758 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaze55]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

IronSabbath88 wrote...

You keep repeating the same thing over and over. It's officially irritating. You're adding nothing new to this.

Right back at ya buddy. Hypocrite
Your little idoc theory club has made about 75 posts now saying the exact same thing for a week, with the sole purpose of convincing everyone you are right. Again just look at the Titles of the threads.

Don't you DARE accuse me of repeating myself when all I do is come in threads YOUR INDOC CLUB makes multiple times a day. 

What a load of horse ****. 

Just because you deserve to see it again.

And it was necessary how?  You can say all the same things about people only ****** off at the endings and spewing hate at anyone that differs in opinion in the slightest, yet it's ok?

The only reason there are multiple indoc threads, just like multiple rage threads, is that new people find things that they don't know are seen before, or feel they have proof, and they post it.  Last time I checked, it is a story discussion thread.

At this point, I can't really see this ending well at all.  

Dude I have done nothing but provide information from the game backing my arguments and have been called a troll on multiple occasions. I have been nothing but polite in giving my counter arguments yet again, I have been called a troll because people don't want to ignore facts.

Not my problem. 

[Cucobr]

stop feeding the troll guys.

[Grusome11]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Detha wrote...

Partly synthetic is not fully synthetic. It can be assumed by the player that perhaps destroying himself partially means Shepard would die.

However, it leaves it for interpretation as well. For the record, Shepard only received implants to mend his bones when he was recreated with the lazarus project (I imagine that would function like a cast, and at this point his bones would be mended), as the other fixings he had were not verbally stated to be implants.  His other implants are the performance implants based on his class.

In the synthesis ending, Shepard disintegrates before our eyes, and in the description for the control ending, it is stated clearly that Shepard would die.

The only ending that both verbally and visually leaves things up in the air concerning Shepard's fate is the destroy one.  And if you have over 4/5000+ EMS, you get a treat

And like another poster said, if the Star Child was capable of lying, would he make the other endings sound bad at all? It doesn't really add up.

There is still the problem at how a nearly dead human, now without the aid of synthetics provided he survived their destruction, lived through the destruction of the Citadel, vacuum, atmospheric reentry, and high velocity impact onto terra.  Space magic can't even save people there.

That doesn't leave much to interpretation, and is the main thing keeping my opinion from accepting the endings at face-value with no string pulling.  

Indoc Theory would say that Shep never went to the Citadel. Everything after getting hit by the Harbinger's red beam is in his mind and is part of an attempt to indoctrinate him.

[Jaze55]

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

[Grusome11]

CrimsonFrost1 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

wtbusername wrote...

Liquoid wrote...

Xerkysz wrote...


I'm still waiting for someone to give actual reasoning and proof to why it's false, instead of screaming GRASPINGATSTRAWS.JPG L3L3L3L3L3L3L

ditto

Thirded.

If that's a word.

Is this how you guys admit that you can't actually support, with proof, your theory claims and so instead petulantly demand it be disproven?

I fully support the "theory" or "interpretation", I'll say that first. Cav is actually right though, the people who are so adamant about forcing others to disprove it are essentially using the same argument as religous zealots: "If you can't disprove my deity, then he/she/it must be real!" Unfortunately, that's not how the scientific method works, and even in that method, "theory" is only *part* of the process.

However! If we wish to be civil about this, we could work together and come up with theories, or revised editions of them, and the naysayers could constructively poke holes in them and we could come up with answers to plug those holes. Thus, making the theory even stronger... Just a thought.

That's what I thought we were doing.

[Denora]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

This is why, please try to keep a cool head. It's the name calling and insults that get people fired up. I welcome evidence on either case but the context of the posts is insulting and borderline harrassment. Please lets keep things civil?

I'm sure you meant well but not everyone took it that way.

[ArkkAngel007]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

Then report it if you feel that strongly about their assumptions about your character.  Let a mod handle it instead of setting yourself up for a situation that may lead you to get reported instead.  People shouldn't be throwing "troll" around at someone adamently rejecting a concept and arguing against it, but you shouldn't be rubbing your rebuttels in user's faces and making the snide remarks.  Don't let it bring you down to their level.

Point is, it's only a theory, and people need to chill in either case.

[Grusome11]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

How would you define a troll?

You keep posting the same points even though multiple posters have offer multiple reasons refuting your points, yet you still repost the same point.

If you don't want to be a troll, post why their refutations are wrong.

[Jaze55]

Denora wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

This is why, please try to keep a cool head. It's the name calling and insults that get people fired up. I welcome evidence on either case but the context of the posts is insulting and borderline harrassment. Please lets keep things civil?

I'm sure you meant well but not everyone took it that way.

Sorry it's really not my problem people are defensive. I have done nothing but be civil, provide evidence backing my cause through research, that I also took the time to provide for everyone to see, yet I am called a troll and dismissed.

[cinderburster]

I don't know if anyone's already linked this (29 pages now, egad!) but this is a pretty comprehensive list of plotholes/support for the Indoctrination Theory (Interpretation, if you'd like): docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/preview

[cynicalandbored]

Stop arguing and tell me the hidden meaning behind Shepard's breath moment.

[ArkkAngel007]

Grusome11 wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Detha wrote...

Partly synthetic is not fully synthetic. It can be assumed by the player that perhaps destroying himself partially means Shepard would die.

However, it leaves it for interpretation as well. For the record, Shepard only received implants to mend his bones when he was recreated with the lazarus project (I imagine that would function like a cast, and at this point his bones would be mended), as the other fixings he had were not verbally stated to be implants.  His other implants are the performance implants based on his class.

In the synthesis ending, Shepard disintegrates before our eyes, and in the description for the control ending, it is stated clearly that Shepard would die.

The only ending that both verbally and visually leaves things up in the air concerning Shepard's fate is the destroy one.  And if you have over 4/5000+ EMS, you get a treat

And like another poster said, if the Star Child was capable of lying, would he make the other endings sound bad at all? It doesn't really add up.

There is still the problem at how a nearly dead human, now without the aid of synthetics provided he survived their destruction, lived through the destruction of the Citadel, vacuum, atmospheric reentry, and high velocity impact onto terra.  Space magic can't even save people there.

That doesn't leave much to interpretation, and is the main thing keeping my opinion from accepting the endings at face-value with no string pulling.  

Indoc Theory would say that Shep never went to the Citadel. Everything after getting hit by the Harbinger's red beam is in his mind and is part of an attempt to indoctrinate him.

Correct, and that is the only thing you can't really explain outside of it either being a plot hole or space-magic (which again, works well with breathing masks, but the above situation would even kill Voldemort's 7-8 lives at one-go, and that only into the atmosphere----that was a joke).

[nyogen]

Grusome11 wrote...

DnVill wrote...

I don't get why Indoctrination believers ask for proof why it is false when the indoctrination theory's proof itself is mere speculation.

We'll never know until Bioware devs stop celebrating and start fixing.

I am not asking to prove that IT is wrong and I don't think anyone else is.

I am simply saying that IT makes the most sense of what we have seen. I do not ask the other side to prove that IT is not true, its a theory, it is not necessarily true, by definition. Evolution is a theory, not a truth.

However, if you want to come and poke hole it the theory you are welcome to. It serves the function of making the theory stronger if we can explain the problems. This is a thread about Indoc Theory, so if you are going to argue that it is wrong, it is expected that you might have to give some reasons.

However, if you come in here and keep repeating things that are not true or have been refuted already, such as indoctrination works a certain way because I said so, or the hero of a story can't do something that no one else has done, when it is obvious that the hero has done those things, don't expect to get understand and sympathy.

It is true that only BW will be able to settle if IT is correct or not.

Oh, well, then too bad they already did that like 16 hours ago:

"We
would like to clarify that we are actively and seriously taking all
player feedback into consideration and have ruled nothing out. At this
time we are still collecting and considering your feedback and have not
made a decision regarding requests to change the ending."

www.facebook.com/masseffect/posts/275243029217754

But by all means look for the details that support your fan fiction deep inside the game, analyze all the movement glitches, the gazes and what not, while completely ignoring that the endings we have are the endings they wanted us to have. Bury your heads deeper into the sand and play into the the community polarization scheme they have provided for you. Why do I even bother ?

[Jaze55]

nyogen wrote...

Grusome11 wrote...

DnVill wrote...

I don't get why Indoctrination believers ask for proof why it is false when the indoctrination theory's proof itself is mere speculation.

We'll never know until Bioware devs stop celebrating and start fixing.

I am not asking to prove that IT is wrong and I don't think anyone else is.

I am simply saying that IT makes the most sense of what we have seen. I do not ask the other side to prove that IT is not true, its a theory, it is not necessarily true, by definition. Evolution is a theory, not a truth.

However, if you want to come and poke hole it the theory you are welcome to. It serves the function of making the theory stronger if we can explain the problems. This is a thread about Indoc Theory, so if you are going to argue that it is wrong, it is expected that you might have to give some reasons.

However, if you come in here and keep repeating things that are not true or have been refuted already, such as indoctrination works a certain way because I said so, or the hero of a story can't do something that no one else has done, when it is obvious that the hero has done those things, don't expect to get understand and sympathy.

It is true that only BW will be able to settle if IT is correct or not.

Oh, well, then too bad they already did that like 16 hours ago:

"We
would like to clarify that we are actively and seriously taking all
player feedback into consideration and have ruled nothing out. At this
time we are still collecting and considering your feedback and have not
made a decision regarding requests to change the ending."

www.facebook.com/masseffect/posts/275243029217754

But by all means look for the details that support your fan fiction deep inside the game, analyze all the movement glitches, the gazes and what not, while completely ignoring that the endings we have are the endings they wanted us to have. Bury your heads deeper into the sand and play into the the community polarization scheme they have provided for you. Why do I even bother ?

Dam I wish I saw that 4 hours ago would have saved me a lot of time. 

[Denora]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Denora wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

This is why, please try to keep a cool head. It's the name calling and insults that get people fired up. I welcome evidence on either case but the context of the posts is insulting and borderline harrassment. Please lets keep things civil?

I'm sure you meant well but not everyone took it that way.

Sorry it's really not my problem people are defensive. I have done nothing but be civil, provide evidence backing my cause through research, that I also took the time to provide for everyone to see, yet I am called a troll and dismissed.

I've seen you post in several threads, and even looking back at this one. No offense, but it's not exactly the most cool and civil discussions.

I do agree with you though, people shouldn't insult you and call you a troll either.

Now then can we get back on topic?

Personally i believe in the Indoc Theory (mostly due to hope), but evidence is shoddy at best. I think there wont be any solid evidence of either side until they give some anouncement regarding the ending.

[ArkkAngel007]

nyogen wrote...

Grusome11 wrote...

DnVill wrote...

I don't get why Indoctrination believers ask for proof why it is false when the indoctrination theory's proof itself is mere speculation.

We'll never know until Bioware devs stop celebrating and start fixing.

I am not asking to prove that IT is wrong and I don't think anyone else is.

I am simply saying that IT makes the most sense of what we have seen. I do not ask the other side to prove that IT is not true, its a theory, it is not necessarily true, by definition. Evolution is a theory, not a truth.

However, if you want to come and poke hole it the theory you are welcome to. It serves the function of making the theory stronger if we can explain the problems. This is a thread about Indoc Theory, so if you are going to argue that it is wrong, it is expected that you might have to give some reasons.

However, if you come in here and keep repeating things that are not true or have been refuted already, such as indoctrination works a certain way because I said so, or the hero of a story can't do something that no one else has done, when it is obvious that the hero has done those things, don't expect to get understand and sympathy.

It is true that only BW will be able to settle if IT is correct or not.

Oh, well, then too bad they already did that like 16 hours ago:

"We
would like to clarify that we are actively and seriously taking all
player feedback into consideration and have ruled nothing out. At this
time we are still collecting and considering your feedback and have not
made a decision regarding requests to change the ending."

www.facebook.com/masseffect/posts/275243029217754

But by all means look for the details that support your fan fiction deep inside the game, analyze all the movement glitches, the gazes and what not, while completely ignoring that the endings we have are the endings they wanted us to have. Bury your heads deeper into the sand and play into the the community polarization scheme they have provided for you. Why do I even bother ?

IT explains behind the ending, not a concept for changing the ending.  It's not a fan fiction.  Some people may be pulling things from thin air in attempts to try and prove it, but the core theory is using what the game provides to EXPLAIN, not fill or replace, the plot holes.

It's speculation.  It doesn't change/replace/refute the endings.  It isn't meant to declare/confirm post-game DLC.

So to your question, you probably shouldn't if you don't understand why the theory came about in the first place, instead of judging it by the excited jumpstarters who throw it around like candy at a parade.

Modifié par ArkkAngel007, 19 mars 2012 - 10:19 .

[Cucobr]

MassEffected555, is pretty simple.

I made you a simple question, and you simply avoid it. And then continues to post the same thing over and over again.

You can't denied the Indoctrination Theory because you can't answer what I ask.

[Grusome11]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Grusome11 wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Detha wrote...

Partly synthetic is not fully synthetic. It can be assumed by the player that perhaps destroying himself partially means Shepard would die.

However, it leaves it for interpretation as well. For the record, Shepard only received implants to mend his bones when he was recreated with the lazarus project (I imagine that would function like a cast, and at this point his bones would be mended), as the other fixings he had were not verbally stated to be implants.  His other implants are the performance implants based on his class.

In the synthesis ending, Shepard disintegrates before our eyes, and in the description for the control ending, it is stated clearly that Shepard would die.

The only ending that both verbally and visually leaves things up in the air concerning Shepard's fate is the destroy one.  And if you have over 4/5000+ EMS, you get a treat

And like another poster said, if the Star Child was capable of lying, would he make the other endings sound bad at all? It doesn't really add up.

There is still the problem at how a nearly dead human, now without the aid of synthetics provided he survived their destruction, lived through the destruction of the Citadel, vacuum, atmospheric reentry, and high velocity impact onto terra.  Space magic can't even save people there.

That doesn't leave much to interpretation, and is the main thing keeping my opinion from accepting the endings at face-value with no string pulling.  

Indoc Theory would say that Shep never went to the Citadel. Everything after getting hit by the Harbinger's red beam is in his mind and is part of an attempt to indoctrinate him.

Correct, and that is the only thing you can't really explain outside of it either being a plot hole or space-magic (which again, works well with breathing masks, but the above situation would even kill Voldemort's 7-8 lives at one-go, and that only into the atmosphere----that was a joke).

I don't understand what you wrote.

[Jaze55]

Denora wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Denora wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

This is why, please try to keep a cool head. It's the name calling and insults that get people fired up. I welcome evidence on either case but the context of the posts is insulting and borderline harrassment. Please lets keep things civil?

I'm sure you meant well but not everyone took it that way.

Sorry it's really not my problem people are defensive. I have done nothing but be civil, provide evidence backing my cause through research, that I also took the time to provide for everyone to see, yet I am called a troll and dismissed.

I've seen you post in several threads, and even looking back at this one. No offense, but it's not exactly the most cool and civil discussions.

I do agree with you though, people shouldn't insult you and call you a troll either.

Now then can we get back on topic?

Personally i believe in the Indoc Theory (mostly due to hope), but evidence is shoddy at best. I think there wont be any solid evidence of either side until they give some anouncement regarding the ending.

I am all for talking about it. But I am giving reasons why it fails. It would just break all the lore and mechanics in the game. That is all I have pointed out. All I have gotten is - Well BW can do anything with Shep he is the hero.

OK then I get that. But why is it OK to allow Shepard to do something completely new and extra ordinary, but it is not OK for them to make the endings as fantastical as they are?

FYI- I hate the endings and want them changed, but not at the price of breaking all the game lore and mechanics already in place. It would completely invalidate the ME universe. 

[Jaze55]

Cucobr wrote...

MassEffected555, is pretty simple.

I made you a simple question, and you simply avoid it. And then continues to post the same thing over and over again.

You can't denied the Indoctrination Theory because you can't answer what I ask.

Where to much posting I cant keep up. Ill find it and reply.

[Jaze55]

Cucobr wrote...

MassEffected555, is pretty simple.

I made you a simple question, and you simply avoid it. And then continues to post the same thing over and over again.

You can't denied the Indoctrination Theory because you can't answer what I ask.

Actually no I won't answer. You are just going to call me a troll again, not wasting my time with you.

Have a nice day though. 

[jaze89]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Denora wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

This is why, please try to keep a cool head. It's the name calling and insults that get people fired up. I welcome evidence on either case but the context of the posts is insulting and borderline harrassment. Please lets keep things civil?

I'm sure you meant well but not everyone took it that way.

Sorry it's really not my problem people are defensive. I have done nothing but be civil, provide evidence backing my cause through research, that I also took the time to provide for everyone to see, yet I am called a troll and dismissed.

I think you're a troll but regardless even if you aren't you've not even been close to being civil and when someone tries to give a counter point all you say, paraphrased, "IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THAN YOU BELIEVE IN SPACE MAGIC THEREFORE YOU CAN'T HATE THE ENDING LOLOLOLOL!"

That doesn't scream civility to me, not in the least.

[Mann42]

Detha wrote...

And like another poster said, if the Star Child was capable of lying, would he make the other endings sound bad at all? It doesn't really add up.

Maybe because, in order for the Indoctrination to take hold, he needs Shepard to believe he is done fighting and sacrifice himself. He can't lie to Shepard about that part, or he won't surrender fully. 

All three options spell out your death differently, but all promise death: 
Destroy = "You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want. Even you are partly synthetic." 
Control = "You will die. You will control us, but you will lose everything you have." 
Synthesis =  "Add your energy to the Crucible's. Everything you are will be absorbed and then sent out."

Shepard has been prepared to sacrifice himself to save everyone from day one. Based on what the Catalyst says, all of the options will result in your death, but Control and Synthesis both offer you divinity. They both offer you to become God, either directly through Control, or indirectly as a template through Synthesis. 

If Shepard is going to die, it should be for something more than just destruction, right? Despite the common quote and theme from the series that life will never truly be free until we destroy the Reapers.

The choice plays on both your virtue and your hubris, the belief that you can save everyone, that you're somehow stronger and better than everyone else, and that you know what's best for everyone. Look at Saren, TIM, and Benezia. Their downfall is the exact same.

Lastly, Shepard is still fully implanted after his resurrection. Your conversation with Chakwas after she returns to the ship has her checking your Cerberus implants to see how they're doing. If you didn't get the med-bay upgrade in the first game, she mentions that the implants will scar your face again (which they do). I'm pretty sure that if Destroy actually worked, you would be dead. 

Modifié par nexworks, 19 mars 2012 - 10:26 .

[Grusome11]

There is anothe rthread up about why Indoc Theory is wrong.

However, IT is the only thing out there that explains the huge plot hole and illogic regarding what the starchild says.

The usual way to disprove a theory is to replace it with another one that better explains the facts.

If IT is wrong, how do you explain the huge plot hole and illogic in the final ten minutes?

[Jaze55]

jaze89 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Denora wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Cucobr wrote...

stop feeding the troll guys.

See? Anyone that disagrees with your theory and provides in game evidence is a troll.

I go out of my way to research and copy/paste what I find so you don't have to look for it yet I am a troll

I really find that funny. It's nice people true colors are shining through now. 

This is why, please try to keep a cool head. It's the name calling and insults that get people fired up. I welcome evidence on either case but the context of the posts is insulting and borderline harrassment. Please lets keep things civil?

I'm sure you meant well but not everyone took it that way.

Sorry it's really not my problem people are defensive. I have done nothing but be civil, provide evidence backing my cause through research, that I also took the time to provide for everyone to see, yet I am called a troll and dismissed.

I think you're a troll but regardless even if you aren't you've not even been close to being civil and when someone tries to give a counter point all you say, paraphrased, "IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THAN YOU BELIEVE IN SPACE MAGIC THEREFORE YOU CAN'T HATE THE ENDING LOLOLOLOL!"

That doesn't scream civility to me, not in the least.

Because it's true?

If you are going to allow Shepard to all of a sudden be able to do something previously impossible according to the lore and mechanics of the Mass Effect world then why is it not OK to allow the writers to incorperate something that was previously not in the game? (meaning the Catalyst and ... ugh space magic?

Both scenerios don't fit into the lore and mechanics of the game. 

Someone please tell me if I am making no sense because it seems like a pretty simple and rational comparision to me.