticipate. 

[n00bsauce2010]

DuskRose wrote...

n00bsauce2010 wrote...

masster blaster wrote...

I know it may sound stupid about what I am saying but if they say "we listen to our fans feed back" then they should know we also listen to theirs as much as they listen to ours. We are also giving Bioware a last triumph card to redeem it's self by just adding the IT to the Mass Effect 3 ending.

If that's not enof then I don't now about Bioware any more, but I think everyone can be happy if they just give IT a chance to defend it's self, by use saying that you can keep the ending part the same but have Shepard awakes from the IT test, and that what went on in Shepard's mind will have a effect on how it will all end for the galaxy.

I also think that the fans will be happy with this because it keeps the games the same, but just adds on to the story,and it will have answered a lot of the plot holes that was left for the messed up/fantastic ending. If Bioware can't see we are offering our support without yelling at them I think they may consider the IT theory only if we present a well case to effect their mode on the IT theory.
And if they want more evidence then just come to the "Was the ending a hallucination" and the first page will already give them the evidence to support the IT theory,

So Kelaseli to all the fans and hope that Bioware comes to terms peacefully to IT theory and if not then we will see what they are planing.

If indoctrination wasn't their intended goal. Which I think it was. Then it is pretty safe to assume that almost all of the reps/devs over there know it or know of it. Tweets have been thrown to them so I think most of them are aware it exists. I think PAX was their intended twist reveal in my eyes. Before all the outrage from "fans"

Agreed, n00bsauce.  If there's one thing BioWare writers love to do, it's mess with the player's head mid to end story

Is that sarcasm? If it indeed isn't then thanks. If it isn't.. then all I can simply ask you is what your statement means?

[masster blaster]

Maybe if we tell the ones how are not happy with ME3 ending, about IT theory but in a nice professional manner, and not shoving the speculations/evidence down their throat.They will most likely come to here to support the IT theory, and we could try to reach out to the Proportion of fans supporting the "Retake back Mass Effect", and try to sway them into supporting the IT theory, which still has them doing what they were originally doing, but supporting the "Retake Mass Effect with the IT theory included part"and with that it may get Bioware to look over the IT theory.

[n00bsauce2010]

masster blaster wrote...

Maybe if we tell the ones how are not happy with ME3 ending, about IT theory but in a nice professional manner, and not shoving the speculations/evidence down their throat.They will most likely come to here to support the IT theory, and we could try to reach out to the Proportion of fans supporting the "Retake back Mass Effect", and try to sway them into supporting the IT theory, which still has them doing what they were originally doing, but supporting the "Retake Mass Effect with the IT theory included part"and with that it may get Bioware to look over the IT theory.

The retake mass effect movement has sorta died down. Though not fully. But they see victory in their eyes to some extent. But I think those people are aware of the theory and if they're a part of the movement, then they're a part of the crowd that hates the ending either way because A) It can be taken at face value or the indoc theory is true and the ending still isn't in the game.. hence to their intended logic.. the ending sucks either way (their words not mine)

I'm a full supporter of indoc theory if previous statement leads you to believe otherwise.

[Flapperrr]

Planet of Zorya (Limit Ismar) mission of the help to Zaid.

[felipejiraya]

Another thing that counts towards the IT: no one from BW shot down the theory yet and they've done that with several other that appeared in the last weeks.