309 réponses à ce sujet

[Cadence of the Planes]

Mass Effect 3 ending was an inside job.

A weak attempt... at best... to parallel the absurdity of 9/11 conspiracy theorists to the Indoctrination Hypothesis.


The Indoctrination Hypothesis has far more meat to it - nice try though- you may have a future as a meme maker or a political pundit. 

[Ariella]

Joshehblanket wrote...

 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. 

I read the original post about IT and when it got to the human numbers on the walls, I just gave up. There are just somethings people hang together out of deperation because they don't want to admit what they believe is not true... I mean look at the John Birch Society or the Flat Earthers or the wacks who think Roosevelt let Pearl Harbor be bombed to get us into WW2 etc...

However people want to believe, because for their own reason (whatever they are) they don't want to accept the endings at face value.

And honestly, I've looked for Chekov's gun on the wall in Act One, there's nothing there, no sublte hints, no odd behaviors that might signal the change, especially consider the symptoms of indoctrination have been gone over with a fine tooth comb in these games. Saren and TIM's experiments (which mirror each other interestingly enough among other actions both individuals took), Maelon's diatribe about Mordin's paper on the subject. Even Shiala talks about how the Reapers tried to reassert control over her, but the Thorian side effects of having connections to the other colonists help keep the Reaper voices at bay. That's pretty good first hand testamony of what Reaper indoctrination feels like during an extinction cycle (almost reminds me of what Alistair said about Joinings and nightmares being worse during a Blight). We see nothing like that with Shepard at all.

And for all the complaints about the ending, Mass Effect 3 is a hell of a game, and if the Writing team was going to hint at something like this, we'd see Chekov's law in play. The gun would have been on the mantle to be used in Act three, but there wasn't any gun there wasn't even a whiff of grapeshot. This is one of my many issues with the IT. I understand it perfectly, but to me, it's a sandcastle or if you want to be more poetic: one of Cosette's Castles on a Cloud. No real substance or storytelling value for that matter.

I'm not saying that the IT couldn't be done and well, but I see no evidence of it being done at all in ME3.

[wheelierdan]

Cadence of the Planes wrote...

Mass Effect 3 ending was an inside job.

A weak attempt... at best... to parallel the absurdity of 9/11 conspiracy theorists to the Indoctrination Hypothesis.


The Indoctrination Hypothesis has far more meat to it - nice try though- you may have a future as a meme maker or a political pundit. 

the point is the theory has no meat at all, it has cirmstancial evidenceat best, meat would imply proof.

I could make the claim that stephen hawking is in a wheelchair, as fact.
I could also claim as fact that I am also in a wheelchair, as fact.
Based on the facts I have proven i am stephen hawking.



The problem is obviously te facts i am choosing are not actual proof of anything, just cherry picked circumstancial evidences.  But by confining myself to a narrowset of facts i have madean air tight case. 

I am ignoring all the facts that disprove my assertion, but whatever.

The indoctrination theory makes the same mistake.

[Ariella]

Oh. My. God.

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

I understand a lot of things, but then I live in a world where the sky is blue, the grass is green and 1+1 =2, rather than EDI's theoretical 1+1=3 universe .

[Blind Rapture]

I read the original post about IT and when it got to the human numbers on the walls, I just gave up. There are just somethings people hang together out of deperation because they don't want to admit what they believe is not true...

Just because some evidence is a stretch is no reason to flat out dismiss all of it before looking at it as a whole. If you want to have a valid educated opinion you need to at least watch: 

www.youtube.com/watch

Not saying it will sway you, but at least do your research... 

Modifié par Blind Rapture, 04 avril 2012 - 05:30 .

[Blind Rapture]

wheelierdan wrote...

Cadence of the Planes wrote...

Mass Effect 3 ending was an inside job.

A weak attempt... at best... to parallel the absurdity of 9/11 conspiracy theorists to the Indoctrination Hypothesis.


The Indoctrination Hypothesis has far more meat to it - nice try though- you may have a future as a meme maker or a political pundit. 

the point is the theory has no meat at all, it has cirmstancial evidenceat best, meat would imply proof.

I could make the claim that stephen hawking is in a wheelchair, as fact.
I could also claim as fact that I am also in a wheelchair, as fact.
Based on the facts I have proven i am stephen hawking.



The problem is obviously te facts i am choosing are not actual proof of anything, just cherry picked circumstancial evidences.  But by confining myself to a narrowset of facts i have madean air tight case. 

I am ignoring all the facts that disprove my assertion, but whatever.

The indoctrination theory makes the same mistake.

It also doesn't prove that you AREN'T Stephen Hawking...

[Trikormadenadon]

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

Because the haters dont like the idea that bioware pulled the wool over their eyes and basically indoctrinated the players.

^This.

Personally I think it would be epic that they indoctrinated the players themselves, assuming that it was the plan all along.

[Trikormadenadon]

Saberchic wrote...

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

Because IT makes more sense than the current endings, that's why.

[Trikormadenadon]

Hexley UK wrote...

I think it has merit and theres some solid basis to it....but I think if it was real then Bioware would have said something by now.

Theres no way they would continue to take the hits they have without letting the cat out of the bag.

Don't get me wrong if i'm mistaken i'll give them kudos for it...but I can't see it.

I agree, I doubt they planned it from the beginning, but if they had....wow.

[Trikormadenadon]

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.

Prove it. BioWare has never difinitavely stated that IT was false, all they said was they had no plans for post ending DLC. Perhaps they wanted the attempt at his indoctrination to actually be the end and they never intended to give us closure at all, until people complained then they said they would explain the endings. Maybe the explaination is IT. You don't know for sure, so don't talk like you know the truth, because you don't.

[Nassegris]

I don’t know whether the Indoctrination theory is true or not. Honestly, I don’t want to read through 1k pages and counting, and sift through youtube videos and posts all over the forums just to decide whether the company I used to love just writes poor endings, or writes poor non-endings in an effort to squeeze more money out of me.

Either alternative is just as bad. No, actually, I will be more disappointed if the theory is true. Talk about an end to trusting your game developer – suddenly you can’t even expect for there to be complete endings to the games you buy, because they might throw in a “it was all a dream! Buy DLC for the real thing!” if you want conclusion for the story you loved.

So – not trying to de-merit the theory itself. More power to you if that’s what you want to be doing. But I wish the supporters would stop lauding it as a genius move on Bioware’s part and calling people who are genuinely upset over the endings – suckers. If IT is true and we let them get away with it with applause – it’s a bigger blow to gaming as art than changing the ending ever would have been.

So – undecided on IT. Only decided that if it’s true, Bioware will lose every shred of respect I ever had for them.

Modifié par Nassegris, 04 avril 2012 - 05:52 .

[Lord Jaric]

Because it is a fan theory. And when it comes to fan theories, heather I like them or not, they are theories made by fans. And from all the backlash Bioware has been receiving and the price cuts on ME3 I don't think keeping silent just to reveal the IT theory later on to be true is worth it.

Until bioware says otherwise I see the ending for what it is, poorly made and poorly performed.

Modifié par Lord Jaric, 04 avril 2012 - 05:46 .

[Trikormadenadon]

MaaZeus wrote...

As much as the Indoc theory makes sense, it would also mean that the games ending is incomplete. Reapers are still out there! The game is practically missing the whole ending chapter!

I have hard time believing any game company would be low enough to pull that kind of stunt...

I odn't. If the plan was to leave the ending that way and have post ending DLC then I can see a company doing that, however Bioware stated they didn't have any plans for post ending DLC which is why people think IT is false when actually they really may have not intended to let us know for sure if we won or not. Maybe they intentionally wanted us to not have closure. Maybe this explaination of the endings they now promise will actually just say IT is true but we are not going to give new endings because we never intended for everyone to know what really happens at the end. I've seen movies do this, so I can see it happen in a video game also.

That being said, it does not mean I agree with that course of action, just that I can see it happen.

[Trikormadenadon]

Alent wrote...

Why so quick to say the events weren't real?

Because they make no sense to the story.

[Xandurpein]

The bottim line for me is this. If they knew they were running out of time and weren't going to have a finished product at deadline, they should have just posponed the release. Anything else is just lame excuses. No IT mindbender will cover that.

[Trikormadenadon]

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.

1) The arms opening are part of the dream sequence. IT says everything after the beam hit Shep was in his head so the arms didn't actually open.

2) No reason both can't be true. The fact that TIM was known to have gone to the citadel does not stop TIM from being in the dream of IT in Shep's head. They can both be true.

3) You are right here, but like you said, it could be starting of indoctrination so you didn't really discount IT with this one.

4) The gun in the Dr. Eva scene was not unlimited ammo.

[Trikormadenadon]

RainyDayLover wrote...

Because that would mean Bioware shipped out an incomplete game and the game has no ending.

Not entirely accurate.

They could have intended to never tell us what the fate of the galaxy was and the ending could have been the point where we find out whether Shep gets indoctrinated or not. I have seen movies do this so why not a video game? No one says the movie had no ending when they do this. It's just a very abrupt ending, one which I personally do not like but that does not mean it was an unfinished product.

[Cadence of the Planes]

wheelierdan wrote...

Cadence of the Planes wrote...

Mass Effect 3 ending was an inside job.

A weak attempt... at best... to parallel the absurdity of 9/11 conspiracy theorists to the Indoctrination Hypothesis.


The Indoctrination Hypothesis has far more meat to it - nice try though- you may have a future as a meme maker or a political pundit. 

the point is the theory has no meat at all, it has cirmstancial evidenceat best, meat would imply proof.

I could make the claim that stephen hawking is in a wheelchair, as fact.
I could also claim as fact that I am also in a wheelchair, as fact.
Based on the facts I have proven i am stephen hawking.



The problem is obviously te facts i am choosing are not actual proof of anything, just cherry picked circumstancial evidences.  But by confining myself to a narrowset of facts i have madean air tight case. 

I am ignoring all the facts that disprove my assertion, but whatever.

The indoctrination theory makes the same mistake.

I'm going to ignore the pointless illustration of a faulty transitive property involving Steven Hawking- and move to the  second part:

I can't say with proof that Indoctrination theory is correct- agreed that all the evidence is circumstantial. But...what *disproves* indoctrination theory, exactly? Please give examples, and say how that is proof against indoctrination theory.

Modifié par Cadence of the Planes, 04 avril 2012 - 06:06 .

[Trikormadenadon]

Xandurpein wrote...

The bottim line for me is this. If they knew they were running out of time and weren't going to have a finished product at deadline, they should have just posponed the release. Anything else is just lame excuses. No IT mindbender will cover that.

The likelyhood that IT is not true is great, however, it would be a good thing if they ran with it to fix the endings. On the other hand, they may not have had the option to delay the release due to pressure from EA, so they did it this way. We won't know for sure until BioWare gives a difinative answer.

[Cadence of the Planes]

RainyDayLover wrote...

Because that would mean Bioware shipped out an incomplete game and the game has no ending.

Disagree. The ending was complete, in my opinion.

[nikki191]

while i think it may possibly of been what bioware planned to do i think at the end it was scrubbed due to time constraints and shipped as is

[Kanner]

I won't touch anything that preserves the current ending, which is such a chore to sit through and evokes such deeply bad feelings in me now.

That includes ironic hipster stuff like IT.

Also, indoctrination does not mean you are asleep in a dream sequence, and being shot with a gigantic laser does not cause indoctrination.

There are just too many problems here all told.

[Irx]

IT has more holes than the official ending.

[Tank207]

Because Mass Effect was always an uplifting Space Opera in the vein of Star Wars. Not some vague pretentious pseudo intellectual bullcrap like the Matrix sequels(that is directed towards both the theory and the actual ending).

-takes a long breath-

Well that's why I don't like the indoctrination theory at least. That, and it's just as bad as an "it was all a dream" ending.

And I HATE HATE HATE HATE... HATE those! /Kefka

Modifié par Tank207, 04 avril 2012 - 06:32 .

[Sainta117]

Too many moving parts. Bioware is not the kind of studio that would do something this sneaky and subversive. They just screwed the pooch. It happens.