119 réponses à ce sujet

[Linus108]

Turtlicious wrote...

GTANJ wrote...

This theory of indoctrination being the ending of ME3 is based on the belief that Shepard has been systematically indoctrinated through the three games. However, there is one important part of ME3 that proves Shepard was not in any shape or form, indoctrinated. If he was, the Prothean VI on Thessia would have sensed that Shepard was indoctrinated to some level and would have said "Sensing Indoctrinated Lifeform" or something of that nature. Remember when the VI did that when Kai Leng showed up? Shepard wasn't indoctrinated at all. The theory is debunk. Sorry fans, it was just a bad ending.

you haven't read the thread. Please educate yourself on the theory before you attempt to debunk.

This seems to be the case with a lot of things lately.

YOU GUYS DONT LIKE THE GAME BECAUSE IT HAD A SAD ENDING

Is it that difficult to listen and understand what people are saying? I don't care if you agree or disagree with me. You could think I'm 100% wrong, and I would respect that. But hell, just get what we are thinking right. 

Modifié par Linus108, 14 mars 2012 - 06:28 .

[Meltemph]

So instead of a badly written ending; we get a badly written one that wasn't real.

Yes, that's so much better........

Actually if you take the choices as manipulations from the reapers, then it would be considered a fairly well written ending to throw people off and then sell them some DLC. Perhaps dirty in the sense that they will probably sell DLC, but bad writing it wouldnt be.

Seriously, the only real conclusion you can have about the ending if you actually look at it analytically is, either the writers are dumb and didnt realize they put everyone on earth, before the joker scene or something more happened then we thought. IMO, it really is that simple.

[Cosmar]

I took it to mean he wasn't indoctrinated till the end of the game. I feel like he was being "conditioned" for being indoctrinated, but did not actually become indoctrinated until the end of the game.

[_NF_Von_Lipwig]

GTANJ wrote...

RyMann88 wrote...

It's possible he was indoctrinated AFTER he spoke with the VI. After the blast knocked Shepard out, it's entirely possible that his mind and body was in a weakened state, allowing for indoctrination. Simple counter to your theory.

So Shepard is out cold. Harbinger can blast him to pieces with his beam. But they decide to indoctrinate him instead? I find that hard to believe.

It is possible that Shepard, at that point, was too close to the Conduit to risk firing. Harbinger wouldn't want to damage the thing they use to beam up their harvested humans.

Another possibility is that Harbinger recognises Shepard as a rather valuable war asset. Just imagine the loss of morale on the alliance's side if their hero, their champion, is indoctrinated and working for the Reapers!

Modifié par _NF_Von_Lipwig, 14 mars 2012 - 06:29 .

[viperabyss]

I love how Jeremy Jahns puts it:

....in the end it just feels that people are grasping for straws to find anything that is not the ending that they got, which I think its really sad...these people going "maybe it was just all a dream"

...you mean you'd rather have a dream that didn't happen rather than the ending be fact?...that doesn't depress anyone else?

[blah64]

GTANJ wrote...

This theory of indoctrination being the ending of ME3 is based on the belief that Shepard has been systematically indoctrinated through the three games. However, there is one important part of ME3 that proves Shepard was not in any shape or form, indoctrinated. If he was, the Prothean VI on Thessia would have sensed that Shepard was indoctrinated to some level and would have said "Sensing Indoctrinated Lifeform" or something of that nature. Remember when the VI did that when Kai Leng showed up? Shepard wasn't indoctrinated at all. The theory is debunk. Sorry fans, it was just a bad ending.

Except not everyone agrees one when it started.

[savionen]

_NF_Von_Lipwig wrote...

GTANJ wrote...

RyMann88 wrote...

It's possible he was indoctrinated AFTER he spoke with the VI. After the blast knocked Shepard out, it's entirely possible that his mind and body was in a weakened state, allowing for indoctrination. Simple counter to your theory.

So Shepard is out cold. Harbinger can blast him to pieces with his beam. But they decide to indoctrinate him instead? I find that hard to believe.

It is possible that Shepard, at that point, was too close to the Conduit to risk firing. Harbinger wouldn't want to damage the thing they use to beam up their harvested humans.

Another possibility is that Harbinger recognises Shepard as a rather valuable war asset. Just imagine the loss of morale on the alliance's side if their hero, their champion, is indoctrinated and working for the Reapers!

Also throughout ME2 one of Harbinger's main interests seems to be capturing Shepard alive, since he's suppsoed to be a perfect human specimen. Harbinger can read minds and gain all the knowledge of their culture and race, who would be a better choice than Shepard?

[Meltemph]

viperabyss wrote...

I love how Jeremy Jahns puts it:

....in the end it just feels that people are grasping for straws to find anything that is not the ending that they got, which I think its really sad...these people going "maybe it was just all a dream"

...you mean you'd rather have a dream that didn't happen rather than the ending be fact?...that doesn't depress anyone else?

You also have to keep in mind, if you watched all his video's he is a commedian as well.  He was not talking about the hallucination on a very analitical level but jodging the ending on its own merits... Which if you do that, yes the ending is awful.  You could tell a lot of what he said was not only because there were good points but also for comedic value.

[Lethys1]

GTANJ wrote...

This theory of indoctrination being the ending of ME3 is based on the belief that Shepard has been systematically indoctrinated through the three games. However, there is one important part of ME3 that proves Shepard was not in any shape or form, indoctrinated. If he was, the Prothean VI on Thessia would have sensed that Shepard was indoctrinated to some level and would have said "Sensing Indoctrinated Lifeform" or something of that nature. Remember when the VI did that when Kai Leng showed up? Shepard wasn't indoctrinated at all. The theory is debunk. Sorry fans, it was just a bad ending.

Not really, this has been disproven already.

The kid is an attempt to indoctrinate Shep which fails.  Shep then, independently of Harbinger, thinks about the kid he thought he saw in the beginning and it haunts him.

The final blast leaves Shep vulnerable enough to finally accept being indoctrinated, and is only freed if he goes against the recommendation of the Reaper AI and kills all the Reapers.

[Baelyn]

GTANJ wrote...

RyMann88 wrote...

It's possible he was indoctrinated AFTER he spoke with the VI. After the blast knocked Shepard out, it's entirely possible that his mind and body was in a weakened state, allowing for indoctrination. Simple counter to your theory.

So Shepard is out cold. Harbinger can blast him to pieces with his beam. But they decide to indoctrinate him instead? I find that hard to believe.

Its very obvious, if you have read the actual arguments for Indoctrination, that Harbinger very much wanted Shepard alive. Indoctrination is what Reapers do. They desire control above destruction. The point being that he thought he had you finally (like hes' been telling you all along) and , if you chose "Destroy", you proved him wrong.

[Sarevok Synder]

Meltemph wrote...


Actually if you take the choices as manipulations from the reapers, then it would be considered a fairly well written ending to throw people off and then sell them some DLC. Perhaps dirty in the sense that they will probably sell DLC, but bad writing it wouldnt be.

Seriously, the only real conclusion you can have about the ending if you actually look at it analytically is, either the writers are dumb and didnt realize they put everyone on earth, before the joker scene or something more happened then we thought. IMO, it really is that simple.

And your evidence that there is going to be DLC.
 
Have you ever considered that they think we're dumb and that's why they pulled this debacle.

[Rawgrim]

savionen wrote...

_NF_Von_Lipwig wrote...

GTANJ wrote...

RyMann88 wrote...

It's possible he was indoctrinated AFTER he spoke with the VI. After the blast knocked Shepard out, it's entirely possible that his mind and body was in a weakened state, allowing for indoctrination. Simple counter to your theory.

So Shepard is out cold. Harbinger can blast him to pieces with his beam. But they decide to indoctrinate him instead? I find that hard to believe.

It is possible that Shepard, at that point, was too close to the Conduit to risk firing. Harbinger wouldn't want to damage the thing they use to beam up their harvested humans.

Another possibility is that Harbinger recognises Shepard as a rather valuable war asset. Just imagine the loss of morale on the alliance's side if their hero, their champion, is indoctrinated and working for the Reapers!

Also throughout ME2 one of Harbinger's main interests seems to be capturing Shepard alive, since he's suppsoed to be a perfect human specimen. Harbinger can read minds and gain all the knowledge of their culture and race, who would be a better choice than Shepard?

This is where the War Assets kicks in. If they are low, and Shep picks Destroy, he doesn`t wake up. If the score is high enough, Shep wakes up. Allied forces keeping the reapers busy\\defending Shep`s body maybe?

[RowanCF]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Meltemph wrote...


Actually if you take the choices as manipulations from the reapers, then it would be considered a fairly well written ending to throw people off and then sell them some DLC. Perhaps dirty in the sense that they will probably sell DLC, but bad writing it wouldnt be.

Seriously, the only real conclusion you can have about the ending if you actually look at it analytically is, either the writers are dumb and didnt realize they put everyone on earth, before the joker scene or something more happened then we thought. IMO, it really is that simple.

And your evidence that there is going to be DLC.

Go read the thread with the twitter postings.

[Meltemph]

Have you ever considered that they think we're dumb and that's why they pulled this debacle.

Have you already forgot the book issues? Pretty sure they know how well the fans know the series.. If they didn't think the endings would be an issue, due to inconsistencies, they would be needing to be fired, not because of bad endings but for incompetence.

Modifié par Meltemph, 14 mars 2012 - 06:36 .

[hex23]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

And your evidence that there is going to be DLC.
 
Have you ever considered that they think we're dumb and that's why they pulled this debacle.

That makes even less sense than the ending we're presented with.

We're so dumb they decided to effectively kill their #1 franchise? The most critically acclaimed series in EA history?

I mean....how would you even frame that argument? If this is the real ending not only did they kill the series, what little good will gamers had towards Bioware, and by extention EA, is gone.

So no. I seriously doubt this was a kamakazi attempt to destroy the franchise.

[Rabbidsquirrel88]

GTANJ wrote...

So Shepard is out cold. Harbinger can blast him to pieces with his beam. But they decide to indoctrinate him instead? I find that hard to believe.

If they kill him, they make him a martyr to anyone who survives the battle. 

If they indoctrinate him, they turn the galaxy's best hope into their weapon. If you have the prothean DLC, one of the conversation strings is how Jarvik got basically mind-effed by having to slit the throats of his own team. It messed him up pretty bad.

Also, if he is not indoctrinated/hallucinating, and the endings are exactly what they seem... Why does the AI that resides within the citadel need Soverign and Saren to activate the citadel mass relay?  If he is a separate entity that controls the reapers, why didn't he just activate the mass relay on his own?

[Sarevok Synder]

RowanCF wrote...

Go read the thread with the twitter postings.

That's just PR; and not answering the question, typical Bioware. Nowhere is there an indication of ending DLC

[Priviums]

The indoctrination wasnt fully complete. This was never about shepard actually being indoctrinated, it was in the manipulation process. Shepard is very strong willed, the reapers never had any control over him. Take the boy in the vents for example, he never really where there, it was just harbinger trying to get on shepards soft spot and then use the boy as projection in the end, making him believe that control or merge was the best choice=give in to harbringers will. shepard was passed out, allowing harbinger to make that whole ending scene a hallucination and easier getting into shepards head.

[Sarevok Synder]

hex23 wrote...

That makes even less sense than the ending we're presented with.

We're so dumb they decided to effectively kill their #1 franchise? The most critically acclaimed series in EA history?

I mean....how would you even frame that argument? If this is the real ending not only did they kill the series, what little good will gamers had towards Bioware, and by extention EA, is gone.

So no. I seriously doubt this was a kamakazi attempt to destroy the franchise.

I don't have to frame anything. It's exactly what they did. Wouldn't be the first time either. DA2 anyone?

[Sarevok Synder]

Meltemph wrote...

Have you already forgot the book issues? Pretty sure they know how well the fans know the series.. If they didn't think the endings would be an issue, due to inconsistencies, they would be needing to be fired, not because of bad endings but for incompetence.

Yeah, pretty much.

[RowanCF]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

RowanCF wrote...

Go read the thread with the twitter postings.

That's just PR; and not answering the question, typical Bioware. Nowhere is there an indication of ending DLC

How is heavily implying that there will be dlc not an indication of dlc.

[Rawgrim]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

hex23 wrote...

That makes even less sense than the ending we're presented with.

We're so dumb they decided to effectively kill their #1 franchise? The most critically acclaimed series in EA history?

I mean....how would you even frame that argument? If this is the real ending not only did they kill the series, what little good will gamers had towards Bioware, and by extention EA, is gone.

So no. I seriously doubt this was a kamakazi attempt to destroy the franchise.

I don't have to frame anything. It's exactly what they did. Wouldn't be the first time either. DA2 anyone?

From a business point of view, how does killing off their biggest moneymaker actually achive anything good for them?

[LucidStrike]

Seems it's implied throughout the series that indoctrination works by CHANGING one's thoughts, not through lies. WHy would the Reapers lie about Destroy also destroying EDI and the Geth, rather than just convincing Shep destroying the Reapers was wrong in and of itself? =/

This theory doesn't make sense because not one of its proponents has explained to me the Geth/EDI thing. You guys think BioWare wanted us to risk the Geth and EDI on a HUNCH that it was a lie, when Shepard himself is given little dialogue to argue anything the Catalyst says? Doubtful.

Modifié par LucidStrike, 14 mars 2012 - 06:43 .

[Sarevok Synder]

RowanCF wrote...

How is heavily implying that there will be dlc not an indication of dlc.

Ending DLC? We all know they have DLC in the works.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 14 mars 2012 - 06:47 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Rawgrim wrote...


From a business point of view, how does killing off their biggest moneymaker actually achive anything good for them?

Because they weren't expecting this reaction? Again, it wouldn't be the first time.