228 réponses à ce sujet

[Slaiyer]

Iron Spetsnaz wrote...



Anyone want some?

Why yes please.... BLECK.. chedder...

[Apollo-XL5]

KevShep wrote...

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

I still cant believe there are people trying to debunk the one theory that has nearly 100% accuracy for the endings to make sense. All the evidence is there in the trilogy, you just need to look between the lines for it. I bet that(if the IT is true, it more than likely is) Bioware meant this and they knew that we fans are a smart lot and would figure it out. WE arent ones for missing the small details, especially on multiple playthroughs.

^This

The ending throws out a thousand plot holes that are nowhere near explained to a trilogy that loves to explain its lore!

why do people insist that the IDT is false.  Do you just hate the ideqa that shepard can be indoctrinated.  BEcuase I personally think that a hero who is as fallible as anyone else is a far more interesting character than one that is absolutly perfect.  I mean even Batman isnt perfect, even if Batman is the definition of awesome.

[Slaiyer]

Also, @OP - on page 5 resides what I believe to be a fairly well made and calm list of arguments against your points. Made by me.

[Thomas Andresen]

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

I mean even Batman isnt perfect, even if Batman is the definition of awesome.

That's an argument that could never get more subjective. I agree that Batman is plenty awesome, but I know several who thinks Superman is vastly superior.

[DrFrankenseuss]

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

DrFrankenseuss wrote...

Here's an argument based in reality. If Bioware makes 3.5 MILLION physical copies of a game were shipped at $60 each, and they also expect origin sales and first day DLC to sell, that's over $200 frigging million dollars of gross income that EA would expect to be coming back. If Bioware decided to release and incomplete game (ie Indoctrination Theory) and expected to finish the story as a dlc, that would be a completely CRAZY thing to do. The End. Why is there even a debate about this anymore?

IF a game needs dlc after it comes out then the devs are basically saying that product wasnt finished.  Do you say that MMORGs are finished products, becuase I notice that they get new material every few months.

The devs are saying they are happy with the ending, and that it will not be changed. "
Building on their research, Exec Producer Casey Hudson and the team are hard at work on a number of game content initiatives that will help answer the questions, providing more clarity for those seeking further closure to their journey. "

They are doing this begrudgedly because artistically this is the ending they wanted. So tell me, did the ending they want involve Shep lying in rubble with the reapers undefeated, no knowledge of what even happened to TIM? No more mention of the crucible? That is clearly an incomplete ending and the theory itself is more elaborate than the ending we're given when taken at face value. And equally full of holes. So, they might be saying that they will clarify their vision of the ending, but not that they will pick up an incomplete story.

And please, MMORPGs? That has nothing to do this discussion about a single player game. But, if you want to know, in all of the MMOs that I've played, the ending was never changed. Content was added which wasn't critical to the plotline and it was paid for by subscription fees. Expansions are just squels that are written to be integrated with the already persistent world. 

[Ultra Prism]

I like this because Indoc theory doesnt cover why mass relays blow up

[Apollo-XL5]

Basically any game that needs Dlc, be it mass effect, call of duty etc are not complete. the only game i cn think of that never needed dlc was MGS4, so that was a truely finished product when it was released.

[DrFrankenseuss]

Go and look at a list of Bioware games and tell me which game needed DLC to finish its story.

[Thomas Andresen]

DrFrankenseuss wrote...

Go and look at a list of Bioware games and tell me which game needed DLC to finish its story.

This argument is completely off-topic. This thread isn't about whether the game needs a new/changed ending or not.

[DrFrankenseuss]

No it's completely on topic if you actually read what I actually said a few posts ago. This is the reason Indoctrination Theory is obviously flawed.  
http://www.cyclechao...llars-money.jpg

EA would not allow them to release an incomplete game if this is what they are expecting to be recieving in the very least. I'm talking about ethics and economy here and how they in a very real way completely debunk this whole IT baloney.

Modifié par DrFrankenseuss, 25 mars 2012 - 02:41 .

[CerealWar]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

Ultai wrote...

The big wrench in the cogs for the indoc theory is the Prothean VI never detects indoctrination on Shepard.

Exactly... People love to ignore this part. 

IT ends with Shepard's resistance or acceptance of indoctrination. This takes place at the very end of the game. The Prothean VI couldn't detect indoctrination within Shepard because he/she wasn't indoctrinated at either point where the Prothean VI is talked to.

[Erield]

CptData wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

I disagree, IDT should be DLC

Pretty much this.

Just in case the OP didn't fully get it: the main reason why ppl support the IDT is to get rid of those events:

- Anderson / TIM talk feels odd -> indoctrinated / hallucinating Shepard
- Starchild + Decision
- Normandy's fate
- Shepard's survival in the Destruction Ending (high EMS).

Basically, the entire ending should be explained as "indoctrination/hallucination" of Shepard. And the DLC itself should give us a real ending.

Why not just skip IDT making sense of the terrible writing and plotting, and skip straight ot getting a real ending?  IDT serves no net beneficial purpose unless it was intended by Bioware from the beginning.  If Bioware intended it from the beginning, they let the backlash go for way too long without saying anything.

[Theobuomai]

I think the OP is certainly fair, and it's author isn't negating all the plot holes and inconsistencies we are discovering.

For me personally, the hope for the IDT isn't so much that it specifically is true, but that Bioware is at work with something along those lines as we play it. I do think some of the points made in the IDT video are reaching in certain places for sure, maybe even too many. But if Bioware did want to complete the Indoctrination idea, the one they considered via ME3: Final Hours, if the problem was integrating the loss of control of Shep's movement with choosing dialog, then it seems to me the solution would be to actually make the player move Shep, which means they would have to experience whatever Shep's experiencing as actuality in the gameplay.

I'm also not so sure giving you the full ending on the disc(s) would be a marketable move either, esp if you want to offer DLC. I mean, you have a brand new Multi-Player, and how else are you going to ensure that it doesn't wither within the first month unless the single player -- which it is tied too -- is "to be continued." It's not Halo, or CoD, so what's to keep people coming back to MP once they finish the game? I'm not saying its great for players to keep us hooked like this, just imagining the question "How do you encourage people to play MP once they've beaten the game?" Me, having 12 different playthroughs, and thus looking forward to 12 diff endings, is enough, but I'm probably not the normative ME player.

If anything, I feel more persuaded by outside sources, with comments from Merizan and Gamble suggesting "we haven't experienced all the facts" quite early in the fan reaction. Perhaps...

Modifié par Theobuomai, 25 mars 2012 - 02:52 .

[CerealWar]

DrFrankenseuss wrote...

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

DrFrankenseuss wrote...

Here's an argument based in reality. If Bioware makes 3.5 MILLION physical copies of a game were shipped at $60 each, and they also expect origin sales and first day DLC to sell, that's over $200 frigging million dollars of gross income that EA would expect to be coming back. If Bioware decided to release and incomplete game (ie Indoctrination Theory) and expected to finish the story as a dlc, that would be a completely CRAZY thing to do. The End. Why is there even a debate about this anymore?

IF a game needs dlc after it comes out then the devs are basically saying that product wasnt finished.  Do you say that MMORGs are finished products, becuase I notice that they get new material every few months.

The devs are saying they are happy with the ending, and that it will not be changed. "
Building on their research, Exec Producer Casey Hudson and the team are hard at work on a number of game content initiatives that will help answer the questions, providing more clarity for those seeking further closure to their journey. "

They are doing this begrudgedly because artistically this is the ending they wanted. So tell me, did the ending they want involve Shep lying in rubble with the reapers undefeated, no knowledge of what even happened to TIM? No more mention of the crucible? That is clearly an incomplete ending and the theory itself is more elaborate than the ending we're given when taken at face value. And equally full of holes. So, they might be saying that they will clarify their vision of the ending, but not that they will pick up an incomplete story.

And please, MMORPGs? That has nothing to do this discussion about a single player game. But, if you want to know, in all of the MMOs that I've played, the ending was never changed. Content was added which wasn't critical to the plotline and it was paid for by subscription fees. Expansions are just squels that are written to be integrated with the already persistent world. 

Changing the ending would involve BW rewriting the events that occur on disk. Adding additional content doesn't change the ending. It provides additional information. BW could have planned to add an expansion the entire time. They've done it before: TotSC, DA:A, not to mention Throne of Bhaal, which was not only an expansion but also the conclusion to the Baldur's Gate series. Whose to say that BW wasn't planning on adding an expansion pack that was integral to the storyline of Mass Effect?

[Apollo-XL5]

YEah they wouldn;t be changing the ending, they would be adding on from the moment you see shep waking up in the rubble. I mean that scene feels very incomplete to me, it just starts only for it to stop, like there is more to show, but couldnt show it.

[Cant Planet]

hakwea wrote...

Cant Planet wrote...

Questions of "why did the Reapers/Harbinger give Shepard the Destroy option" are rather missing the point of the Indoc theory -- which is that Shepard is not in the Citadel or any other Reaper technology at the end. Shepard is within his/her own mind, while laying unconscious on the ground in London.

But it still won't work, as a every game play through option. Because some Shepards saved the geth and were friends with them. Some got tali of all people to be friendly with them. Some shepards got EDI to fall in love with Joker. And then the "break free of indoctrination" option is the one to destroy all of that? Why would that be shepards last ditch effort of strength if it goes against who he is? (Who he is determined by past game choices)?

There were no ending choices that were clearly created by shepards mind that represented him fighting the reapers off if based on who shepard was. If the writers wanted to ignore the choices that made the game such a hit then yes it could be the break indoctrination option. But still if the reapers will controlling the hallucination/dream/whatever why wouldn't they switch the options around? Why wouldn't they really say red is to control.

And if it was all a Hallucination/dream/whatever shepard would live no matter the choice since it was all in his head. He might have been indoctrinated but that doesn't mean he would be auto-killed. The reapers likely would have used him as a figure head to convice others to surender or demoralize them even further rather then kill him.

As I see IT, the choices Shepard is presented with -- more precisely, the choices Shepard produces for him/herself -- don't directly impact the world. They are internal. The "Indoctrination" aspects of this scene might be literal (in that the Reapers are literally having an effect on his/her mind and actively trying to fool Shepard), or they might be metaphorical (in that Shepard's subconscious is presenting the question "can I go on?" to her/him in a form that is meaningful and imminent). I tend toward the first option, but I'm not tied to that interpretation.

In either case, the entire scene is similar to the old cliche of the white light characters face when they're near death. Either they give in and move toward it, or they resist the urge and return to life to continue on with their struggles.

If Shepard is convinced that Synthesis or Control are the way to go, it signifies that Shepard has lost the will to follow the original path of destroying the Reapers, and dies on the ground.

If Shepard sticks with it, and chooses the Destroy option, it signifies s/he still has the will and strength to carry on the fight.

[Admiral H. Cain]

Theobuomai wrote...

I think the OP is certainly fair, and it's author isn't negating all the plot holes and inconsistencies we are discovering.

Thank you. I was definitely trying to be fair considering how polarizing this issue currently is! 

[Gimmethayayo]

The problem with indoctrination is when TIM shoots Anderson, if you don't pull the trigger in time, he shoots you too and you DIE.

[Hanabii]

hakwea wrote...

Hanabii wrote...
Someone with an ACTUAL arguement. THANK YOU!

The fact is they need a mix of useful and subserviant. The Process they are using on Shepard is the same as they used on Sarin. A slow acting Indoctrination to make the host think they are not in fact Indoctrinated.

This allows Shepard some breathing room, when the Reapers arrived the progression of the Indoctrination was kicked up dramatically.

Shepard had an inner reserve of strength left in his mind, As did Sarin. However Sarin, when he found his, was at a stage where he could barely reach a gun up to his own head. Also remember, Sarin had been implanted with tech to more easily control his body.

That said I don't think Shepard is perfectly unscathed either, I think he's been severely weakened in the best case Senario. The Reaper War is coming to a close, and Shepard managed to survive (Possibly) one bout of the final stages of indoctrination.

It means that as time presses on Shepard will either...

A: Have to deal with the Reapers before he's Indoctrinated (Again he barely got out of that last match... maybe.)
Or B: Be Indoctrinated... Perhaps those of us who chose the Blue or Green ending will have some intervention, possibly from the Rachni Queen much like the Thorian did on Feros to Shiala.

But if he is being indoctrinated he couldn't have been on the citadel faced with 3 options. Because it was "all in his head". You honestly think the Reapers would let the only thing capable of destroying them reach the Citadel just to indoctrinate Shepard?

So lets assume shepard did really go up to the citadel. So he is there and the crucible does something. Why would the reapers, and the child AI, tell Shepard the truth about what does what? Why wouldn't they tell him that the Green destroyes the reapers when it really doesn't.

The fact is that your theory has nothing to prove it. Shepard being shown in rubble could very well show that he is indoctrinated. Where as him melting away into a blue beam could be the Reapers being purged from his mind and him being "free" of their influence.

Or he could have just never gone up there and everything was a dream while he was passed out. All theories can be supported with what happened because what happened is incredibly vague with no real connection or explantion in the game.

And the biggest hole of them all is that Shepard would have been destroyed if he picked the red beam and it did what the child AI said it did. Because shepard is part machine. It is how the Illusive Man brought him back from the dead and is a core part of the upgrade system in ME2. If all synthetic life was destroyed included geth, EDI and organic synthetic hybrids like Reapers and their creations then Shepard couldn't have possibly been left alive. But he was.

Headgames and lies is what that boils down to. If they make Shepard think he, his allies and EDI are going to be destroyed by destroying them, it makes it a lot less attractive of an option. While the other ones he still 'dies' and thinks that his allies will survive on. And in the other two. As Control his 'mind' lives on controlling the reapers. As Synth his essense carries on in all living things.

The reason they wouldn't want Shepard to think she is destroying the reapers is because they want to squash that seed in his mind. If Shepard thinks he is controlling the reapers then they get to exist, control him all the while he thinks he's the one in charge while the suplant his reasoning.

Synthasys makes shepard a direct pawn as well, while providing an option not as 'basic and fallable' as the illusive man's control idea. If he sees everything as Hybred and the reapers as no longer part of the cycle then he suddenly becomes a pawn of the reapers while still under a human roof.

The Destroy Ending is the only one they really don't want because Shepard breaks free in it.

If you have low EMS you are shown the world burning, everyone dying but it is the only option. I suspect because if you rush it, you've had less exposure to indoctrination by the end and Shepard at that point would have the will and ability to question the motives and methods of other options making them invalid.

I suspect low EMS ending = dead shepard or at least him not waking up. AKA a heavy mind shock where the reapers do as much damage as possible to try and stop him from recovering.

Modifié par Hanabii, 25 mars 2012 - 03:34 .

[Cobra's_back]

I'm not ruling out indoctrination but thanks for the hard work. The Indoctrination theory was the only way i could finish this game. The ending is just that bad.

I really can’t get into the circular logic, and it doesn’t fit the “against all odd” concept. I can’t see Shepard wanting to keep the Reapers around. I also wouldn’t believe Ghost boy. It was too weird to believe for me. I do respect anyone who liked it. I really can’t see myself putting any money into DLCs with Shepard taking advice from Ghost boy. I was just sitting there waiting for a renegade interrupt. For me at least I’m hoping it is indoctrination, bad dream or hell too much Red Sand. I’m wondering why bother getting all those WAR Assets and playing Multiplayer if your choice is RED, GREEN or BLUE.

[DemonsSouls]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

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!

Refined: There's a fatal flaw in the "Shepard is having a hallucination" argument.

Full blown schizophrenic hallucinations are exceedingly rare among those who a) have no past history of schizoprhenic hallucinations, or have no mental defect or disorder (liek schizoprhenia) which cause hallucinations. (Or the use of hallucinogenic drugs for that matter). You can't assume that Shepard is having a full blown schizoprhenic hallucination because he has no past history of schizophrenic hallucinations; it's a straw man argument.

More information from Thomas Andresen:

Thomas Andresen wrote...

In Geoff Keighley's "The Final Hours of Mass Effect 3", Mac Walters expounds on how the end of ME3 was designed to foster speculation. They wanted the ending to raise questions, rather than provide answers, which is, believe it or not, a method used to great success by many many writers before. Going by that, any theory that may or may not pop up on these forums may or may not be true. This is reinforced by Casey Hudson's statement that he does not wish to make a "post-Shepard" Mass Effect game. Other games in the universe is definitely a possibility, but none that takes place after the events in the trilogy.

As for the scene on the Citadel.
Anderson comments while Shepard is making walking in the corpse-littered hallway how he seemed to have come out somewhere else than Shepard, and how the place seems to be shifting; possibly explaining how he got to the console before Shepard, and how Shepard only sees that one path.

When talking to the Prothean VI in the Illusive Man's control room, the VI says that the Illusive Man already had gone to the Citadel, and considering that he had already been indoctrinated, obviously the Reapers wouldn't stop him.

Admiral Hackett tries to contact Shepard after the encounter with the Illusive Man and Anderson's death. The obvious conclusion is that when he sees the citadel opening, he makes a leap of faith, which he sees as the only choice besides letting the Reapers win. To make that leap of faith, he has has to assume that Shepard miraculously survived, and made it onto the Citadel.

 

You're assuming that TIM has the ability to indoctrinate people. No thrall of the Reapers has ever been able to indoctrinate others. Why wouldn't Saren attempt the same thing? If the Reapers wanted Shepard indoctrinated in that manner, they had plenty of chances in ME1.

Saren is a much better embodiment of the Synthesis option. It's exactly what the Reapers let him believe would happen if he helped them. Control is what the Reapers let TIM believe would happen. See where I'm going with this?

Again, unless Shepard was already indoctrinated, no one could force him to do anything. Especially not with some amazing new telekinesis ability! Also, how do you explain the wound supposedly inflicted on Anderson suddenly appearing on Shepard when Anderson dies? Anderson wasn't even bleeding from the gunshot wound. Also, when Shepard does shoot Anderson, you clearly hear Meer/Hale yelling at the same time as if they just got shot too.

And you're right, the circumstances are strange leading up to that room. The trees and bushes from Shepard's dreams magically appear after Shepard wakes up outside the beam. No one seems to notice that he is alive and that Anderson is supposedly behind him somewhere. Why did Harbinger leave? Why is the hallway leading to the control room made of separate designs ranging from the Collector's ship to the Shadow Broker's ship... Why would the Citadel have technology used on the Shadow Broker's ship? It's millions of years old and it doesn't use the same technology that ships do now. And Anderson saying he came in behind Shepard and yet he's already at the control panel...

If all that doesn't indicate that this is taking place in Shepard's head, much like how his mind assembled a world when he did Legion's mission... I don't know what does. Why would Bioware put all that in the game? It's TOO inconsistent to not be on purpose.

And I don't know where you got schizophrenic hallucinations from. Being slowly indoctrinated has no relation to real world diagnoses. That's like saying Shepard couldn't have seen the visions he did in ME1 from the prothean device because he has no history of schizophrenic hallucinations... That's absurd because this is a si-fi game with its own rules and no real world diagnosis covers anything related to Reapers or Protheans.

Modifié par DemonsSouls, 25 mars 2012 - 04:05 .

[govs6360]

The most likely reason that Anderson was able to the control room before shepered was because they were shorted when they were transported up to the citdel.

By shorted I am that the reapers had a progam that sent the people who sent up to the citdel base on what condution they where in.
For when me meet Anderson he is in slitly better shape than Shepred until he is shot. So it is not unreasonable to assume that the camber Anderson got sent was closer to the control room and being in better shape then Shepred he was able to move faster.

[DemonsSouls]

govs6360 wrote...

The most likely reason that Anderson was able to the control room before shepered was because they were shorted when they were transported up to the citdel.

By shorted I am that the reapers had a progam that sent the people who sent up to the citdel base on what condution they where in.
For when me meet Anderson he is in slitly better shape than Shepred until he is shot. So it is not unreasonable to assume that the camber Anderson got sent was closer to the control room and being in better shape then Shepred he was able to move faster.

There is only one way to the control room. Anderson says he came in behind you. Then he goes on to describe the exact rooms you go through as if he is walking right beside you. The entire time you are in the Citadel, you have a view of the only path to the control room. Even IF Anderson was teleported to a different spot than you, we'd still be able to see him as he goes into the control room. But we don't. So either Anderson is lying, or he was never really there.

[Dave Hoffman]

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

Ooooo, I like paradoxes. I have a question then. If one can't have a hallucination without a history of hallucinations, then how does anyone with a history of hallucinations ever have a hallucination to begin with? Paradox.

I've wondered something else as well. The final sequence should not be possible. When you're talking to that AI child on top of the Citadel where the crucible is docked to it, it's not inclosed, you're in the vacuum of space. Yet, you're standing in tatered armor and not wearing a helmet. Since ME1, Bioware has been pretty steadfast about slamming a helmet on your head whenever you're not in an oxygen-rich environment. I can't believe that they simple got sloppy at the end with something that obvious. To me, that reinforces that it's not real.