384 réponses à ce sujet

[Baihu1983]

3:37

stay tuned, im not done yet - Sheen

[CavScout]

cdancidhe wrote...

It is clear is was an indoctrination attempt (illusion).

It is not.

There are tons of clues like the unlimited ammo, dream like voices, inverted numbers, inverted choices, the black tentacles on the screen, and many others.

Game-play elements =/= Indoctrination evidence

Bioware wanted to test indoctrination on players… would they still destroy the reapers or let them live, hence get indoctrinated.

What?

My only concern is that they are waiting too much to reveal the true and many gamers are returning/exchanging the game. I am also concern at how many DLCs they will use to end the game and how much $$. They may milk us for a while, although I have the feeling that if they don’t provide one big DLC, fans are simply going to drop.

Conspiracy theories as support for indoctrination theory is pathetic.

[PlumPaul93]

the indoctrination theory is false and stupid

Yep.

[Phearmonger]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

Madosu wrote...

Or maybe Shepard wasn't indoctrinated until when Harbinger blasts him/her in the face

So if the whole point is to stop shepard, why would you bother screwing with his mind at all when Shep is laying there unconcious? He's literally knocked out RIGHT THERE. All Harby has to do is step on him or hit him with the laser. 

But Harby instead decideds the best way to stop Shepard is to start indoctrinating him while he's knocked out, and then fly away leaving the path to the beam undefended? Nope, sorry. I don't buy it at all.

Easy. In Mass Effect 2 we see Harby expressing a very personal interest in Shepard. Killing Shepard is one thing; indoctrinating Shepard and parading him/her around to the opposing troops would be utterly demoralizing to them, and might even create a very powerful weapon for the Reapers. Harby has a vendetta against Shepard. This is about more than killing. This is about completely owning Shepard.

The flying away part is arguably part of the "in the mind" section, so there is no logic problem there. According to the theory, AFAIK, Shepard never left the ground, so there was no leaving the beam unprotected. In fact, if one were to continue after the in the head sequence, you might arguably have a bit where Harbinger is temporarily stunned by the failed indoctrination attempt (plausible IMO) and Shepard gets up, dodges past a beam when Harbinger recovers (saw that happen already beforehand with a different reaper) and before another beam can be brought to bear Shepard sprints into the Conduit.

[Phearmonger]

"Game-play elements =/= Indoctrination evidence"

Why not? The choices you have to make are clearly mis-colored for what you are doing. Either the art manager was drunk or they deliberately mis-colored those elements to reflect the deception being foisted upon Shepard. And when you are given the interrupt to save Anderson from TIM's gun to the head, it's a renegade interrupt. Shouldn't that be a paragon interrupt, saving an innocent from a murderer? Games often blur the screen and reverse or affect controls to convey drunkenness. How is this different?

[Rusty0918]

Phearmonger wrote...

"Game-play elements =/= Indoctrination evidence"

Why not? The choices you have to make are clearly mis-colored for what you are doing. Either the art manager was drunk or they deliberately mis-colored those elements to reflect the deception being foisted upon Shepard. And when you are given the interrupt to save Anderson from TIM's gun to the head, it's a renegade interrupt. Shouldn't that be a paragon interrupt, saving an innocent from a murderer? Games often blur the screen and reverse or affect controls to convey drunkenness. How is this different?

Yes. You see, Anderson's option, destroy the Reapers, is colored red as a Renegade option when he's clearly a Paragon, while TIM's option, which is Control, is colored blue as a Paragon option when he's clearly a Renegade. And the big trick to top you all off is that in-between trick, the synthesis. As that latest video pointed out and in an article, that's what Saren was wanting to do.

The big clue is Shepard's breathing amongts the rubble if you have high enough EMS and you choose the Destroy option. You don't get this clip at all with the Control or Syntehsis options.

The indoctrination theory actually brings complete coherence to what is otherwise considered to be "space magic." Think about it. What would make more sense? The indoctrination theory, or space magic?

[Forgomoth]

kathic wrote...

A player may choose to kill Ashly Williams when she is protecting Udina in ME3. Shepard then leaves her body there and there is no significant emotional moment. This is contrary to when Mordin is killed and a highly charged scence results. Williams is far more integral to the story that Mordin. The brushoff that Williams recieves is evidence of poor writing of the scence.

If you choose to shoot Ashley/Kaiden, then you probably don't care (and are indoctrinated, like me).  Also, if they drew out the scene to make it more emotional, they would lose the purpose of the event.  I think was meant to make the player feel rushed, hectic, and grasping for control of the situation.  As you'd expect when a bastion of tranquility (the Citadel) is suddenly invaded.  A decision like killing a squadmate would have to be contemplated after everything else is taken care of, not while there's still an immediate threat.

[pharsti]

No need to call them stupid, the people who believe in it are just in so much denial, that they prefer to not have an ending.

They just.... knock heads on a convoluted fanfic and prefer to imagine their ending on their head...

[Forgomoth]

Rusty0918 wrote...
...Think about it. What would make more sense? The indoctrination theory, or space magic?

Hey!  Don't make fun of my Space Magic...

[CavScout]

Phearmonger wrote...

"Game-play elements =/= Indoctrination evidence"

Why not? The choices you have to make are clearly mis-colored for what you are doing. Either the art manager was drunk or they deliberately mis-colored those elements to reflect the deception being foisted upon Shepard. And when you are given the interrupt to save Anderson from TIM's gun to the head, it's a renegade interrupt. Shouldn't that be a paragon interrupt, saving an innocent from a murderer? Games often blur the screen and reverse or affect controls to convey drunkenness. How is this different?

Simply because it's not. The indoctrination theory is funny. Anything that would contradict it is simply thrown out as being a figment of the indoctrination theory.

As for the colors, I am not sure they are colored incorrectly. It seems that BW thinks the Synthesis option to be the optimal solution. The "Kill them All!" option is red, which actually fits if you think about it.

As for the Anderson/TIM, shooting is the easy option since you can talk TIM into not killing Anderson.

Why do you think Shepperd is drunk?

[Phearmonger]

McAlternate009 wrote...

I love the idea of the indoctrination ending but I thought all this had been settled by this article:

www.gameranx.com/updates/id/5623/article/the-final-hours-of-mass-effect-3-sheds-light-on-controversial-ending/

 "And as for complaints that the game's three endings don't provide enough variety? As late as November, the developers were considering at least one drastically different ending that was eventually scrapped. The sequence would have seen the player lose control of Commander Shepard, revealing that he or she had actually been indoctrinated by the Reapers. This ending was eventually cut for technical reasons, as the team was having a hard time making the gameplay mechanic work alongside dialogue choices."

Sorry for all these responses, but I've been dealing with each as I read them since there are so many posts. This states that there was a scene they were considering where Commander Shepard HAD BEEN indoctrinated. If the indoctrination theory is true, Shep would have been indoctrinated only after the final choice, depending on the choice made. So the said scene would have happened AFTER the current ending. Since nothing exists after the current ending, it was cut. I don't see the theory being disproven there.

Now, I don't believe much of the Indoc theory because I desperately want a better ending. I didn't really hate the ending, although I wasn't amazed by it either. I believe the theory because, from what I've seen, it makes the most sense. I find it harder to believe that a team that delivered a fairly coherent narrative up until that point suddenly devolved into utter ridiculousness, and the seemingly deliberate use of gameplay elements indicating that things are not what they seem provide strong evidence that this was a very deliberate attempt to create a more allegorical sequence than most of the game provided.

[Forgomoth]

pharsti wrote...

No need to call them stupid, the people who believe in it are just in so much denial, that they prefer to not have an ending.

They just.... knock heads on a convoluted fanfic and prefer to imagine their ending on their head...

But that's exactly what BioWare wants us to do.

Wait...  So if BioWare wants us to speculate and come to our "own" conclusions...  Then the Indoctrination Theorists are also indoctrinated, as well as the Ending Haters, and the Complacents....

WERE ALL INDOCTRINATED !!!

Modifié par Forgomoth, 20 mars 2012 - 09:14 .

[CavScout]

Rusty0918 wrote...
The big clue is Shepard's breathing amongts the rubble if you have high enough EMS and you choose the Destroy option. You don't get this clip at all with the Control or Syntehsis options.

That's not a clue for indoctrination, it's simply the fact that only in the destroy option do you not sacrifice your body.

[CavScout]

Forgomoth wrote...

Rusty0918 wrote...
...Think about it. What would make more sense? The indoctrination theory, or space magic?

Hey!  Don't make fun of my Space Magic...

What's funny is indoctrination is simply more space magic... D&D would just call it a Charm Spell....

[Forgomoth]

CavScout wrote...
...Why do you think Shepperd is drunk?

Blood loss is quite the narcotic.

[Phearmonger]

CavScout wrote...

Phearmonger wrote...

"Game-play elements =/= Indoctrination evidence"

Why not? The choices you have to make are clearly mis-colored for what you are doing. Either the art manager was drunk or they deliberately mis-colored those elements to reflect the deception being foisted upon Shepard. And when you are given the interrupt to save Anderson from TIM's gun to the head, it's a renegade interrupt. Shouldn't that be a paragon interrupt, saving an innocent from a murderer? Games often blur the screen and reverse or affect controls to convey drunkenness. How is this different?

Simply because it's not. The indoctrination theory is funny. Anything that would contradict it is simply thrown out as being a figment of the indoctrination theory.

As for the colors, I am not sure they are colored incorrectly. It seems that BW thinks the Synthesis option to be the optimal solution. The "Kill them All!" option is red, which actually fits if you think about it.

As for the Anderson/TIM, shooting is the easy option since you can talk TIM into not killing Anderson.

Why do you think Shepperd is drunk?

Actually, I said the art manager was drunk, and I did forget about the part where you could get TIM to shoot himself. I never had that option in my playthrough, so I didn't remember it. I still think, even with the interrupt discounted, that the evidence adds up to indoctrination. This is, of course, speculation, and I don't mean to suggest otherwise. I just don't see the dreamlike walking, the unlimited ammo, and other parts as being inconsequential. It's hard to believe they weren't used deliberately, and I can think of no other reason to use them.

[ArkkAngel007]

CavScout wrote...

Rusty0918 wrote...
The big clue is Shepard's breathing amongts the rubble if you have high enough EMS and you choose the Destroy option. You don't get this clip at all with the Control or Syntehsis options.

That's not a clue for indoctrination, it's simply the fact that only in the destroy option do you not sacrifice your body.

So...Shepard survives the entire station being blown apart?  Since you want us to take everything at face-value, after all.

[Forgomoth]

CavScout wrote...

Forgomoth wrote...

Rusty0918 wrote...
...Think about it. What would make more sense? The indoctrination theory, or space magic?

Hey!  Don't make fun of my Space Magic...

What's funny is indoctrination is simply more space magic... D&D would just call it a Charm Spell....

Yes, but Space Magic whose existense has already been established within the game's setting.  This isn't a new concept.

Modifié par Forgomoth, 20 mars 2012 - 09:18 .

[Rusty0918]

CavScout wrote...

Forgomoth wrote...

Rusty0918 wrote...
...Think about it. What would make more sense? The indoctrination theory, or space magic?

Hey!  Don't make fun of my Space Magic...

What's funny is indoctrination is simply more space magic... D&D would just call it a Charm Spell....

And what makes you the expert on indoctrination, Mr. CavScout? The point is the indoctrination theory is the only logical theory that could explain those last 5-20 minutes. If not, then what the heck was it?

[IronSabbath88]

I really don't get the people flat out calling this theory stupid.

The evidence is all there throughout the game. If you REALLY think that BioWare are THAT stupid to put all that crap there and have it NOT mean anything then there's just nothing else I can say to you. A lot of people in this thread are seriously under the impression that the devs just aren't smart enough to think of this, which is just utterly ridiculous to think.

In short, if you want to hate the ending and take them at face value, then do so, but don't trash the people who are looking into this belief, because from everything we have right now, this theory is looking a hell of a lot more likely than BioWare just being "stupid."

[Forgomoth]

Rusty0918 wrote...

And what makes you the expert on indoctrination, Mr. CavScout? The point is the indoctrination theory is the only logical theory that could explain those last 5-20 minutes. If not, then what the heck was it?

I don't know about you, but the walking alone took 20 minutes.  How you could finish that part in under 30 minutes is beyond me.

[ULS 980]

kathic wrote...

ULS 980 wrote...

So we agree the ending is not meant to be taken at face value.
So I ask again, what are we supposed to be speculating about if the indoctrination theory is incorrect?

The
nature of the AI Child. The end result of all our choices. The final
fate of Shepard and the crew of the Normandy. The fate of the Galaxy
without the Mass Relays and the Citidel. The lasting legacy of Shepard.
The morality of the different choices. There are many things to
speculate on.

The final fate of Shep is explained. He lives or dies depending on the ending. In control he's the new master of the Reapers.
The final fate of the crew is explained. They get stranded on a planet.
Legacy of Shepard is explained in the Stargazer scene.
Fate of the Galaxy without relays or Citadel isn't really left up to speculation. There's only one thing you can assume, and that's they are either stuck in their systems or in the Sol system if they were fighting the Reapers.
Doesn't the Stargazer ending kinda confirm this? That everyone's stuck where they are?


One thing I want to ask though is, what do you think the true nature of the AI Child is if not some sort of manifestation of indoctrination?
Why is he lying to us about us dying in the destroy ending? Why does he say synthetics and organics will never get along despite Shepard proving him wrong with the Geth/Quarians?
You can't make those kind of "mistakes" unless you actively ignore them. These aren't just oversights. They are massive contradictions that a four year old would be able to pick out.

Modifié par ULS 980, 20 mars 2012 - 09:24 .

[CavScout]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Rusty0918 wrote...
The big clue is Shepard's breathing amongts the rubble if you have high enough EMS and you choose the Destroy option. You don't get this clip at all with the Control or Syntehsis options.

That's not a clue for indoctrination, it's simply the fact that only in the destroy option do you not sacrifice your body.

So...Shepard survives the entire station being blown apart?  Since you want us to take everything at face-value, after all.

Wouldn't be Shep's first fantastical survival... also, unexplained does not equate to indoctrinated.

[CavScout]

Forgomoth wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Forgomoth wrote...

Rusty0918 wrote...
...Think about it. What would make more sense? The indoctrination theory, or space magic?

Hey!  Don't make fun of my Space Magic...

What's funny is indoctrination is simply more space magic... D&D would just call it a Charm Spell....

Yes, but Space Magic whose existense has already been established within the game's setting.  This isn't a new concept.

So you don't mind space magic then.

[Rusty0918]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

I really don't get the people flat out calling this theory stupid.

The evidence is all there throughout the game. If you REALLY think that BioWare are THAT stupid to put all that crap there and have it NOT mean anything then there's just nothing else I can say to you. A lot of people in this thread are seriously under the impression that the devs just aren't smart enough to think of this, which is just utterly ridiculous to think.

In short, if you want to hate the ending and take them at face value, then do so, but don't trash the people who are looking into this belief, because from everything we have right now, this theory is looking a hell of a lot more likely than BioWare just being "stupid."

Yes. IronSabbath88 is right on this. There are compelling articles and videos explaining the whole indoctrination theory. And as I have said before, indoctrination is one of the key tactics of the Reapers, and it would only make sense for Shepard to come face to face with this. Also, Garrus mentioned the Crucible being a test...and this would be it. The indoctrination theory is the only thing that can possibly make sense of the "endings" that we are provided.