1057 réponses à ce sujet

[EpyonX3]

Hawk227 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

from oil shadows was only an example to how they conmunicate and has nothing to do with anything.

Second you did (in a way) mention Exo Geni when I said that she says shepard is fighting the ones responsible for souring the songs of there mothers, You were saying that it was not sovereign/reapers(indoctrination) and then you did not say what it was and the only thing other then the reapers that it could be is Exo Geni.

Third if you run into an asari in ME2 then she states it more clearly that it was the reapers. Any time that the songs of our mothers comes up it is shepard asking about the war!...not the ones that captured her.

QFT

The oily shadows thing comes up when you ask the queen about the original Rachni War. She says they only heard songs of discordance, the color of oily shadows.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:35 for that line of questions.

In ME2 you meet an Asari on Illium who is working as an agent for the Rachni. She tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:15 for that line

The Rachni were indoctrinated by Reapers and made to start the war. The Queen discribes that experience as songs the color of oily shadows.

PS: Exogeni because of the Thorian? The queen was actually held by Binary Helix. In case thats what you were thinking.

"he tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help."

I don't think that's what she says. The quote is "we know you seek those who soured our mother's songs."

I agree that this sounds like Indoctrination, but Shepard isn't seeking reapers in ME2. He's seeking collectors, at which point (I'm guessing here) the link between them and the reapers weren't clear.

[balance5050]

Well, this is speculation from the wikia:


I believe this should be removed as the phrasing "A tone from space hushed one voice after another. It forced the singers to resonate with its own sour yellow note." may be indicative of some sort of indoctrination interference from the Reapers or Collectors it still falls into line with speculation and needs to be removed or thrown into trivia and not the bulk of the article. A proper phrasing of the section I feel, should be addressed as, "The rachni queen on Noveria alludes to a foreign body causing disruption among the rachni and forcing them to all sing "its own sour yellow note." Which may have been the reason the rachni were unable to be negotiated with."--Xaero Dumort 02:27, January 21, 2010 (UTC)


The tone from space was the Krogan wiping the Rachni out. A sour, yellow note probably means they were afraid. Sort of like the phrase "yellow bellied" in the old West. It's the "We only heard discordance. Songs the color of oily shadows." that probably actually alludes to indoctrination or some sort of corruption. Oily shadows could be the Reapers, an allegory for lies or both. Could even be an allusion to Plato's Cave. --Mallissin 02:12, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

[TheFinalDoctor]

Katherine wrote...

Katherine wrote...

 The reason I don't like the IT is because gameplay wise, it shows extremely poor design. I mentioned this in another thread, but challenges in games are either strategy based, or skill based. To "beat" the indoctrination at the end of the game, the player would need to be aware of how to use their strategy or skill to do so. There is no obvious indication that you are being indoctrinated in the game, so if IT is true, the player is unable to use strategy or skill to beat it, which leads to bad linear gaming. 

Now, people have mention that with Morinth it is capable to "lose" the game too, but Morinth is actually a good example of the player being aware of Shepard being controlled. When you are doing Samara's loyalty mission, Samara tells you that Morinth can influence you, and this happens you don't have enough paragon or renegade points. You as a player know what's going on, but your Shepard can't "break" Morinth's control until Samara shows up. This is good gameplay you can use strategy (by getting enough paragon or renegade points) to break Morinth's control. And if you don't break free from her control, you still see what happens afterwards with Samara showing up. 

Having there only be one "right" choice at the end of the game without proper set up for player strategy would simply be terrible level design. It's like those underground sections in the old Mario games where any of the three pipes could send you to another world... except unbeknownst to you two of the pipes automatically kill you, and only one of them works. :/

*bump*

No one wants to debate the merits of IT gameplay? 

This Choice had nothing to do with gameplay, so to speak. It dropped you yourself with no more information on the subject than Shepard, into an important choice. They effectivly made you make a real choice instead of choosing Paragon or Renegade cause you want to feel like a good guy or a badass. You based the choice off of your own beliefs and feelings. 

[EthanDirtch]

My biggest concern with the proposed Indoctrination Theory is motivation.

What exactly would be the Reapers' motivation for further manipulating Shepard? By all accounts they've won. Even supposing that Shepard was not hit by Harbinger, that he's alive and well near the Conduit...what would be the point?

The Reapers controlled the Citadel at that time, they controlled the Conduit. Shepard--if IT is true--failed in entering the Conduit at all. And we can assume that no one else entered the Conduit.

We've already established there was no conventional means of stopping the Reapers; even the combined fleets of the known galaxy do not have the firepower to fight them.

So, let's think this through:

-The Crucible was a weapon against the Reapers--a weapon kept secret from them
-It is realized via Vendetta that the Citadel is required to use the Crucible ("The Catalyst")
-The Illusive Man betrayed this secret to the Reapers
-In retaliation the Reapers--presumably because they could not find the Crucible itself--took control of, and moved, the Citadel to where they can defend it
-During the battle on Earth, when the Reapers realized people were making a beeline for the Conduit, they countered by sending their most powerful Reaper, Harbinger
-Harbinger presumably neutralizes the threat

So, if no one entered the Conduit to open the arms to the Citadel to allow the Crucible to make contact with the Catalyst and be used against the Reapers...then what is the point of completing Shepard's indoctrination?

He is, at that point, of no use to them. They've won. They control the majority of the galaxy, they have conquered Thessia, and it was only a matter of time before they took Palaven completely. They control the Citadel, which was one of the last bastion of galactic civilization. They control Earth. And, again, conventionally speaking they were not going to lose against the combined might of the galaxy.

So, again, that's the big hole I see in the Indoctrination Theory: why? In terms of story, of logic, it makes no sense. The Reapers had essentially won already by that point. The only threat to them was the Crucible. Just kill Shepard and get on with it. If anything, killing Shepard is probably MORE demoralizing than indoctrinating him. Kill Shepard on Earth, show that he has failed, destroy the bulk of the galaxy's remaining defenders. At the same time, destroy the Crucible which has now entered Sol. What hope would be left? All the resources the galaxy spent, gone; their hero, Shepard, dead; Hackett, their leader, would be next; Victus, the Primarch, dead; Wrex, leader of the Krogan, dead. Sure, there's a chance any of those people (aside from Shepard based on what I'm saying to counter IT) could survive, but they'd have nothing left. They could roam in a fleet like the Quarians, sure, but the Reapers are patient and will find them and destroy them, or otherwise let them quietly fade into extinction. They could find another weapon, but again, with the bulk of the resources spent on the Crucible and the counterattack on Earth, not to mention the Reapers control the vast majority of known remaining resources, how would they build it, or be in a position to use it? So, the Reapers won. Again: if they've won, why bother indoctrinating Shepard?


As a side note, I can only logically approve of the Indoctrination Theory if it gives BioWare that wiggle room to retcon 'The Catalyst' kid from existence As it is, I doubt that will happen.

[Hawk227]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

from oil shadows was only an example to how they conmunicate and has nothing to do with anything.

Second you did (in a way) mention Exo Geni when I said that she says shepard is fighting the ones responsible for souring the songs of there mothers, You were saying that it was not sovereign/reapers(indoctrination) and then you did not say what it was and the only thing other then the reapers that it could be is Exo Geni.

Third if you run into an asari in ME2 then she states it more clearly that it was the reapers. Any time that the songs of our mothers comes up it is shepard asking about the war!...not the ones that captured her.

QFT

The oily shadows thing comes up when you ask the queen about the original Rachni War. She says they only heard songs of discordance, the color of oily shadows.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:35 for that line of questions.

In ME2 you meet an Asari on Illium who is working as an agent for the Rachni. She tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:15 for that line

The Rachni were indoctrinated by Reapers and made to start the war. The Queen discribes that experience as songs the color of oily shadows.

PS: Exogeni because of the Thorian? The queen was actually held by Binary Helix. In case thats what you were thinking.

"he tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help."

I don't think that's what she says. The quote is "we know you seek those who soured our mother's songs."

I agree that this sounds like Indoctrination, but Shepard isn't seeking reapers in ME2. He's seeking collectors, at which point (I'm guessing here) the link between them and the reapers weren't clear.

Sadly, the poster of that video didn't choose the dialog option to ask if she meant the reapers.

www.youtube.com/watch 3:15 again for that dialog option

The answer is a little wishy-washy but its still fairly clear. Her people were forced into war against their will. Combined with ME1 dialog, (sour yellow not, Songs the color of Oily Shadows) Indoctrination is pretty obvious.

The rest of your post is kind of silly. Shepard is fighting the Collectors, BECAUSE they are tools of the Reapers.  You learn on Horizon (well before Illium) the collectors are definitly working for Reapers (They have Husks), You learn on the Collector Ship that the Reapers enslaved the Collectors and altered their DNA to make them tools. The final boss fight is a Proto-Reaper. Who else would the Queen have meant? Shepards goals aren't exactly ambigous.

[EpyonX3]

Hawk227 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

from oil shadows was only an example to how they conmunicate and has nothing to do with anything.

Second you did (in a way) mention Exo Geni when I said that she says shepard is fighting the ones responsible for souring the songs of there mothers, You were saying that it was not sovereign/reapers(indoctrination) and then you did not say what it was and the only thing other then the reapers that it could be is Exo Geni.

Third if you run into an asari in ME2 then she states it more clearly that it was the reapers. Any time that the songs of our mothers comes up it is shepard asking about the war!...not the ones that captured her.

QFT

The oily shadows thing comes up when you ask the queen about the original Rachni War. She says they only heard songs of discordance, the color of oily shadows.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:35 for that line of questions.

In ME2 you meet an Asari on Illium who is working as an agent for the Rachni. She tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:15 for that line

The Rachni were indoctrinated by Reapers and made to start the war. The Queen discribes that experience as songs the color of oily shadows.

PS: Exogeni because of the Thorian? The queen was actually held by Binary Helix. In case thats what you were thinking.

"he tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help."

I don't think that's what she says. The quote is "we know you seek those who soured our mother's songs."

I agree that this sounds like Indoctrination, but Shepard isn't seeking reapers in ME2. He's seeking collectors, at which point (I'm guessing here) the link between them and the reapers weren't clear.

Sadly, the poster of that video didn't choose the dialog option to ask if she meant the reapers.

www.youtube.com/watch 3:15 again for that dialog option

The answer is a little wishy-washy but its still fairly clear. Her people were forced into war against their will. Combined with ME1 dialog, (sour yellow not, Songs the color of Oily Shadows) Indoctrination is pretty obvious.

The rest of your post is kind of silly. Shepard is fighting the Collectors, BECAUSE they are tools of the Reapers.  You learn on Horizon (well before Illium) the collectors are definitly working for Reapers (They have Husks), You learn on the Collector Ship that the Reapers enslaved the Collectors and altered their DNA to make them tools. The final boss fight is a Proto-Reaper. Who else would the Queen have meant? Shepards goals aren't exactly ambigous.

Ok that makes more sense now. A little bit of context goes a long way huh?

You're right it is still a bit cryptic whether it was the reapers or not. But it still could have been the collectors. The collectors could have abducted some rachni, discovered how they worked and then as a test, got them to go to war. And yes, using some  Hanar Logic, if the collectors did it and the collectors serve the reapers then the reapers did it.

My second post was a guess and I made sure you knew it was. It's ok though, it's irrelevant now that the message is clearer.

[Hawk227]

Katherine wrote...

 The reason I don't like the IT is because gameplay wise, it shows extremely poor design. I mentioned this in another thread, but challenges in games are either strategy based, or skill based. To "beat" the indoctrination at the end of the game, the player would need to be aware of how to use their strategy or skill to do so. There is no obvious indication that you are being indoctrinated in the game, so if IT is true, the player is unable to use strategy or skill to beat it, which leads to bad linear gaming. 

Now, people have mention that with Morinth it is capable to "lose" the game too, but Morinth is actually a good example of the player being aware of Shepard being controlled. When you are doing Samara's loyalty mission, Samara tells you that Morinth can influence you, and this happens you don't have enough paragon or renegade points. You as a player know what's going on, but your Shepard can't "break" Morinth's control until Samara shows up. This is good gameplay you can use strategy (by getting enough paragon or renegade points) to break Morinth's control. And if you don't break free from her control, you still see what happens afterwards with Samara showing up. 

Having there only be one "right" choice at the end of the game without proper set up for player strategy would simply be terrible level design. It's like those underground sections in the old Mario games where any of the three pipes could send you to another world... except unbeknownst to you two of the pipes automatically kill you, and only one of them works. :/

I see what you're saying, but I disagree. The final "choice" is really a TEST. A test to see if you were paying attention. It may be an unfair test, because they didn't explicitly tell you it was a test, but we're talking about the reapers, so what'd you expect?

From a Gameplay perspective, they give you all you really need to figure it out. The entire art design of that last sequence is dreamy, the conversation with Anderson before you meet the control panel is physically impossible, this should make you suspicious. There's a mission in the geth consensus that tells you that in a virtual reality your mind fills in the blanks with familiar stuff (like the capacitors from the shadow broker ship, showing up on the citadel, several others), and it shows that the Quarians attacked the Geth, not that the Geth rebelled against their Creators. Plus all the interactions with EDI as she proves her allegiance. Eventually you meet the catalyst who tells you the created always rebel against their creators. But huge chunks of the game throw doubt on that statement. He then tells you that your way sucks and will be disastrous, but The Illusive Man's way (whom the catalyst admitted is indoctrinated), or Saren's way (which you know from ME1 was indoctrinated) are both fine solutions. At this point if you were paying attention (I admit I wasn't and picked control, oops) you should be saying "the catalyst's thesis was disproven in game, and he wants me to follow one of my two main enemies, wtf?"

From there its simple, you don't trust the Catalyst and you do what you came to do, destroy them.

From a development stand point you have to do it this way. Indoctrination so insidious, no other mechanic really works. Furthermore, YOU are Shepard. His/her morals are YOUR morals. His/her choices are YOUR choices. Shepard isn't the only one they have to indoctrinate, they have to indoctrinate YOU. Thats why the ambiguity is important.

[CerealWar]

CaliGuy033 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...

Why does having a high EMS score give you a third option that apparently, according to IT, is just another "wrong" choice where you've submitted to indoctrination (just like the Control option)?

More importantly, why is a third choice even necessary?

Higher EMS = bigger army to kill reaper.

The higher the EMS, the more the reapers need to indoctrinate shepard to have a chance at survival. You need the HIGHEST EMS for the Shep alive scene.

This doesn't answer my question.  How does needing to indoctrinate him "more" equate to giving him a third choice?  It doesn't make one bit of sense.

Say I want you to take the blue pill, but the "correct" choice (which will harm me) is the red pill.  And I realize that you are very very powerful and I am in a whole mess of trouble if you take the red pill.  The way I trick you isn't to introduce a third option which is actually the same as the blue pill.  The way to trick you is to make the blue pill seem even more appealing--"No, you REALLY need to pick this one. Here's why."

The third option (synthesis) is indoctrination, the BEST option is waking up;)

But you're still not answering my question.  Synthesis is indoctrination.  Okay, I got you.  Then what is Control?  How is it different for the Reapers purposes?  And if it's not different, what is the point of having it?  Why do the Reapers suddenly give you an additional choice that indoctrinates you, instead of just buffering the choice you already have (Control) to make it seem even sweeter?

Control and Synthesis could be differing degrees of indoctrination. Control would make you into a useful idiot, like all of those mercenaries that stuck around to fight Shepard in Arrival, even after colliding with the relay was ineviatable.. Synthesis would be  a more subtle indoctrination like Saren's.

A neat idea would be to have control causing Shep to wake up and fight your crewmates whose models were swapped. Someone said this in a thread way back. Liara would be a banshee, Garrus a marauder. Shepard would think they'd all been killed and converted while he was unconcious. EDI wouldn't have  a model swap. She could actually be the one to inform Shepard that he is killing squad.

Synthesis would lead to Shepard waking up proceeding to the Conduit, only to betray the team once they're on the Citadel. Or make it impossible for Shepard to survive the ending.

A low EMS destroy option would lead to you finishing the game as Anderson

[Hawk227]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

from oil shadows was only an example to how they conmunicate and has nothing to do with anything.

Second you did (in a way) mention Exo Geni when I said that she says shepard is fighting the ones responsible for souring the songs of there mothers, You were saying that it was not sovereign/reapers(indoctrination) and then you did not say what it was and the only thing other then the reapers that it could be is Exo Geni.

Third if you run into an asari in ME2 then she states it more clearly that it was the reapers. Any time that the songs of our mothers comes up it is shepard asking about the war!...not the ones that captured her.

QFT

The oily shadows thing comes up when you ask the queen about the original Rachni War. She says they only heard songs of discordance, the color of oily shadows.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:35 for that line of questions.

In ME2 you meet an Asari on Illium who is working as an agent for the Rachni. She tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:15 for that line

The Rachni were indoctrinated by Reapers and made to start the war. The Queen discribes that experience as songs the color of oily shadows.

PS: Exogeni because of the Thorian? The queen was actually held by Binary Helix. In case thats what you were thinking.

"he tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help."

I don't think that's what she says. The quote is "we know you seek those who soured our mother's songs."

I agree that this sounds like Indoctrination, but Shepard isn't seeking reapers in ME2. He's seeking collectors, at which point (I'm guessing here) the link between them and the reapers weren't clear.

Sadly, the poster of that video didn't choose the dialog option to ask if she meant the reapers.

www.youtube.com/watch 3:15 again for that dialog option

The answer is a little wishy-washy but its still fairly clear. Her people were forced into war against their will. Combined with ME1 dialog, (sour yellow not, Songs the color of Oily Shadows) Indoctrination is pretty obvious.

The rest of your post is kind of silly. Shepard is fighting the Collectors, BECAUSE they are tools of the Reapers.  You learn on Horizon (well before Illium) the collectors are definitly working for Reapers (They have Husks), You learn on the Collector Ship that the Reapers enslaved the Collectors and altered their DNA to make them tools. The final boss fight is a Proto-Reaper. Who else would the Queen have meant? Shepards goals aren't exactly ambigous.

Ok that makes more sense now. A little bit of context goes a long way huh?

You're right it is still a bit cryptic whether it was the reapers or not. But it still could have been the collectors. The collectors could have abducted some rachni, discovered how they worked and then as a test, got them to go to war. And yes, using some  Hanar Logic, if the collectors did it and the collectors serve the reapers then the reapers did it.

My second post was a guess and I made sure you knew it was. It's ok though, it's irrelevant now that the message is clearer.

Sorry, didn't mean to be rude. My brain shut off after "Shepard isn't seeking the reapers". And I went directly into counter point. My apologies.

[balance5050]

I like this thread.

[CerealWar]

OdanUrr wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Ok, see if you can refute this:

In both the synthesis and control endings, Shepard gets TIM's eyey, while s/he keeps his/her own eyes in destroy. And don't come with "it's Shepard's cybernetic implants", because that was already refuted in Mass Effect: evolution, where Jack Harper/TIM gets the same eyes after coming in contact with a reaper artifact.

Yeah... I don't read the books, or the comics, so that doesn't really mean much to me. Or are we accepting Deception as canon too?

Well Deception is being "fixed" because of its many lore inconsistencies. Do you think they would have made Anderson state twice that he was from London if that fact hadn't been mentioned in the books? The books expand on the game's lore. To ignore the facts presented in the books would be foolhardy since they're integrated with the games.

[EpyonX3]

Hawk227 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

from oil shadows was only an example to how they conmunicate and has nothing to do with anything.

Second you did (in a way) mention Exo Geni when I said that she says shepard is fighting the ones responsible for souring the songs of there mothers, You were saying that it was not sovereign/reapers(indoctrination) and then you did not say what it was and the only thing other then the reapers that it could be is Exo Geni.

Third if you run into an asari in ME2 then she states it more clearly that it was the reapers. Any time that the songs of our mothers comes up it is shepard asking about the war!...not the ones that captured her.

QFT

The oily shadows thing comes up when you ask the queen about the original Rachni War. She says they only heard songs of discordance, the color of oily shadows.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:35 for that line of questions.

In ME2 you meet an Asari on Illium who is working as an agent for the Rachni. She tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help.

www.youtube.com/watch Start at 3:15 for that line

The Rachni were indoctrinated by Reapers and made to start the war. The Queen discribes that experience as songs the color of oily shadows.

PS: Exogeni because of the Thorian? The queen was actually held by Binary Helix. In case thats what you were thinking.

"he tells you that the Queen believes you(shepard) are fighting the ones responsible for the Rachni war, and pledges her help."

I don't think that's what she says. The quote is "we know you seek those who soured our mother's songs."

I agree that this sounds like Indoctrination, but Shepard isn't seeking reapers in ME2. He's seeking collectors, at which point (I'm guessing here) the link between them and the reapers weren't clear.

Sadly, the poster of that video didn't choose the dialog option to ask if she meant the reapers.

www.youtube.com/watch 3:15 again for that dialog option

The answer is a little wishy-washy but its still fairly clear. Her people were forced into war against their will. Combined with ME1 dialog, (sour yellow not, Songs the color of Oily Shadows) Indoctrination is pretty obvious.

The rest of your post is kind of silly. Shepard is fighting the Collectors, BECAUSE they are tools of the Reapers.  You learn on Horizon (well before Illium) the collectors are definitly working for Reapers (They have Husks), You learn on the Collector Ship that the Reapers enslaved the Collectors and altered their DNA to make them tools. The final boss fight is a Proto-Reaper. Who else would the Queen have meant? Shepards goals aren't exactly ambigous.

Ok that makes more sense now. A little bit of context goes a long way huh?

You're right it is still a bit cryptic whether it was the reapers or not. But it still could have been the collectors. The collectors could have abducted some rachni, discovered how they worked and then as a test, got them to go to war. And yes, using some  Hanar Logic, if the collectors did it and the collectors serve the reapers then the reapers did it.

My second post was a guess and I made sure you knew it was. It's ok though, it's irrelevant now that the message is clearer.

Sorry, didn't mean to be rude. My brain shut off after "Shepard isn't seeking the reapers". And I went directly into counter point. My apologies.

No need for apologies. It's a tense subject. At least you were polite about it.

[EpyonX3]

balance5050 wrote...

I like this thread.

Me too! No name calling yet.

Except you called me a troll! But I'll let it slide...

[balance5050]

EpyonX3 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I like this thread.

Me too! No name calling yet.

Except you called me a troll! But I'll let it slide...

Sorry, I just thought it was fairly obvious that the crucible explodes is all.

[SubAstris]

ZackG312 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Katherine wrote...

Katherine wrote...

 The reason I don't like the IT is because gameplay wise, it shows extremely poor design. I mentioned this in another thread, but challenges in games are either strategy based, or skill based. To "beat" the indoctrination at the end of the game, the player would need to be aware of how to use their strategy or skill to do so. There is no obvious indication that you are being indoctrinated in the game, so if IT is true, the player is unable to use strategy or skill to beat it, which leads to bad linear gaming. 

Now, people have mention that with Morinth it is capable to "lose" the game too, but Morinth is actually a good example of the player being aware of Shepard being controlled. When you are doing Samara's loyalty mission, Samara tells you that Morinth can influence you, and this happens you don't have enough paragon or renegade points. You as a player know what's going on, but your Shepard can't "break" Morinth's control until Samara shows up. This is good gameplay you can use strategy (by getting enough paragon or renegade points) to break Morinth's control. And if you don't break free from her control, you still see what happens afterwards with Samara showing up. 

Having there only be one "right" choice at the end of the game without proper set up for player strategy would simply be terrible level design. It's like those underground sections in the old Mario games where any of the three pipes could send you to another world... except unbeknownst to you two of the pipes automatically kill you, and only one of them works. :/

*bump*

No one wants to debate the merits of IT gameplay? 

Unless the game design was to not include dramatic irony. Us knowing that the attempts to indoctrinate Shepard were in full swing breaks the immersion illusion.  We ARE Shepard.  We can't BE Shepard if our awareness of events transcends his or her own.

That just shows that indoctrination doesn't work as a game mechanic. The reader needs to know what is going on at the end, where the plot is meant to be resolved. Not making it obvious makes it bad storytelling, simple as that

You are Shepard in Mass Effect he doesnt know he is being indoctrinated neither should you, just like we didnt things until Shepard found out.

If you don't know by the end that you have been indoctrinated, then it doesn't work as a storytelling device, simple. BW needed to make indoc. completely clear, even if it that detracted from the surprise, because predictable stories are usually better than ones which are tangled messes

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

If you don't know by the end that you have been indoctrinated, then it doesn't work as a storytelling device, simple. BW needed to make indoc. completely clear, even if it that detracted from the surprise, because predictable stories are usually better than ones which are tangled messes

Uhm it's called a twist ending. Just without the ending part.

[EpyonX3]

balance5050 wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I like this thread.

Me too! No name calling yet.

Except you called me a troll! But I'll let it slide...

Sorry, I just thought it was fairly obvious that the crucible explodes is all.

yeah we've gone through that on more than one occassion lol.

[SubAstris]

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

If you don't know by the end that you have been indoctrinated, then it doesn't work as a storytelling device, simple. BW needed to make indoc. completely clear, even if it that detracted from the surprise, because predictable stories are usually better than ones which are tangled messes

Uhm it's called a twist ending. Just without the ending part.

...cos BW love to confuse people by not giving them the proper ending which reveals all. A story with a twist without a twist...

[OdanUrr]

Hawk227 wrote...

The final "choice" is really a TEST. A test to see if you were paying attention.

[Zweipersona]

I actually considered Shepard getting indoctrinated as I played through the game. The problem is, there's no real solid hints of it. What does indoctrination look like? It was always in the back of my mind but nothing jumped out and made that a prominent thought in my head. So when faced with The Catalyst, I took it at exact face value. There was no indication at all that you are being deceived. If you played the game with an open mind, the only time you think 'Uh oh, indoctrination' is when facing the Illusive man, and you're being told you can't move, and there's these odd little shadow things on your screen.

The problem with The Catalyst's proposition is that it only needs to be right once to prove disastrous for the entire universe. I could similar point to the fact that the Catalyst is actually correct in its theory. The geth help the quarians rebuild, doing in days what would take weeks or months for the quarians to do. And the geth have not yet fully evolved either. There is no way human evolution could keep up with a collective conscious that can labor without fatigue, or rest. Yes, the geth are currently peaceful. But if they decide to wage war against their creators, they would undoubtedly win, especially if they are given a chance to evolve further.

Where do you start taking what you're given in the ending as truth for the Indoctrination theory? Does 'control' really offer you control of the Reapers? That you would be some type of godlike creature, no longer existing physically, instead ruling over the nations of people that are symbolized in monstrous starships? Or do you simply become 'indoctrinated'? What happens after that? When did you get indoctrinated? Are you on the Citadel, not activating the Crucible? Are you aboard the Normandy ready to kill your crew? Where's the truth, and where's the lie?

This continues with the 'destroy' idea too. Assume what the Catalyst tells you is correct. Why would the Reapers give you a chance to destroy them? Wouldn't you, after breaking the 'indoctrination', be shown, the REAL console, to activate the Crucible? This would make a lot more sense if Bioware had intended to go this route. Another problem with 'destroy' is... if it IS genuine, why would the starchild allow this? It flippantly mentions that regardless of the cycle, sentient beings create synthetics. If you destroy the Reapers, geth, and other engineered sentient humanoids... what stops the existing sentients from creating new synthetics?

I like the theory, but only because it makes MORE sense than the garbled mess that Bioware left us with. But don't think for a second it was what Bioware intended. If it IS the route Bioware goes, the community should be credited, and not the writers. And even so, compared to Mass Effect 1 and 2, being indoctrinated still makes for a weak ending if it is left exactly as it is now, with more dialogue. I don't see how it could answer all the questions that would remain.

[ShepardTheHopeful]

I can think of multiple logical counters to the indoctrination theory. Two of which are floating somewhere in this thread a few pages back including how Shepard could've survived.

But mainly i'll discuss star child and the idea of the dreams being Shepard's descent into indoctrination.

I do not see this as the case. The child is real. I state this for a few reasons. One the child is at a corner of the vent he could have easily turned and when Shepard turned his head he had more than enough time to get away.

Anderson never asks Shepard who exactly he's talking to which indicates Anderson did not notice the child nor that Shepard was talking at all. It's understandable he's in a building that could come down any second trying to hack open a door while giant robot aliens slaughter millions of his men and friends/family. It's safe to say he was focused on other things rather than what Shepard was saying.

Shepard's dreams represent the child because the child is the first person he couldn't actually save that he had a chance to. In most situations you make a choice yes. You chose to kill someone or save them and you chose to kill one to save another (example: Killing the counsel to hold your forces back for sovereign.) This child was the first that Shepard had a chance to save didn't and then watched his mistake unfold. (child go boom) this is the first time Shepard fails to save someone (you know assuming you didn't kill everyone in ME2). And he dreams constantly about the child as the bodies pile up the shadows represent the people that he couldn't save millions on Palavan, Thessia, Earth, etc.

Another reason I feel the child is real is that the shuttle didn't help him up granted. But there was no other civilian around besides the child and they made sure to not take off until that kid was on the ship. Why wait if the child wasn't real? Why not just take off?

I understood Casey's and Mac's vision. I just think it's god awful! But I don't believe that the Indoctrination theory is as sound as everyone says. This is just one example that I explain logically. I'd be more than happy to explain more should any other questions that arise towards me.

To be honest it's not seriously space magic...but it's still a horrible ending for other reasons. But all of this is my opinion of course.

The starchild itself is just the old fashion sci-fi cliche of "I picked a form most suitible for you"

Modifié par ShepardTheHopeful, 13 avril 2012 - 11:27 .

[balance5050]

OdanUrr wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

The final "choice" is really a TEST. A test to see if you were paying attention.

[EpyonX3]

balance5050 wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

The final "choice" is really a TEST. A test to see if you were paying attention.

[balance5050]

ShepardTheHopeful wrote...

I can think of multiple logical counters to the indoctrination theory. Two of which are floating somewhere in this thread a few pages back including how Shepard could've survived.

But mainly i'll discuss star child and the idea of the dreams being Shepard's descent into indoctrination.

I do not see this as the case. The child is real. I state this for a few reasons. One the child is at a corner of the vent he could have easily turned and when Shepard turned his head he had more than enough time to get away.

Anderson never asks Shepard who exactly he's talking to which indicates Anderson did not notice the child nor that Shepard was talking at all. It's understandable he's in a building that could come down any second trying to hack open a door while giant robot aliens slaughter millions of his men and friends/family. It's safe to say he was focused on other things rather than what Shepard was saying.

Shepard's dreams represent the child because the child is the first person he couldn't actually save that he had a chance to. In most situations you make a choice yes. You chose to kill someone or save them and you chose to kill one to save another (example: Killing the counsel to hold your forces back for sovereign.) This child was the first that Shepard had a chance to save didn't and then watched his mistake unfold. (child go boom) this is the first time Shepard fails to save someone (you know assuming you didn't kill everyone in ME2). And he dreams constantly about the child as the bodies pile up the shadows represent the people that he couldn't save millions on Palavan, Thessia, Earth, etc.

Another reason I feel the child is real is that the shuttle didn't help him up granted. But there was no other civilian around besides the child and they made sure to not take off until that kid was on the ship. Why wait if the child wasn't real? Why not just take off?

I understood Casey's and Mac's vision. I just think it's god awful! But I don't believe that the Indoctrination theory is as sound as everyone says. This is just one example that I explain logically. I'd be more than happy to explain more should any other questions that arise towards me.

To be honest it's not seriously space magic...but it's still a horrible ending for other reasons. But all of this is my opinion of course.

The starchild itself is just the old fashion sci-fi cliche of "I picked a form most suitible for you"

Indeed, the child could have been real in the first scene, doesn't disprove I.T.

"This child was the first that Shepard had a chance to save didn't "

False, many could have died because of your actions, at least Kaiden or Ashley..

Modifié par balance5050, 13 avril 2012 - 11:33 .

[OdanUrr]

CerealWar wrote...

Well Deception is being "fixed" because of its many lore inconsistencies. Do you think they would have made Anderson state twice that he was from London if that fact hadn't been mentioned in the books? The books expand on the game's lore. To ignore the facts presented in the books would be foolhardy since they're integrated with the games.

I'm not saying we should outright dismiss the books/comics but that the game should be able to stand on its own. If I need to find the answers to the story of a game outside of the game, then the game has failed to deliver said story. That story can be delivered through codex entries, cutscenes, dialogues, choices, gameplay mechanics, etc., but it must be delivered in its entirety.