564 réponses à ce sujet

[Nauks]

With all the in-your-face-hints of an indoc type ending, it's really hard to believe that they didn't plan this all along.
Ray's respone shook my resolve some sure, but it would simply be too bafflingly pants-on-head-retarded for it not to be so.

So I remain convinced hopeful.

[dreman9999]

Capeo wrote...

bigbad1013 wrote...

lynch108 wrote...

Yeah, still a believer in indoctrination theory. They decided to make the announcement at PAX and they're sticking to it. They're holding their own line. All this is delaying tactics to appease fans until announcement. I'm going to be stubborn about this. I just can't buy that their writers fumbled on the one yard line.

+1

IF Indoc theory was the plan all along and they planned the big reveal for April, and if they truly were surprised by the strong reaction from the fans, then it makes sense for Muzyka to post something like this now, doing some damage control, urging people to play the game for themselves and recommend it to others if they liked the majority of the game. It's still a possibility.

No it is not!  Wow, you folks are something else.  They are not going to retcon a game that everyone has played and has been reviewed.  Can you not read?  He is defending the endings as is over and over again.  The most we're going to get is a motion comic or maybe epilogues.

Who said anything about retconing the ending. All they need to do contioue the story  with Shep  is to start everything with Shep waking up from the dream.

[Capeo]

dreman9999 wrote...

Demon Velsper wrote...

I said it before, indoctrination theory was simply confidence born of ignorance.

Plese point to a hole in the theory....I like to see one.

Give me a break.  How about that the kid is real and always has been.  The dreams are about guilt and always have been.  Indoctrination doesn't work that way and the most that could happen is Shep could wake up and shoot himself in the head.  I could go on but I've already wasted enough time on this idiocy.

[Demon Velsper]

dreman9999 wrote...

Demon Velsper wrote...

I said it before, indoctrination theory was simply confidence born of ignorance.

Plese point to a hole in the theory....I like to see one.

How about the fact that you have to work your hardest to get the BAD ending? Destroy is always the default option, control and merge are unlocked through EMS. So you have to work harder to get the bad ending... makes sense.

Then there's the fact that the Crucible gets destroyed and you get game over if you don't make a choice so apparently you are on it after all.

[Capeo]

dreman9999 wrote...

Capeo wrote...

bigbad1013 wrote...

lynch108 wrote...

Yeah, still a believer in indoctrination theory. They decided to make the announcement at PAX and they're sticking to it. They're holding their own line. All this is delaying tactics to appease fans until announcement. I'm going to be stubborn about this. I just can't buy that their writers fumbled on the one yard line.

+1

IF Indoc theory was the plan all along and they planned the big reveal for April, and if they truly were surprised by the strong reaction from the fans, then it makes sense for Muzyka to post something like this now, doing some damage control, urging people to play the game for themselves and recommend it to others if they liked the majority of the game. It's still a possibility.

No it is not!  Wow, you folks are something else.  They are not going to retcon a game that everyone has played and has been reviewed.  Can you not read?  He is defending the endings as is over and over again.  The most we're going to get is a motion comic or maybe epilogues.

Who said anything about retconing the ending. All they need to do contioue the story  with Shep  is to start everything with Shep waking up from the dream.

OMG.  Are you dense?  That IS retconning the ending.  It invalidates the other two choices millions of people have made.  You IT people are so blind you can't see that.  It invalidates the ENTIRE ending.  TIM.  Anderson.  Everything.

[dreman9999]

Nauks wrote...

With all the in-your-face-hints of an indoc type ending, it's really hard to believe that they didn't plan this all along.
Ray's respone shook my resolve some sure, but it would simply be too bafflingly pants-on-head-retarded for it not to be so.

So I remain convinced hopeful.

I see his reponce as a delay tatic because  they did not want to tell everyone what they are really doing.

[Myskal1981]

Exolyps wrote...

I still believe in the indoctrination theory. And one of my biggest reasons is the grass that appears after you're hit by the beam. Also add the grunting sounds. And oh, Shepards blood on the left side after Anderson dies.

There is just to many signs there to not believe they had something in mind.

EDIT: We also have these tweets that says things like "if you guys just knew what we have in store for you".

That is not something you pull without a good reason to it.

Apparently they do not know either or why do they need to gather feedback and analyze research data?

And Ray's Response doesn't change anything. If they want to wait with releasing things then they won't deny or comfirm anything until that time.

You see, that for me makes even less sense than these endings. To keep so stubbornly on a timeline with the backlash that is happening and the financial damage (refunds anybody?) is not logical.
Best example was the fast reaction to the From Ashes DLC explaining why it was on the disc.
Actually, they tried to do the same by reacting quickly on the endings discussion with the Final Hours App. Unfortunately it made things worse.

[saren9330]

.

Modifié par saren9330, 21 mars 2012 - 04:44 .

[ijobes1]

If Shepard was indoctrinated we are seeing what Shepard sees because we are playing the game from his perspective, we wouldn't have seen the events outside of what happened to Shepard. Shepard could not possibly see Jokers escape and crash land as this would only work to convince him he is dreaming and seeing a construction, and think about it if he is Indoctrinated or failed to be turned is now dead or a Husk.

And consider this: the Catalyst AI claims that he controls the reapers and the Citadel is part of him/it. What I don't get then, is why did Sovereign in ME1 need to go the Citadel to let its fellow reapers in? All the AI had to do was activate itself (the Citadel) and let the reapers in, it can create the most impressive killing machines in history but it cant press a button and activate itself?? So ME3's ending seems to invalidate the entire point of ME1 & ME2.

[CavScout]

dreman9999 wrote...

ijobes1 wrote...

I think Indoctrination is a mistake, Shep Indoctrinated would not see the catalyst activate or the cutscene in London, if he was Indoctrinated whatever choice he made, the game would end at that point as that would mean either they kill him if he chooses the 'kill all Synthetics option' as he can't be controlled, and the other two mean they have suceded and they have full control and turned Shep into a husk or whatever they want really. If what we saw took place in his mind they wouldn't proceed to show him a cutscene of joker in the Normandy as they get no benefit from this, in fact it would only help confirming to him/her he/she is in a dream state and would work against their intention for control because he/she would fight to wake up.

Ignore the cutscene with joker..It's a trick. It's meant to confuse you. It's meant to be like a dream and dream nomally make no sense. By the time it is show, It's too late for Shep to do anything about it, He is already fully controled.

It's Indoctrination Theory 101: Anything you see in the game that doesn't directly support Indoctrination Theory is fake, a dream, a trick, not real, a mistake, a game-play mechanic, bad writing and whatever else it needs to be to not completely and utterly disprove Indoctrination Theory.

Indoctrination Theory is constructed to be non falsifiable... which is utterly convenient for the proponents of it.

[iTofu]

CrasVox wrote...

there is no way the intent of the endings
as they stand is indoctrination. because that reality is a grim one.
that means bioware intentionally lied about the endings, far worse than
could be imagined, and that they intentionally sold us an incomplete
game.

The backlash would destroy the studio.

I disagree. No doubt many would be angry, but many would be relieved. If Bioware came out with another incredible game, enough people would still buy it.

CrasVox wrote...

My guess is that with Indoctrination being an earlier concept for the ending, cues were put in at various points to help build a foundation for the reveal, up on the Citidel. When the plan was scrapped, BW was short on cash and time to remove those cues, so that is why if you look close enough, you can still build the case for it.

I've actually wondered if this was the case for a while.

Modifié par iTofu, 21 mars 2012 - 04:39 .

[Cyren]

The Indoc theory won't work in the long run and just an attempt to put reason into things that aren't even there.
I'm just hoping they won't put all their money on just one possible thing.

[dreman9999]

Capeo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Capeo wrote...

bigbad1013 wrote...

lynch108 wrote...

Yeah, still a believer in indoctrination theory. They decided to make the announcement at PAX and they're sticking to it. They're holding their own line. All this is delaying tactics to appease fans until announcement. I'm going to be stubborn about this. I just can't buy that their writers fumbled on the one yard line.

+1

IF Indoc theory was the plan all along and they planned the big reveal for April, and if they truly were surprised by the strong reaction from the fans, then it makes sense for Muzyka to post something like this now, doing some damage control, urging people to play the game for themselves and recommend it to others if they liked the majority of the game. It's still a possibility.

No it is not!  Wow, you folks are something else.  They are not going to retcon a game that everyone has played and has been reviewed.  Can you not read?  He is defending the endings as is over and over again.  The most we're going to get is a motion comic or maybe epilogues.

Who said anything about retconing the ending. All they need to do contioue the story  with Shep  is to start everything with Shep waking up from the dream.

OMG.  Are you dense?  That IS retconning the ending.  It invalidates the other two choices millions of people have made.  You IT people are so blind you can't see that.  It invalidates the ENTIRE ending.  TIM.  Anderson.  Everything.

No, It's not. Based on the theory, Shep is still on earth in rubble dreaming this and then wakes up when be over comes indoctrination or as a reaper sleeper agent. It retcons nothing.

[TheMerchantMan]

Nauks wrote...

With all the in-your-face-hints of an indoc type ending, it's really hard to believe that they didn't plan this all along.
Ray's respone shook my resolve some sure, but it would simply be too bafflingly pants-on-head-retarded for it not to be so.

So I remain convinced hopeful.

I think perhaps, and I know this is just wishful thinking, but perhaps the point is to create confusion. If the Indoc Theory were true, and we all figured it out. Wouldn't they want to throw us off the scent. To make the reveal more surprising? 

I'm not certain though. Seems like their just making this difficult for themselves. It's important to note, he says that they are working on something, that confirms more than we had known previously.

[Capeo]

CavScout wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

ijobes1 wrote...

I think Indoctrination is a mistake, Shep Indoctrinated would not see the catalyst activate or the cutscene in London, if he was Indoctrinated whatever choice he made, the game would end at that point as that would mean either they kill him if he chooses the 'kill all Synthetics option' as he can't be controlled, and the other two mean they have suceded and they have full control and turned Shep into a husk or whatever they want really. If what we saw took place in his mind they wouldn't proceed to show him a cutscene of joker in the Normandy as they get no benefit from this, in fact it would only help confirming to him/her he/she is in a dream state and would work against their intention for control because he/she would fight to wake up.

Ignore the cutscene with joker..It's a trick. It's meant to confuse you. It's meant to be like a dream and dream nomally make no sense. By the time it is show, It's too late for Shep to do anything about it, He is already fully controled.

It's Indoctrination Theory 101: Anything you see in the game that doesn't directly support Indoctrination Theory is fake, a dream, a trick, not real, a mistake, a game-play mechanic, bad writing and whatever else it needs to be to not completely and utterly disprove Indoctrination Theory.

Indoctrination Theory is constructed to be non falsifiable... which is utterly convenient for the proponents of it.

As are all baseless conspiracy theories.  That's why they don't die.  The goalposts keep getting moved.  Whatever doesn't fit is intentionally there to fool people.  It's idiotic.

[Baelyn]

Capeo wrote...

No it is not!  Wow, you folks are something else.  They are not going to retcon a game that everyone has played and has been reviewed.  Can you not read?  He is defending the endings as is over and over again.  The most we're going to get is a motion comic or maybe epilogues.

Do you have some deep insecurities rooted in other people's opiniong or something?

I have seen you post continuously for days (quite rude in most posts), attacking anyone that even hints that Indoctrination Theory might hold weight. Just drop it, or learn to discuss without being demeaning in every one of your posts.

There are a good number of people that see all the pieces line up for IT. And for good reason, because it makes ALOT of sense, fits the plot inconsistencies, and seems in line with Bioware's MO. Let people think what they want. It in no way affects you.

[dreman9999]

CavScout wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

ijobes1 wrote...

I think Indoctrination is a mistake, Shep Indoctrinated would not see the catalyst activate or the cutscene in London, if he was Indoctrinated whatever choice he made, the game would end at that point as that would mean either they kill him if he chooses the 'kill all Synthetics option' as he can't be controlled, and the other two mean they have suceded and they have full control and turned Shep into a husk or whatever they want really. If what we saw took place in his mind they wouldn't proceed to show him a cutscene of joker in the Normandy as they get no benefit from this, in fact it would only help confirming to him/her he/she is in a dream state and would work against their intention for control because he/she would fight to wake up.

Ignore the cutscene with joker..It's a trick. It's meant to confuse you. It's meant to be like a dream and dream nomally make no sense. By the time it is show, It's too late for Shep to do anything about it, He is already fully controled.

It's Indoctrination Theory 101: Anything you see in the game that doesn't directly support Indoctrination Theory is fake, a dream, a trick, not real, a mistake, a game-play mechanic, bad writing and whatever else it needs to be to not completely and utterly disprove Indoctrination Theory.

Indoctrination Theory is constructed to be non falsifiable... which is utterly convenient for the proponents of it.

If you think that you don't understand the theaory. Dreams don't make sence....Jokerpart of the dream makes no sense. If it's a dreamthen it understandible that it makes no sense. Hech, most of everything after Shep is shot down from harbinger makes no sense. Also, nothing anyone has said disproven the theory.

[Hashbeth]

Whether they planned it or no, the Indoctrination Theory still provides, imo, the most efficient way to deal with the ending Debacle. So whether it was planned is moot, I find.

[ashwind]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

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? 

How could it have ever been their intention? People will always see what they want to see, believe what they want to believe. Especially desperate fans who is beating their heads against the wall trying to make sense out of the plotholes.

Indoctrination theory places the game to the point where it is 1 level/map/confrontation before the end. Bioware needs a whole new level and whole new list of endings. No real business/company would ever do that.

The extra content that is required to support this indoctrination theory makes it extremely unlikely, nearly impossible actually. They will not be able to get it out for at least a few more months.

In short, the indoctrination theory is nothing more than something desperate fans cook up to void & nullify the entire ending so that a new adding can be connected seamlessly.

[CavScout]

dreman9999 wrote...

Capeo wrote...

OMG.  Are you dense?  That IS retconning the ending.  It invalidates the other two choices millions of people have made.  You IT people are so blind you can't see that.  It invalidates the ENTIRE ending.  TIM.  Anderson.  Everything.

No, It's not. Based on the theory, Shep is still on earth in rubble dreaming this and then wakes up when be over comes indoctrination or as a reaper sleeper agent. It retcons nothing.

It retcons the current non-Indoctrination ending.

[RavenEyry]

I don't want to debate IT here. The good doctor's response was merely to say they are going to announce something about the endings at PAX and asking the fans to at least be civil. Something that a few aren't doing here.

[Shayuri]

Ray's message changes nothing about my beliefs. It neither confirms nor denies anything substantial.

I've never maintained that the end definitely involves indoctrination, though I find it plausible. I don't even say it can't be real...though it seems exceedingly unlikely that it is. What I maintain, and have since I finished, is that this isn't the end...and that it was never meant to be.

Ray was being honest when he expressed surprise. Surprise not at the confusion people have, but at the anger, even hate. I don't think they expected quite as much as they got. I'm sure they never anticipated complaints to the FTC, or wholesale returning of product either. I think they thought people would give them the benefit of the doubt. I think they believed more people would find the trail of breadcrumbs they left, and that more people would follow them. So yes, surprise.

The talk of artistic integrity could just as easily apply to a work currently in progress as the sequence on the CD.

Anyway, I don't claim to know anything for sure, but I do claim that the latest response does not debunk, or for that matter bunk, anything. The only specific info it contains is something most people who share my beliefs...or similar belief...already thought was going to happen. The exposition will take place in April. Specifically (or so the train of thought goes), on April 6th at the PAX convention.

I guess we'll find out.

[Exolyps]

Okay, so the boy was real. Now the Theory is false? It's true even if the boy is real.

[dreman9999]

iTofu wrote...

CrasVox wrote...

there is no way the intent of the endings
as they stand is indoctrination. because that reality is a grim one.
that means bioware intentionally lied about the endings, far worse than
could be imagined, and that they intentionally sold us an incomplete
game.

The backlash would destroy the studio.

I disagree. No doubt many would be angry, but many would be relieved. If Bioware came out with another incredible game, enough people would still buy it.

CrasVox wrote...

My guess is that with Indoctrination being an earlier concept for the ending, cues were put in at various points to help build a foundation for the reveal, up on the Citidel. When the plan was scrapped, BW was short on cash and time to remove those cues, so that is why if you look close enough, you can still build the case for it.

I've actually wondered if this was the case for a while.

What was scrapped was indoctrination to be used as a gameplay element. Not a story element.

[rvgifford]

No indoc theory then the ending is just plain stupid. That's as constructive as I can get with it. Shep is very much not himself in that scene. It makes zero sense. Indo theory was one of the only decent explanations. Now I want to hear how Bioware explains it because the whole ending continues to see the antithesis of logical. I didn't need the "solution" to the bad ending to be indoc theory, but I do need a solution.

Modifié par rvgifford, 21 mars 2012 - 04:45 .