230 réponses à ce sujet

[-Zorph-]

OP a few questions, if you will (in no particular order):

1) Why is the boy from the nightmares coincidentally the Star Child, are you trying to tell me he isn't related?
2) Read the Indoc entry in the Codex, it summarizes the final scene almost perfectly.
3) Listen to the Rachni Queen's description of how indoctrination felt in ME1 and ME3, it relates to many things in the final scene.
4) Why can Femshep/A Child/and Manshep all be heard as the one voice of the Star Child, why does he have 3 voices; specifically Female/Male Shepard?
5) How come TIM says "See what they can do" before Shepard shoots Anderson. How would 'they' make him do that, without at least partially controlling his mind, or attempting to.
6) How come TIM appears out of nowhere, there's nowhere to hide near that console. Speaking of which, how did Anderson teleport ahead of you?
7) Why did Anderson mention moving walls and it resembling the Collector ship? First of all, he wasn't even there. Second of all, it's not moving to Shepard.
8) Why are these huge chasms and platforms with weird HUMAN/ALLIANCE NUMBERS UNLIKE ANYTHING THE CITADEL WOULD HAVE in the so-called 'Citadel'. How would the Engineers of the place not seen these huge chasms? Maybe the beam brought them inside Sovereign instead.
9) Going off of 8, why did Sovereign conveniently fly away the second Shepard starts getting up?
10) Why are the trees from your nightmare there when you get up after getting hit by the beam?
11) How did your squadmates survive the beam and then get beamed up to the Normandy? This isn't Star Trek, despite the cameo to Scotty.
12) Why does James and Kaidan mention a hum, when the Indoc codex entry and the Rachni queen mention noises, not to mention the derelict Reaper scientists mentioning the same thing.

Just some food for thought. I respect your opinion, I just feel like there's too many signs the contrary of the OP.

[CrisisOne]

I have question. The reapers practically own most if not all of the galaxy, they have possession of the citadel, and have most if not all the fleets of the asari, turian, human, etc gathered in one place ready to picked apart. Why bother indoctrinating Shepard? I know Harbinger stated he's got plans for Shepard, but at that point in the game wouldn't really matter to the reapers?

Modifié par CrisisOne, 19 mars 2012 - 09:02 .

[greywardencommander]

Also I might be wrong given I've not seen the control ending but someone said he seems to smirk as though he got what he wanted?

[greywardencommander]

CrisisOne wrote...

I have question. The reapers practically own most if not all of the galaxy, they have possession of the citadel, and have most if not all the fleets of the asari, turian, human, etc gathered in one place ready to picked apart. Why bother indoctrinating Shepard? I know Harbinger stated he's got plans for Shepard, but at that point in the game wouldn't really matter to the reapers?

for whatever reason after his exploits in ME1 Harbinger has an unhealthy obsession with Shephard, it is plausible to the point that anhilation is not complete unless it comes from controlling Shephard (whatever motivation that might be)

[CrisisOne]

greywardencommander wrote...

Also I might be wrong given I've not seen the control ending but someone said he seems to smirk as though he got what he wanted?

I noticed that too, I don't know if he smirks but that look he gives is...suspicious.

[A Paperback Hero]

Midnight Eternal wrote...

To add to your point about the gun I'll make an analogy. His gun doesn't run out of ammo for the same reason cars in the GTA series never run out of gas. But people never read too much into that huh?

So with this if, you're right, you at least prove that the ending is so poorly contrived that they had to break their own game's conventions. I.E. give you inifinite ammo cause they had no other way for the scene.

Also nothing you say disproves indoc. If the theory claims are true and its a struggle within the mind while Shepard is unconscious, then anything could be happening as they are dream sequences. The confrontations Shep has within his mind can all be formulations of the mental struggle he is facing to resist control.

Furthermore as it is a dream it is possible for some of the ending outcomes to be Shepard's will broken and him being unable to fight indoc meaning that he is now making choices against his better judgement because he has been influenced.

Your arguement is null as it claims to discount the possibility based off events that are impossible within a structure that has. No limits. The mind.

Last, no literature or information describes the mental battle of indoc or how it may happen within an unconscious mind. If there is then please link it or tell me where to find it I would love to read it.

Thank you for your 'arguement' you are always entitled to your opinion as is those who wish to believe indoc. It was fun to see how you thought you might discount a dream sequence though.

Modifié par A Paperback Hero, 19 mars 2012 - 09:10 .

[Peer of the Empire]

 Nice wall, but again indoc has not been debunked

Under rigorous analysis from the folks at BSN, indoc theory resists all plotholes and fools all logic traps.  Short of someone really bringing up a brilliant point, indoc theory is only false when Bioware intends the endings as literal

Modifié par Peer of the Empire, 19 mars 2012 - 09:11 .

[InfiniteDemise]

atum wrote...

Personally I find it much more interesting to read the arguments on why or why not a theory fits the *story* and less interesting to read why or why not they might plan a DLC or what the business reasons behind something are.  Not that the later is completely invalid, but it's not particularly interesting.

I like the Indoctrination theory because it's interesting.  I'm indifferent to DLC.  Sure a free one might be nice but otherwise I'm not sure I care.

Sure, and it would be fine in that respect. If the Indoc theory was generally protrayed (and yes, I realized that it is by some people) as an alternate ending that is better than the crap we got, it would be a different story.

However, the overwhelming message from pro-Indoc people is that Bioware planned this from the start, and that they're brilliant for uncovering it before Bioware released it to the people.

That is just insane. Bioware did no such thing. Doing that intentionally results in exactly what's happening now: huge outcry, damaging consumer good-will, and straight up financial loss.

And some might feel that it's their job to inject the lone sane voice into a conversation. 

So I hate to break it to you, but you (and I) are just as crazy as the rest.

Guilty, I guess. You might have me there.

[greywardencommander]

CrisisOne wrote...

greywardencommander wrote...

Also I might be wrong given I've not seen the control ending but someone said he seems to smirk as though he got what he wanted?

I noticed that too, I don't know if he smirks but that look he gives is...suspicious.

So it just seems to me that MAYBE (I'm not sure either way I just can't believe Bioware would make so many continuity errors in the last 5-10 minutes, never mind the sudden magic deus ex machina that doesn't fit) all these subtle clues were supposed to show us 'don't worry guys he's indoctrinated, we'll carry on the battle'. If true it is a dangerous marketing ploy, an attempt at a 'real life experiment' of breaking the 4th wall but if it's free dlc, deliberately witheld to 'indoctrinate us' then well regardless of your opinion about right or wrong (unfortunately dlc is here to stay) it would be quite impressive. After all they said ME3 would be the end of the trilogy, and the end of shepard, techinically ME3 + DLC still = ME3 (morally questionnable but still technically true)

[Capeo]

Jesus, people, last night the devs outright said these are the intended endings on Facebook. Indoc is utterly ridiculous. Get over it. Was nobody up after 1 EST last night when these boards exploded? It's confirmed. These are the endings they intended. They softened the message a bit and said they are still considering if they make changes and are still listening to feedback but these are the endings. Give it up already with the indoc crap.

[Tsantilas]

-Zorph- wrote...

OP a few questions, if you will (in no particular order):

1) Why is the boy from the nightmares coincidentally the Star Child, are you trying to tell me he isn't related?
2) Read the Indoc entry in the Codex, it summarizes the final scene almost perfectly.
3) Listen to the Rachni Queen's description of how indoctrination felt in ME1 and ME3, it relates to many things in the final scene.
4) Why can Femshep/A Child/and Manshep all be heard as the one voice of the Star Child, why does he have 3 voices; specifically Female/Male Shepard?
5) How come TIM says "See what they can do" before Shepard shoots Anderson. How would 'they' make him do that, without at least partially controlling his mind, or attempting to.
6) How come TIM appears out of nowhere, there's nowhere to hide near that console. Speaking of which, how did Anderson teleport ahead of you?
7) Why did Anderson mention moving walls and it resembling the Collector ship? First of all, he wasn't even there. Second of all, it's not moving to Shepard.
8) Why are these huge chasms and platforms with weird HUMAN/ALLIANCE NUMBERS UNLIKE ANYTHING THE CITADEL WOULD HAVE in the so-called 'Citadel'. How would the Engineers of the place not seen these huge chasms? Maybe the beam brought them inside Sovereign instead.
9) Going off of 8, why did Sovereign conveniently fly away the second Shepard starts getting up?
10) Why are the trees from your nightmare there when you get up after getting hit by the beam?
11) How did your squadmates survive the beam and then get beamed up to the Normandy? This isn't Star Trek, despite the cameo to Scotty.
12) Why does James and Kaidan mention a hum, when the Indoc codex entry and the Rachni queen mention noises, not to mention the derelict Reaper scientists mentioning the same thing.

Just some food for thought. I respect your opinion, I just feel like there's too many signs the contrary of the OP.

I could have made a massive post picking appart every single tiny detail that people claim supports the Indoctrination theory, but I decided to focus on the major aspects that pretty much hold the entire theory up.  There are many details like the ones you've mentioned that can be written off as inconsistencies, plot devices/space magic, and flavor details that have no significant meaning in relation to the plot.  I can't give you an explanation for most of them, but I feel that they don't really matter if the main points regarding Indoctrination, don't themselves have any relevance to the established Canon.

How did Kai Leng survive being shot in the face 20 times with a Widow in my playthrough?

How did Joker survive the Normandy crash without so much as a sprained finger?  He's practically made of glass yet he walks out without a single scratch.

How did some ancient civilization design the crucible without knowing what it does, how it works, or how it interracts with the catalyst?  How did each cycle since the initial design keep adding to the it, without knowing any of that either? 

Why did Shepard find it more reasonable to spend every single resource on a mystical space magic powered superweapon of questionable origin and purpose, rather than outfitting every ship in the galaxy with Thanix Cannons?

Compared to questions like that I find it humorous that people are using issues such as a gun having infinite ammo, or trees as evidence to support the theory. 

Shepard goes into the crucible (in the hallucination or whatever) not having any idea how exactly it works, other than it is supposed to defeat the reapers.  The Starchild/Harbinger kid could have easily told him that there is only 1 function, and that is Synthesis and Shepard wouldn't have been the any the wiser.

[Sibbwolf]

Tsantilas wrote...
The reapers are not so petty to go after shepard for some mere vendetta.

Let's ignore that Shepard is the 'Hero', shall we? Commander of the most advanced ship, the reason all these races came together, the one on which all the galaxy's hopes are based...

So, yes, it's more than a mere vendetta. The reapers are taking losses (How many has died as a result of Shepard's actions? And we know reapers are being destroyed elsewhere), and Shepard is their best hope to minimise future losses.

Their logic is supposedly out of mortal realms.  Harbinger is going to go after Shepard because he picked on his little brothers?  That makes no sense.  Again, a pawn is only useful as long as you have someone to manipulate.  It takes 100s of years for the Reapers to conquer the Protheans, but I'm pretty sure the whole Prothean fleet and army wasn't in the same system to be whiped out in 1 cleaving swipe.

Reading comprehension fail, or intentionally missing the point?

The whole point is to make Shepard an AGENT (see Illusive man and Saren), not a mere pawn (pawns being husks, cannibals, marauders).

If they kill everyone in SOL system they've practically won, and Shepard won't make any difference.

Except that we know other races have more forces and ships elsewhere, and regardless of how the battle over Earth turns out, the Reapers are going to take losses elsewhere once they move out again. Shepard's indoctrination - because of his stature - offers a good chance to reduce losses.

Modifié par Sibbwolf, 19 mars 2012 - 09:14 .

[effortname]

Capeo wrote...

Jesus, people, last night the devs outright said these are the intended endings on Facebook. Indoc is utterly ridiculous. Get over it. Was nobody up after 1 EST last night when these boards exploded? It's confirmed. These are the endings they intended. They softened the message a bit and said they are still considering if they make changes and are still listening to feedback but these are the endings. Give it up already with the indoc crap.

We know. We're saying it's the best possible choice for a continuation of the ending without compromising the rest of the game at all.

[-Zorph-]

Capeo wrote...

Jesus, people, last night the devs outright said these are the intended endings on Facebook. Indoc is utterly ridiculous. Get over it. Was nobody up after 1 EST last night when these boards exploded? It's confirmed. These are the endings they intended. They softened the message a bit and said they are still considering if they make changes and are still listening to feedback but these are the endings. Give it up already with the indoc crap.

It's not confirmed until they say it's confirmed in a formal statement that doesn't get deleted immediately on a social network site. When they release a press statement for shareholders and other parties, then I'll know the concrete answer.

Just because you have no hope, doesn't mean some of us don't. Don't tell me what my mind can do or can't do. You're an individual conforming to society and thinking that you must believe everything you're told.  I think independently, and my opinion is not 'wrong'.  I respect your opinion, but clearly you don't respect ours.

[Rusty0918]

Tsantilas - You are assuming that Shepard is ALREADY indoctrinated. That's not the case here. The Reapers are trying to break through Shepard's mental barriers to GET him indoctrinated, which is, if the IT theory is true, if he chooses Control or Synthesis. Once they break through, it's easier for them to fudge up your mind. Once the barriers are broken, THEN it becomes pretty much irreversable.

[MyEternalReward]

Tsantilas wrote...

Sibbwolf wrote...

Tsantilas wrote...

I'll ask a question that I edited into the OP, now that I remembered it:

Indoctrinating Shepard at this stage of the war serves no purpose.

Indoctrination is not always a quick process. See Saren, Illusive man.. and read the books!

For all practical purposes, killing him would have the same result,


Agent vs pawn. Subtle influence of a powerful individual is far more valuable than turning that individual into a pawn.

and the reapers will win unless someone else activates the Crucible.


Irrelevent.

Indoctrinating Shepard wouldn't help their war in any way, as the time of politics and such is long past.


Wrong. It takes 100s of years for the Reapers to conquer the Protheans, and if you pay attention in ME3, the Earth gvt orders troops to arrest/kill anyone "provoking" the reapers - "in the name of peace".

So why bother? Harbinger obviously meant to kill Shepard with the deathray during the charge, and his survival is a fluke at best. So why bother with Indoctrination?

The greatest weapon to use against any army is it's own hero - if he can be turned or tricked, the power of the force can be sapped away without a battle.

The reapers are not so petty to go after shepard for some mere vendetta.  Their logic is supposedly out of mortal realms.  Harbinger is going to go after Shepard because he picked on his little brothers?  That makes no sense.  Again, a pawn is only useful as long as you have someone to manipulate.  It takes 100s of years for the Reapers to conquer the Protheans, but I'm pretty sure the whole Prothean fleet and army wasn't in the same system to be whiped out in 1 cleaving swipe.  If they kill everyone in SOL system they've practically won, and Shepard won't make any difference.

I'm sure if the greatest/bravest soldier to live (and the galaxy's last hope for survival) was turned into a mindless zombie, I'm sure everyone would give up all hope.

[Jaze55]

-Zorph- wrote...

OP a few questions, if you will (in no particular order):

1) Why is the boy from the nightmares coincidentally the Star Child, are you trying to tell me he isn't related?
2) Read the Indoc entry in the Codex, it summarizes the final scene almost perfectly.
3) Listen to the Rachni Queen's description of how indoctrination felt in ME1 and ME3, it relates to many things in the final scene.
4) Why can Femshep/A Child/and Manshep all be heard as the one voice of the Star Child, why does he have 3 voices; specifically Female/Male Shepard?
5) How come TIM says "See what they can do" before Shepard shoots Anderson. How would 'they' make him do that, without at least partially controlling his mind, or attempting to.
6) How come TIM appears out of nowhere, there's nowhere to hide near that console. Speaking of which, how did Anderson teleport ahead of you?
7) Why did Anderson mention moving walls and it resembling the Collector ship? First of all, he wasn't even there. Second of all, it's not moving to Shepard.
8) Why are these huge chasms and platforms with weird HUMAN/ALLIANCE NUMBERS UNLIKE ANYTHING THE CITADEL WOULD HAVE in the so-called 'Citadel'. How would the Engineers of the place not seen these huge chasms? Maybe the beam brought them inside Sovereign instead.
9) Going off of 8, why did Sovereign conveniently fly away the second Shepard starts getting up?
10) Why are the trees from your nightmare there when you get up after getting hit by the beam?
11) How did your squadmates survive the beam and then get beamed up to the Normandy? This isn't Star Trek, despite the cameo to Scotty.
12) Why does James and Kaidan mention a hum, when the Indoc codex entry and the Rachni queen mention noises, not to mention the derelict Reaper scientists mentioning the same thing.

Just some food for thought. I respect your opinion, I just feel like there's too many signs the contrary of the OP.

1- The child embodies all of Shepards greif. Read this please and educate yourself. Ignorance is not a good trait. http://www.asdreams...._nightmares.htm 

2-Once again doesn't matter. No one in the history of the game is able to break free of indoctrination. Effects are irreversable. People that did break free did so for a tiny amount of time, before they started doing the Reapers will again.

3- The sour notes? Explain exactly what you mean please because I cant answer something so vague.

4- Bioware wanted to be cool and mysterious? 

5- The entire Cerubus mission explains this. Maybe pay attention a little to in game lore?

6- Bad writing and TIM could have been on the side of where you entered. Like hiding behind a wall when you walk into a room. I can hide from someoene just by standing off to the side when they walk in, not a big mystery. Try it yourself.

7- Its called being debriefed. Shep told them all about the ship. The wall does in fact move right before you get to the bridge

8 - Again explained in the games. The keepers are in charge of that, it tells you in both ME1 and ME2 that no one knows all the secrets of the citadel

9- Harrbringer did. I can't find it but you are welcome to try but I know I read they deleted a scene where Joker attacks Harrgringer to get him away from the battle. Joker and the Normandy I should say.

10- Oversight. Nothing you should be grasping at.

11- See 9

12 - I guess Kaiden and James are indoctrinated to then if they can hear the hum. 

I really think you don't know as much about the games lore as you think you do because some of those questions were clearly answered in the games.

[agathokakological]

I'm not going to be so rude as to say you are confused, but I will say that you are misinformed on indoctrination. You have a firm grasp of the fan theory, but the lore you're a little shakey on. Not by much, but just enough to bring up some key issues. I will try to be brief.

Tsantilas wrote...

If the reapers use indoctrination on someone, their way of thinking is altered to follow reaper doctrine.  After a while, the subject becomes a full blown slave who isn't in control of his actions.  The subject never makes a choice to join the reapers, nor does he become tricked.  He simply joins them without knowing he has changed.

...



As such, if Harbinger did use indoctrination on Shepard, we would not have the whole ending sequence.  Shepard would simply become Indoctrinated. 

edit: Not to mention, that Indoctrinating Shepard at this stage of the war serves no purpose.  For all practical purposes, killing him would have the same result, and the reapers will win unless someone else activates the Crucible.

Your first paragraph is almost absolutely correct, the problem is that you contradict yourself later. The lore states that indoctrination is a gradual process, not one that is "activated" or "imposed" by the Reapers, or by a specific Reaper, but just something that happens when someone is near Reaper technology for a while. Therefore, Harbinger doesn't "use indoctrination." Instead, prolonged exposure to Reaper tech (Sovereign, Collector Base, Derelict Reaper, Human Reaper, Arrival, Rannoch, Harbinger's beam itself) would let it sink in, possibly triggered by the stress of the situation, a concussion from the blast, etc.

The process is so gradual that the indoctrinated don't realize they're indoctrinated (ie, Saren, TIM). There is nothing in the canon that states they cannot be tricked. What goes on in the mind between being free-willed and being indoctrinated has never been explored. It would be a compelling argument to say that a strong way of enslaving someone to your will is to convince them that they are an ally, or simply not a threat. Saren spoke of talking to Sovereign, and reasoning with him, to which their conclusion was the same as Shepard's Synthesis ending. This sounds very similar to Shepard's conversation with the Catalyst.


Also, the salarians on Virmire were test subjects in Saren's lab testing indoctrination in general, not just Reaper indoctrination (using the Thorian from Feros). As such, they are not analogous to this situation.

If the Starchild is infact an illusion created by Harbinger to fool shepard, then the options provided make no sense from an "evil villain" point of view.  There is no logical reason for Harbinger to give Shepard the option to break out of Indoctrination.  A true villain would simply lie about the destroy ending and make the other 2 options seem much more attractive options, or disregard the destroy option all together in order to trick the hero.

This is untrue on a number of levels. First of all, logistically for Bioware, the player would have to find a way to get out of indoctrination if that was the case. If nothing else, they would have to have a destroy option because that's been the goal the whole time. Not including it wouldn't make sense in the narrative. As far as indoctrination, it's a common behavioral tool used in psychology, to show the option that the subject is naturally inclined towards, and then painting that as the "bad" option. It turns things around, making the subject self-conscious, and question their own way of answering the question. This makes them more susceptible to being convinced to choose another option. For a quick example, you can choose a carrot or a slice of cake. You want the cake, but if I said the cake will give you gas or is a flavor you don't like, the carrot seems more appealing. Then, if I say the carrot has unique health benefits, you're more inclined towards the carrot. In this instance, the Catalyst says about the Destroy option, "the peace won't last, all synthetics (EDI comes to mind) will die, you are part synthetic (self-preservation may be at stake)," and then he plays up the other two as being more preferrable to Destroy. Do you see the resemblence?

It is established canon that there is no indoctrination "attempt" or "trial".  A Person simply becomes indoctrinated...  This leaves no room for continuation of Shepard's story.

Actually, in the novels, indoctrination is often described in "attempts." When Paul Grayson resists indoctrination, it's written that he hears a growling sound, like a Reaper.

Would they risk an entire franchise on some marketting ploy?

The franchise is over after this game, they have no more money to reap (ahhhh) from it, other than DLC. It makes perfect sense to starve the fanbase when there is no future purchase other than DLC. Notice how so many people on these forums are more likely to buy DLC, as long as it provides an ending? Also, this is EA we're talking about.

The Control ending eyes/scars have no relevance.  It's simply a visual representation of shepard being disintegrated in the process of becoming "reaper king".

I would be tempted to agree with you. At first, I thought that was kind of stretching it. After all, it was the BLUE ENDING, of course his eyes would be blue. But the same thing happens in the Synthesis ending, when everything else is green. Why have blue eyes then? And, eyes that are identical to TIM's, at that, pattern and all? Saren's eyes were also unique in a similar fashion. Not conclusive, but very strong evidence.

So every ending except Destroy with high EMS is a bad ending. So all the other endings are "you lose"

... like indoctrination.

So that means that unless you shell out 10 bucks to Bioware for the so called "real ending" DLC, you will not experience the end of the Mass Effect franchise.

The Indoctrination Theory contracticts... everything Bioware advertised the game as being about.

Yes, that's why we're upset.

Not to mention that it doesn't actually leave room for continuation of the story because Shepard will be a braindead husk...

Unless you chose the Destroy option and didn't give in to indoctrination.

Again, you make a stunning argument against indoctrination theory, but your information is a little skewed. Hopefully this counter-argument has at least let you reconsider the indoctrination theory. I would love to hear further responses to this analysis from both sides.

Modifié par agathokakological, 19 mars 2012 - 09:20 .

[blooregard]

f you don't mind me saying could shepard's ability to possibly resist indoctronation be an effect of his time exposed to the thorian? I mean he walked around zhu's hope, walked down and talked to the thorian and ran around shooting the thorian

[effortname]

How did Kai Leng survive being shot in the face 20 times with a Widow in my playthrough?

Biotic barriers and shields. He was doing some kind of crouchy tiger thing to regenerate.

How
did Joker survive the Normandy crash without so much as a sprained
finger?  He's practically made of glass yet he walks out without a
single scratch.

This supports the indoctrination theory since it refutes the factual basis of the current ending.

How did some ancient civilization design the
crucible without knowing what it does, how it works, or how it
interracts with the catalyst?  How did each cycle since the initial
design keep adding to the it, without knowing any of that either? 

The Crucible is a reaper trap that comes up as a last resort if the cycle offers a strong resistance. It wastes their resources and maybe has a nefarious purpose.

Why
did Shepard find it more reasonable to spend every single resource on a
mystical space magic powered superweapon of questionable origin and
purpose, rather than outfitting every ship in the galaxy with Thanix
Cannons?

He knew they needed some kind of deus ex machina to win against the Reapers; you should assume the Thanix upgrades happened anyway. Also note that the Quarians/Geth joined at the last minute, and that Krogans don't have a fleet.

Shepard goes into the
crucible (in the hallucination or whatever) not having any idea how
exactly it works, other than it is supposed to defeat the reapers.  The
Starchild/Harbinger kid could have easily told him that there is only 1
function, and that is Synthesis and Shepard wouldn't have been the any
the wiser.

Again, it's a metaphorical representation of the battle between Shepard's inner mind and Harbinger. There are multiple choices because Harbinger is trying to weed himself into Shepard's decision making process.

[Sibbwolf]

MassEffected555 wrote...

1- The child embodies all of Shepards greif. Read this please and educate yourself. Ignorance is not a good trait. http://www.asdreams...._nightmares.htm

Then how/why would the catalyst take the form of said child?

2-Once again doesn't matter. No one in the history of the game is able to break free of indoctrination. Effects are irreversable. People that did break free did so for a tiny amount of time, before they started doing the Reapers will again.

How many years between the first contact war and Saren's eventual indoctrination? Same question for TIM. Don't assume it's always a quick process.

3- The sour notes? Explain exactly what you mean please because I cant answer something so vague.

The sour notes are how the rachni queens perceive(d) the indoctrination process, since their communication takes the form of colour and music.

Note, the queen from ME1 and 3 successfully breaks free form indoctrination at least twice, and does not commit suicide.

12 - I guess Kaiden and James are indoctrinated to then if they can hear the hum. 

I really think you don't know as much about the games lore as you think you do because some of those questions were clearly answered in the games.

You have read the books, right?

10- Oversight. Nothing you should be grasping at.

Addition of trees and change of ambient effects is merely an "Oversight"?

Interesting theory in itself.

Modifié par Sibbwolf, 19 mars 2012 - 09:26 .

[NinjaBoyGT]

Personally I don't think that the ending is Harbinger actively trying to indoctrinate Shepard but rather a combination of Harbinger/Reaper presence, adrenalin and unconsciousness causing Shepard's subconscious to battle the final stages of indoctrination.

None of anything shown in the ending is directly controlled by Harbinger or any Reaper it is all representative of Shepard's mind. Anderson is Shepard's strength of will, the Illusive Man is the indoctrinated portion and the Starchild the actual representation of the indoctrination.

The 'ending choices' are just representations of the paths Shepard can take to either break free, fall fully under control or the synthesis which I think is continuing on as is, no breaking free but not fully succumbing either.

[greywardencommander]

Capeo wrote...

Jesus, people, last night the devs outright said these are the intended endings on Facebook. Indoc is utterly ridiculous. Get over it. Was nobody up after 1 EST last night when these boards exploded? It's confirmed. These are the endings they intended. They softened the message a bit and said they are still considering if they make changes and are still listening to feedback but these are the endings. Give it up already with the indoc crap.

that was a 'misunderstanding' based on the initial question so I'm not going to incinuate anything until they formally say, these are the endings, this is why. If they do that at the very least we need to have explained, why that ending and what actually happened re Joker & your party member ditching you at the last minute and managing to set off to escape before you yourself have even found out what's going to happen.

[effortname]

NinjaBoyGT wrote...

Personally I don't think that the ending is Harbinger actively trying to indoctrinate Shepard but rather a combination of Harbinger/Reaper presence, adrenalin and unconsciousness causing Shepard's subconscious to battle the final stages of indoctrination.

None of anything shown in the ending is directly controlled by Harbinger or any Reaper it is all representative of Shepard's mind. Anderson is Shepard's strength of will, the Illusive Man is the indoctrinated portion and the Starchild the actual representation of the indoctrination.

The 'ending choices' are just representations of the paths Shepard can take to either break free, fall fully under control or the synthesis which I think is continuing on as is, no breaking free but not fully succumbing either.

The indoctrination theory is just a variation of "it was all a dream" so your theory is equally valid.

[greywardencommander]

NinjaBoyGT wrote...

Personally I don't think that the ending is Harbinger actively trying to indoctrinate Shepard but rather a combination of Harbinger/Reaper presence, adrenalin and unconsciousness causing Shepard's subconscious to battle the final stages of indoctrination.

None of anything shown in the ending is directly controlled by Harbinger or any Reaper it is all representative of Shepard's mind. Anderson is Shepard's strength of will, the Illusive Man is the indoctrinated portion and the Starchild the actual representation of the indoctrination.

The 'ending choices' are just representations of the paths Shepard can take to either break free, fall fully under control or the synthesis which I think is continuing on as is, no breaking free but not fully succumbing either.

that is how I felt too, that it is all abstract representations in Shepards mind influenced by his exposure, or even a 'near death experience' causing him to have this temporary faze out. For example the Normany scene and Joker and crew etc was his undying hope that no matter what his friends and those he loved most will survive.