181 réponses à ce sujet

[Siven80]

IsaacShep wrote...

This ending has the same problems as KOTOR 2 ending had. Critical content is missing.

Thats what i think too.

Theres just not enough info to say which theories may be right, and until bioware say something i doubt we will truly know the answers.

And thats what annoys me the most.....its like they intentionally held back the ending, probably for DLC which is 

Modifié par Siven80, 13 mars 2012 - 10:50 .

[Mavkiel]

Just throwing out another theory here, everyone assumes the reapers are doing the indoctrinating, but what if its the illusive man? Its clear he has been messing around with various means of controlling other people, and he did have Shepard helpless in a lab for a long time.

Perhaps, the reason he didnt sign off on a control chip, is because he already had a failsafe. In the form of one of your implants slowly changing you.

It being slow would explain why he couldn't just trigger it to stop you from blowing the collector base, that and he was also was working on other schemes to keep track of you (If you scouted his base you know what I mean). He only starts up control program once you start to threaten his end-game.

[Candidate 88766]

The biggest question of all is why.

Why would Bioware, a developer renowned for their stories, knowingly and deliberately end one of, if not their most successful story to date on a cliffhanger just so they could finish it slightly later?

Regardless of whether this hypothetical DLC were to be free or priced, where is the reason to do this?

If it is to be free, then they would've put it in the game. Charging for the 'true' ending would be catastrophic and actually would ruin Bioware - you do not leave a story this big on a cliffhanger just to make a few extra pounds a month later.

There is no reason for the ending to be a cliffhanger. If we take the endings at face value, they are conclusive. They aren't satisfying, but they provide closure. This indoctrination/hallucination theory says that the story isn't finished, yet it ignores the obvious point that Bioware simply wouldn't do that. No sane developer would. A company built around creating story-based games would not withhold the ending of what they may well have wanted to be their magnum opus.

That, and the game specifically states that Shepard has ended the Reaper threat regardless of your ending choice. Not that Shepard will go on to end the Reaper threat later on, but that in the course of what was on the disc and what you played Shepard ended the Reaper threat.

As a theory, its nice. There are just too many problems with it for it to be convincing, and I watching it spread like wildfire on the forums is depressing because it simply cannot be true and people are just building themselves up for more disappointment.

Maybe there will be alternate endings made for ME3. It won't be based around this theory though - there is just too much evidence to the contrary.

As they are, the endings feel unfinished, rushed, and poorly explained. This indoctrination theory is fans trying to think of something, anything, that makes these endings seem better. And while thats their right to do so, it does fly in the face of the obvious evidence the game throws at you, as well as common sense. Its reading too much into details that clearly weren't thought out anywhere near as well as the bulk of the game was.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 13 mars 2012 - 10:52 .

[Rawgrim]

Mavkiel wrote...

Just throwing out another theory here, everyone assumes the reapers are doing the indoctrinating, but what if its the illusive man? Its clear he has been messing around with various means of controlling other people, and he did have Shepard helpless in a lab for a long time.

Perhaps, the reason he didnt sign off on a control chip, is because he already had a failsafe. In the form of one of your implants slowly changing you.

It being slow would explain why he couldn't just trigger it to stop you from blowing the collector base, that and he was also was working on other schemes to keep track of you (If you scouted his base you know what I mean). He only starts up control program once you start to threaten his end-game.

I think he would have used that one in ME2, if it was the case. You know, when you destroy the Collector`s base. He was pretty steamed about that.

[Sc2mashimaro]

Mavkiel wrote...

Just throwing out another theory here, everyone assumes the reapers are doing the indoctrinating, but what if its the illusive man? Its clear he has been messing around with various means of controlling other people, and he did have Shepard helpless in a lab for a long time.

Perhaps, the reason he didnt sign off on a control chip, is because he already had a failsafe. In the form of one of your implants slowly changing you.

It being slow would explain why he couldn't just trigger it to stop you from blowing the collector base, that and he was also was working on other schemes to keep track of you (If you scouted his base you know what I mean). He only starts up control program once you start to threaten his end-game.

Interesting thought, but I think the child at the beginning and the connection with the Arrival DLC points to the Reapers in a fairly solid manner. Besides, the Illusive Man only gained this power recently, as revealed during Miranda's mission on Sanctuary.

[v0rt3x22]

Mavkiel wrote...

Just throwing out another theory here, everyone assumes the reapers are doing the indoctrinating, but what if its the illusive man? Its clear he has been messing around with various means of controlling other people, and he did have Shepard helpless in a lab for a long time.

Perhaps, the reason he didnt sign off on a control chip, is because he already had a failsafe. In the form of one of your implants slowly changing you.

It being slow would explain why he couldn't just trigger it to stop you from blowing the collector base, that and he was also was working on other schemes to keep track of you (If you scouted his base you know what I mean). He only starts up control program once you start to threaten his end-game.

Essentially the Illusive Man tried what Saren tried in ME1 - to ally himself with the Reapers - but both (Saren and TIM) had two different reasons of doing so.

Saren thought that a war against the Reapers would ultimately be in vain - and he wanted to join the Reapers in order to save the Galaxy from annihilation.

TIM was experimenting with Indoctrination - in hopes that he could somehow control the Reapers - and save humanity that way (what all the experiments on Sanctuary were about).

Ultimately - the Reapers found out about his plan to backstab them - and succeeded in TIMs indoctrination and (if we go back to the indoctrination theory) - used him as a puppet to try and stop Shepard.

[AtreiyaN7]

I usually don't buy into things like this, but I am starting to wonder. There were a few things that happened during the ending sequence that seemed odd to me - even Shepard's dreams themselves actually, but I dismissed them out of hand because to do something so...convoluted seemed really unlikely at the time. I was (and am) fine with taking the existing endings as being real, but...

There was some weird stuff going on like the flickering blackness at the edges of Shepard's vision which seemed rather like the wispy figures from Shepard's dreams. I'd always assumed that they represented all the dead people Shepard knew or whose deaths he/she was responsible for and just chalked that Shep's vision issue to her being closer to death than ever before. Admittedly, I was wondering where, exactly, Anderson was on the Citadel, how he could be ahead of me and not be seen, etc. Given how details like the leaked script got out and other details, I wonder if BW didn't pulled off something very tricky, but...no, that would be ridiculous...but maybe...no...well, if they did A) it's one of the greatest mind----s ever and I kind of hope it's true for the sake of everyone who's upset by the current endings.

[Rawgrim]

You know when Shep is speaking to the reaper, on Rannoch. Tali never seems to notice the conversation at all. Look at the words being said. I beilve those are a huge hint about what is going on.

Reaper: Shepard.
Shepard: You know who I am?
Reaper: Harbinger speaks of you. You resist. But you will fail.

[Sc2mashimaro]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The biggest question of all is why.

Why would Bioware, a developer renowned for their stories, knowingly and deliberately end one of, if not their most successful story to date on a cliffhanger just so they could finish it slightly later?

Regardless of whether this hypothetical DLC were to be free or priced, where is the reason to do this?

If it is to be free, then they would've put it in the game. Charging for the 'true' ending would be catastrophic and actually would ruin Bioware - you do not leave a story this big on a cliffhanger just to make a few extra pounds a month later.

There is no reason for the ending to be a cliffhanger. If we take the endings at face value, they are conclusive. They aren't satisfying, but they provide closure. This indoctrination/hallucination theory says that the story isn't finished, yet it ignores the obvious point that Bioware simply wouldn't do that. No sane developer would. A company built around creating story-based games would not withhold the ending of what they may well have wanted to be their magnum opus.

That, and the game specifically states that Shepard has ended the Reaper threat regardless of your ending choice. Not that Shepard will go on to end the Reaper threat later on, but that in the course of what was on the disc and what you played Shepard ended the Reaper threat.

As a theory, its nice. There are just too many problems with it for it to be convincing, and I watching it spread like wildfire on the forums is depressing because it simply cannot be true and people are just building themselves up for more disappointment.

Maybe there will be alternate endings made for ME3. It won't be based around this theory though - there is just too much evidence to the contrary.

As they are, the endings feel unfinished, rushed, and poorly explained. This indoctrination theory is fans trying to think of something, anything, that makes these endings seem better. And while thats their right to do so, it does fly in the face of the obvious evidence the game throws at you, as well as common sense. Its reading too much into details that clearly weren't thought out anywhere near as well as the bulk of the game was.

I think the in-game evidence is more than sufficient to prove that Shepard was under the influence of Reaper indoctrination at the end of the game. However, it does not prove that this is anything but the actual end of the story. For proof of that, we need to see evidence of Bioware performing ARG/publicity stunt activities. There is some evidence to suggest they MIGHT be, but nothing very good yet. Still, statements by various writers and devs that we fans don't know or understand the whole picture yet sound promising. I don't want to be set up for another let down either, so I'm trying really hard to reserve judgement until we get official word from the devs or writers about what is happening/not happening regarding the end of the story.

[Leafs43]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The biggest question of all is why.

Why would Bioware, a developer renowned for their stories, knowingly and deliberately end one of, if not their most successful story to date on a cliffhanger just so they could finish it slightly later?

Regardless of whether this hypothetical DLC were to be free or priced, where is the reason to do this?

If it is to be free, then they would've put it in the game. Charging for the 'true' ending would be catastrophic and actually would ruin Bioware - you do not leave a story this big on a cliffhanger just to make a few extra pounds a month later.

There is no reason for the ending to be a cliffhanger. If we take the endings at face value, they are conclusive. They aren't satisfying, but they provide closure. This indoctrination/hallucination theory says that the story isn't finished, yet it ignores the obvious point that Bioware simply wouldn't do that. No sane developer would. A company built around creating story-based games would not withhold the ending of what they may well have wanted to be their magnum opus.

That, and the game specifically states that Shepard has ended the Reaper threat regardless of your ending choice. Not that Shepard will go on to end the Reaper threat later on, but that in the course of what was on the disc and what you played Shepard ended the Reaper threat.

As a theory, its nice. There are just too many problems with it for it to be convincing, and I watching it spread like wildfire on the forums is depressing because it simply cannot be true and people are just building themselves up for more disappointment.

Maybe there will be alternate endings made for ME3. It won't be based around this theory though - there is just too much evidence to the contrary.

As they are, the endings feel unfinished, rushed, and poorly explained. This indoctrination theory is fans trying to think of something, anything, that makes these endings seem better. And while thats their right to do so, it does fly in the face of the obvious evidence the game throws at you, as well as common sense. Its reading too much into details that clearly weren't thought out anywhere near as well as the bulk of the game was.

Because they are trying to invoke a response.

If indoctrination was the original script all along and leaving the details out and make the playerbase figure it all out, then release the end after they have enough mad fans its genius.

Sure it trolls the player base a little bit, but genius nonetheless.

[Candidate 88766]

Leafs43 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The biggest question of all is why.

Why would Bioware, a developer renowned for their stories, knowingly and deliberately end one of, if not their most successful story to date on a cliffhanger just so they could finish it slightly later?

Regardless of whether this hypothetical DLC were to be free or priced, where is the reason to do this?

If it is to be free, then they would've put it in the game. Charging for the 'true' ending would be catastrophic and actually would ruin Bioware - you do not leave a story this big on a cliffhanger just to make a few extra pounds a month later.

There is no reason for the ending to be a cliffhanger. If we take the endings at face value, they are conclusive. They aren't satisfying, but they provide closure. This indoctrination/hallucination theory says that the story isn't finished, yet it ignores the obvious point that Bioware simply wouldn't do that. No sane developer would. A company built around creating story-based games would not withhold the ending of what they may well have wanted to be their magnum opus.

That, and the game specifically states that Shepard has ended the Reaper threat regardless of your ending choice. Not that Shepard will go on to end the Reaper threat later on, but that in the course of what was on the disc and what you played Shepard ended the Reaper threat.

As a theory, its nice. There are just too many problems with it for it to be convincing, and I watching it spread like wildfire on the forums is depressing because it simply cannot be true and people are just building themselves up for more disappointment.

Maybe there will be alternate endings made for ME3. It won't be based around this theory though - there is just too much evidence to the contrary.

As they are, the endings feel unfinished, rushed, and poorly explained. This indoctrination theory is fans trying to think of something, anything, that makes these endings seem better. And while thats their right to do so, it does fly in the face of the obvious evidence the game throws at you, as well as common sense. Its reading too much into details that clearly weren't thought out anywhere near as well as the bulk of the game was.

Because they are trying to invoke a response.

If indoctrination was the original script all along and leaving the details out and make the playerbase figure it all out, then release the end after they have enough mad fans its genius.

Sure it trolls the player base a little bit, but genius nonetheless.

Its not genuis. Its poor writing.

Showing the player the Reaper threat being ended, the Relays being destroyed and then literally putting writing on the screen confirming that Shepard did indeed end the threat, just in case there were lingering doubts, and then saying that actually all of that was a lie and that you don't see the endings is terrible.

After paying £40 for this game, finding out that they haven't put the actual ending in would be disgraceful.

The response they were trying to evoke was sadness. Shepard defeated the Reapers, but at the cost of galactic civilization and, in most cases, their own life and the relationships they built up with the characters. As a character driven game, that is just about the strongest and most gut-wrenching emotional response they could've gone for.

This theory simply seeds confusion. Why tell us, and show us, that the Reapers are defeated if it is a lie? Why withhold the ending? What is the point of doing well in the game, when we have no idea if what we're seeing has actually happened? Indoctrination isn't a sudden change from being normal to imagining stuff like the entire ending sequence of ME3. So how far back into the game did things stop being as they seemed?

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 13 mars 2012 - 11:10 .

[ticklefist]

JeffZero wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Daoa wrote...

What hints?

"Hardest. Day. Ever. Seriously, if you people knew all the stuff we
are planning…you’d, we’ll – hold onto your copy of [Mass Effect 3]
forever."

https://twitter.com/...942797880541185

So, people are still quoting the one tweet? The one tweet made by the guy who moments later replied to a tweet from femshep.com by saying he never specifically implied anything about dlc for that matter, and who has recently re-tweeted the PennyArcade article on why the endings were good?

Wait wait wait. Penny-arcade is not saying the endings are good. They are saying they are in awe by the differences between their respective roads to the ending. The quality of the ending is being carefully ignored in order to praise what that game does well. When that was originally posted, "Gabe" hadn't even finished the game yet.

[Sylvanfeather]

This may have been brought up somewhere else and I just haven't seen it yet, but on a high level, it also makes sense that Bioware would combine the colour choices with a person of the opposite disposition.

Red path with the 'good'/paragon aligned character - this way they can avoid indicating that only a specifically aligned Shepard would pick the path that succeeds in defeating the Reapers.

[Arppis]

Legendaryred wrote...

Yea, there is no way the crucible would know about the kid that shepard saw died.

Think of it as "geth software" remember? They replace the objects as familiar figures.

[Sc2mashimaro]

ticklefist wrote...

JeffZero wrote...

So, people are still quoting the one tweet? The one tweet made by the guy who moments later replied to a tweet from femshep.com by saying he never specifically implied anything about dlc for that matter, and who has recently re-tweeted the PennyArcade article on why the endings were good?

Wait wait wait. Penny-arcade is not saying the endings are good. They are saying they are in awe by the differences between their respective roads to the ending. The quality of the ending is being carefully ignored in order to praise what that game does well. When that was originally posted, "Gabe" hadn't even finished the game yet.

Yeah, I noticed that too. I wonder what they'll say when they're both done....

At any rate, we will just have to wait and see about the ending. Bioware has, quite intentionally, not said anything about it yet. I don't know if they're waiting to see if people change their mind as the ending settles in their mind or if they're waiting for more people to finish so they don't spoil anything or if they're running some kind of ARG/promo stunt that they need to keep mum about until more people have finished and all markets are starting to rage about it. I really hope it's ARG and the ending is still on route, but I'm very much afraid that isn't what we're going to get.....  Sorry....the space magic smiley makes me feel better...........



...

[Candidate 88766]

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The biggest question of all is why.

Why would Bioware, a developer renowned for their stories, knowingly and deliberately end one of, if not their most successful story to date on a cliffhanger just so they could finish it slightly later?

Regardless of whether this hypothetical DLC were to be free or priced, where is the reason to do this?

If it is to be free, then they would've put it in the game. Charging for the 'true' ending would be catastrophic and actually would ruin Bioware - you do not leave a story this big on a cliffhanger just to make a few extra pounds a month later.

There is no reason for the ending to be a cliffhanger. If we take the endings at face value, they are conclusive. They aren't satisfying, but they provide closure. This indoctrination/hallucination theory says that the story isn't finished, yet it ignores the obvious point that Bioware simply wouldn't do that. No sane developer would. A company built around creating story-based games would not withhold the ending of what they may well have wanted to be their magnum opus.

That, and the game specifically states that Shepard has ended the Reaper threat regardless of your ending choice. Not that Shepard will go on to end the Reaper threat later on, but that in the course of what was on the disc and what you played Shepard ended the Reaper threat.

As a theory, its nice. There are just too many problems with it for it to be convincing, and I watching it spread like wildfire on the forums is depressing because it simply cannot be true and people are just building themselves up for more disappointment.

Maybe there will be alternate endings made for ME3. It won't be based around this theory though - there is just too much evidence to the contrary.

As they are, the endings feel unfinished, rushed, and poorly explained. This indoctrination theory is fans trying to think of something, anything, that makes these endings seem better. And while thats their right to do so, it does fly in the face of the obvious evidence the game throws at you, as well as common sense. Its reading too much into details that clearly weren't thought out anywhere near as well as the bulk of the game was.

I think the in-game evidence is more than sufficient to prove that Shepard was under the influence of Reaper indoctrination at the end of the game. However, it does not prove that this is anything but the actual end of the story. For proof of that, we need to see evidence of Bioware performing ARG/publicity stunt activities. There is some evidence to suggest they MIGHT be, but nothing very good yet. Still, statements by various writers and devs that we fans don't know or understand the whole picture yet sound promising. I don't want to be set up for another let down either, so I'm trying really hard to reserve judgement until we get official word from the devs or writers about what is happening/not happening regarding the end of the story.

Evidence that this theory cannot be correct:

-Firstly, and most importantly, the game outright tells you that Shepard has ended the Reaper threat, regardless of which ending you pick. It doesn't say that Shepard will go on to end the threat, or that the VI's Liara plants around the galaxy will help hte next Cycle end the threat, but that within the context of the ME3 story that is on the disc Shepard has ended the Reaper threat.

-Why would Bioware end the story to one of their greatest series on a cliffhanger? And why would they deliberatly withold the 'true' ending until it could be released as DLC?

-Why would the player be shown the scenes of the Crucible activating and the Normandy crashing all the time? If Shepard broke free of indoctrination, why would the Reapers keep creating random visions such as the Normandy crash? And if Shepard fails, and sucumbs to indoctrination, why show us scenes of the Reapers leaving and the Relays being destroyed? If he has become fully indoctrinated why keep showing visons - he is already inder their spell?

-Why are there no signs of indoctrination throughout the game? From the ME3 codex:

Organics undergoing indoctrination may complain of headaches and buzzing or ringing in their ears. As time passes, they have feelings of "being watched" and hallucinations of "ghostly" presences. Ultimately, the Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify its signals, manifesting as "alien" voices in the mind. 

Shepard experienced none of these things at any point. People points out the whispers during the dream sequence, but they're dreams. Dreams are generally weird. They aren't indicitive of Shepard becoming indoctrinated. 

-On TIM's base, the VI detects no indoctrination in Shepard. Indoctrination is not a rapid process, and it wouldn't suddenly occur in the final level with no previous foothold.

-Indoctrination, as per the codex entry, manifests itself as 'alien' voice, not as incredibly detailed hallucinations.

What the devs seem to be implying is that the story is not over. We seem to be in agreement there. However, them vaguely implying that there may be more story to follow doesn't prove that the endings we were given we illusions, which is what some people are claiming.

There are inconsistencies in the endings, no doubt about it. But this theory has too many flaws, and too much stacked against it, for it to be considered anything other than wishful thinking. 

[PSUHammer]

I wonder why Javik got off the shuttle with Joker and Ash (my LI) at the end? Would have assumed Garrus.

[Mavkiel]

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

Mavkiel wrote...

Just throwing out another theory here, everyone assumes the reapers are doing the indoctrinating, but what if its the illusive man? Its clear he has been messing around with various means of controlling other people, and he did have Shepard helpless in a lab for a long time.

Perhaps, the reason he didnt sign off on a control chip, is because he already had a failsafe. In the form of one of your implants slowly changing you.

It being slow would explain why he couldn't just trigger it to stop you from blowing the collector base, that and he was also was working on other schemes to keep track of you (If you scouted his base you know what I mean). He only starts up control program once you start to threaten his end-game.

Interesting thought, but I think the child at the beginning and the connection with the Arrival DLC points to the Reapers in a fairly solid manner. Besides, the Illusive Man only gained this power recently, as revealed during Miranda's mission on Sanctuary.

Maby I am wrong about this, but its controllable indocternation is what he learned from those experiements. Far as the child goes, it could just be Shepards mind filling in the blanks. If you have the from ashes dlc, you can talk to a crew member on why all protheans look alike.

So your implants could have stayed dorment until the right time. Or was triggered by a certain good doctor scanning your implants. *shrugs* Yes I am doing some mental gymnastics, but it is possible. Anything to avoid the ending standing "as is".

[Rawgrim]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Sc2mashimaro wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The biggest question of all is why.

Why would Bioware, a developer renowned for their stories, knowingly and deliberately end one of, if not their most successful story to date on a cliffhanger just so they could finish it slightly later?

Regardless of whether this hypothetical DLC were to be free or priced, where is the reason to do this?

If it is to be free, then they would've put it in the game. Charging for the 'true' ending would be catastrophic and actually would ruin Bioware - you do not leave a story this big on a cliffhanger just to make a few extra pounds a month later.

There is no reason for the ending to be a cliffhanger. If we take the endings at face value, they are conclusive. They aren't satisfying, but they provide closure. This indoctrination/hallucination theory says that the story isn't finished, yet it ignores the obvious point that Bioware simply wouldn't do that. No sane developer would. A company built around creating story-based games would not withhold the ending of what they may well have wanted to be their magnum opus.

That, and the game specifically states that Shepard has ended the Reaper threat regardless of your ending choice. Not that Shepard will go on to end the Reaper threat later on, but that in the course of what was on the disc and what you played Shepard ended the Reaper threat.

As a theory, its nice. There are just too many problems with it for it to be convincing, and I watching it spread like wildfire on the forums is depressing because it simply cannot be true and people are just building themselves up for more disappointment.

Maybe there will be alternate endings made for ME3. It won't be based around this theory though - there is just too much evidence to the contrary.

As they are, the endings feel unfinished, rushed, and poorly explained. This indoctrination theory is fans trying to think of something, anything, that makes these endings seem better. And while thats their right to do so, it does fly in the face of the obvious evidence the game throws at you, as well as common sense. Its reading too much into details that clearly weren't thought out anywhere near as well as the bulk of the game was.

I think the in-game evidence is more than sufficient to prove that Shepard was under the influence of Reaper indoctrination at the end of the game. However, it does not prove that this is anything but the actual end of the story. For proof of that, we need to see evidence of Bioware performing ARG/publicity stunt activities. There is some evidence to suggest they MIGHT be, but nothing very good yet. Still, statements by various writers and devs that we fans don't know or understand the whole picture yet sound promising. I don't want to be set up for another let down either, so I'm trying really hard to reserve judgement until we get official word from the devs or writers about what is happening/not happening regarding the end of the story.

Evidence that this theory cannot be correct:

-Firstly, and most importantly, the game outright tells you that Shepard has ended the Reaper threat, regardless of which ending you pick. It doesn't say that Shepard will go on to end the threat, or that the VI's Liara plants around the galaxy will help hte next Cycle end the threat, but that within the context of the ME3 story that is on the disc Shepard has ended the Reaper threat.

-Why would Bioware end the story to one of their greatest series on a cliffhanger? And why would they deliberatly withold the 'true' ending until it could be released as DLC?

-Why would the player be shown the scenes of the Crucible activating and the Normandy crashing all the time? If Shepard broke free of indoctrination, why would the Reapers keep creating random visions such as the Normandy crash? And if Shepard fails, and sucumbs to indoctrination, why show us scenes of the Reapers leaving and the Relays being destroyed? If he has become fully indoctrinated why keep showing visons - he is already inder their spell?

-Why are there no signs of indoctrination throughout the game? From the ME3 codex:

Organics undergoing indoctrination may complain of headaches and buzzing or ringing in their ears. As time passes, they have feelings of "being watched" and hallucinations of "ghostly" presences. Ultimately, the Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify its signals, manifesting as "alien" voices in the mind. 

Shepard experienced none of these things at any point. People points out the whispers during the dream sequence, but they're dreams. Dreams are generally weird. They aren't indicitive of Shepard becoming indoctrinated. 

-On TIM's base, the VI detects no indoctrination in Shepard. Indoctrination is not a rapid process, and it wouldn't suddenly occur in the final level with no previous foothold.

-Indoctrination, as per the codex entry, manifests itself as 'alien' voice, not as incredibly detailed hallucinations.

What the devs seem to be implying is that the story is not over. We seem to be in agreement there. However, them vaguely implying that there may be more story to follow doesn't prove that the endings we were given we illusions, which is what some people are claiming.

There are inconsistencies in the endings, no doubt about it. But this theory has too many flaws, and too much stacked against it, for it to be considered anything other than wishful thinking. 

The ghostly visions are in the dream sequences. Benezzia also mentions the whisperings, in ME1. The whispers in the dream sequences just increases in eac sequence. On Rannoch Shep talks to the reaper. Tali doesn`t seem to notice the conversation at all. She is close to the reaper, and he hears "alien voices in his head".

Reaper: Shepard.
Shepard: You know who I am?
Reaper: Harbinger speaks of you. You resist. But you will fail.

Interesting choice of words too.

[KillerQuag]

So regardless of your decision to believe you're being indoctrinated, any of the 3 choices all lead to the same box that says, "Gratz, you beat the reapers, play the side missions or DLC to become even more legendary." So, either Shepard failed cause he passed out and dreamed at some point or the ending is what you get. The big ol' box confirms you 'have beaten the reapers'... How's that fit in with all this indoctrination BS.

Face it, we got trolled.

[Rawgrim]

Hammer6767 wrote...

I wonder why Javik got off the shuttle with Joker and Ash (my LI) at the end? Would have assumed Garrus.

I belive its Joker, Love interest, and the squadmate you used most often.

[Lethys1]

All of this means I purchased a game wihout an ending......

Why is anyone happy about this being true if it's the case???

[Mr. Grumpy]

KillerQuag wrote...

So regardless of your decision to believe you're being indoctrinated, any of the 3 choices all lead to the same box that says, "Gratz, you beat the reapers, play the side missions or DLC to become even more legendary." So, either Shepard failed cause he passed out and dreamed at some point or the ending is what you get. The big ol' box confirms you 'have beaten the reapers'... How's that fit in with all this indoctrination BS.

Face it, we got trolled.

i agree with you

[Candidate 88766]

Rawgrim wrote...

The ghostly visions are in the dream sequences. Benezzia also mentions the whisperings, in ME1. The whispers in the dream sequences just increases in eac sequence. On Rannoch Shep talks to the reaper. Tali doesn`t seem to notice the conversation at all. She is close to the reaper, and he hears "alien voices in his head".

Reaper: Shepard.
Shepard: You know who I am?
Reaper: Harbinger speaks of you. You resist. But you will fail.

Interesting choice of words too.

Strange things happen in dreams. The whispers are those of characters who you have met, and are mostly from those who died. In the second and third, you hear Mordin's voice. The ghosts are simply Bioware representing those who have died fighting the Reapers.

There's no indication that Tali can't hear the Reaper; its simply not her the Reaper is talking to, and even a dying Reaper is something you'd be afraid to be near. Surely if the voice was in Shepard's head, Tali would ask what Shepard is replying to?

You are resisting the Reapers by fighting the Cycle.

None of those things prove the indoctrination theory. I agree that they suggest it, if you ignore all the stuff I pointed out, but there are logical explanations for all of those things besides indoctrination. 

[H3xTech]

Rawgrim wrote...
Reaper: Shepard.
Shepard: You know who I am?
Reaper: Harbinger speaks of you. You resist. But you will fail.

I think that is enough telling what the end is about.