Ghost of a Messiah wrote...
I don't understand how every time I find a "Pro Indoctrination Theory" thread, all the same people come in and try to debunk the theory... Why do that? Trolls perhaps?
samb wrote...
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.
Modifié par Humakt83, 22 mars 2012 - 06:49 .
GBGriffin wrote...
Renessa wrote...
Everything else would mean serious re-writing of the endings and I don't think Bioware is going to do this. If they use the indoctrination theory they just would have to add content, not completely change the whole last bit.
Actually, no. If Dr. Ray is to be believed, then all they'll do is just expand on what they have. It would be (presumably) easier than generating fresh new content; they just have to expand on what they have.
Also, even though I want to leave this argument alone because people, again, are clearly intent on believing in the IT and nothing else: what version of the IT works for you? There are multiple variations of it beyond just "Shepard was indoctrinated".
samb wrote...
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.
Modifié par MattFini, 22 mars 2012 - 06:49 .
KaeserZen wrote...
(Great video about the Indoctrination theory : )
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.
Even if most of the official statements are extremely cryptic, to me, they scream like a massive "Wait for it !" ("If the fans knew what was planned, they would hold on to their saves" / "We care about this feedback, and we’re planning to directly address it" / "You'll hear more on this in April" / "We want more people to experience the endings").
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 (SPOILERS FROM OTHER GAMES RIGHT BELOW) :
- Knights of the Old Republic : The Player is actually Darth Revan
- Knights of the Old Republic 2 (even though BioWare wasn't the developper) : Darth Traya is using you
- Jade Empire : Your master has actually bred you to be manipulated into serving his dark goals
- SW:TOR : Sith Warrior story (Your master betrays you, even though that was to be expected) / Trooper story (Your squad are double agents) / Jedi Knight story (The kidnapped superweapon scientist is actually a Sith Lord trying to activate it)
Because, I did not see such a massive, story-central plot-twist in Mass Effect 3, and that I would expect it for the Grand Finale and from BioWare.
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, why would they want more player to experience the ending, if it wasn't to prevent them from being spoiled by such a massive plot-twist, if it was already released in the game ?
Because, the Indoctrination theory has too many hints supporting it and makes too much sense within the framework and story of the series to only think of it as a mere coincidence.
Because, the Indoctrination theory is the perfect set-up for the massive plot-twist that would close the game on a firework show of epicness.
Because, revealing the Indoctrination theory through free DLC will be a massive and bold publicity stunt, based on the attention they already have gotten.
Because, they want to continue the franchise, and these ends can't provide that.
Because, BioWare is expert at playing with people's emotions with their video games, and because of everything we have felt so far, Indoctrination theory would be the pinnacle of this, by simply breaking the fourth wall between the gamer and the game.
Because, every other BioWare game is amazing and a masterpiece, and have you already been massively disappointed by the stories, their symbolism and their implementation ?
Because, the Stargazer has "One more story".
___
Because of this all, I have now renewed faith in the company, and think that if this is the way they have planned all along, they will live up to their company name, and will "enter the Pantheon" of major artists based on their impact on society (yes, society. This topic has hit many newspapers and websites, some so far away from the usually closed world of video gaming).
Because of this all, I implore everyone on this forum, and around the Internet, to keep holding the line, this time with Hope, not Anger.
And then, we will know and welcome the truth about Commander Shepard's story.
GBGriffin wrote...
Ghost of a Messiah wrote...
I don't understand how every time I find a "Pro Indoctrination Theory" thread, all the same people come in and try to debunk the theory... Why do that? Trolls perhaps?
Because both sides are looking for nothing better to do until "April". Seriously.
There is nothing other than these theories to talk about without any breaking news.
MeganHunter wrote...
As much as I love the idea of indoctrination theory, Mike Gamble's twitter last night said that Synthesis was the optimal ending because it's the hardest to unlock.
Yes.
It wasn't an offical statement on his part or anything, he was just answering questions and being playful. But it sure sounds like he means it. Sorry, new to twitter and not sure how to link to that tweet alone, but he said it at 11:33 pm last night.
https://twitter.com/#!/GambleMike
GBGriffin wrote...
Tovanus wrote...
GBGriffin wrote...
If Shep dies, you can;t even import to ME3, and honestly, you actually have to work to make that happen. I think you have to actually go out of your way beyond just ignoring everything to make that actually happen.
The choice would only be controversial because many (the IT backers) consider that Shep can only wake up in one ending, and therefore, that would be the only choice that would advance the plot. If people want to see the additional content, they'd have to pick that option, whether or not they believe it's right.
If there is only one choice that leads to more content, why even make it a choice?
I don't see how that nullifies anything. You can end ME 2 with Shepherd dying. To do it, you probably have to ignore content that's in the game (like loyalty missions), but it can be the story you tell. Morinth is mostly a joke, but the notion of a "you die" ending is not a problem.
But like I said, I'm only thinking of indoctrination as the only way to salvage the ending scenes with Starchild and still have a satisfying conclusion not full of poor writing and plotholes. If they ret-con the whole thing, that works too.
You can end ME2 with Shep dying and not be able to import into 3. That's the problem with it.
Your story would end in ME2, so why even buy ME3 then if you want Shep's story to end in 2?
MeganHunter wrote...
As much as I love the idea of indoctrination theory, Mike Gamble's twitter last night said that Synthesis was the optimal ending because it's the hardest to unlock.
Yes.
It wasn't an offical statement on his part or anything, he was just answering questions and being playful. But it sure sounds like he means it. Sorry, new to twitter and not sure how to link to that tweet alone, but he said it at 11:33 pm last night.
https://twitter.com/#!/GambleMike
Ghost of a Messiah wrote...
GBGriffin wrote...
Ghost of a Messiah wrote...
I don't understand how every time I find a "Pro Indoctrination Theory" thread, all the same people come in and try to debunk the theory... Why do that? Trolls perhaps?
Because both sides are looking for nothing better to do until "April". Seriously.
There is nothing other than these theories to talk about without any breaking news.
Here's an Idea... There should be 2 threads... 1 Pro-ITs are stupid... 2 Con-ITs are stupid... then we shoul all just stay in our respective threads....
Let me just start by saying we have the better name. Go Pro-ITS!
Modifié par Erethrian, 22 mars 2012 - 06:52 .
Tovanus wrote...
Why have multiple Shepherds if that's the way to look at it? Or why allow people to save before big decisions so they can have different saves with the same Shepherd leading to different conclusions? There's a legitimate ending where Shepherd has died in the past. I can understand people wanting Bioware to fix ME 3 in a different way than indoctrination, I just don't see the "only destroy choice is right" as a good argument against it.
GBGriffin wrote...
Drake-Shepard wrote...
what if...(assume there an indoc sub-ending) ... there was not a starchild choice....but a starchild cutscene and in that cutscene your shepard just picked destroy?
Then your choice would not be 'funneled'...and then when the game eventually ended...you had your 16 different ending's based on your me1-me3 choices.
What i am trying to say is the 1 correct choice in the potential indoc ending is not a bad thing. It just adds an interactive element to a cutscene. Involves you more.
I see the point you are making, but in the event the indoc theory is correct, the starchild is not a choice on that magnitude. Because actual choice and consequence that can shape your ending has already happened and is still yet to happen.
That's the thing....if they didn't even dress it up as a choice, and just made Shep default choose destroy...I still think people would be upset about not being able to choose, but they wouldn't be guilted into it vs picking a clear game overIf 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.
GBGriffin wrote...
MeganHunter wrote...
As much as I love the idea of indoctrination theory, Mike Gamble's twitter last night said that Synthesis was the optimal ending because it's the hardest to unlock.
Yes.
It wasn't an offical statement on his part or anything, he was just answering questions and being playful. But it sure sounds like he means it. Sorry, new to twitter and not sure how to link to that tweet alone, but he said it at 11:33 pm last night.
https://twitter.com/#!/GambleMike
This actually supports my idea that they weren't outright lying about needing MP to get the "best" ending.
If they think the "best" ending is Synthesis, then you can get it without MP. It's just that the players feel 4k/5k Destroy is the best...but I don't think the devs do.
GBGriffin wrote...
MeganHunter wrote...
As much as I love the idea of indoctrination theory, Mike Gamble's twitter last night said that Synthesis was the optimal ending because it's the hardest to unlock.
Yes.
It wasn't an offical statement on his part or anything, he was just answering questions and being playful. But it sure sounds like he means it. Sorry, new to twitter and not sure how to link to that tweet alone, but he said it at 11:33 pm last night.
https://twitter.com/#!/GambleMike
This actually supports my idea that they weren't outright lying about needing MP to get the "best" ending.
If they think the "best" ending is Synthesis, then you can get it without MP. It's just that the players feel 4k/5k Destroy is the best...but I don't think the devs do.
GBGriffin wrote...
Ghost of a Messiah wrote...
GBGriffin wrote...
Ghost of a Messiah wrote...
I don't understand how every time I find a "Pro Indoctrination Theory" thread, all the same people come in and try to debunk the theory... Why do that? Trolls perhaps?
Because both sides are looking for nothing better to do until "April". Seriously.
There is nothing other than these theories to talk about without any breaking news.
Here's an Idea... There should be 2 threads... 1 Pro-ITs are stupid... 2 Con-ITs are stupid... then we shoul all just stay in our respective threads....
Let me just start by saying we have the better name. Go Pro-ITS!
I dunno, I like being called an "unbeliever". It adds a much mroe religious overtone to the debate.
Also, good luck trying to limit people to posting in just one thread when the reaction seems to be "omg I thought of this did anyone else think of this hmmmmm!?" or "Here is my take on why you people are idiots"
Seriously. People on both sides start their own threads for the sake of starting a thread. There will never be just two of them.
GBGriffin wrote...
Tovanus wrote...
Why have multiple Shepherds if that's the way to look at it? Or why allow people to save before big decisions so they can have different saves with the same Shepherd leading to different conclusions? There's a legitimate ending where Shepherd has died in the past. I can understand people wanting Bioware to fix ME 3 in a different way than indoctrination, I just don't see the "only destroy choice is right" as a good argument against it.
My reasoning behind why destroy is right would be this: assuming that Destroy is the *only* option that leads to DLC content (a boss fight, even other endings, whatever)...people would pick it regardless of their feelings about it if the other 2 ended with "Game Over". You would have to in order to experience the true ending.
Also, from a business model, wouldn't you want all of your fans buying DLC, not just the ones who support Destroy?
Drake-Shepard wrote...
''punish them'' But is this not the beauty of choice! Sometimes there is only one right method!
Tovanus wrote...
GBGriffin wrote...
MeganHunter wrote...
As much as I love the idea of indoctrination theory, Mike Gamble's twitter last night said that Synthesis was the optimal ending because it's the hardest to unlock.
Yes.
It wasn't an offical statement on his part or anything, he was just answering questions and being playful. But it sure sounds like he means it. Sorry, new to twitter and not sure how to link to that tweet alone, but he said it at 11:33 pm last night.
https://twitter.com/#!/GambleMike
This actually supports my idea that they weren't outright lying about needing MP to get the "best" ending.
If they think the "best" ending is Synthesis, then you can get it without MP. It's just that the players feel 4k/5k Destroy is the best...but I don't think the devs do.
That sounds like it's true. I always just kind of assumed they miscounted in the past and were too lazy to fix that announcement that said MP wasn't required. The other thing that came to mind was that maybe the DLC they planned would add enough war assets to make MP unrequired. "Congratulations! Aria has Omega back! Add 1k assets!"
Tovanus wrote...
I think everyone would just pick destroy rather than say "I can't support destroy." Just add a scene onto synthesis and control making it clear that those choices were "giving in" to indoctrination.
I'll be honest though, if I had to lay odds, I'd say that Bioware won't do anything more than try to mitigate the terrible face-value plot we got in the end. Maybe give us a longer conversation with Starchild trying to make him seem less like a shoehorned in deus ex machina. I don't think they can do a very good job with it though. But then again, I'm one of those who strongly feels that Starchild, at face value, demeans the entire series.
)
GBGriffin wrote...
I dunno, I like being called an "unbeliever". It adds a much mroe religious overtone to the debate.
Retour en haut