Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
watch this!
You can make gullible people believe almost anything you want with a straw man argument.
Oh you mean like the ending we got?
I didn't say I liked the ending. In actuality, the ending sucked. I'm simply debunking Indoc. Theory.
Doppelgaenger wrote...
BlackAlpha wrote...
froggeh2 wrote...
I missed the part where you debunked the theory?
I think the OP means that TIM can indoctrinate thanks to the implants. So the OP proves this part wrong of the IT. Then you can ask yourself, if the IT had this part wrong, how many more mistakes are there? Then the question changes to, how many mistakes will you accept before you stop believing?
Once again: it can not be disproven because it is logically imposible to be the person that is presumably hallucinating and finding evidence inside that possible hallucination that proves that you are not hallucinating.
Doppelgaenger wrote...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
watch this!
You can make gullible people believe almost anything you want with a straw man argument.
Oh you mean like the ending we got?
I didn't say I liked the ending. In actuality, the ending sucked. I'm simply debunking Indoc. Theory.
So if TIM is part of the hallucination: How do you prove that anything he does actually happens?
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
alx119 wrote...
So? People is truly unhappy with what they were delievered in that videogame, videogames are supposed to make people happy, satisfied, content. If it didn't there's no other way around it. Making theories about it is an optimistic outlook of it. I myself like to contemplate the idea, because anything is better than what we got.Admiral H. Cain wrote...
alx119 wrote...
Why is people trying to make others unhappy so badly?
Leave the theories running, it keeps the hopes up for christ sake. If it makes people happy to think that way and not plainly that the endings sucked, **** why not let them!?
I personally don't believe in anything, but should I go around trying to pop the parties of other people? Well I don't see the positive part of that. It's not like they are being "ignorant" or anything, they are just keeping their hopes. And losing hope is one of the saddest things in life.
It's a video game...
Since when is it the job of the video game to make you happy, satisfied or content? I can agree that satisfaction should be a key requirement in producing any work of art, but why does it need to make you happy?
Example: The best music can make you feel happy then sad then both at the same time. The best films can leave you utter flabbergasted and disgusted at the same time. (See: Se7en and The Departed). They can also make you very happy. (See: The Dark Knight or Toy Story 3). They can also leave you very sad. (See: Saving Private Ryan, The Green Mile). The same also hold true for literature...
Modifié par alx119, 25 mars 2012 - 12:16 .
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
Doppelgaenger wrote...
BlackAlpha wrote...
froggeh2 wrote...
I missed the part where you debunked the theory?
I think the OP means that TIM can indoctrinate thanks to the implants. So the OP proves this part wrong of the IT. Then you can ask yourself, if the IT had this part wrong, how many more mistakes are there? Then the question changes to, how many mistakes will you accept before you stop believing?
Once again: it can not be disproven because it is logically imposible to be the person that is presumably hallucinating and finding evidence inside that possible hallucination that proves that you are not hallucinating.
There's a serious flaw in your argument:
Hallucinations are extraordinarily rare among people without a history of having them, and to my knowledge, Shepard has never had any hallucinations before this one. I'm assuming of course that Shepard did not consume any hallucinogenic drugs...
Doppelgaenger wrote...
BlackAlpha wrote...
froggeh2 wrote...
I missed the part where you debunked the theory?
I think the OP means that TIM can indoctrinate thanks to the implants. So the OP proves this part wrong of the IT. Then you can ask yourself, if the IT had this part wrong, how many more mistakes are there? Then the question changes to, how many mistakes will you accept before you stop believing?
Once again: it can not be disproven because it is logically imposible. It is impossible to be the person that is presumably hallucinating and finding evidence inside that possible hallucination that proves that you are not hallucinating.
Modifié par BlackAlpha, 25 mars 2012 - 12:24 .
Modifié par DiE231, 25 mars 2012 - 12:28 .
The kid could be very well a hallucination, since it's not been proven otherwise, and so is it's reiterations in the dreams.Admiral H. Cain wrote...
Doppelgaenger wrote...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
watch this!
You can make gullible people believe almost anything you want with a straw man argument.
Oh you mean like the ending we got?
I didn't say I liked the ending. In actuality, the ending sucked. I'm simply debunking Indoc. Theory.
So if TIM is part of the hallucination: How do you prove that anything he does actually happens?
You're using a straw man argument again...
You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination without any past history of hallucinations.
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
Doppelgaenger wrote...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
watch this!
You can make gullible people believe almost anything you want with a straw man argument.
Oh you mean like the ending we got?
I didn't say I liked the ending. In actuality, the ending sucked. I'm simply debunking Indoc. Theory.
So if TIM is part of the hallucination: How do you prove that anything he does actually happens?
You're using a straw man argument again...
You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination without any past history of hallucinations.
Maybe I've missed something, is the theory not that she's suddenly seeing things due to the indoctrination? Surely "having aliens messing with your melon" doesn't require a prior history?Admiral H. Cain wrote...
You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination without any past history of hallucinations.
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
watch this!
You can make gullible people believe almost anything you want with a straw man argument.
Oh you mean like the ending we got?
I didn't say I liked the ending. In actuality, the ending sucked. I'm simply debunking Indoc. Theory.
Geth server? It could either be an interpretation of the presented data in a form he can understand, or the thing chose to look like that having read his mind and found a form that would appeal.KevShep wrote...
Explain the boy then.
Why does the catalyst look like that if he is not in his mind?
Maybe it was indocrinated too.Ultai wrote...
The big wrench in the cogs for the indoc theory is the Prothean VI never detects indoctrination on Shepard.
Ultai wrote...
The big wrench in the cogs for the indoc theory is the Prothean VI never detects indoctrination on Shepard.
BlackAlpha wrote...
Doppelgaenger wrote...
BlackAlpha wrote...
froggeh2 wrote...
I missed the part where you debunked the theory?
I think the OP means that TIM can indoctrinate thanks to the implants. So the OP proves this part wrong of the IT. Then you can ask yourself, if the IT had this part wrong, how many more mistakes are there? Then the question changes to, how many mistakes will you accept before you stop believing?
Once again: it can not be disproven because it is logically imposible. It is impossible to be the person that is presumably hallucinating and finding evidence inside that possible hallucination that proves that you are not hallucinating.
Using that logic, we can say that everything is a dream but because Shepard hasn't woken up yet and there will be no Mass Effect 4 with Shepard, we will never find out! But, obviously, it's all a dream, right?
Look, I'd rather use common sense. That's why, using logic, I say that the indoctrination theory is simply wishful thinking on the behalf of people who are unhappy with the current ending of the game.
KevShep wrote...
Explain the boy then.
Why does the catalyst look like that if he is not in his mind?
Doppelgaenger wrote...
BlackAlpha wrote...
Doppelgaenger wrote...
BlackAlpha wrote...
froggeh2 wrote...
I missed the part where you debunked the theory?
I think the OP means that TIM can indoctrinate thanks to the implants. So the OP proves this part wrong of the IT. Then you can ask yourself, if the IT had this part wrong, how many more mistakes are there? Then the question changes to, how many mistakes will you accept before you stop believing?
Once again: it can not be disproven because it is logically imposible. It is impossible to be the person that is presumably hallucinating and finding evidence inside that possible hallucination that proves that you are not hallucinating.
Using that logic, we can say that everything is a dream but because Shepard hasn't woken up yet and there will be no Mass Effect 4 with Shepard, we will never find out! But, obviously, it's all a dream, right?
Look, I'd rather use common sense. That's why, using logic, I say that the indoctrination theory is simply wishful thinking on the behalf of people who are unhappy with the current ending of the game.
Yes! That is correct EVERYTHING we see MIGHT be a dream of Shepard. And that is the point: we don#t know and we can't and yes it is most likely just made up but we can never make a convincing case. This is exceptionally pointless because we have only Shepards perception. In real life the same applies but you HAVE to make assumptions. But in a game where you clearly loose conciousness for a moment at the end it could mean anything after that is just a dream or not. If we change to anyther persons viewpoint that would be evidence.
Modifié par Admiral H. Cain, 25 mars 2012 - 12:25 .
Like Jokers?Doppelgaenger wrote...
If we change to anyther persons viewpoint that would be evidence.
Ultai wrote...
The big wrench in the cogs for the indoc theory is the Prothean VI never detects indoctrination on Shepard.
Ultai wrote...
The big wrench in the cogs for the indoc theory is the Prothean VI never detects indoctrination on Shepard.
Not the catalyst in all. Just the part of him being the SAME BOY from his dreams!Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
Explain the boy then.
Why does the catalyst look like that if he is not in his mind?
Really, you want me to explain the catalyst? This part of the game made no sense whatsoever, and you want me to explain it?
Come on...
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
It would be unfair to BioWare if I didn't start by once again stating that Mass Effect 3 is one hell of a ride. In fact, excluding the final five minutes, this game is easily in my top five all-time favorite games. The scene featuring Mordin on Tuchanka was pure brilliance. "I MADE A MISTAKE!"
Anyways, let's get started...
I've had a change of heart in regards to the "Indoctrination Theory;" basically, I think it's B.S. I also think it would be a huge mistake for BioWare to write a new ending based on it. I admit the circumstances surrounding the final minutes of the game are filled with inconsistencies and plot holes, and it's undoubtedly strange and ridiculous, but this theory is really just wishful thinking on the part of those who, like me, dislike the ending.
Let's talk about the meeting between Shepard, Anderson and the Illusive Man on the Citadel. This is the most heavily discussed and supposedly features the best and the most "evidence" for Indoctrination Theory. Taken out of context, there actually is a lot of evidence supporting indoctrination during this scene; the problem is that the wrong dots were connected, leading to the wrong conclusion. (According to Indoctrination Theory, the Reapers are controlling Shepard alone, and this scene is only taking place in his mind). This is what actually happened:
TIM is (somewhat successfully) attempting to indoctrinate and control Shepard and Anderson using his new implants.
How do I come to this conclusion?
[First, you need to understand why this "final confrontation" between Shepard, Anderson and TIM even takes place. In my opinion, this scene takes place to put faces on the options you are given by the Catalyst in the following scene. It's a kind of precursor.
The Illusive Man embodies the "control" option. This is self-evident. When the Catalyst explains the control option, the Illusive Man is shown using it during a cutscene.
Anderson embodies the "destroy" option. This is also self-evident. Similar to the above, Anderson is shown shooting the power conduit (the destroy option) in a cutscene.
Shepard, then, embodies the "synthesis" option, albeit somewhat poorly. This is definitely not self-evident beyond the blatantly obvious fact that Shepard is already part organic and part synthetic. However, the fact that he is part organic and part synthetic is only a very small piece of the philosophical puzzle BioWare wanted us to "solve." (I would explain further, but after writing two and a half paragraphs, I realized it could take me a very long time to complete my thoughts on the matter, and it would take us further off topic than we already are)].
Back on topic:
Observational Evidence: Observe the manner in which Anderson moves; his actions resemble that of a marionette. (A marionette is a puppet controlled by strings from above). Observe the "black tentacles" surrounding the edges of the screen, and Shepard keeling over in obvious mental pain; TIM is attempting to indoctrinate and control Shepard and Anderson, and he is somewhat successful. (Easy example: he forces Shepard to shoot Anderson). We know from past experience, however, that Shepard is extremely strong willed, and in the end, his will proves too strong for TIM to fully control. [Note: TIM is [/i]indoctrinated by the Reapers].
Material Evidence: We learned during the Sanctuary mission that Miranda's father had discovered how Reaper indoctrination works. We also discover that Kai Leng escaped Sanctuary with all the research data and brought it back to the Illusive Man. During the assault on the Cerberus' HQ, we discover in the last surveillance video that the Illusive Man is getting new implants. It wasn't hard to conclude that these new implants were designed to give the user the ability to indoctrinate and/or control as Reapers do.
Finally, I realize how strange the circumstances leading up this scene are, specifically in regards to how both TIM and Anderson manage to even get to the "control room." First, TIM seemingly appears from nowhere. Second, there is only a single way into the control room, yet somehow Anderson gets to the room first even though he claims to have got onto the Citadel after Shepard. He also describes the exact path Shepard takes.
Anyways, I just wanted to share some of my thoughts on the matter. If you have any other questions, please throw them my way!
EDIT: There's a fatal flaw in the "Shepard is having a hallucination" argument.
Hallucinations are exceedingly rare among those who a) have no past history of hallucinations, orhave no mental defect or disorder which causes hallucinations. (Or the use of hallucinogenic drugs for that matter). You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination because he has no past history of hallucinations; it's a straw man argument.
effortname wrote...
Ultai wrote...
The big wrench in the cogs for the indoc theory is the Prothean VI never detects indoctrination on Shepard.
Except it isn't at all? This thread has seriously been done to death but people keep making the same iteration of "indoctrination debunked" over and over again. Indoctrination is fully internally consistent because it's explicitly designed from the ground up to fix the plotholes in the game.
Admiral H. Cain wrote...
KevShep wrote...
Explain the boy then.
Why does the catalyst look like that if he is not in his mind?
Really, you want me to explain the catalyst? This part of the game made no sense whatsoever, and you want me to explain it?
Come on...
Retour en haut