358 réponses à ce sujet

[Ghost of a Messiah]

JasonDaPsycho wrote...

Meh. Bioware's response to this outrage has been extremely antagonizing rather than providing hints, teases or snippets of a supplement of the endings. I'll believe it when I see it.

Any teases or hints would be too obvious... If it were me I'd be enjoying watching you all speculate... Then I'd give you all the fix you so desperately need... Am I... Is Bioware a bunch of sadists?

[ShepardTheHopeful]

Ya know now that I think about it if Shepard is indeed indoctrinated how the hell does that explain EVERYTHING that happens after? The soldiers fighting, joker making it to that planet the grandpa and son speaking who are obviously human in nature, so.... Shepard saw all that in his indoctrinated state? All I know is if I'm seeing people's events happen and I'm NOT there than I would've questioned if I were perhaps not in my correct state of mind. So none of the events happened and that lil epilogue was just all in Shepards head....where he dreams himself dying.....to save the universe....that gets saved....yup makes perfect sense to me.

Modifié par ShepardTheHopeful, 22 mars 2012 - 06:08 .

[GBGriffin]

Tovanus wrote...

The notion that "indoctrination" limits choice because it presents ONE situation in the game where Shepherd can make a bad choice is foolish. If that choice leads to an ending that takes into account ALL your choices throughout the series, or an ending that simply leads to other choices with thoughtful consequences, it presents a better ending (even if Bioware never intended to use it to begin with).

The idea of a "choice" being a test of Shepherd - a test he can fail - is a good one. It limits nothing, and whether you are Paragon or Renegade, it's frankly a bit out of character for him to go with destroy or synthesize. Shepherd's of all stripes have given way too many speeches across each game about destroying the Reapers being the ONLY choice that will protect the galaxy from them once and for all. Walking into either synthesize or destroy - leaving aside plotholes - does feel a little bit like Shepherd just kind of gives up on his own personality.

To me, "foolish" is the desire to punish players by forcing them to accept a "right" answer. Again, if this is the player' story, then wouldn't it be up to the player to make their own right choice? Or are people now suddenly fine with BioWare deciding for the player what is right or wrong...which, imo, is the essence of the argument against the godchild.

It's presenting 3 options and having only 1 of them be correct. IMO, that goes against the theme of the thoeries just as much as what we got. I shouldn't be forced to choose Destroy, or Control, or Synthesis, or the "one" right answer...why not let players choose all 3 and give each of the 3 multiple endings, not just the one?

Modifié par GBGriffin, 22 mars 2012 - 06:09 .

[GBGriffin]

Renessa wrote...

I don't believe anymore that they are writing gods, but if they have two brain cells left between them, they should take the indoctrination theory and run with it, whether it was planned or not.

Which version of it should they take?

[Ghost of a Messiah]

Ghost of a Messiah wrote...

Everyone who see IT thinks choosing Synthesis or control punishes the player... But what if you simple change sides... It would give the player a new perspective on being aligned with the reapers... Even having to kill your squad-mates or convince them that the reapers are right...

Think about the way KOTOR ended if you chose the dark side... I ended that game with only Bastilla in one playthrough.

[Drake-Shepard]

Tovanus wrote...

The notion that "indoctrination" limits choice because it presents ONE situation in the game where Shepherd can make a bad choice is foolish. If that choice leads to an ending that takes into account ALL your choices throughout the series, or an ending that simply leads to other choices with thoughtful consequences, it presents a better ending (even if Bioware never intended to use it to begin with).

The idea of a "choice" being a test of Shepherd - a test he can fail - is a good one. It limits nothing, and whether you are Paragon or Renegade, it's frankly a bit out of character for him to go with destroy or synthesize. Shepherd's of all stripes have given way too many speeches across each game about destroying the Reapers being the ONLY choice that will protect the galaxy from them once and for all. Walking into either synthesize or destroy - leaving aside plotholes - does feel a little bit like Shepherd just kind of gives up on his own personality.

AGREED with the first part..im assuming you meant control and synthesis = bad and destroy = good. You might of got mixed up (i hope)

The ME1 style choice where you continue with minor consquence was nice, but its the finale of the game. Bad me3 choice should be fatal -Not to one character but game ending fatal. It's at the end of the game aswell so you replay the last 3 hours...boo hoo. 

They couldn't do it for me1 because if an me1 decision left you know wriggle room in me3 then that would be toooo realistic. 

Real choice = choices that get you killed.

[Renessa]

GBGriffin wrote...

Renessa wrote...

I don't believe anymore that they are writing gods, but if they have two brain cells left between them, they should take the indoctrination theory and run with it, whether it was planned or not.

Which version of it should they take?

The one that makes most sense?!

[suusuuu]

BioWare are writing gods

yeah, yeah... I should go.

[The Divine Avenger]

GBGriffin wrote...

The Divine Avenger wrote...


My Shep is a paragon but I've waited 3 f***ing games to hand the reapers there a** damb right I'd pick destroy

Same here. But not everyone thinks like we do, and if we say our choice is right and their's is wrong and they don't deserve content as a result...how does that win the movement anything beyond only pleasing *some* of the players, instead of all (which, imo could be done with just expanding the current endings and adding new ones).

Oh no I agree with that 100% the main thing I really want is choice haveing 1 ending with 3 different coulered explosions is unexceptable. The way I see it if they choose to go the way of the IT then they could pull a the end is'nt really the end. they could do it so that even if you choose synthasis or controle they could continue the game you'd just be fighting for he reapers or they could have control backfire in someway. I don't know but the point I guess is that with the IT they could take it many different way's. But me personally like yourself I want to kick the reapers a**

The way I see it right now we have 3 choices

Control = giving in to the Illusive man, which would mean why the fu** didn't we just join Cerberus on no 2 what was the point of blowing up the collecters base if you choose this option.

Synthasis = Basily we've just done the reapers job for them & tuned the entire galaxy into mini reapers against there will. Not just the galacic civilisations but the one that have yet to develop space traval like the yarg.

Destroy = yay we can hand the reapers there a** but we betray the geth & EDI at the same time, ok I got the option to kick there a** but can it be revised so we don't have to commit genocide on every AI just to slap the reapers for there actions.

Modifié par The Divine Avenger, 22 mars 2012 - 06:15 .

[Tovanus]

Drake-Shepard wrote...

Tovanus wrote...

The notion that "indoctrination" limits choice because it presents ONE situation in the game where Shepherd can make a bad choice is foolish. If that choice leads to an ending that takes into account ALL your choices throughout the series, or an ending that simply leads to other choices with thoughtful consequences, it presents a better ending (even if Bioware never intended to use it to begin with).

The idea of a "choice" being a test of Shepherd - a test he can fail - is a good one. It limits nothing, and whether you are Paragon or Renegade, it's frankly a bit out of character for him to go with destroy or synthesize. Shepherd's of all stripes have given way too many speeches across each game about destroying the Reapers being the ONLY choice that will protect the galaxy from them once and for all. Walking into either synthesize or destroy - leaving aside plotholes - does feel a little bit like Shepherd just kind of gives up on his own personality.

AGREED with the first part..im assuming you meant control and synthesis = bad and destroy = good. You might of got mixed up (i hope)

The ME1 style choice where you continue with minor consquence was nice, but its the finale of the game. Bad me3 choice should be fatal -Not to one character but game ending fatal. It's at the end of the game aswell so you replay the last 3 hours...boo hoo. 

They couldn't do it for me1 because if an me1 decision left you know wriggle room in me3 then that would be toooo realistic. 

Real choice = choices that get you killed.

Yup, typo. Fixing it. Meant Synthesis and Control were the bad choices. 

Also, if I were totally honest about my renegade Shepherd's fate, he made a choice that led to his death long ago, ending his tragic story. But, what was I supposed to do? Morinth was pretty sexy and she was coming on to Shepherd. How do you say no to that? I assume he died a happy Shepherd.

[Sashimi_taco]

Why does everyone think the indoc theory is real when bioware themselves said they didn't have plans to change the ending until we said something? The facebook said they didn't have any plans on new endings, which they deleted and later said that they are listening to fan feedback to possibly maybe make new endings one day if they feel like it.

[ShepardTheHopeful]

[quote]Renessa wrote...

[quote]GBGriffin wrote...

[quote]Renessa wrote...

I don't believe anymore that they are writing gods, but if they have two brain cells left between them, they should take the indoctrination theory and run with it, whether it was planned or not.[/quote]

[/quote]

If they have two brain cells left between them (and i'm sure they have many more than that) they should scrap any indication that the indoctrination theory is correct. I'm nowhere near convinced enough to accept it as the norm or universally accepted theory. It's not the best theory, heck I don't even think it's a good theory (personal opinion), But one thing I can say for sure is it's certainly the loudest theory.

[Drake-Shepard]

ahhaha.. morinth crossed my mind too! That was choice at its finest

[KaeserZen]

Ghost of a Messiah wrote...

Everyone who see IT thinks choosing Synthesis or control punishes the player... But what if you simple change sides... It would give the player a new perspective on being aligned with the reapers... Even having to kill your squad-mates or convince them that the reapers are right...

Think about the way KOTOR ended if you chose the dark side... I ended that game with only Bastilla in one playthrough.

I think that Shepard being indoctrinated would have him work either as Saren or TIM. Both strong willed characters, but doing the Reaper's bidding without them thinking they are doing it.

There can be a way to have all the three choices not result in Shep's death and have an impact over the true endings.

However, seeing that if you don't use the Renegade option to shoot TIM in the conversation, you can die, I wouldn't mind Destroy being the only way to "survive" the Indoctrination. With afterwards, a choice to destroy or control the Reapers.

If we look at the cutscenes, in both Control and Synthesis, Shepard is huskified (falling under Reaper control), then disintegrated (mind shattered because of indoctrination too rapid ?).

Since the true endings should be open ended, it would be unfair not to give players the true choice to kill or control the Reapers.

[DarthSliver]

I hope this theory is right because its the only thing that makes the endings make sense. The bad thing is about the theory is we the fans just wrote them the perfect escape goat if they truly did f-up the ending. Basically they could just go "yeah totally he was indoctrinated" even through they truly did mess up. Also if the ending is truly what they wanted they couldve done it so EA couldnt really milk the series and ME could hopefully end on a high note.

[GBGriffin]

Tovanus wrote...


Yup, typo. Fixing it. Meant Synthesis and Control were the bad choices. 

Also, if I were totally honest about my renegade Shepherd's fate, he made a choice that led to his death long ago, ending his tragic story. But, what was I supposed to do? Morinth was pretty sexy and she was coming on to Shepherd. How do you say no to that? I assume he died a happy Shepherd.

...I think I've argued about this with you before. I specifically remember someone mentioning Morinth.

Morinth and this are not the same choice, not on the same degree. Morinth is an optional ending for Shep based on a choice earlier on in the game...a choice that lets the player keep playing regardless. You get Samara or you get Morinth....and, once you beat the game, you can romance Morinth and die.

The thing is, choosing to romance Morinth isn't required to advance the plot, not in the way any DLC relating to IT would. IT basically needs DLC to make it work, and you would be forced to choose the one option that, as of now, would make it work.

Morinth had no impact on the ending of ME2; it was just a stupid thing for Shep to do. IT is, in the minds of many, the only way to advance the plot of ME3...I'd say that's a big difference.

[D1ck1e]

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.

I don't know, makes me hate the reapers even more.

[CaptainBlackGold]

Psychology of Learning 101: the human mind is so constructed that it insists on imposing order on chaos. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that humans will find order, even when it can be verified that no such order exists.

It is one of the reasons why memory and eye-witness testimony are inherently unreliable; people try to find patterns and relationships between discordant events, actually changing their memories to fit their new construct (see "Brain Games" for more detail).

Or as Robert Heinlein said, "Man is not a rational animal, but a rationalizing animal."

Hence, while I would like the endings to make sense, and find the IT theory interesting, my better judgment keeps telling me that someone simply screwed up, badly. Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by incompetance...

[The Divine Avenger]

Ghost of a Messiah wrote...

JasonDaPsycho wrote...

Meh. Bioware's response to this outrage has been extremely antagonizing rather than providing hints, teases or snippets of a supplement of the endings. I'll believe it when I see it.

Any teases or hints would be too obvious... If it were me I'd be enjoying watching you all speculate... Then I'd give you all the fix you so desperately need... Am I... Is Bioware a bunch of sadists?

is Bioware a bunch of sadists = who really knows 4 sure

is EA a bunch of sadists = oh absolutly

[GBGriffin]

CaptainBlackGold wrote...

Psychology of Learning 101: the human mind is so constructed that it insists on imposing order on chaos. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that humans will find order, even when it can be verified that no such order exists.

It is one of the reasons why memory and eye-witness testimony are inherently unreliable; people try to find patterns and relationships between discordant events, actually changing their memories to fit their new construct (see "Brain Games" for more detail).

Or as Robert Heinlein said, "Man is not a rational animal, but a rationalizing animal."

Hence, while I would like the endings to make sense, and find the IT theory interesting, my better judgment keeps telling me that someone simply screwed up, badly. Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by incompetance...

As a psych major (even though I'm returning to school for computer science), I love you for this. 

[Tovanus]

Drake-Shepard wrote...

ahhaha.. morinth crossed my mind too! That was choice at its finest

I've also seen a video of an outcome for ME 2's ending where Shepherd dies (along with everyone else) and only Joker survives. And it's a real ending, giving the cutscenes and showing the giant Reaper fleed headed into the galaxy. 

Just don't see why indoctrination giving, "Shepherd dies or fails" possibilities would be a controversial lack of choice. Honestly, as I approached the end of the game, I wasn't even expecting a big choice in the end. When I thought of choice mattering, I thought that just meant that the ending would take into account all the choices you made from ME 1 to ME 3. Another choice if it works with the plot will be fun still, but I really hope everything just makes sense.

[KaeserZen]

Ghost of a Messiah wrote...

Any teases or hints would be too obvious... If it were me I'd be enjoying watching you all speculate... Then I'd give you all the fix you so desperately need... Am I... Is Bioware a bunch of sadists?

This would be sadism and risky... but the priiiiiiize...

[ShepardTheHopeful]

I still strongly disagree with the indoctrination theory to be honest the ending as it is now makes more sense logically than the damn indoctrination ending. I honestly wish people would just stop talking about it.

[MingWolf]

KaeserZen wrote...

Even with all the official responses from BioWare hinting at no change in the endings, I can't help but think the Indoctrination theory is right and is indeed what BioWare intented.

I wish to carry the same enthusiasm as you.  However, please explain to me why the text box at the very end of the game (the one that encourages you to buy more DLC) plainly said that Shepard has defeated the reapers.  To me, this seems to throw the intent of indoctrination theory straight out the window, because it implies that the ending is real.

Because, in every BioWare-produced game I have played, there was an exceptionnally well crafted plot twist or betrayal with a massive impact on the play experience

Some of them were, but not all of them.  I personally had a distaste for Dragon Age II.  Haven't finished KOTOR yet so can't comment on that.  Neverwinter Nights had a pretty hit and miss plot as well, though I found the game acceptable. 

Because, this just cannot be the way it ends.

Because, they have promised us ealier, and usually BioWare doesn't market what they can't/won't deliver (check SW:TOR's development information releases).

Because...

I was in the same kind of denial too.  But then came DA2, which to me placed skepticism in their marketing (to put it VERY lightly).

[ShepardTheHopeful]

And just for the sake of saying it the wound in Shepard's side? That could've easily been the marauder who shot you ya know...right before you enter the citadel and walk the rest of the way injured holding your SIDE which you didn't do prior to the shot.