309 réponses à ce sujet

[Delta Sierra]

IT makes more sense than anything else that I've heard so far, but it would mean that Bioware willingly sold me an incomplete game. Which means we're being manipulated, and since release we've all been part of some messed up internet mind-game. I don't like that thought one bit.

Modifié par Delta Sierra, 03 avril 2012 - 10:53 .

[Laurencio]

RiGoRmOrTiS_UK wrote...

Why so quick to de-merit Indoctrination Theory?

because:

1) Bioware has never been that clever in their story telling; its always been straight forward character based story telling with very little interpretation.

2) its caused them even more hassle and brand damage than any “clever” ending is worth.

3) all of their replies and responses since everything blew up has been counter to if the indoctrination theory is true. Their behaviour would have been different and less “damaging”.


However the final nail in the coffin of indoctrination theory will be PAX. The only way I believe it's true is if they show polished footage of the final ending clearly demonstrating in was indoctrination. That way we know they planned it all along as they wouldn't have had time to produce the content that quickly after the fact.


This is why I don't believe indoctrination theory; I think indoctrination theorist just got lucky with how bioware chose to represent certain moments and choices of dialogue which allowed us to connect so many points... Sometimes chaos can have misleading patterns of logic which actually mean nothing..

If you look hard enough I'm sure you could find references to Nostredamus prophecies.

[The Mercenary55]

Would love the indoc theory to be true. cant say i was pleased with the ending and for me the indoc theory makes sense since in mass effect 2 harbinger tells his men to try and preserve shepard as well as the hints throughtout mass effect 3. If bioware brought out dlc that was indoc theory and added expansion to current ending i would buy it. plus people who like the current ending or arent emotionally invested like some dont need the dlc to fulfill their experiance. lol I would be like OMFG you guys are amazing!! and would tell my friends i was wrong and they should buy it NOW lol but thats just me

[Apollo-XL5]

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.

Dont you think it is funny how little opposition the reapers put towards the crucible (the reaper killing weapon), I mean i just finished 3rd play and when they bring it into the battle, there are hardly any reapers around.  I think that now matter how many ships the alliance has around the crucible, if the reapers really wanted the crucible destroyed, the would just do it.  I mean its not like we could take them in conventionally.  They mentioned that alot during the game, so the logical reason is that the reapers want the crucible to dock with the citadel.

[TudorWolf]

My main problem is the fact that people overlook the canon to make it fit.

Since when have we had "indoctrination attempts" and my personal peeve, "overcoming" such an attempt? Every single time indoctrination has appeared, it's been portrayed as irresistible and impossible to recover from once it's set in. The best hope an indoctrinated person has is still having enough free will to be talked into realizing the fact and being able to kill themselves.

Yet the theory that people so vehemently stick to claims both

[Saberchic]

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

Saberchic wrote...

*snipping for length*

Dont you think it is funny how little opposition the reapers put towards the crucible (the reaper killing weapon), I mean i just finished 3rd play and when they bring it into the battle, there are hardly any reapers around.  I think that now matter how many ships the alliance has around the crucible, if the reapers really wanted the crucible destroyed, the would just do it.  I mean its not like we could take them in conventionally.  They mentioned that alot during the game, so the logical reason is that the reapers want the crucible to dock with the citadel.

I'm not saying there aren't any plot holes (hello Joker and squaddies who were just by my side!), but reality makes more sense to me than indoctrination. There's less holes to fill/clarify with the reality ending.

[Apollo-XL5]

TudorWolf wrote...

My main problem is the fact that people overlook the canon to make it fit.

Since when have we had "indoctrination attempts" and my personal peeve, "overcoming" such an attempt? Every single time indoctrination has appeared, it's been portrayed as irresistible and impossible to recover from once it's set in. The best hope an indoctrinated person has is still having enough free will to be talked into realizing the fact and being able to kill themselves.

Yet the theory that people so vehemently stick to claims both

Because it is shepard (the hero) and it is ultimatly up to the player if he will become indoctrinated.  Hence the dreams and the mindf*** from harbinger.
Oh yeah harbinger, the big bad of ME2 who barely appeared in ME3 until right at the end.

[rpgfan321]

I admit the IT is very clever if it was pulled off, but I really don't like the fact that the ending has to be paid to be seen. I waited quite some time to see this franchise come to a close, and I want to move on.

And if Bioware starts to sell a game without an ending at launch, who knows what game studios start to do that, too? I don't want that! I want DLCs to add something to the middle of the game or bridge something to the next sequel like ME2 did.

But if Bioware did pull the IT in the current game, I would have clapped for such clever twist. *sigh* Alas they did not however.

[Ariella]

wtbusername wrote...

Alent wrote...

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

I don't know, it might have something to do with the entire ending sequence after being hit by beam being kind of surreal. (that is a gross understatement)

Might have, just a guess.

All it does is mirror a good piece of the ending of ME1 down to having to get to the Citadel via Conduit (which is how that beam is referred to several times, as for the "fuzzy parts" when Shep wakes up:

"Another subtle cimematic tenique the team used to create a stronger bond between the player and their Shepard is the subjective camera used in all three games when Shepard is coming to after having been unconcious., In Mass Effect 1 this occurs after Shepard's first vision of the Reapers, In Mass Effect 2, is was when he woke up on the operating table in the Cerberus reconstruction facility. In Mass Effect 3 it was after the explosion in the trial that launches Shepard across the room. These scenes are not only to provide highly cinematic moments for the player, but allow them to feel they are experiencing what Shepard is experiencing: Their vision is blurry then resolves to clarity. And once they can see clearly tehy feel they are Shepard."- Connecting to Shepard, Cinemantic Storytelling in Mass Effect, Prima Mass Effect 3 Collector's Strategy Guide

So the whole blur thing is a cinematic touch not a transition to a dream state, and Shepard shows no other signs of indoctrination, in fact much of his conversation with TIM revolves around the fact that TIM's the one who's Indoctrinated and has been for a while. And of course there's the Catalyst who says "We don't control you" but that wouldn't satisfy the IT would it?

[Tiax Rules All]

Indoctrination will no longer be a theory after friday. prepare yourselves

[Apollo-XL5]

Saberchic wrote...

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

Saberchic wrote...

*snipping for length*

Dont you think it is funny how little opposition the reapers put towards the crucible (the reaper killing weapon), I mean i just finished 3rd play and when they bring it into the battle, there are hardly any reapers around.  I think that now matter how many ships the alliance has around the crucible, if the reapers really wanted the crucible destroyed, the would just do it.  I mean its not like we could take them in conventionally.  They mentioned that alot during the game, so the logical reason is that the reapers want the crucible to dock with the citadel.

I'm not saying there aren't any plot holes (hello Joker and squaddies who were just by my side!), but reality makes more sense to me than indoctrination. There's less holes to fill/clarify with the reality ending.

Wait you think that the original ending makes MORE SENSE than indoctrination, the most powerful weapob the reapers possess.  I still think that the extended ending will show shep either give in/break free of indoctrination only to find that the crucible is a reaper trap and then kills harbinger who is infact the real target(being the alpha reaper...you know, largest and oldest) and the defeats the reapers and earth and the galaxy are saved and all the sacrifices that you and you friends (mordin, legion etc) made actually mattered.

[ericjdev]

Indoc is a lie people tell themselves because they cannot face the truth.

[The Mercenary55]

@Apollo-XL5 the indoctrinaton theory takes place from when shepard gets hit by harbingers beam so everything after that point takes place in shepards head, so the arms opening and tim on the citadel, yup thats in sheps mind to progress the indoctrination. The dreams shepard has about the boy could be sublte attempts to prepare him for indoctrination ( not so sure on that one) and if its not taking place in sheps mind how does he have infinite ammo? the indoc thoery covers your points, you just need to actually read it not breaze over it.

[Tiax Rules All]

ericjdev wrote...

Indoc is a lie people tell themselves because they cannot face the truth.

your world is in for some shattering after friday.

[Eshaye]

Saberchic wrote...

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

Personally if it is real it's really not well done AT ALL. If it's all real and not mostly in Shepard's head then it was rushed and poorly put together and comparing that to the rest of the game I have a hard time believing that this was the intention. Therefore the IT theory rings true to me and I already suspected since ME2 that Shepard MUST be somewhat sensitive to Reaper voices by now, you just can't escape that the way indoctrination is meant to work. 
And I also always figured that TIM was also indcotrinated and he's been there long before Shepard. It's a testament to his will how long he held out. 

I also want to play more Mass Effect. If this is the last of Shepard we will ever see I would hope they would stretch out for as long as possible. An expansion pack andor DLC(s) would be nice. 

Modifié par Eshaye, 03 avril 2012 - 11:13 .

[Caz Tirin]

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

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

And the IT sheep don't like that BioWare actually wrote a bad ending so they "made one up".

[lordofdogtown19]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Indoctrination will no longer be a theory after friday. prepare yourselves

I honeslty hope you're right. I just can't see it though

Modifié par lordofdogtown19, 03 avril 2012 - 11:09 .

[rachellouise]

I think it'll just show squad members on the ground, anderson following you into the beam, the beam 'closing', then cortez coming down and non-squad members checking/getting your squad members back to the normandy

[yahtzo]

Well whether you believe IT or not it is really our only hope at this time. They have made it very clear they will not ret con or change the endings. Clarifying the ending by inserting deleted scenes to better explain it is still technically changing it too.

So there are only 2 options at this point: IT is real or we will be getting a wall of text right before the credits hit

[Mbednar]

Saberchic wrote...

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

The current story has holes.  Why favor it?  XD

That said, they've all but blatantly said that the IT is false.  Sucks, cuz the current ending leaves much to be desired.  Clarification will be garbage too

[Apollo-XL5]

The Mercenary55 wrote...

@Apollo-XL5 the indoctrinaton theory takes place from when shepard gets hit by harbingers beam so everything after that point takes place in shepards head, so the arms opening and tim on the citadel, yup thats in sheps mind to progress the indoctrination. The dreams shepard has about the boy could be sublte attempts to prepare him for indoctrination ( not so sure on that one) and if its not taking place in sheps mind how does he have infinite ammo? the indoc thoery covers your points, you just need to actually read it not breaze over it.

I already have mate weeks ago, infact i wrote a long post with how i saw the indoctrination happen afew weeks back on the main IT thread and it covered everything already in the IT.

[Apollo-XL5]

Caz Tirin wrote...

Apollo-XL5 wrote...

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

And the IT sheep don't like that BioWare actually wrote a bad ending so they "made one up".

Sorry but that is bull****, bioware who have made a brillaint trilogy would not just blow it right at the end, and if you bring up DA2, I will have to remind you that ME is made by a different team inside bioware.
haters=peckers (want to know what a ****** is....look up one of my old posts.

[Saberchic]

Apollo-XL5 wrote...
Wait you think that the original ending makes MORE SENSE than indoctrination, the most powerful weapob the reapers possess.  I still think that the extended ending will show shep either give in/break free of indoctrination only to find that the crucible is a reaper trap and then kills harbinger who is infact the real target(being the alpha reaper...you know, largest and oldest) and the defeats the reapers and earth and the galaxy are saved and all the sacrifices that you and you friends (mordin, legion etc) made actually mattered.

I'm not saying I take the kid at face value. I thought his logic was bogus and could potentially be the reapers last line of defense with Control being making everyone indoctrinated, Synthesis also making people indoctrinated, and Destroy being a giant screw you to the reapers.

I just want an ending that makes sense, and as it stands, whether it's IT or reality, the ending does not deliver what Bioware promised.

Side note: I would have loved some kind of epic stand off with Harby. Totally felt shafted that we didn't get that.

[CombustiblePanda]

I like the theory, but I don't think it should be stated as fact.

[Apollo-XL5]

rachellouise wrote...

I think it'll just show squad members on the ground, anderson following you into the beam, the beam 'closing', then cortez coming down and non-squad members checking/getting your squad members back to the normandy

THen the normandy running away as fast as possible and showing sheps crew to be total cowards.
I dont think so.