228 réponses à ce sujet

[Personuknow]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

TIM is (somewhat successfully) attempting to indoctrinate and control Shepard and Anderson using his new implants.

This is plainly the intent of the scene, and what is meant to be conveyed on the face of it.

Yet there is no rule, no literary law, that states that scenes that deliver one message on their face cannot also posses a deeper symbolism to be interpreted by the viewer upon reflection and subsequent viewing.

Quite the opposite, actually.

Unfortunately, this debunks nothing. Though perhaps congratulations are in order for interpreting the events as they... are (rather than, I suppose, what they represent)?

Modifié par Personuknow, 25 mars 2012 - 12:30 .

[Cheezer]

Hey I think the indoctrination theory works, especially since bioware stated they had intended to make an indoctrination scene:

From the Mass Effect 3: Final Hours App:
"And even in November, the gameplay team was still experimenting with an end-game sequence where players would suddenly lose control of Shepard's movement and fall under full Reaper control. (This sequence was dropped because the gameplay mechanic proved too troublesome to implement alongside dialogue choices)."

Maybe it could be that while they dropped the gameplay of falling under reaper sway, they didn't drop the idea. Truthfully, debunking the theory is like taking ice cream from little kids; you might get some sick joy in destroying others happiness, but it doesn't accomplish anything whatsoever for you nor your victim. Let the Indoctrinated be happy, ignorance is bliss.

[Iwillbeback]

TIM was control
Saren was Synthesis
Anderson was destroy


You didn't debunk anything, you have failed.

[Admiral H. Cain]

Hanabii wrote...

Dear Sir, please watch this Vid.



It explains WHY the Indoctrination Theory Holds water. I am open to debating it with you in an intelectual manner but first you must know the Indoctrination Theory inside and outside for you to be able to debate rather it is right or wrong.

It is like trying to debunk Evolution or The Bible without examining either in context, ways or by marit of action.

To argue against something logically, you must know it first.

Also, Indoctrination is not A-Typical Halucination, it's a reaper created Signal that slowly over-rides the brain waves of the minds it hits.

I've seen it multiple times, in fact, I'm a former believer.

Yes, you are correct about what indoctrination is, however, the indoctrination in this case was caused by TIM, not by the Reapers. This is why it immediately goes away when Shepard mortally wounds TIM, breaking TIM's grasp on Shepard. This is also why Anderson immediately falls to the ground; he was being "puppeteered" by TIM. 

[Admiral H. Cain]

Iwillbeback wrote...

TIM was control
Saren was Synthesis
Anderson was destroy


You didn't debunk anything, you have failed.

You think you are 100% certain on philosophical concepts... You have completely failed. 

Could you go ahead and tell me why we are here, and what our purpose is while you are at it?

Modifié par Admiral H. Cain, 25 mars 2012 - 12:34 .

[Ecmoose]

You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination because he has no past history of hallucinations; it's a straw man argument.

Except that indoctrination causes hallucinations in it's victims regardless of prior exposure.

Straw man what?

[KevShep]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

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...

no the BOY, not boy-binger

the boy in the 2-3 nightmares, the boy who dies (or doesn't cause hes a hallucination) at the begginign

not catalyst

Iam not sure what your saying here but I am talking about the only boy in the game!

If the catalyst is real then why does he look like the boy in his dreams? He would have to be in his mind unless you can explain it in a different way.

[Admiral H. Cain]

Ecmoose wrote...

You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination because he has no past history of hallucinations; it's a straw man argument.

Except that indoctrination causes hallucinations in it's victims regardless of prior exposure.

Straw man what?

Except that Shepard wasn't indoctrinated... The Prothean VI proved it. 

[Hanabii]

You people need to... Oh, I dunno STOP FEEDING THE TROLL...

Seriously Original Poster, Watch the Vid in my signature, it's the COMPLETE Argument FOR the Indoctrination Theory. IF you would watch it, perhaps you could give your argument some weight.

[Ziggeh]

Tiax Rules All wrote...
we are not playing an indoctrinated shepard, we are playing a shepard that is fighting an attempt during the ending

Tiax Rules All wrote...

the
boy in the 2-3 nightmares, the boy who dies (or doesn't cause hes a
hallucination) at the begginign

I'm clearly missing something....is there like a solid summary of the theory in a post anywhere? I'm interested, but not 20 minutes interested.

[Admiral H. Cain]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

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...

no the BOY, not boy-binger

the boy in the 2-3 nightmares, the boy who dies (or doesn't cause hes a hallucination) at the begginign

not catalyst

What about him do you want me to explain?

[Hanabii]

ADMIRAL H. CAIN!

IF YOU WANT TO ARGUE STUDY WHAT YOU ARE ARGUING AGAINST!

Watch the Video to see what we are clinging to for our Arguements! Don't pick and choose, if you're gonna refute something then examine it, pick it apart and refute the godam thing!

[Admiral H. Cain]

Hanabii wrote...

You people need to... Oh, I dunno STOP FEEDING THE TROLL...

Seriously Original Poster, Watch the Vid in my signature, it's the COMPLETE Argument FOR the Indoctrination Theory. IF you would watch it, perhaps you could give your argument some weight.

Jeez, this is like debating 9/11 Truthers... 

I've seen it multiple times... It's a COMPLETE STRAW MAN ARGUMENT. It misrepresents EVERY SINGLE POSITION in a single minded attempt to prove that the entire ending was a hallucination.

[Hanabii]

Then would you kindly approach EACH point it made, and debunk it piece by piece.

[Iwillbeback]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

Iwillbeback wrote...

TIM was control
Saren was Synthesis
Anderson was destroy


You didn't debunk anything, you have failed.

You think you are 100% certain on philosophical concepts... You have completely failed. 

Could you go ahead and tell me why we are here, and what our purpose is while you are at it?

No it showed it.
We are here because the Reapers spared us 50000 years ago, our purpose is to put an end to them by either stopping dark energy or by using it against them.

Modifié par Iwillbeback, 25 mars 2012 - 12:41 .

[Admiral H. Cain]

Hanabii wrote...

ADMIRAL H. CAIN!

IF YOU WANT TO ARGUE STUDY WHAT YOU ARE ARGUING AGAINST!

Watch the Video to see what we are clinging to for our Arguements! Don't pick and choose, if you're gonna refute something then examine it, pick it apart and refute the godam thing!

For the last time, I'm not going to pick apart a straw man argument point for point...

[Admiral H. Cain]

Iwillbeback wrote...

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

Iwillbeback wrote...

TIM was control
Saren was Synthesis
Anderson was destroy


You didn't debunk anything, you have failed.

You think you are 100% certain on philosophical concepts... You have completely failed. 

Could you go ahead and tell me why we are here, and what our purpose is while you are at it?

No it showed it.
We are here because the Reapers spared us 50000 years ago, our purpose is to put an end to them by either stopping dark energy or by using it against them.

Lol, thanks for proving my point.

[Cosmar]

Good read OP, however I still think there's way more evidence for the IT than you debunk.

[Ecmoose]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

Ecmoose wrote...

You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination because he has no past history of hallucinations; it's a straw man argument.

Except that indoctrination causes hallucinations in it's victims regardless of prior exposure.

Straw man what?

Except that Shepard wasn't indoctrinated... The Prothean VI proved it. 

Right, and the VI's are fool proof. If I recall Javik was betrayed on Eden Prime by members of his own race who were indoctrinated...in the presence of a Prothean VI.

[Admiral H. Cain]

Cosmar wrote...

Good read OP, however I still think there's way more evidence for the IT than you debunk.

There definitely is, but it took me long enough to write just that up... I have a life which I can't ignore! 

[Admiral H. Cain]

Ecmoose wrote...

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

Ecmoose wrote...

You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination because he has no past history of hallucinations; it's a straw man argument.

Except that indoctrination causes hallucinations in it's victims regardless of prior exposure.

Straw man what?

Except that Shepard wasn't indoctrinated... The Prothean VI proved it. 

Right, and the VI's are fool proof. If I recall Javik was betrayed on Eden Prime by members of his own race who were indoctrinated...in the presence of a Prothean VI.

Prove it. 

Javik never mentioned that a Prothean VI was present when he was betrayed.

[BlackAlpha]

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.

I do not agree with your logic. In fact, I'm going to use sarcasm now, if you don't mind. I do that so that maybe I'll get finally trough to you. Or maybe I won't, but it will make me feel better at least.

I'm now going to tell you a big secret that only I know. Yes, Bioware has lied to you. Yes, I know, I know... You want to know the truth about the story, right? Well, listen, I'm going to tell it to you.

You know that little boy and that man at the end of the game? On that alien planet with snow all around? Well, guess what? The story in the game is actually that the little boy is imagining it in his head as the man tells it to him... Yes, but here's the thing, the man is just making it all up!

Alright, so there we go, that's the real truth. And you cannot disprove it, because it is true, because it's impossible to disprove. But trust me, it's true! By the way, I call it the "little boy and old man on an alien world covered by snow" theory.

Modifié par BlackAlpha, 25 mars 2012 - 12:51 .

[hakwea]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

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, or have 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.

Except Shepard has been having hallucinations or hallucination-like dreams through out the entire game. He kept seeing the kid in a forest with red lights and reaper noises. All the while hearing voices and seeing black shadows. Some of those voices even tried to talk to shepard.

While the indoctrination theory might have some flaws or might not be accurate, I think it has some merit. However I'd go one step further and say that the indoctrination of Shepard by the Illusive Man started during Mass Effect 2. When shepard was brought back from the "dead" and rebuilt with a synthetic framework. That set the ground work for the indoctrination but shepard proved "beyond" control and still his own self.

I believe the Illusive man could already have been partly under the control of reapers but they gave him leeway as they were using both him and shepard to ultimately reach their goals. Then in ME3 shepard see's a kid on earth that he can't save and see's killed. Then further shows up in his dreams and when he finally does catch him he burns.

[Snazzy McSplendid]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

You're using a straw man argument again...

You can't assume that Shepard is having a hallucination without any past history of hallucinations. 

The Straw Man fallacy involves misrepresenting your opponents position. You set up a weaker, or more exaggerated, version of what the person you're arguing with is saying, then attack that, rather than your opponants actual arguement. I don't really see how the fan theories in favour of Indoctrination fit.

If anything, I'm sorry to say, you're own arguements against Indoctrination actually seem to come closer to a Straw Man fallacy - since it looks like you're ignoring some of the evidence fans are using. Like the fact that the Codex entry on Indoctrination lists hallucinations as a possible symptom - meaning that the fact that Shephard doesn't have a history of hallucinations doesn't really matter.

To be honest, I like the Indoctrination theory (since I was as disappointed with the ending as anyone) but, until I hear something official from Bioware, it's still just a fan theory to me.

[Iwillbeback]

The prothean VI was very much present on Eden Prime.
We saw it in the cut scene.