Aller au contenu

Photo

I think (alot) of those people who hate the endings don't actually "get it" I want to help you all (not pretentious)


  • Ce sujet est fermé Ce sujet est fermé
1594 réponses à ce sujet

#1176
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

thoreauscabin wrote...

soundhole wrote...

 Indocrination: A hypothesis stitched together with weak threads and cherry picked examples.  Glenn Beck would be proud.  
. . .

This whole thing is silly.  


A+ post. I wish all the Bioware apologists would read this. Probably wouldn't do much for the smug "you just don't get it" crowd, though.


Tiax Rules All wrote...

we shall see whos silly


Really? That's all you have? Great job defending your weak argument. I know you were just trying to come up with an explanation, but face it -- Bioware dropped the ball. No amount of DLC or patches is going to fix how badly they ruined this series.


I cant prove what hasn't happened yet. When they release the DLC I will be right, simple as that. I can't prove the DLC... but it WILL be proven. "we shall see"

i am not going to change his mind, if he spends that much time writing, hes set in his ways, so he will not be happy till DLC. or maybe not even after that as then he might have to admit to himself that he was wrong..

#1177
weltraumhamster89

weltraumhamster89
  • Members
  • 571 messages

hes not indoctrinated. hes fighting an indoctrination attempt at the end of the game after he was weakend phsically and mentally by the destroyer beam. INSIDE of his half dead hallucinations, the indoctrination attempt takes over. that is what the choices are really about. none of the described results of the choices are actually what it is about, its all an illusion for the choice shepard is making. the fight over his mind. its not control, synth or destroy, its make a deal with reapers (indoc, dont wake up) or resist them (wake up)


Signed. That's exactly what I thought yesterday after finishing the game. At first, I was raving mad, but then I took myself some time to think and realised that if Shepard would take "control" or "synthesize", all she would do is give in to the reapers. The "kill all organic life"-choice is the only right choice, because obviously it's not what this is about.. I don't know how to explain, but you said it anyway: If Shep would really kill all synth life, the galaxy would be doomed, but it isn't because the Reapers/ cataclyst wants you to NOT choose this option because it would mean that they have no control over Shepard... Argh I can't explain that in English :-/ I guess the "destroy snyth life" option is the "fight of the haluzination option and wake up"...

Still it would be enormously unfair from Bioware to sell us that, because then it would mean the game is not finished and we would have to pay for the real ending... All very sad :'(

#1178
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

soundhole wrote...

That's not my assertion, nor do I prefer to believe it.  The evidence simply points to bad writing, either due to incompetence or the desire to get more money out of us somehow.  The OP's argument is ridiculous, and unless you have specific refutations, that stands as a simple fact of logic.  Nothing they pointed out necessarily points to the indoctrination interpretation as being legitimate.  

The end isn't bad because there's plot holes, the end is bad because it is nothing but one, giant plot hole.  It.  Makes.  No.  Sense.  The OP's explanation makes even less.  

The story was great, and I used to recommend it to everyone I met.  The ending was such complete crap that it ruined the whole universe for me.


im sorry but the op is my facts, i back them up. Lots of people dont think its rediculous.
I explain the plot holes you mention.
and there is no "evidence" for bad writing, just a lack of evidence or a rejection of my evidence.

#1179
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

thoreauscabin wrote...

DragonRageGT wrote...

I read the whole of it. You prefer to believe that a company that made great games and perhaps a couple not so great, can never do it again. I prefer to believe in the creativity of the human mind.

Not every great (if any) band has a discography without s***y albums but nothing prevents them from having their best album yet after a not-so-good-one.

And if you look for plot holes in works of fantasy/sci-fi/fiction, whatever medium, you will find it in 100% of them. So let's just start with ME1. There would be no way for the Reapers be stopped in ME1. That is the biggest plot hole in the whole series. We only had ME2 and ME3 because of a huge plot hole and you can see it anywhere in ME1 following its storyline.

It doesn't mean it is a bad story or anything. The greatest story of all will still have plot holes in it.


First, no one is saying Bioware is incapable of making another good game. Of course they could. But with the cacafest that was DA2 and now this, it's really turns a lot of people off. I know I'm not the only person who from now on will thoroughly read every review of a Bioware game before making any hasty purchasing decisions.

Second, no one is knocking Bioware for having a few tiny plot holes. The heavy criticism is coming for the lame, boring, uncreative and unsatisfying ending. Period.


on the second note... fine... if it were the ending. its not its a cliffhanger that will turn out to be a twist

#1180
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

weltraumhamster89 wrote...

hes not indoctrinated. hes fighting an indoctrination attempt at the end of the game after he was weakend phsically and mentally by the destroyer beam. INSIDE of his half dead hallucinations, the indoctrination attempt takes over. that is what the choices are really about. none of the described results of the choices are actually what it is about, its all an illusion for the choice shepard is making. the fight over his mind. its not control, synth or destroy, its make a deal with reapers (indoc, dont wake up) or resist them (wake up)


Signed. That's exactly what I thought yesterday after finishing the game. At first, I was raving mad, but then I took myself some time to think and realised that if Shepard would take "control" or "synthesize", all she would do is give in to the reapers. The "kill all organic life"-choice is the only right choice, because obviously it's not what this is about.. I don't know how to explain, but you said it anyway: If Shep would really kill all synth life, the galaxy would be doomed, but it isn't because the Reapers/ cataclyst wants you to NOT choose this option because it would mean that they have no control over Shepard... Argh I can't explain that in English :-/ I guess the "destroy snyth life" option is the "fight of the haluzination option and wake up"...

Still it would be enormously unfair from Bioware to sell us that, because then it would mean the game is not finished and we would have to pay for the real ending... All very sad :'(


there isnt much evidence as of yet but all hints are to as it will be free. and if it wasn't at first it probably will be now

#1181
killnoob

killnoob
  • Members
  • 856 messages
This is why i ****ing hate the hallucination theory.

Every theorist and their mums thinks they "GETS IT", when its nothing but a bunch of speculations with straw grasping explaination.

If you can believe Shepard hallucinated everything, you might as well believe the Stargazer made Shepard up for his grandson. Different play through, different endings, different choice, different morality options all rolled into 1 character?

A dead give away that Shepard is just some made up hero that doesn't exist.
Now, as a true hallucination believer would say, prove me wrong.

Modifié par killnoob, 15 mars 2012 - 09:49 .


#1182
soundhole

soundhole
  • Members
  • 95 messages

Tiax Rules All wrote...

I cant prove what hasn't happened yet. When they release the DLC I will be right, simple as that. I can't prove the DLC... but it WILL be proven. "we shall see"

i am not going to change his mind, if he spends that much time writing, hes set in his ways, so he will not be happy till DLC. or maybe not even after that as then he might have to admit to himself that he was wrong..


Wait... what?  Your first post was longer than my response.  Does that mean you're even less amenible to change?  

Even if the DLC comes out, I won't have to admit crap.  Go re-read my post (or read it for the first time, you sneaky cheater, you).  The evidence you provided is crap, plain and simple.  Bioware could release a DLC tomorrow with whatever ending you predict and it doesn't make the evidence you presented any less crap.  I have written my arguments, and like it or not, they completely devistate your original post.  

By the way, 

I cant prove what hasn't happened yet. When they release the DLC I will be right, simple as that. I can't prove the DLC... but it WILL be proven. "we shall see"


is pretentious as f#@k.  You're not entitled to anyone's faith.  You can either make a case for your hypothesis, or you can admit you're wrong.

#1183
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

killnoob wrote...

This is why i ****ing hate the hallucination theory.

Every theorist and their mums thinks they "GETS IT", when its nothing but a bunch of speculations with straw grasping explaination.

If you can believe Shepard hallucinated everything, you might as well believe the Stargazer made Shepard up for his grandson. Different play through, different endings, different choice, different morality options all rolled into 1 character?

A dead give away that Shepard is just some made up hero that doesn't exist.
Now, as a true hallucination believer would say, prove me wrong.


if you truley understand indoc theory there is only 2 real endings to ME3
and the end has not been written as the end was not real.
You will either be indoc to start the DLC or awake after the attmept having rejected it.

quote me on that

prove you wrong? did you read my OP? you have to prove ME wrong in my own thread.

#1184
soundhole

soundhole
  • Members
  • 95 messages

Tiax Rules All wrote...


im sorry but the op is my facts, i back them up. Lots of people dont think its rediculous.
I explain the plot holes you mention.
and there is no "evidence" for bad writing, just a lack of evidence or a rejection of my evidence.


They aren't your facts, and the OP is fallacious.  Where do you explain these plot holes?  I'd like to see that.

The evidence for bad writing is everywhere.  There is no evidence for indoctrination.  

#1185
Guest_Fandango_*

Guest_Fandango_*
  • Guests
And now you’re being disingenuous. I’m the furthest thing from a Bioware apologist and support the OP’s hypothesis. Why? Because it’s obvious.

#1186
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

soundhole wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...


im sorry but the op is my facts, i back them up. Lots of people dont think its rediculous.
I explain the plot holes you mention.
and there is no "evidence" for bad writing, just a lack of evidence or a rejection of my evidence.


They aren't your facts, and the OP is fallacious.  Where do you explain these plot holes?  I'd like to see that.

The evidence for bad writing is everywhere.  There is no evidence for indoctrination.  


fine i will break down your original post point by point and copy paste from my op if you want.

btw step back a sec and look at what your posting. how are you not behaving like you are accusing me of behaving?

I posted my theory, you posted yours, if you dont like mine then thats really the end. Do i really need to RE post what i know you will reject immediatly.

not normally worth my time. I was here to help those who wanted help not yo disprove the ones that were already set in their thinking.

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 15 mars 2012 - 10:07 .


#1187
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

Fandango9641 wrote...

And now you’re being disingenuous. I’m the furthest thing from a Bioware apologist and support the OP’s hypothesis. Why? Because it’s obvious.


it was because there was examples and evidence to back it wasn't it?

lets be fair though there was never supposed to be anything OBVOIUS about the ending and thats why there is some much anger and confusion. Its a risky plot twist. You decide wehter it backfired or is working perfectly.

But the proof will come in time. read the twitters from Bioware, its pretty much out already.

#1188
Jerrybnsn

Jerrybnsn
  • Members
  • 2 291 messages
the only thing about Mass Effect 3 that is a fact is that the vast majority of consumers who purchased it aren't pleased. Whether the ending was done artistically for a thought provoking ending, or if it was done for profit reasons to get more money in a dlc ending is subjective.

#1189
Guest_Fandango_*

Guest_Fandango_*
  • Guests

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

And now you’re being disingenuous. I’m the furthest thing from a Bioware apologist and support the OP’s hypothesis. Why? Because it’s obvious.


it was because there was examples and evidence to back it wasn't it?

lets be fair though there was never supposed to be anything OBVOIUS about the ending and thats why there is some much anger and confusion. Its a risky plot twist. You decide wehter it backfired or is working perfectly.

But the proof will come in time. read the twitters from Bioware, its pretty much out already.



Sure it may not have been immediately obvious, but there’s evidence enough to be sure that 2 of the final 3 choices were indoctrination attempts. Brilliant idea, absolutely brilliant.

Modifié par Fandango9641, 15 mars 2012 - 10:22 .


#1190
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

Jerrybnsn wrote...

the only thing about Mass Effect 3 that is a fact is that the vast majority of consumers who purchased it aren't pleased. Whether the ending was done artistically for a thought provoking ending, or if it was done for profit reasons to get more money in a dlc ending is subjective.


lets just be hypothetical here.

lets say a movie came out and the ending was an obvoius segue to a sequel..
Id imagine this is not anything wrong to you.
then sequel comes out and is a great movie but is missing an ending..
you would be confused and angry
Some time later after the movie genrates enormous buzz for that, they release the ending movie a short to be shown for free at theaters
how would you feel now?

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 15 mars 2012 - 10:15 .


#1191
Captain_Black

Captain_Black
  • Members
  • 18 messages
 Hi all, 

I think this interpretation is correct, further, I
think we've not seen then end. I went in with just 3000 points and did
not witness the rubble scene but watched it on ‘you tube’.

Taking the main post here as what is going on, I think on top of this, the entire game after the Harbinger
beam is pure dream scene.

Two options: Reapers win – blue and green – you become mind controlled and die on the ground in London.

Third option Red – you defy control and wake up on the ground in London. The final battle or decision to
end the Reapers happens in DLC. If you have amassed enough points, you wake up
as the military strength you gathered as a player assists in a practical way to
your chance of real survival on the ground, in the rubble. If you did not your body then
gives up due to the damage inflicted after the dream, even though you
resisted control; as the force amassed was too low.

All the clues are there as discussed. The impact on you as a player is just what Bioware wanted, and they
also have a great opportunity to sell extra content. Like the business model or
not, you’ve not seen the end, and if you don’t buy additional chapters then
please accept the ending as is.

I both love and hate this
current ending phase. But prepare for the shocker of the post rubble “breath!”

Note all those scenes afterwards would be just Shepard's imagination - the crashed ship, the Grandfather... remember the love interest is onboard.. how did that happen? It makes no sense as it's all a dream. And as a result (not a bad plot device like that terrible Dallas soap) but a very clear move by Bioware to indoctrinate the player in real time during the game; with Shepard's subconscious dreaming about his friends and his legacy! 

The angry back lash is the game's big hit and the result of this mild indoctrination scene on the player. LIFE imitating ART!! :P 

Modifié par Captain_Black, 15 mars 2012 - 10:26 .


#1192
soundhole

soundhole
  • Members
  • 95 messages

Tiax Rules All wrote...

fine i will break down your original post point by point and copy paste from my op if you want.

btw step back a sec and look at what your posting. how are you not behaving like you are accusing me of behaving?

I posted my theory, you posted yours, if you dont like mine then thats really the end. Do i really need to RE post what i know you will reject immediatly.

not normally worth my time. I was here to help those who wanted help not yo disprove the ones that were already set in their thinking.


I've already re-formatted my contentions.  Posting soon.

You're blindly following what some bloggers have told you and not interpreting the game for yourself.  You don't seem to realize that Bioware has screwed you over.  Moreover, you spread that ignorance like a disease.  

I'm not going to reject what is soundly supported by evidence.  

#1193
soundhole

soundhole
  • Members
  • 95 messages
[quote]Tiax Rules All wrote...

I am making this post in an honest attempt to help people understand and appreciate the endings more. I personally feel after reading posts here and hearing from friends that, most of this anger over the endings is caused because they did not see the over 4000 asset "destroy" option ending.

I hope to make a complete and easy explanation of the ending, comment if you think I need to adjust or add to it.
This post does not apply to those who just don't like it because of its lack of detailed epilogue.

First of all there is one ending that is the real ending and all other endings are tricks and illusions. In fact the only REAL ending in the whole game is if you pick the destroy option with over 4000 assets. The real ending is only that 20 seconds they show of Shepard in the rubble and then takes a breath.

That (supposed to be) eye opening moment is supposed to tell you that Shepard was never on the Citadel. He lies just where he was knocked out by the destroyer blast, in the rubble of London. This is where the confusion takes place.

Everything that happens after the destroyer hits Shepard during his charge is a combination of a dying Shepard's hallucinations and reaper indoctrination trying to take over. Right after the blast, Shepard wakes with his armor half blown off. This is not just cut scene fubar, this is the start of his indoctrination fight when everything is slightly off, as in a dream (because it is)

If you listen to the radio chatter before Shepard goes into the beam, you can hear allied forces saying that NOBODY made it to the beam, not you and not Anderson before you. This is the real world radio chatter now in the background subconscious of this hallucination.
[/quote]

That is what you want to believe.  Not a fact, not backed by evidence.

[quote]
After he reaches the Citadel there is more oddness that should be setting off triggers for the player that something is not right, that this is an illusion... Anderson describes shifting walls and only ever agrees with Shep on his surroundings after Shep describes his and saying "like the collector base you described". Everything is just a projection from Shepard's mind and subconscious.
[/quote]

Again, just what you want to believe.  A transforming space station doesn't itself indicate a dream or illusion.  This is a sci-fi story, and the main enemies are Lovecraftian machinations that sleep in "dark space" for 50,000 years.  Shifting walls isn't so hard to believe, and remember that in ME2, Anderson noted how amazingly fast the Citadel was being put back together.  Restructuring itself is obviously not such a difficult task. There is no evidence for this, nothing to back it up.  Anderson no doubt heard about Shepard's description of the Collector base.  The Collectors, using Reaper technology and being trained by the Reapers to harvest organic life, will undoubtably make their surroundings look the inside of a Reaper base (which, as it turns out, the Citadel is).

[/quote]
When you are having the conversation with TIM and Anderson, It's all just again Sheps subconscious reminding himself and the player about indoctrination and what happens when you stop fighting it... you lose control (shoot Anderson) This is similar to the nightmares Shep has of the boy. This is the game through Shep's subconscious telling you do not follow the kid, you will burn (kid goes up in flames). And the last one when you see she with the kid and they both burn. Again telling you, no matter what happens you will get burned by trusting the kid.
[/quote]

Really think about this.

1) Shepard's dream is telling him something about the future.  You are saying that Shepard is suddenly psychic.

2) The boy, instead of a more reasonable, emotional metaphor, represents a being Shep has no idea exists.

3) When Shep finally contronts the Catalyst, it chooses the form of the boy.  Why?  Shep's own subconscious doesn't trust the form.  What does the Catalyst have to gain?

[quote]
There are more allusions to not trusting Cerberus/reapers throughout the game as well. You really start to see them after you understand the indoctrination ending. For example: TIM talking to Kai Lang says "Shepard was always going to stay true to his ideals" subtlety suggesting that the player should do the same and not let TIM/reapers compromise you destroying the reapers. The goal you have had since the very beginning. Also before the attack on Cerberus base I believe, there is a quantum comm. call between you and Hackett. You have the option of saying something like "what if TIM is right and the reapers CAN be controlled" and Hackett shoots you down. Gives you a direct order to kill TIM and destroy reapers. No questions asked. Once again, game trying to remind you of the one true goal and keep you focused.
[/quote]

There are lots of reasons why the Alliance would compell you to not trust Cerberus.  What else would you expect Hackett to say about them?  What else would he say about controlling the Reapers?

[quote]
Now about the Catalyst and the crucible conversation and decision itself... By this time indoctrination is very close to taking over. The end is near. The catalyst looks like the little boy because of shep's subconscious and indoctrination is feeding off that. Everything in this scene is A LIE. The choices and how they are presented to you are all part of the deception to get Shepard to give his mind into indoctrination and lose the will to fight it.

You are presented first with the destroy option. He says "I KNOW you have been thinking of destroying us but..." The catalyst is scared, knows that its only chance is to manipulate Shepard here and now. It's painted in renegade red to through you off. This is purposefully done to manipulate Shepard's decision to fight. He tells you all synthetic life will be wiped out, including Geth and including Shepard because he is partially cybernetic himself. In sales you always present the worst option first and the best for last. So the next 2 options can then be presented and made more appealable.

the other 2 options do not let you ever see Shepard "alive" at the end so to me BOTH of these options are fails and result in you being indoctrinated and/or dying right there on the streets of London. Without that last breath scene. There can be no happy ending. I will elaborate on them a bit more separately.

Synthesis was in the middle and last option presented, this is what they ultimately want. He even likened the synthesis to husks in his description. The reapers want to harvest organics and change them into hybrids. By choosing synthesis you would be doing their work for them in an instant. Basically I see this as total fail ending, you have been played.

Now the control option was not presented as prominently as the synthesis but was still painted in paragon blue and offered as an option still better then destroy. In the end the result for choosing this is the same behind the scenes. Shepard gave into indoctrination/death and you do not get the breath tidbit.
[/quote]


1) Why does it matter that the destroy option is red? 

2 )My character was a sociopathic cadaver-junky.  Most of my rep points were renegade. 

3) Why didn't the Catalyst, being all up inside my mind and dicking with my subconscious, change the colors to manipulate my personality type? 

4) Why wouldn't it make the synthesis option red for me, since that is what I clicked the most?  

Edit: What I mean is, why would the Catalyst present an option it doesn't want me to take as the only type of option I do take?  

This makes no sense.

[quote]
So if you choose destroy like I believe we are somewhat intended to, remember that the explosion cut scene and relays exploding and Normandy running/crashing ALL OF THAT IS STILL HALLUCINATION. This is Shepard's subconscious imagining a "happy ending" he imagines reapers destroyed, earth fighters celebrating, and he imagines and ending for companions. The lush new planet-scape is just a metaphor for starting over and them being at peace. That's why immediately after they show Shep waking up, to solidify the dream idea.

At that point you are supposed to start thinking about what really happened. Shepard is alive, on Earth, has conquered indoctrination. Another HUGE thing is that after destroying the reapers you were supposed to be dead. Recalling the little boy "you will die as you are partly synthetic". When you wake up after that in the rubble, it should be a clear indication that you have been lied to. You did not die like the boy said you would, he just said that to dissuade you. The rest is left even more ambiguous but...
[/quote]

Or, that's what you want to believe, and will believe, fanatically, regardless of the evidence provided.

[quote]
I personally believe that Shepard's job ended there..... etc
[/quote]

Your 'personal' beliefs are your own.  Fine.  But they aren't backed by evidence.

The rest of your original post is just conjecture based on Bioware's PR campaign.  If you want to elaborate on any of it, fine, but I am not going to address it immediately.

Modifié par soundhole, 15 mars 2012 - 10:25 .


#1194
Vedexent

Vedexent
  • Members
  • 29 messages
 I haven't read the entire thread, but I'll say this:

A story ending is alot like a joke: If you HAVE to explain it for your audience to get it, it doesn't work. If it OFFENDS and ANGERS your audience, you really didn't undertand your audience to begin with.

#1195
Jerrybnsn

Jerrybnsn
  • Members
  • 2 291 messages

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

the only thing about Mass Effect 3 that is a fact is that the vast majority of consumers who purchased it aren't pleased. Whether the ending was done artistically for a thought provoking ending, or if it was done for profit reasons to get more money in a dlc ending is subjective.


lets just be hypothetical here.

lets say a movie came out and the ending was an obvoius segue to a sequel..
Id imagine this is not anything wrong to you.
then sequel comes out and is a great movie but is missing an ending..
you would be confused and angry
Some time later after the movie genrates enormous buzz for that, they release the ending movie a short to be shown for free at theaters
how would you feel now?


That's a tuffy to answer because it's just so hard to believe that anyone would do that with a movie.  Which shows that gaming and movie watching are two different mediums in storytelling.  I think if they gave the final ending away for free or not a couple of months after the last movie I wouldn't really care to go see it because the memory would have faded enough to care about the plotline anymore.

I think the problem is the arch in storytelling here.  Waiting to give the real ending to the climax and the conclusion to the trilogy a couple of months later kind of loses the momentum in the art of story telling.

Which still doesn't make sense because you are given a conclusion to the trilogy with the Stargazer.

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 15 mars 2012 - 10:46 .


#1196
Archonsg

Archonsg
  • Members
  • 3 560 messages
That was interesting.
Though at this point I am more inclined to think that we are grasping at straws to make sense of what happened.

To put it bluntly, the ending was bad. Not just from a story point of view but also from a logical perspective. Mass Effect is Science Fiction and as so while you can make up certain physics rules and or dream up races that could not possibly exist outside of their own environment, a certain leeway is given. BUT, those rules must at least be logical and consistent.

Mass Effect has done this beautifully, even explaining how an aquatic race like the Hanar is able to move and communicate with air breathers like humans and asari. BUT they had to explain and stay within the rules of physics and science, even made up science (that's why its SCIENCE fiction) they they have set up.

Even the Reapers, powerful as they are took centuries to wipe out sentient life, why? Because they too had to follow a real set of rules in terms of time, travel and physically destroying life as their victims knew it.

The ending as we have it, threw all those rules out and then some. From exploding mass relays, to energy release (regardless of type) that are able to span hundreds of parsecs (roughly 3.3 light years per pc) in a blink of an eye, genetically alter people with "magic"?

A note in regards to that short youtube movie. (its a good attempt)
It did not refute that Shepard was on the Citadel. Right up to the point that he reached for the console.

This can't be, if Shepard is later found "alive" in the ruins of London as we are led to believe at that last "teaser clip"

1) The Citadel was destroyed and Shepard is on it.
The last time Shepard was spaced he had his Armor on, which made it "plausible" that he survived his ordeal. Not so this time. He would freeze, his veins swell due to pressure loss and ... lets just say die a very very nasty painful death.

2) Re-entry into earth's atmosphere
Great ball of fire?

3) Terminal velocity and Impact
That is assuming he survives re-entry.

So ya, your hallucination / indoctrination theory does start to sound better and better all the time. But even so, it meant that it had be right at the point when Shepard and squad were hit by the beam and everything that comes after is a "lie" / dream / hallucination... whatever.

Given that was the ending given to us, it IS A BAD ending. No matter how you want to call it.

We don't have to come up with excuses for Bioware or their writers and we certainly do not need to come up with convoluted what ifs to make sense of what we saw.
What really made me mad is that right up to London and the events that followed, Mass Effect 3 was a beautifully crafted game and more then met expectations. But to finally cap it off with poor and shoddy writing at the end? Where choices given to you are contrary to what your character would do, where "all your decisions leading to this point ...(effects your outcome!) didn't matter.. is just wrong.

Modifié par Archonsg, 15 mars 2012 - 10:49 .


#1197
Cody211282

Cody211282
  • Members
  • 2 541 messages
If I don't have the full picture it's because they didn't give it to me. Now I paid for it and I should have it, but since I don't I think I will opt out of buying anything from them for a bit.

#1198
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

soundhole wrote...

That is what you want to believe.  Not a fact, not backed by evidence.

the evidence is what we see in the game with our own eyes. or hear as in the radio chatter. its in the game. but it needs interpretation. So explaining it becomes the theory. Proof will come officially when it comes.

Again, just what you want to believe.  A transforming space station doesn't itself indicate a dream or illusion.  This is a sci-fi story, and the main enemies are Lovecraftian machinations that sleep in "dark space" for 50,000 years.  Shifting walls isn't so hard to believe, and remember that in ME2, Anderson noted how amazingly fast the Citadel was being put back together.  Restructuring itself is obviously not such a difficult task. There is no evidence for this, nothing to back it up.  Anderson no doubt heard about Shepard's description of the Collector base.  The Collectors, using Reaper technology and being trained by the Reapers to harvest organic life, will undoubtably make their surroundings look the inside of a Reaper base (which, as it turns out, the Citadel is).


maybe, i cant disprove that but i still think your wrong

Really think about this.

1) Shepard's dream is telling him something about the future.  You are saying that Shepard is suddenly psychic.

2) The boy, instead of a more reasonable, emotional metaphor, represents a being Shep has no idea exists.

3) When Shep finally contronts the Catalyst, it chooses the form of the boy.  Why?  Shep's own subconscious doesn't trust the form.  What does the Catalyst have to gain?


i wouldnt be here if i havent "really thought about this" I do the work.

1) Sheps dream is not telling him anything, but Anderson is sheps conscience or moral center projected, TIM is the control option projected and Boy-binger is Synth option projected. Together though control and synth represent outside forces (indoc forces) feeding misinformation while Andersons  projection is sheps mind fighitng back. nothing happens while sheps out except wether he gives into indoc or not, everything else is false and will fade away once dlc proves this.

2 and 3) actually the boy in the nightmares is sheps mind but the boy at the end was harbinger, using that form to get a more sympathetic result from shepard knowing that Shep feels gulty for not saving him. 

There are lots of reasons why the Alliance would compell you to not trust Cerberus.  What else would you expect Hackett to say about them?  What else would he say about controlling the Reapers?


Its not just Hackett, its established from early game one that there is no comprimise with reapers.. it reinforced over and over and over. Sheps own speech at the beginning is "we fight or we die" not "we fight or we die or maybe pick the wierd nonsensical third option if presented by a reaper"

1) Why does it matter that the destroy option is red? 

2 )My character was a sociopathic cadaver-junky.  Most of my rep points were renegade. 

3) Why didn't the Catalyst, being all up inside my mind and dicking with my subconscious, change the colors to manipulate my personality type? 

4) Why wouldn't it make the synthesis option red for me, since that is what I clicked the most?  

Edit: What I mean is, why would the Catalyst present an option it doesn't want me to take as the only type of option I do take?  

This makes no sense.



1 and 2) Boy-binger wants to portray that as a bad thing, its subtle manipulation. You may be a renegade Shep but there is now way to play a traitorous shep in ME3, you dont have the option.

3) the colors represent what the REAPERS want as paragon and renegade not shep's morals, if you are so renegade that you would make a deal with the devils then you DESERVE to be indoctrinated in game.

4) harbinger does not expect shepard to WANT to join them and is skewing his perceptions to that nature.

it makes sense

Or, that's what you want to believe, and will believe, fanatically, regardless of the evidence provided.


my evidence to that was shep waking up on earth. Thats the biggest peice of hard evidence so far. Thats why its the hardest to get and the last thing shown. Its important, very important and foreshadows the future dlc. that is evidence stop telling me i dont have any... you must be skipping over those lines..

IYour 'personal' beliefs are your own.  Fine.  But they aren't backed by evidence.

The rest of your original post is just conjecture based on Bioware's PR campaign.  If you want to elaborate on any of it, fine, but I am not going to address it immediately.


Biowares PR campaign right now is one of "we dont have the whole ending"
are we supposed to believe that this will turn out to be a lie and they will say. " actually disregard that last post" you DO have the whole story...

ALSO) you said i stole my ideas from others, not true. Dont accuse me of something you could never prove. If i came up with the same theory on my own that others came up with it should only help the idea that its not all that hard to come to same conclustions after different people see the same game.

Do you have more? I used indoctrination theory to explain and refute your side. None of my answers were just thought up now, they were already established by my OP and other Indoc theory threads. my answeres wont change with any new evidence you can present because all the evidence there is, is already plain to see in the game ending as is.

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 15 mars 2012 - 11:01 .


#1199
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

Vedexent wrote...

 I haven't read the entire thread, but I'll say this:

A story ending is alot like a joke: If you HAVE to explain it for your audience to get it, it doesn't work. If it OFFENDS and ANGERS your audience, you really didn't undertand your audience to begin with.


so in your mind they took a risk and it failed...

but why be mad if it means there is only more to come?

#1200
Tiax Rules All

Tiax Rules All
  • Members
  • 2 938 messages

Cody211282 wrote...

If I don't have the full picture it's because they didn't give it to me. Now I paid for it and I should have it, but since I don't I think I will opt out of buying anything from them for a bit.


what if the ending DLC is free? which it likely will be.
whats the difference really?