463 réponses à ce sujet

[Malanek]

sorentoft wrote...

It's a theory because it has no proof.

+1
/thread

[saracen16]

I strongly disagree, OP, with your meaningless attempt to stifle debate.

Consider: Aria T'Loak. Is she Aleena? Is she some random Asari Commando? We don't know.

[Erszebeth]

The indoc theory is merely conjecture. A seductive one, but it doesn't mean it's real. The ending can also be explained as something thrown together at the last minute, with crappy cinematic editing to boot. Indoc doesn't dismiss most plotholes, either.

[xdognatex]

Torga_DW wrote...

wow, pass the bong dude. I want a hit of what you're smoking.

me too

[DangerDavidson]

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

No that's my answer to this entire thread NO. It was never a theory to begin with it's a poorly constructed Hypothesis a horrible cliche, and a freaking family guy joke. It's not real there's more holes in it than the real ending itself and I will gladly tear apart any speculation on it everything and I mean EVERYTHING void of maybe 2 scenes can be explained with logic. This isn't a theory at all I downgrade it to a hypothesis because that's what it is. I was cool with it all until this post.

The indoctrination hypothesis is a blight and you people who believe it are blights. You sir are a blight!

Actually, there are no plotholes in IT.

1. Harbinger/Reapers come to earth, start indoctrinating Shepard.
2. There may or may not be an indoctrination device on the normandy (James Vega and his "wtf humming" quotes)
3. Dreams of loser child hallucination are meant to break shepard's hope.
4. Harbinger blast shepard at Conduit 2.0 and while he is on the ground continues to try to break him.

An indoctrinated Shepard, the "hero of the galaxy" would be an excellent reaper weapon.

[Taboo]

zephyr2025 wrote...

Can you prove Shepherd wasn't in purgatory? Can you prove you're not dreaming right now? Can you prove we're not in the Matrix? Can you prove God exists?

having a theory about whether something is a dream is easy to make because you can literally apply it to anything.

[weltraumhamster89]

I think he is trying to say that the indoc theory is not a "theory" because he thinks it is right/ he believes in it.

I WHISH it was true. Would be the most awesome move ever ... but are they releasing a DLC in April at all? I thought they just said to give us new info on an upcoming DLC.

[blackangel209]

DangerDavidson wrote...

recentio wrote...

I agree that IT isn't a theory anymore. No, it's reached TINHAT status as utter self-delusion at this point.

The only true conspiracy: The Weekes Leak. This is the real explanation, unsavory as it may be.

OOH the "Weekes Leak" sounds intriguing!!!! : ) Link ?   

http://geek.pikimal.com/2012/03/22/controversy-erupts-over-mass-effect-3-writers-forum-post-name-release/

Formats a little different than I thought it was when I bookmarked it, but here ya go.

[Naqey]

DangerDavidson wrote...

sorentoft wrote...

Apophenia.

No need for speculation.

One of the most successful entertainment companies, responsible for KOTOR, BG, etc etc, suddenly acquiring the storytelling skills of a ten year old: highly likely.

Oh wait. No.

also, bioware has a very long history for very subtle and clever endings, right? ...

and at this point I dont know what would be worse, the endings as they are right now, or the prospect of a "the truth" dlc that would be like "hey, me3 wasn´t really the ending ("unfinished" some would say), of your 3 ending choices 2 were the same (synthesis and control being you ****ing lose haha!) and only one was the "right" choice, and only if you played mp or app games (to get the 4k ems requirement) you get to play this cool new dlc for 10$ that will complete your 60-80$ game)

oh boy, I really do hope indoc wasn´t their plan all along (even if they´ll do it now), because that would be waaaaaaaaaay more insulting as a fan / customer (for me personally)

[Ck213]

It was also interesting that if you change your mind and turn around and walk away from the choice...game over.

The crucible is destroyed. Yet you can leave Shep standing around watching the battle, leave your computer, go in the kitchen for a snack, and come back and continue watching the battle, but the monent you change your mind and walk away from a choice...GAME OVER.

I guess someone isn't happy you don't swallow a choice automatically.

Modifié par Ck213, 25 mars 2012 - 08:41 .

[Caz Tirin]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

So, you're okay with the fact that the game that was supposed to be the end, didn't have an ending?

Friend, the ending is coming.

Having to pay for an ending after shelling out $60 for a game that was supposed to be the ending is not not good business.  It is, however, a great way to kill your business.

[DangerDavidson]

blackangel209 wrote...

DangerDavidson wrote...

recentio wrote...

I agree that IT isn't a theory anymore. No, it's reached TINHAT status as utter self-delusion at this point.

The only true conspiracy: The Weekes Leak. This is the real explanation, unsavory as it may be.

OOH the "Weekes Leak" sounds intriguing!!!! : ) Link ?   

http://geek.pikimal.com/2012/03/22/controversy-erupts-over-mass-effect-3-writers-forum-post-name-release/

Formats a little different than I thought it was when I bookmarked it, but here ya go.

My explenation for this: 

1. That particular write wasn't in the loop. (Highly unlikely)
2. That particular writer anticipated the amount of negative fan backlash from an "intellectual" ending that is actually a troll and was never on board with it (Highly likely).

at no point does that post invalidate IT.

[AtreiyaN7]

If people want to be technically accurate about it, they should be calling it a hypothesis, which is what it really is, unlike the theory of evolution (an actual theory that is regarded as correct by many people and is supported by evidence in the existing fossil records, etc.). I admit to being lazy on occasion and saying theory when I mean hypothesis because most people don't really make that distinction between the two things.

EDIT: Just explaining the technical nitpick there - I actually find the IT (or IH or whatever else you want to call it) an interesting concept, and it's at least more stimulating than reading threads comprised almost entirely of sniping at each other over the endings.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 25 mars 2012 - 08:46 .

[Taboo]

At least the Indoc people will be great assets once Bioware announces the Indoc theory wasn't intentional.

[sorentoft]

DangerDavidson wrote...

sorentoft wrote...

It's a theory because it has no proof.

Harbinger death laser = dream trees + marauder shields?
Citadel architecture = cerberus + SB ship + citadel + collector base?
TIM suicide = Saren suicide?
5000 AMS + destroy = only possibility of survival?

Hallucination = Hallucination

QED

I refer you to my original statement in this thread.

[Baronesa]

OP...

Is the indoctrination hypothesis falsifiable? can it fail? or is it airtight and cannot be disproved, according to you?

[Golferguy758]

No. It's still a theory until confirmed by Bioware

[blackangel209]

DangerDavidson wrote...

My explenation for this: 

1. That particular write wasn't in the loop. (Highly unlikely)
2. That particular writer anticipated the amount of negative fan backlash from an "intellectual" ending that is actually a troll and was never on board with it (Highly likely).

at no point does that post invalidate IT.

Never meant to imply it did. Just giving the link. However, it does give a potential explanation as to why the ending is so completely disconnected from the rest of the game.

At this point, I feel Bioware's original intention with the ending is irrelevant with regard to the IT. It's just an out for them to take that would make sense without scrapping the last 15 minutes entirely.

Modifié par blackangel209, 25 mars 2012 - 08:45 .

[Fawx9]

No, until BioWare actually says something the endings are quite literally exactly what the look like. Plot holes and star child included.

The IDT was designed to fill in all the plot holes so that the ends actually made sense and possibly give way to an actual finale that works(in the fan's opinion).

We've seen more people come forth with cut dialogue, such as the joker rescue scene, and your squad getting fried if you had low EMS. Which to me suggests that there was nothing special about the endings except for sloppy story telling due to cuts.

You also have to ask yourself what's more believable. BioWare creating this mass conspiracy over the endings, or them simply cutting to much content and inadvertently creating plot holes in the fans' eyes since they never saw the ending script.


Does the IDT work in the ending's current form? Yes. Was it actually intended from a development standpoint? Probably not, unless it was a conscience change, plus a tight lipped secret to keep it from the final hours app, and that's why they cut those scenes.

[recentio]

DangerDavidson wrote...

recentio wrote...

I agree that IT isn't a theory anymore. No, it's reached TINHAT status as utter self-delusion at this point.

The only true conspiracy: The Weekes Leak. This is the real explanation, unsavory as it may be.

OOH the "Weekes Leak" sounds intriguing!!!! : ) Link ?   

Explains everything as a unilateral act stemming from a tragic character flaw -- inflated pride:

www.gameranx.com/updates/id/5695/article/mass-effect-3-writer-allegedly-slams-controversial-ending/

[Hexxys]

It's a theory until explicitly confirmed by Bioware. Period, the end.

Modifié par Hexxys, 25 mars 2012 - 08:44 .

[ShepardTheHopeful]

DangerDavidson wrote...

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

No that's my answer to this entire thread NO. It was never a theory to begin with it's a poorly constructed Hypothesis a horrible cliche, and a freaking family guy joke. It's not real there's more holes in it than the real ending itself and I will gladly tear apart any speculation on it everything and I mean EVERYTHING void of maybe 2 scenes can be explained with logic. This isn't a theory at all I downgrade it to a hypothesis because that's what it is. I was cool with it all until this post.

The indoctrination hypothesis is a blight and you people who believe it are blights. You sir are a blight!

Actually, there are no plotholes in IT.

1. Harbinger/Reapers come to earth, start indoctrinating Shepard.
2. There may or may not be an indoctrination device on the normandy (James Vega and his "wtf humming" quotes)
3. Dreams of loser child hallucination are meant to break shepard's hope.
4. Harbinger blast shepard at Conduit 2.0 and while he is on the ground continues to try to break him.

An indoctrinated Shepard, the "hero of the galaxy" would be an excellent reaper weapon.

1) they came to earth no proof of indoctrination

2) NO! JUST No! I honestly have no idea what magic fairy dust paint that people are huffing to come up with this theory the only reaper tech ever introduced was IFF and we all saw what it did it was NOT in the new normandy nor was there a need for it it was solely to get through the omega relay with the collectors dead there was no need to keep it in the normandy this whole damn point is malarkey for both sides but sure as hell for this indoctrination bull. 

3) once again logical explination overly speculated reasoning. It could have been this but it was more likely stress and ptsd involved not reaper mind jacking. 

4) This is just 1 restated there's no proof there's no reasoning it's just that emergency induction port people keep grasping at. 

Ya know what I like my old ending over indoctrination I'll take space magic over it was all a dream anyday.

ALL HAIL SPACE MAGIC! 

Modifié par ShepardTheHopeful, 25 mars 2012 - 08:46 .

[DangerDavidson]

Baronesa wrote...

OP...

Is the indoctrination hypothesis falsifiable? can it fail? or is it airtight and cannot be disproved, according to you?

I think at this point, I can come up with a counter-argument for every single problem you would have with it.

The only retort I would accept is Bioware outright telling me I am wrong.

WOW this is  much like religion vs. atheism. The only proof of god I would accept is god himself telling me he exists! Oh life, you are TOO fun sometimes : ).

[Baronesa]

DangerDavidson wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

OP...

Is the indoctrination hypothesis falsifiable? can it fail? or is it airtight and cannot be disproved, according to you?

I think at this point, I can come up with a counter-argument for every single problem you would have with it.

The only retort I would accept is Bioware outright telling me I am wrong.

WOW this is  much like religion vs. atheism. The only proof of god I would accept is god himself telling me he exists! Oh life, you are TOO fun sometimes : ).

That is my problem.. if you cannot see a way to falsify it, then it simply does not work, sorry. It is a great idea, I actually like it, but I'm not behind it.

Russell's teapot. nuff said

[RacistRabbi]

This one will just leave this here..

Modifié par RacistRabbi, 25 mars 2012 - 08:48 .