564 réponses à ce sujet

[Valdimier]

GBGriffin wrote...

Humakt83 wrote...

Tsantilas wrote...

If you choose anything other than Destroy with higher than 4000+ EMS you don't even get that.  This is why the Indoctrination theory is even worse than just assuming the endings now are badly written messes.  I hate the current endings as much as many of you guys, but you're fooling yourself if you think this is all some elaborate scheme on Bioware's part and they are going to surprise us with a free DLC that suddenly clarifies everything us.  In fact Ray's statement pretty much says they had no plans for any such free dlc, and that any post ending dlc will be something that will be made in the future.

You realize that after the game ends, you are able to continue from the point just before attack to Cerberus base. That means, you can replay the ending with very little effort. Bioware might also change the EMS requirement for the ending, since that should be trivial thing to change. Besides, is Shepard even required for the ending anyway?

So basically, you'd be punished for choosing the "wrong" answer by being forced to replay the entire mission so that you can arrive back in the same spot and  pick the right one?

How is that a good thing?

I don`t know if its true, but I heard that you can not import a savegame from ME2 when Shepard dies there at the end, because his story is over.

As long as they don`t give you the opourtunity to play ask a Hsuk Shepard it is the same thing to me.

[Rafe34]

Tsantilas wrote...

Humakt83 wrote...

Tsantilas wrote...

If you choose anything other than Destroy with higher than 4000+ EMS you don't even get that.  This is why the Indoctrination theory is even worse than just assuming the endings now are badly written messes.  I hate the current endings as much as many of you guys, but you're fooling yourself if you think this is all some elaborate scheme on Bioware's part and they are going to surprise us with a free DLC that suddenly clarifies everything us.  In fact Ray's statement pretty much says they had no plans for any such free dlc, and that any post ending dlc will be something that will be made in the future.

You realize that after the game ends, you are able to continue from the point just before attack to Cerberus base. That means, you can replay the ending with very little effort. Bioware might also change the EMS requirement for the ending, since that should be trivial thing to change. Besides, is Shepard even required for the new ending anyway?

So... lets say I pick Synergy for argument's sake.  I get the whole ending cutscene, have a feeling of "wtf just happened?" so I go to the BSN looking for answers.  I stumble into some Indoctrination Theory thread and everyone's like "Destroy is the good ending".  No problem, the game continues from before the Cerberus base, I play the sequence again, get to the ending, choose Destroy (and made sure I have 4000+ ems), I get the same cutscene except in a lovely shade of red, and a 3 second clip of Shepard breathing.  "Yay I broke out of Indoctrination, I'm awake in London!" Then I get the same pop up saying congrats you beat the game, the reapers are still killing everyone but no worries you somehow defeated them and Shepard is a legend.

Better?

Than the original ending? Hell yes.

[lookingglassmind]

Theorycrafting HUB's response to Ray:

http://w11.zetaboard...18624&t=7698722

TH3Fish wrote...

Honestly, at this point, it's become a matter of what BioWare will do. I think, unintentionally, the concept behind Indoctrination wrote itself into the story. Since the change in the ME writers has occurred, we have seen a change in focus and despite that, the endings (as they currently stand) have more holes than swiss-cheese. No writer in his or her right mind should find what was presented to us as being 'acceptable'.

The Indoctrination Theory practically built itself into the game; all the evidence is there, and points to the fact that indoctrination can work as a very viable solution. The details are there, and the subtle and obvious clues are there. Simply dismissing the theory as 'grasping at straws' is the sound of hurt fans who are, in matter of fact, thinking critically.

Many do not want to admit that indoctrination has been a core theme of Mass Effect, nor of Shepard's story itself, ever since Mass Effect 1. The theory is viable because the game itself supports the concept... and any who say otherwise do not understand the analysis that the Theorist community has made. We have done exactly what BioWare has said they have been looking for: we've given constructive criticism and feedback.

We've picked apart all the details, all the clues and hints; we've examined the endings from every angle we can. We've argued what works and what doesn't, and how our evidence could be interpreted differently. Alternative theories and analysis have spawned from this and we have become a cultured community where theorycrafting in any media is encouraged. This was a communal effort of analytical minds looking for justification and answers, not the drabblings of an angry fan-base demanding for a change that they believe they are entitled to by the company. We believe there can be more to this, and whether that happens or not is irrelevant. If BioWare's intention was to get the community to write its own ending, then they should be in awe of the Theorists who have come together and literally wrote out this theory as being a viable ending to the Mass Effect trilogy.

I encourage others to spread this post to BSN and other areas, make people aware that we are not 'crazy' and we are just as much fans of Mass Effect as those who would quick to quash our creativity.



http://w11.zetaboard...18624&t=7698722

[Dr_Hello]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

I was thinking that after Ray's response (http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/) and Hudson's response last week - the InDoc Theory (as much as I support it) - was probably not planned afterall.

I believe that if the InDoc theory will appear in a future DLC - it is probably due to community feedback - rather than original intend.

Hey if I had a game with an ending where everyone complains, and a lot of people see hints about how to continue the series: If that wasn't my original intention and I wanted to make changes - why not incorporate something that seems to resonate with a lot of people.

Sure - this whole thing still could have been planned - I supported that stance for as long as I could - but after seeing two official responses from BioWare - none of which discussed that it was their original intend to continue the series - it seems a bit unlikely that the InDoc theory was planned.

Or let me put it in other words: If anything of the InDoc theory is correct - as I've already stated in another thread: I don't see why BioWare drops more hints about it - given the huge controversy that sparked - with EA even accepting refunds of the game.

So to summarize: Sure the InDoc theory might still happen - but reading Ray's announcement it doesn't seem like it was their original intention.

Thoughts? 

Whether their original intention or not,

the indoctrination theory fits seamlessly within the story and context. It allows for ME3 endings to remain intact but most importantly it offers a golden opportunity for the endings, and story altogether, to expand and evolve with great potential.

But whatever they end up doing, however they choose to,
they should make sure to cover these 4 criteria in order to resolve the whole issue and create proper ending(s):

1- Fill the plot holes and gaps
2- Create closure, not necessarily entirely but where needed
3- Avoid brevity where unwarranted
4- Do what was promised to fans i.e. make the decisions chosen throughout series count in the end, that includes Love-Interest

Modifié par Dr_Hello, 21 mars 2012 - 09:31 .

[Golferguy758]

Whatever happens happens. If it's IT great where are my endings? If it's not IT okay, where are my endings?

As long as I get my damn endings that make some damn sense I don't really care how they go about explaining it.

Modifié par Golferguy758, 21 mars 2012 - 09:28 .

[Humakt83]

Tsantilas wrote...  "Yay I broke out of Indoctrination, I'm awake in London!" Then I get the same pop up saying congrats you beat the game, the reapers are still killing everyone but no worries you somehow defeated them and Shepard is a legend.

Better?

Why don't you wait until we have an ending DLC before replaying? The DLC may continue right after discussion with Starchild, so you can still make the final choice. Complaining about ending dlc is not going to help us get it.

[Kiara]

I don't see why this article suddenly proves there is no ID theory. It addresses the upset fans yes, but that is all it does. So this is the ending they intended, so what? it doesn't mean they are done expanding on it. Personally if the ID theory is true and that is where they are gonna take it, I am looking forward to how it will proceed. Everything about the story of ME3 is awesome and then the ending comes up and things go weird. There is no way the amazing writers of most of the story suddenly give up on it while they are so close to the end. Now that make no sense.

Modifié par Kiara, 21 mars 2012 - 09:31 .

[JeffZero]

Didn't believe it originally; still don't believe it now. As I said weeks ago, though, I wouldn't be opposed to being proven wrong.

[CptData]

lookingglassmind wrote...

Theorycrafting HUB's response to Ray:

http://w11.zetaboard...18624&t=7698722

TH3Fish wrote...

Honestly, at this point, it's become a matter of what BioWare will do. I think, unintentionally, the concept behind Indoctrination wrote itself into the story. Since the change in the ME writers has occurred, we have seen a change in focus and despite that, the endings (as they currently stand) have more holes than swiss-cheese. No writer in his or her right mind should find what was presented to us as being 'acceptable'.

The Indoctrination Theory practically built itself into the game; all the evidence is there, and points to the fact that indoctrination can work as a very viable solution. The details are there, and the subtle and obvious clues are there. Simply dismissing the theory as 'grasping at straws' is the sound of hurt fans who are, in matter of fact, thinking critically.

Many do not want to admit that indoctrination has been a core theme of Mass Effect, nor of Shepard's story itself, ever since Mass Effect 1. The theory is viable because the game itself supports the concept... and any who say otherwise do not understand the analysis that the Theorist community has made. We have done exactly what BioWare has said they have been looking for: we've given constructive criticism and feedback.

We've picked apart all the details, all the clues and hints; we've examined the endings from every angle we can. We've argued what works and what doesn't, and how our evidence could be interpreted differently. Alternative theories and analysis have spawned from this and we have become a cultured community where theorycrafting in any media is encouraged. This was a communal effort of analytical minds looking for justification and answers, not the drabblings of an angry fan-base demanding for a change that they believe they are entitled to by the company. We believe there can be more to this, and whether that happens or not is irrelevant. If BioWare's intention was to get the community to write its own ending, then they should be in awe of the Theorists who have come together and literally wrote out this theory as being a viable ending to the Mass Effect trilogy.

I encourage others to spread this post to BSN and other areas, make people aware that we are not 'crazy' and we are just as much fans of Mass Effect as those who would quick to quash our creativity.



http://w11.zetaboard...18624&t=7698722

Pretty much this.

I'm following fish's thread for a while now, and he (or she???) did a great job here.

[twystedspyder]

I wholeheartedly support the theory and the fact that it works both as an intended story twist and as a legitimate and well thought out fix.

However, I've come to the conclusion that nothing less than the Indoctrination Theory playing out as additional DLC will satisfy me. This actually makes me depressed.

Patched endings or extended endings really just wont cut it for me. I need this complete rewrite that incorporates all the effort all of the developers have put into the final game and provides all the fans with one more chance to find the endings they deserve while supporting a major theme of the Mass Effect series...

Because as Eve reminds Shepard, "In the darkest hour, there is always a way out."

[earth_angel]

If indoctrination theory is picked by Bioware as the explanation, I will feel like I expericenced both indoctrination and asari's "electronic democracy".

[GBGriffin]

twystedspyder wrote...

I wholeheartedly support the theory and the fact that it works both as an intended story twist and as a legitimate and well thought out fix.

However, I've come to the conclusion that nothing less than the Indoctrination Theory playing out as additional DLC will satisfy me. This actually makes me depressed.

Patched endings or extended endings really just wont cut it for me. I need this complete rewrite that incorporates all the effort all of the developers have put into the final game and provides all the fans with one more chance to find the endings they deserve while supporting a major theme of the Mass Effect series...

Because as Eve reminds Shepard, "In the darkest hour, there is always a way out."

You know that the IT was born out of a need to explain the plotholes, so if they explain the plotholes, then the IT has no reason to exist, right?

[TuringPoint]

The IT has more plotholes than the ending already has. I hope they focus on the ending they made and clarifying what needs to be clarified.

[Segameister]

Guys / Gals: I like that the theory fits what happened in game, but the idea is still a pathetic ending. You don't end a trilogy such as this with what is essentially a dream sequence!

Modifié par Segameister, 23 mars 2012 - 01:47 .

[Shayuri]

I think the point would be that the dream sequence wouldn't actually be the end though.