GBGriffin wrote...
I posted a thread about this already, but basically, it invalidates 2 of the endings where you fall victim to indoctrination, and it cheapens the death of Anderson because he didn't really die.
Based on my current understanding of the IT, you would have to pick Destroy to break the indoctrination...otherwise Shep becomes indoctrinated. People who choose those other endings don't want Shep to be indoctrinated; they choose those endings, in some cases, because they are the best for their Shep.
IT really only benefits one group of people: those who believe in Destroy. It screws over the rest, while expanding on all of the endings and hopefully adding new ones benefits everyone.
This.
I absolutely hate the Indoctrination theory. Hate it. The greatest thing about the series is that there is no "wrong" choice. Your choices always result with you either being the hero or getting the job done. IT implies that there is only one choice: destroy. If only one choice was right then IT makes for an even more limited role of free will. Something that was complained about of the original ending.
No, what is more consistent with the series is that all choices are "right" or inconsequential. Look at all the major choices you had to make and ask yourself how many could have resulted in a truly bad consequence? Give the Collector base to TIM only resulted in a change in icon for a war asset. Saving the Council didn't help you getting help for Earth. Punching the reporter didn't get you assault charges or even a restraining order.
Let's also be honest here, "all a just dream" is the most cliched trope out there. It reeeks of poor writing and wasted time. "Sooooo none of that really happened? What a waste of time.
Did it ever occur to anyone of the possibility that Bioware never had the IT in mind? That they liked their current idea for an ending and the IT is basically you wishing it never happened? The message you send is that you want to nullify the presented material completely. Did you just assume Bioware saw things your way?
I liked the original ending but felt it didn't go far enough. It didn't tie up all the loose ends, or show the consequences of my actions. How could we have differentiated the endings to illustrate this?
1) Red/Destroy: Reapers destroyed, soldiers are buried, Reaper body parts become basis for new tech all over the galaxy, eventually leading to rebuilding of the mass relays but with acutal understanding of the science behind it.
2) Blue/Control: Shepp becomes the god of the Reapers, watches the races he saved from afar and uses sutble indoctrination to maintain galactic peace between organics and synthetic. He also uses his vast brainwashing powers to prod technology along, eventually leading to rebuilding of the mass relays but with acutal understanding of the science behind it.
3) Green/Synthesis: Shepp's DNA is in everyone, hence making the galaxy better by default. This new evolution lets people transmit , intergrate and process information at extraordinary speeds. Galaxy makes great strides in science, eventually leading to rebuilding of the mass relays but with acutal understanding of the science behind it.
All of them lead to same evenuality (concistent with ME's MO) but get there differently. BW has been using the "false choice" in all ME games so far, but they do it so well we accept that illusion.
Retour en haut
If the goal is to make only one choice branch out into 16 areas, then don't make it a choice...make every player experience it to get those 16 endings, not punish them for picking the "wrong" choice.
