367 réponses à ce sujet

[InsaneAzrael]

Ricvenart wrote...
@Azreal: Saren didn't interact with Vigil iirc, he didn't reveal himself to Saren because he sensed his deep indoctrination.
See theres something to help you.

That's right he didn't. I confused my points there for a second. He had the Cipher but didn't deal with Vigil.

[Noirinsoleil]

Kylie Nightbreeze wrote...

curdy wrote...

in my opinon the person who created the indoc theory should be hired by bioware to sort this out lol

LOL I agree so they can hammer out what the hell to do with as an alternate BAD (as in you did everything wrong) ending.

I disagree.  The Indoctrination theory makes the ending SO much worse.  Instead of having just the ending being shoehorned into 3 decision options, you have NONE of the decisions you make over the course of the game matter. After all, how long has this indocrination influence been happening?  A lot of the theories say  Do I care which of the three options I took anymore?  Nope, none of them were real.  Does indoctrination explain what happened to the crew or anything?  No, you still don't know what happened to any of your crew or the rest of the galaxy, but it is a good bet that you actually helped destroy them.

Most of the "problems" the indocrination theory raises can be explained in other ways.  For example, the Catalyst is an exteremly powerful and most likely slightly psychic entity.  Maybe it noticed that Shepard was fixated on that child and so it took the form of the child.  Maybe the catalyst revealed itself to Shepard for the first time on Earth and that child was never there.  The growing shadows in Shepards dreams may not reprsent Reapers (they are humanoid), but rather Shepards guilt at being away as the body count of Earth piles up.  The Illusive man says he is on his way to the Citadel when you get to his base.  He was already on the Citadel because he got there before the Reapers took it to Earth.

Don't pull the "but if you really understood the theory, you would agree it is better" crap.  I understand the arguements for it.  It isn't better (which is a subjective statement, you can't prove your ending is better).

[Apollo-XL5]

Noirinsoleil wrote...

Kylie Nightbreeze wrote...

curdy wrote...

in my opinon the person who created the indoc theory should be hired by bioware to sort this out lol

LOL I agree so they can hammer out what the hell to do with as an alternate BAD (as in you did everything wrong) ending.

I disagree.  The Indoctrination theory makes the ending SO much worse.  Instead of having just the ending being shoehorned into 3 decision options, you have NONE of the decisions you make over the course of the game matter. After all, how long has this indocrination influence been happening?  A lot of the theories say  Do I care which of the three options I took anymore?  Nope, none of them were real.  Does indoctrination explain what happened to the crew or anything?  No, you still don't know what happened to any of your crew or the rest of the galaxy, but it is a good bet that you actually helped destroy them.

Most of the "problems" the indocrination theory raises can be explained in other ways.  For example, the Catalyst is an exteremly powerful and most likely slightly psychic entity.  Maybe it noticed that Shepard was fixated on that child and so it took the form of the child.  Maybe the catalyst revealed itself to Shepard for the first time on Earth and that child was never there.  The growing shadows in Shepards dreams may not reprsent Reapers (they are humanoid), but rather Shepards guilt at being away as the body count of Earth piles up.  The Illusive man says he is on his way to the Citadel when you get to his base.  He was already on the Citadel because he got there before the Reapers took it to Earth.

Don't pull the "but if you really understood the theory, you would agree it is better" crap.  I understand the arguements for it.  It isn't better (which is a subjective statement, you can't prove your ending is better).

The ending is only part completed, the rest will come out soon.  And you reasons that explain the indoc theory as wrong are nowhere near strong enough.  where would the IM hide in that one hallway leading to the control panel.  Was he hiding in the piles of bodies waiting for shep to pass.  Also how did anderson get there before shep.  also why is shep bleeding from the same gut wound that anderson dies from, when the only time you see shep get shot is by maarauder sheilds at the condiut entrance and that was in the arm.

[Kylie Nightbreeze]

Again this post is not trying to disprove or prove one point it is about descussing why only one answer isn't good enough maybe I should have said that in the begining.

[Golferguy758]

Indoctrination theory isn't an actual ending. It's a path to GET to the endings. both sides want different, logical, endings.

Not sure why people don't grasp this concept. You guys are fighting for the same cause. Just going about it in different ways.

[Penitent]

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

The ending is only part completed, the rest will come out soon.  (1) And you reasons that explain the indoc theory as wrong are nowhere near strong enough.  (2) where would the IM hide in that one hallway leading to the control panel.  (2b) Was he hiding in the piles of bodies waiting for shep to pass.  (2c) Also how did anderson get there before shep.  (3) also why is shep bleeding from the same gut wound that anderson dies from, when the only time you see shep get shot is by maarauder sheilds at the condiut entrance and that was in the arm.

Yet more "leaps."

http://social.biowar...8315/8#10584685

(1): I don't need to explain something that is nowhere definitively proven to exist.

(2,2b,2c): I don't have the answers to these questions. And it would be nice if you people realized that you don't either. Rather, all you have is speculation, based upon your subjective interpretation of virtually any and every circumstance you consider unusual, which you arbitrarily graft into your theory as "proof." 

TIM could have been waiting in a broom closet for all we know, because he got therefore them. This is also an "explanation," but again, it will be disregarded for being "too rational," and therefore incompatible with your "theory;" which demands that everything be as extraordinary as possible in order to be true.

(3): Shepard is holding his adomen for the entire dialogue with TIM, and before Anderson is ever shot. This proves nothing for your "theory," as the guy had just been majorly jacked up by a Reaper beam, even worse than the first time. (It should also be noted that this sequence is the only time when shepard exhibits any overt lack of self-control.)

http://social.biowar...315/13#10590229

I've already explained multiple times why IT sucks. Even were it brilliantly contrived (the opposite being the case), it would still serve, in function, only to excuse BIoware's bad ending, and destroy any incentive for them to make a better one.

http://social.biowar...4081/4#10562768

Bioware can take one look at these forums, and observe, "Why do we need to fix our bad ending, when the fans will so eagerly fabricate their own to justify the existing one, thereby completely eliminating any necessity for us to do so?"

So, it should be realized by everyone who wants a better ending, that the IT proponents are the ones to blame for you not getting it now. Initially, it was only Bioware's fault, but now these guys are equally to blame; as their "theory" effectively pardons them.

Modifié par Penitent, 25 mars 2012 - 08:24 .

[Apollo-XL5]

The IT is of the reapers trying to indoctrinate shepard, that is what happens through out the story, not that it has already happened. I dont know how you came to this conclusion. And I bet their will be multiple endings ( at least 3 to go with the choices you had), so that you can see how all your decisions pan out.

As far as you blaming us for this, how dare you, I wonder if we are proven right will you apologise for that comment. I know that if we are proven wrong, i will be one of the first to put my hands up and say yeah I was wrong, but i wonder if you would. Also blaming bioware also stinks. IT is there series to go where ever they want to go with it and if the IT was part of their pan for the ending( I said part of it, not the not ending we have been given on disc, then they deserve applause, not your bile.

BEcause by not giving us the whole ending (remember the game was released at different times around the world) there wont be many chances for idiots to spoil it for the rest of us. So they can then release the rest of the ending worldwide at the same time and we can enjoy it.

I said it once (maybe 2,3,4 times, who is keeping count.) the IT is not saying that shep is indoctrinated but the reapers trying to indoctrinate him.

So lets just wait for April and see what Bioware has instore for us.

[iorveth1271]

I always find it funny how there needs to be "resistance" to the Indoctrination theory when:
1. we're all fans of the same game
2. we're all grown-ups (I mean, c'mon)
3. the Indoc theory would mean that a future DLC would only continue after the existing ending... I haven't heard of any kind of DLC being forced on you so far. Don't like it? Don't buy it.

And even yet, we don't even know what Bioware has in store for us, if they have anything in store for us at all. So just wait, people.

Modifié par iorveth1271, 25 mars 2012 - 10:23 .

[Apollo-XL5]

I think the real reason they don't like it is because when you think about it, if you chose control or synthesis then you the player was indoctrinated and that really is very clever as well very funny.

When I completed it the first time I chose control and when I heard about the IT, I just started laughing and thought bioware really played me. Good for them.

So these IT haters are basically saying " No you can't indoctrinate me, I have my own mind and I'm in control nobody's telling me what to do!"

[Vromrig]

Doesn't matter, it is Canon.
Arrival is why shepard was grounded and held on earth.

Not necessarily. If user did Arrival, this is the cause of grounding.

If not, Cerberus connection.

[SiriusXI]

Kylie Nightbreeze wrote...

Again this post is not trying to disprove or prove one point it is about descussing why only one answer isn't good enough maybe I should have said that in the begining.

1. The current endings suck. We agree on that, right?
2. Bioware needs to fix the endings somehow, right?
3. Indoctrination Theory is a way to enable Bioware of ficing the endings without discarding their current endings completely. Instead, they sill are a valuable part of the story, namely, the fight in Shepards mind.

So wahy are you against IT again? How would YOU want Bioware to change the endings? Just deleat all scenes after Harbinger hits Shep with the beam?


Right now, IT is the best way out for Bioware. If they come up with a better solution, I'd be fine with it, but I aam pretty sure that anythng else will suck and disappoint us even more.

[Lexagg]

Kylie Nightbreeze wrote...

I love that BioWare is listening to us, but I think that those of us that don't believe in the Indoctronization theory need to stand up, before our favorite game is destroyed by an ending we don't want. I mean how many of us are there? Since BioWare listens to these forms and it seems to be drowning in this Indoc Theory we may be given that without our voice being heard right?

A.) There's no point resisting conspiracy theorists. Ever. It just gives them more audience.
B.) BioWare aren't changing ending. They are expanding it.

[JesseLee202]

Penitent wrote...

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

The ending is only part completed, the rest will come out soon.  (1) And you reasons that explain the indoc theory as wrong are nowhere near strong enough.  (2) where would the IM hide in that one hallway leading to the control panel.  (2b) Was he hiding in the piles of bodies waiting for shep to pass.  (2c) Also how did anderson get there before shep.  (3) also why is shep bleeding from the same gut wound that anderson dies from, when the only time you see shep get shot is by maarauder sheilds at the condiut entrance and that was in the arm.

Yet more "leaps."

http://social.biowar...8315/8#10584685

(1): I don't need to explain something that is nowhere definitively proven to exist.

(2,2b,2c): I don't have the answers to these questions. And it would be nice if you people realized that you don't either. Rather, all you have is speculation, based upon your subjective interpretation of virtually any and every circumstance you consider unusual, which you arbitrarily graft into your theory as "proof." 

TIM could have been waiting in a broom closet for all we know, because he got therefore them. This is also an "explanation," but again, it will be disregarded for being "too rational," and therefore incompatible with your "theory;" which demands that everything be as extraordinary as possible in order to be true.

(3): Shepard is holding his adomen for the entire dialogue with TIM, and before Anderson is ever shot. This proves nothing for your "theory," as the guy had just been majorly jacked up by a Reaper beam, even worse than the first time. (It should also be noted that this sequence is the only time when shepard exhibits any overt lack of self-control.)

http://social.biowar...315/13#10590229

I've already explained multiple times why IT sucks. Even were it brilliantly contrived (the opposite being the case), it would still serve, in function, only to excuse BIoware's bad ending, and destroy any incentive for them to make a better one.

http://social.biowar...4081/4#10562768

Bioware can take one look at these forums, and observe, "Why do we need to fix our bad ending, when the fans will so eagerly fabricate their own to justify the existing one, thereby completely eliminating any necessity for us to do so?"

So, it should be realized by everyone who wants a better ending, that the IT proponents are the ones to blame for you not getting it now. Initially, it was only Bioware's fault, but now these guys are equally to blame; as their "theory" effectively pardons them.

So you prefer Space  and loop holes the size of our galaxy? Good to know... 

[blah64]

It's a method to erase the garbage we got, without "erasing" it. However, at this point IT's and everyone else in Retake need to stand together. Two lines is a bad idea, just when we are getting traction.

[The Irish Man]

The Indoctrination theory only elaborates on questions and is not an ending in itself. An ending that just shows Shepard getting to see his LI interest again and crew is enough for me. If the Indoctrination theory was an ending I would hope it would show Shepard snapping out of his hallucinations or something and then the real ending would take effect. The Fallout 3 Broken Steel DLC created a post ending free play of your character waking up and getting back into the action. I believe that a similar DLC for ME3 is on it's way.

[TSgt_ShaneV]

can we name the group T.A.In.T (Those against Indoctrination Theory)?

[gudman]

Oh, battle over IT again! How fresh.


Drop it people, seriously, or write down a fanfic. It's NOT going to be implemented, nor ending is going to be changed AT ALL. Save yourself from dissapointment, accept that this game is just unfinished, rushed, missing on content and with this plot for the ending in mind all along, despite any advertising lies you can find and argue upon. We are all "disposable" for EA. It's all calculated a long time ago. This rage happened - it was known to happen by them, and was "acceptable".

[Apollo-XL5]

Wow, aren't you a breath of fresh sir. Why so sceptical mate.