249 réponses à ce sujet

[Naarad]

Shunt Mcblunt wrote...

Because even after the crash when EVA tried to attack you You had rounds but all after being hit by the Beam you had unlimited Clips. You would think that all your Thermal Clips would be spent but Unlimited ammo. Sorry it was Dream time. Isn't Ignorance Bliss!

PS: Quit Trolling - We have our views and you have yours lets keep it like that.

Yeah, call the guy using common sense a troll, that always works

Gameplay decission for the EVA fight is that you can't save Kaidan/Ashley. It makes no sense to have unlimited ammo. Gameplay decissions do exist, you are just not willing to accept them because then you can't argue with me. 

[PlumPaul93]

111987 wrote...

If the theory is true, what does that mean for the people whom chose synthesis or control? Does it mean that the ending DLC just wouldn't be available for them?

Also, why would Shepard envision the whole Normandy scene?

I have to say, there are a lot of good points about the Indoctrination theory, but something about it doesn't feel quite right yet.

The theory isn't true so I wouldn't worry about it.

[Empiro3]

hex23 wrote...

The main problem with using the Prothean VI to disprove the indoctrination theory is....well....most people aren't saying Shepard was indoctrinated then. That addition to the theory popped up much, much later.

The "streamlined" version of indoctrination theory is: the last 5-10ish minutes of the game is all in Shepard's head while he struggles against an indoctrination attempt....the Control/Synthesis option is siding with the Reapers, Destroy is telling the Reapers to go to hell. It also explains why Anderson and The Illusive Man magically appear out of thin air....they represent opposite sides of the internal debate.

It's also the case that Protheans couldn't detect indoctrination that well. Virgil tells you in ME1, Javik tells you in ME3. Shepard was likely in the early stages of indoctrination at that point.

This also perfectly explains why you wake up in rubble, on Earth. And before someone asks "why wouldn't Harbinger just kill Shepard?"....why would he? In the second game he talked nonstop about wanting to possess your mind and body.

Don't forget that in Arrival, Shepard was unconscious and helpless for a whole two days.

[Renfielder]

If he was indictrinaited why did it not sence the Ai on Thessia

[PlumPaul93]

Guglio08 wrote...

Occam's Razor: Shepard's pistol had infinite ammo when five seconds earlier it needed thermal clips.

It's a dream / hallucination / indoctrination.

I'd bet they did that to make that sequence less annoying. Shepard is a slug during it and if you're playing on higher difficulties those enemies are hard to kill. I certainly wouldn't use that as evidence to support the theory.

Modifié par PlumPaul82393, 15 mars 2012 - 09:45 .

[Astarmos]

If indoctrination theory is true, than why do we have Stargazer scene and after control and synthesis ending - where Shepard DIES - we have further scenes? I mean - if indoctrination theory is fine, than for what purpose there are scenes, when it was all a lie and Shepard is now under control or finds himself dead

[Naarad]

Astarmos wrote...

If indoctrination theory is true, than why do we have Stargazer scene and after control and synthesis ending - where Shepard DIES - we have further scenes? I mean - if indoctrination theory is fine, than for what purpose there are scenes, when it was all a lie and Shepard is now under control or finds himself dead

Not to mention the final message that says "Your Commander Shepard is now a legend!" For what? For being indoctrinated? Come on.

[Guglio08]

111987 wrote...

If the theory is true, what does that mean for the people whom chose synthesis or control? Does it mean that the ending DLC just wouldn't be available for them?

Also, why would Shepard envision the whole Normandy scene?

I have to say, there are a lot of good points about the Indoctrination theory, but something about it doesn't feel quite right yet.

Joker and the Normandy are in the middle of the Mass Relay destruction. Instead of being wiped out, we see them crash on a planet with a lush rainforest and presumbably a jungle. Also, all your squadmates that were on earth, including the pair that came with you to the beam, are on it.

It's Shepard's mind, or subconscious if you will, showing that his "family" was able to survive the Mass Relay destruction. 

How would the Catalyst know to look like the Earth boy? Shepard is filling in the blanks on his own. That's why the endings are so clear cut. The choice has to be obvious.

Modifié par Guglio08, 15 mars 2012 - 09:48 .

[111987]

Guglio08 wrote...

111987 wrote...

If the theory is true, what does that mean for the people whom chose synthesis or control? Does it mean that the ending DLC just wouldn't be available for them?

Also, why would Shepard envision the whole Normandy scene?

I have to say, there are a lot of good points about the Indoctrination theory, but something about it doesn't feel quite right yet.

Joker and the Normandy are in the middle of the Mass Relay destruction. Instead of being wiped out, we see hem crash on a planet with a lush rainforest and presumbably a jungle. Also, all your squadmates that were on earth, including the pair that came with you to the beam, are on it.

It's Shepard's mind, or subconscious if you will, showing that his "family" were able to survive the Mass Relay destruction. 

How would the Catalyst know to look like the Earth boy? Shepard is filling in the blanks on his own. That's why the endings are so clear cut. The choice has to be obvious.

I agree, there's definitely some merit to the whole indoctrination thing. But still, what happens to the players who chose options other than destroy? Is their game now finished? That doesn't seem right.

Also, why was the mass relay destruction a part of the vision anyways?

[Astarmos]

Guglio08 wrote...

It's Shepard's mind, or subconscious if you will, showing that his "family" were able to survive the Mass Relay destruction. 

Yet another attempt to use "mass relays supernova explosion" from arrival. It was discussed many times and proven this is not the case.

How would the Catalyst know to look like the Earth boy? Shepard is filling in the blanks on his own. That's why the endings are so clear cut. The choice has to be obvious.

Catalyst uses this body for reasons:
- Shepard is deeply mourning the boy's death. It is shown that he thinks about him, dreams about him and so on. Perhaps this is the most important reason.
- It is good to use a normal human presence. Would you like to talk to some kind of strange looking thing with strange voice?

If indoctrination theory is right, then why provide a destroy solution and make Catalyst say that "you can do it, i don't really care what you do, it's your choice"?

[Empiro3]

Guglio08 wrote...

111987 wrote...

If the theory is true, what does that mean for the people whom chose synthesis or control? Does it mean that the ending DLC just wouldn't be available for them?

Also, why would Shepard envision the whole Normandy scene?

I have to say, there are a lot of good points about the Indoctrination theory, but something about it doesn't feel quite right yet.

Joker and the Normandy are in the middle of the Mass Relay destruction. Instead of being wiped out, we see them crash on a planet with a lush rainforest and presumbably a jungle. Also, all your squadmates that were on earth, including the pair that came with you to the beam, are on it.

Plus, it's not so easy to pick up your crew, since Cortez has crashed. And the whole running away business...

And what are the odds that someone travelling at Hyper-FTL speeds between relays just happen to crashland on a lush, green planet? Hint: "less than winning the lottery" would a huge understatement.

[Guglio08]

Astarmos wrote...

Yet another attempt to use "mass relays supernova explosion" from arrival. It was discussed many times and proven this is not the case.

Catalyst uses this body for reasons:
- Shepard is deeply mourning the boy's death. It is shown that he thinks about him, dreams about him and so on. Perhaps this is the most important reason.
- It is good to use a normal human presence. Would you like to talk to some kind of strange looking thing with strange voice?

If indoctrination theory is right, then why provide a destroy solution and make Catalyst say that "you can do it, i don't really care what you do, it's your choice"?

Firstly, where did I mention Arrival?

Arrival showed that smashing a giant asteroid into a Mass Relay caused it to explode.

Working under the pretense that ME3's "ending" was a dream-state (not  necessarily indoctrination), the Mass Relay "explosion" is how Shepard imagined it, because he witnessed the events of Arrival. 

And yes, that's a good case for why the Catalyst would choose to take the appearance of the Earth Boy, but my question is, HOW did it know to use it? There's no "scanning sequence." And it's not a magical being. It would need that info from somewhere. But Shepard's been dreaming about the kid the whole game.

[Empiro3]

Guglio08 wrote...

Astarmos wrote...

Yet another attempt to use "mass relays supernova explosion" from arrival. It was discussed many times and proven this is not the case.

Catalyst uses this body for reasons:
- Shepard is deeply mourning the boy's death. It is shown that he thinks about him, dreams about him and so on. Perhaps this is the most important reason.
- It is good to use a normal human presence. Would you like to talk to some kind of strange looking thing with strange voice?

If indoctrination theory is right, then why provide a destroy solution and make Catalyst say that "you can do it, i don't really care what you do, it's your choice"?

Firstly, where did I mention Arrival?

Arrival showed that smashing a giant asteroid into a Mass Relay caused it to explode.

Working under the pretense that ME3's "ending" was a dream-state (not  necessarily indoctrination), the Mass Relay "explosion" is how Shepard imagined it, because he witnessed the events of Arrival. 

And yes, that's a good case for why the Catalyst would choose to take the appearance of the Earth Boy, but my question is, HOW did it know to use it? There's no "scanning sequence." And it's not a magical being. It would need that info from somewhere. But Shepard's been dreaming about the kid the whole game.

Also, considering that the Catalyst basically is a Reaper, if it can read Shepard's mind and mess with it to project itself as whatever it feels like, that actually supports indoctrination.

[Astarmos]

Guglio08 wrote...

Astarmos wrote...

Yet another attempt to use "mass relays supernova explosion" from arrival. It was discussed many times and proven this is not the case.

Catalyst uses this body for reasons:
- Shepard is deeply mourning the boy's death. It is shown that he thinks about him, dreams about him and so on. Perhaps this is the most important reason.
- It is good to use a normal human presence. Would you like to talk to some kind of strange looking thing with strange voice?

If indoctrination theory is right, then why provide a destroy solution and make Catalyst say that "you can do it, i don't really care what you do, it's your choice"?

Firstly, where did I mention Arrival?

Arrival showed that smashing a giant asteroid into a Mass Relay caused it to explode.

Working under the pretense that ME3's "ending" was a dream-state (not  necessarily indoctrination), the Mass Relay "explosion" is how Shepard imagined it, because he witnessed the events of Arrival. 

And yes, that's a good case for why the Catalyst would choose to take the appearance of the Earth Boy, but my question is, HOW did it know to use it? There's no "scanning sequence." And it's not a magical being. It would need that info from somewhere. But Shepard's been dreaming about the kid the whole game.

How does Prothean VI finds taints if indoctrination at a distance? Maybe Catalyst and its systems have some "mind readers". 
Discussing if it was Shepard imagination is not really a good idea. It can lead to "Everything after Eden Prime beacon accident is an illusion". There is no way you can disprove that or anything else connected to dreams and illusions.

[Shunt Mcblunt]

Just because you do not believe the post why bash it?

In life everyone is entitled to their opinions and until they are proved wrong by the creators of the image, they are not wrong. Schrodinger's cat theory takes place here. This situation is sometimes called quantum indeterminacy or the observer's paradox: the observation or measurement itself affects an outcome, so that the outcome as such does not exist unless the measurement is made.

Lets wait till they lift the box to find out which is fact and which is fiction. PAX is less than a month away.

[Guglio08]

Astarmos wrote...

How does Prothean VI finds taints if indoctrination at a distance? Maybe Catalyst and its systems have some "mind readers". 
Discussing if it was Shepard imagination is not really a good idea. It can lead to "Everything after Eden Prime beacon accident is an illusion". There is no way you can disprove that or anything else connected to dreams and illusions.

Because The Illusive Man had subjected himself to Reaper tech and thus was partially husk-ified (which he technically was even before ME3, according to the novel I didn't read that had him in it). 

As I recall, all Cerberus troops (I presume Kei Leng included) had Reaper tech fused in.

[Guglio08]

Okay, just to make this even clearer. Using Occam's Razor as my basis:

- "Shepard Alive" sequence clearly shows Shepard in the rubble on London.
- Shepard couldn't have survived the Citadel's explosion.
- Therefore the Citadel sequence and "Shepard Alive" can't both have occurred.
- If Shepard was actually in the Citadel for realz, then there's no way he could have imagined being alive, because he's dead.
- Therefore, he had to imagine the Citadel explosion.

[PlumPaul93]

Guglio08 wrote...- "Shepard Alive" sequence clearly shows Shepard in the rubble on London.

It does?

[111987]

Why was the destruction of the mass relays even a part of the vision? What purpose did that serve, seeing as how it would happen in every ending anyways?

[Guglio08]

111987 wrote...

Why was the destruction of the mass relays even a part of the vision? What purpose did that serve, seeing as how it would happen in every ending anyways?

The Catalyst tells Shepard that using the Crucible, no matter what path he chooses, will blow up all the Relays. Despite destroying his friends (the Geth, EDI) and wiping out the tech that allowed Humanity to evolve past what it would have been able to without the rest of the galactic community, he's still committed to destroying the Reapers. regardless of the sacrifice. He had to break the cycle. 

So the Relays blow up. Joker and Normandy, in the middle of FTL travel, crashes on a jungle planet, alive. Shepard destroyed the Reapers and all Reaper tech but all his friends were okay. That's how he knew he made the right choice. He did what he set out to do. So that's why he resists death, one last time, on London.

[Astarmos]

Guglio08 wrote...


Because The Illusive Man had subjected himself to Reaper tech and thus was partially husk-ified (which he technically was even before ME3, according to the novel I didn't read that had him in it). 

As I recall, all Cerberus troops (I presume Kei Leng included) had Reaper tech fused in.

What I wanted to point out is "what magical technolody Prothean VI uses to find indoctrination at a distance". My point i, that Catalyst uses more advance technology and it doesn't have to be impossible to see the child in Shepard's mind.

[111987]

Guglio08 wrote...

111987 wrote...

Why was the destruction of the mass relays even a part of the vision? What purpose did that serve, seeing as how it would happen in every ending anyways?

The Catalyst tells Shepard that using the Crucible, no matter what path he chooses, will blow up all the Relays. Despite destroying his friends (the Geth, EDI) and wiping out the tech that allowed Humanity to evolve past what it would have been able to without the rest of the galactic community, he's still committed to destroying the Reapers. regardless of the sacrifice. He had to break the cycle. 

Nah, that doesn't really explain why the relays blowing up were a part of the vision. It would work if the relays were destroyed only in the 'destroy' ending, as that would show the commitment you're talking about, but it doesn't matter if the relays are destroyed in the control and synthesis ending. Choosing those endings also show a commitment to ending the cycle no matter what.

[Monochrome Wench]

Renfielder wrote...

If he was indictrinaited why did it not sence the Ai on Thessia

For the n'th time, Shepard is only indoctrinated IF you choose the Control or Synthesis options in the ending. The ending is an indoctrination attempt. Shepard is not yet indoctrinated when you speak to the VI, both times!

Modifié par Monochrome Wench, 15 mars 2012 - 10:36 .

[Guglio08]

111987 wrote...

Nah, that doesn't really explain why the relays blowing up were a part of the vision. It would work if the relays were destroyed only in the 'destroy' ending, as that would show the commitment you're talking about, but it doesn't matter if the relays are destroyed in the control and synthesis ending. Choosing those endings also show a commitment to ending the cycle no matter what.

The Catalyst specifically says that every choice will blow up the Relays. It doesn't "make sense" because the whole thing is a fabrication of Shepard's subconscious while he lies in the rubble, half dead.

[Astarmos]

Benezia thought she could resist indoctrination attempt but it was far to powerful. Indoctrination isn't a fight. In the end you will fall. Why does Catalyst warn Shepard that control and synthesis results in death? He could just say what are the possible options and let him choose.