358 réponses à ce sujet

[KaeserZen]

Sparatus wrote...

KaeserZen wrote...

Perhaps they didn't want anyone to have the ending of this marvelous franchise spoiled, and kept the true ending under total wraps for a later release ?

That's stupid. And if it's true, which it probably isn't, then they deserve the backlash they are getting.

Unless they also ran out of time to implement a proper ending. From what was said in the Final Hours report, the ending was still not determined by November. They could have bought some time (and backlash) doing so.

[Dominus]

I've spent a great deal of time thinking about the legitimacy of the indoctrination theory, and I'm sort of in the same place: It could really go either way, to me. Either an incredibly simplified, plot-hole ridden ending was built, potentially against the will of others, or...

It was intended that way, and they're staying cryptically ambiguous about the entire thing. Frankly, I'd say give it a month or two....or more before they reveal any definitive answer. If I remember correctly, casey said he liked the ending due to its "multiple interpretations". Like I said, Vague and ambiguous.

For now, I'll just be blazing through the game and skipping the bit before hitting the Super-Crazy-Matrix-Reloaded-Ending Mode.

Modifié par DominusVita, 22 mars 2012 - 05:15 .

[The Divine Avenger]

Zhuinden wrote...

The problem with the indoctrination theory is that it does NOT address how you actually have defeated the Reapers. If the ending showed that Shepard was assumed control of and he beat Harbinger outta there with his mind and when his shields (not marauder) were off Joker would blast Harbinger outta thin air and everyone would be like Yaaaaay and well that would make sense.
It would not be that great - considering I'm not a writer of any kind - BUT it would be an ending.

If the indoctrination theory is correct, then the game doesn't actually end.
That seems wrong for 60$.

As I've said since the start of all this I don't know what's worse.

The fact that I spent £65 on the collectors edition for a game with a stupid ending

Or

That I spent £65 on a game that wasn't even complete

[Drake-Shepard]

GBGriffin wrote...

Drake-Shepard wrote...



its my way of saying what i hope. It is feasible if it isn't.
I am hoping BW is sooo good that it is. 
I should of added /dramatic
http://i1.kym-cdn.co...271/119/207.jpg 

If BW actually meant 'a new type of DNA'. synthetics have DNA?? How did i not realise how absurb that is. I won't be able to pick up a bw title again. I don't know how you can patch up the DNA plothole.

The current endings need fixing. I am supporting that entirely. I just don't believe that the IT is the perfect fix, not the way some people currently imagine it being implemented.

If they actually make sense of things, and hopefully add just *one* option for a brighter ending (hell, one option for a worse ending to hit both sides of the spectrum), I'd be happy. But to force players to accept even more than they may be willing to accept already seems a bit...much.

Just end the game. End the game, fix the endings, and give people a reason to play campaign DLC. If people like the current endings, let them pick one, and if they don't, let them pick other valid options that won't include content the former will miss out on.

oh yh i agree to an extent. I am hopeful for the indoc theory..and i am assuming its true.... BUT if it wasn't their plan then i don't want it.

I invested in a vision..they said it was a trilogy..all planned...to some extent....
I assumed that means they had figured out why the reapers were reaping and how they could be stopped... Atleast a general idea.
But with these changing endings...they were making it up as the went along'?
this disheartens me. Other fans should demand what they were promised but i wouldn't care anymore. I still support the hold the line movement. False advertising is against regulations for a reason

I am just hoping they were planning to deliver on what was promised all along...

is it wrong to hope? am i digging BW a bigger hole imagining this is their amazing plan all along? probably. I will have my hope redeemed come April or crushed

Modifié par Drake-Shepard, 22 mars 2012 - 05:20 .

[ShepardTheHopeful]

KaeserZen wrote...

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

Everyone keeps talking about the secret ending that you can only get with destroy the reapers option....did anyone think it was just simple enough because it's the only option that doesn't require him to sacrifice his body? It couldn't just be that simple? Man gets killed, destroyed beyond repair, rebuilt after a time dead that shouldn't be possible to revive. No one questions that? But Shepard lands in London and suddenly "INDOCTRINATION!" sorry it doesn't fit I have a much more viable reason as to why Indoctrination wouldn't work. Saren talks about synthesis but Shepard already achieved synthesis even the little brat AI says it. He's part man part machine he works with nanobots and implants directly in his brain. Indoctrination works through rewriting the neurological patterns of the brain through differing waves of radio, etc. So no one can assume instead of the reapers indoctrinating him maybe his achievement to synthesis evolution through Cerberus couldn't have blocked the indoctrination? Maybe it was attempted or tried as shown with the Illusive Man but that his implants stopped it.

Thanks for taking the time to write down your points ! I have a few counter arguments to them.

First, synthesis isn't about implanting people with cybernetics, it is about creating a new DNA form that makes both life synthetic and organic at the same time. It isn't the case with Shepard, so I don't think we can say he has acheived Synthesis.

Second, one can argue whether the rubble in the "Shepard lives" cutscene is indeed in London, but one cannot argue that it clearly isn't the Citadel. Besides, if "Destroy" was chosen and the endings were true, Shepard would have been on the Citadel by the time it exploded. So, this is not the Citadel. And if he fell to Earth from it and survived... well, no, he can't have, really.

There's two very important parts I want to mention. You're right about implanting cybernetics but this wasn't just planting cybernetics this was complete reconstruction of Shepard from the ground up. Remember the only thing that was in tact when he died was his brain. His god knows how long dead brain. His entire body and psychology had to be rewired and rebuilt from the ground up. It's safe to say that Shepard is the closest thing to a true cyborg that ever existed in the Mass Effect Universe. Far as we know. Also after watching it happen multiple times. The citadel itself does take serious damage but it's never actually blown up to the way everyone thinks. It's actually the Crucible that explodes so it's possible to think that the citadel could have fallen out of orbit to earth and that's where shepard ended up. Or maybe he did fall to earth and somehow live with his face being all sorts of messed up. But in terms of London everyone talks about the rubble shepard is near but my question is. What rubble? The idea was that Shepard was fully indoctrinated by the laser that Harbringer hit him with right? Well the entire area around him wasn't concrete hell there were barely any buildings it was a wasteland. So if this was all in SHepards head from that moment where did the rubble even come from? Did someone just throw a building on Shepard? Or did he fall with the citadel somehow surviving a crash on earth where he's thrown back by an already existant explosion from destroying the power conduit. 

[ArkkAngel007]

Taleroth wrote...

There's little I hate more than indoctrination theory. Bioware are not writing gods. They never were. They've written one good plot, and a bunch of good characters. This is not a character we're talking about here.

Besides, the logic of destroy defying the Reapers is simply absurd. Defiance would be the hidden option that we don't get. It would be the option the Starkid never bothers to mention. It would be Shepard throwing himself off the Citadel or finding a hidden panel and pulling out the wires. It would be doing nothing at all just to delay for time, but that only gets you a game over. It would be standing up to the Starkid and saying "no, shove those Reapers up your Citadel, the galaxy deserves better than you or the Crucible. Synthetics deserve better, too." It would be actually rejecting them.

You're not defying them by choosing red. You're just setting the train down the same tracks to the same crappy ending as the rest of us. Which is the exact problem Dragon Age 2 had.

Would you believe the little brat if it never mentioned Destroy, the very thing you set out to do?  The point according to IT is to get Shepard to believe he/she is making the right decision.  By denouncing destroy and coloring the other two in rainbows and unicorns, it isn't that much of a stretch to make that connection.  I see your point, and it's one brought up a lot, but the above is what IT tends to stand on that issue.

And you have to understand that IT was never a fix.  I don't know why people believe it is on both ends of the argument.  Different perspective on ending that made sense with the disjointed mess we received.  It was nothing more or less.  Than when everyone began clamoring for new endings or w/e, than the talks on how it's a perfect solution and all that began.

So yeah, it's the same crappy ending.  Not as holey, but still crap.  Now with no ending.  Perhaps crappier.  More calibrations were definitely needed.

[DGuyton]

I think it's most likely Bioware will be like 'Uh...hey, look what these fans came up with.' 'Huh? Hey, that could save our butts, let's pretend it was our idea all along!'

[GBGriffin]

Drake-Shepard wrote...


oh yh i agree to an extent. I am hopeful for the indoc theory..and i am assuming its true.... BUT if it wasn't their plan then i don't want it.

I invested in a vision..they said it was a trilogy..all planned...to some extent....
I assumed that means they had figured out why the reapers were reaping and how they could be stopped... Atleast a general idea.
But with these changing endings...they were making it up as the went along'?
this disheartens me. Other fans should demand what they were promised but i wouldn't care anymore. I still support the hold the line movement. False advertising is against regulations for a reason

I am just hoping they were planning to deliver on what was promised all along...

is it wrong to hope? am i digging BW a bigger hole imagining this is their amazing plan all along? probably. I will have my hope redeemed come April or crushed

IIRC, Drew Karpyshyn defended the ending initially (not sure what his current stance is) as "It was always about Shepard and the Reapers, but we changed things along the way." The example he gave was Cerberus. Cerberus was not slated to become the "big bad" or whatever; it developed over time, as they went along. This also explains why dark energy was scrapped as well...it was on the table and they ended up just not using it.

The changing up of the writing staff should also indicate that the writing probably wasn't consistent, not to the extent some people think. 

No, it isn't wrong to hope, but I want people to be cautious, and I want them brace themselves that they might not support the IT, when it has become the *only* solution for some. Those people will take it the hardest, I think, and possibly lash out even more with furthering the campaign or whatever this is.

Modifié par GBGriffin, 22 mars 2012 - 05:25 .

[ArkkAngel007]

KaeserZen wrote...

Sparatus wrote...

KaeserZen wrote...

Perhaps they didn't want anyone to have the ending of this marvelous franchise spoiled, and kept the true ending under total wraps for a later release ?

That's stupid. And if it's true, which it probably isn't, then they deserve the backlash they are getting.

Unless they also ran out of time to implement a proper ending. From what was said in the Final Hours report, the ending was still not determined by November. They could have bought some time (and backlash) doing so.

I have to disagree with an ending not determined, because wasn't that when we received the leaks of the script?  Which contained the same ending, minus the Normandy and Buzz Aldrin's horrible voice acting...

[KaeserZen]

GBGriffin wrote...

No, it isn't wrong to hope, but I want people to be cautious, and I want them brace themselves that they might not support the IT, when it has become the *only* solution for some. Those people will take it the hardest, I think, and possibly lash out even more with furthering the campaign or whatever this is.

I definitely agree with you. While the Indoctrination theory is not the only way out for BioWare, it is most certainly the most elegant and tangible one.

I would be happy with anything they made as long as it does not support the current ending and its logic. The Indoctrination Theory kind of makes me think that it was intended.

[UrgentArchengel]

Can't really believe official statements until I can see the people in person, telling me. The Twitter/Facebook on the other hand, gives me more faith.

[KaeserZen]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

I have to disagree with an ending not determined, because wasn't that when we received the leaks of the script?  Which contained the same ending, minus the Normandy and Buzz Aldrin's horrible voice acting...

I am not sure about the date of the leaks, but I remember it was around that time. However it appears from the Final Hours documentary that nothing was set in stone until around November, which means a very late decision regarding on how the ending could play out.

It's possible they felt they ran out of time, and did a placeholder ending as a good opportunity to mess with us and still get us pumped !

DGuyton wrote...

I think it's most likely Bioware will be
like 'Uh...hey, look what these fans came up with.' 'Huh? Hey, that
could save our butts, let's pretend it was our idea all along!'

Yeah, that's highly possible, but I wouldn't mind that. It'll still be an elegant move !

[Darthdac2]

DGuyton wrote...

I think it's most likely Bioware will be like 'Uh...hey, look what these fans came up with.' 'Huh? Hey, that could save our butts, let's pretend it was our idea all along!'

It would still be beter than the current ending

[GBGriffin]

KaeserZen wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

No, it isn't wrong to hope, but I want people to be cautious, and I want them brace themselves that they might not support the IT, when it has become the *only* solution for some. Those people will take it the hardest, I think, and possibly lash out even more with furthering the campaign or whatever this is.

I definitely agree with you. While the Indoctrination theory is not the only way out for BioWare, it is most certainly the most elegant and tangible one.

I would be happy with anything they made as long as it does not support the current ending and its logic. The Indoctrination Theory kind of makes me think that it was intended.

I'd say it would be simply the "easiest". The fans have pretty much have done all of the hard work by writing it for them

I made this poor little graph for my own thread (with my limited artistic talent) to show the implications of why I hope the current IT (as I understand it) isn't implemented.


Now, people have posted other solutions to get around the end result of Synthesis/Control, but if BioWare takes the IT as is...basically, those 2 choices wouldn't lead to anything, or couldn't conceivably lead to something as significant as the third. Now, if all 3 choices got a chance at relatively equal (even different) content, then sure. But there are some who feel Shepard should only pick Destroy, or else Shep (and, by extension, the player) needs to learn a little lesson and start over again to make the "right" choice...even though some people believe (and have argued reasonably well) that Destroy isn't the option their Shepard would pick.

Modifié par GBGriffin, 22 mars 2012 - 05:33 .

[RealSmokki]

I agree with OP 100%. It will be fun to see everyones responses when this indeed turns out to be true. I just feel bit sad for Bioware, since they propably thought that most would get those hints throughout the game and there would be "lots of speculation" about WHAT WILL HAPPEN AFTER YOU WAKE UP.

And all who complain about game not being complete... can't you really just wait for one month for free ending that will be suicide mission x10? They have hinted so much that this will not be the end and they are going to have a surprise for us.

In TIM voice: Have a little hope (and patience more than 5 year old)

[AngryFrozenWater]

The IT is too flexible. Anything that doesn't "make sense" in the game can be explained with it. That alone makes it unacceptable for me.

[ticklefist]

Indoc theory raises a lot of questions best concluded with one obvious answer.

The video game developers didn't have enough time.

[ShepardTheHopeful]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

The IT is too flexible. Anything that doesn't "make sense" in the game can be explained with it. That alone makes it unacceptable for me.

I have to agree with you it's kind of the "A wizard did it" explination. 

If that's the case Miranda must be one badass white mage in her spare time. 

[blah64]

BigGuy28 wrote...

Indoctrination theory is silly and I'm sick of seeing people constantly bringing it up. It's worse than the endings we got. I'll take "choose your color to screw over the galaxy with" over "lol the last part didn't happen you were really indoctrinated" any day.

Except the part where it leaves the door open to fix everything that sucked? Indoc theory represents a giant do-over button without scraping the whole ME universe, and our faith in BW. Its less about how good Indoc theory is on its own, versus what its able to accomplish.

[ArkkAngel007]

GBGriffin wrote...

I'd say it would be simply the "easiest". The fans have pretty much have done all of the hard work by writing it for them

I made this poor little graph for my own thread (with my limited artistic talent) to show the implications of why I hope the current IT (as I understand it) isn't implemented.
*Snip sensible flowchart*

Now, people have posted other solutions to get around the end result of Synthesis/Control, but if BioWare takes the IT as is...basically, those 2 choices wouldn't lead to anything, or couldn't conceivably lead to something as significant as the third. Now, if all 3 choices got a chance at relatively equal (even different) content, then sure. But there are some who feel Shepard should only pick Destroy, or else Shep (and, by extension, the player) needs to learn a little lesson and start over again to make the "right" choice...even though some people believe (and have argued reasonably well) that Destroy isn't the option their Shepard would pick.

Yeah, I posted over on the main thread with that solution to that very issue I suggested and....nothing.  Too busy going over the same data the hundreth time as if it was a brand new revelation (to be fair, many of them active on there weren't the same people from 2-300 pages back), and the only comment was mostly an assumption on why you feel the way you do about the endings (no idea why it was relevent).  

But yeah, especially after taking time in that thread of yours, I could tell that many people seem pretty dead set on only having Destroy be the only way to carry on and those that chose the others should suffer by that decision and be forced to reload and replay.  I doubt BioWare would alienate parts of their consumer base.

[Arisu]

I still wish it were true... Indoctrination would be the perfect plot twist! And most people are willing to believe it anyway.

[Evil_medved]

My ass.

[Ultra Prism]

Right now they could be denying the Indoctrination theory as it could be greatest plottwist they come with .... they dont want everyone to know the theory yet

[Drake-Shepard]

GBGriffin wrote...

KaeserZen wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

No, it isn't wrong to hope, but I want people to be cautious, and I want them brace themselves that they might not support the IT, when it has become the *only* solution for some. Those people will take it the hardest, I think, and possibly lash out even more with furthering the campaign or whatever this is.

I definitely agree with you. While the Indoctrination theory is not the only way out for BioWare, it is most certainly the most elegant and tangible one.

I would be happy with anything they made as long as it does not support the current ending and its logic. The Indoctrination Theory kind of makes me think that it was intended.

I'd say it would be simply the "easiest". The fans have pretty much have done all of the hard work by writing it for them

I made this poor little graph for my own thread (with my limited artistic talent) to show the implications of why I hope the current IT (as I understand it) isn't implemented.


Now, people have posted other solutions to get around the end result of Synthesis/Control, but if BioWare takes the IT as is...basically, those 2 choices wouldn't lead to anything, or couldn't conceivably lead to something as significant as the third. Now, if all 3 choices got a chance at relatively equal (even different) content, then sure. But there are some who feel Shepard should only pick Destroy, or else Shep (and, by extension, the player) needs to learn a little lesson and start over again to make the "right" choice...even though some people believe (and have argued reasonably well) that Destroy isn't the option their Shepard would pick.

you are assuming the INDOC is part of the ending. This could of happened just as easily at the start of the game....you beat indoc and carry on with me3.

Not every event needs multiple 'correct' choices.

There doesnt have to even be a  decision at the end. You can jus fight through a last defence and activate the weapon. This maybe where the problem arouse (if you take the end literally)...dev's thought fans want random illogical choice and added a starchild.

The 'your decisions matter' bit can be in regards to if the crucible actually makes it into the catalyst and the aftermathe.

An indoc and new ending that makes more sense can exist in unison. Basically the drawing you made... after 'continue to play through dlc'..you wrote '(multiple endings?) exactly...here...draw 16 arrows coming out. Thats your choice. Choice is not limited by indoc theory. Infact its not even affected.

Eventhough i think giving in to indoc is choice. what is more choice then choosing to die and lose.

Again i only want this if it was planned all along. otherwise it is a slap in peoples face who (correctly?)took the ending at face value

Modifié par Drake-Shepard, 22 mars 2012 - 05:48 .

[ArkkAngel007]

blah64 wrote...

BigGuy28 wrote...

Indoctrination theory is silly and I'm sick of seeing people constantly bringing it up. It's worse than the endings we got. I'll take "choose your color to screw over the galaxy with" over "lol the last part didn't happen you were really indoctrinated" any day.

Except the part where it leaves the door open to fix everything that sucked? Indoc theory represents a giant do-over button without scraping the whole ME universe, and our faith in BW. Its less about how good Indoc theory is on its own, versus what its able to accomplish.

Yeah, now it is, and only because we now actually have word that something will be done, though we haven't a clue what that entails.  

You can't just brush away that it's horrible on it's own in that regard due to future interventions by BioWare when we didn't know there would be any until yesterday.