278 réponses à ce sujet

[Warhawk7137]

Sepharih wrote...

The Free Jaffa wrote...

They said they wanted to create fan speculation, right? This was said in that stupid app. So what's the problem with the indoctrination theory?

DING DING DING!!! We have a winner.

I repeat, if Bioware and their apologists didn't want something like the indoctrination theory to take hold they should not have gone with such a nonsensical ending that was designed purely to promote discussion and speculation.

Exactly.  The ending right now is ambiguous and logically flawed to the point where it demands multiple interpretations and explanations.

Indoc theory is both a perfectly valid interpretation, and a symptom of the problem.  That problem is that ambiguous endings are a damn cop-out.  Just because I buy into indoc theory doesn't mean I think the ending was well executed - not by a long shot.

[Deltateam Elcor]

Answer.

Why care what other people think about, it is hardly like you are offended by someone else's idea, is it because fans from all the way back from before ME1 was even released are not running around with a torch and pitchfork in hand, calling for the burning of Alexandria and for the walls of Babylon to come crashing to the ground.

Everybody has a thought, a question, speculation, just pure imagination, if you do not want to accept an idea, that is your choice.

There is no need to be purposely crude or in any way belittling of people's speculation, i suspect it doesn't garner much attention in the real world.

[Warhawk7137]

Rafe34 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

MassEffected555....he's not in the wards! He's not IN the citadel when talking to starkid....he's on the OUTSIDE of it! Or do your eyes not see that, just as you can't see him waking up in Concrete rubble?

Yeah that's what you want to believe. All the evidence I need is that BW ending the game and it's over in an extemely ****ty way. Until they prove me wrong all you have is a grasping at straws theory. ( AGAIN I do like it its a pretty good read)

Hey I have a theory too. I believe Shepard is really Link. See what happens is the Reapers kidnapped Zelda and Link went to the future to save her. Only problem is while going to the future a bomerang Link threw a day before today hit him in the head. Anderson found him with amnesia and told him this fantastic story about how he is Commander Shepard just so Anderson wouldn't have to be the one that talked to the star kid with no helmet because Anderson knew how stupid that would look.

PROVE TO ME IT ISNT TRUE!!!

Zero evidence supporting it.

Indoc has at least 30, I think, "plotholes" in the original ending that are explained by it, as well as numerous things that point to that final sequence being a dream sequence. (The trees from Shepard's dreams appear behind you all of a sudden, for one).

Strictly speaking I think it only rectifies about 4 or 5 "true" plot holes, and the rest of the evidence is visual and audio cues and connections with past events in the context of Shepard's memory.

[Zalitara]

I don't understand why some people need to crush others hope at all costs. So what if the indoctrination theory isn't correct? Why can't you just let people believe it? Does it hurt you in any way shape or form? Nope. So why be so pissed off about it?

[Baine10]

Yea. this thread has lost meaning. Relax everyone, and let him drown.

[Sepharih]

Rafe34 wrote...

Indoc has at least 30, I think, "plotholes" in the original ending that are explained by it, as well as numerous things that point to that final sequence being a dream sequence. (The trees from Shepard's dreams appear behind you all of a sudden, for one).

Wait...the trees appear?  I never noticed that.  Someone have an image?

[Jaze55]

Rafe34 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

MassEffected555....he's not in the wards! He's not IN the citadel when talking to starkid....he's on the OUTSIDE of it! Or do your eyes not see that, just as you can't see him waking up in Concrete rubble?

Yeah that's what you want to believe. All the evidence I need is that BW ending the game and it's over in an extemely ****ty way. Until they prove me wrong all you have is a grasping at straws theory. ( AGAIN I do like it its a pretty good read)

Hey I have a theory too. I believe Shepard is really Link. See what happens is the Reapers kidnapped Zelda and Link went to the future to save her. Only problem is while going to the future a bomerang Link threw a day before today hit him in the head. Anderson found him with amnesia and told him this fantastic story about how he is Commander Shepard just so Anderson wouldn't have to be the one that talked to the star kid with no helmet because Anderson knew how stupid that would look.

PROVE TO ME IT ISNT TRUE!!!

Zero evidence supporting it.

Indoc has at least 30, I think, "plotholes" in the original ending that are explained by it, as well as numerous things that point to that final sequence being a dream sequence. (The trees from Shepard's dreams appear behind you all of a sudden, for one).

Still didn't prove me wrong. There was no evidence that there was a "star kid" either but look what happened?


Nothing you or anyone says besides Bioware will ever convince me that this is THE ENDING they planned all along. Once again, in my humble opinion, those who are fighting for a vauge nonsense theory when the game has ended are delusional. I honestly think you are all setting yourselves up to be heartbroken again. I do hope I am wrong and it would be pretty cool if the idoc idea turned out to be true, but I have absolutely no faith that it is. None. Zero. The ENTIRE game is a massive plot hole so honestly go back and disect ME1 or 2 and tell me some more hidden meaning from the oh so smart godly genius BW writing team.  Again, I will never be happier to be wrong though. 

[MintyCool]

Lethys1 wrote...

Stop conveniently ignoring people once they disprove you.  Just the most annoying kind of troll.  Gosh I have respect for how hard I'm being trolled by you right now.

You can wave your arms around and say no all you like but it turns out you remain ignorant and realize you're just wrong.

Disprove what? Who are you? Oh you're one of those Indoc. Theory Cult Members....

Reread the topic. You will notice that I shreaded his ideas into a million little pieces. This is why he desperatly derails his premise time after time trying to switch directions. Looking for anything that'll stick.

Again reread the discussion, or are your just intellectually incapable of focusing for that long?

Hold the line....lol.

Modifié par MintyCool, 16 mars 2012 - 08:00 .

[Mcfly616]

MassEffected555 you are the one grabbing.at straws....you say we have no evidence that's explained but we have Shep waking up and the fact he's breathing in outerspace....the voice on the radio even says "nobody made it" to the conduit....your evidence is the citadels atmosphere is still up....when does it say that? wheres your evidence? You have none. Zero. That's grasping at straws if I've ever seen it. Not that it matters if.the atmosphere is up or down, due to the fact he's on the exterior of the station

[CrisisOne]

Rafe34 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

MassEffected555....he's not in the wards! He's not IN the citadel when talking to starkid....he's on the OUTSIDE of it! Or do your eyes not see that, just as you can't see him waking up in Concrete rubble?

Yeah that's what you want to believe. All the evidence I need is that BW ending the game and it's over in an extemely ****ty way. Until they prove me wrong all you have is a grasping at straws theory. ( AGAIN I do like it its a pretty good read)

Hey I have a theory too. I believe Shepard is really Link. See what happens is the Reapers kidnapped Zelda and Link went to the future to save her. Only problem is while going to the future a bomerang Link threw a day before today hit him in the head. Anderson found him with amnesia and told him this fantastic story about how he is Commander Shepard just so Anderson wouldn't have to be the one that talked to the star kid with no helmet because Anderson knew how stupid that would look.

PROVE TO ME IT ISNT TRUE!!!

Zero evidence supporting it.

Indoc has at least 30, I think, "plotholes" in the original ending that are explained by it, as well as numerous things that point to that final sequence being a dream sequence. (The trees from Shepard's dreams appear behind you all of a sudden, for one).

You can actually see the trees, on the right side I believe, appear at the start when they start running aswell

[JamesYHT]

i think the people who create the theory and people who believe it are also the people who are denying the ending. they just like us but acting in a different way.

[Mcfly616]

MassEffected555 I'm just going to let you drown in your ridiculous logic...or lack there of.....hope.you enjoy the ending when it comes out....

[pprrff]

People are really abusing the word 'proof'. Finding suggestions in game that a certain interpretation of an ending can exist in the structure established story doesn't prove that interpretation is true.

All these complicated extrapolations, however much sense they make, doesn't change the fact that bioware did what they did. It's interesting to see that fans can come up with good idea to fill in the plot holes, but now it's really just got out of hand.

[Capeo]

Mcfly616 wrote...

MassEffected555 you are the one grabbing.at straws....you say we have no evidence that's explained but we have Shep waking up and the fact he's breathing in outerspace....the voice on the radio even says "nobody made it" to the conduit....your evidence is the citadels atmosphere is still up....when does it say that? wheres your evidence? You have none. Zero. That's grasping at straws if I've ever seen it. Not that it matters if.the atmosphere is up or down, due to the fact he's on the exterior of the station

What are you talking about?  The Citadel always has atmosphere.  Where do you keep getting this "in space" crap?  The Citadel is full of mass effect generators that keep the atmosphere.  Shep is never in space in the ending. 

[Warhawk7137]

JamesYHT wrote...

i think the people who create the theory and people who believe it are also the people who are denying the ending. they just like us but acting in a different way.

Exactly.  Indoc theory ending still has problems that need to be rectified, but at least it's something that can be worked with.

[Kanon777]

JamesYHT wrote...

i think the people who create the theory and people who believe it are also the people who are denying the ending. they just like us but acting in a different way.

I liked the ending (check my post history) so im not emotionally invested in wishing for IT to be real...

[Juniper Mucius]

I'm finding the "if you're so passionate about this, why not be passionate about something that matters" argument to be rather silly. That argument can be said about anything. Why are we posting here? Why not go read a book or news sites and learn about what's going on in the world? Why are we watching television when we can be assisting the homeless instead? Why spend money on pop when we can just drink tap water, and use that money to buy food for the poor?

It's a pathetic, ignorant argument. We are allowed to have our free time. I believe in, and have been paying attention to the indoctrination theory. I also put a political podcast (The Young Turks) and listen to it while I go for a walk around my neighborhood. I go to school and I have a job. I write and I read. I hang out with my friends.

Spending time on the indoctrination theory != not having a life. It != not caring about the real world. Saying it does, is plain moronic to the core, and only shows the immaturity of the person claiming that it does. From now on, anyone that says "herp derp, why would you spend time on this pixelated theory when there is other stuff out there" should be ignored as nothing more than a troll. Anyone with common sense would find the pure flaw and lack of common logic in that poor "argument".

[Makatak]

Baine10 wrote...

Well, there are good people out there Makatak, don't forget this is a video game forum. People have their fantasies here, no need for the "real world" to come in here. The "real world" doesn't need apply. Leave them burdens behind, etc. Yes, there's no need to pick on every word I use. Admittedly, betrayal is a strong word, but this is the internet, and I am passionate about my games.

Notice the lack of absolutes. I am in control here.

It's actually specific words that brought me here, because they really are important.

I'm fine with speculation as long as it's open to debate. The problem is that people don't come on to the BSN and say, "Hey guys, what if the ending was Shepard being Indoctrinated/having a fantasy/dream? Take a look at these screenshots and tell me what you think."

Instead, we're confronted with, "THE ENDING MUST BE INDOCTRINATION. THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO EXPLAIN THESE THINGS. LOOK AT WHAT I FOUND. IS BIOWARE NOT LAZY?! HEADCANNON."

The satirical nature of my OP was a response to that, largely, because as I pointed out, the absolutes and must-bes can be proved un-absolute and may-bes. Indoctrionation Theory is fun headcanon, sure; I didn't actually make the connections that Shepard may be dreaming since the Eden Prime encounter until I started writing the thread, and now it's kind of not a bad idea. But I wouldn't dare actually seriously come forward on this (or any) board and actually suggest that such a thing were true. For me (or anyone) to actually prove any of these theories, it would require either mind-reading abilities and the writers' thoughts, a statement from the writers confirming the theories, or a DLC/addon/etc confirming the theories. And until then, it's just speculation, and people forget that sometimes.

If I am a troll, and troll I may be, the only people I am trolling are the people who try to sell me their fanfiction as part of what Bioware actually wrote.

I'm just as passionate about this game, I'm sure (why would I be on these forums if I wasn't), but I try to be careful about the words I choose, because they can have ramifications. Accusing someone of fraudulent advertising can be backed with actual, real, legal action. Saying what Bioware did is "betrayal" is dangerously toeing that line; now I'm sure you're reasonably intelligent and understand to some degree how advertisement works, so I do believe that what you're saying is probably from a place of pain and passion, and you don't actually mean that Bioware betrayed us in the actual sense -- that would imply that they had intentions to do so. My problem is that others don't understand that necessarily. And suddenly what starts as "Bioware did not live up to their fans' expectations" becomes "Bioware must be sued." And I don't think the latter is the case. That's all.

[ArkkAngel007]

pprrff wrote...

People are really abusing the word 'proof'. Finding suggestions in game that a certain interpretation of an ending can exist in the structure established story doesn't prove that interpretation is true.

All these complicated extrapolations, however much sense they make, doesn't change the fact that bioware did what they did. It's interesting to see that fans can come up with good idea to fill in the plot holes, but now it's really just got out of hand.

True.  It shouldn't be held up as a fact.

However, it's only a theory that has a lot of supporting elements in the game.  Again, it's only a theory.  What is getting out of hand are those that hate the ending, but don't want people to speculate on it.  That's the problem.  There is nothing wrong with the indoc theorists.  It's those who just can't leave it be and want to burn everyone else's view of the game since theirs was.

[Thornquist]

Web Access Card wrote...

I don't buy into the indoctrination theory, but I find it admirable in a tragic sort of way; it's basically an elaborate coping mechanism, and I think it's kind of ingenius.

Exactly, they believe what they want to believe.

People are in denial, thats it.

Trying to debate them is pointless - its like a conspiracy theory.

Modifié par Thornquist, 16 mars 2012 - 08:11 .

[Kanon777]

Makatak wrote...


Instead, we're confronted with, "THE ENDING MUST BE INDOCTRINATION. THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO EXPLAIN THESE THINGS. LOOK AT WHAT I FOUND. IS BIOWARE NOT LAZY?! HEADCANNON."

Strawman, the vast majority of debate over the IT is nothing like youre trying to make us to be. We just see something that fixes many pieces of the puzzle and actually makes alot of sense, no one is claiming absolute truth and bashing people who disagree with anti-IT...

[Cold42]

I view it as when you are hit by the laser, you are knocked unconscious, maybe this makes you more susceptible to indoc. The ending choice area (the Citadel) was actually Sheppard's subconscious while the Reapers were trying to indoc him. The hurt, stumbling Sheppard is a metaphor or representation of your free will or consciousness. Choosing control or merging in effect makes your conscious part of the Reapers, therefore you gave into indoc. Choosing destroy however is you rebelling against the indoc, and the reason why you wake up at the end of this one and not the others.

Dunno seemed to make sense to me...

[Juniper Mucius]

Makatak wrote...
*snip*

I don't think BioWare should be sued, but they did lie.  The ending doesn't answer questions.  It leaves it very open ended, which is the opposite of what we were told.  I don't believe we can or should take legal action against BioWare.  I do, however, believe we are entitled as their fans and customers for an answer to their misleading comments leading up to the game.  "They were advertising" is not a sufficient excuse, and will thusly be disregarded.  

[III Mav III]

My question to you, why do you wish to mock those who discuss the theory? Your going to look mighty foolish if it turns out to be true in the same way that they seem foolish if it's false.

You don't believe it, your most likely to be right, but don't put all your eggs in one basket without significant proof that's just foolish

[JamesYHT]

Warhawk7137 wrote...

JamesYHT wrote...

i think the people who create the theory and people who believe it are also the people who are denying the ending. they just like us but acting in a different way.

Exactly.  Indoc theory ending still has problems that need to be rectified, but at least it's something that can be worked with.

yep, but i think it can only works with a coming real ending DLC. otherwise it just a lie people tell to thmeselves to make them feel better.