455 réponses à ce sujet

[CommanderWilliams]

Valentia X wrote...

CommanderWilliams wrote...

@ Valentins X (I felt the need to end that ever increasingly long quote)

I swear to you I am trying to get your point. Are you sure you read my post correctly? I admitted that your theory is "a reasonable alternative". But you said that everything was a result of PTSD at that it starts when he leaves Earth. If that is the case then is that caused the three choices? Or are you saying its completely irrelevant to the ending and only affects the journey, not the conclusion (which actually did happen).

I read your post just fine. I'm not trying to 'disprove' your theory even. 


I used PTSD as a reasonable explaination for some of the symptoms that Shepard experiences in-game. You have given your theories and evidence on how it could be indoctrination, and I gave mine on how it could be PTSD. If it is absolutely necessary, I can probably also make it fit for terminal brain cancer, several allergic reactions,  Shepard suffocating after being spaced in ME2, or Shepard being high after licking Thane. 


The point is not PTSD > Indoc > Concussion > Illegal Drell Licking. The point is that I, and many others, can come up with reasonable explainations for in-game events that do not require Indoc Theory, and so please, for the love of God, stop trying to post it as fact or the only reasonable explaination. Most of us accept that Indoc Theory is popular. I have flat out said several times that it's reasonable and well thought-out. But it's theory on the level of 'sugar makes kids hyper' and not gravitational pull theory. 

I would like to tell you that I was never trying to say it's the definitive theory, but that's true. I firmly believe if the Indoc theory is not currently a fact, it will be soon.But I understand and accept what you say. I will stop trying to push it as the true ending, but I will remain silent and be satisfied with myself if it is true. 

[MisterNugNug]

We don't know if its Shepard. Could be anyone who was in the N7 program. I have a hard time accepting the Indoctrination theory because again, if this is ALL PLANNED as some kind of elaborate ending sequence....Why are they asking fans what they liked and didn't like with the ending on Twitter?

If this is all apart of a well vetted and planned ending sequence; their response to all of our outrage and inquiries should not be asking us about our thoughts on what worked and what didn't work.

[Beast919]

MisterNugNug wrote...

We don't know if its Shepard. Could be anyone who was in the N7 program. I have a hard time accepting the Indoctrination theory because again, if this is ALL PLANNED as some kind of elaborate ending sequence....Why are they asking fans what they liked and didn't like with the ending on Twitter?

If this is all apart of a well vetted and planned ending sequence; their response to all of our outrage and inquiries should not be asking us about our thoughts on what worked and what didn't work.

As for the twitter feed, the more people talking about the game, the better (in their eyes) - any press is good press.

As for it not being Shepard...c'mon...really.  Random N7 personnel.  Is that the next DLC? 

Mass Effect 3 : Random Human Dude

[IanPolaris]

RegularX wrote...

Beast919 wrote...

RegularX wrote...

But back to my point.  If you can prove that 95% of the game was not a dream/hallucination/whatnot, but the last bits of it are ... then you disprove everything I just wrote.

But you can't.  

But if you have fun doing so - please.  People having fun is good.

Said multiple times, I'm not looking for conclusive "oh boy with this there's no way we can be proven wrong!" type of info here.  What I'm looking for is a reasonable argument as to why it isn't Indoc, based on some kind of game-knowledge or even a business sense reason for doing what they did.

The only semi-compelling evidence I've seen to say it wasn't Indoc was the Thessia VI, but I'm not so sure about that, I feel it only detects people who are fully Indoc'd (i.e. it would detect it by examining brain waves or some such and reading them as such, in which case Shepard would still be a self-aware functinoing human at that point in the story).

Ok, I'll play.

1. We know Shepard and Company were not indoctrinated at Thessia.

But we DO know that Shepard had been exposed (see Object Rho among other things).  We also know that Shepard has an extraordinary resistance to indoctrination, far more than pretty much any other organic perhaps in history.  It seems likely then that the Prothean VI wasn't able to detect it.  Indoctrination happens in stages and I don't think Shepard was indoctrinated at that point.

2. Shepard and company are not introduced to any major Repear technology between Thessia and the end of the game that they haven't already been.  And certainly in a much, much, much shorter time period.

Yes, but the dreams about the kid (that doesn't actually seem to follow the normal behavior of kids btw) had been haunting Shepard for a long time...something that wouldn't normally make sense especially for a copper-plated renegade shep.  Even in the prologue back on earth, there are things that are 'wrong' about the kid almost from the start....and shep has been exposed to various forms of reaper tech the entire game.

3. Both Shepard and Anderson can clearly tell that TIM is indoctrinated (which at this point is the biggest DUH in the entire plot of the entire franchise.  Oh hey, Martin Sheen - what is that growing out of your neck? Is is it ... A LITTLE BIT OF HUSK???  But if Shepard was indoctrinated, TIM would appear as sympathetic, not antagonstic.

My take is that Anderson was never there.  Anderson and TIM represented moral avatars in Shep's mind, and TIM was clearly indoctinated long before then and Shep knew it.  As for why TIM would appear to be antagonistic, you are assumine that Harbinger has it all his own way in Shepard's mind, and I challenge this assertion.  Shep has a long history of mistrust with TIM and Shep's mind is trying to warn him.  At least that's my take.

4. The Catalyst specifically says TIM was indoctrinated, Shepard was not.

First of all, the "catalyst" lies like a rug.  In the second place, this is the point.  The Reapers WANT to indoctrinate Shepard, but understand by this point that it won't happen unless some part of Shepard's free will allows this to happen.  That's why there's an escape route (see Inception).

-Polaris

[CommanderWilliams]

Beast919 wrote...

MisterNugNug wrote...

We don't know if its Shepard. Could be anyone who was in the N7 program. I have a hard time accepting the Indoctrination theory because again, if this is ALL PLANNED as some kind of elaborate ending sequence....Why are they asking fans what they liked and didn't like with the ending on Twitter?

If this is all apart of a well vetted and planned ending sequence; their response to all of our outrage and inquiries should not be asking us about our thoughts on what worked and what didn't work.

As for the twitter feed, the more people talking about the game, the better (in their eyes) - any press is good press.

As for it not being Shepard...c'mon...really.  Random N7 personnel.  Is that the next DLC? 

Mass Effect 3 : Random Human Dude

Mass Effect 3: The Conrad Verner Story

[Beast919]

CommanderWilliams wrote...

Beast919 wrote...

MisterNugNug wrote...

We don't know if its Shepard. Could be anyone who was in the N7 program. I have a hard time accepting the Indoctrination theory because again, if this is ALL PLANNED as some kind of elaborate ending sequence....Why are they asking fans what they liked and didn't like with the ending on Twitter?

If this is all apart of a well vetted and planned ending sequence; their response to all of our outrage and inquiries should not be asking us about our thoughts on what worked and what didn't work.

As for the twitter feed, the more people talking about the game, the better (in their eyes) - any press is good press.

As for it not being Shepard...c'mon...really.  Random N7 personnel.  Is that the next DLC? 

Mass Effect 3 : Random Human Dude

Mass Effect 3: The Conrad Verner Story

I would buy it in a heartbeat.

[RegularX]

IanPolaris wrote...

But we DO know that Shepard had been exposed (see Object Rho among other things).  We also know that Shepard has an extraordinary resistance to indoctrination, far more than pretty much any other organic perhaps in history.  It seems likely then that the Prothean VI wasn't able to detect it.  Indoctrination happens in stages and I don't think Shepard was indoctrinated at that point.

Like I said - we know that Shepard was not indoctrinated when she was on Thessia.  

Yes, but the dreams about the kid (that doesn't actually seem to follow the normal behavior of kids btw) had been haunting Shepard for a long time...something that wouldn't normally make sense especially for a copper-plated renegade shep.  Even in the prologue back on earth, there are things that are 'wrong' about the kid almost from the start....and shep has been exposed to various forms of reaper tech the entire game.

Everyone has dreams, you aren't countering my point.  Shepard was not indoctrinated, and does not encounter anything new to indoctrinate her.  

And having bad dreams about a dying kid when you are trying to save the entire galaxy is what most psychologists would call "completely freaking normal".

My take is that Anderson was never there.  Anderson and TIM represented moral avatars in Shep's mind, and TIM was clearly indoctinated long before then and Shep knew it.  As for why TIM would appear to be antagonistic, you are assumine that Harbinger has it all his own way in Shepard's mind, and I challenge this assertion.  Shep has a long history of mistrust with TIM and Shep's mind is trying to warn him.  At least that's my take.

Your take assumes your premise to be true.  

First of all, the "catalyst" lies like a rug.  In the second place, this is the point.  The Reapers WANT to indoctrinate Shepard, but understand by this point that it won't happen unless some part of Shepard's free will allows this to happen.  That's why there's an escape route (see Inception).

This also assume the premise to be true.  You don't have any proof the Catalyst is lying.  You can't because it was introduced at the last minute and you have no basis to determine what it is, what is is capable of, what kind of motivations it might have, or what kind of track history it might have.  For all we know, it cheats at cards.  Or calls his ghost-mommy every Thursday.  

But what was requested was reasonable assertions based on ingame logic.  My four still stand.  If you want to assume things like "Anderson was never there and TIM and Shepard had some kind of weird fantasy-out" then, great.  Have at it.  But then I return to my original premise - prove to me any other portion of the storyline was "real".

Again - I'm not trolling.  The OP asked to "disprove" something.  If people want to enjoy conspiracy theories - go to town.  But you aren't going to really "prove" or "disprove" this.

[MisterNugNug]

Beast919 wrote...
As for the twitter feed, the more people talking about the game, the better (in their eyes) - any press is good press.

As for it not being Shepard...c'mon...really.  Random N7 personnel.  Is that the next DLC? 

Mass Effect 3 : Random Human Dude

Did I say it wasn't Shepard?  Did I rule out the possibility that it is Shepard?

[Beast919]

MisterNugNug wrote...

Beast919 wrote...
As for the twitter feed, the more people talking about the game, the better (in their eyes) - any press is good press.

As for it not being Shepard...c'mon...really.  Random N7 personnel.  Is that the next DLC? 

Mass Effect 3 : Random Human Dude

Did I say it wasn't Shepard?  Did I rule out the possibility that it is Shepard?

my point is simply...if it isn't Shepard.....why?  Just....why?

[SKiLLYWiLLY2]

I think this is just a classic case of "it can not be." The ending was not what people expected/wanted so we're desperately trying to analyze every detail in order to ignore the harsh truth.

[Naarad]

CommanderWilliams wrote...

Its a small thing that can be taken several ways but in no way disproves or even hurts the theory. The sooner people realize we solved the puzzle the sooner all the flames will die down. Besides, even if they didn't plan it, they would complete idiots to tell us they didn't or not make a proper ending proving the theory right.

The things is. If I say I have a theory about the Earth being the center of the Galaxy, I will be the one forced to show why I'm right. Not NASA to prove me wrong. Because I'm the one going against what's generally accepted.

You can't logically disprove a negative. It's called unfair burden. You're committing an argumentum ad ignorantiam or an argument that uses the lack of evidence to the contrary as a claim it's right. Just because something can't be proven false doesn't mean it's true.
Please at least skim this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

And this, so much of this.

[CommanderWilliams]

MisterNugNug wrote...

Beast919 wrote...
As for the twitter feed, the more people talking about the game, the better (in their eyes) - any press is good press.

As for it not being Shepard...c'mon...really.  Random N7 personnel.  Is that the next DLC? 

Mass Effect 3 : Random Human Dude

Did I say it wasn't Shepard?  Did I rule out the possibility that it is Shepard?

No, but the idea itself, that The Indoctrination Theory is not true, implies that is not Shepard. Without that scene, and the requirements for it, the Theory would not exist becuase it would have no basis. That 20 seconds is hope.

[PlumPaul93]

SKiLLYWiLLY2 wrote...

I think this is just a classic case of "it can not be." The ending was not what people expected/wanted so we're desperately trying to analyze every detail in order to ignore the harsh truth.

this x100000000000000000000000

[MisterNugNug]

Beast919 wrote...

my point is simply...if it isn't Shepard.....why?  Just....why?

If you would have told me that the ending segments of Mass Effect 3, would entail me having a one-sided conversation with the apparation of a dead boy whilst the battle for galactic survival taking place all around me; I would have laughed in your face.

[Beast919]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

SKiLLYWiLLY2 wrote...

I think this is just a classic case of "it can not be." The ending was not what people expected/wanted so we're desperately trying to analyze every detail in order to ignore the harsh truth.

this x100000000000000000000000

I've taken it as an exercise of - well, if it isn't Indoc, just *how many things* are horrifically bad about it.  Take a drink after every point.  Dulls the pain the ending caused.

[CommanderWilliams]

Naarad wrote...

CommanderWilliams wrote...

Its a small thing that can be taken several ways but in no way disproves or even hurts the theory. The sooner people realize we solved the puzzle the sooner all the flames will die down. Besides, even if they didn't plan it, they would complete idiots to tell us they didn't or not make a proper ending proving the theory right.

The things is. If I say I have a theory about the Earth being the center of the Galaxy, I will be the one forced to show why I'm right. Not NASA to prove me wrong. Because I'm the one going against what's generally accepted.

You can't logically disprove a negative. It's called unfair burden. You're committing an argumentum ad ignorantiam or an argument that uses the lack of evidence to the contrary as a claim it's right. Just because something can't be proven false doesn't mean it's true.
Please at least skim this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

And this, so much of this.

Lol, still proving my point. Only one person so far has had the balls to challenge the Indoc theory. Everyone deflects the purpose of this thread and expects me to do what they themselves cannot. Prove what happened.

Lets be honest. That 20 second clip is all the proof we need that Shepard is alive. And on Earth. If it wasn't all a dream he would not be alive. He would not be on Earth. And if he was, he would be all alone. And soon die.

Someone present a counter arguement. Do not ask me to present more evidence. The theory has more than enough. I want to see evidence agaisnt it. If you are simply going to deflect the question then don't even post.

[sorentoft]

Beast919 wrote...

Statulos wrote...

sorentoft wrote...

I don't have to disprove it. It is up to you to prove this theory correct. So far it remains a theory.

Exactly, that´s how theories work: it´s not up to me to demonstrate that something unconfirmed is right or wrong. We work with the data we have, and that data is the ending.

Indoctrination is not confirmed, therefore, it is up to its supporters to prove it, not me disproving something that is simply a matter of faith.

There's no need to be an ass about it.  If you have a reason you think supports the current endings as being truth, bring it up.  Don't just say "well you guys did some work thinking about this but uh....no."  No one can currently prove it one way or the other (outside of Bioware).  The point of this thread is to say "We think its Indoc - show us something that works against that."

We are not. We are simply stating things as they are. There is no foundation for the indoctrination theory - it is built on nothing. I have to do nothing to disprove it because there is nothing to disprove. It is however up to those who believe in this theory to prove it right.

[Naarad]

But we DO know that Shepard had been exposed (see Object Rho among other things).  We also know that Shepard has an extraordinary resistance to indoctrination, far more than pretty much any other organic perhaps in history.  It seems likely then that the Prothean VI wasn't able to detect it.  Indoctrination happens in stages and I don't think Shepard was indoctrinated at that point.

You don't know what's likely, because you're not the writer of Mass Effect. Noone is. You've no idea how indoctrination happens at no stage, other than making up assumptions. Face it, you are not the writers, neither we are.

Yes, but the dreams about the kid (that doesn't actually seem to follow the normal behavior of kids btw) had been haunting Shepard for a long time...something that wouldn't normally make sense especially for a copper-plated renegade shep.  Even in the prologue back on earth, there are things that are 'wrong' about the kid almost from the start....and shep has been exposed to various forms of reaper tech the entire game.

Yeah, because the guy being tormented because of a 7-8 year old dying makes no impact on anyone. Absolutely none. 

This is like people that want to see Christ's face in a bag of potatoes, in the sky, or in the ripples of a lake, you're seeing it only because you're willing to twist it beyond belief to acommodate your own.

My take is that Anderson was never there.  Anderson and TIM represented moral avatars in Shep's mind, and TIM was clearly indoctinated long before then and Shep knew it.  As for why TIM would appear to be antagonistic, you are assumine that Harbinger has it all his own way in Shepard's mind, and I challenge this assertion.  Shep has a long history of mistrust with TIM and Shep's mind is trying to warn him.  At least that's my take.

I don't care what your take is. I don't care what you assume. Your take does not constitute a fact. At most, you have grounds for a discussion on what''s your take, and what's my take, and what's Obama's take on this. But not to present me a fact based on your take. Because your word is not fact.

First of all, the "catalyst" lies like a rug.  In the second place, this is the point.  The Reapers WANT to indoctrinate Shepard, but understand by this point that it won't happen unless some part of Shepard's free will allows this to happen.  That's why there's an escape route (see Inception).
-Polaris

You don't know anything about the Catalyst. Seriously. Nothing. There's absolutely no context to it at all in the ending other than he's the Catalyst (and the Citadel), the Reapers are his solution, and his odd usage of "We" when speaking about the reapers.

That's it. Anything that goes beyond that point, is assumptions. Assumptions aren't facts. 

[Beast919]

MisterNugNug wrote...

Beast919 wrote...

my point is simply...if it isn't Shepard.....why?  Just....why?

If you would have told me that the ending segments of Mass Effect 3, would entail me having a one-sided conversation with the apparation of a dead boy whilst the battle for galactic survival taking place all around me; I would have laughed in your face.

I apply the same question.  Why?  Just......why?  There is some purpose behind the ending, and as it stands..............I only see one *logical* explanation.  The people who wrote it could turn out to be mindless monkeys and truly be as stupid as it looks currently, but in terms of logic, I see only one reasonable choice.  And that's Indoc.

[Gbentley]

As much as there is some strange evidence for backing it, I think it's more likely that it's biowares poor writing for the end of the game that makes it inconstant and seem like there may be more. It's caseys game, he's the one who has to live with the fact he made a bad call for the end. Maybe they got something up planned that will blow everyone's mind, but doubtful.

Was just watching the clip where you see him take a breathe. It's totally him awakening. To what extent, or to what it could point to, who knows? But who else thought that it seemed like there was more to that clip? Watching it, it seems to just stop abruptly like there should be additional footage. Reminded me of "the truth" from assassins creed.

[Naarad]

CommanderWilliams wrote...
Someone present a counter arguement. Do not ask me to present more evidence. The theory has more than enough. I want to see evidence agaisnt it. If you are simply going to deflect the question then don't even post.

I only see the possibility that Shepard might be alive after the Citadel's blast. That's it. You've got no right to decide it happens before the ending just because you say so. The ending, and the order in which the scenes are presented says otherwise. And that's fact, that's canon, you don't get to move scenes around as you please to fit your theory.

[CommanderWilliams]

Just so I am clear. I am not asking anyone to disprove the theory. I am simply asking for evidence, that can found within the game and possibly be used to disprove the theory. Just as I am not proving the theory true, but using in game evidence that can possibly prove the theory.

@Naarad
What did I move around? Given the conditions for the secret ending we can infer it occurs after the blast, and that Shepard is alive. Where did I break the chronologically events?

Modifié par CommanderWilliams, 15 mars 2012 - 09:21 .

[Beast919]

Gbentley wrote...

As much as there is some strange evidence for backing it, I think it's more likely that it's biowares poor writing for the end of the game that makes it inconstant and seem like there may be more. It's caseys game, he's the one who has to live with the fact he made a bad call for the end. Maybe they got something up planned that will blow everyone's mind, but doubtful.

Was just watching the clip where you see him take a breathe. It's totally him awakening. To what extent, or to what it could point to, who knows? But who else thought that it seemed like there was more to that clip? Watching it, it seems to just stop abruptly like there should be additional footage. Reminded me of "the truth" from assassins creed.

This is what I'm still waiting to see people try and explain.  Please, flesh out any reasonable, logical explanation for this clip other than Indoc.  I'm not being an ass, I want some variety.  What is the purpose of that clip.

[MisterNugNug]

Beast919 wrote...
I apply the same question.  Why?  Just......why?  There is some purpose behind the ending, and as it stands..............I only see one *logical* explanation.  The people who wrote it could turn out to be mindless monkeys and truly be as stupid as it looks currently, but in terms of logic, I see only one reasonable choice.  And that's Indoc.

Then why does the game end right there?  Why that point?  

[Beast919]

Naarad wrote...

CommanderWilliams wrote...
Someone present a counter arguement. Do not ask me to present more evidence. The theory has more than enough. I want to see evidence agaisnt it. If you are simply going to deflect the question then don't even post.

I only see the possibility that Shepard might be alive after the Citadel's blast. That's it. You've got no right to decide it happens before the ending just because you say so. The ending, and the order in which the scenes are presented says otherwise. And that's fact, that's canon, you don't get to move scenes around as you please to fit your theory.

Use your imagination and flesh out what you're saying.  How did Shepard survive the blast.  How did Earth survive the catastrophe that would be the Citadel rubble falling into it.  How did Shepard survive re-entry.  What is the purpose of Shepard surviving?  Where does the Mass Effect series go now that all relays are gone and Earth is about to be torn apart by a collision with the Citadel?

Don't just say he's still alive - explain *how* and *why*.  Thats the purpose of our Indoc argument, and the purpose of this thread is to find a fleshed out, reasonable counter argument that presents another fully functional idea.  Cause we can all agree what we currently have is not fully functional.