I'm for indoctrination theory as long as it starts with Shepard being knocked out by the beam during the first Reaper attack on Earth, during the hearing with the committee. When Anderson calls Shepard and Shepard gets up, that's when the nightmare starts.
Why? The story up until the ending is perfectly fine.
Though I will admit, one piece of the debris in Shepard's Alive, does resemble the admiralty board's table. But that would mean the entire game was fony and I'm not entirely behind that idea. It would be neat but it would mean Mass Effect 4 is a copy and paste.
it's so funny see dudes defending space magic, god-kid etc etc... but... they can't explain the final CG when Shepard wake up.
I've explained this tons of times no one believes me. Apparently we can breath in space and have robots that reprogram your brain from miles away but my theory is impossible.
1)Shepard had billions of credits of experimental synthetics
2)The cruicble is a giant six billion year old machine of unknown origin and function. All we know is it stops the reapers and destroys the relays in a way that doesn't destroy the systems and annihilate all organic life in the process.
3)We are aware that the synthetics in Shepard did indeed survive up to this point and that the Cruicble would affect his synthetics in some way.
4)The reapers have a degree of time and space manipulation and oganics have a degree of understanding with stasis and stopping time in enclosed areas.
5) is it such an impossibility in sci-fi that the crucible destroyed the synthetics by restoring shepard to a point where his body didn't need them. Remember these synthetics were keeping him alive but with the effects of the magic 6 billion year old machine of unknown anything who's to say the reaction with the synthetics wasn't enough to shoot some life back into shepard. Thus the gasp he's coming back to life rather than waking up it sounded like he was taking breath for the first time.
6) Shepard survived the fall once somehow keeping his body and brain in tact granted it required 4 billion credits and 2 years time but this was before SHepard had anything in him this time he's different modified stronger. Though still himself. I also think that this is the reason he can't be indoctrinated, he never did anything really indoctrination worthy until 2 after he was rebuilt for the most part ME1 didn't have a lot of scenes where indoctrination seemed possible.
1. That doen't mean he can servive the void of space and a fall from space. 2.It doen't mean it can do space magic 3.Shep is only alive because ofhis synthetics. If they don't wotk...He's dead. 4.Reapers can't do that. 5. You don't see that it's odd that the synthesis choice is exactly like Seran arguement in ME1? 6..Uh...SHEP die from it.
I think you need to watch this...
For the last itme sarens choice is NOTHING like the synthetic option. Saren specifically spoke about being tools for the reapers for proving our use to stay as a species. This was pointless as useful humans were just used to either lead to the harvesting of others or just get harvested themselves.
Why can't it do space magic we know nothing about it we know nothing past the Protheans. that's 50k years this thing is BILLIONS of years old. And we thought the prothean race was the most amazing advanced race. We aren't even a 5th of that who knows how far behind the Protheans were to the race prior and they could indefinately put themselves in stasis long as they had power they were good.
You obviously didn't read my post so I'm not going to give you an answer for your third comment
all i'm suggesting is that what happens to shepard the second time he falls from space to his death is similar to the first time with a reasonable variable to make it possible this time.
Reapers can't do that is officially the dumbest pro indoctrination theory comment i've heard on forums to date. Good for you.
for the shep died comment if there was a facepalm emote I would put it here. Read the damn post before you comment on stuff I already explained and then try to link that stupid 21 minute video that only makes me believe that the indoctrination theory is inaccurate all the more.
1.What the starchild says... http://www.youtube.c...ailpage#t=1163s "Synthesis is the final evolution for organics...It wil combine all organic and synthetic life." At 19:48
What Seran says....http://www.youtube.c...11tt8BaY#t=207s The relastion ship is symbiotic.organic and Machine intertwine, a union of flesh ans stell the strenght of both the weakness of nether." ..... It's the same thing. 2.Again, their is nothing to showhow any of whathappensinthe end happens. Saying it can do anything doesn't mean it can do anything. 3.But he is alive because of his cybernetic implats...If they don't work heis dead. 4.No. Shepard at that time had a helmet and a full suit on. Sheperd now has a burn up suit, holes every where, and no gauntlets. He would never sevive a fall form space. 5. Reaper can't warp time or effect time. They can warp space but to small degress. he ending is not a small degress nor is Sheperd falling from space. 6.But Shepard die from the fall from space in ME2. You just said he sevived. That did not happen. He was dead when they started to rebuild him.
I am sorry man but that don't answer anything, is just a theory of what could had happend. One i have no choice to hope is true...Because i didn't let Marauder Shields kill me, and ruin the ME series for me forever.
I said many times before people who just play ME3 may find the current endings average or good. Now if you play the entire series this endings are retarded.
It awnsers everything. It points out that sysnthesis and Seran arguement is the same thing and more so. It awnsers all of the tc, questions.
I am sorry man but that don't answer anything, is just a theory of what could had happend. One i have no choice to hope is true...Because i didn't let Marauder Shields kill me, and ruin the ME series for me forever.
I said many times before people who just play ME3 may find the current endings average or good. Now if you play the entire series this endings are retarded.
It awnsers everything. It points out that sysnthesis and Seran arguement is the same thing and more so. It awnsers all of the tc, questions.
To be fair, it doesn't answer IT. It merely argues in support of it, we don't know. Yes, I see Synthesis the way Shepard sees Saren's idea, a diabolical plot that combines organic with machines and the result isn't pretty (husks, marauders, brutes, etc).
Well, IGN just finished their Spoiler Streaming Ending Talkpoints Show, or whatever it was, and now their saying that Indoctrination Theory is pretty clear to them. They're still saying that gamers are upset because the ending went over their heads, but now its that the IT ending specifically was too much for gamers to grasp. Which is kind of funny.
Well, IGN just finished their Spoiler Streaming Ending Talkpoints Show, or whatever it was, and now their saying that Indoctrination Theory is pretty clear to them. They're still saying that gamers are upset because the ending went over their heads, but now its that the IT ending specifically was too much for gamers to grasp. Which is kind of funny.
Well I can understand the whole "over people's heads" be it if you're a person who never played ME1 or ME2 and just came to ME3 for gameplay. There's still a considerable amount of codex you can dig up in the game to help explain it.
For people who have played the other games, I'd say their issue is they keep expecting something more. In the end IT is very simple, that's why it's so believeable. It's a simple solution and an answer people miss quickly because they're expecting something else therefore refuse to believe it or in it.
With me, it's the only logical conclusion that makes concrete sense. The only solution that can fix this terrible ending that, as it stands right now, doesn't make sense at all.
While I think the Indoctrination Theory is interesting, well thought-out and (sadly) improves upon the current ending, like a few others have said, I honestly think it's a case of the fans putting more work and thought into a flawed and sloppy ending than the original writers did.
Up until the end, the game, and the entire series, was painstakingly written, filled with foreshadowing and countless interactions between individual pieces of the story. At the end, we get a quick deus ex machina which seems to use circular logic (synthetics to destroy organics to save from synthetics) as the explanation for its "plan," and vague assertions as to why the Crucible and Catalyst coming together has made everything possible. We get an ending which is functionally very similar in all 3 versions (which, if the Indoctrination Theory were true, would be quite a disappointment) and no particular sense of what the hell is going on, regardless of which route we take.
I'm all for complicated, thought-provoking endings, but the simple fact of the matter is, they should provoke thought based on the information you're given, not the complete lack thereof. Things like unlimited ammo in the final section and Anderson's sudden change of gaze when talking to the Illusive Man can be just as much a product of the game being a GAME (and thus not limited to any sort of specific rules) as they can be a secret message. It seems fairly clear from what we're heard about the creative process in ME3 that they meant this to be the true ending. If it can be taken as indoctrination, that's fine, but even so, the end should be more in-depth, better written, and up to the quality we've expected from Bioware.
While I think the Indoctrination Theory is interesting, well thought-out and (sadly) improves upon the current ending, like a few others have said, I honestly think it's a case of the fans putting more work and thought into a flawed and sloppy ending than the original writers did.
Up until the end, the game, and the entire series, was painstakingly written, filled with foreshadowing and countless interactions between individual pieces of the story. At the end, we get a quick deus ex machina which seems to use circular logic (synthetics to destroy organics to save from synthetics) as the explanation for its "plan," and vague assertions as to why the Crucible and Catalyst coming together has made everything possible. We get an ending which is functionally very similar in all 3 versions (which, if the Indoctrination Theory were true, would be quite a disappointment) and no particular sense of what the hell is going on, regardless of which route we take.
I'm all for complicated, thought-provoking endings, but the simple fact of the matter is, they should provoke thought based on the information you're given, not the complete lack thereof. Things like unlimited ammo in the final section and Anderson's sudden change of gaze when talking to the Illusive Man can be just as much a product of the game being a GAME (and thus not limited to any sort of specific rules) as they can be a secret message. It seems fairly clear from what we're heard about the creative process in ME3 that they meant this to be the true ending. If it can be taken as indoctrination, that's fine, but even so, the end should be more in-depth, better written, and up to the quality we've expected from Bioware.
Well put.
As to the OP (Mesina2), your statements against IT are weak. Not that I'm against debating it, but there are far more convincing arguments out there. I don't know why you started this thread when people have already done a much better job of discussing counterpoints.
General User wrote... Yeah. The "Indoctrination Theory" is really just fans trying to make sense of the garbage that is the ending we actually got in the game.
To get the "Indoctrination Theory" to make sense you need to cherry pick certain bits and pieces of the game. Selectively interpreting the bits that fit the theory and ignoring the bits that don't.
It's very human to try to make sense out of something that is really just senseless. It's a very human reaction, just not a rational one. Or maybe "it is selectively rational" would be a better way to put it.
In any case, as far as I'm concerned, the video game portion of Mass Effect 3 ends once Shepard launches the missiles in London and Arcian's Fixed Ending takes over from there.
So basically Indoctrination Theory is just a conspiracy theory. Makes sense. I prefer thinking that Shep met the Catalyst ; the catalyst created the reapers based on the belief synths will always kill off all biologics, and to forestall this he started the cycle. Shepard broke the cycle by finally being the first to finish the crucible, by creating a synth that didn't want to destroy all life (EDI) and (in some play throughs) the Geth. But that's just my opinion.
Sounds good to me. As long someone (as I believe you do) acknowledges that they are really just trying to make some sense out of a nonsense ending, I have no problem with any particular theory someone subscribes to. Because, until and unless we get a new ending that's actually worthy of the rest of the game, theorize and speculate are about all any of us can do.
Wolfva2 wrote... (still trying to figure out where the 'star child' name came from, I didn't see it ingame)
I believe that the term is a reference to the film "2001: A Space Odyssey." But I may be wrong.
Well then it's not indoctrination. It's Shepard getting hit by a giant laser weapon and buried under a building worth of rubble. So a hallucination/dream he's having while unconscious.
Still the theory holds true. Why? Because nobody even remotely connected to the writing of ME so far could come up with something so stupid and full of holes as the current ending.
I'm for indoctrination theory as long as it starts with Shepard being knocked out by the beam during the first Reaper attack on Earth, during the hearing with the committee. When Anderson calls Shepard and Shepard gets up, that's when the nightmare starts.
Why? The story up until the ending is perfectly fine.
Though I will admit, one piece of the debris in Shepard's Alive, does resemble the admiralty board's table. But that would mean the entire game was fony and I'm not entirely behind that idea. It would be neat but it would mean Mass Effect 4 is a copy and paste.
Holy crap! I just had one big mind frick there. What if the story was designed so when you played it through the first time you go through all the stuff and bam, you get that indecipherable ending, but the little breathing Shep hint at the end, then you take your save file, run through as New Game+ or whatever and it carries on from there, Shep was knocked down in that opening explosion, the rest of the first playthrough was just a dream, and now you go through the game again but with some different details and a real ending?
I'm not saying that's true, just that it could be a trippy way to do it.
Well then it's not indoctrination. It's Shepard getting hit by a giant laser weapon and buried under a building worth of rubble. So a hallucination/dream he's having while unconscious.
Still the theory holds true. Why? Because nobody even remotely connected to the writing of ME so far could come up with something so stupid and full of holes as the current ending.
This is pretty much how I feel. The first time I played through the game, my brother was watching, and we just kept staring at each other everytime StarKid opened his mouth and let more drivel spill out. Regardless of I.T. being correct or not, the ending was surprisingly rushed feeling, and badly written.
Well then it's not indoctrination. It's Shepard getting hit by a giant laser weapon and buried under a building worth of rubble. So a hallucination/dream he's having while unconscious.
Still the theory holds true. Why? Because nobody even remotely connected to the writing of ME so far could come up with something so stupid and full of holes as the current ending.
This is pretty much how I feel. The first time I played through the game, my brother was watching, and we just kept staring at each other everytime StarKid opened his mouth and let more drivel spill out. Regardless of I.T. being correct or not, the ending was surprisingly rushed feeling, and badly written.
I still don't hold with IT, in any of its forms. It's not that I disagree with the logic, I just don't think Bioware had intended it to play out that way. You can't set up for future games sans Shepard by saying, "Everything was a lie, lolz, gotcha f***ers!"
However; if they wind up using IT to cover their mistakes, I'll be downright blissful. Yessir.
I just replayed one part in order to help Mesina's topic that is something I hold sound on these forums. After Shepard escapes Geth dreadnaught s/he gets a chance to talk to Javik again and in that conversation for the first time we get a glimpse on endings that we currently have in the game. After Javik's questions on Geth and his story on Zha'til and when Shepard asks him couldn't just synthetics and organics just co-exist - Javik adamantly replies something that we hear from Catalyst at the end - he says, I'll paraphrase - there is only one direction - either perfection of machines or chaos of organics. That's the exact argument the Catalyst gives Shepard at the very end explaining its reasons for its 'plan'. Also, Vendetta on Thessia will add the additional option - when Liara asks it why Protheans didn't finish the Crucible, Vendetta states that there was an argument between Protheans themselves whether to control Reaper or destroy them.
After all, listen to entire conversation with Javik here. Even Javik and Vendetta (none of them recognizing hint not even a hint of indoctrination in Shepard) give the clue on what will happen at the end, what choices will be presented - basic ones - destroy or control. Shepard's being indoctrinated was never planned and these conversations actually confirm further that indoctrination in the end wasn't planned.
Well then it's not indoctrination. It's Shepard getting hit by a giant laser weapon and buried under a building worth of rubble. So a hallucination/dream he's having while unconscious.
Still the theory holds true. Why? Because nobody even remotely connected to the writing of ME so far could come up with something so stupid and full of holes as the current ending.
I just replayed one part in order to help Mesina's topic that is something I hold sound on these forums. After Shepard escapes Geth dreadnaught s/he gets a chance to talk to Javik again and in that conversation for the first time we get a glimpse on endings that we currently have in the game. After Javik's questions on Geth and his story on Zha'til and when Shepard asks him couldn't just synthetics and organics just co-exist - Javik adamantly replies something that we hear from Catalyst at the end - he says, I'll paraphrase - there is only one direction - either perfection of machines or chaos of organics. That's the exact argument the Catalyst gives Shepard at the very end explaining its reasons for its 'plan'. Also, Vendetta on Thessia will add the additional option - when Liara asks it why Protheans didn't finish the Crucible, Vendetta states that there was an argument between Protheans themselves whether to control Reaper or destroy them.
After all, listen to entire conversation with Javik here. Even Javik and Vendetta (none of them recognizing hint not even a hint of indoctrination in Shepard) give the clue on what will happen at the end, what choices will be presented - basic ones - destroy or control. Shepard's being indoctrinated was never planned and these conversations actually confirm further that indoctrination in the end wasn't planned.
That's... not going to do anything to convince the IT crowd they've got it wrong. Especially not after IGN was all "Totally Indoc Theory, obviously, gotta be, otherwisethere'd be problems."
But yes, you are correct. IT is conjecture, lovely and fragile as kitten farts and unicorn sneezes.
Well then it's not indoctrination. It's Shepard getting hit by a giant laser weapon and buried under a building worth of rubble. So a hallucination/dream he's having while unconscious.
Still the theory holds true. Why? Because nobody even remotely connected to the writing of ME so far could come up with something so stupid and full of holes as the current ending.
He hasn't BEEN indoctrinated yet. The Reapers are TRYING to indoctrinate him.
If Shep chooses anything other than "destroy" then that completes the indoctrination. Assuming the VI or Javik are around to sniff him, THEN they would detect it.
You can't detect what isn't there yet.
THERE IS NO TRYING WTIH INDOCTRINATION!! Once you start ahllucinating and hearing voices, those never go away and you can't just fight them off.
It's like getting hit with radiation and saying "I'm not getting irradiated, The energy is just TRYING to pass through me, and I can fight it off if i'm strong enough and pick the right color".
It is a permanant process due to it rewriting neural pathways in orde rto put you under it's control, and no one is ever given a matrix red or blue pill option before indoctrination, it happens. It is a physical process that affects people on a mental and physical scale, not blood magic that clouds a person's mind using magical energy.
EDIT: Heard about the shiala theory. So...when did shepard get abosorbed into a million year old plant monster, cause I never saw that happen in my playthrough.
Sure, not every piece of evidence people have been using for the Indoctrination Theory stands up to close scrutiny. But it has some compelling points as well - the strongest for me being: How could the writers who were so good up to that point suddenly go ape-**** crazy?!
During my first unspoiled play-through, I actually thought indoctrination was happening. The whole ending sequence felt "wrong" somehow, and then I was shocked when Shepard didn't snap out of it, and we got the trilogy-killing space-child. I don't think the theory is incompatible with the game experience.
Just a thought: if Shep fails to shake off indoctrination in the red ending, perhaps Shep will be the last boss, and some other team member will have to finish the mission.
EDIT: There are plenty of examples in the lore of people fighting indoctrination: why else does Saren commit suicide? Or Benezia shake it off for a bit?
If Shepard is indoctrinated, why doesn't the VI on Thessia detect it?
This is a tough one to tackle, because we really just don't know much about how a VI detects indoctrination.
The most common and simple response to this argument is simply that Shepard is either not indoctrinated until Harbinger weakens and mentally attacks him on London, or that he is not indoctrinated enough for the VI to detect it.
Most indoctrination theorists believe that Shepard does not ever become indoctrinated unless he chooses the wrong answers at the very end. Everything leading up to that is subtle manipulation/preparation, or failed attempts to indoctrinate him.
If Shepard is indoctrinated, why doesn't Javik detect it?
This is a tough one to tackle, because we really just don't know much about how prothean touch-sense works.
The most common and simple response to this argument is simply that Shepard is either not indoctrinated until Harbinger weakens and mentally attacks him on London , or that he is not indoctrinated enough for Javik to detect it. An equally valid theory is that prothean touch-sense simply doesn't have the ability to detect indoctrination. Lest we forget, the protheans were betrayed by an indoctrinated splinter group, so we know that they can be fooled.
Why dreams?
From the codex:
Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper's resulting control over the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestions.
The limbic system has access to all sorts of different emotions, visions, and other mental tasks, including dreaming. In particular, there are studies linking it to threatening/dangerous elements in dreams.
Indoctrination seems too easy, why not just do that?
We know a lot of things about indoctrination, but we do not know what sort of strain, if any, it puts on the Reaper(s) doing it. We know from ME1 that any sort of direct control / attack consumes enough of a Reaper's focus to weaken/distract it - which is exactly how we killed Sovereign.
How did Shepard get indoctrinated so quickly, while it took TIM/Saren longer?
The codex explains that "rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes this decay in days or weeks." Bear in mind that it is not the rapid indoctrination that takes days or weeks: it is the decaying effects of that indoctrination: physical weakness and loss of higher mental capacity.
Harbinger is one of the largest and most powerful Reapers we know of.It is not unreasonable to assume that his indoctrination abilities are powerful enough to attempt rapid indoctrination with Shepard, especially in his physically weakened, unconscious state. He isn't necessarily concerned with the long-term use of Shepard: he only needs to indoctrinate him long enough to create a few critical mistakes, harnessing Shepard's position of influence among the allied fleets.
Indoctrination is permanent.
We know of at least one confirmed case of an organic reversing the effects of indoctrination: Shiala. She fell under Sovereign's indoctrination, but was traded to the Thorian in exchange for knowledge of the Cipher. It is not clearly explained how, but Sovereign's indoctrination was supplanted by the Thorian's unique control mechanism (which bears a lot of similarities and serves as a useful, if not perfectly transferrable, analogue to indoctrination).
When the Thorian was killed, Shiala was set free of its control, leaving her in charge of her own actions. In fact, Shiala and the other released thralls on Feros were able to use the remaining traces of the Thorian's "indoctrination" to enhance their own communications, turning a ragtag group of militia into a powerful military force capable of fighting against the Reaper threat. Shiala seems to acknowledge that there are still traces of her indoctrination present, as she can feel the Reapers' influence in her mind, but that she is able to wholly resist these influences because of her Thorian-given connection to the other colonists.
We also know of at least one case of an organic being resisting Reaper indoctrination with almost perfect results: the Rachni Queen. We know that it is not simply a biological immunity, as her spawn as easily indoctrinated by the Reapers, and other queens appear to have been indoctrinated during the Rachni Wars. But for unexplained reasons (presumably, the tremendous amount of mental fortitude required to manage a hivemind), this particular Rachni Queen resisted Reaper indoctrinate so perfectly that the Reapers resorted to physical restraints.
With all of that said, it is 100% possible that after this, Shepard's indoctrination would be permanent, and he would need to die. That, in my opinion, is a much more acceptable price to pay than what we currently have.
If Shepard is indoctrinated, why doesn't the VI on Thessia detect it?
This is a tough one to tackle, because we really just don't know much about how a VI detects indoctrination.
The most common and simple response to this argument is simply that Shepard is either not indoctrinated until Harbinger weakens and mentally attacks him on London, or that he is not indoctrinated enough for the VI to detect it.
Most indoctrination theorists believe that Shepard does not ever become indoctrinated unless he chooses the wrong answers at the very end. Everything leading up to that is subtle manipulation/preparation, or failed attempts to indoctrinate him.
If Shepard is indoctrinated, why doesn't Javik detect it?
This is a tough one to tackle, because we really just don't know much about how prothean touch-sense works.
The most common and simple response to this argument is simply that Shepard is either not indoctrinated until Harbinger weakens and mentally attacks him on London , or that he is not indoctrinated enough for Javik to detect it. An equally valid theory is that prothean touch-sense simply doesn't have the ability to detect indoctrination. Lest we forget, the protheans were betrayed by an indoctrinated splinter group, so we know that they can be fooled.
Why dreams?
From the codex:
Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper's resulting control over the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestions.
The limbic system has access to all sorts of different emotions, visions, and other mental tasks, including dreaming. In particular, there are studies linking it to threatening/dangerous elements in dreams.
Indoctrination seems too easy, why not just do that?
We know a lot of things about indoctrination, but we do not know what sort of strain, if any, it puts on the Reaper(s) doing it. We know from ME1 that any sort of direct control / attack consumes enough of a Reaper's focus to weaken/distract it - which is exactly how we killed Sovereign.
How did Shepard get indoctrinated so quickly, while it took TIM/Saren longer?
The codex explains that "rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes this decay in days or weeks." Bear in mind that it is not the rapid indoctrination that takes days or weeks: it is the decaying effects of that indoctrination: physical weakness and loss of higher mental capacity.
Harbinger is one of the largest and most powerful Reapers we know of.It is not unreasonable to assume that his indoctrination abilities are powerful enough to attempt rapid indoctrination with Shepard, especially in his physically weakened, unconscious state. He isn't necessarily concerned with the long-term use of Shepard: he only needs to indoctrinate him long enough to create a few critical mistakes, harnessing Shepard's position of influence among the allied fleets.
Indoctrination is permanent.
We know of at least one confirmed case of an organic reversing the effects of indoctrination: Shiala. She fell under Sovereign's indoctrination, but was traded to the Thorian in exchange for knowledge of the Cipher. It is not clearly explained how, but Sovereign's indoctrination was supplanted by the Thorian's unique control mechanism (which bears a lot of similarities and serves as a useful, if not perfectly transferrable, analogue to indoctrination).
When the Thorian was killed, Shiala was set free of its control, leaving her in charge of her own actions. In fact, Shiala and the other released thralls on Feros were able to use the remaining traces of the Thorian's "indoctrination" to enhance their own communications, turning a ragtag group of militia into a powerful military force capable of fighting against the Reaper threat. Shiala seems to acknowledge that there are still traces of her indoctrination present, as she can feel the Reapers' influence in her mind, but that she is able to wholly resist these influences because of her Thorian-given connection to the other colonists.
We also know of at least one case of an organic being resisting Reaper indoctrination with almost perfect results: the Rachni Queen. We know that it is not simply a biological immunity, as her spawn as easily indoctrinated by the Reapers, and other queens appear to have been indoctrinated during the Rachni Wars. But for unexplained reasons (presumably, the tremendous amount of mental fortitude required to manage a hivemind), this particular Rachni Queen resisted Reaper indoctrinate so perfectly that the Reapers resorted to physical restraints.
With all of that said, it is 100% possible that after this, Shepard's indoctrination would be permanent, and he would need to die. That, in my opinion, is a much more acceptable price to pay than what we currently have.
^This
If instant indoctrination is the case, then why actually go for other 'clues' in game? So, which 'clues' are right and which ones are not? Seriously, if BW doesn't overhaul the entire ME3, indoctrination brings more plot holes, new ones and it deprives those players that play only SP and those who had chosen other endings then destroy from actually continuing the game (and that kinda sucks 'cause BW would be betraying large portion of their player base). Not to mention Reapers' inclination then to play movies in Shepard's head even in destroy ending about Normandy end and then the old man and the boy... Yes, current endings are bad, with lack of logic and conclusion, but also having Normandy scene and Stargazer scene in all outcomes of supposed indoctrination is huge lapse of logic... Unless Reapers think they have future in movies industry... why would they even bother with compiling such scenes... and what's the purpose of those scenes in indoctrination solution? Reapers managed to develop empathy or taste for humor like EDI? In order to have indoctrination solution, the entire Mass Effect needs overhauling. Yes I know, oily shadows, but also Shepard is not Rachni Queen - meaning, that also if Shepard sees something sour yellow, then we have ultimate proof of indoctrination no matter that Rachni Queen is actually using different language/symbol code to describe things or we just take things for granted when it suits us and yet when not, we find hidden meanings or even make them up.
Retour en haut
