309 réponses à ce sujet

[Wolfen919]

wheelierdan wrote...

you seem to have a good head on your shoulders, but you havent been reading what people have had to say about IT, even in this thread, they believe it isnt fanfiction they believe they've uncovered the true meaning of the end itself.

Didn't want to read all the pages in the thread, but I don't see why people would take IT as more than just a possibility. Bioware could make Intox Theory the new ending for all we know. Sadly, it would "Still be a better ending than Mass Effect 3". Derp.

I had to say it. 

Modifié par Wolfen919, 04 avril 2012 - 03:48 .

[froggeh2]

Ariella wrote...

froggeh2 wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

froggeh2 wrote...

Ariella wrote...
There's no hard proof what so ever that Shepard is indoctrinate, and in fact, if he was, one of the three options wouldn't be open to him (control). This is very specifically and plainly laid out. 

You are demonstrating your lack of understanding of the IT here. Yes the catalyst says TIM couldn't control the reapers because they already controlled him.  However that did not stop TIM from thinking he could control the reapers.

as she demonstrates her lack of understanding, i feel less inclined to elaborate, therefore she feels she is winning when really we are just giving up on trying to help her out.

No, I just don't understand how people can run off on such a werid tangent when everything in the game suggests otherwise, especially as it requires spit, bailing wire, and wishes to hold together. I've also asked questions like when was Shepard indoctrinated? What symptoms did he or she show? What factual basis do you have to claim that the dreams are premonitions? That the fuzzy camera is used as a cinematic device, nothing more. The conversation between Cat and Shepard has Shepard's personality intact, showing no sign of indoctrination.

I'd suggest you guys go back and replay ME2 Mordin's loyalty mission where Maelon talks about the paper Mordin wrote on indoctrination, and what it does to a person. None of those things show up in Shepard at the end.

Thus endth the lesson.

So your telling me that when the catalyst lays out three options for Shepard, which all result in her dying, and Shepard doesn't question this?  How is Shepard to know its not a trap? Yes you are right Shepard's personality is definately intact.

Hello... Shepard at his/her core is a soldier, and he she has said time and again "I'm going to stop the r4eapers or die trying". If Shepard's death could save billions even trillions of lives and end the cycle, s/he'd do it in a heartbeat. It's part of being a solider, knowing you might have to make that ultimate sacrifice no matter what YOU want to save others. I don't know why that seems out of character to you,especially since Sacrifice has been one of the themes of Mass Effect since its inception.

And if I may point out, Shepard took on a mission where s/he expected to die in way back in ME 2. Coming back from the Citadel in that situation was a one way trip and Shepard knew it. The idea that Shepard wouldn't be willing to lay down his or her life to save others, especially the entire galaxy from the Reapers forever just shows how weak the IT is. This has been Shepard focus and almost obession since the start. There's no way that Shepard's going to say "to hell with this, I wanna live" with so much riding on those choices. No, Shepard would take the hit, anything else to save him or herself at the expense of the galaxy WOULD be out of character.

Again you missed the point.  My point is not that Shepard wouldn't sacrifice herself to save the galaxy.  My point is Shepard has no reason to believe the catalyst. The catalyst is basically giving up even though it has no reason to. There is a fail condition in the end where the reapers destroy the crucible. So why should Shepard trust the catalyst?

[jds1bio]

froggeh2 wrote...

So your telling me that when the catalyst lays out three options for Shepard, which all result in her dying, and Shepard doesn't question this?  How is Shepard to know its not a trap? Yes you are right Shepard's personality is definately intact.

Here's the explanation on this,

From the harbinger beam to TIM's death, it's a concentrated indoctrination attempt.  Once TIM is gone, the Reapers' chances of getting Shepard are slim, but...

Now you have Anderson (who indoctrination-wise represents Shepard) and Shepard.  When Anderson closes his eyes for the last time, Shepard (in real life) loses consciousness on the battlefield and begins to experience a nightmare independent of indoctrination but composed of some of its residual elements.  In the meantime, Hackett's voice is real and he really can't reach Shepard.  All of Shepard's fears are realized - getting shot, and facing the boy he couldn't save in the form of the Catalyst.  The setting, the focal point of the crucible, represents Shepard's subconscious awareness that it's now or never for the Crucible to fire.

The loss of combat and speech abilities (i.e. to tell the Catalyst to "stuff it") represents Shepard's fear of losing his humanity.  Shepard can now only act in terms of cold Reaper logic, which like many nightmares, seems to invert logic.

The three options represent more of Shepard's fears - TIM winning (control), Saren winning (synth), Reapers winning (destroy - Shepard fears being capable of genocide the way the Reapers are).

On high EMS scores, the Catalyst tells Shepard to "wake up".  This is actually Shepard saying to him/herself, "snap out of it".  Also on high EMS scores, Shepard faces more of his fears and is able to choose a dialogue response to the Catalyst.

On low EMS scores, Shepard does not have enough energy or success level to face all of the fears, nor the power to try to wake him/herself up, nor the power to choose dialogue to say to the Catalyst.  Shepard can only "destroy".

To bring the nightmare to a terrifying climax, Shepard is forced to embrace one of the fears.  What follows after making the choice is simply Shepard's imagining of what happens.  Shepard imagines the fear materializing, after which he/she hopes there is a world left to inhabit and live on, while hoping his/her squadmates somehow live on.

If your EMS is high enough you get the breath scene, a breath not unlike snapping quickly out of a trance. Shepard's alive, but in what state?  I don't know since the story isn't over yet.

Modifié par jds1bio, 04 avril 2012 - 03:52 .

[KingDan97]

ForceXev wrote...

You've picked on some of the weakest evidence for IT.  Now for the real evidence:

Appearance of trees and bushes around Shepard after "waking up" from being hit by the Reaper beam.  There were no trees there before, and they make it look a lot like his dreams/nightmares.

The beam leads Shepard to a room with only one control panel which just so happens to be the one Shepard needs to open the Citadel arms, and he faces no opposition at all on the Citadel.

The Catalyst taking the form of the boy.  There is no reason for the catalyst to tap into Shepard's mind and use that image.  The Reapers however would use that image because it what they have been using all along in the dreams to break his will.

Lemme just disect these a bit.
The trees/bushes were there before, I actually took the time to replay through the Cerberus Base and earth to check, if you'd like to you can as well, just stop running during the chase to the beam and look around with your camera those same trees and shrubs are very clearly there.
EDIT: Just to save you some time I found them for you.
http://www.youtube.c...NlpFTY#t=13m56s 
Bottom right of the video right when Shep drops.

The image of the boy is quite easily explained by the fact that this was the first kid Bioware was putting into the series and they did many iterations on just his clothes, They wanted him to have more screen time. If you want an "in universe" explaination, it's the old cliche of making you feel comfortable with a form you know. As for "The same figure Harbinger was using", you need to subscribe to Indoctrination Theory to consider that a valid portion of the point, and circular logic has no place in actual debate.

The boy was a symbol, but not one of indoctrination. To quote "The Art of the Mass Effect Universe", "One child would be the face of the people on earth whom Shepard chould not save."

Modifié par KingDan97, 04 avril 2012 - 04:02 .

[froggeh2]

jds1bio wrote...

froggeh2 wrote...

So your telling me that when the catalyst lays out three options for Shepard, which all result in her dying, and Shepard doesn't question this?  How is Shepard to know its not a trap? Yes you are right Shepard's personality is definately intact.

Here's the explanation on this,

From the harbinger beam to TIM's death, it's a concentrated indoctrination attempt.  Once TIM is gone, the Reapers' chances of getting Shepard are slim, but...

Now you have Anderson (who indoctrination-wise represents Shepard) and Shepard.  When Anderson closes his eyes for the last time, Shepard (in real life) loses consciousness on the battlefield and begins to experience a nightmare independent of indoctrination but composed of some of its residual elements.  In the meantime, Hackett's voice is real and he really can't reach Shepard.  All of Shepard's fears are realized - getting shot, and facing the boy he couldn't save in the form of the Catalyst.  The setting, the focal point of the crucible, represents Shepard's subconscious awareness that it's now or never for the Crucible to fire.

The loss of combat and speech abilities (i.e. to tell the Catalyst to "stuff it") represents Shepard's fear of losing his humanity.  Shepard can now only act in terms of cold Reaper logic, which like many nightmares, seems to invert logic.

The three options represent more of Shepard's fears - TIM winning (control), Saren winning (synth), Reapers winning (destroy - Shepard fears being capable of genocide the way the Reapers are).

On high EMS scores, the Catalyst tells Shepard to "wake up".  This is actually Shepard saying to him/herself, "snap out of it".  Also on high EMS scores, Shepard faces more of his fears and is able to choose a dialogue response to the Catalyst.

On low EMS scores, Shepard does not have enough energy or success level to face all of the fears, nor the power to try to wake him/herself up, nor the power to choose dialogue to say to the Catalyst.  Shepard can only "destroy".

To bring the nightmare to a terrifying climax, Shepard is forced to embrace one of the fears.  What follows after making the choice is simply Shepard's imagining of what happens.  Shepard imagines the fear materializing, after which he hopes there is a world left to inhabit and live on, while hoping his squadmates somehow live on.

If your EMS is high enough you get the breath scene, a breath not unlike snapping quickly out of a trance. Shepard's alive, but in what state?  I don't know since the story isn't over yet.

I wasn't arguing against IT.

[hardcoregmr]

Saberchic wrote...

Nauks wrote...

Saberchic wrote...

The IT theory has holes. It's not perfect. Why favor that over the "it was real" theory?

Because it has less holes than the current real ending?

Not true.

1) How do the arms get open  if Shep isn't really on the Citadel?

The arms need to be open in order to line up the Crucible. To do that Shep had to get in the Citadel. IT that I've seen all state that indoctrination happens to Shep on Earth (and that's where Shep 'wakes up' if you have a high enough EMS according to these people). They say Shep never left Earth, and it's all in Shep's head. I think Shep is just buried in rubble. 

2) TIM being on the Citadel is part of the indoctrination because why would he even be there?

Again, not true. The prothean VI clearly says that TIM has fled to the Citadel when you go to the Cerberus base. He was there before Shep, not after. Also, Anderson says the walls moved when you are walking to the platform. IT people say there is only one way there (to the platform). The path could have changed to guide Shep to where our favorite starchild wanted Shep to go.

3) The dreams are subtle indoctrination.

This is subjective. When I experienced the dreams the first time, I thought this could be the case. There were whispers and shades in Shep's mind. However, they could just as easily be the things which haunt Shepard during sleep.

4) The lovely infinite ammo pistol.

Yeah, it also appears along with a 'slowed reality' (just like the end where you run to the beam) when you take out Dr. Eva Core on Mars. I chalk this up to 'artistic license.'  Not a fan of it, but I'm sure there are plenty on reasons why they felt the need to do this (storywise and logistics).

These are just some of the points IT puts forth, and it doesn't work better than the "it was real" argument. yes, there are significant questions that need to be answered either way, but "it was real" makles more sense than IT.

IT says that everything that happens after the Harbinginer beam hits Shepard is a hallucination, a dream, an attempt at indoctrination. It supposes that when players get the breathing scene that Shepard awakes and has beaten indoctrination and is in position to finally fight the Reapers. (The breathing scene only plays after the Normandy crash lands but before Stargazer scene)

To all the people saying IT makes less sense than actual ending need to read the entirety of the post, its actually quite sound. I agree that it does leave the game without an actual ending but I would challenge anyone who liked the ending to defend the "in game" endings!  At least IT gives them a logical place to retell the end, and you must admit, that from the second changing the ending came into the picture it meant that some people were never going to get the new ending, even if it's just clarity to  the existing endings. 

[Ariella]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Ariella wrote...
Your proof is a youtube video? something that can be edited in any number of ways, rather than going by personal experience of playing the blessed game several times? Heck I've played all three games in the last month or so, so my memory is still pretty fresh on what indoctrination is, what it does, and how it degenates a person. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THIS IN SHEPARD AT THE END OF THE GAME! The IT is just wishful thinking and as you and Tiax (who's namesake is a nutjob in himself) are present this as fact, it's your burden to prove it, not mine to disprove if you actually want to go by the rules of debate,

no **** the video is edited. its to fit it all into a nice video and to clearly show the points and overlay important soundbytes over the corrosponding video clips. nothing is created by the author, just compiled. get a grip. The video is the proof. Its there, its in game.

no matter how we try to prove you will deny out of spite.

Im done, you ask for proof then dont watch the proof. good day.

That isn't proof, it's speculation and assumption put together in a fashion to "prove" IT. But there's no proof in the game itself. I have yet to see anyone point to anything that is in the game and speficially points to Shep being indoctrinated. We know what indoctrination looks like, but nothing in game that shows those symptoms in Shepard, even at the end.

You know what is considered one of the greatest romance stories of all time? Romeo and Juliet, which is a tragedy, they both end up dead in the end. If the genre is going to evolve and mature, it means that endings aren't always going to be wine and roses. What happens is bittersweet, but how many great stories end on the same kind of note. Hell, take a look at what Mass Effect lists for its inspirations: Aliens, Blade Runner, Star Ship Troopers (I assume the book not the movie), even ST Wrath of Khan, none of which are exactly happy ending stories. Hell, even Star Wars, and what's usually listed as the favorite SW movie: Empire, where Luke just had the shock of his life and lost his hand, Han's encased in carbonite going who knows where, if he's alive (something they actually weren't sure of until they started filming Jedi). All of these are not happy, but they are about loss, sacrifice, comradery between brothers in arms, who you can depend on when the world is going to Hell. No wine and roses happy, but more poinient for it.

The IT makes a mockery of Shepard's sacrifice, because the greatest love one can have for his brother is to lay down his life in the dark for no one to hear or see.

[jds1bio]

froggeh2 wrote...

I wasn't arguing against IT.

Ok.  But some IT believers believe that the Catalyst's choice is the final step to indoctrination.  Since they believe this, they cannot plausibly explain the scenes occuring aftewrards.

I don't believe that the Catalyst is real or a part of indoctrination.  I believe it to simply be a manifestation of Shepard's fears.  And, I can believe this without having to tie myself down on the issue of whether the boy was ever real or alive or whatever.  Having him in the nightmares was significant enough.

[Wolfen919]

Ariella wrote...

That isn't proof, it's speculation and assumption put together in a fashion to "prove" IT. But there's no proof in the game itself. I have yet to see anyone point to anything that is in the game and speficially points to Shep being indoctrinated. We know what indoctrination looks like, but nothing in game that shows those symptoms in Shepard, even at the end.

You know what is considered one of the greatest romance stories of all time? Romeo and Juliet, which is a tragedy, they both end up dead in the end. If the genre is going to evolve and mature, it means that endings aren't always going to be wine and roses. What happens is bittersweet, but how many great stories end on the same kind of note. Hell, take a look at what Mass Effect lists for its inspirations: Aliens, Blade Runner, Star Ship Troopers (I assume the book not the movie), even ST Wrath of Khan, none of which are exactly happy ending stories. Hell, even Star Wars, and what's usually listed as the favorite SW movie: Empire, where Luke just had the shock of his life and lost his hand, Han's encased in carbonite going who knows where, if he's alive (something they actually weren't sure of until they started filming Jedi). All of these are not happy, but they are about loss, sacrifice, comradery between brothers in arms, who you can depend on when the world is going to Hell. No wine and roses happy, but more poinient for it.

The IT makes a mockery of Shepard's sacrifice, because the greatest love one can have for his brother is to lay down his life in the dark for no one to hear or see.

Nothing can prove IT, but we can at least fill in all the major plot holes left to us by the developers. If you care to believe the current ending is satisfactory, so be it. You have your opinion, but if you honestly just WATCH. THE. VIDEO. it will show you all the various things that the game simply does not explain.

By the way, the video does indeed answer all your questions. If you wish to ignore it, then please stop coming to this thread. We are trying our best to explain how it works, but instead you ask the same questions every time.

By the way, if Shepard is clear of thought, just please explain how our Shepard that we have developed accepts the Catalyst's bs? Sure, he wants to destroy the Reapers, but some mysterious figure tells you it and you believe him?! Really?!

Either way, you really should watch the video to at least the FOR side rather than the AGAINST side. It'll gain you the ability to see both sides and then make your arguments.

Modifié par Wolfen919, 04 avril 2012 - 04:06 .

[jds1bio]

Ariella wrote...

That isn't proof, it's speculation and assumption put together in a fashion to "prove" IT. But there's no proof in the game itself. I have yet to see anyone point to anything that is in the game and speficially points to Shep being indoctrinated. We know what indoctrination looks like, but nothing in game that shows those symptoms in Shepard, even at the end.

...

The IT makes a mockery of Shepard's sacrifice, because the greatest love one can have for his brother is to lay down his life in the dark for no one to hear or see.

There's no proof in the game itself, hence the voluminous babbling on the forums.  But his nightmares, and the rendering of the TIM confrontation, do contain what could be described as "oily shadows".  And the reaper whines synced-up to certain moments are interesting to ponder.  The symptoms aren't necessarily in him, but they show up around him.

Also, there's no proof because Shepard is not actually ever indoctrinated.  People are tied down to the notion that the game went all the way as far as indoctrinating Shepard, and that his/her final choice is the completion of indoctrination.  That's the problem with chasing a theory too far.

[kilgorek]

Ariella wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Ariella wrote...
Your proof is a youtube video? something that can be edited in any number of ways, rather than going by personal experience of playing the blessed game several times? Heck I've played all three games in the last month or so, so my memory is still pretty fresh on what indoctrination is, what it does, and how it degenates a person. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THIS IN SHEPARD AT THE END OF THE GAME! The IT is just wishful thinking and as you and Tiax (who's namesake is a nutjob in himself) are present this as fact, it's your burden to prove it, not mine to disprove if you actually want to go by the rules of debate,

no **** the video is edited. its to fit it all into a nice video and to clearly show the points and overlay important soundbytes over the corrosponding video clips. nothing is created by the author, just compiled. get a grip. The video is the proof. Its there, its in game.

no matter how we try to prove you will deny out of spite.

Im done, you ask for proof then dont watch the proof. good day.

That isn't proof, it's speculation and assumption put together in a fashion to "prove" IT. But there's no proof in the game itself. I have yet to see anyone point to anything that is in the game and speficially points to Shep being indoctrinated. We know what indoctrination looks like, but nothing in game that shows those symptoms in Shepard, even at the end.

You know what is considered one of the greatest romance stories of all time? Romeo and Juliet, which is a tragedy, they both end up dead in the end. If the genre is going to evolve and mature, it means that endings aren't always going to be wine and roses. What happens is bittersweet, but how many great stories end on the same kind of note. Hell, take a look at what Mass Effect lists for its inspirations: Aliens, Blade Runner, Star Ship Troopers (I assume the book not the movie), even ST Wrath of Khan, none of which are exactly happy ending stories. Hell, even Star Wars, and what's usually listed as the favorite SW movie: Empire, where Luke just had the shock of his life and lost his hand, Han's encased in carbonite going who knows where, if he's alive (something they actually weren't sure of until they started filming Jedi). All of these are not happy, but they are about loss, sacrifice, comradery between brothers in arms, who you can depend on when the world is going to Hell. No wine and roses happy, but more poinient for it.

The IT makes a mockery of Shepard's sacrifice, because the greatest love one can have for his brother is to lay down his life in the dark for no one to hear or see.

Oh. My. God.

You clearly do not understand anything. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[Plasma Prestige]

Saberchic wrote...

The IT theory has holes. It's not perfect. Why favor that over the "it was real" theory?

The IT theory has a few holes worth mentioning, but if the ending is to be "real," then there are a lot more holes to be be threaded.

[Wolfen919]

kilgorek wrote...

Oh. My. God.

You clearly do not understand anything. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Love you for that reference. 

Plasma Prestige wrote...

Saberchic wrote...

The IT theory has holes. It's not perfect. Why favor that over the "it was real" theory?

The IT theory has a few holes worth mentioning, but if the ending is to be "real," then there are a lot more holes to be be threaded.

 

Precisely. 

Modifié par Wolfen919, 04 avril 2012 - 04:08 .

[Mr Deathbot]

Samuel_Valkyrie wrote...

It's the classic debate between religieus people, and atheists.

The facts point towards Indoc not being true. It was never Bioware's intention for Shep to be indoctrinated. That is the TRUTH.

However, like religious people, you don't care about the truth. You want the subjective experience, and your subjective experience prefers you to have Indoc. It's not true, but you want it to be.

So, whatever arguments you have in favor if Indoc? On the big heap, because they do not matter.

Indoc still isn't true.

That's a little short sited you can't compare indoc theory and religeon at all and if your gonna attack religeous people and say they're wrong don't hide it behind something else. Also science has proven the bible to be right a million times over so get your facts straight before you start an argument. As for your statement about Bioware and indoc theory you don't know that they didn't plan it, your not part of Bioware your assuming they didn't plan it out and assumptions make and ass out of you and me.

[xenu101]

If Bioware actually makes some stupid DLC with an indoctrination ending, I'm going to take my xbox versions of ME1 and ME2, fill them with dog crap and mail them to Bioware.

The indoctrination theory is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Only deluded fanboys think it's real because they believe bioware can't do anything wrong.

Hey, why don't you just give EA unlimited access to your checking account while you're at it? Let them pump you for all you're worth.

Modifié par xenu101, 04 avril 2012 - 04:22 .

[Ariella]

froggeh2 wrote...

Ariella wrote...

froggeh2 wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

froggeh2 wrote...

Ariella wrote...
There's no hard proof what so ever that Shepard is indoctrinate, and in fact, if he was, one of the three options wouldn't be open to him (control). This is very specifically and plainly laid out. 

You are demonstrating your lack of understanding of the IT here. Yes the catalyst says TIM couldn't control the reapers because they already controlled him.  However that did not stop TIM from thinking he could control the reapers.

as she demonstrates her lack of understanding, i feel less inclined to elaborate, therefore she feels she is winning when really we are just giving up on trying to help her out.

No, I just don't understand how people can run off on such a werid tangent when everything in the game suggests otherwise, especially as it requires spit, bailing wire, and wishes to hold together. I've also asked questions like when was Shepard indoctrinated? What symptoms did he or she show? What factual basis do you have to claim that the dreams are premonitions? That the fuzzy camera is used as a cinematic device, nothing more. The conversation between Cat and Shepard has Shepard's personality intact, showing no sign of indoctrination.

I'd suggest you guys go back and replay ME2 Mordin's loyalty mission where Maelon talks about the paper Mordin wrote on indoctrination, and what it does to a person. None of those things show up in Shepard at the end.

Thus endth the lesson.

So your telling me that when the catalyst lays out three options for Shepard, which all result in her dying, and Shepard doesn't question this?  How is Shepard to know its not a trap? Yes you are right Shepard's personality is definately intact.

Hello... Shepard at his/her core is a soldier, and he she has said time and again "I'm going to stop the r4eapers or die trying". If Shepard's death could save billions even trillions of lives and end the cycle, s/he'd do it in a heartbeat. It's part of being a solider, knowing you might have to make that ultimate sacrifice no matter what YOU want to save others. I don't know why that seems out of character to you,especially since Sacrifice has been one of the themes of Mass Effect since its inception.

And if I may point out, Shepard took on a mission where s/he expected to die in way back in ME 2. Coming back from the Citadel in that situation was a one way trip and Shepard knew it. The idea that Shepard wouldn't be willing to lay down his or her life to save others, especially the entire galaxy from the Reapers forever just shows how weak the IT is. This has been Shepard focus and almost obession since the start. There's no way that Shepard's going to say "to hell with this, I wanna live" with so much riding on those choices. No, Shepard would take the hit, anything else to save him or herself at the expense of the galaxy WOULD be out of character.

Again you missed the point.  My point is not that Shepard wouldn't sacrifice herself to save the galaxy.  My point is Shepard has no reason to believe the catalyst. The catalyst is basically giving up even though it has no reason to. There is a fail condition in the end where the reapers destroy the crucible. So why should Shepard trust the catalyst?

Because outside sources all said that Cat was needed to activate the Crucible. Cat might have offered the choices, but one could say he wasn't trusting in Cat, but in Liara and the researchers who worked on the Crucible. add to that the fact there was no reserve for any of the races of the Milky Way if this failed (which it would if he did nothing) Shepard opted to take the slim chance and trust that his friend gave him the right information rather than just let the Galaxy burn. Better to take the chance on the slim hope that might do something than do nothing and see the galaxy burn. In fact that's pretty much been a halmark of Shepard's career: getting to Ilos and postponing the cycle, stopping the Collectors and going through the Omega 4 relay. Shepard's danced on the wire for all of his Specter career, why would the willingness to make this sacrifice on a slim chance be any different?

[aimlessgun]

I want to debunk the indoc theory because it's an echo of all the other stupid conspiracy theories floating around the web. It's an great example of people interpreting things in a way that makes themselves feel better and ignoring what is real.

In a videogame, whatever, I guess that's fine. But I hope the IT people realize what they're doing, and don't do it in regards to real life things.

[Lmaoboat]

aimlessgun wrote...

I want to debunk the indoc theory because it's an echo of all the other stupid conspiracy theories floating around the web. It's an great example of people interpreting things in a way that makes themselves feel better and ignoring what is real.

In a videogame, whatever, I guess that's fine. But I hope the IT people realize what they're doing, and don't do it in regards to real life things.

Mass Effect 3 ending was an inside job.

[kilgorek]

xenu101 wrote...

If Bioware actually makes some stupid DLC with an indoctrination ending, I'm going to take my xbox versions of ME1 and ME2, fill them with dog crap and mail them to Bioware.

The indoctrination theory is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Only deluded fanboys think it's real because they believe bioware can't do anything wrong.

Hey, why don't you just give EA unlimited access to your checking account while you're at it? Let them pump you for all you're worth.

And this where you're wrong. I personally, while disappointed, was not at all enraged over the endings. Games generally do not effect me that much. It's like a movie. You watch it for entertainment purposes and then forget about it. I was ready to move on to something else almost as soon as I finished the game. I came here to get into some discussion about the endings, and that's when I found the IT. The idea is so fascinating to me and has so many possibilities that I decided to keep sail and see what Bioware has in store. But, if they end up disclaim the IT at PAX, I won't lose any sleep over it. It's not that big of a deal.

So, you shouldn't generalize like that. In fact, I would argue that the people who support IT are more rational than the fans who don't. I mean, seriously, have you seen the posts regarding the ending? The majority of IT supporters are discussing rationally the possiblities of the ending, while everyone is just spouting off how they're going to sue Bioware or some ****e. Or SPACE MAGIC. I mean, come on. The joke got old weeks ago.

[Blind Rapture]

Also, there's no proof because Shepard is not actually ever indoctrinated.  People are tied down to the notion that the game went all the way as far as indoctrinating Shepard, and that his/her final choice is the completion of indoctrination.  That's the problem with chasing a theory too far.

Any more proof and they would be thwacking you in head with it so hard that it would defeat the purpose, it's meant to be speculative to get people to debate and discuss it. I think the evidence speaks for itself, it's just enough to give the theory merit, but also just enough to leave some doubts.

The only real proof will be if Bioware confirms or denies it. And even then people will just claim they stole the fan's ideas.

I even LOVED Dragon Age 2. THAT'S RIGHT! I LOVED DRAGON AGE 2, despite all it's faults. But this ending taken at face value with all it's inconsistencies and plot holes is just a shame. Hell, i'd rather them lie about it and steal the idea anyway.

Inversely, the indoctrination theory is brilliant. As a social experiement. As a buisness decision. As a hype generator. As a story telling device. So, who is it hurting to believe, at least until they confirm or deny it?

Modifié par Blind Rapture, 04 avril 2012 - 04:46 .

[Sisterofshane]

Blind Rapture wrote...

Also, there's no proof because Shepard is not actually ever indoctrinated.  People are tied down to the notion that the game went all the way as far as indoctrinating Shepard, and that his/her final choice is the completion of indoctrination.  That's the problem with chasing a theory too far.

Any more proof and they would be thwacking you in head with it so hard that it would defeat the purpose, it's meant to be speculative to get people to debate and discuss it. I think the evidence speaks for itself, it's just enough to give the theory merit, but also just enough to leave some doubts.

The only real proof will be if Bioware confirms or denies it. And even then people will just claim they stole the fan's ideas.

Of course there is always that chance that it's not true and that it is just poor writing. If that were to be true, they would lose at least one of their biggest fans and biggest defenders. I even LOVED Dragon Age 2. THAT'S RIGHT! I LOVED DRAGON AGE 2, despite all it's faults. But this ending taken at face value with all it's inconsistencies and plot holes is just unnacceptable. Hell, i'd rather them lie about it and steal the idea anyway.

Inversely, the indoctrination theory is brilliant. As a social experiement. As a buisness decision. As a hype generator. As a story telling device. So, who is it hurting to believe, at least until they confirm or deny it?

I, for one, also liked Dragon Age 2.  Storywise, I think it was better then ME3.  Who else here was totally tricked into helping Anders with his explosive ending?  A lot of what I didn't like about DA2 had to do with the gameplay - such as the recycled environments and the exploding enemies.

Which is why I have a hard time believing that ME3's endings were meant to be taken at face value.  If they were really that rushed, I think I would have waited for a proper ending.

[Blind Rapture]

aimlessgun wrote...

I want to debunk the indoc theory because it's an echo of all the other stupid conspiracy theories floating around the web. It's an great example of people interpreting things in a way that makes themselves feel better and ignoring what is real.

In a videogame, whatever, I guess that's fine. But I hope the IT people realize what they're doing, and don't do it in regards to real life things.

That's why we CAN have this much fun with the IT. Because it's NOT real life and real consequences are NOT at stake. People need to lighten up, we need to stop being outraged about everything. Even if the dlc isn't free, which at this point i'm sure it has to be, how many of us really wouldn't buy it for any reason other than out of protest anyway?

[wheelierdan]

Lmaoboat wrote...

aimlessgun wrote...

I want to debunk the indoc theory because it's an echo of all the other stupid conspiracy theories floating around the web. It's an great example of people interpreting things in a way that makes themselves feel better and ignoring what is real.

In a videogame, whatever, I guess that's fine. But I hope the IT people realize what they're doing, and don't do it in regards to real life things.

Mass Effect 3 ending was an inside job.

So much this!

the whole theory is classic conspiracy mindset.
Everything that can be used as circumstancial evidence is proof.  Everything that does not directly support the theory is symbolism that supports the theory. 
A ton of people would have to be in on it, and they are keeping perfect silence.  Anyone who contradicts the premise is hidding the truth.

Anyone who doesn't agree doesn't "get" it.  There is only one conclusion.  

Youtube proof is the new grainy video.

edit- how could i forget, if you dont agree you havent seen the evidence ive seen.

Modifié par wheelierdan, 04 avril 2012 - 04:56 .

[Joshehblanket]

 I must say if you are going to tells us Indoctrination Theory is not true at least know what you are talking about. Know what it is please or the opinion is useless.  I belive that most people that oppose Indoc Theory do no know, I myself was against it until I looked at it. Give it a chance just like everything else. BEFORE hating on it. 

All truth passes through three phases: First it is considered absurd and is ignored or riduculed. NExt, it is considered dangerous to the status quo and viciously attacked. Finally, it is considered wholesome; indeed self-evident- Arthur Schopenhauer.   Think what you are at in this conversation.

[Ariella]

jds1bio wrote...

Ariella wrote...

That isn't proof, it's speculation and assumption put together in a fashion to "prove" IT. But there's no proof in the game itself. I have yet to see anyone point to anything that is in the game and speficially points to Shep being indoctrinated. We know what indoctrination looks like, but nothing in game that shows those symptoms in Shepard, even at the end.

...

The IT makes a mockery of Shepard's sacrifice, because the greatest love one can have for his brother is to lay down his life in the dark for no one to hear or see.

There's no proof in the game itself, hence the voluminous babbling on the forums.  But his nightmares, and the rendering of the TIM confrontation, do contain what could be described as "oily shadows".  And the reaper whines synced-up to certain moments are interesting to ponder.  The symptoms aren't necessarily in him, but they show up around him.

I never noticed any "oily" shadows during gameplay either in the dream or at the end during the TIM confrontation.

I did notice the "wraiths" in dreams 2 and 3, but they seemed more to me to be manifestations of the stress and loss along with the whispers from the past. As I called it before, it just seems to me, he's feeling the weight of his dead. It's possible he was hearing what he though were the whines of reapers in the distance, but considering the situation, for the big enemy to have no presense felt as it's a major part of his own psyche's fears and concerns, wouldn't make sense. The dreams are the "show don't tell". Yes Shepard talks about how he felt seeing the boy die, and how he feels under the weight of his dead, but the dreams take us into his mind and we SEE how it's tearing at him. A dramatic touch to build another connection to Shepard as a person. It's a storytelling device. I just have trouble getting how it suddenly morphs into visions of doom and indoctrination. If anything, I'd think that the Cypher would have more of an effect on his dreams and psyche than the Reapers as the thing is inside his own mind.

And one of the ANN news briefs in the emails talks about Rana, who showed no symptoms of indoctrination of Virmire, but lost it when the Horde showed up. I have trouble believing that Shepard, who has had more exposure than just about anybody to the Reapers, their artifact etc, isn't showing any signs when the bulk of the Reapers attack Earth thus exposing him to more Reaper voices than ever didn't send him over the edge, I have trouble believing it was going to happen, period.

As for the Reaper whines. I only really noticed them at the very beginning during the Vancover attack and when scanning, that was about it. Being chased by a Reaper Destroyer the only noises I recall are the ones from the main Reaper cannon. The Reaper dreadnought on Tuchanka, most of the noise I recall came from that wonderful gorgeous sparky worm...

Also, there's no proof because Shepard is not actually ever indoctrinated.  People are tied down to the notion that the game went all the way as far as indoctrinating Shepard, and that his/her final choice is the completion of indoctrination.  That's the problem with chasing a theory too far.

Agreed, and just find it even cheaper than the endings we have because it takes away from Shepard the person, in fact it destroys the whole character. I'd rather go with the Intoxication Theory, because as my husband noted, Shepard can put them away if I had to pick a weird and out there theory or EDI's universe where 1+1=3.