300 réponses à ce sujet

[Mad-Max90]

Why is it Shepard has relatively little trouble defeating reapers on foot and it takes a galaxy's fleet to even struggle against an army of reapers?!? Seriously just pit Shepard by himself on a planet and send every reaper there, Shepard will be the only thing left standing, reapers are defeated and the starchild is left with no body ever wanting to find him

[The Smitchens]

CavScout wrote...

hexediter wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Sirartistic wrote...

Also, you guys are forgetting one major thing. If you have a low ems, you will NOT get the ending where Shepard awakes! That means he died.

Yet the Reapers are still destroyed. That's a win.

In his dream they are (along with everyone else).  In reality I'd assume they are happily turning humanity into a reaper because you've lost.  They don't even need to indoctrinate you, because your shepard is full of fail.

More it's Indoctrination Theory proves Indoctrination Theory circular reasoning....

Firstly a low EMS doesn't mean Shepard died.  It just means we don't have proof he survived.  Screen goes black.  Maybe he did, maybe not.  We just don't know.

Secondly, if the crucible was all in Shepard's head then he would have never actually destroyed the reapers because he was never actually on the crucible.  We see him on a planet afterward.  He wasn't there.  The reapers are still out there.

Thirdly how is any of that circular reasoning?  I mean... just look at it.

[TheLastAwakening]

Imo Destroy with low ems is not the same as Destroy with high ems.

Destroy with low ems imo = creating order thus everything is vaporized. Where as if your military strength is effective enough you get another choice.

The stronger the Effect of your military strength the more choices you get.

imo eventually you are allowed to synthesis which I think is the same as Ascension...Harbinger...

After all which endings does Shepard lose his form?

[CavScout]

The Smitchens wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Shep was wounded long before that scene. You can't even prove a bullet wound, let alone a magical bullet that goes one way and turns around another...

Ever seen The Matrix?  The fiction of The Matrix argued that just because something was happening in your head your mind made it real and thus falling off a building would cause a physical reaction.  A similar argument could easily be translated to this.

CavScout wrote...

And if he is, how does that prove Indoctrination and not just some heroic survival?

Well.  He wasn't floating out in space.  Gravity.  He was laying on something.  If the citadel broke to pieces like we saw he'd just be floating in a vacuum where there is no oxygen for him to take a quick breath from.

CavScout wrote...
Oh, maybe the lack of ASTEROIDS hitting them....

Yeah, because the image of the Milky Way at the end when we saw the relays blowing up they certainly didn't show a diameter of lightyears upon lightyears.  Oh wait.  They did.

ME =/= Matrix. The Matrix sets up the computer world vrs the real world. You don't have ANY of that in ME.

You can't prove he was on Earth. You can't even know how he survived. Unexplained doesn't prove Indoctrination Theory.

You just move the Goal Posts on the relay "explosions". Nice try though. The energy field is being spread via the relays, was that even in question? No, it wasn't. The "relays going bye-bye have to be mean the solar systems are blow up too" was. Can I assume you just yielded on this point?

[CavScout]

hexediter wrote...

Deganis76 wrote...

The reason I disagree with indoctrination is this: wouldn't it have been a heck of a lot easier for Harbinger to just shoot a second death ray to vaporize Shepard and be done with it?

This is true, but it's also true if IT is not what happened.  It's a plot hole not matter what you assume lol.

Not at all. Indoctrination Theory assume the Reapers know Shep lived and try to indoctrinate. If Indoctrination Theory is not true, then there is no reason to assume the Reapers know Shep wasn't killed.

[Rafe34]

CavScout wrote...
Child was acknowledged, they wait until he got on-board before closing the doors and taking off. Oh, and how does the child not being directly help by soldiers in a firefight with Reapers prove Indoctrination Theory?

Your "unanswerable" question have several plausible answers and none have anything to do with Indoctrination Theory.

No, actually, they're waiting for the woman who they drag on board the ship. The civilians on board the ship don't help the child at all.

But then, I've come to the conclusion that you're just a troll, since your arguments against IT use the *exact* same logic you accuse people who are for IT of using.

If you ever want to actually look at IT, all your so-called "responses" have been answered a dozen times in the main IT thread. There's a ton of evidence for it. No, it's not proven. Yes, you can just use the explanation: BW sucks at writing. Some of us like to think otherwise. And the mountaints of little things do add up to one huge snowball of evidence.

[CavScout]

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

This video is damn good evidence for IT. If you want to see a list of questions worth wondering about, go to 20:40

www.youtube.com/watch

A) It's not even good evidence
The questions don't even prove Indoctrination Theory
C) The answer to the same questions for IT are just "it was Indoctrination Theory".
D) Common conspiracy theorist tactic

[The Smitchens]

CavScout wrote...

The Smitchens wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Shep was wounded long before that scene. You can't even prove a bullet wound, let alone a magical bullet that goes one way and turns around another...

Ever seen The Matrix?  The fiction of The Matrix argued that just because something was happening in your head your mind made it real and thus falling off a building would cause a physical reaction.  A similar argument could easily be translated to this.

CavScout wrote...

And if he is, how does that prove Indoctrination and not just some heroic survival?

Well.  He wasn't floating out in space.  Gravity.  He was laying on something.  If the citadel broke to pieces like we saw he'd just be floating in a vacuum where there is no oxygen for him to take a quick breath from.

CavScout wrote...
Oh, maybe the lack of ASTEROIDS hitting them....

Yeah, because the image of the Milky Way at the end when we saw the relays blowing up they certainly didn't show a diameter of lightyears upon lightyears.  Oh wait.  They did.

ME =/= Matrix. The Matrix sets up the computer world vrs the real world. You don't have ANY of that in ME.

You can't prove he was on Earth. You can't even know how he survived. Unexplained doesn't prove Indoctrination Theory.

You just move the Goal Posts on the relay "explosions". Nice try though. The energy field is being spread via the relays, was that even in question? No, it wasn't. The "relays going bye-bye have to be mean the solar systems are blow up too" was. Can I assume you just yielded on this point?

Do you read your posts before you hit submit?

[squee365]

Wait I remember this being explained multiple times in the main IDT thread.

Low EMS = Less time spent for the indocrination process to take effect -> Less force of persuasion, Shepard sees destroy as the only option.

High EMS = More time spent for the indoctrination to take full effect -> Shepard sees full reason for controlling the reapers, even higher EMS means even more time for Shepard to be persuaded that Synergy is the ultimate option

In the end, Control and Synthesis are just means of fully indoctrinating Shepard.
If Shepard picks destroy with a low ems and "imagines" Earth incinerating, its because he knows he wasn't prepared and automatically sees what will be the death of Earth.

Modifié par squee365, 27 mars 2012 - 02:16 .

[hexediter]

DasGota wrote...

 I still find my explanation for the endings to be satasfactory, no Indoctrination Theory required.
 
Terrible. Writing. 

Also entirely within the realm of possability!

[Rafe34]

hexediter wrote...

DasGota wrote...

 I still find my explanation for the endings to be satasfactory, no Indoctrination Theory required.
 
Terrible. Writing. 

Also entirely within the realm of possability!

Definitely. Both explanations work just as well.

Most of us are just hoping it's not terrible writing and BW actually has something left.

[CavScout]

The Smitchens wrote...

CavScout wrote...
So Shepard never shows signs of indoctrination because BioWare never wants to you see Shepard being indoctrinated... yet this is proof of indoctrination how?

Well... here we go back to that funny thing called thinking.  Think about it.  If they came right out and said "Shepard.  By jove you're indoctrinated."  Who is going to pick synthesis or control?  If anything it's a brilliant way to test the fans and see who actually did end up indoctrinated.  Did the fans catch the clues and choose destroy despite its being a renegade option?  Or were they like me and thought "BLUE PARAGON WIN"?

If they go and call themselves out on it then the gig is up.  Shepard isn't the only one being indoctrinated.  The guy controlling Shepard is.  We were.  That's how you immerse the fans into the universe.

So far all you've done is say everyone is wrong, and that's completely 100% fine, but you're not bringing anything to the table here.  Prove it wrong.  Bring legitimate, thought out points to the table.  People will consider it.  If it makes sense it will find a home in the theory.

Don't you think it is funny to invoke "you need to think" when you're basing a theory on the idea that Indoctrination Theory is proved because Shep is not shown being indoctrinated?

Besides, who's to say that BioWare doesn't think the Synthesis and/or Control endings are better endings over the base destroy option?

[CavScout]

Ingu wrote...

Considering the destroy ending destroys everything. Reapers are still going to destroy everything, right?

It only destroys Reapers if you have high enough EMS.

[TheLastAwakening]

Rafe34 wrote...

hexediter wrote...

DasGota wrote...

 I still find my explanation for the endings to be satasfactory, no Indoctrination Theory required.
 
Terrible. Writing. 

Also entirely within the realm of possability!

Definitely. Both explanations work just as well.

Most of us are just hoping it's not terrible writing and BW actually has something left.

Mass Shift? jk.

[matchboxmatt]

I always saw the low-tier endings as a lack of will power, commitment, or hope. If you were indoctrinated, you're really no use if you don't even have the power to stand against the reapers. Why provide the illusion of choice to someone so insignificant in the end.

[Rafe34]

The Smitchens wrote...

CavScout wrote...

The Smitchens wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Shep was wounded long before that scene. You can't even prove a bullet wound, let alone a magical bullet that goes one way and turns around another...

Ever seen The Matrix?  The fiction of The Matrix argued that just because something was happening in your head your mind made it real and thus falling off a building would cause a physical reaction.  A similar argument could easily be translated to this.

CavScout wrote...

And if he is, how does that prove Indoctrination and not just some heroic survival?

Well.  He wasn't floating out in space.  Gravity.  He was laying on something.  If the citadel broke to pieces like we saw he'd just be floating in a vacuum where there is no oxygen for him to take a quick breath from.

CavScout wrote...
Oh, maybe the lack of ASTEROIDS hitting them....

Yeah, because the image of the Milky Way at the end when we saw the relays blowing up they certainly didn't show a diameter of lightyears upon lightyears.  Oh wait.  They did.

ME =/= Matrix. The Matrix sets up the computer world vrs the real world. You don't have ANY of that in ME.

You can't prove he was on Earth. You can't even know how he survived. Unexplained doesn't prove Indoctrination Theory.

You just move the Goal Posts on the relay "explosions". Nice try though. The energy field is being spread via the relays, was that even in question? No, it wasn't. The "relays going bye-bye have to be mean the solar systems are blow up too" was. Can I assume you just yielded on this point?

Do you read your posts before you hit submit?

This is his logic, pretty much:

Nuh uh! Just because a theory gives a perfectly valid reason for a previously unexplained phenomenon means nothing! You can't PROVE it! So I won't believe it until you can PROVE it! 100% prove that its real or you're just using conspiracy theorist logic.

I mean, science wouldn't go anywhere if we started where this guy comes from.

"Hmm, an apple falls and hits my head. I think maybe there was a force that caused it to happen."
"Can you PROVE it?"
"Well, no, but it's a good explanation for a previously unexplainable phenomenon, so I'm going to look at the other evidence for it."
"Nope. If you can't prove it, it's not true. Forget about it and go do something you can PROVE."

Lol. Just ignore this guy, seriously. Fail troll is fail.

[The Smitchens]

Rafe34 wrote...

hexediter wrote...

DasGota wrote...

 I still find my explanation for the endings to be satasfactory, no Indoctrination Theory required.
 
Terrible. Writing. 

Also entirely within the realm of possability!

Definitely. Both explanations work just as well.

Most of us are just hoping it's not terrible writing and BW actually has something left.

If they were really bad writers then I really don't think so many people would be so into the franchise this far in.  I think mostly people were just really surprised at the direction they went and where they left off at.

I don't think we have anything to worry about.  Even if they debunk indoctrination I'm sure they'll make sense of things all the same.

[Capeo]

Haha. Just scanning those 15 reasons is a joke. Quickly off the top of my head, everything you say the starchild invalidates is already invalidated by the early plot long before indoctrination could be happening. You have unlimited ammo with no reloading in the beginning of the game too. Shep must have been indoctrinated then. TIM is on the Citadel because he's working for the Reapers by that point. In the synthesis ending there will never be a need for synthetics again. The rest don't even qualify as potholes considering the rest of the game's raging potholes. Your talking about friggin' helmets in a game where people walk around in space wearing oxygen masks. Give me a break. ME is not hard sci-fi and has never been that logically consistent. God, I could go on but this is just dumb. Ray already confirmed these are the endings. Final Hours already confirmed these are the real endings. IT is moving from delusion to actual psychosis now.

[THEE_DEATHMASTER]

I agree that you should ignore posts you don't think provide any real input. That's what I'm doing alright.

[Rafe34]

OH!

I've got #15 for plotholes!

15. Why do the Reapers leave open a backdoor to the ONE WEAPON that can possibly be used to stop them? Illogical event.

[hexediter]

CavScout wrote...

The Smitchens wrote...

CavScout wrote...
So Shepard never shows signs of indoctrination because BioWare never wants to you see Shepard being indoctrinated... yet this is proof of indoctrination how?

Well... here we go back to that funny thing called thinking.  Think about it.  If they came right out and said "Shepard.  By jove you're indoctrinated."  Who is going to pick synthesis or control?  If anything it's a brilliant way to test the fans and see who actually did end up indoctrinated.  Did the fans catch the clues and choose destroy despite its being a renegade option?  Or were they like me and thought "BLUE PARAGON WIN"?

If they go and call themselves out on it then the gig is up.  Shepard isn't the only one being indoctrinated.  The guy controlling Shepard is.  We were.  That's how you immerse the fans into the universe.

So far all you've done is say everyone is wrong, and that's completely 100% fine, but you're not bringing anything to the table here.  Prove it wrong.  Bring legitimate, thought out points to the table.  People will consider it.  If it makes sense it will find a home in the theory.

Don't you think it is funny to invoke "you need to think" when you're basing a theory on the idea that Indoctrination Theory is proved because Shep is not shown being indoctrinated?

Besides, who's to say that BioWare doesn't think the Synthesis and/or Control endings are better endings over the base destroy option?

No one, IT can't be proven, it can only match the evidence and then make sense, or not make sense.  That is as far as we can go with it.  We must wait for Bioware to be certain of anything, it is up to the individual to make up there own damn mind.

[The Smitchens]

Rafe34 wrote...

Lol. Just ignore this guy, seriously. Fail troll is fail.

I plan on it.  It's tiresome.  I originally had about three paragraphs written then just sorta looked at it and thought "... I should probably stop now before my brain says 'you're too stupid to live' then gives me an aneurism."  So I scrapped it all and left it at that.

[The Smitchens]

hexediter wrote...

No one, IT can't be proven, it can only match the evidence and then make sense, or not make sense.  That is as far as we can go with it.  We must wait for Bioware to be certain of anything, it is up to the individual to make up there own damn mind.

Save your brain cells.  You're gonna need them later.

[Rafe34]

Capeo wrote...

Haha. Just scanning those 15 reasons is a joke. Quickly off the top of my head, everything you say the starchild invalidates is already invalidated by the early plot long before indoctrination could be happening. You have unlimited ammo with no reloading in the beginning of the game too. Shep must have been indoctrinated then. TIM is on the Citadel because he's working for the Reapers by that point. In the synthesis ending there will never be a need for synthetics again. The rest don't even qualify as potholes considering the rest of the game's raging potholes. Your talking about friggin' helmets in a game where people walk around in space wearing oxygen masks. Give me a break. ME is not hard sci-fi and has never been that logically consistent. God, I could go on but this is just dumb. Ray already confirmed these are the endings. Final Hours already confirmed these are the real endings. IT is moving from delusion to actual psychosis now.

First off, way to stay classy and call people names, [/sarcasm]

Second off, even if its not the real thing that happened, IT fits better than the real ending, that's all I was saying.

No, actually, you have to reload in the beginning. And even if that's the case, it could be explained by just teaching newcomers to the franchise how ME works. That logic doesn't hold for end-game because everyone should already know how the game works. And yes, Shepard is already beginning to be indoctrinated, it started in Arrival.

Why will there never be a need for synthetics again?

You obviously don't actually care to debate the topic, so I'll leave it at that. Everything you say has been answered a dozen times over in the main thread.

Modifié par Rafe34, 27 mars 2012 - 02:25 .

[Rafe34]

hexediter wrote...

CavScout wrote...

The Smitchens wrote...

CavScout wrote...
So Shepard never shows signs of indoctrination because BioWare never wants to you see Shepard being indoctrinated... yet this is proof of indoctrination how?

Well... here we go back to that funny thing called thinking.  Think about it.  If they came right out and said "Shepard.  By jove you're indoctrinated."  Who is going to pick synthesis or control?  If anything it's a brilliant way to test the fans and see who actually did end up indoctrinated.  Did the fans catch the clues and choose destroy despite its being a renegade option?  Or were they like me and thought "BLUE PARAGON WIN"?

If they go and call themselves out on it then the gig is up.  Shepard isn't the only one being indoctrinated.  The guy controlling Shepard is.  We were.  That's how you immerse the fans into the universe.

So far all you've done is say everyone is wrong, and that's completely 100% fine, but you're not bringing anything to the table here.  Prove it wrong.  Bring legitimate, thought out points to the table.  People will consider it.  If it makes sense it will find a home in the theory.

Don't you think it is funny to invoke "you need to think" when you're basing a theory on the idea that Indoctrination Theory is proved because Shep is not shown being indoctrinated?

Besides, who's to say that BioWare doesn't think the Synthesis and/or Control endings are better endings over the base destroy option?

No one, IT can't be proven, it can only match the evidence and then make sense, or not make sense.  That is as far as we can go with it.  We must wait for Bioware to be certain of anything, it is up to the individual to make up there own damn mind.

Bingo. Look, people, a logical response! This is how you do it.