287 réponses à ce sujet

[Sett101]

Maybe because it's half cooked and the people who think it's great won't even say wait they covered this in the App, was an optional ending they removed, been commented on by writers? When someone in the know says we thought about that or tell you how they planned the endings, indoc people come back with "that's just what they would say to keep the secret"?

It's like trying to talk someone into or out of a tinfoil hat. Sorry keep the hat it suits you but, I don't like hat hair.

[Applepie_Svk]

Because they are already indoctrinated, they think it can be solved as a Saren did and also as TIM but instead they are changing to husk which thinks the ending are gOOd

[Kamagawa]

Lol...what about this scene ...

(you know what I mean)

[Grasich]

ohbobsagetpiss wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

Grasich wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

Grasich wrote...



The point is that the game would then continue after that, where you would continue to make REAL choices. Think of it this way, technically you could choose to lose a boss fight and have that be your ending, but do you consider the necessity to defeat a boss to be a reduction of your choices?

But if you fall to indoctrination, what possible choices could you make? You would have to pick the destroy ending to be able to make future choices, otherwise, you would be indoctrinated.

Correct, which would be the equivalent of losing a boss fight.

So...again, I'm actually failing to understand how that isn't railroading or driving you toward a "proper" ending. If you want to make future choices, you would have to pick the destroy ending.

That's why it falls apart. It's like giving you a canon ending, which hasn't been done in the last 2 games. Why have a "right" ending now?

It wouldn't be a canon ending. It's a single canon choice, which would lead to you being able to make more choices.

I think what's being missed here is that the indoc theory means that the game doesn't end where it does now, it would keep going.

[Zulufoxtrot]

Vigil_N7 wrote...

Because the idea that bioware would purposely with hold the real ending because they either didn't have time or because they wanted to release it as DLC is quite frankly insulting and is no way to treat loyal customers.

[GBGriffin]

Grasich wrote...

It wouldn't be a canon ending. It's a single canon choice, which would lead to you being able to make more choices.

I think what's being missed here is that the indoc theory means that the game doesn't end where it does now, it would keep going.

Yes, it would keep going by limiting you to making one choice. At this point, why even make it a choice if two options lead to game over? What about the people who actually believe in Synthesis and think that makes sense? This only benefits the people who want to pick Destroy...and it railroads everyone else into picking destroy to continue the game.

If all choices matter, which is what people I think generally want from the endings (for their choices to matter), they would be forced to make one choice in order to make more choices in the true ending of the game...which, in my case, I paid $80 for and didn't receive.

Modifié par GBGriffin, 20 mars 2012 - 11:13 .

[czombie]

Indoctrination is too simple of a twist and the fact that it was proposed and discussed so quickly on a message board shows its simplicity. If there were a surprise twist (which I sincerely doubt), I would hope that it would be something a bit more complicated in nature. As it is, I think Bioware wanted an ending that was controversial and that some people really liked and some people were not satisfied with. I do not think that they anticipated the kind of vitriol that they have received, however, nor that so few people are in support of the ending. The fact that they are perceived as having lied to the video game community about the multiple endings that were promised is not changed by indoctrination theory, nor does the idea that game buyers may be charged extra for DLC to get the *real* endings sit well with most fans, either. I see IT as the same kind of blind hope that people who subscribe to religious belief without scrutiny believe in. I do believe that there will be alternate *free* DLC endings only because there is so much future money involved in this for Bioware and EA. The existence of message boards, Facebook and the fact that people are so much more involved in their gaming than they used to be means that this issue is not going to go away for Bioware and EA. If Mass Effect were just a shooter, people would just move on. But as an RPG guided by player choice, unless you give the players a choice in the end that they are satisfied with, people will never trust you to make another quality RPG story again.

Modifié par czombie, 20 mars 2012 - 11:15 .

[xsdob]

Cause it makes the endings not only bad, but adds an extra slap to the face of "it was all a dream and you choose poorly, so **** you." type experience to anyone who didn't play the game just right.

[ohbobsagetpiss]

Skyline45 wrote...

Kamagawa wrote...

ohbobsagetpiss wrote...

Kamagawa wrote...

Is it because we are still getting an incomplete game?
or because they don't think bioware has 2 brain cells to rub together?
Perhaps it is because they don't like this kind of ending (like thinking fight club was epic except for the end)?

The point of the ending(s) is that Shepherd gets 3 choices on how to solve the reaper problem. He can destroy, control, or combine synth with organic life. Destroy basically says "organics and sythetics can't get along, so sythetics should be destroyed". That's why EDI and the geth die with this ending. Control gives you a way to preserve all life in hope that organics and synthetics can find a way to cooperate, basically the paragon choice. The synergy ending transcends both organic and synthetic and says "let's be one" so that the fighting (although i disagree) will be stopped. 

Indoctrination "theory" ruins this idea by giving you only one "right" choice, destroy. It's like bioware is saying killing all sythetic life is morally right. All other views are wrong and get you killed. That's why it makes no sense.

you aren't distroying all synthetic life, it is the option to distroy the reapers, though to make you feel like you will distroy the Geth which you have now come to like, which is not true.

The start child also mentions that you have cybernetics right after the geth implying you would die, but yet at the end you see him gasp a breath. The ID suggests everything after the beam takes place in shepards head so the geth and EDI dying as a result of the destroy option would only be in his head.

I'm not saying its 100% true. But if its not it seems like they subconsciously wrote it to be like this, and should prob just run with it. I guess we'll have to wait till Bioware decides to comes out of thier bunker.

I could easily just say Shep was dying due to the loss of his cybernetics. That was the last breath he drew before kicking the bucket. I mean, indoc theory just makes everything even more convoluted than it already is. 

[Jaze55]

saren9330 wrote...

Because every evidence speaks against it.
The iOS App and the leaked Script.
The real question ist, why do some people still believe in it?
Because they want to think they are smarter than us?
Look at Cult Leader Tiax Rules All and his topics. We don't get it and need enlightenment....

Oh you noticed him to huh? He just came in my thread and started going crazy. He couldn't even type coherently he go so angry someone said the theory was false. 

[tamperous]

Because we're not seeing the narrative of ME from Shep's eyes.

We are observing the actions from an impartial narrator. This is proven to be the case during the sequence we play as Joker.

Also the idea that they would hold back the endings and subject Hudson, Walters, Gamble and the rest to our abuse is laughable.

[STEEEEVE]

Grasich wrote...

ohbobsagetpiss wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

Grasich wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

Grasich wrote...



The point is that the game would then continue after that, where you would continue to make REAL choices. Think of it this way, technically you could choose to lose a boss fight and have that be your ending, but do you consider the necessity to defeat a boss to be a reduction of your choices?

But if you fall to indoctrination, what possible choices could you make? You would have to pick the destroy ending to be able to make future choices, otherwise, you would be indoctrinated.

Correct, which would be the equivalent of losing a boss fight.

So...again, I'm actually failing to understand how that isn't railroading or driving you toward a "proper" ending. If you want to make future choices, you would have to pick the destroy ending.

That's why it falls apart. It's like giving you a canon ending, which hasn't been done in the last 2 games. Why have a "right" ending now?

It wouldn't be a canon ending. It's a single canon choice, which would lead to you being able to make more choices.

I think what's being missed here is that the indoc theory means that the game doesn't end where it does now, it would keep going.

Nobody is missing that.  It's just not part of the game.

[Sett101]

 http://t0.gstatic.co...NmmJLqcreTE-RZw
Indoc people really need to post this in their threads. Elvis and his free mason buddies will send the CIA to get you if you don't...............

[Jaze55]

By the way - the indoc theory is just an insane idea on so many levels.

From a:

Business standpoint
From a PR standpoint
From a legal standpoint
from a COMMON SENSE standpoint

Not to mention the in game issues and all the plot holes it opens and all the lore it breaks.

[RLesueur]

MassEffected555 wrote...

By the way - the indoc theory is just an insane idea on so many levels.

From a:

Business standpoint
From a PR standpoint
From a legal standpoint
from a COMMON SENSE standpoint

Not to mention the in game issues and all the plot holes it opens and all the lore it breaks.

This. It's insane. It makes no sense, and all 'proof' presented is at very best a desperate leap of faith.

[ohbobsagetpiss]

GBGriffin wrote...

Grasich wrote...

It wouldn't be a canon ending. It's a single canon choice, which would lead to you being able to make more choices.

I think what's being missed here is that the indoc theory means that the game doesn't end where it does now, it would keep going.

Yes, it would keep going by limiting you to making one choice. At this point, why even make it a choice if two options lead to game over? What about the people who actually believe in Synthesis and think that makes sense? This only benefits the people who want to pick Destroy...and it railroads everyone else into picking destroy to continue the game.

If all choices matter, which is what people I think generally want from the endings (for their choices to matter), they would be forced to make one choice in order to make more choices in the true ending of the game...which, in my case, I paid $80 for and didn't receive.

Thank you. I couldn't have said it better myself. 

[GBGriffin]

MassEffected555 wrote...

By the way - the indoc theory is just an insane idea on so many levels.

From a:

Business standpoint
From a PR standpoint
From a legal standpoint
from a COMMON SENSE standpoint

Not to mention the in game issues and all the plot holes it opens and all the lore it breaks.

People need to believe in it though because "nothing else makes sense" of the plotholes....other than the possibility they just left them in there. It pretty much is an unfalsifiable theory; you really can't prove it wrong if you think everything points to it. It's also fan-made, as in, BioWare hasn't supported it...only fans have so far, and with an almost religious devotion in some cases.

I'm out of here, though. Like I said, pick your side and hold the line over it. It's silly to argue over it when BioWare hasn't confirmed or denied it and it remains, as of now, a fan-made theory.

[Tezzajh]

because Mass effect 3 ended in death pure and simple unless the good ending.

shep displays no symptoms of indoctrantion, headache, ringing,

why would shep be indoctranated and not anderson? Anderson spent the most time around the reapers.

im all for a diffrent ending but this theory is just pants, Indoctranation just makes people loyal to the reapers, so why the heck would shep just start seeing things?

[Computron2000]

OP, the answer is simple for those who already thought further ahead

if Indoc is true = Bioware SHIPPED THE GAME WITHOUT AN ENDING
If Indoc is false = Space magic

It becomes obvious the indoc theory does not matter. It instead becomes wierd if you celebrate the indoc theory as a godsend or the "so hidden only i noticed it" thing because you're supporting companies selling you the ending seperately.

Also as noted prior by another poster, the indoc theory is the same as the "its a dream", "He's really insane", "Near death hallucination" and similar endings. Anything you say can be true since its a dream. Anything you say can be false since its a dream. There is no solid reason only conjectures and guesses based on conjectures which the "its a dream" theory also works on.

[lex0r11]

GBGriffin wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

By the way - the indoc theory is just an insane idea on so many levels.

From a:

Business standpoint
From a PR standpoint
From a legal standpoint
from a COMMON SENSE standpoint

Not to mention the in game issues and all the plot holes it opens and all the lore it breaks.

People need to believe in it though because "nothing else makes sense" of the plotholes....other than the possibility they just left them in there. It pretty much is an unfalsifiable theory; you really can't prove it wrong if you think everything points to it. It's also fan-made, as in, BioWare hasn't supported it...only fans have so far, and with an almost religious devotion in some cases.

I'm out of here, though. Like I said, pick your side and hold the line over it. It's silly to argue over it when BioWare hasn't confirmed or denied it and it remains, as of now, a fan-made theory.

this, what the volus said.
bioware needs to say what is their position on the endgame so everyone can together go nuts or thank them for fixing dlc.

[Lmaoboat]

I think all the people who believe Indoctrination Theory are poor souls who could simply not handle terribleness of the ending, and were driven insane. I have dubbed this condition "Reaper Madness,"

[Kamagawa]

Sett101 wrote...

 http://t0.gstatic.co...NmmJLqcreTE-RZw
Indoc people really need to post this in their threads. Elvis and his free mason buddies will send the CIA to get you if you don't...............

Beautiful...Brilliant...
+1 internet.

[Area42T]

Because it's dumb.

[Paragon Auducan]

And yet I have still to hear a SINGLE argument as to why Shepard wakes up on Earth in the destruction ending that makes any sense whatsoever.

[Mr Indivisible]

Because of Final Hour, because of everything they have said and not said so far.

They would not let it blow to this level if they had something up their sleeve.

They intended the current ending to be it, they wanted to reach for something deep because they got stuck trying to write an ending.