281 réponses à ce sujet

[JasmoVT]

Karakuri wrote...

Karakuri wrote...

To the original topic poster,

I think have a probable answer to that hole you are refering to...... Might be a bit long...

I believe that the Child is Harbinger not the actual Catalyst.

The
real Catalyst is a dark energy emission device that is hidden within
Citadel. It can amplify the dark energy by several folds via mass relays
and destroy every synthetic and organic lives in the galaxy. It was 
first created by one of the civilizations driven extinct by the reapers
billions of years ago. Knowing that this weapon will not only wipe out
reapers but also all lives possible in this galaxy, they couldn’t find 
the courage to activate their last resort. Eventually, civilizations 
from the cycles afterward discovered this device and each added a bit of
their own design to better harness this energy. In the end, it became
the crucible as we know it. Notice that if Crucible is poorly build with
a low war asset rating, the energy will wipe out everything, and no one
will survive. But if properly build with a high war asset rating, the
device will only kill reapers and render buildings, human lives, and
even half  synthetic Shepard unharmed.

When reapers discovered this weapon, their immediate response was to eliminate this threat. However,
further
examination revealed that if tempered by reaper signal or any  violent
means, Catalyst will prematurely activate itself and wipe out all forms
of synthetic and organic lives in the galaxy via mass relay.  Notice
that in the red ending, Shepard simply had to shoot catalyst to activate
it. This further proves my point that Catalyst is highly
volatile. Any damage done to it will cause the eruption of the dark energy

So
Harbinger devised a plan to get rid of the catalyst.  That was their
plan all along in London. They were building their own designs to
complement our crucible. Their purpose is to modify the  function of the
Catalyst so it would present Shepard two other options to waste this
energy. Hence we were given Control and Synthesis as well.
Both of which will render reapers unharmed.

Absolutely, the god child is an unreliable narratator. Having sensed Shepard's sympathy for the child at the beginning they used that image throughout the game to try to influence Shepard's decisions. (Children are almost alwyas unreliable narators in video games.) The god child is being used at the end to put forward a more subtle arguement than the original sentient life is chaotic and reapers must eliminate the chaos. In the end, however, it is all aimed at influencing Shepard away from destroying the reapers.

[CitizenSnips]

MassEffected555 wrote...

ElementL09 wrote...

The theory makes the most sense considering the secret ending and dreams shepard had. Alot more evidence there then in any other theory.

How about we don't go with other THEORYS and just go with that FACT that Casey Hudson said it's done and we got a 'definitive and ....something something ending"

ITS OVER.

Now let's focus on getting it fixed instead of trying to convice everyone how smart you guys are for figuring out the master plan from BW

Intended or not, the indoctrination theory does fit and it fits very well.

[Senario]

The indoctrination HYPOTHESIS is one that I have several problems with. One being that the Prothean VI would have been able to detect "Indoctrinated Presence" when Shepard talked to it. There is a lot of speculation but...honestly. Throw out the Star child, restart the final running scene towards the beam. That last twenty minutes of limping didn't at all feel epic or heroic like the ending of ME1. Actually got somewhat annoyed playing on the harder difficulties because Marauder Shields kept killing me. I should have stayed dead.

Remember ME1's final scenes? OMG MAKO RUN TO THE CONDUIT! RUN TO FIGHT SAREN! KILL SAREN, AND AGAIN! Focus fire on Sovereign!

[Malanek]

This isn't proof against the indoctrination theory. I haven't read this whole thread but to address the OP, firstly you are metagaming which is not a good start for a proof. Second, even when you do metagame it is almost an argument the other way around. The writers would not want to let players to not be able to break free of indoctrination. The EMS could then play a part in what the "real" endings are likely to be. But anyway very few players would have such a low score.

I have wavered back and forth on whether I believe the indoctrination theory. Firstly I thought it was nonsense, then I was convinced it was true, but now I suspect it is not. There is no doubt in my mind that Shepard was partly indoctrinated (after all he had all the symptoms and shoots anderson), but now I suspect it was merely by TIM rather than the reapers. It was Casey's most recent address that left me somewhat flat. I did not detect any signs that they had an addition, or even an established plan, ready to go, as I did from earlier people like Mike Gamble. It could still be true ie Reapers take over from TIM and the effect is much more powerful, but I now suspect it isn't. It was a great theory though.

[agathokakological]

H. Birdman wrote...

The AI needs to trick you only if you have sufficient EMS to win the battle. That's why higher EMS opens up "control" and "synthesis." They are the last ditch saving throws for the reapers.

The only way to make sense of the "breathing in the rubble on Earth" scene is if literally nothing you perceived on the Citadel happened. That includes the choices and the destruction of the station.

[Xerkysz]

Senario wrote...

The indoctrination HYPOTHESIS is one that I have several problems with. One being that the Prothean VI would have been able to detect "Indoctrinated Presence" when Shepard talked to it.

See this here, this is one thing I'm sick of trying to get people to realise.
Read this: http://social.biowar...5488/2#10186556
Should clear a lot of things up, as far as the Prothean VI screaming Shep is indoctrinated, said on this forum was that the PVI cannot detect early stages of indoctrination. Javik says it himself.

2. Prothean VI: "Security protocols have been overridden, I will comply."  This is in TIM's base, so why did he tell TIM about the Catalyst? when TIM was clearly Indoctrinated? Yet if Shep is indoctrinated it won't tell him?

Please tell me how TIM is indoctrinated, yet still found out about the Catalyst from the PVI.

Modifié par Xerkysz, 18 mars 2012 - 08:03 .

[MrIllusion]

MassEffected555 wrote...

ElementL09 wrote...

The theory makes the most sense considering the secret ending and dreams shepard had. Alot more evidence there then in any other theory.

How about we don't go with other THEORYS and just go with that FACT that Casey Hudson said it's done and we got a 'definitive and ....something something ending"

ITS OVER.

Now let's focus on getting it fixed instead of trying to convice everyone how smart you guys are for figuring out the master plan from BW

I would love to hear how we can "focus on getting it fixed".

Since you seem to have a plan of some sort.

[XPMUser]

Regarding the OP:
According to the IT the choices don't actually have effect on the real world, the explosion scene is just part of a hallucination. The reason high EMS Shep can choose control/synthesis is that s/he poses a greater threat to reapers, and thus by the godchild/reapers' will needs to be misguided to choose those 2 "endings". OP just further proves that IT is correct.

Modifié par XPMUser, 18 mars 2012 - 08:04 .

[Xerkysz]

On another note, shall we start another debate?

It seems like a long shot, but there’s some evidence that suggests there’s more to the endings than what’s currently available on the disc. Rumor has it, a DLC pack called “The Truth” is coming in April (although just how legitimate that is is up for debate, with the scale sliding quickly toward “not legitimate”). And there’s quite a bit of evidence that suggests that Shepard’s experience on the Citadel at the end of the game isn’t all there is to the story — and that, in fact, some of his experiences may be the result of indoctrination.

There are some interesting circumstances under which the ending of Mass Effect 3 could be one of the greatest pieces of game design ever created; in other circumstances, it could be even worse or more confusing than what players have already experienced. But if it’s true (an incredibly big “if”), then BioWare has pulled off the greatest feat ever: they indoctrinated us all.

Edit:
Sauce:
http://www.gamefront...ination-theory/

Modifié par Xerkysz, 18 mars 2012 - 08:11 .

[ULS 980]

mushoops86anjyl wrote...

ULS 980 wrote...

nyogen wrote...
Occam's razor (very short adapted interpretation) states the simpler explanations tend to be true, in this case it seems to me easier to believe the Bioware dropped the ball than the interpretation of the y axis of the gaze of Anderson when he hicks up.

Playing Devil's Advocate here: on the other hand, I find it very hard to believe a company that's done so well through two games and 99.9% of a third game without any significant plot-holes and whatnot would drop the ball so hard in the last ten minutes of the third game. It's completely out of character for Bioware, or more specifically the ME team, (I'd say) to somehow manage to screw up this badly, even if they actively tried to.

I could argue that Bioware screwing up this badly makes even less sense than the indoctrination theory.

Not saying the theory is true, just that I think it has it's merits and at least tries to make sense of an ending that's completely uncharacteristic of ME Team's high standards.

http://www.gamefront...ination-theory/

The article actually mentions how the ending isn't just bad compared to all the content before it, but that it's anomalously bad. I have to agree.

If anything, I think the problem with the ending stemmed from the ill advised idea of making it ambiguous (hence the "Lots of speculation for everyone!").
OBVIOUSLY there's something else going on behind the scenes and the ending isn't supposed to be taken at face value (because Bioware wants people to theorize on it). 
Whether that's indoctrination or something else (again, not arguing for indoctrination), I don't really know.

All I really know is, I can't sit here and believe Bioware screwed up this badly after doing so consistently well over five years. What I can believe is that Bioware tried something new, went for something high brow and they didn't pull it off well at all.

Modifié par ULS 980, 18 mars 2012 - 08:13 .

[Xerkysz]

ULS 980 wrote...

mushoops86anjyl wrote...

ULS 980 wrote...

nyogen wrote...
Occam's razor (very short adapted interpretation) states the simpler explanations tend to be true, in this case it seems to me easier to believe the Bioware dropped the ball than the interpretation of the y axis of the gaze of Anderson when he hicks up.

Playing Devil's Advocate here: on the other hand, I find it very hard to believe a company that's done so well through two games and 99.9% of a third game without any significant plot-holes and whatnot would drop the ball so hard in the last ten minutes of the third game. It's completely out of character for Bioware, or more specifically the ME team, (I'd say) to somehow manage to screw up this badly, even if they actively tried to.

I could argue that Bioware screwing up this badly makes even less sense than the indoctrination theory.

Not saying the theory is true, just that I think it has it's merits and at least tries to make sense of an ending that's completely uncharacteristic of ME Team's high standards.

http://www.gamefront...ination-theory/

The article actually mentions how the ending isn't just bad compared to all the content before it, but that it's anomalously bad. I have to agree.

If anything, I think the problem with the ending stemmed from the ill advised idea of making it ambiguous (hence the "Lots of speculation for everyone!").
OBVIOUSLY there's something else going on behind the scenes and the ending isn't supposed to be taken at face value (because Bioware wants people to theorize on it). 
Whether that's indoctrination or something else (again, not arguing for indoctrination), I don't really know.

All I really know is, I can't sit here and believe Bioware screwed up this badly after doing so consistently well over five years. What I can believe is that Bioware tried something new, went for something high brow and they didn't pull it off well at all.

If I was going for indoctrination ending I'd be going for something like this, with a bit of action thrown in for the action freaks:
http://social.biowar...13/108#10177518

Edit: Link
& I must be gone, it's 7am, perfect time to go to sleep. Back on later, keep talking and discussing things between each other, and lets not argue.

Modifié par Xerkysz, 18 mars 2012 - 08:18 .

[REAPER48]

shepard can't indoctrinated the reapers didn't get what they wanted from any of the endings. first destroying them i don't need to explain that its straight forward enough to understand. second controlling them they said it wasn't possible for the illusive man cause he was indoctrinated shepard wasn't and shepard told them to leave when he took control and life went on as can be seen by the stargazer scene at the end. the reapers didn't get anything from shepard taking control except being told to f*** off. third synthesis was to stop the chaos of synthetic life like the geth from killing organics by picking this option the reapers would no longer be required to stop the chaos cause all life has reached its highest point of evolution so there will be no chaos between organics and synthetics cause there all the same, part organic and synthetic. besides the stargazer scene shows life went on and that scene can't be a dream shepards having cause his long dead since the stargazer said it happen long ago. so there you have it the indoctrination theory is a load of s***.

[JasmoVT]

REAPER48 wrote...

shepard can't indoctrinated the reapers didn't get what they wanted from any of the endings. first destroying them i don't need to explain that its straight forward enough to understand. second controlling them they said it wasn't possible for the illusive man cause he was indoctrinated shepard wasn't and shepard told them to leave when he took control and life went on as can be seen by the stargazer scene at the end. the reapers didn't get anything from shepard taking control except being told to f*** off. third synthesis was to stop the chaos of synthetic life like the geth from killing organics by picking this option the reapers would no longer be required to stop the chaos cause all life has reached its highest point of evolution so there will be no chaos between organics and synthetics cause there all the same, part organic and synthetic. besides the stargazer scene shows life went on and that scene can't be a dream shepards having cause his long dead since the stargazer said it happen long ago. so there you have it the indoctrination theory is a load of s***.

You are believing the god like star child's narration. Don't!!!

[nyogen]

Xerkysz wrote...

Senario wrote...

The indoctrination HYPOTHESIS is one that I have several problems with. One being that the Prothean VI would have been able to detect "Indoctrinated Presence" when Shepard talked to it.

See this here, this is one thing I'm sick of trying to get people to realise.
Read this: http://social.biowar...5488/2#10186556
Should clear a lot of things up, as far as the Prothean VI screaming Shep is indoctrinated, said on this forum was that the PVI cannot detect early stages of indoctrination. Javik says it himself.

2. Prothean VI: "Security protocols have been overridden, I will comply."  This is in TIM's base, so why did he tell TIM about the Catalyst? when TIM was clearly Indoctrinated? Yet if Shep is indoctrinated it won't tell him?

Please tell me how TIM is indoctrinated, yet still found out about the Catalyst from the PVI.

Wow, he told TIM about the Catalyst precisely because his security protocols had been overriden by TIM, hence how TIM found out; the VI asks Sheperd if he came to save him from indoctrinated forces... so much out of context make-belif, but whatever, it's your right to die for the cause but I suspect we didn't play the same game. 

You don't get it, that I and many others wish that you and the others supporting this theory were actually right and that there would be proper endings, unfortunately I have a feeling you'll need a lot more anti depressents when they actually admit that this is their artistic vision for the endings. I eventually am more prepared for this event considering I am not willing to make the endings in my head based on inconsequential evidence and very very doubtful interpretation of out of context scenes that in the end are not even coherent with ME1 and ME2.

[MegumiAzusa]

nyogen wrote...

Xerkysz wrote...

Senario wrote...

The indoctrination HYPOTHESIS is one that I have several problems with. One being that the Prothean VI would have been able to detect "Indoctrinated Presence" when Shepard talked to it.

See this here, this is one thing I'm sick of trying to get people to realise.
Read this: http://social.biowar...5488/2#10186556
Should clear a lot of things up, as far as the Prothean VI screaming Shep is indoctrinated, said on this forum was that the PVI cannot detect early stages of indoctrination. Javik says it himself.

2. Prothean VI: "Security protocols have been overridden, I will comply."  This is in TIM's base, so why did he tell TIM about the Catalyst? when TIM was clearly Indoctrinated? Yet if Shep is indoctrinated it won't tell him?

Please tell me how TIM is indoctrinated, yet still found out about the Catalyst from the PVI.

Wow, he told TIM about the Catalyst precisely because his security protocols had been overriden by TIM, hence how TIM found out; the VI asks Sheperd if he came to save him from indoctrinated forces... so much out of context make-belif, but whatever, it's your right to die for the cause but I suspect we didn't play the same game. 

You don't get it, that I and many others wish that you and the others supporting this theory were actually right and that there would be proper endings, unfortunately I have a feeling you'll need a lot more anti depressents when they actually admit that this is their artistic vision for the endings. I eventually am more prepared for this event considering I am not willing to make the endings in my head based on inconsequential evidence and very very doubtful interpretation of out of context scenes that in the end are not even coherent with ME1 and ME2.

Yes Xerkysz is wrong in some part, security protocols are overwritten so it tells TIM where it is, but he is right in saying the VI can only detect later stages of indoctrination. Thus you can't decline that Shep might be in the earlier stages, as you are still in control of his/her actions.

[NightAntilli]

Oyeah.. One more.. I'll edit this in my opening post too.

Going on from the theory in the opening post, let's say that after Harbinger blasted Shepard, everything that happens is in his head. So.. Shepard eventually breathes if he chose the right path. There is one problem here. The camera hovers there for quite a while. You see nor hear no war, no reaper sounds, no soldiers walking around, nothing. If Shepard never actually made it to the beam and the crucible was never activated, how is the earth suddenly so quiet when he wakes up? That indicates that the war is over right? How did that happen if Shepard never entered the beam to open the Citadel arms so the crucible can be used?

Modifié par NightAntilli, 18 mars 2012 - 10:23 .

[REAPER48]

as was said on the first page of this topic the indoctrination theory was made up cause some people wanted to believe the ending wasn't the actual ending so get over it. besides i seen worse endings than mass effect 3 and i actually thought the ending for me3 was good. the game is meant to be the final chapter for commander shepard whats a better way to end a hero's story other than the ultimate sacrifice for what he believed in

[Davies993]

NightAntilli wrote...

Oyeah.. One more.. I'll edit this in my opening post too.

Going on from the theory in the opening post, let's say that after Harbinger blasted Shepard, everything that happens is in his head. So.. Shepard eventually breathes if he chose the right path. There is one problem here. The camera hovers there for quite a while. You see nor hear no war, no reaper sounds, no soldiers walking around, nothing. If Shepard never actually made it to the beam and the crucible was never activated, how is the earth suddenly so quiet when he wakes up? That indicates that the war is over right? How did that happen if Shepard never entered the beam to open the Citadel arms so the crucible can be used?

I can answer this one, that is likely just ME's traditionally low standards of ambient audio fidelity. I don't know if you noticed but the same thing happens in this scene, when there is a full fledged reaper invasion of Earth unfolding in the background;



Skip to 17:50, not a single ambient combat sound to be heard. No screams, no gun fire, no explosions, nothing. Just the Normandy's engines. There is even a reaper a few hundred metres away and NOTHING.

(Inb4 someone says 'that is from the demo' - I know it is, it's the same in the full game too, go and check)

Modifié par Davies993, 18 mars 2012 - 10:45 .

[MegumiAzusa]

REAPER48 wrote...

as was said on the first page of this topic the indoctrination theory was made up cause some people wanted to believe the ending wasn't the actual ending so get over it. besides i seen worse endings than mass effect 3 and i actually thought the ending for me3 was good. the game is meant to be the final chapter for commander shepard whats a better way to end a hero's story other than the ultimate sacrifice for what he believed in

This would make destruction the only viable choice as Shep once said "I'm gonna win this war, and I will do it without sacrificing the soul of our species."

[Xerkysz]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Yes Xerkysz is wrong in some part, security protocols are overwritten so it tells TIM where it is, but he is right in saying the VI can only detect later stages of indoctrination. Thus you can't decline that Shep might be in the earlier stages, as you are still in control of his/her actions.

Thank you for explaining this better then I could after going 2 days with no sleep.
Damn party people next door.

[REAPER48]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

REAPER48 wrote...

as was said on the first page of this topic the indoctrination theory was made up cause some people wanted to believe the ending wasn't the actual ending so get over it. besides i seen worse endings than mass effect 3 and i actually thought the ending for me3 was good. the game is meant to be the final chapter for commander shepard whats a better way to end a hero's story other than the ultimate sacrifice for what he believed in

This would make destruction the only viable choice as Shep once said "I'm gonna win this war, and I will do it without sacrificing the soul of our species."

                                                                                                                                                                                                      shep said that to TIM when he wanted to use the reaper tech in the collector base to advance humanity by making everyone the same way cerberus was made husk like. the green ending was to quickly achive the highest point of evolution like what happened with the geth they got what they were trying to achive' to be fully independent and now their working with the quarians complete peace which was the point of the synthesis option to create peace amoung organics and syntheitcs. control is just shep telling the reapers to go away. sacrificing himself to save everyone in 2 of the endings and survieing in one. so this dosen't make destruction the viable choice

[Kanon777]

The new twitter that was imediately deleted, they stated that there was no plan atm for a new ending. This is the only evidence we need to dismiss the theory as real, the ingame evidence might be compeling but the real world evidence is overwelming...

[MalevoIence]

Holes? Their isn't even a solid foundation lol, assumptions and speculations are what makes up their argument which so many seem to believe, simply for the fact those ppl cannot imagine Bioware making such a simplistic ending. Blue- Paragon= everyone lives, galaxy is at peace. Red- Renegade= kill all synthetics, including the Geth, EDI, and the Reapers where Shepard himself determined they are a species. So, only thing they have to go on, is their own opinion, "was the starchild lying?" with facts all showing he's been telling you nothing but the truth since the crucible was attached, it's only assumptions that make ppl think their word isn't genuine; either you believe cold hard facts of everyone lives peacefully, or you speculate the Reapers will return. One is explained right on the screen, the other is explained in the imaginations of all those warped by those silly conspiracy theories

[S Atomeha]

NightAntilli wrote...

Hole number 1:
There is a very simple but large hole in the indoctrination theory. In most (if not all) versions of the indoctrination theory, it is said that 'destroy' is the only good option, and if you choose any of the other two options, you ultimately do what the reapers wanted you to do and thus they succeed in fully indoctrinating you. If you choose destroy, you remain independent and free. Problem here is that at the lowest possible military strength, destroy is the only option. How can a much greater military strength give you two additional options that are suddenly worse than the default low military strength one? That doesn't make any sense. 

Hole number 2:
Going on from the above theory, let's say that after Harbinger blasted Shepard, everything that happens is in his head. So.. Shepard eventually breathes if he chose the right path. There is one problem here. The camera hovers there for quite a while. You see nor hear no war, no reaper sounds, no soldiers walking around, nothing. If Shepard never actually made it to the beam and the crucible was never activated, how is the earth suddenly so quiet when he wakes up? That indicates that the war is over right? How did that happen if Shepard never entered the beam to open the Citadel arms so the crucible can be used?

i'll just put in my 2cent to the op.
apparently you get the control ending if you have low ems, and chose to save the base (not sure if confirmed, i think it is but i'll have to check.). but if we go off that, then the assumption is you agree that you won't let fear compromise who you are.
while keeping gets another decision etc.

there's no sound as you initially leave earth as well, well until it shifts to the refugees.  Could also mean that the alliance fleet was broken, last we heard hammer was in full retreat.

[S Atomeha]

MalevoIence wrote...

Holes? Their isn't even a solid foundation lol, assumptions and speculations are what makes up their argument which so many seem to believe, simply for the fact those ppl cannot imagine Bioware making such a simplistic ending. Blue- Paragon= everyone lives, galaxy is at peace. Red- Renegade= kill all synthetics, including the Geth, EDI, and the Reapers where Shepard himself determined they are a species. So, only thing they have to go on, is their own opinion, "was the starchild lying?" with facts all showing he's been telling you nothing but the truth since the crucible was attached, it's only assumptions that make ppl think their word isn't genuine; either you believe cold hard facts of everyone lives peacefully, or you speculate the Reapers will return. One is explained right on the screen, the other is explained in the imaginations of all those warped by those silly conspiracy theories

 control is not paragon, until the very last second of the game your told that destroy is the correct choice and that well TIM is obviously crazy. and his ideals, and ideas were just as crazy.  For paragon to be associated with that is more of a mindf*** then anything.
The child lies, the 'secret ending' proves that.

Modifié par S Atomeha, 19 mars 2012 - 10:17 .