463 réponses à ce sujet

[Solmanian]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Solmanian wrote...

I usually try not to be mean to community members. But since he basically called the sane part of the community morons, I don't feel that bad just saying it bluntly: OP, you're a moron, and a rude one at that. The IT has no real basis in reality and its foundations are laid one what could be a simple easter egg (the mashed bodies of ME1 ashly&kaiden). The human marking in the chamber are human because shepard is standing inside the crucible, a human built construct, the idea of such a chamber existing in the citadel, is imposssible since the crucible was designed a long long time the citadel was built, so there is no reason for the citadel to have a compatible chamber to use the catalyst...

This is absolutely wrong. Shepard is not standing inside the crucible. If you look up, you can see the crucible hovering above you in its entirety. Shepard is standing on the dream-citadel-crucible-adapter that was already on the dream-citadel. This is apparent from the joining cinematic. He was lifted to the site from an interior dream-citadel control room.

Shepard is on the dream-citadel. That is undisputible from the visual evidence, sorry.

You're using the termdream-citadel in the same sentence as undisputable? Shepard takes an elevator from the (real) citadel to the joining chamber, but the joining chamber is part of the crucible. just watch the joining sequence without your "indoctrination goggles".

I don't understand why doesn't a mod just come and squash this ridiculous theory? It'll save bioware alot of wrath in the future when the indoctrinated will learn that life they're living is a lie...

[DangerDavidson]

Nostradamoose wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

So wait....you think the Indoctrination theory is correct? It has already been dis-proven long ago if that is what you are going on about. Their is no Indoctrination theory, it is over with, he was not Indoctrinated that is the ending Bioware wanted, and intended, their is countless evidence to prove this. I honestly couldn't make out what you were trying to ramble about though due to your introduction and conclusion paragraph's conflicting.

It has never been disproven. Please stop that. Read this thread for more info.  I had a post about what the game directors/creators said and it does not involve discrediting IT in any way shape or form.

They actually discredit it in "the Final hours of Mass effect"...

No they absolutely did not. Please post the exact content that makes you believe this, and we can talk about it some more. 

I promise that the first Casey Hudson quote that blatantly says:
"IT Theory is wrong, we ****ed up" 
will instantly shatter my adherence to this theory.

[ahandsomeshark]

I don't understand how anyone can believe it after everything bioware has said and the final hours app. Not to mention considering the mass backlash why would they not tell fans by now?

[DangerDavidson]

ahandsomeshark wrote...

I don't understand how anyone can believe it after everything bioware has said and the final hours app. Not to mention considering the mass backlash why would they not tell fans by now?

The final hours app and bioware quotes have said NOTHING in particular. Please see the rest of this thread for reference.

[Jacobcus]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

So wait....you think the Indoctrination theory is correct? It has already been dis-proven long ago if that is what you are going on about. Their is no Indoctrination theory, it is over with, he was not Indoctrinated that is the ending Bioware wanted, and intended, their is countless evidence to prove this. I honestly couldn't make out what you were trying to ramble about though due to your introduction and conclusion paragraph's conflicting.

It has never been disproven. Please stop that. Read this thread for more info.  I had a post about what the game directors/creators said and it does not involve discrediting IT in any way shape or form.

Yes it has been disproven, Mass Effect Datapad also disproves what you are saying in every shape and form. A game is not released without being completed, it would not survive critics, you are giving to much pull and weight to the name. False hope is just as blasphemous as the ending of Mass Effect 3.

[liggy002]

Yeah, it is mind blowing and awesome. The ending as of now doesn't do the game any justice even if you attempt to explain those horrible plot holes.  Think of how many people hated the ending, a lot of people did.  They are in hot water right now.

Modifié par liggy002, 25 mars 2012 - 11:55 .

[SpiderFan1217]

It's funny how the OP genuinly thinks he's right.

[DangerDavidson]

Jacobcus wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

So wait....you think the Indoctrination theory is correct? It has already been dis-proven long ago if that is what you are going on about. Their is no Indoctrination theory, it is over with, he was not Indoctrinated that is the ending Bioware wanted, and intended, their is countless evidence to prove this. I honestly couldn't make out what you were trying to ramble about though due to your introduction and conclusion paragraph's conflicting.

It has never been disproven. Please stop that. Read this thread for more info.  I had a post about what the game directors/creators said and it does not involve discrediting IT in any way shape or form.

Yes it has been disproven, Mass Effect Datapad also disproves what you are saying in every shape and form. A game is not released without being completed, it would not survive critics, you are giving to much pull and weight to the name. False hope is just as blasphemous as the ending of Mass Effect 3.

Again, please POST/LINK TO THE FU@KING CONTENT that disproves this theory. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT HONESTLY, I WOULD.

Thus far I have seen NOTHING, from ANY source that blatantly disproves this and I really wish people would stop repeating garbage from a second-hand source, (I am assuming that that is how you know about this, as you have not provided any detailed info).


In fact, IF YOU WOULD, if you find this content, please feel free to link a reference and then summarize in point form, so that I can read it and switch to your side of the debate even faster.

Modifié par DangerDavidson, 25 mars 2012 - 11:56 .

[ahandsomeshark]

DangerDavidson wrote...

ahandsomeshark wrote...

I don't understand how anyone can believe it after everything bioware has said and the final hours app. Not to mention considering the mass backlash why would they not tell fans by now?

The final hours app and bioware quotes have said NOTHING in particular. Please see the rest of this thread for reference.

then why would they not come out and say the indoctrination theory is true to put an end to the backlash?

[ahandsomeshark]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

So wait....you think the Indoctrination theory is correct? It has already been dis-proven long ago if that is what you are going on about. Their is no Indoctrination theory, it is over with, he was not Indoctrinated that is the ending Bioware wanted, and intended, their is countless evidence to prove this. I honestly couldn't make out what you were trying to ramble about though due to your introduction and conclusion paragraph's conflicting.

It has never been disproven. Please stop that. Read this thread for more info.  I had a post about what the game directors/creators said and it does not involve discrediting IT in any way shape or form.

Yes it has been disproven, Mass Effect Datapad also disproves what you are saying in every shape and form. A game is not released without being completed, it would not survive critics, you are giving to much pull and weight to the name. False hope is just as blasphemous as the ending of Mass Effect 3.

Again, please POST/LINK TO THE FU@KING CONTENT that disproves this theory. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT HONESTLY, I WOULD.

Thus far I have seen NOTHING, from ANY source that blatantly disproves this and I really wish people would stop repeating garbage from a second-hand source, (I am assuming that that is how you know about this, as you have not provided any detailed info).

I can't post any images from Final Hours app because it's copyrighted and would get removed. I can link you to a post that outlined basically everything in it though. 

Modifié par ahandsomeshark, 25 mars 2012 - 11:56 .

[Lexagg]

DangerDavidson wrote...

I promise that the first Casey Hudson quote that blatantly says:
"IT Theory is wrong, we ****ed up" 
will instantly shatter my adherence to this theory.

This is so funny. You dig into some deep meanings and subtle signs and hints when it's somthing that PROVES your point, but for something that DISPROVES it, you only want a direct literal statement. There's a name for this actually: confirmation bias.

[Jacobcus]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

So wait....you think the Indoctrination theory is correct? It has already been dis-proven long ago if that is what you are going on about. Their is no Indoctrination theory, it is over with, he was not Indoctrinated that is the ending Bioware wanted, and intended, their is countless evidence to prove this. I honestly couldn't make out what you were trying to ramble about though due to your introduction and conclusion paragraph's conflicting.

It has never been disproven. Please stop that. Read this thread for more info.  I had a post about what the game directors/creators said and it does not involve discrediting IT in any way shape or form.

Yes it has been disproven, Mass Effect Datapad also disproves what you are saying in every shape and form. A game is not released without being completed, it would not survive critics, you are giving to much pull and weight to the name. False hope is just as blasphemous as the ending of Mass Effect 3.

Again, please POST/LINK TO THE FU@KING CONTENT that disproves this theory. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT HONESTLY, I WOULD.

Thus far I have seen NOTHING, from ANY source that blatantly disproves this and I really wish people would stop repeating garbage from a second-hand source, (I am assuming that that is how you know about this, as you have not provided any detailed info).

Casey Is one such piece of evidence. Try to calm down and stop over reacting just because you don't want to believe "The Truth," See what I did thar? "Whatever we do would likely happen before or during the events of Mass Effect 3, not after"

[DangerDavidson]

Lexagg wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

I promise that the first Casey Hudson quote that blatantly says:
"IT Theory is wrong, we ****ed up" 
will instantly shatter my adherence to this theory.

This is so funny. You dig into some deep meanings and subtle signs and hints when it's somthing that PROVES your point, but for something that DISPROVES it, you only want a direct literal statement. There's a name for this actually: confirmation bias.

Sorry, I did not state that the direct quote is THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD SWAY ME. I said that that DEFINITELY WOULD.

At this stage, there are heaps of evidence for both sides of the argument. Everything else is a small pile of rubbish. In Comparison, IT  is a mountain.

[Nostradamoose]

So we designed Mass Effect 3 to be a series of endings to key plots and storylines, each culminating in scenes that show you the consequences of your actions. You then carry the knowledge of these consequences with you as you complete the final moments of your journey.

You gotta take the ending at face value, it doesn't get anymore official a statement than this.

http://social.biowar.../index/10089946

[DangerDavidson]

Jacobcus wrote...

Casey Is one such piece of evidence. Try to calm down and stop over reacting just because you don't want to believe "The Truth," See what I did thar? "Whatever we do would likely happen before or during the events of Mass Effect 3, not after"

I absolutely did see this quote. And consider it a weighty piece of evidence for the other side of the argument. I do not necessarily believe he was referencing the April DLC with this.

I understand what Confirmation Bias is. I don't think I am indulging in it.

[hakwea]

DangerDavidson wrote...

PS. I see a lot of posts below about the "plot holes" in IT. Would one of you be willing to lay out what you think those plot holes actually are? As far as I can tell, there are none and it actually consolidates all of the plotholes in the current ending:

1) Tree's exist around the area before you get hit by a beam. Its london and london/earth has tree's. A tree wasn't the only thing to appear in the path there were two tanks that mystically appear near the beam as well. Along with other objects, and only 2 husks and 1 maurader appearing out of no where to stop shepard. If he was being indoctrinated why create fake enemies to attack him and try to stop him?

2) If he was being indoctrinated all along why would the reapers make the option that destroys them the option that destroys them. Wouldn't they trick him but saying "oh this one destroys us" when it really indoctinrates shepard?

3) Why does shepard only live when he fights off the indoctrination? He would still be alive if that was all happening in his head. Why couldn't him melting away in the blue stream be his soul/mind being ripped away from the reapers control and we don't see him "alive" because he is off saving the world cause he isn't indocttrinated.

4) If it was all in his head, what caused the FTL explosion that the Normandy was racing from? Why would the reapers fake that? If it all happened in his head how did the reapers actually get destroyed? If shepard possed that kind of power in his head why wouldn't the reapers just you know shoot him in the head?

5)If the reapers were really destroyed and the crucible used, who opened the arms to the citadel if it all happened in his head while he was being indoctrinated?

6) The past dreams shows shepard catching up to the Child and burning in fire. The red beam is "fire" and could symbolize that he really will be destroyed if he "gives in".

7) Shepard is a part synthetic life form. If red happened he would be dead himself otherwise the reapers and their forces wouldn't be dead. Banshee's, Brutes, Ravagers all running around with no command would be deadly foe's unless "red" destroyed ogranic-synthetic hybrids. But that doesn't matter cause it was all in his head right?

I could go on. The Indoctrination theory is just a bunch of speculation. Nothing more, Nothing less. If people looked at it objectively instead being indoctrinated by the indoctrination theory perhaps we could have some actual discussions. Instead of all this "hold the line" and "There are no plot holes its not a theory but fact" crap.

And if bioware doesn't go with this theory and doesn't clarify it or clarifies it and it still doesn't match the theory, then what? I thought it was a fact and everything points to it as "real"?

[The Anti-Saint]

DangerDavidson wrote...
Again, please POST/LINK TO THE FU@KING CONTENT that disproves this theory. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT HONESTLY, I WOULD.

Thus far I have seen NOTHING, from ANY source that blatantly disproves this and I really wish people would stop repeating garbage from a second-hand source, (I am assuming that that is how you know about this, as you have not provided any detailed info).


In fact, IF YOU WOULD, if you find this content, please feel free to link a reference and then summarize in point form, so that I can read it and switch to your side of the debate even faster.

The cracks in the armor are now visible...

[FemmeShep]

I'm almost hoping it's not real at this point, because Indoctrination Theory fans are really annoying in how blindly they accept it.

It's one thing to have a theory, another to say it's 100% factual, and everyone else is just in denial. IMO there is just as much evidence to suggest it's not true. Especially, the writers reaction to the ending. If Indoctrination was really what they were going for, they would not be getting as upset and defending it.

Further, it's been made pretty clear that Mac and Casey were the ones that wrote the ending on their own. So it's just as likely that the ending was just trying to go for overt symbolism and themes and fell flat. 

Modifié par FemmeShep, 26 mars 2012 - 12:01 .

[Jacobcus]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Jacobcus wrote...

Casey Is one such piece of evidence. Try to calm down and stop over reacting just because you don't want to believe "The Truth," See what I did thar? "Whatever we do would likely happen before or during the events of Mass Effect 3, not after"

I absolutely did see this quote. And consider it a weighty piece of evidence for the other side of the argument. I do not necessarily believe he was referencing the April DLC with this.

I understand what Confirmation Bias is. I don't think I am indulging in it.

The "April" DLC you keep going on about, is Multiplayer DLC, where you will beable to play on a new level, a Prothean, Geth, and Batar. classes.
On Deciding the End of the Game said: The illusive man boss fight had been scrapped... but there was still much debate. 'One night walters scribbled down some thought on various ways the game could end with the line "Lots of speculation for Everyone!" at the bottom of the page.'
In truth the final bits of dialogue were debated right up until the end of 2011. Martin sheen's voice-over session for the illusive man, originally scheduled for August, was delayed until mid-November so the writers would have more time to finesse the ending.
And even in November the gameplay team was still experimenting with an endgame sequence where players would suddenly lose control of Shepard's movement and fall under full reaper control. (This sequence was dropped because the gaemplay mechanic proved too troublesome to implement alongside dialogue choices).

[Lexagg]

DangerDavidson wrote...

At this stage, there are heaps of evidence for both sides of the argument. Everything else is a small pile of rubbish. In Comparison, IT  is a mountain.

This is EXACTLY confirmation bias - basically how much you value evidence FOR your position vs. evidence AGAINST it. You always see the evidence for you as more important/significant/decisive than evidence against you. And OF COURSE you don't think you are indulging in it - it wouldn't be bias if you did =)

Modifié par Lexagg, 26 mars 2012 - 12:03 .

[DangerDavidson]

hakwea wrote...


1) Tree's exist around the area before you get hit by a beam. Its london and london/earth has tree's. A tree wasn't the only thing to appear in the path there were two tanks that mystically appear near the beam as well. Along with other objects, and only 2 husks and 1 maurader appearing out of no where to stop shepard. If he was being indoctrinated why create fake enemies to attack him and try to stop him?

2) If he was being indoctrinated all along why would the reapers make the option that destroys them the option that destroys them. Wouldn't they trick him but saying "oh this one destroys us" when it really indoctinrates shepard?

3) Why does shepard only live when he fights off the indoctrination? He would still be alive if that was all happening in his head. Why couldn't him melting away in the blue stream be his soul/mind being ripped away from the reapers control and we don't see him "alive" because he is off saving the world cause he isn't indocttrinated.

4) If it was all in his head, what caused the FTL explosion that the Normandy was racing from? Why would the reapers fake that? If it all happened in his head how did the reapers actually get destroyed? If shepard possed that kind of power in his head why wouldn't the reapers just you know shoot him in the head?

5)If the reapers were really destroyed and the crucible used, who opened the arms to the citadel if it all happened in his head while he was being indoctrinated?

6) The past dreams shows shepard catching up to the Child and burning in fire. The red beam is "fire" and could symbolize that he really will be destroyed if he "gives in".

7) Shepard is a part synthetic life form. If red happened he would be dead himself otherwise the reapers and their forces wouldn't be dead. Banshee's, Brutes, Ravagers all running around with no command would be deadly foe's unless "red" destroyed ogranic-synthetic hybrids. But that doesn't matter cause it was all in his head right?

I could go on. The Indoctrination theory is just a bunch of speculation. Nothing more, Nothing less. If people looked at it objectively instead being indoctrinated by the indoctrination theory perhaps we could have some actual discussions. Instead of all this "hold the line" and "There are no plot holes its not a theory but fact" crap.

And if bioware doesn't go with this theory and doesn't clarify it or clarifies it and it still doesn't match the theory, then what? I thought it was a fact and everything points to it as "real"?

(1) didn't see any trees as I was dodging harbinger's beam for the THIRD time. SS?
(2) the option that destroys them really doesn't destroy them, it lets shepard break out of the indoctrination. It is presented as red as historically, red is the renegade option. This is another troll.
(3) That would make sense. Why would we want to see Husk-Shepard controlled by Harbinger and killing everyone. We know what happens via that route already
(4) Nothing, that was some nonsense added in.
(5) Shepard apparently did, via the console after TIM sequence, but it doesn't matter because it was a dream.
(6) What is your point, this is evidence for IT
(7) Red didn't happen, the logic for shepard destroying himself is likely why it was represented as the "red" option because it was so destructive to the reapers. WHo are trying to indoctrinate you.

TL;DR, a lot of the stuff you said supports IT  : /

[DangerDavidson]

Lexagg wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

At this stage, there are heaps of evidence for both sides of the argument. Everything else is a small pile of rubbish. In Comparison, IT  is a mountain.

This is EXACTLY confirmation bias - basically how much you value evidence FOR your position vs. evidence AGAINST it. You always see the evidence for you as more important/significant/decisive than evidence against you. And OF COURSE you don't think you are indulging in it - it wouldn't be bias if you did =)

Sorry, I think confirmation BIas explicitly states that I FAVOR information one way or the other.

I do not FAVOR any information.

I see that there is 10000000 points on side A, and 10 points on side B.

I acknowledge that the 10 points on side B exist and are relevant. However, at this time, I choose side A, due to the amount/quality of information presented.

Modifié par DangerDavidson, 26 mars 2012 - 12:07 .

[Hydralysk]

You know on the one hand I hope indoc theory is true because it's bioware's best way out of this predicament. On the other hand it'd be funny to see all the indoc theory's proponents world crash down around their ears after all this fanatical belief. I swear it's like most of them believe indoc theory is a religion and they're trying to save our souls.

Modifié par Hydralysk, 26 mars 2012 - 12:06 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

SpiderFan1217 wrote...

It's funny how the OP genuinly thinks he's right.

Sad thing is, he's not the only one.  Lots of people think that theory is true, and proven. I feel sorry for them. Those are the people who got hit the hardest by the endings, and they're just trying to make sense out of it. It's like trying to make a gourmet meal out of dirt.

-Polite

[DangerDavidson]

Hydralysk wrote...

You know on the one hand I hope indoc theory is true because it's bioware's best way out of this predicament. On the other hand it'd be funny to see all the indoc theory's proponents world crash down around their ears after all this fanatical belief. I swear it's like most of them believe indoc theory is a religion and they're trying to save our souls.

Welllll not quite. I want BioWare to present what they planned to present< (the complete version) and not for fans immediate backlash to get in the way of that. I'm not saying believe me. I'm saying, there are other views on what happened. Think about them and relax.