463 réponses à ce sujet

[LolaLei]

MassEffected555 wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

In the end of the Mass Effect 2, didn't harbringer release control of the collector "master"? If there is no one to control Shepard (reapers are dead) and the indoctrination didn't go too far (making Shepard into a husk), then would just "releasing control" work?

I think this will explain it. From the Indoctrination wiki-

[color=rgb(255, 255, 255)"> ] relay, the Reapers abandoned their indoctrinated slaves, leaving them to starve or die of exposure.[/color] 

Yes, but if you are not a husk yet you still have "free will"  (like Saren/TIM before getting implants) and no one is telling you what to do anymore - then indoctrination won't matter, right?

No it's stated and inferred that once you are indoctrinated and they stop telling you what to do your mind decays and you stop being able to take care of yourself. Doesn't say Husk, just says once you are indoctrinated. 

Out of interest OP, what endings would you like to see if you could decide for Bioware? Would you keep the current ones? Scrap the current endings completely? 

I'm curious.

Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it.

I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew.

Edit- HELL NO would I keep the current ending, don't insult me please! 

Ok, lemme try a different approach.

What were you expecting to see from the endings? You must have had some sort of expectation based on the previous two games, right?

[Jaze55]

jedsithor wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...


Good points actually.

But again, before gettting hit by the beam the game shows everyone dying. And the squad vanished. You do know why right? They cut scenes showing them getting vaporized and they just removed that scene and your squad from the beam run.. still needs a re write.

Google about the squad getting killed by the beam if you didnt see it, its rough. 

The game doesn't show everyone dying. A deleted scene is a deleted scene. It doesn't count. In Revenge of the Sith there are not one, but two different deleted scenes of Shaak Ti dying and neither of them count (she actually dies in The Force Unleashed). So forget the deleted scenes.

If we assume that Shepard is indoctrinated by the beam (which actually makes no sense by the way, it's a laser beam, not a mind control beam so at best Harbinger would take control of Shepard's mind due to his weakened state in another fashion) then everything that happens afterwards, including the Normandy's escape, is part of the indoctrination, likely a projection into Shepard's mind to show that his friends are alive and well so that he doesn't have the will to break the mind control, which is essentially what indoctrination is.

So the Normandy isn't really on another planet, Joker didn't really fly away, the Normandy crew didn't magically appear on board.

In the game, we don't see his squadmates die. Sure, you can turn around and see them disappear but you're not supposed to turn around. At most it was an oversight by the developers of that sequence, probably due to them cutting the death scenes. What you can see if you play the sequence the way it was supposed to be played, is your squad lying on the ground, apparently dead. But since the actual death scenes were cut from the game, that gives you room to work without drastic rewrites.

So your squadmates were dead on the ground...guess what, so was Shepard. The entire Indoctrination Theory is based on the notion that everything that happened after the Harbinger beam was an illusion and that Shepard is in fact still outside the conduit, lying on the ground and presumed dead. The theory suggests that Shepard breaks indoctrination and wakes up. He survives.

So what I'm saying is that if Shepard survives, there's no reason the other squadmates can't either. Seeing their bodies isn't enough. I'm sure people saw Shepard's body and assumed he was dead. In the game as it is, he manages to get up and keep going. If you apply the indoctrination theory, he goes through the ending and then wakes up, still alive, and keeps going. The same can happen for the other squadmembers and you don't need to rewrite anything. Shepard survives a Reaper attack. If he can do it, so can the others. No rewrite required.

Now, for the record, I actually favour a rewrite of the ending rather than going with a continuation through indoctrination but it is possible to go with indoctrination without rewriting the original ending as I've just shown in a way that allows you to keep your squad members intact.

That can easily be overcome without rewriting that sequence.

First of all, THANK YOU! I have wanted to point out its not a "mind control beam" for days but didn't bother lol. Seriousl thank you for saying that. 

Second - Remember when you get dropped off by Cortez? Either then or right before that you hear the Normandy getting ordered, or maybe Joker just says, they are re joining the Sword team to fight the space battle so they are pretty much out of the picture. 

[Lugoffo]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

In the end of the Mass Effect 2, didn't harbringer release control of the collector "master"? If there is no one to control Shepard (reapers are dead) and the indoctrination didn't go too far (making Shepard into a husk), then would just "releasing control" work?

I think this will explain it. From the Indoctrination wiki-

[color=rgb(255, 255, 255)"> ] relay, the Reapers abandoned their indoctrinated slaves, leaving them to starve or die of exposure.[/color] 

Yes, but if you are not a husk yet you still have "free will"  (like Saren/TIM before getting implants) and no one is telling you what to do anymore - then indoctrination won't matter, right?

No it's stated and inferred that once you are indoctrinated and they stop telling you what to do your mind decays and you stop being able to take care of yourself. Doesn't say Husk, just says once you are indoctrinated. 

I couldn't find that quote, so I didn't take that into account. As far as I understood, it only said that your mind decays for as long as you are exposed to "the signal" and not just because your mind was indoctrinated. Sovereign could prevent further indoctrination to Saren (until the last part with the implants), so I assumed it was something the reapers had to actively do...

They control how strong the signal is yes, but it's always there. Even when they leave which that wiki quote I pasted tells. So when a person loses the signal they still have mind decay and eventual brain death I guess you can call it.

Yes, even if they go away the damage is done, but if you're not too damaged you should be able to survive, right? They can't send the signal if they're dead...

[Jaze55]

LolaLei wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

In the end of the Mass Effect 2, didn't harbringer release control of the collector "master"? If there is no one to control Shepard (reapers are dead) and the indoctrination didn't go too far (making Shepard into a husk), then would just "releasing control" work?

I think this will explain it. From the Indoctrination wiki-

[color=rgb(255, 255, 255)"> ] relay, the Reapers abandoned their indoctrinated slaves, leaving them to starve or die of exposure.[/color] 

Yes, but if you are not a husk yet you still have "free will"  (like Saren/TIM before getting implants) and no one is telling you what to do anymore - then indoctrination won't matter, right?

No it's stated and inferred that once you are indoctrinated and they stop telling you what to do your mind decays and you stop being able to take care of yourself. Doesn't say Husk, just says once you are indoctrinated. 

Out of interest OP, what endings would you like to see if you could decide for Bioware? Would you keep the current ones? Scrap the current endings completely? 

I'm curious.

Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it.

I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew.

Edit- HELL NO would I keep the current ending, don't insult me please! 

Ok, lemme try a different approach.

What were you expecting to see from the endings? You must have had some sort of expectation based on the previous two games, right?

The best way for me to answer that is with another vague respone.

I expected to see the exact opposite then what we saw.

If you want me to come up with something?

OK 4th ending.

Everything is EXACTLY the same till Start Kid is done with his bull****. If you have a high enough EMS AND you united the Geth and Quarians a 4th option becomes available.

Show the idiot star kid that in fact Synthetics and Organics CAN work together. Point out it was ORGANICS (Quarians) that started the Morning War. Show that the Geth never wanted to fight the Quarians. Show that it was the Synthetics that were advocating peace. Show how EDI broke free from evil Cerebus and chose her own path which was to let Organics control their own destiny, away from the influence of Cerebus and the Reapers. 

Stupid Star kid can't compute that, short circuits, Reapers become mindless husks themselves since they lost their controll device or controller, whatever, and the combined fleet destroys them.

Thats the best ending. Shep lives. Everyone is happy. 

Obvioulsy I didn't put much thought but its a rough draft. 

The end. 

[jedsithor]

MassEffected555 wrote...



First of all, THANK YOU! I have wanted to point out its not a "mind control beam" for days but didn't bother lol. Seriousl thank you for saying that. 

Second - Remember when you get dropped off by Cortez? Either then or right before that you hear the Normandy getting ordered, or maybe Joker just says, they are re joining the Sword team to fight the space battle so they are pretty much out of the picture. 

Joker is indeed fighting the battle in space. But if he hears that the whole mission has gone to hell and the ground forces are being decimated by Harbinger, you don't think he'd swoop down to lend a hand? The battle in space is really meant to protect the Crucible but if Shepard can't get the arms open, the Crucible becomes pointless. Joker swooping in to fight Harbinger is certainly far more in character than him running away.

[xztr]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...
Harby beam vaporizes people. It causes massive damage. You can only assume Shepard is in pretty bad shape. Also considering he was able to "resist" indoctrination that would take a considerable toll on someone since no one else, ever, was able to beat it. 

So Harby's beam vaporizes people but Shepard managed to survive in the obvious ending (albeit with melted armor).  So from that can we assume he didn't take a direct hit (as otherwise, by your logic, he would have been vaporized)?

And if he can take a non-direct hit which critically injures but doesn't kill him, then why can't he take an even more non-direct hit which simply knocks him unconscious with fairly minor injuries?

And we have no idea how much toll an attempted indoctrination has upon someone.  Maybe it has no long term impacts at all.  Javik for example tells us that his whole squad got indoctrinated.  Presumably Javik was with his squad so what prevented him from getting indoctrinated too?

Either way it suggests that indoctrination is far from the foolproof method you seem to believe it is.  To be honest, the only thing that suggests indoctrination is foolproof is the often inaccurate codex entries.  There is plenty of in-game evidence (and the books too) of people resisting indoctrination.

A minor hit wouldn't knock you out would it? And the theory hinges on Shepard being weakened by the blast which is why he is even able to have an indoctrination attempt on him.

See if the hit was minor, your theory loses all credability since at no other time was he able to have an attempt come close to working. The hit has to be enough to hurt him badly.

Also, yeah the beam vaporizing everyone else, but somehow just knocking Shep out is just MORE bad writing. 

There are plenty of possible explanations for why indoctrination only works now.  Perhaps Shepard is knocked unconscious by a hit just hard enough to take down his shields and knock him out (call the hit what you like, minor, major, middling, whatever).  And then the close proximity of Harbinger is sufficient for him to attempt indoctrination.

As for bad writing, I'd agree that there is plenty of bad writing here, which ever ending is chosen.  And even before the ending, Dr Eva and Kai-Leng v1 with their invicible plot armor was pretty bad wriing too.

Eitherway, its been an interesting discussion, but you seem to be at the point of simply ignoring the parts of the argument you don't have an answer to so I'm done here.

OK well I didn't ask for why the Indoc Theory works, I asked how it could possibly be extended to a new ending. So thanks for missing the point of the thread I guess? Don't really know what to say.

You have been TOLD this in several different post  over and over again. But you just keep coming back just for the sake of insulting everyone. I mean why? What do you get out of it? For the sake of trying to do a subtle troll thread?

[Tiax Rules All]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Panicomatic wrote...

I'm pretty sure that if you take the destroy ending and have a high enough ems that you will shake of the Indoctrination. If you chose synthesis or control then you lose the inner battle and accept the will of the Reapers.

No sorry the game says it's permanant. Unless you want to open another plot hole to fill in a plot hole.

so you fight it till the end, struggling against it the whole way.. as opposed the destroy ending crew. Im not a writer so dont ask me to get creative. but playing under partial indoc control can be done, maybe even done well. Ill leave the deatails to Bioware. It can just mean that you can no longer get the shep lives outcome at the end of the DLC. maybe you succomb to as you finally kill the reapers.

I actually think this is a great idea and not a "plot hole" at all

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 20 mars 2012 - 09:02 .

[Jaze55]

xztr wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...
Harby beam vaporizes people. It causes massive damage. You can only assume Shepard is in pretty bad shape. Also considering he was able to "resist" indoctrination that would take a considerable toll on someone since no one else, ever, was able to beat it. 

So Harby's beam vaporizes people but Shepard managed to survive in the obvious ending (albeit with melted armor).  So from that can we assume he didn't take a direct hit (as otherwise, by your logic, he would have been vaporized)?

And if he can take a non-direct hit which critically injures but doesn't kill him, then why can't he take an even more non-direct hit which simply knocks him unconscious with fairly minor injuries?

And we have no idea how much toll an attempted indoctrination has upon someone.  Maybe it has no long term impacts at all.  Javik for example tells us that his whole squad got indoctrinated.  Presumably Javik was with his squad so what prevented him from getting indoctrinated too?

Either way it suggests that indoctrination is far from the foolproof method you seem to believe it is.  To be honest, the only thing that suggests indoctrination is foolproof is the often inaccurate codex entries.  There is plenty of in-game evidence (and the books too) of people resisting indoctrination.

A minor hit wouldn't knock you out would it? And the theory hinges on Shepard being weakened by the blast which is why he is even able to have an indoctrination attempt on him.

See if the hit was minor, your theory loses all credability since at no other time was he able to have an attempt come close to working. The hit has to be enough to hurt him badly.

Also, yeah the beam vaporizing everyone else, but somehow just knocking Shep out is just MORE bad writing. 

There are plenty of possible explanations for why indoctrination only works now.  Perhaps Shepard is knocked unconscious by a hit just hard enough to take down his shields and knock him out (call the hit what you like, minor, major, middling, whatever).  And then the close proximity of Harbinger is sufficient for him to attempt indoctrination.

As for bad writing, I'd agree that there is plenty of bad writing here, which ever ending is chosen.  And even before the ending, Dr Eva and Kai-Leng v1 with their invicible plot armor was pretty bad wriing too.

Eitherway, its been an interesting discussion, but you seem to be at the point of simply ignoring the parts of the argument you don't have an answer to so I'm done here.

OK well I didn't ask for why the Indoc Theory works, I asked how it could possibly be extended to a new ending. So thanks for missing the point of the thread I guess? Don't really know what to say.

You have been TOLD this in several different post  over and over again. But you just keep coming back just for the sake of insulting everyone. I mean why? What do you get out of it? For the sake of trying to do a subtle troll thread?

OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE DIDNT READ THIS THREAD.

Did I make ONE SINGLE insult in this thread? 

edit- as a matter of fact I have been THANKED for making this. Good job making yourself look like a @ass though. 

Modifié par MassEffected555, 20 mars 2012 - 09:03 .

[CerinDeVane]

In my own little world, I want to think that everything after getting smacked by the beam is in Shep's head. What happens to him at that point is irrelevant. As I recall, there was an absolutely massive armada in orbit that wasn't doing too badly against the Reapers.

Shep was what they needed - a focus to rally behind. That's why he's a legend, even if he gets indoctrinated or killed in the final battle... He led them into the breach, a galaxy united with single purpose... hang together or hang separately. I believe Hackett and company were entirely capable, at that point, of ending the threat through firepower.

The Crucible and The Catalyst.... kind of a metaphor. The war is the Crucible, Shep is the Catalyst... and the end result is the most powerful weapon of all. Unity.

[Jaze55]

MassEffected555 wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Lugoffo wrote...

In the end of the Mass Effect 2, didn't harbringer release control of the collector "master"? If there is no one to control Shepard (reapers are dead) and the indoctrination didn't go too far (making Shepard into a husk), then would just "releasing control" work?

I think this will explain it. From the Indoctrination wiki-

[color=rgb(255, 255, 255)"> ] relay, the Reapers abandoned their indoctrinated slaves, leaving them to starve or die of exposure.[/color] 

Yes, but if you are not a husk yet you still have "free will"  (like Saren/TIM before getting implants) and no one is telling you what to do anymore - then indoctrination won't matter, right?

No it's stated and inferred that once you are indoctrinated and they stop telling you what to do your mind decays and you stop being able to take care of yourself. Doesn't say Husk, just says once you are indoctrinated. 

Out of interest OP, what endings would you like to see if you could decide for Bioware? Would you keep the current ones? Scrap the current endings completely? 

I'm curious.

Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it.

I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew.

Edit- HELL NO would I keep the current ending, don't insult me please! 

Ok, lemme try a different approach.

What were you expecting to see from the endings? You must have had some sort of expectation based on the previous two games, right?

The best way for me to answer that is with another vague respone.

I expected to see the exact opposite then what we saw.

If you want me to come up with something?

OK 4th ending.

Everything is EXACTLY the same till Start Kid is done with his bull****. If you have a high enough EMS AND you united the Geth and Quarians a 4th option becomes available.

Show the idiot star kid that in fact Synthetics and Organics CAN work together. Point out it was ORGANICS (Quarians) that started the Morning War. Show that the Geth never wanted to fight the Quarians. Show that it was the Synthetics that were advocating peace. Show how EDI broke free from evil Cerebus and chose her own path which was to let Organics control their own destiny, away from the influence of Cerebus and the Reapers. 

Stupid Star kid can't compute that, short circuits, Reapers become mindless husks themselves since they lost their controll device or controller, whatever, and the combined fleet destroys them.

Thats the best ending. Shep lives. Everyone is happy. 

Obvioulsy I didn't put much thought but its a rough draft. 

The end. 

Lola you asked and it got buried so I put it here again in case you didn't see it. 

[Sleeping Slig]

OP why do you expect Indoctrination theory supporters to come up with an ending?

You said "Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it. I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew."

I think people that support the theory could say the same thing.

[ArkkAngel007]

Here is what I've thought about COULD possibly happen following the events of IT. Granted, I haven't spent much time on them, so there could be plenty of holes, and there is still a lot that I and anyone who isn't BioWare can really account for.

1. The first issue is dealing with the three endings. To simplify this, let's just focus on the Destroy ending where Shepard lives and supposedly successfully resists the attempt. How the other two will play out can be returned to later or else where.

2. Moving forward is dealing with how Shepard is recovered. If the squadmates and Anderson survived, I would expect them to move him to a more defensible position. We don't know how long Shepard has been out. What seemed like 10 minutes could have only been a minute or less in reality. Depending on this perceptual difference, Shepard may already have been moved, explaining why there is rubble surrounding him/her and the sound of structural stress.

3. The following step would to get Shepard aid, probably through the Normandy. Normandy would have to be piloted down to the hot zone to recover Shepard and the remainder of that wave of Hammer. For the other squadmates, there are unlimited possibilities on what can happen there. I'm not going to stretch this out to that, as the focus is getting Shepard to the Citadel.

4. Now we have the issue of opening the arms of the Citadel, provided Shepard is patched up enough to continue, though this next step really doesn't require much on Shepard's part. So how do the arms open? This could do with EDI, possibly through the Reaper IFF altered with the changes made by the Protheans on the Keepers. It could be a throwback to the quest in ME1 or something else revolving around these components. To me, that would be the only other way of opening the arms, as Ilos is probably not an option.

5. Once inside the Citadel, it's anyone's ball game. We don't know what the exact situation is inside, and we don't know what activating the crucible will entail once it docks. TIM will be involved more than likely, and it's a pretty safe bet that the fate of the residents aboard will be demonstrated.  

6. The final conclusion would likely see the end of the Reapers themselves.  However, again, it's unknown how this occurs exactly from the result of the Crucible.  We also don't know what will happen to Shepard and what exactly Shepard's role is when activating the thing. 

So that's what I quickly threw together.  Again, it's rather brief and abstract, but it's difficult to go into huge details on something we can't really make a call on.  There's no proof, though it doesn't contradict lore at least. This is just in response to your request.  I wouldn't know how this thing would end if there was DLC.

Modifié par ArkkAngel007, 20 mars 2012 - 09:15 .

[Tiax Rules All]

MassEffected555 wrote...

OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE DIDNT READ THIS THREAD.

Did I make ONE SINGLE insult in this thread? 

edit- as a matter of fact I have been THANKED for making this. Good job making yourself look like a @ass though. 

im not gonna read the whole tread to find individal posts but it does seem like you are upset at the endings and get offended with others seem to either not hate them or explain them with indoc theory, i have followed your posts around the forums.

Whats worse the guy who has a theory with answers that makes him happy, which he likes to spread..

or the guy who is upset and wants others to be upset by simply denying anything put in front of them on principal?

If you dont like the theory... then dont believe in it, be upset and unhappy an nobdy will bother you. but dont tell us we cant use a logical theory to improve OUR endings.

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 20 mars 2012 - 09:11 .

[xztr]

MassEffected555 wrote...

xztr wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...
Harby beam vaporizes people. It causes massive damage. You can only assume Shepard is in pretty bad shape. Also considering he was able to "resist" indoctrination that would take a considerable toll on someone since no one else, ever, was able to beat it. 

So Harby's beam vaporizes people but Shepard managed to survive in the obvious ending (albeit with melted armor).  So from that can we assume he didn't take a direct hit (as otherwise, by your logic, he would have been vaporized)?

And if he can take a non-direct hit which critically injures but doesn't kill him, then why can't he take an even more non-direct hit which simply knocks him unconscious with fairly minor injuries?

And we have no idea how much toll an attempted indoctrination has upon someone.  Maybe it has no long term impacts at all.  Javik for example tells us that his whole squad got indoctrinated.  Presumably Javik was with his squad so what prevented him from getting indoctrinated too?

Either way it suggests that indoctrination is far from the foolproof method you seem to believe it is.  To be honest, the only thing that suggests indoctrination is foolproof is the often inaccurate codex entries.  There is plenty of in-game evidence (and the books too) of people resisting indoctrination.

A minor hit wouldn't knock you out would it? And the theory hinges on Shepard being weakened by the blast which is why he is even able to have an indoctrination attempt on him.

See if the hit was minor, your theory loses all credability since at no other time was he able to have an attempt come close to working. The hit has to be enough to hurt him badly.

Also, yeah the beam vaporizing everyone else, but somehow just knocking Shep out is just MORE bad writing. 

There are plenty of possible explanations for why indoctrination only works now.  Perhaps Shepard is knocked unconscious by a hit just hard enough to take down his shields and knock him out (call the hit what you like, minor, major, middling, whatever).  And then the close proximity of Harbinger is sufficient for him to attempt indoctrination.

As for bad writing, I'd agree that there is plenty of bad writing here, which ever ending is chosen.  And even before the ending, Dr Eva and Kai-Leng v1 with their invicible plot armor was pretty bad wriing too.

Eitherway, its been an interesting discussion, but you seem to be at the point of simply ignoring the parts of the argument you don't have an answer to so I'm done here.

OK well I didn't ask for why the Indoc Theory works, I asked how it could possibly be extended to a new ending. So thanks for missing the point of the thread I guess? Don't really know what to say.

You have been TOLD this in several different post  over and over again. But you just keep coming back just for the sake of insulting everyone. I mean why? What do you get out of it? For the sake of trying to do a subtle troll thread?

OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE DIDNT READ THIS THREAD.

Did I make ONE SINGLE insult in this thread? 

You state that you really want to "know" what happens and be enlighted about the subject. But you dont care at all about the indo theory, or how it would play out. As I said you have been told how it could play out and how Shep could fight the attempt of indoctrination off. But your post AND replays to people that actually are trying to answer your question with seriousness are condescending. And THAT my fellow gamer is an insult.

[Jaze55]

Sleeping Slig wrote...

OP why do you expect Indoctrination theory supporters to come up with an ending?

You said "Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it. I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew."

I think people that support the theory could say the same thing.

I guess you don't understand this but I will spell it out clearly for you ok.

The ending we saw, is the one BW planned. It was THE ending of the game.

The indoctrination theory is in fact CHANGING the ending....

So you are ALREADY changing the ending but in a way that doesn't allow the game to continue from the point the indoc theory leaves off.


OK if you can't take the time to go over the thread I am going to ignore your post,. I have repeated myself several times already and my fingers are starting to hurt from typing. 

[Lugoffo]

I suppose I compare it to the lord of the rings, where if the source (the ring and sauron/reapers) is destroyed, Frodo/Shepard is no longer bound to the ring/reapers. He/She still has some brain damage and horrible memories (PTSD), but is free to do what he/she wants.

Just wanted to put it out there. I should perhaps mention that the indoctrination theory has some major flaws to begin with, mostly about how Shepard even got indoctrinated... I'm just arguing about the effects of it.

[Jaze55]

xztr wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

xztr wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...
Harby beam vaporizes people. It causes massive damage. You can only assume Shepard is in pretty bad shape. Also considering he was able to "resist" indoctrination that would take a considerable toll on someone since no one else, ever, was able to beat it. 

So Harby's beam vaporizes people but Shepard managed to survive in the obvious ending (albeit with melted armor).  So from that can we assume he didn't take a direct hit (as otherwise, by your logic, he would have been vaporized)?

And if he can take a non-direct hit which critically injures but doesn't kill him, then why can't he take an even more non-direct hit which simply knocks him unconscious with fairly minor injuries?

And we have no idea how much toll an attempted indoctrination has upon someone.  Maybe it has no long term impacts at all.  Javik for example tells us that his whole squad got indoctrinated.  Presumably Javik was with his squad so what prevented him from getting indoctrinated too?

Either way it suggests that indoctrination is far from the foolproof method you seem to believe it is.  To be honest, the only thing that suggests indoctrination is foolproof is the often inaccurate codex entries.  There is plenty of in-game evidence (and the books too) of people resisting indoctrination.

A minor hit wouldn't knock you out would it? And the theory hinges on Shepard being weakened by the blast which is why he is even able to have an indoctrination attempt on him.

See if the hit was minor, your theory loses all credability since at no other time was he able to have an attempt come close to working. The hit has to be enough to hurt him badly.

Also, yeah the beam vaporizing everyone else, but somehow just knocking Shep out is just MORE bad writing. 

There are plenty of possible explanations for why indoctrination only works now.  Perhaps Shepard is knocked unconscious by a hit just hard enough to take down his shields and knock him out (call the hit what you like, minor, major, middling, whatever).  And then the close proximity of Harbinger is sufficient for him to attempt indoctrination.

As for bad writing, I'd agree that there is plenty of bad writing here, which ever ending is chosen.  And even before the ending, Dr Eva and Kai-Leng v1 with their invicible plot armor was pretty bad wriing too.

Eitherway, its been an interesting discussion, but you seem to be at the point of simply ignoring the parts of the argument you don't have an answer to so I'm done here.

OK well I didn't ask for why the Indoc Theory works, I asked how it could possibly be extended to a new ending. So thanks for missing the point of the thread I guess? Don't really know what to say.

You have been TOLD this in several different post  over and over again. But you just keep coming back just for the sake of insulting everyone. I mean why? What do you get out of it? For the sake of trying to do a subtle troll thread?

OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE DIDNT READ THIS THREAD.

Did I make ONE SINGLE insult in this thread? 

You state that you really want to "know" what happens and be enlighted about the subject. But you dont care at all about the indo theory, or how it would play out. As I said you have been told how it could play out and how Shep could fight the attempt of indoctrination off. But your post AND replays to people that actually are trying to answer your question with seriousness are condescending. And THAT my fellow gamer is an insult.

The bunch of people I have been discussing this with for several pages made no complaints.

Maybe you just have security issues and get defensive whenever you percieve someone going against you.

That's not my issue that's yours to work out but I would appreciate you not laying you baggage one me. Thanks. 

[Jaze55]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE DIDNT READ THIS THREAD.

Did I make ONE SINGLE insult in this thread? 

edit- as a matter of fact I have been THANKED for making this. Good job making yourself look like a @ass though. 

im not gonna read the whole tread to find individal posts but it does seem like you are upset at the endings and get offended with others seem to either not hate them or explain them with indoc theory, i have followed your posts around the forums.

Whats worse the guy who has a theory with answers that makes him happy, which he likes to spread..

or the guy who is upset and wants others to be upset by simply denying anything put in front of them on principal?

If you dont like the theory... then dont believe in it, be upset and unhappy an nobdy will bother you. but dont tell us we cant use a logical theory to improve OUR endings.

If you aren't going to read the whole thread and just come up with assumptions then you are a waste of time and I don't care at all what you say. Stay out of the thread then. BYE!!!

I am having a pretty nice convo with a few people here actually. 

[xztr]

[/quote]

The bunch of people I have been discussing this with for several pages made no complaints.

Maybe you just have security issues and get defensive whenever you percieve someone going against you.

That's not my issue that's yours to work out but I would appreciate you not laying you baggage one me. Thanks. 

[/quote]

See you are doing it again. Insulting me over and over again. When did I say I was against YOU? I merly told you that you had already been told the answers to your OP. And that you infact are subtly insulting about everyone that doesnt agree with you.

Modifié par xztr, 20 mars 2012 - 09:16 .

[Tiax Rules All]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Sleeping Slig wrote...

OP why do you expect Indoctrination theory supporters to come up with an ending?

You said "Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it. I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew."

I think people that support the theory could say the same thing.

I guess you don't understand this but I will spell it out clearly for you ok.

The ending we saw, is the one BW planned. It was THE ending of the game.

The indoctrination theory is in fact CHANGING the ending....

So you are ALREADY changing the ending but in a way that doesn't allow the game to continue from the point the indoc theory leaves off.


OK if you can't take the time to go over the thread I am going to ignore your post,. I have repeated myself several times already and my fingers are starting to hurt from typing. 

we all saw the same ending, IDT doesnt CHANGE anything. it just interperets it diferently then you, troll harder.

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 20 mars 2012 - 09:18 .

[Jaze55]

[quote]xztr wrote...


[/quote]

The bunch of people I have been discussing this with for several pages made no complaints.

Maybe you just have security issues and get defensive whenever you percieve someone going against you.

That's not my issue that's yours to work out but I would appreciate you not laying you baggage one me. Thanks. 

[/quote]

See you are doing it again. Insulting me over and over again. When did I say I was against YOU? I merly told you that you had already been told the answers to your OP. And that you infact are subtly insulting about everyone that doesnt agree with you.

[/quote]

I am doing it to you because you came in here and just starting raging for no reason because you saw I was posting and I hurt your feeling the other day knocking the theory.

You are a waste of time and if you have nothing to add, begone.

If you do, I am all ears. 

[Sleeping Slig]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Sleeping Slig wrote...

OP why do you expect Indoctrination theory supporters to come up with an ending?

You said "Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it. I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew."

I think people that support the theory could say the same thing.

I guess you don't understand this but I will spell it out clearly for you ok.

The ending we saw, is the one BW planned. It was THE ending of the game.

The indoctrination theory is in fact CHANGING the ending....

So you are ALREADY changing the ending but in a way that doesn't allow the game to continue from the point the indoc theory leaves off.


OK if you can't take the time to go over the thread I am going to ignore your post,. I have repeated myself several times already and my fingers are starting to hurt from typing. 

I think you misunderstood me, personally I don't agree with the theory for exactly the same reason you stated.

I don't believe that the theory is what Bioware intended, at the same time, I also respect the theory and those who support it.

So I was curious as to why you wanted people to give you and Indoctrination theory ending.

Now I know...

Modifié par Sleeping Slig, 20 mars 2012 - 09:21 .

[Jaze55]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Sleeping Slig wrote...

OP why do you expect Indoctrination theory supporters to come up with an ending?

You said "Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it. I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew."

I think people that support the theory could say the same thing.

I guess you don't understand this but I will spell it out clearly for you ok.

The ending we saw, is the one BW planned. It was THE ending of the game.

The indoctrination theory is in fact CHANGING the ending....

So you are ALREADY changing the ending but in a way that doesn't allow the game to continue from the point the indoc theory leaves off.


OK if you can't take the time to go over the thread I am going to ignore your post,. I have repeated myself several times already and my fingers are starting to hurt from typing. 

we all saw the same ending, IDT doesnt CHANGE anything. it just interperets it diferently then you, troll harder.

You can leave my thread anytime you know. BYE!!! 

[Sharkey1337]

I just want to point out that indoctrination is not PERMANENT, especially early on. Examples from the series:

-Lady Benezia, she was able to break free at the very end and explained everything to Shepard, though she did warn that she could easily fall back again, thus her death was necessary.
-Saren, if you paragon convince him he'll break free of indoctrination and kill himself
-TIM, again much like Saren, you can paragon convince him and he'll break free of his indoctrination, killing himself
-Samara's daughter, before being processed into a Banshee, she started falling under indoctrination control, though she managed to break free of it and sacrificed herself by activating the bomb at the monastery.

So while it's possible to break free of indoctrination, each example died shortly after. So it's very possible for Shepard to break free of indoctrination, though if he chose Control or Synthesis he would most likely die in the end before falling under full control of the Reapers. Destroy seems like the only option to free yourself entirely of indoctrination, if the theory is true.

[Jaze55]

Sleeping Slig wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Sleeping Slig wrote...

OP why do you expect Indoctrination theory supporters to come up with an ending?

You said "Oh I in NO WAY want to think up an ending lol I want Bioware to come up with it. I don't want to know ahead of time what happens, why the hell would I even bother with it if I already knew."

I think people that support the theory could say the same thing.

I guess you don't understand this but I will spell it out clearly for you ok.

The ending we saw, is the one BW planned. It was THE ending of the game.

The indoctrination theory is in fact CHANGING the ending....

So you are ALREADY changing the ending but in a way that doesn't allow the game to continue from the point the indoc theory leaves off.


OK if you can't take the time to go over the thread I am going to ignore your post,. I have repeated myself several times already and my fingers are starting to hurt from typing. 

I think you misunderstood me, personally I don't agree with the theory for exactly the same reason you stated.

I don't believe that the theory is what Bioware intended, at he same time, I also respect the theory and those who support it.

So I was curious as to why you wanted people to give you and Indoctrination theory ending.

Now I know...

In case you came to the wrong conclusion, I jsut want to know how to make it work after, that's it. Nothing more, nothing less.