364 réponses à ce sujet

[Texhnolyze101]

bo_7md wrote...

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

It won't insult anybody but you as im perfectly fine with bioware adding it in.

If they use I.T it would be like saying you guys played all 3 games just to fight in a dream. Does that seem better to you than killing the reapers with a sucky ending ?

Anything is better than the garbage endings so yes i do think it would be better.

[Fdmatt]

Since Synthesis is the "best" ending I kind of regret pursuing Saren in the first place.

Guess I should just go back in time to ME1 and be like "My bad bro, you right." And then just let Sovereign do his thing.

[Heimdall]

Fdmatt wrote...

Since Synthesis is the "best" ending I kind of regret pursuing Saren in the first place.

Guess I should just go back in time to ME1 and be like "My bad bro, you right." And then just let Sovereign do his thing.

...You do realize there is no Reaper technology implants involved in the results of the Synthesis ending, right? 

[bo_7md]

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

bo_7md wrote...

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

It won't insult anybody but you as im perfectly fine with bioware adding it in.

If they use I.T it would be like saying you guys played all 3 games just to fight in a dream. Does that seem better to you than killing the reapers with a sucky ending ?

Anything is better than the garbage endings so yes i do think it would be better.

Wow so no ending at all is better than knowing at least you killed the reapers ? I thoght the main reason people came up with their own endings is to get closure not to add more problems than already is. The I.T is nothing but a fad people like it because its mysterious and vague, if you see the early arguments in this post only, you will notice how every person keeps adding to it and tweaking it to add reason behind it.

Anyway to each his own I guess.

[IST]

 Disagree - and think OP needs to take a breath.

That is all.

xx oo xx GG.

[The Spamming Troll]

long story short:

if ME3s next DLC isnt the best peice of art bioware has ever concocted, then theres going to be alot of hesitation in buying games with the label 'bioware' on them.

[BiancoAngelo7]

OP you should write a philosophy book. I don't think I've read so many self asserted truths plucked from thin air in so little time anywhere, at any time.

Bravo.

Haha, if you're going to go so far as to say that "anyone with a brain" should be offended by the IT theory, then you should at least TRY to understand what you're talking about before you do so...

[Wolfva2]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

long story short:

if ME3s next DLC isnt the best peice of art bioware has ever concocted, then theres going to be alot of hesitation in buying games with the label 'bioware' on them.

Bah, that's what people said after DA2.  Yet people lunged for this game like it was a scuba mask on the Titanic.  (<blink><blink>  Bad example.  SCUBA didnt' exist then...they'd've looked at it blankly and thought, "What wierd shaped goggles!  Surely they would be of no use to me in the frigid, icey waters I am about to be drawn into!" but I digress).  

Granting that the ending was weak (and I haven't reached it yet, so I don't know from experience) many people will still eagerly  buy their next game.  We always do.

BiancoAngelo7 wrote...

OP you should write a philosophy
book. I don't think I've read so many self asserted truths plucked from
thin air in so little time anywhere, at any time.

Bravo.

Haha,
if you're going to go so far as to say that "anyone with a brain"
should be offended by the IT theory, then you should at least TRY to
understand what you're talking about before you do so...

I tried pointing that out back on the first page.  I guess she didn't listen.  Which means, I suppose, that she isn't trying to have a debate, but is just demogoging.  After all, how can you possibly have a debate when you assert from the very beginning that the ONLY valid opinion is yours, and all others are not worth listening to?

[Chashan]

Ieldra2 wrote...

****oops. this may have gotten into the wrong forum. Mods, I'm sorry. Please move to the campaign and storyline forum if you can be bothered****

I've lurked here a while now, hope I can still give some input which wasn't brought up yet however...

[...]
I am not, in principle, opposed to the idea that the Citadel sequence isn't real. The sticking point is the part about Destroy being the only option. This presumes that the other two options for the final choice are in some way objectively wrong. This is false. [...]

I do think you have a point here: If Bioware choose to continue on the premise that the whole sequence post-Harbinger's lazor is a near-death experience/delusion/whatever, the simplest way to proceed would be to add "dream sequences" to the other two endings which prompt Shepard to snap out of it, which could be unique in their own way depending on whether you chose Control or Synthesis. Up to Bioware how to handle that. They did love their "shock-images" from the Prothean Beacon quite a lot in ME1 and even 2 - although that kind of got old for me fast after the first two times at the latest - and while that might be the "budget" version to implement here, it would not be satisfying in my view.

In other words, "waking up" in a DLC/Add-on should happen regardless of the choice you make, only with variations added to what this looks like depending on the "pill" you chose. The fact should still remain that Shepard gets up and kicks arse - which can still be tied to war assets whether this happens or not, if they want to roll with that.

Now I'm interesting in what others have to say about this.

Summary:
I think implementing the indoctrination theory would be an an insult to rational thinkers because the indoctrination theorists' choice for the "correct" option is based on the false reasoning that association with major villains makes the other options recognizable as being trick answers. The merit of ideas is independent from the morality of those who support them. Anyone who contests this is not thinking rationally and prone to the (very common) delusion that evil is somehow contagious.

I hope the simple "fix" I gave above fixes the issue of the "correct choice", even though I do not exactly demand they go ahead with the hypothesis put forward by many to circumvent the ending. But in the end, an individual successfully resisting what amounts to "mind control" in fiction is nothing too new and could be used. Either way, whether subconscious dream close to dying or invasion of Shepard's mind by Harbinger and friends for the hell of it, either option works for me.

[The Razman]

I think Indoctrination Theory is the ultimate example of gamers being unable to cope with a story that they cannot win. They fabricated a massively elaborate, nonsensical mess of an explanation which actually achieves the difficult goal of having more plotholes than the original ending does, all so they could boil the ending down to "Pick this and you win, pick these other two and you lose".

It's gamer nature ... if we can't win, we feel cheated. Break the mould, Mass Effect ... keep on breaking that mould.

Modifié par The Razman, 23 mars 2012 - 03:54 .

[Praetor Knight]

The Razman wrote...

I think Indoctrination Theory is the ultimate example of gamers being unable to cope with a story that they cannot win. They fabricated a massively elaborate, nonsensical mess of an explanation which actually achieves the difficult goal of having more plotholes than the original ending does, all so they could boil the ending down to "Pick this and you win, pick these other two and you lose".

It's gamer nature ... if we can't win, we feel cheated. Break the mould, Mass Effect ... keep on breaking that mould.

Well, I disagree.

It's not so much trying to "cope" as it is trying to make sense out of the endings. And it seems that the term "Indoctrination Theory" has become a catch-all for any idea, even reasonable ideas for understanding what we watched. Also, I figure that the current endings simply try to wrap up Shepard's story, building on Shepard's hopes and fears, finished with Shepard's death. And I'm figuring that Shep will be dead from injuries sustained eventually in all three endings, the only difference is that the Breathe scene could allow for Shepard's final words to be spoken or not.

So at least for me, I'm hoping that future DLC can properly address the fate of the Galaxy, with Shepard out of the picture (and obliviously basing what happens off what Shepard did do throughout the trilogy) and account for our EMS scores in greater detail than simply unlocking similar videos that basically reset the Galaxy.

[bo_7md]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

The Razman wrote...

I think Indoctrination Theory is the ultimate example of gamers being unable to cope with a story that they cannot win. They fabricated a massively elaborate, nonsensical mess of an explanation which actually achieves the difficult goal of having more plotholes than the original ending does, all so they could boil the ending down to "Pick this and you win, pick these other two and you lose".

It's gamer nature ... if we can't win, we feel cheated. Break the mould, Mass Effect ... keep on breaking that mould.

Well, I disagree.

It's not so much trying to "cope" as it is trying to make sense out of the endings. And it seems that the term "Indoctrination Theory" has become a catch-all for any idea, even reasonable ideas for understanding what we watched. Also, I figure that the current endings simply try to wrap up Shepard's story, building on Shepard's hopes and fears, finished with Shepard's death. And I'm figuring that Shep will be dead from injuries sustained eventually in all three endings, the only difference is that the Breathe scene could allow for Shepard's final words to be spoken or not.

So at least for me, I'm hoping that future DLC can properly address the fate of the Galaxy, with Shepard out of the picture (and obliviously basing what happens off what Shepard did do throughout the trilogy) and account for our EMS scores in greater detail than simply unlocking similar videos that basically reset the Galaxy.

I agree with what Razman said, most of the discussions i have seen on these forums or on youtube are based on cut and paste facts to make an alternative theory simply because they didn't like it. While the current one leaves some question to be answered it is not unclear, Shepard dies Reapers die others unknown.

I agree with the second part of the DLC I hope those left over questions of what happened to the rest of the people at least like DA in text form anything is good.

As far as EMS score i DISAGREE i LOATH this idea of EMS I'm a single player gamer I don't like to play alot of MP games and I'd rather they removed this connection from the single player game, I had to leave the SP campaign for a couple of days to get the 95% between server issues/Kicked at low levels and all other internet problems it was hell.

Sorry for the caps but i just hated EMS

[Max2011]

You are the sort of people ruining everything...

[Heimdall]

Max2011 wrote...

You are the sort of people ruining everything...

Elaborate

[Praetor Knight]

bo_7md wrote...

I agree with what Razman said, most of the discussions i have seen on these forums or on youtube are based on cut and paste facts to make an alternative theory simply because they didn't like it. While the current one leaves some question to be answered it is not unclear, Shepard dies Reapers die others unknown.

I agree with the second part of the DLC I hope those left over questions of what happened to the rest of the people at least like DA in text form anything is good.

Yeah, but there are gems in between those types of posts though, with such a a high volume of gamers not really detailing what they did and did not like, or trying to think critically about what they think about the endings, it is very easy to miss those gems. And being around here so often I figure gamers are simply venting frustration or mocking others when that happens, so I don't pay too much attention to that stuff.

As far as EMS score i DISAGREE i LOATH this idea of EMS I'm a single player gamer I don't like to play alot of MP games and I'd rather they removed this connection from the single player game, I had to leave the SP campaign for a couple of days to get the 95% between server issues/Kicked at low levels and all other internet problems it was hell.

Sorry for the caps but i just hated EMS

Not the MP Galactic Readiness stuff with the 50% rating and such (I don't have a Silver on 360 so I can't even use that MP stuff myself). I refer to the War Assets collected during normal SP play that are in the Effective Military Strength score. I wanted to watch my Geth Primes and Krogan riding Kakliosaurs on Earth fighting, for example.

[bo_7md]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

bo_7md wrote...

I agree with what Razman said, most of the discussions i have seen on these forums or on youtube are based on cut and paste facts to make an alternative theory simply because they didn't like it. While the current one leaves some question to be answered it is not unclear, Shepard dies Reapers die others unknown.

I agree with the second part of the DLC I hope those left over questions of what happened to the rest of the people at least like DA in text form anything is good.

Yeah, but there are gems in between those types of posts though, with such a a high volume of gamers not really detailing what they did and did not like, or trying to think critically about what they think about the endings, it is very easy to miss those gems. And being around here so often I figure gamers are simply venting frustration or mocking others when that happens, so I don't pay too much attention to that stuff.

As far as EMS score i DISAGREE i LOATH this idea of EMS I'm a single player gamer I don't like to play alot of MP games and I'd rather they removed this connection from the single player game, I had to leave the SP campaign for a couple of days to get the 95% between server issues/Kicked at low levels and all other internet problems it was hell.

Sorry for the caps but i just hated EMS

Not the MP Galactic Readiness stuff with the 50% rating and such (I don't have a Silver on 360 so I can't even use that MP stuff myself). I refer to the War Assets collected during normal SP play that are in the Effective Military Strength score. I wanted to watch my Geth Primes and Krogan riding Kakliosaurs on Earth fighting, for example.

Ah ok sorry it was a bit unclear to me because the EMS = War assets X Readiness, so i assumed it was the readiness. Yes I agree I think they should put it somewhere to reflect how you played the game as it stands now no matter what you pick it is only reflected in the EMS screen but no effect on real action or the real fights e.g DA denerim figth where you pick factions to deploy based on your gameplay.

[Yeti1069]

I don't understand what the indoctrination theory has to do with you assertion that the game should cleave toward a fluid morality. Officially supporting the indoctrination idea doesn't have anything to do with morality. If you invest in the theory, your three choices would be read as:

• You break from indoctrination -- choosing to destroy the reapers represents your assertion of your own will
• You succumb to indoctrination -- choosing to control the reapers represents their tricking you into thinking that you can control them
• You succumb to indoctrination -- choosing to synthesize organic and synthetic life represents their tricking you into thinking that harmony can be obtained

Look at the dialogue with Saren from ME 1; he was tricked into thinking that some peace could be made with the reapears, that by going along with their plan, he would be spared, and could win some sort of reprieve for the other people of the galaxy, that the reapers would be content enslaving everyone. Your options are similar. The fact that Shepard is shown to be taking a breath only after the first choice would (according to the theory) support the idea that you have broken from indoctrination.

None of that has any bearing on morality. You can only argue that the moral choice is being ignored, or overridden, if you discount indocrtination theory, which presupposes that you feel the end of the game makes sense. It doesn't, though. Not at all. There may be a third option, one that is neither indoctrination, nor acceptance, but some other interpretation of the ending that also makes sense of all the nonsense we're given, but I haven't seen anything along those lines, and doubt there will be. You can choose to read the way the choices are displayed as being weighted toward one side of the morality spectrum, but they aren't as presented, and hardly are in consequence.

Ideally, we would receive DLC that picks up after the "ending" as we come out of the indoctrination sequence, and, depending upon our choice, are either under the reapers' control or are still standing against them. Further, we would be given a real choice, with real variation in consequences, based upon our own morals (or those we have instilled in our version of Shepard)--something like choosing between a usage of the Crucible that will destroy all the reapers, but may/probably also destroy Earth, or the combined fleet of the galaxy, or one that  may wipe out all repears, but will probably spare Earth/the galactic armies. etc...

[bo_7md]

Yeti1069 wrote...

I don't understand what the indoctrination theory has to do with you assertion that the game should cleave toward a fluid morality. Officially supporting the indoctrination idea doesn't have anything to do with morality. If you invest in the theory, your three choices would be read as:

• You break from indoctrination -- choosing to destroy the reapers represents your assertion of your own will
• You succumb to indoctrination -- choosing to control the reapers represents their tricking you into thinking that you can control them
  
• You succumb to indoctrination -- choosing to synthesize organic and synthetic life represents their tricking you into thinking that harmony can be obtained

Look at the dialogue with Saren from ME 1; he was tricked into thinking that some peace could be made with the reapears, that by going along with their plan, he would be spared, and could win some sort of reprieve for the other people of the galaxy, that the reapers would be content enslaving everyone. Your options are similar. The fact that Shepard is shown to be taking a breath only after the first choice would (according to the theory) support the idea that you have broken from indoctrination.

None of that has any bearing on morality. You can only argue that the moral choice is being ignored, or overridden, if you discount indocrtination theory, which presupposes that you feel the end of the game makes sense. It doesn't, though. Not at all. There may be a third option, one that is neither indoctrination, nor acceptance, but some other interpretation of the ending that also makes sense of all the nonsense we're given, but I haven't seen anything along those lines, and doubt there will be. You can choose to read the way the choices are displayed as being weighted toward one side of the morality spectrum, but they aren't as presented, and hardly are in consequence.

Ideally, we would receive DLC that picks up after the "ending" as we come out of the indoctrination sequence, and, depending upon our choice, are either under the reapers' control or are still standing against them. Further, we would be given a real choice, with real variation in consequences, based upon our own morals (or those we have instilled in our version of Shepard)--something like choosing between a usage of the Crucible that will destroy all the reapers, but may/probably also destroy Earth, or the combined fleet of the galaxy, or one that  may wipe out all repears, but will probably spare Earth/the galactic armies. etc...

I have seen similar question asked of the OP in previous posts, did you read those or just the main post ?

[Yeti1069]

Just the first post.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Doesn't matter. The indoc theory is so much better than what we got. I would be tremendously happy if Bioware took this up and made that whole disgusting sequence a dream; no matter how insulting it is.

In actuality, it is MORE insulting to rational minds if they kept the endings as is.

[bo_7md]

Yeti1069 wrote...

None of that has any bearing on morality. You can only argue that the
moral choice is being ignored, or overridden, if you discount
indocrtination theory, which presupposes that you feel the end of the
game makes sense. It doesn't, though. Not at all. There may be a third
option, one that is neither indoctrination, nor acceptance, but some
other interpretation of the ending that also makes sense of all the
nonsense we're given, but I haven't seen anything along those lines, and
doubt there will be. You can choose to read the way the choices are
displayed as being weighted toward one side of the morality spectrum,
but they aren't as presented, and hardly are in consequence.

To me the ending made sense, it was lacking and some parts needed clarification but I understood it. The I.T doesn't make sense to me.

Can I ask,What didn't make sense to you in the current ending ?

[Gibb_Shepard]

bo_7md wrote...

Yeti1069 wrote...

None of that has any bearing on morality. You can only argue that the
moral choice is being ignored, or overridden, if you discount
indocrtination theory, which presupposes that you feel the end of the
game makes sense. It doesn't, though. Not at all. There may be a third
option, one that is neither indoctrination, nor acceptance, but some
other interpretation of the ending that also makes sense of all the
nonsense we're given, but I haven't seen anything along those lines, and
doubt there will be. You can choose to read the way the choices are
displayed as being weighted toward one side of the morality spectrum,
but they aren't as presented, and hardly are in consequence.

To me the ending made sense, it was lacking and some parts needed clarification but I understood it. The I.T doesn't make sense to me.

Can I ask,What didn't make sense to you in the current ending ?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/preview?pli=1&sle=true

Read from 4-6 on the contents page.

[Ragebourne]

I agree 100%, the worst thing about the indoc theory is the fact you pointed out, that there is a correct ending, and making a choice with our values and morality has nothing to do with it

[Yeti1069]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

bo_7md wrote...



To me the ending made sense, it was lacking and some parts needed clarification but I understood it. The I.T doesn't make sense to me.

Can I ask,What didn't make sense to you in the current ending ?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/preview?pli=1&sle=true

Read from 4-6 on the contents page.

There you go. Admittedly, only about half of that occurred to me when I beat the game, before I spent some time digesting it. Another quarter came up when I was giving it some thought, and the rest seems pretty obvious upon reading stuff like is linked.

How did any of that make sense to you? 

[bo_7md]

Yeti1069 wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

bo_7md wrote...



To me the ending made sense, it was lacking and some parts needed clarification but I understood it. The I.T doesn't make sense to me.

Can I ask,What didn't make sense to you in the current ending ?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/preview?pli=1&sle=true

Read from 4-6 on the contents page.

There you go. Admittedly, only about half of that occurred to me when I beat the game, before I spent some time digesting it. Another quarter came up when I was giving it some thought, and the rest seems pretty obvious upon reading stuff like is linked.

How did any of that make sense to you? 

Because I read other things some of these questions on the page makes sense and btw most of them are plot holes that occur even before the ending so the I.T wouldn't explain them either.