463 réponses à ce sujet

[iorveth1271]

MassEffected555 wrote...

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

Yes, that much is true, the ending gets changed through the Indoc theory so that the existing plotholes get filled. It's an attempt to fill in the missing logic in the current ending.

MassEffected555 wrote...

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.

And THAT is where you are wrong. The Indoctrination theory the way I see it can only work with one of the current endings: The destroy-ending. It is the only ending that offers Shepard a way to survive instead of becoming a Reaper thrall. And THAT is where the game could now continue. Shepard wakes up in London, Anderson never died, The Star Child and TIM conversation NEVER happened. And from there we could go on.

[Jaze55]

Sharkey1337 wrote...

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.

Already went over this

Benezia broke free for 2 minutes, told them the info, went right back into attacking them due to indoc.

Saren broke free for just 2 minutes to kill himself, if you dont para/rena him you fight him, goes back under control

I always shot TIM or he kills himself, dunno what happens if he doesnt do those 2

Right but her eyes turned black to show you it was taking effect, leave her alone a little longer you have a new banshee. 

So you just proved to me what I already knew. You can break free just long enough to kill yourself.

[Jaze55]

iorveth1271 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

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

Yes, that much is true, the ending gets changed through the Indoc theory so that the existing plotholes get filled. It's an attempt to fill in the missing logic in the current ending.

MassEffected555 wrote...

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.

And THAT is where you are wrong. The Indoctrination theory the way I see it can only work with one of the current endings: The destroy-ending. It is the only ending that offers Shepard a way to survive instead of becoming a Reaper thrall. And THAT is where the game could now continue. Shepard wakes up in London, Anderson never died, The Star Child and TIM conversation NEVER happened. And from there we could go on.

Went over it, sorry I am not repeating myself, its already written. If you don't want to look that's OK but I won't type it all out again. 

[Tiax Rules All]

MassEffected555 wrote...

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!!! 

I will, last thing, its been said but the whole premise of this thread is off.

IDT doesn't need to have an ending written for you already. It just has to say that the ending has not been finished. Wether you believe it or not, IDT allows for more content to follow with very little or no changing what has been written already. It only asnweres questions and doesn't raise any that can't be answered by BIOWARE when they choose to release it.

its like saying mass effect 2 did not have an ending because you didnt know mass eefect 3's ending ahead of time. we will know how it ends when it ends. applying IDT to a still theoretical DLC is silly. we just want to apply it to what we have in front of us.

[Turran]

Well..
Tell me if I miss the point here.


The Indoctrination Theory is based on trying to work out the ending we have been given. No one has gone any further to explain what happens after the ending, because no one actually knows.
For all we know (Let's say the Theory stands correct) Shepard could wake up from breaking free, then bleed out and die.


We have no idea what happens next, it is just a theory. A thought. Or as a famous quote does say "LOTS OF THEORIES FOR EVERYONE!".
So I am not quite sure what you want from people. It is like going into a Church and simply asking.. "Ok, I get it, but what now? What is to happen next?". They just won't have an answer for you.

Modifié par Turran, 20 mars 2012 - 09:26 .

[Sleeping Slig]

MassEffected555 wrote...

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. 

Ok that is fine.

But I'm assuming then that you can accept it if no one actually writes out the ending.
 
Like you said people that support the theory want Bioware to finish it, whats the point if they already knew exactly how it comes to a close.

[ArkkAngel007]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

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.

Posting this again, as it fits the demand that the OP is making.

I'd also like to add, when it comes to Shepard's conclusion in this possible expansion, that Shepard may turn out to have been affected by the attempt afterall and may end up dying no matter what.

Again, it could go in so many different directions.

So there's the fan fiction you demand.  And still awaiting.

Modifié par ArkkAngel007, 20 mars 2012 - 09:32 .

[Tiax Rules All]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Sharkey1337 wrote...

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.

Already went over this

Benezia broke free for 2 minutes, told them the info, went right back into attacking them due to indoc.

Saren broke free for just 2 minutes to kill himself, if you dont para/rena him you fight him, goes back under control

I always shot TIM or he kills himself, dunno what happens if he doesnt do those 2

Right but her eyes turned black to show you it was taking effect, leave her alone a little longer you have a new banshee. 

So you just proved to me what I already knew. You can break free just long enough to kill yourself.

just because we haven't seen anybody with Sheps willpower yet try doesn't mean its impossible. I believe it is impossible to break free, but doesn't mean its impossible to repress longer then others have.

[Jaze55]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

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!!! 

I will, last thing, its been said but the whole premise of this thread is off.

IDT doesn't need to have an ending written for you already. It just has to say that the ending has not been finished. Wether you believe it or not, IDT allows for more content to follow with very little or no changing what has been written already. It only asnweres questions and doesn't raise any that can't be answered by BIOWARE when they choose to release it.

its like saying mass effect 2 did not have an ending because you didnt know mass eefect 3's ending ahead of time. we will know how it ends when it ends. applying IDT to a still theoretical DLC is silly. we just want to apply it to what we have in front of us.

It did end already. Remember? And no one liked it.

Remember, 3 different color explosions, no relays, Normandy and crew stranded, pop up saying we are a Legend and buy more DLC.... doesn't that sound familiar?


Or are you one of the people that think BW did this on purpose and sold us an incomplete game?

[Tiax Rules All]

Turran wrote...

Well..
Tell me if I miss the point here.


The Indoctrination Theory is based on trying to work out the ending we have been given. No one has gone any further to explain what happens after the ending, because no one actually knows.
For all we know (Let's say the Theory stands correct) Shepard could wake up from breaking free, then bleed out and die.


We have no idea what happens next, it is just a theory. A thought. Or as a famous quote does say "LOTS OF THEORIES FOR EVERYONE!".
So I am not quite sure what you want from people. It is like going into a Church and simply asking.. "Ok, I get it, but what now? What is to happen next?". They just won't have an answer for you.

my point roughly.

its nice to ask questions but OP is asking wrong questions.

[FearTheLiving]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

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!!! 

I will, last thing, its been said but the whole premise of this thread is off.

IDT doesn't need to have an ending written for you already. It just has to say that the ending has not been finished. Wether you believe it or not, IDT allows for more content to follow with very little or no changing what has been written already. It only asnweres questions and doesn't raise any that can't be answered by BIOWARE when they choose to release it.

its like saying mass effect 2 did not have an ending because you didnt know mass eefect 3's ending ahead of time. we will know how it ends when it ends. applying IDT to a still theoretical DLC is silly. we just want to apply it to what we have in front of us.

Exactly just putting in the IDT now solves nothing it's there to create a future DLC that can build and fix the ending. The IDT by it's self solves nothing because then it essentially doesn't end the game.

[DextroDNA]

The game never says the effects of Indoctrination are permanent. Never.

[xztr]

[quote]MassEffected555 wrote...

[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. 

[/quote]

This is the first time I have ever seen you or read any of your posts. And I dont support the Indo theory. But what I did do was to tell you that all your questions in this post have already been answered you just choose to ignore them and continue to to treat ppl condecending. How is that raging? You got your answers from other ppl to your questions so how am I wasting your time in telling you this? <_<

[Jaze55]

FearTheLiving wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

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!!! 

I will, last thing, its been said but the whole premise of this thread is off.

IDT doesn't need to have an ending written for you already. It just has to say that the ending has not been finished. Wether you believe it or not, IDT allows for more content to follow with very little or no changing what has been written already. It only asnweres questions and doesn't raise any that can't be answered by BIOWARE when they choose to release it.

its like saying mass effect 2 did not have an ending because you didnt know mass eefect 3's ending ahead of time. we will know how it ends when it ends. applying IDT to a still theoretical DLC is silly. we just want to apply it to what we have in front of us.

Exactly just putting in the IDT now solves nothing it's there to create a future DLC that can build and fix the ending. The IDT by it's self solves nothing because then it essentially doesn't end the game.

Read the thread, it makes the ending more plot hole driven. 

Seriously read the dam thread or don't comment, you people are that dam lazy you can skim a few pages? 

WOW I have ADD but even I can go over a thread before I respond to it.

[Tiax Rules All]

MassEffected555 wrote...

It did end already. Remember? And no one liked it.

Remember, 3 different color explosions, no relays, Normandy and crew stranded, pop up saying we are a Legend and buy more DLC.... doesn't that sound familiar?


Or are you one of the people that think BW did this on purpose and sold us an incomplete game?

hmm those are my choices?

why cant they do both.. end it with a crappy kind of non-ending leaving you wanting for more. and then giving you more. Why is that crazy?

also its an assumption that DLC is coming
its a further stretch to speculate on what will be in it.
its even further still till speculate on wheter it will cost us or not and how much content will be in it.

[Jaze55]

[quote]xztr wrote...

[quote]MassEffected555 wrote...

[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. 

[/quote]

This is the first time I have ever seen you or read any of your posts. And I dont support the Indo theory. But what I did do was to tell you that all your questions in this post have already been answered you just choose to ignore them and continue to to treat ppl condecending. How is that raging? You got your answers from other ppl to your questions so how am I wasting your time in telling you this? <_<

[/quote]

No sorry, I was given reasons like - Shep wakes up and fights on

NO Shep is blasted by a beam, half dead just fought off indoctrination so you have to assume he is also mentally exhausted. OK so what happens? The crew is not there. If they are there they need to re write the entire scene. I countered that.

I have been told - The Normandy picks him up. No the Normandy is off fightting in Sword team in the space battle. It would take A LOT of time to get Shep, and how to they even know where Shep is or if he is alive?

The crucible still has to be docked, and the citadel still needs its arms open. What happenes about that?


Those are pretty GLARING holes the theory leaves wide open so explain that to me and I will be happy. 

Thats all I asked for.

edit - the point is if the people that came up with, and support the theory can't fill in this holes, how the hell do you expect Bioware to do it?

Modifié par MassEffected555, 20 mars 2012 - 09:37 .

[FearTheLiving]

MassEffected555 wrote...
Read the thread, it makes the ending more plot hole driven. 

Seriously read the dam thread or don't comment, you people are that dam lazy you can skim a few pages? 

WOW I have ADD but even I can go over a thread before I respond to it.

Read what? You repeat yourself a bunch and just throw out every logical answer we give you? I still have no idea what you even want anymore. And stop with all the random caps like us trying to help you is an inconvience on you.

Modifié par FearTheLiving, 20 mars 2012 - 09:37 .

[Jaze55]

FearTheLiving wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

FearTheLiving wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

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!!! 

I will, last thing, its been said but the whole premise of this thread is off.

IDT doesn't need to have an ending written for you already. It just has to say that the ending has not been finished. Wether you believe it or not, IDT allows for more content to follow with very little or no changing what has been written already. It only asnweres questions and doesn't raise any that can't be answered by BIOWARE when they choose to release it.

its like saying mass effect 2 did not have an ending because you didnt know mass eefect 3's ending ahead of time. we will know how it ends when it ends. applying IDT to a still theoretical DLC is silly. we just want to apply it to what we have in front of us.

Exactly just putting in the IDT now solves nothing it's there to create a future DLC that can build and fix the ending. The IDT by it's self solves nothing because then it essentially doesn't end the game.

Read the thread, it makes the ending more plot hole driven. 

Seriously read the dam thread or don't comment, you people are that dam lazy you can skim a few pages? 

WOW I have ADD but even I can go over a thread before I respond to it.

Read what? You repeat yourself a bunch and just throw out every logical answer we give you? I still have no idea what you even want anymore. And stop with all the random caps like us trying to help you is an inconvience on you.

Dude seriously stop wasting my time but thanks for the bumps. 

[Tiax Rules All]

MassEffected555 wrote...


Read the thread, it makes the ending more plot hole driven. 

Seriously read the dam thread or don't comment, you people are that dam lazy you can skim a few pages? 

WOW I have ADD but even I can go over a thread before I respond to it.

we read you OP and your thread. and nothing in it creates more "plot holes" for us. for you obviously but thats because you are unwilling to see the evidnece.

i just dont get fighitng us. If we are wrong... then its over. and you stay pissed off.

if we are right though, we all get more to look forward to.

its like an exercise to tell who the stubbon and pessimistic ones are in the forums.

[Jaze55]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...


Read the thread, it makes the ending more plot hole driven. 

Seriously read the dam thread or don't comment, you people are that dam lazy you can skim a few pages? 

WOW I have ADD but even I can go over a thread before I respond to it.

we read you OP and your thread. and nothing in it creates more "plot holes" for us. for you obviously but thats because you are unwilling to see the evidnece.

i just dont get fighitng us. If we are wrong... then its over. and you stay pissed off.

if we are right though, we all get more to look forward to.

its like an exercise to tell who the stubbon and pessimistic ones are in the forums.

WHAT EVIDENCE? I am not asking for evidence lol I am askng for 1 single feasable way for BW to continue on with out making more plot holes.

[FearTheLiving]

MassEffected555 wrote...Dude seriously stop wasting my time but thanks for the bumps. 

Now your just trolling. LMAO at wasting your time that's funny anyone who even looks at this thread is wasting their time. Sucsessful troll is succsessful.

[Tiax Rules All]

MassEffected555 wrote...

The crucible still has to be docked, and the citadel still needs its arms open. What happenes about that?


Those are pretty GLARING holes the theory leaves wide open so explain that to me and I will be happy. 

Thats all I asked for.

edit - the point is if the people that came up with, and support the theory can't fill in this holes, how the hell do you expect Bioware to do it?

OMG!!!!! this is crazy.

an unanswered question IS NOT A PLOT HOLE!, its just an unanswered question. what is wrong with you?

IDT answeres so many questions your "edit" is just wrong, your whole thread is wrong, and you are losing this thread now becasue its YOU that cant keep a coherant arguement.

[Jaze55]

FearTheLiving wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...Dude seriously stop wasting my time but thanks for the bumps. 

Now your just trolling. LMAO at wasting your time that's funny anyone who even looks at this thread is wasting their time. Sucsessful troll is succsessful.

Leave please.

[Turran]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Turran wrote...

Well..
Tell me if I miss the point here.


The Indoctrination Theory is based on trying to work out the ending we have been given. No one has gone any further to explain what happens after the ending, because no one actually knows.
For all we know (Let's say the Theory stands correct) Shepard could wake up from breaking free, then bleed out and die.


We have no idea what happens next, it is just a theory. A thought. Or as a famous quote does say "LOTS OF THEORIES FOR EVERYONE!".
So I am not quite sure what you want from people. It is like going into a Church and simply asking.. "Ok, I get it, but what now? What is to happen next?". They just won't have an answer for you.

my point roughly.

its nice to ask questions but OP is asking wrong questions.

Does it answer the OP? And it has turned into just a bickering thread?

Or have I still missed the point?
I am so confused. 

[ArkkAngel007]

The OP doesn't care. All it is the OP flame-baiting certain members and jumping on anything negative directed at him.

I was thinking of attaching that write-up that I posted twice already, which is only an abstract (can't really do more than that) that requires maybe 2 minutes if that to go over, yet ignores it. And even if it's read (15-16 minutes ago from this edit), it plays into exactly what the OP wants to do, which is to disprove how IT won't work in expanding the game.

Could be proven wrong on the intentions, but what the OP is saying the intentions are and what is being demonstrated at this point are very different.

Modifié par ArkkAngel007, 20 mars 2012 - 09:43 .