247 réponses à ce sujet

[ScaredPeach]

What I hate about the Indoc Theory is that it means the games forces on you that the ONLY way you could ever pick control or synthesis is if your indoctrinated.

What if I actually wanted to control the reapers or take a solution other than destroying all synthetics? Answer? Nope, you indoctrinated. But what if im not? Nope, doesnt matter about your free choice, your indoctrinated. Thats even WORSE than the 3 endings we get, thats basically means you really have ONE successful ending; destroy, or the reapers win. I thought we wanted branching endings, not pick anything other than x and your character turns out to be a mindless puppet.

[thefallen2far]

Yes. I like Indoc theory.

1. It's the best correction to the ending [and yes, it needs it]
2. It opens up possibilities for the ending.
3. I actually like the concept.

[Humakt83]

This question must be asked at least five or three or five times more. Make it three... no, five times.

Modifié par Humakt83, 18 juin 2012 - 12:59 .

[corkey sweet]

TheDragonPrincess wrote...

So, do you like it?
I definetly hate it! I don't want my Shepard to be a sleeper agent for the reapers!
If BioWare will use that in ME3 new dlc ending I'm so not buying it!
And if Shep will die in dlc ending I don't buy it!

Spoilers ahead sorry...
And sorry. I'm Finn so my english isn't great and I didn't know what No Spoilers ment. (I know it now)

i didn't like it, but it was way better than what we got from Bioware. That ending was a joke

[ThinkIntegral]

Don't like the IT

[Demyx_IX]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Its either IT or the Catalyst stays, which would you prefer?

Or you could make your own theory that actually works. IT doesn't. It has far too many loopholes, it in fact fails as a theory and there's many reasons why. I could go into detail but it would take a lot of time. So rather, watch these parts,aka 1-3 on youtube. The girl covers it pretty well. Part1: www.youtube.com/watch

[asdfsdadfs]

I personally believe that what we know as the indoctrination theory was used as a way for the majority of Bioware employees to fight back against an ending they despised. More than likely, Hudson and Walters were convinced (read: forced) to write up the ending by EA, but the majority of the team was still against it (like any sane, non-bribed human being). So, the people in charge of really MAKING the game, rather than simply overseeing its production, dropped hints wherever they could that not everything is as it seems. All of them just light enough to be ignored by Hudson, and some of them designed so as to be undetectable even if they were suspicious. This sub-theory would explain many of the shocks regarding "How did this slip through the entire development team? Why did no one question this? Why is there so much discordance between Hudson and the others, and so much silence from the majority of the team?" The hints are far too many in number to be done by two people, and too out of place to be coincidental. That's just my dollar ninety-five. Take it as you will.

[Jadebaby]

Demyx_IX wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Its either IT or the Catalyst stays, which would you prefer?

Or you could make your own theory that actually works. IT doesn't. It has far too many loopholes, it in fact fails as a theory and there's many reasons why. I could go into detail but it would take a lot of time. So rather, watch these parts,aka 1-3 on youtube. The girl covers it pretty well. Part1: www.youtube.com/watch

Sorry got 4 minutes in. If you could put the 'loopholes' in point form here - if you've already seen the vid that is - that'd be good.

Also, read the top comment, pretty much sums it up.

[Bill Casey]

I watched the whole video and wasn't impressed...
That was pretty weak...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 18 juin 2012 - 04:40 .

[justafan]

With no clarification or epilogue of any sorts (stargazer does not count), I like to think the Indoc theory is true.

It has been, and will be my headcanon to get through the endings until the EC comes out and either makes things more palatable, or cements the Indoc theory as my permanent ending of choice.

Modifié par justafan, 18 juin 2012 - 04:40 .

[Jadebaby]

Bill Casey wrote...

I watched the whole video and wasn't impressed...
That was pretty weak...

That was only part 1.

[UrgentArchengel]

Yes, I do.

[Deputy Secretary of Awesome]

Yes. No way to know for sure until the EC is out, but the case is compelling and it's a cool idea.

[liggy002]

Yes I love the indoctrination theory and yes Bioware should go with it. Nevermind all of the haters who didn't pay attention to the Arrival DLC in which Harbinger CLEARLY wanted to indoctrinate Shepard. Don't say he didn't. You're wrong if you think otherwise.

[LucasShark]

No, hell no: I did not pay 100 bucks to be punked by a major developer and their giant corporate pimp!

[Demyx_IX]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Demyx_IX wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Its either IT or the Catalyst stays, which would you prefer?

Or you could make your own theory that actually works. IT doesn't. It has far too many loopholes, it in fact fails as a theory and there's many reasons why. I could go into detail but it would take a lot of time. So rather, watch these parts,aka 1-3 on youtube. The girl covers it pretty well. Part1: www.youtube.com/watch

Sorry got 4 minutes in. If you could put the 'loopholes' in point form here - if you've already seen the vid that is - that'd be good.

Also, read the top comment, pretty much sums it up.

I will point out some of my arguments, take some points from sources, as well as doing what you asked. Mostly the latter. First I would like to say that the Indoctrination done by the reapers are not enforcing illusions, dreams or otherwise similar things. It's only been shown to control people's actions, but even though they are controlled, the things that happen are real. 

They say the boy is one of the biggest indicators that Shepard is indoctrinated. However this doesn't work as the boy represents Shepard's guilt as BioWare themselves has written, nothing more. People try to state why doesn't the ones at the scene help the little boy. But they were too busy worrying about the reapers so they didn't see him, if you don't see someone you won't help them.

It's been questioned why does the Harbringer just leave? Harbringer left before Shepard got up from the ground. At the time Shepard looked dead. He only got up after Harbringer left, thus making sense that Harbringer left. 

The shrumps/trees  is stated to not be there when you are running, but they're there-- it's not some illusion. They've always been there.

Vega is sometimes saying he can hear a hum, they say this is one of the reasons why Shepard is indoctrinated. However there is a legitimate hum in the room. We can hear the hum, Vega can and Shepard can as well. There is a real hum down there. No indoctrinated people has hum'd, why would Shepard?

The Illusive Man was interested in the control panel. The llusive Man was already indoctrinated when we got there. Most likely before even prior to that. The reapers simply didn't let him use the panel. It was no hallucination.

It's stated by the IT that in reality he was never taken up to the Citadel when he was hit by the beam. That doesn't work. There is cinematics off the cruicible, the citadel arms opening up, Hackett talking, etc after Shepard went up there. Shepard imagining all this doesn't make any sense.

Shepard is holding his left side when he is with Anderson on the Citadel. Not his right side.

The Illusive Man's eyes aren't representitive of people that has been indoctrinated. Or eyes like it. Saren never had his eyes changed even when it was completely clear that he was indoctrinated towards the end of the game.

If the reapers had Shepard indoctrinated, they would never let him destroy them. Let alone even give him the oppurtunity.

In the Arrival DLC there was no mention or proof that Harbringer wanted to indoctrinate Shepard. And he was there as a hollagram, he obviously couldn't. 

The first symptom of indoctrination, weak or strong minded, is always hearing the voice of the reapers. (cause not being a PB, that doesn't count.) Shepard never had this symptom. 

Prothean VI, Vendetta, has an ability to detect indoctrination and if it does detect it, it's programmed to guard information it has on the Crucible and Catalyst. Both on Thessia and Cronos it shares it's information with Shepard freely, and if the Indoctrination Theory is to be believed, reaper influence over Shepard should be stronger during the Cronos mission since indoctrination had become more advanced. VI is cooperating fully with Shepard and his team on both occasions. And on Cronos refers to Cerberus as "indoctrinated forces" ignoring Shepard's presence.

If you are to assume the IT is reality then it means the game effectively didn't even have an ending. There is no way BioWare would take a approach like the IT to the last game of the triology. 

Shepard was really never near Harbringer long enough to be indoctrinated, even in the slightest. Shepard is incredibly strong willed. 

As for the top comment on this page, I agree. If the IT is the truth (which it thankfully is not) then it would be even worse than the current endings. Even after the extended cut, I don't think I will like anything that has to do with the ending. Since it will just be a attempt to justify what happened. At least that is what I read. 

Modifié par Demyx_IX, 18 juin 2012 - 06:59 .

[RADIUMEYEZ]

Yes I like the Indoctrination Theory and I made this in support of it and to make people laugh.

[Bourne Endeavor]

ScaredPeach wrote...

What I hate about the Indoc Theory is that it means the games forces on you that the ONLY way you could ever pick control or synthesis is if your indoctrinated.

What if I actually wanted to control the reapers or take a solution other than destroying all synthetics? Answer? Nope, you indoctrinated. But what if im not? Nope, doesnt matter about your free choice, your indoctrinated. Thats even WORSE than the 3 endings we get, thats basically means you really have ONE successful ending; destroy, or the reapers win. I thought we wanted branching endings, not pick anything other than x and your character turns out to be a mindless puppet.

You forget the Indoc Theory is only stage one. If it were adopted, then we get to play as Shepard again after "waking up" presuming the Destroy ending was chosen and carry on the story to its actual conclusion. Therefore, Indoc Theory might open the possibility for new endings, not that I expect BioWare to make use of it.

[Astralify]

Yes! It is the only way! lol

[Humakt83]

Demyx_IX wrote...

I will point out some of my arguments, take some points from sources, as well as doing what you asked. Mostly the latter. First I would like to say that the Indoctrination done by the reapers are not enforcing illusions, dreams or otherwise similar things. It's only been shown to control people's actions, but even though they are controlled, the things that happen are real. 

Read the codex entry.

[Demyx_IX]

Humakt83 wrote...

Demyx_IX wrote...

I will point out some of my arguments, take some points from sources, as well as doing what you asked. Mostly the latter. First I would like to say that the Indoctrination done by the reapers are not enforcing illusions, dreams or otherwise similar things. It's only been shown to control people's actions, but even though they are controlled, the things that happen are real. 

Read the codex entry.

"
hallucinations of "ghostly" presences "

This doesn't support the IT very well. Everything you saw after Shepard went up to the Citadel were just 'ghostly pressences'? That doesn't make any sense. And this wiki section mentions nothing of dreams. Shepard wasn't dreaming, the ending is reality. Let's face it, the IT is just a means for people who couldn't get over the real ending. 

Modifié par Demyx_IX, 18 juin 2012 - 07:07 .

[RADIUMEYEZ]

Demyx_IX wrote...

Humakt83 wrote...

Demyx_IX wrote...

I will point out some of my arguments, take some points from sources, as well as doing what you asked. Mostly the latter. First I would like to say that the Indoctrination done by the reapers are not enforcing illusions, dreams or otherwise similar things. It's only been shown to control people's actions, but even though they are controlled, the things that happen are real. 

Read the codex entry.

"
hallucinations of "ghostly" presences "

This doesn't support the IT very well. Everything you saw after Shepard went up to the Citadel were just 'ghostly pressences'? That doesn't make any sense. And this wiki section mentions nothing of dreams. Shepard wasn't dreaming, the ending is reality. Let's face it, the IT is just a means for people who couldn't get over the real ending. 

Listen to yourself! You're indoctrinated!

[Humakt83]

Demyx_IX wrote...

"
hallucinations of "ghostly" presences "

This doesn't support the IT very well. Everything you saw after Shepard went up to the Citadel were just 'ghostly pressences'? That doesn't make any sense. And this wiki section mentions nothing of dreams. Shepard wasn't dreaming, the ending is reality. Let's face it, the IT is just a means for people who couldn't get over the real ending. 

Your conclusion is born of ignorance. There are many instances in ME games and novels where indoctrination causes hallucination or works through dreams.

[Simocrates]

Demyx_IX wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Its either IT or the Catalyst stays, which would you prefer?

Or you could make your own theory that actually works. IT doesn't. It has far too many loopholes, it in fact fails as a theory and there's many reasons why. I could go into detail but it would take a lot of time. So rather, watch these parts,aka 1-3 on youtube. The girl covers it pretty well. Part1: www.youtube.com/watch

"What's up guys.."   Alt f4.

Couldn't do it. I tried, I really did.

[BatmanTurian]

Demyx_IX wrote...

I will point out some of my arguments, take some points from sources, as well as doing what you asked. Mostly the latter. First I would like to say that the Indoctrination done by the reapers are not enforcing illusions, dreams or otherwise similar things. It's only been shown to control people's actions, but even though they are controlled, the things that happen are real. 

They say the boy is one of the biggest indicators that Shepard is indoctrinated. However this doesn't work as the boy represents Shepard's guilt as BioWare themselves has written, nothing more. People try to state why doesn't the ones at the scene help the little boy. But they were too busy worrying about the reapers so they didn't see him, if you don't see someone you won't help them.

This argument is weak as hell.  Arguably, it could go either way anyway but it seems more obvious that they just really don't see him there. Men and women in the Armed Forces who agree with IT difinitively say they would pick up a child and physically carry them to a shuttle. A child is instinctually more [/b]important to protect to adults, especially soldiers trained to protect innocent civilians.

It's been questioned why does the Harbringer just leave? Harbringer left before Shepard got up from the ground. At the time Shepard looked dead. He only got up after Harbringer left, thus making sense that Harbringer left. 

Why would Harbinger leave when Shepard, the object of his obsession, is laying right there? It's idiotic and not in Harbinger's character.

The shrumps/trees  is stated to not be there when you are running, but they're there-- it's not some illusion. They've always been there.

This has always been weak evidence and is not complete proof to most IT'ers.


Vega is sometimes saying he can hear a hum, they say this is one of the reasons why Shepard is indoctrinated. However there is a legitimate hum in the room. We can hear the hum, Vega can and Shepard can as well. There is a real hum down there. No indoctrinated people has hum'd, why would Shepard?

Because if Shepard is suffering under an indoctrination attempt, Shepard would be broadcasting the signal to the people around him. Also, Vega has already had some encounters with Reapertech and indoctrinated beings (Collectors).

The Illusive Man was interested in the control panel. The llusive Man was already indoctrinated when we got there. Most likely before even prior to that. The reapers simply didn't let him use the panel. It was no hallucination.

This is really weak BS. If the Illusive Man was interested in control, WHICH HE IS, he would be obsessively trying to figure out the control panel. But no, he walks away. Yeah I'm going to argue with someone about control for 5-10 mins then completely abandon the object that might allow me to do that. Please.

It's stated by the IT that in reality he was never taken up to the Citadel when he was hit by the beam. That doesn't work. There is cinematics off the cruicible, the citadel arms opening up, Hackett talking, etc after Shepard went up there. Shepard imagining all this doesn't make any sense.

Shepard isn't imagining it because it is the Reapers influencing Shepard's mind, placing things there, mimicing voices. They do that. That's how you manipulate a person's mind. However, Shepard is imagining things familiar to him, which is what one does in dreams and in the Geth Concensus. Arguably, the ending is both except swap Geth with Reaper. It's a battle in the center of the mind with Harbinger. TVtropes itself says this trope is "One of the basic building blocks of story telling..." so it's not hackneyed or terrible shlock. Plenty of examples on that page.

Shepard is holding his left side when he is with Anderson on the Citadel. Not his right side.

He could have some cracked ribs or internal bleeding and that would be why he would hold his right side. He doesn't actually bleed from his left side until after Anderson dies.

The Illusive Man's eyes aren't representitive of people that has been indoctrinated. Or eyes like it. Saren never had his eyes changed even when it was completely clear that he was indoctrinated towards the end of the game.

Actually they are representive of people who have Reapertech, which indoctrinates especially once present in the body. The Illusive man was exposed to an indoctrination artifact in Mass Effect: Evolution. Saren and his brother are also indoctrinated by the same object. TIM get's his eyes (which are difinitively reaper tech; husks have them) from a glancing surge of power from the artifact after pulling his friend Ben Hislop from the artifact. It's already too late for Ben though because Ben is turned into a Husk. Saren's eyes, and actually almost all of him, were already synthetic on Eden Prime, when he was already indoctrinated. Saren's eyes are also Reapertech eyes.

If the reapers had Shepard indoctrinated, they would never let him destroy them. Let alone even give him the oppurtunity.

Shepard is not indoctrinated until he makes the choice of control or synthesis, which the themes, indoctrinated antagonists, and the Reapers themselves show time and again are their preferred ideology. They are only attempting to indoctrinate Shepard throughout ME3 from Arrival onward. If Arrival was not done by the player, the Proto Reaper is enough since Shepard and his team are literally yards from it while they're attacking it at the end of ME2. Shepard has the willpower to break the attempt and never become indoctrinated. It's the same willpower that kept him from becoming a vegetable after coming in contact with the Prothean Beacon on Eden Prime.

Also, destroy is Shepard's mind showing him a way out.
Shepard still has Hope and the indomitable will and need to stop the Reapers, still has that pestering subconcious telling himnone of this vision is right. Also, the illusion the Reapers are forcing upon him
would not seem real without an option to destroy them. Shepard would
reject it completely.

In the Arrival DLC there was no mention or proof that Harbringer wanted to indoctrinate Shepard. And he was there as a hollagram, he obviously couldn't. 

With very statement you make, you and this girl show you have no idea what you are talking about and haven't been paying attention to the codex or the story. Shepard is exposed to Object Rho, which is an indoctrination device. This indoctrination device has indoctrinated not only the scientists studying it but also the soldiers protecting them. Harbinger can control indoctrinated subjects from  deep space, by evidence of the Collectors in ME2. The same glow used to show Harbinger's control of Dr. Kenson. Also, Harbinger has repeatedly shown an obsession with Shepard and has said repeatedly that he desires Shepard's mind aka he wants to control Shepard.


The first symptom of indoctrination, weak or strong minded, is always hearing the voice of the reapers. (cause not being a PB, that doesn't count.) Shepard never had this symptom.
Yet Harbinger is speaking to your mind while you battle Kenson and company while near Object Rho. Also Harbinger shows up in front of Shepard on a landing pad where a holographic projector would not be built. Indoctrination creates a rent in the fabric of an organic's mind, allowing the Reapers in. The rip grows over time and after subsequent exposure.

Prothean VI, Vendetta, has an ability to detect indoctrination and if it does detect it, it's programmed to guard information it has on the Crucible and Catalyst. Both on Thessia and Cronos it shares it's information with Shepard freely, and if the Indoctrination Theory is to be believed, reaper influence over Shepard should be stronger during the Cronos mission since indoctrination had become more advanced. VI is cooperating fully with Shepard and his team on both occasions. And on Cronos refers to Cerberus as "indoctrinated forces" ignoring Shepard's presence.

Prothean VI's were notoriously terrible at detecting sleeper agents and the already mentally indoctrinated. Protheans did not understand indoctrination and thought it meant only husks or installed reaper tech. Also, as has already been mentioned, Shepard isn't actually indoctrinated until the end.

If you are to assume the IT is reality then it means the game effectively didn't even have an ending. There is no way BioWare would take a approach like the IT to the last game of the triology. 

The game would have an ending. There would be an ending after each of the choices. Granted not all of them would be happy, but it's not Bioware's fault if you make a greedy or naive choice instead of sticking to the goal you've had since ME1.

Shepard was really never near Harbringer long enough to be indoctrinated, even in the slightest. Shepard is incredibly strong willed. 
Shepard doesn't need to be around specifically Harbinger. Shepard has been around literally tons of Reapertech over the course of the games. Indoctrination can be a slow process, cumulative, and it can also stack. Even the strongest of wills would eventually succumb to it, by evidence of TIM fighting it for 30 years and then giving in to it after possessing the parts of the Proto Reaper in his base. " A dead god still dreams."

As for the top comment on this page, I agree. If the IT is the truth (which it thankfully is not (supposition and wishful thinking isn't fact) then it would be even worse than the current endings. (only because it denouces your preferred ideology, which just happens to coincide with Reaper values, and makes you seem foolish) Even after the extended cut, I don't think I will like anything that has to do with the ending. Since it will just be a attempt to justify what happened. At least that is what I read. 

Please do your research before trying to argue against IT. This stuff is in the videos and blogs referenced in the first page of the indoctrination thread. Blind hate without informationt to back it up is ignorant bigotry.
[b]

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 18 juin 2012 - 04:29 .