1594 réponses à ce sujet

[Smiley556]

Just to clear this out, people think the reapers would have some kind of instant win if they killed shepard there and then. The protheans did Not unite the whole galaxy together, and it took the reapers over 100 years to kill them, through the use of sleeper agents. With the galaxy united as it is its safe to say the galaxy has allot better chance than the protheans ever had. Killing sheppard would NOT have been an instant win for the reapers, and having him as an indoctrinated agent would Greatly help them exterminate the galaxy.

[Eudaemonium]

Zeroscape wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

comanche warior wrote...

ok i can see this theory but what about at the very end after the credits when it comes to the scene with the stargazers?

That bit could be pretty unrelated to the ending itself. Say its set 1 million years in the future. No matter the outcome of the game, it could just be another civilization on the rise - who may or may not be attacked by the reapers soon. Who knows. Personally, I felt that little scene was out of place in the Destroy ending.

Indeed, it's pretty tricky to really say anything conclusive about it. It could be part of the illusion and Shep's mind thinking life will continue on. Or it could very well happen regardless of your choice + any ending dlc to come and just serve as a reminder that there's a future to the ME universe.

Considering Shep is a legend and details are lost to time indicates this is many years in the future. Perhaps an indication of where the next ME game(s) will be set.

Ultimately, for the purpose of figuring out what's happening in regards to the ending, it's irrelevant.

You could argue (and I'm not saying this is right) that it's from a culture who discovered Liara's 'message-in-a-bottle' and so learnt about the war that way, hence part of the legend.

[Tiax Rules All]

FOX216BC wrote...

 This all what there is to say

as a joke?.. heh

as truth? .. they took the face value ending, no analasis. and will be proven to look just as silly as the video for thinking this is all hes gonna get. remeber, it doesn't make sense because it not supposed to. you are supposed to reject it. thats the whole point

[UKJackMan]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

UKJackMan wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

UKJackMan wrote...

If you look at Shepard's speech wheel when he first speaks to the Illusive man during the ending it has BLUE: You don't get it. RED: Were not the enemy here. TOP RIGHT: Don't do this.LOWER RIGHT: Control is pointless.

Are these clues?

the whole fcuking thing is a clue, why do thesethings not make sense? becasue they are made not to..
how does one know hes in a dream? its not easy to think logically in a dream, wierd things happen and you are lead to believe they are real.

Bioware wrote the indoctrination sequence so well that people accept face value when they actually should have written it with even more obvious holes  so even the blind squirells can find the nuts..

The more I look the more clues I see . Another part of the ending speech wheel  YOU ARE BLIND Another BLUE:You didnt earn this power. Oh boy am I going to have fun picking this apart............

anderson is sheps consciece/ moral influence / ending coach, projected by shep
TIM is the control option projected by the reapers..

that conversation is full force "snap out of it Shepard"
even though it doesnt really happen, shooting anderson against your will is showing you this is what happens whe you trust reapers. you cant control them, they control you.. and they made you shoot your conscience.. etc etc.

The Catalyst affect .......multi headed Cerberus the plot thickens

[Smiley556]

Zyrious wrote...

What, you mean that people dont treat your "theories" as facts, and remain skeptical, especially since developer intentions in the script, the Stargazer scene, and even the tweet calling shep living an "Easter Egg" as opposed to "Critical plot point"....

You guys are the ones treating this theory as fact, betraying the very word "theory". Infact this isnt even a theory, it's techically still in the hypothesis stage.

Evidence, not fact. We are bringing up arguments to support our explenation where the other explenation is supported by 'bad writing' and endlessly people calling out were wrong without being able to counter our arguments.

Modifié par Smiley556, 15 mars 2012 - 04:54 .

[Zyrious]

Smiley556 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

What, you mean that people dont treat your "theories" as facts, and remain skeptical, especially since developer intentions in the script, the Stargazer scene, and even the tweet calling shep living an "Easter Egg" as opposed to "Critical plot point"....

You guys are the ones treating this theory as fact, betraying the very word "theory". Infact this isnt even a theory, it's techically still in the hypothesis stage.

Evidence, not fact. We are bringing up arguments to support our explenation where the other explenation is supported by 'bad writing' and endlessly people calling out were wrong without being able to counter are arguments.

They have countered you, many times, and you guys have dismissed it. It isn't evidence, it's *interpretation* of what's presented, being used as evidence. Plot holes become indoctrination, Easter Eggs become critical plot points, and artistic license becomes subtle hints, even though this goes against the very narrative and obvious style of this Space opera in its previous titles and 99% of ME3.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Zeroscape wrote...

We have no way of knowing how the situation changed during and as a consequence of our 'dream sequence'. 

Killing the 'possessed' super Saren at the end of ME1 disrupted Sovereign's barriers to allow the fleet to destroy it. It could very well be that we might have some effect on the Reaper(s) by going through that sequence. Who knows what, but it could give the 'organics and their plucky Geth sidekicks' time to make a move.

But we have no way of knowing due to lack of information and any idea we come up with could easily be shot down.

Exactly!   We can only operate based on what we know.  You're right, maybe the Reapers did pour all their juju into indoctrinating Shepard and so when she resisted, every single Reaper in the fleet had to reboot.  Or something.  Maybe that's true... but we have no evidence to contradict what we saw.

[saren9330]

Op you really sound like some kind of Cult Leader. You are right and we are all wrong.
I think your theory could be possible but there is no evidence, beside the real ending is crap.
But the ending in Dragon Age 2 was also really bad (Oh no, we killed all Templer an we are safe. now i will transform myself in a crazy demon and fight you without any reason)
Don't tell us you KNOW its the right ending. You dont know it. You think the indoctrination theory is right. Fine. But its jetzt that. A Theory.

[Rawgrim]

Zyrious wrote...

Smiley556 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

What, you mean that people dont treat your "theories" as facts, and remain skeptical, especially since developer intentions in the script, the Stargazer scene, and even the tweet calling shep living an "Easter Egg" as opposed to "Critical plot point"....

You guys are the ones treating this theory as fact, betraying the very word "theory". Infact this isnt even a theory, it's techically still in the hypothesis stage.

Evidence, not fact. We are bringing up arguments to support our explenation where the other explenation is supported by 'bad writing' and endlessly people calling out were wrong without being able to counter are arguments.

They have countered you, many times, and you guys have dismissed it. It isn't evidence, it's *interpretation* of what's presented, being used as evidence. Plot holes become indoctrination, Easter Eggs become critical plot points, and artistic license becomes subtle hints, even though this goes against the very narrative and obvious style of this Space opera in its previous titles and 99% of ME3.

Why would the reapers use every weapon they have against Shep, and just leave out indoctrination? Its their most powerfull weapon after all.

[Sky Shadowing]

A post on another forum made me realize something.

Nearly everybody in the game tells you that destroying the Reapers is the only way to win. The exceptions to that rule? They're all indoctrinated.

[Zyrious]

Rawgrim wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Smiley556 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

What, you mean that people dont treat your "theories" as facts, and remain skeptical, especially since developer intentions in the script, the Stargazer scene, and even the tweet calling shep living an "Easter Egg" as opposed to "Critical plot point"....

You guys are the ones treating this theory as fact, betraying the very word "theory". Infact this isnt even a theory, it's techically still in the hypothesis stage.

Evidence, not fact. We are bringing up arguments to support our explenation where the other explenation is supported by 'bad writing' and endlessly people calling out were wrong without being able to counter are arguments.

They have countered you, many times, and you guys have dismissed it. It isn't evidence, it's *interpretation* of what's presented, being used as evidence. Plot holes become indoctrination, Easter Eggs become critical plot points, and artistic license becomes subtle hints, even though this goes against the very narrative and obvious style of this Space opera in its previous titles and 99% of ME3.

Why would the reapers use every weapon they have against Shep, and just leave out indoctrination? Its their most powerfull weapon after all.

TIM uses it against in in the confrontation with him. That is the head of that plot line. There isn't some long line of headaches and humming through ME3 to indicate shepard is suffering the effects other than loosely interpreting every plot hole in the game. I guess saren not just using his spectre status to walk onto the citadel and take control was also indoctrination, and not just a plot hole.

[Tiax Rules All]

Smiley556 wrote...

Just to clear this out, people think the reapers would have some kind of instant win if they killed shepard there and then. The protheans did Not unite the whole galaxy together, and it took the reapers over 100 years to kill them, through the use of sleeper agents. With the galaxy united as it is its safe to say the galaxy has allot better chance than the protheans ever had. Killing sheppard would NOT have been an instant win for the reapers, and having him as an indoctrinated agent would Greatly help them exterminate the galaxy.

when you get enough war assets the war asset screen dercribes the galactic forces chances of victory at "even"
so yeah, we aren't completely out of it. and even is pretty good against an "invicible" army

reapers could have killed Saren, could have killed TIM, why would he take anybody when he could just kill them?
because indoctrination is their most powerful weapon, not any eye laser. oh tough shields..

they win because they turn the peons into husks and such to fight for them and they take the cream of the crop guys, and ones with unique skills or influence and turn them into indoc luitenants. By indoc TIM, Reapers got influence over all of cerberus.. by indoc Saren they got a Spectre with immunity and connections, which led to controlling the geth..

what wonders could they do with an indoc Shep...

[Smiley556]

Zyrious wrote...

Smiley556 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

What, you mean that people dont treat your "theories" as facts, and remain skeptical, especially since developer intentions in the script, the Stargazer scene, and even the tweet calling shep living an "Easter Egg" as opposed to "Critical plot point"....

You guys are the ones treating this theory as fact, betraying the very word "theory". Infact this isnt even a theory, it's techically still in the hypothesis stage.

Evidence, not fact. We are bringing up arguments to support our explenation where the other explenation is supported by 'bad writing' and endlessly people calling out were wrong without being able to counter are arguments.

They have countered you, many times, and you guys have dismissed it. It isn't evidence, it's *interpretation* of what's presented, being used as evidence. Plot holes become indoctrination, Easter Eggs become critical plot points, and artistic license becomes subtle hints, even though this goes against the very narrative and obvious style of this Space opera in its previous titles and 99% of ME3.

Indoctrination, a main subject throughout the series, especially ME3 goes against the narrative and obvious 'style' yet god kid, space magic and limited choices does not? If anything your statement disproves your theory more then anything. Yes some of our evidence (oke, put it your way, interpretation used as evidence, thats still evidence. A bullet casing in a shootout is a bullet casing, but in court it is being used as evidence, that makes it evidence) has been countered, and we have dismissed that with argumentation and more evidence. Thats kinda the idea, we are having a debate about the ending, and highly value any input like that.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

To me, the best evidence =in favor of= Hallucination Theory is the state and shape of Shepard's eyes during the Control and Synthesis endings. You have to admit... while Shepard's face is burning away, her eyes look an awful lot like the Indoctrinated TIM's eyes.

Eyes are often symbolic of the soul... so does that mean that Shepard was Indoctrinated or Shepard finally saw things TIM's way...

...or does it mean nothing more than TIM bought the same model of top of the line, spare-no-expense cybernetic eyes while rebuilding Shepard that he himself used?

[Rawgrim]

Zyrious wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

Smiley556 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

What, you mean that people dont treat your "theories" as facts, and remain skeptical, especially since developer intentions in the script, the Stargazer scene, and even the tweet calling shep living an "Easter Egg" as opposed to "Critical plot point"....

You guys are the ones treating this theory as fact, betraying the very word "theory". Infact this isnt even a theory, it's techically still in the hypothesis stage.

Evidence, not fact. We are bringing up arguments to support our explenation where the other explenation is supported by 'bad writing' and endlessly people calling out were wrong without being able to counter are arguments.

They have countered you, many times, and you guys have dismissed it. It isn't evidence, it's *interpretation* of what's presented, being used as evidence. Plot holes become indoctrination, Easter Eggs become critical plot points, and artistic license becomes subtle hints, even though this goes against the very narrative and obvious style of this Space opera in its previous titles and 99% of ME3.

Why would the reapers use every weapon they have against Shep, and just leave out indoctrination? Its their most powerfull weapon after all.

TIM uses it against in in the confrontation with him. That is the head of that plot line. There isn't some long line of headaches and humming through ME3 to indicate shepard is suffering the effects other than loosely interpreting every plot hole in the game. I guess saren not just using his spectre status to walk onto the citadel and take control was also indoctrination, and not just a plot hole.

Indoctrination is a slow process. Hearing voices etc is a symptom of it. Notice on Rannoch, when Shep is talking to the reaper. Tali is in the background, seeimgly oblivious to the conversation taking place. In the game its also been said that adrenaline can speed up the process. Notice what Shep is doing before he gets hit by the beam. Running and dodging explosions. Thats a good way to push up the adrenaline, I would think.

[Smiley556]

Rawgrim wrote...

In the game its also been said that adrenaline can speed up the process. Notice what Shep is doing before he gets hit by the beam. Running and dodging explosions. Thats a good way to push up the adrenaline, I would think.

I can confirm this, nothing pumps your adrenaline like explosions and firefights. Ive been trying to get a better or similiar adrenaline rush ever since my deployment to afghanistan (though in a safer way) but I havent found it by any conventional means yet I'm afraid.

[Tiax Rules All]

Zyrious wrote...

Smiley556 wrote...

Zyrious wrote...

What, you mean that people dont treat your "theories" as facts, and remain skeptical, especially since developer intentions in the script, the Stargazer scene, and even the tweet calling shep living an "Easter Egg" as opposed to "Critical plot point"....

You guys are the ones treating this theory as fact, betraying the very word "theory". Infact this isnt even a theory, it's techically still in the hypothesis stage.

Evidence, not fact. We are bringing up arguments to support our explenation where the other explenation is supported by 'bad writing' and endlessly people calling out were wrong without being able to counter are arguments.

They have countered you, many times, and you guys have dismissed it. It isn't evidence, it's *interpretation* of what's presented, being used as evidence. Plot holes become indoctrination, Easter Eggs become critical plot points, and artistic license becomes subtle hints, even though this goes against the very narrative and obvious style of this Space opera in its previous titles and 99% of ME3.

easter egg is just another term for sneak peak of the DLC, Why would they give you an easter egg that invalidates the ending? if not because its supposed to. the easter egg is evidence. evidence is just something that happens in game that can help your point...

if shep lives is not evidence of a future DLC, the what about stargazers "one more story" (that is evidence, not PROOF but evidence)  Evidence is all over the place, proof is not yet. and just because its not proven doesnt mean its not evident.

while my side puts up evidence to support all your side has to do is say its wrong. how come you dont need to support your findings? I will make you. Give me evidence as to how shep lives doesn not contridict the blowing up citadel ending.

also because they didnt do it in ME1 and 2 doesnt mean they cant do it in 3. there is no rules as to how they can write their endings.

[BoneNinja]

@JessicaMerizan Will there be any sort of explanation from the devs regarding the ending? Or are you not allowed to say yet :/

@mattdunmore we're waiting for more people to finish the game so no one misses out on the conversation

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

you dont know why harby wants to indoctrinate you... but you will after playing the DLC

and DLC for ME3 is Still ending the series in ME3, they didnt lie

theory not officially busted at all

We know why Harby would want Shepard indoctrinated.  Pin-up pictures.    (j/k!)

It's fair that ME3 DLC is still ME3, too.  I'm not saying BioWare lied, I'm just saying that based off of what we see before us, there's no reason to think that Shepard's story isn't over.  Maybe there will be DLC like Fallout 3's resurrection DLC.  I wouldn't complain!  


I do think the theory is busted though.  Why would Shepard's subconscious imagining of a happy ending involve all the relays being destroyed?  That makes no sense.  My Shepard so loved the galaxy that she filled the hours of her life flying around it, trying to keep it safe from Reapers.  She had faith that the krogan and salarians could work things out, faith that the rachnai queen would learn from the mistakes of the past, faith that the geth and quarians were better together than they were apart. 

Why would her happy ending involve seperating all these races with the destruction of the relays?  That makes no sense.

You can say the relays being destroyed is a metaphor, but that would be a cop out.  In HT, Shepard's dreamed that every she loved would be carved up and seperated forever.  That makes no sense.  That is not a happy ending.

You have to either come up with a better reason for the "dream" or admit the whole theory is busted.



FWIW, I love the work that people are putting into this.   :)  I just don't see how it is right based off of what we know now.

[Tiax Rules All]

Smiley556 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

In the game its also been said that adrenaline can speed up the process. Notice what Shep is doing before he gets hit by the beam. Running and dodging explosions. Thats a good way to push up the adrenaline, I would think.

I can confirm this, nothing pumps your adrenaline like explosions and firefights. Ive been trying to get a better or similiar adrenaline rush ever since my deployment to afghanistan (though in a safer way) but I havent found it by any conventional means yet I'm afraid.

never thought of that. not as strong but still "evidence"

add it to the list...

im sorry but i have to point out when we put "evidence" up or else the deniers will just keep saying we have no evidence again.. its tiring i know. just trying to cover my bases

[Zeroscape]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

To me, the best evidence =in favor of= Hallucination Theory is the state and shape of Shepard's eyes during the Control and Synthesis endings. You have to admit... while Shepard's face is burning away, her eyes look an awful lot like the Indoctrinated TIM's eyes.

Eyes are often symbolic of the soul... so does that mean that Shepard was Indoctrinated or Shepard finally saw things TIM's way...

...or does it mean nothing more than TIM bought the same model of top of the line, spare-no-expense cybernetic eyes while rebuilding Shepard that he himself used?

I agree with you on this, it's worth some analysis. 

I like how in both the control and synthesis endings Shep skin gets burned off/charred. I didn't really notice the eyes but something to check out when rewatching the endings. On the other hand, Destroy requires no physical interaction on Sheps part. He doesn't touch anything just shoots to kill using his weapon. Pretty big difference.

Another slight detail is that during the synthesis ending, Shep starts running really hard to jump into the beam. Considering how injured he was I found that eye-brow raising. Perhaps it's just Shep's final expression of willpower, mustering all his remaining strength for his final act. OR it could be a hint that this is a dream. 

Edit: To reply to your second post above, I have a cautious but optimist stance on this theory. No doubt my disbelief at our current endings is making me look for something better, but I really think there's something going on. I don't know what for sure, but that's why looking at the details is a good way to figure things out one way or the other.

Modifié par Zeroscape, 15 mars 2012 - 05:14 .

[trancers3]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

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.

ofc he say none made it in to beam because it was true in that time when shepard was down too and it was after that when he moved in to beam

[Rawgrim]

I am currently replaying the game, and I got to the first dream sequence some hours ago. I noticed when Shep reaches the kid, for the first time. We hear a reaper sound. Might be a pointer.

[evisneffo]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

if shep lives is not evidence of a future DLC, the what about stargazers "one more story" (that is evidence, not PROOF but evidence)

Right after you see this, you're plonked back in time to just before the final assault. You're invited to extend the legend as it is told. The "one more story" could take place at any point during Shepard's life. It could be evidence of a future DLC involving a picnic on Mars.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if BioWare ran with the indoctrination thing given the relative support behind the theory, but to cover the damage rather than because it was planned. That would still annoy me.