227 réponses à ce sujet

[Gyroscopic_Trout]

Here are our choices

• Take the ending literally, in chich case it is just objectively bad.
• The indoctrination theory is correct, in which case it's just terribly obfuscated and even then leaves us with no ending.  I don't know if that's worse than option 1.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with paid dlc.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with free dlc.  Probably not the most likely outcome, is it?

Seriously people, pick your poison.

[MrIllusion]

Gyroscopic_Trout wrote...

Here are our choices

• Take the ending literally, in chich case it is just objectively bad.
• The indoctrination theory is correct, in which case it's just terribly obfuscated and even then leaves us with no ending.  I don't know if that's worse than option 1.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with paid dlc.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with free dlc.  Probably not the most likely outcome, is it?

Seriously people, pick your poison.

Short and sweet. I love it.

I don't understand all that hate for the indoctrination theory. Are there that many other interpretations to choose from?

[harrier25699]

Claym0re wrote...

Indoctrination theory is sound and I like it. Sadly its a well known fact by now that the ending we got was intentional.

I agree it is a solid theory, however I have seen no fact one way or the other about the ending, just rhetoric from BW that it maybe/was intentional but also that "this is not the last we'll hear of Commander Shepherd".  Nothing is fact for me at this point.   The ending sucked.  Did it intentionally suck? was there actually something else going on that most did not perceive? No one likes to be wrong and people have already committed to their opinions.  It's up to BW now to put us out of our misery and end this once and for all, something they are not willing to do at the moment.

I personally believe wholeheartedly in the indoctrination theory, the notion that the end really was the end and that's all we are getting is just too painful on it's own.  That aside, there are some very clever observations that to my mind fully evidence this choice.  This youtube video (*spoiler warning!*) does exactly that:

Modifié par harrier25699, 19 mars 2012 - 11:42 .

[Captain Shakespeare]

 

Gyroscopic_Trout wrote...

Here are our choices

• Take the ending literally, in chich case it is just objectively bad.
• The indoctrination theory is correct, in which case it's just terribly obfuscated and even then leaves us with no ending.  I don't know if that's worse than option 1.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with paid dlc.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with free dlc.  Probably not the most likely outcome, is it?

Seriously people, pick your poison.

Wait... I can pick?  I want the last one!

[nullobject]

Gyroscopic_Trout wrote...

Here are our choices

• Take the ending literally, in chich case it is just objectively bad.
• The indoctrination theory is correct, in which case it's just terribly obfuscated and even then leaves us with no ending.  I don't know if that's worse than option 1.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with paid dlc.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with free dlc.  Probably not the most likely outcome, is it?

Seriously people, pick your poison.

Others in this thread were arguing for: 

5. The ending was intended to be taken literally, but Bioware may attempt to deflect fan outrage by developing DLC that retcon's the original ending as Indoctrination

I think two of those are reasonable given Bioware's track record.

Modifié par nullobject, 19 mars 2012 - 11:35 .

[FlameAble_]

The indoc "theory" feels like desperation. And its not a theory, its speculation.

[kunzite]

Really? I have to just accept this theory as truth? This is getting a bit ridiculous.

[MrIllusion]

nullobject wrote...

Gyroscopic_Trout wrote...

Here are our choices

• Take the ending literally, in chich case it is just objectively bad.
• The indoctrination theory is correct, in which case it's just terribly obfuscated and even then leaves us with no ending.  I don't know if that's worse than option 1.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with paid dlc.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with free dlc.  Probably not the most likely outcome, is it?

Seriously people, pick your poison.

Others in this thread were arguing for 

5. The ending was intended to be taken literally, but Bioware may attempt to deflect fan outrage by developing DLC that retcon's the original ending as Indoctrination

I think two of those are reasonable given Bioware's track record.

The indoctrination theory doesn't require a retcon. All of it is supported by interpretation or existing info.

If you have a choice for an ending that doesn't require a retcon, I'd like to hear it.

Modifié par MrIllusion, 19 mars 2012 - 11:37 .

[nullobject]

kunzite wrote...

Really? I have to just accept this theory as truth? This is getting a bit ridiculous.

I provided a lot of evidence in the OP (including offsite stuff), I really encourage you to check it out.

[kunzite]

nullobject wrote...

kunzite wrote...

Really? I have to just accept this theory as truth? This is getting a bit ridiculous.

I provided a lot of evidence in the OP (including offsite stuff), I really encourage you to check it out.

I've read many threads about this indoctrination theory. I admit, its well thought out and could explain quite a few things. But I dont believe its the only theory that could fit the ending. Then again...Speculation For All, right? 

[Captain Shakespeare]

Speculation!

[MrIllusion]

kunzite wrote...

nullobject wrote...

kunzite wrote...

Really? I have to just accept this theory as truth? This is getting a bit ridiculous.

I provided a lot of evidence in the OP (including offsite stuff), I really encourage you to check it out.

I've read many threads about this indoctrination theory. I admit, its well thought out and could explain quite a few things. But I dont believe its the only theory that could fit the ending. Then again...Speculation For All, right? 

Which is the part I'm curtious about. What other theories have there been?

Modifié par MrIllusion, 19 mars 2012 - 11:40 .

[nullobject]

kunzite wrote...

I've read many threads about this indoctrination theory.

This one is a bit different

[MrIllusion]

nullobject wrote...

kunzite wrote...

I've read many threads about this indoctrination theory.

This one is a bit different

Your post goes only as far as to back up the opinion that "Bioware can be that incomptent".

Even if this is true, how does this invalidate the plot elements regarding the indoctrination theory?

Modifié par MrIllusion, 19 mars 2012 - 11:43 .

[kunzite]

I dont put weight behind something just because it keeps getting commented on to the front page of the forums. My own theory got swept away minutes after I wrote it last night, but that doesnt make it any less valid a theory.

I am not against the Indoc Theory, but I am agreeing with some people that it appears to being pushed upon us who dont believe in it. Its a great theory and its nice to see it supported, but the tone of most of the threads supporting it are that its the only answer, and those who dont agree either dont understand, or arent smart enough to get it. And that really turns me off to the whole thing.

Just saying, sometimes its nice to keep an open mind.

[GnusmasTHX]

I wonder if anyone even bothered to click the links in the OP and realize the TC was being facetious.

[MrIllusion]

kunzite wrote...

I dont put weight behind something just because it keeps getting commented on to the front page of the forums. My own theory got swept away minutes after I wrote it last night, but that doesnt make it any less valid a theory.

I am not against the Indoc Theory, but I am agreeing with some people that it appears to being pushed upon us who dont believe in it. Its a great theory and its nice to see it supported, but the tone of most of the threads supporting it are that its the only answer, and those who dont agree either dont understand, or arent smart enough to get it. And that really turns me off to the whole thing.

Just saying, sometimes its nice to keep an open mind.

Well ok then, which other theories are there. Interpretations aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. It doesn't mean that I have to choose one and reject all others.

[AlexMBrennan]

LessWrong wrote...
"What you've just discovered is called 'positive bias'," said the boy. "You had a rule in your mind, and you kept on thinking of triplets that should make the rule say 'Yes'. But you didn't try to test as many triplets as possible that should make the rule say 'No'. In fact you didn't get a single 'No', so 'any three numbers' could have just as easily been the rule. It's sort of like how people imagine experiments that could confirm their hypotheses instead of trying to imagine experiments that could falsify them - that's not quite exactly the same mistake but it's close. You have to learn to look on the negative side of things, stare into the darkness. When this experiment is performed, only 20% of grownups get the answer right. And many of the others invent fantastically complicated hypotheses and put great confidence in their wrong answers since they've done so many experiments and everything came out like they expected."

You are suffering from positive bias - you are looking only for facts to support the hypothesis in your mind. A more detailed explanation can be found in this chapter of LessWrong's Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality, of all places.

Let's think this through. You propose a hypothesis - that Shepard had been indoctrinated, and is really unconscious back on Earth and never reached the beam.

Is it falsifiable? Sure - if Shepard is indoctrinated and/or unconscious back then his actions should not result in ending the Reaper threat... which is exactly what happens. For the love of CoD, the game explicitly tells the player that Shepard ended the Reaper threat

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 19 mars 2012 - 11:47 .

[nullobject]

MrIllusion wrote...

nullobject wrote...

kunzite wrote...

I've read many threads about this indoctrination theory.

This one is a bit different

Your post goes only as far as to back up the opinion that "Bioware can be that incomptent".

Even if this is true, how does this invalidate the plot elements regarding the indoctrination theory?

My post? If someone were to approach the Indoc theory by arguing that Bioware really could be that incompetent, perhaps they would be relying on Occam's Razor - in that all the options on Gyroscopic_Trout's list are possible, and consistent with the story as presented, but some are vastly more likely than others.

[Aiyie]

nullobject wrote...

SamFlagg wrote...

Could someone help me understand.

Why the solution can't be "Bioware chooses to do the indoctrination theory for the DLC"

and absolutely must be "Bioware was doing indocrintation the whole time, this was all planned"

Help me understand why this has to have all been planned.

I think the issue is that if 
"Bioware was doing indocrintation the whole time, this was all planned"  is NOT the case, it implies certain things about members of Bioware's staff and their competence. The OP is concerned with adressing this argument with reference to Bioware's previously released games.

this is why i have a funny feeling the ending is not Bioware's fault.

its EA rushing the deadline.

[kunzite]

MrIllusion wrote...

Well ok then, which other theories are there. Interpretations aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. It doesn't mean that I have to choose one and reject all others.

Thats my point. Indoc Theory isnt the only option, at the expense of others. But I digress, I did not click on every link in the OP to realize the OP was making a bit of a joke. Forgive me, my coffee hasnt kicked in yet this morning =)

[nullobject]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

LessWrong wrote...
"What you've just discovered is called 'positive bias'," said the boy. "You had a rule in your mind, and you kept on thinking of triplets that should make the rule say 'Yes'. But you didn't try to test as many triplets as possible that should make the rule say 'No'. In fact you didn't get a single 'No', so 'any three numbers' could have just as easily been the rule. It's sort of like how people imagine experiments that could confirm their hypotheses instead of trying to imagine experiments that could falsify them - that's not quite exactly the same mistake but it's close. You have to learn to look on the negative side of things, stare into the darkness. When this experiment is performed, only 20% of grownups get the answer right. And many of the others invent fantastically complicated hypotheses and put great confidence in their wrong answers since they've done so many experiments and everything came out like they expected."

You are suffering from positive bias - you are looking only for facts to support the hypothesis in your mind. A more detailed explanation can be found in this chapter of LessWrong's Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality, of all places.

Let's think this through. You propose a hypothesis - that Shepard had been indoctrinated, and is really unconscious back on Earth and never reached the beam.

Is it falsifiable? Sure - if Shepard is indoctrinated and/or unconscious back then his actions should not result in ending the Reaper threat... which is exactly what happens. For the love of CoD, the game explicitly tells the player that Shepard ended the Reaper threat

Looks like you've been reading sites where fans of Reverend Bayes hang out. 

Perhaps you should check your priors and re-read the OP?

[Joccaren]

Because there is a first time for everything (DA2 [Nice troll links BTW]), and a second time after that. If Bioware were rushed for some reason or other, this is what I'd expect to get. Hence, I think Bioware was rushed. I'm sure that they want to give us a good ending set, but they can't ATM due to resource allocation issues. So, we need to convince EA that resources need to be allocated to a better ending for ME3 people. Get convincing! (Nicely of course)

[Aiyie]

MrIllusion wrote...

Gyroscopic_Trout wrote...

Here are our choices

• Take the ending literally, in chich case it is just objectively bad.
• The indoctrination theory is correct, in which case it's just terribly obfuscated and even then leaves us with no ending.  I don't know if that's worse than option 1.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with paid dlc.
• The indoctrination theory is correct and they're following it up with free dlc.  Probably not the most likely outcome, is it?

Seriously people, pick your poison.

Short and sweet. I love it.

I don't understand all that hate for the indoctrination theory. Are there that many other interpretations to choose from?

[*]im thinking the hate comes from people feeling betrayed and wanting to wallow in self-pity rather risk looking like idiots if all their negativity turns out to be false.  most people would rather concentrate on the problem rather than try to find a solution... its easier and makes them feel better.
[*]granted, im of the opinion that indoc was never the intention, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great solution.

[kunzite]

Just so I dont seem like an ingrate with nothing but complaints, here is a link to my theory for the endings. Yes, it doesnt full explain everything (as I think Bioware needs to flesh out some of it on their end), but its just a possible explanation.

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10212124

Whether or not Indoc Theory is true, I still think its a better option than the current endings as they are. Just saying it wouldnt be the only option.

Modifié par kunzite, 19 mars 2012 - 12:00 .