564 réponses à ce sujet

[Gyspy Jive]

"FINISH THE FIGHT!" and get a ****ty ending.

[Baelyn]

KroganShields wrote...

DESTRAUDO wrote...

KroganShields wrote...

Can anyone please explain to me how you guys managed to figure out from Ray's respone that the indo. theroy is wrong? Just because he didn't mentioned it or I missed something?

They were heartbroken that people did not like ending. They were trying to resolve it without compromising their artistic integrity. Therefore for better or worse, the endings as presented were real and depicted actual events. 

Alright. Thank you for the explanation.

In addition to the fact that they neither confirmed, nor denied, that the ending interpretation  is or is not indoctrination. They are happy with the current endings, which, in IT, is indoctrination, and for others the metaphysical explanation the star child gives.

All this confirms is that they are happy with the ending, not what the ending really was.

[RLesueur]

DESTRAUDO wrote...

The indoc theory burns. ha . HAHA. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Delighted.

Does it make me a bad person that I share these sentiments?

So many smug indoc theorists are now having their 'I'm so smart that I get the ending and you don't' statements rubbed in their faces.

[dreman9999]

MassEffected555 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

MassEffected555 wrote...

Vromrig wrote...

LOLOL NO not everyone died. You ONLY see the 2 shuttles getting shot down. There were people still on the floor.

WOW you guys seriously need to stop leaving stuff out to support your data.

YOU ONLY SEE THE 2 SHUTTLES IN THE AIR GETTING BLOWN UP NOT THE GROUND TROOPS.

ANY one of the ground troops could have taken that pic. ANY ONE OF THEM.

Awkward suggestion. Troops in Apocalyptic battle. See child. Decide perfect time to take photograph. Remember moment before he dies. More important than saving Earth. Or not being turned into DNA paste.

Strange.

Looking at vague pictures floating around the internet saying it's meaningful. Taking things out of context in the game to support crazy theory. Ignoring all previous 3 games, and books, lore to make it look like I am right. Grasping at straws. 

Psychotic. 

You still haven't explain who took the kids picture yet. You who says the theory is based on leaps on asumptions with no real fact is are reason to dicredit it with something that has not explination to be there is ironic.
Really, who took the picture of the kid and who posted the kid picture on the wall if everyone at that launch site die?

Explain to me who didn't take it. That's easier. Because you know, during a way it's not like reporters would be everywhere taking pics.

That didn't happen in Vietnam or any other wars. I know I never saw any wartime pics in the last few wars we had.

Also, just for IN GAME purposes, there were a lot of people I saw running around groundside. And just for that single scene where you see the kid get blown up. 

2 shuttles on the ground. Both take off. Both get blown up in the air. There were soldiers on the ground that did NOT get in the shuttles. Any one of them could have taken the pic.

So instead, I want you to tell me everyeone that DIDN'T take the pic. 

Your kidding. No one got out alive at that evacuation site. No one would have expididted that photo because they are dead. And only the military has the tech to get info out to the galaxy because the extra net is down. It was  down since after the fall of the bartarian home world.

Modifié par dreman9999, 21 mars 2012 - 05:46 .

[CrisisOne]

I still don't see the point in indoctrinating Shepard, when the reapers had the galaxy practically under their control, had the citadel, and Shepard's assembled fleets now in one place ready to be picked off. And even if the fleets actually manage to take out most of them the reapers would just call in more to come in through the relay behind them. To me indoctrinating at this point seems like a waste of time.

[Turran]

>_>



I'm sorry did I miss something? Where does it disprove the Indoc Theory?

Modifié par Turran, 21 mars 2012 - 05:40 .

[dreman9999]

Myskal1981 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Myskal1981 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

That's a story for another time.

Think of it this way...The ending part is a battle of wills. The reaper, with you having high ems, want to change you mind.
What happens after is story for only BW to tell.
Also, takea notice of the meaning of crucible.....

1. A vessel made of a refractory substance such as graphite or porcelain, used for melting and calcining materials at high temperatures.2. A severe test, as of patience or belief; a trial. See Synonyms at trial.3. A place, time, or situation characterized by the confluence of powerful intellectual, social, economic, or political forces

You do realize that basically you are saying: if you chose control or synthesis, you as a player lost, because you failed the trial? You know, there is a trial in the end, it is the trial against TIM.

I don't want to defend the current endings cause I don't like them, to short, to generic and full of inconsistencies.
But to go and invalidate two choices and with it all the players that picked those choices, well, doesn't feel right. And saying that those players failed the trial is pretentious.

The breathing scene is only available with at least 4000 EMS, something that can only be achieved by playing Multiplayer. So all those pure singleplayer can never see it. How is that supposed to be fair?
Not everyone wants to play MP. --> ah, well, we dismissed that claim...

Please, ask yourself this: if you never saw the breathing scene, would you still believe so adamantly that the indoc theory is correct?

I doesn't mean that. Shepard never really dies in any of the endings. I having the breath scene at 4000 ems only doesn't mean Shep won't wake up over time. It just means you do get the final hint it's a dream. Remeber. No matter what, it's made clear that Shep defeat the reapers.....How he did it is unclear. That what they did not put in the game.

Ok, if he is not really dead in any of the endings, what constitutes the trial and what are its effects?
As far as I understood the indoc theory you can only break out of it, if you pick destroy, because it is the only option showing Shepard breathing. So you remain indoctrinated when choosing control or synthesis, right? This has the same result --> Shepard failed, player failed.
The text describing Shepard as a legend for stopping the Reaper threat cannot be correct if you choose control or synthesis, because he remained indoctrinated and someone else had to finish his job, so why show the text in the first place?

That part of the story has yet to be told. Remeber even Saren was able to resist it in some way after words.

[Texhnolyze101]

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? 

Of course it wasn't planned before as the lead writer does not have the skill required to do such a thing.

[AMmayhem]

I think the Indoctrination Theory fits very well, but I agree that I do not think it was planned at all. If it was planned why wouldn't they make it more clear to the gamers? The cutscene after you pick your color does not make any sense for Indoctrination Theory. Also, if this was intended by Bioware, why aren't they saying, in response to this controversy, that Indoctrination Theory was right all along? Bioware's reaction doesn't support that this was their plan.

[Jaze55]

PROOF! I found the most compelling argument for the Indoc Theory yet!

[GOODKyle]

Not reading through 9 pages of threads so I'm sure it's been said. This is PR speak and the indoc theory was just side stepped. He didn't denounce it or confirm it.

[booboo645]

Just because you see a bonus ending for actually picking the correct choice doesn't show that you wouldn't wake up from any of the others, simply you are falling further into control. As you have done in every other dream that you followed that stupid child... You burn in the child dream and you wake up just fine, so that's not an indicator of anything for me.

I think the cruicible is the test for how indoctrinated shepard is and the effects would be seen after the ending we got. Which.. Shepard wakes up from every single choice you make. Resulting in a *different* range of endings people actually want.

[dreman9999]

CrisisOne wrote...

I still don't see the point in indoctrinating Shepard, when the reapers had the galaxy practically under their control, had the citadel, and Shepard's assembled fleets now in one place ready to be picked off. And even if the fleets actually manage to take out most of them the reapers would just call in more to come in through the relay behind them. To me indoctrinating at this point seems like a waste of time.

The crucible...The rason why they want to control Shep is to stop the crusible and find all info about it so they can make sure the info does not get into future races hands.

[RavenEyry]

Baelyn wrote...

In addition to the fact that they neither confirmed, nor denied, that the ending interpretation  is or is not indoctrination. They are happy with the current endings, which, in IT, is indoctrination, and for others the metaphysical explanation the star child gives.

All this confirms is that they are happy with the ending, not what the ending really was.

I agree with this.

[Vromrig]

Those weak arguments are listed and taken from the indoc bible that people have been linking left right and centre. If you have strong arguments lets see them.

Observations. Easily dismissed. As said, some people take comfort in community over facts. Frustrating, undermines community as whole. Community strength built by affirmation of data, not by affirmation of community.

Primary data contradictory statements made by Catalyst, overtly obvious "mistakes" made in dialogue by NPCs. Ending contradicts self, inconsistent with in-game dialogue, consistent with Indoctrination Theory. Choices laid consistent with choices put before Saren and Illusive Man.

These are meat of argument, not "unlimited ammunition". Silly course to take.

[Myskal1981]

Baelyn wrote...

KroganShields wrote...

DESTRAUDO wrote...

KroganShields wrote...

Can anyone please explain to me how you guys managed to figure out from Ray's respone that the indo. theroy is wrong? Just because he didn't mentioned it or I missed something?

They were heartbroken that people did not like ending. They were trying to resolve it without compromising their artistic integrity. Therefore for better or worse, the endings as presented were real and depicted actual events. 

Alright. Thank you for the explanation.

In addition to the fact that they neither confirmed, nor denied, that the ending interpretation  is or is not indoctrination. They are happy with the current endings, which, in IT, is indoctrination, and for others the metaphysical explanation the star child gives.

All this confirms is that they are happy with the ending, not what the ending really was.

but by definition with IT it is not an ending, so why say it is an ending?

I'm not saying they will not bring out a DLC, either explaining the current endings or actually saying that it was indoc and a "true" ending follows. This DLC will be released because of the fans backlash, not because they planned it all along. And actually we as fans can be proud of that.

[Jaze55]

RavenEyry wrote...

Baelyn wrote...

In addition to the fact that they neither confirmed, nor denied, that the ending interpretation  is or is not indoctrination. They are happy with the current endings, which, in IT, is indoctrination, and for others the metaphysical explanation the star child gives.

All this confirms is that they are happy with the ending, not what the ending really was.

I agree with this.

Did you see this tweet?

@[/s]socrates92[/b] Both Casey and Ray's statements say we will release additional content to address questions, not necessarily alter anything. 

Did you read the statements?

Geez you need to get a grip on reality. Remember reality? 

[DESTRAUDO]

Yep. It was the 'you just dont get it, you cannot see the signs'  attitude that vexed me so terribly. Like they were in on biowares secret ending that you had to be clever enough to get.  

RLesueur wrote...

DESTRAUDO wrote...

The indoc theory burns. ha . HAHA. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Delighted.

Does it make me a bad person that I share these sentiments?

So many smug indoc theorists are now having their 'I'm so smart that I get the ending and you don't' statements rubbed in their faces.

[dreman9999]

booboo645 wrote...

Just because you see a bonus ending for actually picking the correct choice doesn't show that you wouldn't wake up from any of the others, simply you are falling further into control. As you have done in every other dream that you followed that stupid child... You burn in the child dream and you wake up just fine, so that's not an indicator of anything for me.

I think the cruicible is the test for how indoctrinated shepard is and the effects would be seen after the ending we got. Which.. Shepard wakes up from every single choice you make. Resulting in a *different* range of endings people actually want.

Just because you think a bonus ending has no merit does not discredit the reat of the points to the theory. Even then it makes sense for that to happen at max ems anyways.

[Jaze55]

Vromrig wrote...

Those weak arguments are listed and taken from the indoc bible that people have been linking left right and centre. If you have strong arguments lets see them.

Observations. Easily dismissed. As said, some people take comfort in community over facts. Frustrating, undermines community as whole. Community strength built by affirmation of data, not by affirmation of community.

Primary data contradictory statements made by Catalyst, overtly obvious "mistakes" made in dialogue by NPCs. Ending contradicts self, inconsistent with in-game dialogue, consistent with Indoctrination Theory. Choices laid consistent with choices put before Saren and Illusive Man.

These are meat of argument, not "unlimited ammunition". Silly course to take.

Just curious. Do you ever talk like that IRL? 

And if you do, how many people know what you are doing? I'm not making fun of you, just curious. 

Modifié par MassEffected555, 21 mars 2012 - 05:45 .

[Darthdac2]

MassEffected555 wrote...

PROOF! I found the most compelling argument for the Indoc Theory yet!

So you proved you're just a troll.....

[darkiddd]

RLesueur wrote...

DESTRAUDO wrote...

The indoc theory burns. ha . HAHA. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Delighted.

Does it make me a bad person that I share these sentiments?

So many smug indoc theorists are now having their 'I'm so smart that I get the ending and you don't' statements rubbed in their faces.

how exactly does this discredit the indoctrination theory? who is grasping at straws now? 

[RedShft]

What I don't understand is why people have to be such ****s:

Arokel wrote...

I'm just going to watch as this thread devolves into the worst flame war since the endings.

DESTRAUDO wrote...

The indoc theory burns. ha . HAHA. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Delighted.

Are you kidding me? What happened to A CIVIL discussion? Maybe you should go back to elementary school since you're as mature as a 5 year old.

[Ukjack44]

Thornquist wrote...

While some of you, my fellow IT-deniers are again so busy debating - I am myself sipping a beer and watching this theory drown with tears of unfathomable denial - I suggest you join me, this is internet-entertainment at its best.

I shall keep an eye on your account and come the day all is revealed I will not resist in rubbing it in your face.

Oh well stupid is stupid I guess

Modifié par Ukjack44, 21 mars 2012 - 05:48 .