463 réponses à ce sujet

[FearTheLiving]

MassEffected555 wrote...

FearTheLiving wrote...

Why are you asking us what would happen? We're not rewriting the ending just making the ending make sense and allow Bioware to create a new ending with DLC. It's possible and can be done right however I'm not gonna sit here and now and write you a whole new edition in DLC form to satisfy you as Bioware should be able to do that.

The indoc theroy does, in fact, re write the ending. So while I hear what you are saying I dismiss it because

1- BW plainly stated that was the planned ending
2- any change is effectivly RE WRITING the ending.

Sorry. 

That's not RE WRITING the ending...it's adding to the ending... it's completing it plain and simple. 

[kunzite]

MassEffected555 wrote...

kunzite wrote...

Doesnt the Crucible (and I'm going by the movie with the coloured explosion) dock with the Citadel from underneath? It doesnt dock with the tower, like Sovreign did, it docks from the other side, which would be the 'bottom'.

It docks in the center. When the arms are open wide at the ending scene the Crucible docks right smack in the middle of the center ring.

The ONLY way to dock it is if the arms open fully. 

yes, but it doesnt dock from the side that would be covered by the arms if it were closed does it?

[ArkkAngel007]

If you don't want fan-fiction, why are you trying to be told fan-fiction?

The theory just uses what is in the ending and is a different perception. Nothing added or changed. A whole bunch of "maybes", "possiblies", etc. It's nothing being said as fact.

A post-"ending" DLC would be an entire fan fiction on our part, because we can't say what will happen. There is nothing to support anything anyone really comes up with, as there is nothing to stand on, especially with this being an event not known to be done before. It goes from being a perception to pure, foggy speculation.

[Jarcander]

MassEffected555 wrote...

All you have to do is tell me a way they can continue the story from there that makes sense. 

BUT the Crucible has to dock, which means the Citadel has to have it's arms open. 

Shepard has to be in a world of pain from being beamafied, and has to be a confused twit after "beating" indoctrination. That has to take a mental toll and saying he just pops up and is fine after is complete nonsense.

So yeah, just tell me how to make it fit and I will never say anything bad about the indoc theory again. 

I think getting to the Normandy is elementary compared to getting into Citadel that is supposedly indestructible and inaccessible when its arms are closed.

The point is... without hope... what do we have? Okay, enough ME3 quotes. I trust Bioware's crazed writers will solve this for us... should EA choose to allow Ending DLC.

[Jaze55]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

If you don't want fan-fiction, why are you trying to be told fan-fiction?

The theory just uses what is in the ending and is a different perception. Nothing added or changed. A whole bunch of "maybes", "possiblies", etc. It's nothing being said as fact.

A post-"ending" DLC would be an entire fan fiction on our part, because we can't say what will happen. There is nothing to support anything anyone really comes up with, as there is nothing to stand on, especially with this being an event not known to be done before. It goes from being a perception to pure, foggy speculation.

I am trying to understand how the theory can work without making the ending worse and more full of plot holes.

EVERYONE and their mother by now knows how it fits into the CURRENT story, but I am asking how it allows the story to continue AFTER.

I still haven't heard anything that doesnt open more plot holes and make the ending worse. I am asking you guys to educate me on how anything can fit in AFTER the theory.

SO far, nothing has. 

[Jaze55]

kunzite wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

kunzite wrote...

Doesnt the Crucible (and I'm going by the movie with the coloured explosion) dock with the Citadel from underneath? It doesnt dock with the tower, like Sovreign did, it docks from the other side, which would be the 'bottom'.

It docks in the center. When the arms are open wide at the ending scene the Crucible docks right smack in the middle of the center ring.

The ONLY way to dock it is if the arms open fully. 

yes, but it doesnt dock from the side that would be covered by the arms if it were closed does it?

That's another stupid thing on BW part. The center is a ring, and yeah you are right. Why not just go behind the Citadel and dock on the opposite side of the right? The back is wide open. More sloppy writing I guess. 

[Dr_Hello]

Thorn Harvestar wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Dr_Hello wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Thorn Harvestar wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Thorn Harvestar wrote...

If your EMS is high enough, you don't see your 2 squadmates killed. They are behind you on the run downhill though. They are just gone when you get up. If you're hallucinating from that point on, why isn't this plausible?

But they aren't. I replayed the scene where you run to the beam and walked backwards the whole time. They are with you and then vanish. Where did they go? I know they show up on the Normandy but that's a major complaint with the ending, how did they get there? OK then how did they come half way on the trip to the beam the disappear BEFORE you get hit? 

try it, walk backwards during that scene they are there then vanish before the beam. Pretty sure I am remember that right. 

This sounds like they just were sloppy with the programming. They don't expect the player to be looking backwards when the beam strikes, and I bet you they disappear there even with low EMS, only for their bodies to be seen when you get back up.

Anytime a character model instantly vanishes like that, I mean it's obviously not intented that way story-wise.

Umm so sloppy coding and vanishing characters is explainable as sloppy coding and programming but a terrible ending can in no way JUST be sloppy writing? 

SO CONFUSED!

Undoubtedly it was some sort of glitch, but it can be worked into the story. We can only work with what we've been given.

Vanishing characters happen here and there in Mass Effect games I've noticed. It's more of a technical issue than story-related. I wouldn't read into the vanishing characters on the ground as definite proof of what so ever.

But it's OK to use some random trees that pop up as evidence of something? Or some random cable next to Shep in the Alive scene as evidence?

Hmm that doesn't sound right to me. 

Things appearing in new scenes (after blackouts, transitions) is different from a graphic/character model instantaneously appearing or disappearing while you are looking at it.

Precisely

[yumesama]

MassEffected555 wrote...

I am NOT bashing the theory, I just want it to make sense.

Make it make sense to me pls. Just the after effect, I read the 1 bazillion posts explaining how it can fit.

If you choose the destroy option, then you resist indoctrination. Not that you get indoctrinated, and then shake it off, but that it doesn't succeed against you at all. It is an attempt to gain control, that works 99% of the time, but since understandably overt in this particular instance, is noticed and deflected by shepard.

The other choises, on the other hand, could have him wake up and wrestle with himself, but severely affect the outcome.

[Jaze55]

Dr_Hello wrote...

Thorn Harvestar wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Dr_Hello wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Thorn Harvestar wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Thorn Harvestar wrote...

If your EMS is high enough, you don't see your 2 squadmates killed. They are behind you on the run downhill though. They are just gone when you get up. If you're hallucinating from that point on, why isn't this plausible?

But they aren't. I replayed the scene where you run to the beam and walked backwards the whole time. They are with you and then vanish. Where did they go? I know they show up on the Normandy but that's a major complaint with the ending, how did they get there? OK then how did they come half way on the trip to the beam the disappear BEFORE you get hit? 

try it, walk backwards during that scene they are there then vanish before the beam. Pretty sure I am remember that right. 

This sounds like they just were sloppy with the programming. They don't expect the player to be looking backwards when the beam strikes, and I bet you they disappear there even with low EMS, only for their bodies to be seen when you get back up.

Anytime a character model instantly vanishes like that, I mean it's obviously not intented that way story-wise.

Umm so sloppy coding and vanishing characters is explainable as sloppy coding and programming but a terrible ending can in no way JUST be sloppy writing? 

SO CONFUSED!

Undoubtedly it was some sort of glitch, but it can be worked into the story. We can only work with what we've been given.

Vanishing characters happen here and there in Mass Effect games I've noticed. It's more of a technical issue than story-related. I wouldn't read into the vanishing characters on the ground as definite proof of what so ever.

But it's OK to use some random trees that pop up as evidence of something? Or some random cable next to Shep in the Alive scene as evidence?

Hmm that doesn't sound right to me. 

Things appearing in new scenes (after blackouts, transitions) is different from a graphic/character model instantaneously appearing or disappearing while you are looking at it.

Precisely

Hmmm then the Indoc theory states to late. It should start earlier. See there were a few times I had a cut scene and I was holding a pistol or a rifle when in fact I didn't bring a pistol with me OR a rifle with me, yet they are still in the cut scene.

[LolaLei]

MassEffected555 wrote...

FearTheLiving wrote...

Why are you asking us what would happen? We're not rewriting the ending just making the ending make sense and allow Bioware to create a new ending with DLC. It's possible and can be done right however I'm not gonna sit here and now and write you a whole new edition in DLC form to satisfy you as Bioware should be able to do that.

The indoc theroy does, in fact, re write the ending. So while I hear what you are saying I dismiss it because

1- BW plainly stated that was the planned ending
2- any change is effectivly RE WRITING the ending.

Sorry. 

Chances are Bioware won't change the endings. But I thought we were talking hypothetically here.

[Jaze55]

yumesama wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

I am NOT bashing the theory, I just want it to make sense.

Make it make sense to me pls. Just the after effect, I read the 1 bazillion posts explaining how it can fit.

If you choose the destroy option, then you resist indoctrination. Not that you get indoctrinated, and then shake it off, but that it doesn't succeed against you at all. It is an attempt to gain control, that works 99% of the time, but since understandably overt in this particular instance, is noticed and deflected by shepard.

The other choises, on the other hand, could have him wake up and wrestle with himself, but severely affect the outcome.

Yes right I get it. 

What happens after Shep wakes up in the rubble is what I am asking.

[Karnor00]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Jarcander wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Dunno doesn't make any sense at all to me. 

I wish you could see it the way I now see it... it is... so... perfect. *stops channeling imaginery Illusive Man*

All you have to do is tell me a way they can continue the story from there that makes sense. 

BUT the Crucible has to dock, which means the Citadel has to have it's arms open. 

Shepard has to be in a world of pain from being beamafied, and has to be a confused twit after "beating" indoctrination. That has to take a mental toll and saying he just pops up and is fine after is complete nonsense.

So yeah, just tell me how to make it fit and I will never say anything bad about the indoc theory again. 

We don't know how badly injured Shepard is in the brief seconds under the rubble.  Although his armor does have a clear N7 logo on it, whereas when he goes through the beam his armor is completely melted (i.e. no N7 logos in sight).  If the indoctrination theory is isn't true then that's one more inconsistency to explain.

If the indoctrination theory is true then it suggests Shepard isn't as badly damaged as we previously thought.  Maybe he just got knocked out briefly but is in good enough shape to get up, run to the beam, open the Citadel arms and then activate the Crucible for real (at which point we find out what it really does).  There's your ending that fits.

I'm not about to suggest that the indoctrination theory is flawless - there are some bits which don't really fit properly with the theory (such as why do we still get the Normandy crash scene after supposedly breaking the indoctrination by chosing the destroy option).  But there are plenty of flaws with the obvious ending too (such as the magical transporting Normandy and crew).

Hell, maybe the rubble cutscene is Bioware setting us up for ME4.  And it's not actually Shepard in the rubble, but Lt Commander Grissom, who is also a highly trained N7 specialist that we just haven't met before.

[Vromrig]

Ideally, Shepard wakes up. Stumbles. Suffers severe damage and trauma from blast. Looks up. Sees Harbinger, angry at failed Indoctrination attempt. Seems doomed.

Destiny Ascension arrives. Fights with Harbinger.

DLC then follows final battle. Destiny Ascension dies to save Shepard, in memory of the humans lost to save Destiny Ascension.

Sufficient ending. Would result in chills from many players. Ideal.

[Jarcander]

MassEffected555 wrote...

I am trying to understand how the theory can work without making the ending worse and more full of plot holes.

Hell, if the community managed to piece together The Indoctrination Theory that makes jaw-dropping amounts of sense ( ) then I'm sure if it was planned thatway by Bioware, they have already figured out the plot for the ending DLC and currently creating the content itself.

Now, they wouldn't just sell us a few cutscenes and call that DLC. It'll have to have some combat which the assault to citadel will provide. This could open a number of different endings of which some can be "happy", some of heroic sacrifice and some with Reapers pwning Shepard with their deceiving machine intelligence.

[Dr_Hello]

Idea for DLC:

After Shepard defeats indoc. and wakes up in the rubble, a bright light is seen descending from the dark skies to the ground... everyone stops the fight for a moment, including the Reapers. The light takes the shape of none other than 'Jesus'...

Jesus speaks: "I have returned. Kneel and make peace!"

Modifié par Dr_Hello, 20 mars 2012 - 07:47 .

[Jaze55]

LolaLei wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

FearTheLiving wrote...

Why are you asking us what would happen? We're not rewriting the ending just making the ending make sense and allow Bioware to create a new ending with DLC. It's possible and can be done right however I'm not gonna sit here and now and write you a whole new edition in DLC form to satisfy you as Bioware should be able to do that.

The indoc theroy does, in fact, re write the ending. So while I hear what you are saying I dismiss it because

1- BW plainly stated that was the planned ending
2- any change is effectivly RE WRITING the ending.

Sorry. 

Chances are Bioware won't change the endings. But I thought we were talking hypothetically here.

We are. Like I said since it seems a lot of people like the indoc theory I want to give people a chance to explain to me how it works after the theory.

I am still waiting for that explanation and its been 8 pages. 

[Thorn Harvestar]

MassEffected555 wrote...

Thorn Harvestar wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

I can conceed that. I still don't think the trees are anything more then a design oversight though. Can't prove it either way thought so I won't either bother trying. 

I too am not convinced by the trees. Things like Shepard only visibly surviving with one specific choice, or the Normandy inexplicably deserting you after your crew promises to basically follow you into hell, THOSE are the kind of nonsensical pieces that I think need to be the focus.

There's no good reason to show Shepard breathe at the end if there isn't something else to be explained after that scene. And it would be monumentally dumb for it to just be Shepard living out the rest of his days alone on a ruined Earth with his loved ones/crew lost in the galaxy.

LOL wouldn't it? I think it was supposed to symbolize hope. Shep, the hero, beat all odds and saved teh galaxy and just when you though he was dead... he isn't

But he is stuck in a pile of rubble and no one knows it and he has no way of comunicating with anyone so they can rescue him.... lol I know what BW was going for but man did they drop the ball. 

They dropped it hard if that was their intent. I felt ill after reflecting on what I just watched. Espescially after listening to what Shep says to Garrus on their bro-date:

"Times like these, you know who your real friends are. They're not the ones running around looking for an escape route. They're the ones who stand at your side through the worst of it, who never give up on you. I'm lucky I can say I know someone like that"

Guess Shep didn't know someone like that after all...

(ok, i'm done getting off-topic)

[jedsithor]

MassEffected555 wrote...


I am trying to understand how the theory can work without making the ending worse and more full of plot holes.

EVERYONE and their mother by now knows how it fits into the CURRENT story, but I am asking how it allows the story to continue AFTER.

I still haven't heard anything that doesnt open more plot holes and make the ending worse. I am asking you guys to educate me on how anything can fit in AFTER the theory.

SO far, nothing has. 

I thought mine did. I'm not suggesting it's good but as far as fitting with the current ending I think it works. The only issue was dead squadmembers but I resolved that one easily enough. Now, does it make the ending worse? It might. I'm a screenwriter, but not necessarily a good one.

[Jaze55]

Karnor00 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Jarcander wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Dunno doesn't make any sense at all to me. 

I wish you could see it the way I now see it... it is... so... perfect. *stops channeling imaginery Illusive Man*

All you have to do is tell me a way they can continue the story from there that makes sense. 

BUT the Crucible has to dock, which means the Citadel has to have it's arms open. 

Shepard has to be in a world of pain from being beamafied, and has to be a confused twit after "beating" indoctrination. That has to take a mental toll and saying he just pops up and is fine after is complete nonsense.

So yeah, just tell me how to make it fit and I will never say anything bad about the indoc theory again. 

We don't know how badly injured Shepard is in the brief seconds under the rubble.  Although his armor does have a clear N7 logo on it, whereas when he goes through the beam his armor is completely melted (i.e. no N7 logos in sight).  If the indoctrination theory is isn't true then that's one more inconsistency to explain.

If the indoctrination theory is true then it suggests Shepard isn't as badly damaged as we previously thought.  Maybe he just got knocked out briefly but is in good enough shape to get up, run to the beam, open the Citadel arms and then activate the Crucible for real (at which point we find out what it really does).  There's your ending that fits.

I'm not about to suggest that the indoctrination theory is flawless - there are some bits which don't really fit properly with the theory (such as why do we still get the Normandy crash scene after supposedly breaking the indoctrination by chosing the destroy option).  But there are plenty of flaws with the obvious ending too (such as the magical transporting Normandy and crew).

Hell, maybe the rubble cutscene is Bioware setting us up for ME4.  And it's not actually Shepard in the rubble, but Lt Commander Grissom, who is also a highly trained N7 specialist that we just haven't met before.

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. 

[UrgentArchengel]

You wake up, but in the end you kill your friends because the Reapers make it seem lie they are trying to kill you, and then the Reapers win in the end.

[Jaze55]

jedsithor wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...


I am trying to understand how the theory can work without making the ending worse and more full of plot holes.

EVERYONE and their mother by now knows how it fits into the CURRENT story, but I am asking how it allows the story to continue AFTER.

I still haven't heard anything that doesnt open more plot holes and make the ending worse. I am asking you guys to educate me on how anything can fit in AFTER the theory.

SO far, nothing has. 

I thought mine did. I'm not suggesting it's good but as far as fitting with the current ending I think it works. The only issue was dead squadmembers but I resolved that one easily enough. Now, does it make the ending worse? It might. I'm a screenwriter, but not necessarily a good one.

You wrote the long post right? I did like yours but like I said no one is around to help you at that point so I can't make that work.

If they retconned that entire running to the beam scene, that's another story, but if they retconned running to the beam, Shep hasn't been hit by the laser yet so no indoctrination is happening. 

Complete re write. 

[Tyrf]

I wrote everything (that could happen) after the indoc theory. Too long to copy + paste, so heres the link:

http://social.biowar...ndex/10291016/1 

Modifié par Tyrf, 20 mars 2012 - 07:51 .

[Jarcander]

UrgentArchengel wrote...

You wake up, but in the end you kill your friends because the Reapers make it seem lie they are trying to kill you, and then the Reapers win in the end.

Deal, but only if you chooce the control "ending".

[Minkyboi]

Since indoctrination cannot be broken, maybe Shep is the first person to be able to break free of it? I'd say he has the stronger willpower than Saren, Benezia and TIM to be able to resist and possibly reject indoctrination entirely.

[Jaze55]

Tyrf wrote...

 Here, I wrote everything that happens after the indoc theory.

http://social.biowar...ndex/10291016/1 

That's long but I will read it and comment. But on my next bathroom break. That is a compliment, I do my best reading on my throne.