57139 réponses à ce sujet

[thelightofspeed]

Calling the claims "weak" is an oppinion.

Not particularly. The evidence for IT is made up of many, many tidbits that can be viewed as supporting indoctrination. For instance:

- Infinite ammo pistol
- Shepard bleeding on left side
- Files named 'Dream'
- TIM able to control Shepard

The issue I have with each of those points is that they have many alternate explanations. The pistol could be an artistic/gameplay choice, Shepard's bleeding all over, assets are reused or even just named strangely all the time, TIM could have put in a mind control device anyway... etc.

Furthermore, a good deal of the 'evidence' can be explained simply by bad writing or a rushed effort. Most of it is weak, and when you add multiple pieces of weak evidence together, they do not get stronger.

In this sense, it is perfectly valid to call evidence 'weak'.

Some of the evidence presented in this thread has been half decent, or hard to explain otherwise. Shepard waking up in rubble, controlling Anderson, etc. These can still be explained away by a poor writing effort, internal feedback and possibly a rushed game, but it's a little stronger than "I didn't need to reload my pistol, must've been dreaming."

As a whole, given the sheer number of alternate explanations that could apply, and a basic application of Occam's Razor... the 'proof' for IT seems fairly weak. It 'fits', but it is not strongly proven whatsoever.

[BastiSito]

streamlock wrote...

I guess we can agree to disagree in this matter

Agreed.

[Rifneno]

thelightofspeed wrote...


Not particularly. The evidence for IT is made up of many, many tidbits that can be viewed as supporting indoctrination. For instance:

- Infinite ammo pistol
- Shepard bleeding on left side
- Files named 'Dream'
- TIM able to control Shepard

The issue I have with each of those points is that they have many alternate explanations. The pistol could be an artistic/gameplay choice, Shepard's bleeding all over, assets are reused or even just named strangely all the time, TIM could have put in a mind control device anyway... etc.

Furthermore, a good deal of the 'evidence' can be explained simply by bad writing or a rushed effort. Most of it is weak, and when you add multiple pieces of weak evidence together, they do not get stronger.

In this sense, it is perfectly valid to call evidence 'weak'.

Some of the evidence presented in this thread has been half decent, or hard to explain otherwise. Shepard waking up in rubble, controlling Anderson, etc. These can still be explained away by a poor writing effort, internal feedback and possibly a rushed game, but it's a little stronger than "I didn't need to reload my pistol, must've been dreaming."

As a whole, given the sheer number of alternate explanations that could apply, and a basic application of Occam's Razor... the 'proof' for IT seems fairly weak. It 'fits', but it is not strongly proven whatsoever.

Hmm.  ...  No, sounds like you're the one grasping at straws.  And anyone that thinks Occam's Razor applies to fiction doesn't understand what fiction is.

[IronSabbath88]

Can I just say that I respect even the people who don't believe in this theory but are being civil and respectful to people's opinions?

This is easily the best topic on the boards.

[Dance Craze]

in splinter cell double agent when you have to shoot lambert there is no ammo count... must have been dreaming.

[BubbleDncr]

Sorry if I'm behind on this discussion, but...

Doesn't the fact that the worst possible ending only lets you pick the destroy option, kind of completely debunk the indoctrination theory? Shepard who completely fails, automatically gets to break indoctrination, but Shepard who tried hard to save the galaxy has a 2 out of 3 chance of being indoctrinated?

[savagejuicebox]

CaliGuy033 wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...

NikolaiShade wrote...

@CaliGuy033

I'm sorry, but since we have no "proof" for IT nor any other explanation, at least for now, until BioWare speaks clearly, we can add all the circustantial evidence for one theory or the other, they're still all true and all false at the same time.

Here's where we differ.  You're speaking in terms of "true" or "false."  I'm not.  I cannot tell you that IT is "false."  I have no idea--I didn't write the game.

What I can tell you is that the arguments for IT are incredibly weak, and that the evidence supporting the theory is incredibly weak.  

Calling the claims "weak" is an oppinion. And you are one of the few you don't seem to grasp the implications, almost everyone else views this as near solid proof (maybe because they actually understand it) just because you can't see it doesn't mean its a poor theory.

The failure of the IT movement to understand the mechanics of logical proofs, necessary and sufficient conditions, and the probative value of circumstantial evidence is not "my opinion."  If you say "2+2 = 5" and I tell you you're wrong, that is also not "my opinion."

CaliGuy: Your honor my client is innocent!

Judge: And why do you say that councilor?

CaliGuy: I DONT HAVE TO EXPLAIN MYSELF TO YOU!!

[SharpVec]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

Can I just say that I respect even the people who don't believe in this theory but are being civil and respectful to people's opinions?

This, 100%.

[Rob_K1]

Dance Craze wrote...

Over the past day, I have been feeling a strong inclination that the ending is not indoctrination. I was once a true believer and then a doubter and then a true believer once more but now I'm a doubter once again. I feel that it is obvious that the starchild is not a hallucination. The catalyst is a true necessity that is introduced in the very beginning of the game as being crucial to the crucible. If he is not the catalyst, then what would be? It cannot just be the citadel because it is just a space station. This thought has swayed me to the other side once more... Any thoughts as to what else the catalyst would be and what not?

Only an assumption, but it could be something not introduced yet, Shepard or the gathered army themselves.

Why Shepard or the gathered army?

Because they have plenty enough defiance and/or hope. Shepard himself is the one they've placed their trust in.

I do doubt it though. So, back to something that's not been introduced yet or thought of. That is if the kid is not the catalyst and/or isn't real.

Modifié par Rob_K1, 28 mars 2012 - 06:44 .

[waldstr18]

Dance Craze wrote...

in splinter cell double agent when you have to shoot lambert there is no ammo count... must have been dreaming.

why would you spoil that for me?!!! i havent played that far yet. im actualy in the ice mission.

[IronSabbath88]

BubbleDncr wrote...

Sorry if I'm behind on this discussion, but...

Doesn't the fact that the worst possible ending only lets you pick the destroy option, kind of completely debunk the indoctrination theory? Shepard who completely fails, automatically gets to break indoctrination, but Shepard who tried hard to save the galaxy has a 2 out of 3 chance of being indoctrinated?

Well it all comes down to whether or not you have the power for the Reapers to view you as a threat. Not many people are going to rush through to the end like that, and imo, if you DO rush through like that you don't deserve a choice.

It's basically the Reapers looking at you as unworthy of joining their cause, and it's a pretty good logic if you think about it.

[RoyalGambit]

Rifneno wrote...

RoyalGambit wrote...

Started replaying the original Mass Effect. Noticed that Kaidan comments on a "low hum" coming from a very reaper looking statue of a mass relay, inside the citadel. He says it pretty much the exact same way as Vega does in ME3, so maybe it isn't a coincidence?

You mean the conduit?

Heh yeah guess I do. Haven't played the orignal for 3 years. Guess my memory isn't what it used to be.

[JustAidan]

Dance Craze wrote...

Over the past day, I have been feeling a strong inclination that the ending is not indoctrination. I was once a true believer and then a doubter and then a true believer once more but now I'm a doubter once again. I feel that it is obvious that the starchild is not a hallucination. The catalyst is a true necessity that is introduced in the very beginning of the game as being crucial to the crucible. If he is not the catalyst, then what would be? It cannot just be the citadel because it is just a space station. This thought has swayed me to the other side once more... Any thoughts as to what else the catalyst would be and what not?

This question is actually very interesting.

FYI: the Citadel is a massive Mass Effect relay (did it also regulate the Mass relays as well?) not a space station, that's just what the current civilisations use it for.

We learn from the Prothean VI that the Catalyst is the Citadel and that TIM is over there right now and that he has informed the Reapers likewise.

Question is: Can we trust the *hacked* Prothean VI? Is the Catalyst actually something completely different? Is th Crucible a Reaper trap? etc etc. All speculation and no way to figure this out from what is given in the game.

There is a lot to suggest and indicate that the ending is not real, far too much has been diliberately put in throughout the game. Most likely you are just worried about being disappointed. Same here.

[byne]

BubbleDncr wrote...

Sorry if I'm behind on this discussion, but...

Doesn't the fact that the worst possible ending only lets you pick the destroy option, kind of completely debunk the indoctrination theory? Shepard who completely fails, automatically gets to break indoctrination, but Shepard who tried hard to save the galaxy has a 2 out of 3 chance of being indoctrinated?

You also dont live in the worst possible ending. Could just be the Reapers deciding not to bother with you, and leaving you to die.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

BubbleDncr wrote...

Sorry if I'm behind on this discussion, but...

Doesn't the fact that the worst possible ending only lets you pick the destroy option, kind of completely debunk the indoctrination theory? Shepard who completely fails, automatically gets to break indoctrination, but Shepard who tried hard to save the galaxy has a 2 out of 3 chance of being indoctrinated?

Actually an imported save with the Collector base intact only gets the control ending, but it has allready been discussed. basicly the lack of choices represents that the Reapers are not really interested in Sheaprd since they are practically have already won as the fleet is simply not big enough.

The differences in control/destroy represent Shepard leaning towards Andersons or TIM´s way of thinking depending on if you destroyed or kept the collector base.

[Dance Craze]

Rob_K1 wrote...

Dance Craze wrote...

Over the past day, I have been feeling a strong inclination that the ending is not indoctrination. I was once a true believer and then a doubter and then a true believer once more but now I'm a doubter once again. I feel that it is obvious that the starchild is not a hallucination. The catalyst is a true necessity that is introduced in the very beginning of the game as being crucial to the crucible. If he is not the catalyst, then what would be? It cannot just be the citadel because it is just a space station. This thought has swayed me to the other side once more... Any thoughts as to what else the catalyst would be and what not?

Only an assumption, but it could be something not introduced yet, Shepard or the gathered army themselves.

Why Shepard or the gathered army?

Because they have plenty enough defiance and/or hope. Shepard himself is the one they've placed their trust in.

I do doubt it though. So, back to something that's not been introduced yet or thought of. That is if the kid is not the catalyst and/or isn't real.

Maybe. I think that would be quite interesting if shepard was the catalyst...

[Rob_K1]

BubbleDncr wrote...

Sorry if I'm behind on this discussion, but...

Doesn't the fact that the worst possible ending only lets you pick the destroy option, kind of completely debunk the indoctrination theory? Shepard who completely fails, automatically gets to break indoctrination, but Shepard who tried hard to save the galaxy has a 2 out of 3 chance of being indoctrinated?

Not saying it's right, but the usual response to that is that the Reapers simply don't care enough about giving you plenty of choice and just go with what they think you'd want to do, as they know they've won if you have a low EMS.

Like the child says if you have a low EMS, 'why are you here?' instead of 'wake up' if you have a high EMS.

[Kyzee]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

Can I just say that I respect even the people who don't believe in this theory but are being civil and respectful to people's opinions?

This is easily the best topic on the boards.

Thank you. Need more people with attitudes like this.

(Seriously, I was starting to feel like my requests for civility were being ignored in favor of a flame war.)

[Dance Craze]

waldstr18 wrote...

Dance Craze wrote...

in splinter cell double agent when you have to shoot lambert there is no ammo count... must have been dreaming.

why would you spoil that for me?!!! i havent played that far yet. im actualy in the ice mission.

It says spoliers allowed!!! Also, I chose to shoot next to him instead. A last minute stroke of genius!

[Rifneno]

Dance Craze wrote...

in splinter cell double agent when you have to shoot lambert there is no ammo count... must have been dreaming.

Super Mario Brothers 2 (US) was a dream, so this must be too. See how hard you can hit logic in the face with a shovel when you use situations from other games by other companies as evidence of something for this one? Good thing I was saying it in jest at least.

BubbleDncr wrote...

Sorry if I'm behind on this discussion, but...

Doesn't the fact that the worst possible ending only lets you pick the destroy option, kind of completely debunk the indoctrination theory? Shepard who completely fails, automatically gets to break indoctrination, but Shepard who tried hard to save the galaxy has a 2 out of 3 chance of being indoctrinated?

No, especially since if you kept the Collector Base instead of destroying it, the only option you get is control.

[JustAidan]

SharpVec wrote...

IronSabbath88 wrote...

Can I just say that I respect even the people who don't believe in this theory but are being civil and respectful to people's opinions?

This, 100%.

Agreed, most people on both sides are pretty decent it is just the rude minority that are loud.

Hehe, even if this turns out to be true some people will still deny it; "Bioware just copied your fandom!"

[baruaru]

BubbleDncr wrote...

Sorry if I'm behind on this discussion, but...

Doesn't the fact that the worst possible ending only lets you pick the destroy option, kind of completely debunk the indoctrination theory? Shepard who completely fails, automatically gets to break indoctrination, but Shepard who tried hard to save the galaxy has a 2 out of 3 chance of being indoctrinated?

The worst one: Because Shepard might be near the line-of-the-dead, so, not worthy to push the indoc.


Tried one: Its just the last effort to "try" to convince her/him do what they want. Its just like the villains: Promise everything if the protagonist spare ehm.

[Dance Craze]

JustAidan wrote...

Dance Craze wrote...

Over the past day, I have been feeling a strong inclination that the ending is not indoctrination. I was once a true believer and then a doubter and then a true believer once more but now I'm a doubter once again. I feel that it is obvious that the starchild is not a hallucination. The catalyst is a true necessity that is introduced in the very beginning of the game as being crucial to the crucible. If he is not the catalyst, then what would be? It cannot just be the citadel because it is just a space station. This thought has swayed me to the other side once more... Any thoughts as to what else the catalyst would be and what not?

This question is actually very interesting.

FYI: the Citadel is a massive Mass Effect relay (did it also regulate the Mass relays as well?) not a space station, that's just what the current civilisations use it for.

We learn from the Prothean VI that the Catalyst is the Citadel and that TIM is over there right now and that he has informed the Reapers likewise.

Question is: Can we trust the *hacked* Prothean VI? Is the Catalyst actually something completely different? Is th Crucible a Reaper trap? etc etc. All speculation and no way to figure this out from what is given in the game.

There is a lot to suggest and indicate that the ending is not real, far too much has been diliberately put in throughout the game. Most likely you are just worried about being disappointed. Same here.

Haha, I really am worried about being disapointed. I feel like waiting a month and finding out nothing is too depressing. I just want to get the grieving process over with.. if I have to....