1057 réponses à ce sujet

[SubAstris]

tute wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

tute wrote...

Slightly off topic, but it might also had something to do with indoctrination attempts on shepard. Shepard's implants are cerberus tech. Cerberus implants were based on grayson's implants. The last terminal in the cerberus base talks about the cerberus implants and how the troopers hear whispers and how grayson eventually succumbed to indoctrination. Coincidence? Anyone clarify on this please?

I presume different implants were used for regular soldiers and Shephard because they have different capabilites (as well as values).

But they are still based on reaper tech, the purposes are different but the fact that it's reaper tech makes for a possible indoctrination way, and would also explain the hole on how shepard gets indoctrinated if the player didnt do arrival (no object rho contact), or we could say

When you say cerberus tech, you mean cerberus implants, don't you?

For your last point, wouldn't that imply that those who played Arrival are more indoctrinated, or rather further down the path to being indoctrination, than those who didn't? If so, why don't they have a different story, see things differently etc?

[Iconoclaste]

balance5050 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Well im kinda confused becasuse I was never talking about Earth. I was talking about the Citadel going up in flames after it fires its "Lazor" into the Charon Relay. 

That is the 2nd explosion, happening in some reasonable delay after the 1st "spherical wave", that "pushed stuff without burning it" (hint in there, see?). To still be in the place Shepard was when firing at the red tube when the 2nd explosion happen would require him to resist the eccentric push of the 1st wave.

Tell me again where Shep would be "pushed" to please.

Any eccentric location around point zero.

How far would he have been "pushed"?

Until any "unmoveable" obstacle is encountered. The soldiers on Earth just ducked behind rubble to stay in place. The Reapers in space were clearly "pushed" by the "destroy wave", and they did not explode.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 14 avril 2012 - 07:22 .

[Tom Lehrer]

MothrascoolerthenGodzilla wrote...

astreqwerty wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

astreqwerty wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

astreqwerty wrote...

I dunno..If IT is true then i will bow down to bioware and mindlessly buy all their future games..however to me this seems like a sample of very bad writing and proof that bioware are not who they used to be

You were supposed to provide evidence against I.T. not give your very generic opinion. Read the OP please.

Your are supposed to read more than three posts per page if you want to actually contribute in this thread
Read the last page please.

Oh, did you post some? Must have missed it. Humble apologies.

Accepted.
Another hole: The prothean VI doesnt recognize reaper indoc
around shepard.IT insists that indoc has begun since shep is having
those dreams.If he really was indocrinated shouldn't the vi be able to
recognize the signs?

Accepted.

However, the Protheans were defeated by indoctrinated agents working for the Reapers.  How infallible could there screening techniques have been?

The indoctrinated agents told the Reapers what the Protheans were planning they did not infiltrate and sabotage. Basicly the Reapers used info they got from PoWs to put a stop to the Protheans activities.

[Iconoclaste]

Back later. I need to go out play in the sun with little babbling beings. If not, they will endoctrinate me into making ice cream cones forever.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 14 avril 2012 - 07:27 .

[balance5050]

Tom Lehrer wrote...

MothrascoolerthenGodzilla wrote...

astreqwerty wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

astreqwerty wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

astreqwerty wrote...

I dunno..If IT is true then i will bow down to bioware and mindlessly buy all their future games..however to me this seems like a sample of very bad writing and proof that bioware are not who they used to be

You were supposed to provide evidence against I.T. not give your very generic opinion. Read the OP please.

Your are supposed to read more than three posts per page if you want to actually contribute in this thread
Read the last page please.

Oh, did you post some? Must have missed it. Humble apologies.

Accepted.
Another hole: The prothean VI doesnt recognize reaper indoc
around shepard.IT insists that indoc has begun since shep is having
those dreams.If he really was indocrinated shouldn't the vi be able to
recognize the signs?

Accepted.

However, the Protheans were defeated by indoctrinated agents working for the Reapers.  How infallible could there screening techniques have been?

The indoctrinated agents told the Reapers what the Protheans were planning they did not infiltrate and sabotage. Basicly the Reapers used info they got from PoWs to put a stop to the Protheans activities.

They were referred to as "sleeper" agents, which implies they got the top secret crucible info by infiltration. "sleeper also implies that they went unnoticed. Them wanting to "control" the reapers implies that it was a group similar to Cerberus.

[Rohirrim]

TheTrueObelus wrote...

Main issue with IT...you have less choice than the crappy ending that Bioware actually wrote.

Lets break down the ending choices.

With "control" or "synthesis" you are indoctrinated. You dont wake up. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick "destroy" and you escape indoctrination but you die (because of low war assets). Nothing is resolved. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick destroy and escape being indoctrinated and wake up (because you have enough war assets). But that means you didn't actually witness the end of the game...you still have to defeat the Reapers. So this would also mean they gave us a totally unfinished game. This is beyond lame.

So basically the only way to win and the only choices that mattered were the few that gave you the "perfect" destroy ending. Having only one choice basically means you have no choice.

You do have choice! In fact, it could be the most important one throughout Mass Effect. Think about it as the final battle of the game. It's a novel approach but not that much different from being shot down by a human reaper when you think about it. If you picked green or blue, you just lost the game.
Of course, there is no GAME OVER screen which, at first glance, makes it somewhat unsatisfying. However, this is the ending to YOUR story of Commander Shepard. And in your mind, you just defeated the reapers and dream about a happy ending.
The problem I see with this myself is that the actual ending for those who won the final battle is still missing. The only people still waiting for their ending are those that chose red. Either you wanted to stay on your path of defeating the reapers, didn't trust Starchild or even saw through the indoctrination while you were playing - but your Shepard wakes up after being struck by Harbinger's beam, and you want to continue. This, in my mind, is the real travesty of Mass Effect 3's ending - it is not there.

[SubAstris]

Rohirrim wrote...

TheTrueObelus wrote...

Main issue with IT...you have less choice than the crappy ending that Bioware actually wrote.

Lets break down the ending choices.

With "control" or "synthesis" you are indoctrinated. You dont wake up. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick "destroy" and you escape indoctrination but you die (because of low war assets). Nothing is resolved. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick destroy and escape being indoctrinated and wake up (because you have enough war assets). But that means you didn't actually witness the end of the game...you still have to defeat the Reapers. So this would also mean they gave us a totally unfinished game. This is beyond lame.

So basically the only way to win and the only choices that mattered were the few that gave you the "perfect" destroy ending. Having only one choice basically means you have no choice.

You do have choice! In fact, it could be the most important one throughout Mass Effect. Think about it as the final battle of the game. It's a novel approach but not that much different from being shot down by a human reaper when you think about it. If you picked green or blue, you just lost the game.
Of course, there is no GAME OVER screen which, at first glance, makes it somewhat unsatisfying. However, this is the ending to YOUR story of Commander Shepard. And in your mind, you just defeated the reapers and dream about a happy ending.
The problem I see with this myself is that the actual ending for those who won the final battle is still missing. The only people still waiting for their ending are those that chose red. Either you wanted to stay on your path of defeating the reapers, didn't trust Starchild or even saw through the indoctrination while you were playing - but your Shepard wakes up after being struck by Harbinger's beam, and you want to continue. This, in my mind, is the real travesty of Mass Effect 3's ending - it is not there.

So this renders your decisions completely meaningless throughout the game, failing to do one of the main things that happens in ME, player choice. Some one could have done everything right, but because they got one thing supposedly wrong, they failed. 100 hours put is effectively wasted. Whilst someone who has done much less, made bad decision, can WIN? Games generally work on the principle of the more you put in, the more you get out of, but according to ME, this doesn't happen, which is really odd (only if you subscribe to IT). It completely ruins incentive to play and makes for an unappealing game. EA want happy customers, not people annoyed with the game, so why would they do this?

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

Rohirrim wrote...

TheTrueObelus wrote...

Main issue with IT...you have less choice than the crappy ending that Bioware actually wrote.

Lets break down the ending choices.

With "control" or "synthesis" you are indoctrinated. You dont wake up. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick "destroy" and you escape indoctrination but you die (because of low war assets). Nothing is resolved. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick destroy and escape being indoctrinated and wake up (because you have enough war assets). But that means you didn't actually witness the end of the game...you still have to defeat the Reapers. So this would also mean they gave us a totally unfinished game. This is beyond lame.

So basically the only way to win and the only choices that mattered were the few that gave you the "perfect" destroy ending. Having only one choice basically means you have no choice.

You do have choice! In fact, it could be the most important one throughout Mass Effect. Think about it as the final battle of the game. It's a novel approach but not that much different from being shot down by a human reaper when you think about it. If you picked green or blue, you just lost the game.
Of course, there is no GAME OVER screen which, at first glance, makes it somewhat unsatisfying. However, this is the ending to YOUR story of Commander Shepard. And in your mind, you just defeated the reapers and dream about a happy ending.
The problem I see with this myself is that the actual ending for those who won the final battle is still missing. The only people still waiting for their ending are those that chose red. Either you wanted to stay on your path of defeating the reapers, didn't trust Starchild or even saw through the indoctrination while you were playing - but your Shepard wakes up after being struck by Harbinger's beam, and you want to continue. This, in my mind, is the real travesty of Mass Effect 3's ending - it is not there.

So this renders your decisions completely meaningless throughout the game, failing to do one of the main things that happens in ME, player choice. Some one could have done everything right, but because they got one thing supposedly wrong, they failed. 100 hours put is effectively wasted. Whilst someone who has done much less, made bad decision, can WIN? Games generally work on the principle of the more you put in, the more you get out of, but according to ME, this doesn't happen, which is really odd (only if you subscribe to IT). It completely ruins incentive to play and makes for an unappealing game. EA want happy customers, not people annoyed with the game, so why would they do this?

Uhm, it's like that with or with out IT at this moment in time. Not sure what you're getting at.

[rachellouise]

Can't see if anyone replied, lost my post, anyway,

so if the dreams are 'constructed' by the reapers, whether you're awake or not, basically they're controlling what you see/perceive etc. through suggestion.

But if they're able to control you like that, then it would mean you are already indoctrinated, and there would be no 'resisting' , nor 'breaking free'

[SubAstris]

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Rohirrim wrote...

TheTrueObelus wrote...

Main issue with IT...you have less choice than the crappy ending that Bioware actually wrote.

Lets break down the ending choices.

With "control" or "synthesis" you are indoctrinated. You dont wake up. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick "destroy" and you escape indoctrination but you die (because of low war assets). Nothing is resolved. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick destroy and escape being indoctrinated and wake up (because you have enough war assets). But that means you didn't actually witness the end of the game...you still have to defeat the Reapers. So this would also mean they gave us a totally unfinished game. This is beyond lame.

So basically the only way to win and the only choices that mattered were the few that gave you the "perfect" destroy ending. Having only one choice basically means you have no choice.

You do have choice! In fact, it could be the most important one throughout Mass Effect. Think about it as the final battle of the game. It's a novel approach but not that much different from being shot down by a human reaper when you think about it. If you picked green or blue, you just lost the game.
Of course, there is no GAME OVER screen which, at first glance, makes it somewhat unsatisfying. However, this is the ending to YOUR story of Commander Shepard. And in your mind, you just defeated the reapers and dream about a happy ending.
The problem I see with this myself is that the actual ending for those who won the final battle is still missing. The only people still waiting for their ending are those that chose red. Either you wanted to stay on your path of defeating the reapers, didn't trust Starchild or even saw through the indoctrination while you were playing - but your Shepard wakes up after being struck by Harbinger's beam, and you want to continue. This, in my mind, is the real travesty of Mass Effect 3's ending - it is not there.

So this renders your decisions completely meaningless throughout the game, failing to do one of the main things that happens in ME, player choice. Some one could have done everything right, but because they got one thing supposedly wrong, they failed. 100 hours put is effectively wasted. Whilst someone who has done much less, made bad decision, can WIN? Games generally work on the principle of the more you put in, the more you get out of, but according to ME, this doesn't happen, which is really odd (only if you subscribe to IT). It completely ruins incentive to play and makes for an unappealing game. EA want happy customers, not people annoyed with the game, so why would they do this?

Uhm, it's like that with or with out IT at this moment in time. Not sure what you're getting at.

So IT is not as good as it cracked up to be...

[TheCrazyHobo]

Iconoclaste wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Well im kinda confused becasuse I was never talking about Earth. I was talking about the Citadel going up in flames after it fires its "Lazor" into the Charon Relay. 

That is the 2nd explosion, happening in some reasonable delay after the 1st "spherical wave", that "pushed stuff without burning it" (hint in there, see?). To still be in the place Shepard was when firing at the red tube when the 2nd explosion happen would require him to resist the eccentric push of the 1st wave.

Tell me again where Shep would be "pushed" to please.

Any eccentric location around point zero.

How far would he have been "pushed"?

Until any "unmoveable" obstacle is encountered. The soldiers on Earth just ducked behind rubble to stay in place. The Reapers in space were clearly "pushed" by the "destroy wave", and they did not explode.

Well seeing as the bottom of the Citadel Tower has an artifical atmosphere and gravity, I highly doubt that the first wave could have knocked him onto the Wards. Also he is located at the back of the Citadel so even if he was knocked in any direction off the Tower, he would be in the vacumm of space.  Also, how is he supposed to survive the journy through the vacuum of space without his suit?  Anyway, Shep is either fried or floating in space waiting re-entry...again...without his suit...

[OH-UP-THIS!]

TheTrueObelus wrote...

Main issue with IT...you have less choice than the crappy ending that Bioware actually wrote.

Lets break down the ending choices.

With "control" or "synthesis" you are indoctrinated. You dont wake up. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

And this is wrong, HOW? It offers more of a diverse ending, than what we got!  Although, 'synth' isn't the Reapers winning.

You pick "destroy" and you escape indoctrination but you die (because of low war assets). Nothing is resolved. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

In one instance this is totally believable, simply because of too low of those assets, something to strive for perhaps??

You pick destroy and escape being indoctrinated and wake up (because you have enough war assets). But that means you didn't actually witness the end of the game...you still have to defeat the Reapers. So this would also mean they gave us a totally unfinished game. This is beyond lame.

How does playing MORE Mass Effect, constitute being lame? You still have to reach the citadel, so more gameplay is LAME??

So basically the only way to win and the only choices that mattered were the few that gave you the "perfect" destroy ending. Having only one choice basically means you have no choice.

You have more choices than you are willing to look for!

[I Soya I]

I honestly think that the best evidence for this theory is the differences in the child's dialogue depending on your EMS. If you have a high enough EMS to get the ending where Shepard wakes up, then the child greets Shepard by saying"Wake Up" instead of "Why are you here?" Why waste time and resources to change one line of dialogue that would go by completely unnoticed unless people had reason to believe Shepard was not awake? My thought is because it was meant to be noticed. I have yet to see any argument for this =/ but maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Takers?

Modifié par I Soya I, 14 avril 2012 - 08:17 .

[SubAstris]

I Soya I wrote...

I honestly think that the best evidence for this theory is the differences in the child's dialogue depending on your EMS. If you have a high enough EMS to get the ending where Shepard wakes up, then the child greets Shepard by saying"Wake Up" instead of "Why are you here?" Why waste time and resources to change one line of dialogue that would go by completely unnoticed unless people had reason to believe Shepard was not awake? My thought is because it was meant to be noticed. I have yet to see any argument for this =/ but maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Takers?

What exactly is your argument?

[rachellouise]

I Soya I wrote...

I honestly think that the best evidence for this theory is the differences in the child's dialogue depending on your EMS. If you have a high enough EMS to get the ending where Shepard wakes up, then the child greets Shepard by saying"Wake Up" instead of "Why are you here?" Why waste time and resources to change one line of dialogue that would go by completely unnoticed unless people had reason to believe Shepard was not awake? My thought is because it was meant to be noticed. I have yet to see any argument for this =/ but maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Takers?

I don't really understand what you mean? Shepard is dreaming, so dream kid says "wake up" because he's asleep?


I take it as though "why are you here", he doesn't think you're worthy and can't change anything, but "wake up" he is accepting that you may actually be able to do somethign.

[RaidShock]

This may have been addressed already and if so, I apologize.

I personally love the indoctrination theory, as I believe it ultimately makes the most sense compared to the other possibilities. However, there are a number of holes in it, as has clearly already been established. It seems that the indoctrination theory assumes that Shepard has gradually become indoctrinated from his long term exposure to the Reapers and their technology.

However, if this is the case, why did the Prothean VI detect an "Indoctrinated Presence" only when Kai Leng arrived? Wouldn't it have done the same thing if Shepard had been indoctrinated? If so, then the indoctrination theory would have to assume Shepard becomes indoctrinated after those events occur, which leaves a very small window for indoctrination that goes against the fact that we know indoctrination typically takes a long time.

Any thoughts on this?

[balance5050]

rachellouise wrote...

Can't see if anyone replied, lost my post, anyway,

so if the dreams are 'constructed' by the reapers, whether you're awake or not, basically they're controlling what you see/perceive etc. through suggestion.

But if they're able to control you like that, then it would mean you are already indoctrinated, and there would be no 'resisting' , nor 'breaking free'

If we go along with the idea that it wasn't a dream, but rather hallucinations in real time, then yes, he is already indoctrinated. But if he did some how still resist the suggestions by choosing destroy even though it seems to have the worst outcome. Then Shep did still destroy the reapers, so the Indoctrination would be broken despite the reapers attempt to trick you, because they are now destroyed.

[balance5050]

rachellouise wrote...

I Soya I wrote...

I honestly think that the best evidence for this theory is the differences in the child's dialogue depending on your EMS. If you have a high enough EMS to get the ending where Shepard wakes up, then the child greets Shepard by saying"Wake Up" instead of "Why are you here?" Why waste time and resources to change one line of dialogue that would go by completely unnoticed unless people had reason to believe Shepard was not awake? My thought is because it was meant to be noticed. I have yet to see any argument for this =/ but maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Takers?

I don't really understand what you mean? Shepard is dreaming, so dream kid says "wake up" because he's asleep?


I take it as though "why are you here", he doesn't think you're worthy and can't change anything, but "wake up" he is accepting that you may actually be able to do somethign.

He's pandering to you more, all of his dialogue is more "friendly", or "brown nosey" with high EMS.

[balance5050]

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Well im kinda confused becasuse I was never talking about Earth. I was talking about the Citadel going up in flames after it fires its "Lazor" into the Charon Relay. 

That is the 2nd explosion, happening in some reasonable delay after the 1st "spherical wave", that "pushed stuff without burning it" (hint in there, see?). To still be in the place Shepard was when firing at the red tube when the 2nd explosion happen would require him to resist the eccentric push of the 1st wave.

Tell me again where Shep would be "pushed" to please.

Any eccentric location around point zero.

How far would he have been "pushed"?

Until any "unmoveable" obstacle is encountered. The soldiers on Earth just ducked behind rubble to stay in place. The Reapers in space were clearly "pushed" by the "destroy wave", and they did not explode.

Well seeing as the bottom of the Citadel Tower has an artifical atmosphere and gravity, I highly doubt that the first wave could have knocked him onto the Wards. Also he is located at the back of the Citadel so even if he was knocked in any direction off the Tower, he would be in the vacumm of space.  Also, how is he supposed to survive the journy through the vacuum of space without his suit?  Anyway, Shep is either fried or floating in space waiting re-entry...again...without his suit...

Yeah, the "red wave pushes Shepard to safety" theory is just reaching to far.

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Rohirrim wrote...

TheTrueObelus wrote...

Main issue with IT...you have less choice than the crappy ending that Bioware actually wrote.

Lets break down the ending choices.

With "control" or "synthesis" you are indoctrinated. You dont wake up. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick "destroy" and you escape indoctrination but you die (because of low war assets). Nothing is resolved. Reapers win. Everyone dies. Everything you did up till that point was completely meaningless. Game over.

You pick destroy and escape being indoctrinated and wake up (because you have enough war assets). But that means you didn't actually witness the end of the game...you still have to defeat the Reapers. So this would also mean they gave us a totally unfinished game. This is beyond lame.

So basically the only way to win and the only choices that mattered were the few that gave you the "perfect" destroy ending. Having only one choice basically means you have no choice.

You do have choice! In fact, it could be the most important one throughout Mass Effect. Think about it as the final battle of the game. It's a novel approach but not that much different from being shot down by a human reaper when you think about it. If you picked green or blue, you just lost the game.
Of course, there is no GAME OVER screen which, at first glance, makes it somewhat unsatisfying. However, this is the ending to YOUR story of Commander Shepard. And in your mind, you just defeated the reapers and dream about a happy ending.
The problem I see with this myself is that the actual ending for those who won the final battle is still missing. The only people still waiting for their ending are those that chose red. Either you wanted to stay on your path of defeating the reapers, didn't trust Starchild or even saw through the indoctrination while you were playing - but your Shepard wakes up after being struck by Harbinger's beam, and you want to continue. This, in my mind, is the real travesty of Mass Effect 3's ending - it is not there.

So this renders your decisions completely meaningless throughout the game, failing to do one of the main things that happens in ME, player choice. Some one could have done everything right, but because they got one thing supposedly wrong, they failed. 100 hours put is effectively wasted. Whilst someone who has done much less, made bad decision, can WIN? Games generally work on the principle of the more you put in, the more you get out of, but according to ME, this doesn't happen, which is really odd (only if you subscribe to IT). It completely ruins incentive to play and makes for an unappealing game. EA want happy customers, not people annoyed with the game, so why would they do this?

Uhm, it's like that with or with out IT at this moment in time. Not sure what you're getting at.

So IT is not as good as it cracked up to be...

Still better then face value, that's all I ever said. I would rather let them leave it on a cliffhanger for me to decide what happens logically rather then accept 

It's still just an interpretation (until the EC is out.)

[SubAstris]

balance5050 wrote...

rachellouise wrote...

I Soya I wrote...

I honestly think that the best evidence for this theory is the differences in the child's dialogue depending on your EMS. If you have a high enough EMS to get the ending where Shepard wakes up, then the child greets Shepard by saying"Wake Up" instead of "Why are you here?" Why waste time and resources to change one line of dialogue that would go by completely unnoticed unless people had reason to believe Shepard was not awake? My thought is because it was meant to be noticed. I have yet to see any argument for this =/ but maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Takers?

I don't really understand what you mean? Shepard is dreaming, so dream kid says "wake up" because he's asleep?


I take it as though "why are you here", he doesn't think you're worthy and can't change anything, but "wake up" he is accepting that you may actually be able to do somethign.

He's pandering to you more, all of his dialogue is more "friendly", or "brown nosey" with high EMS.

So a change in a single line (which can be interpreted in either way) means that those with high EMS get a much more  friendly reception by than those who don't? Talk about grasping at straws...

[rachellouise]

EMS affecting how people/things react to you...grasping at straws.....yeaaaah. Hmmmm...Excuse me.

[wickedgoodreed]

RaidShock wrote...

This may have been addressed already and if so, I apologize.

I personally love the indoctrination theory, as I believe it ultimately makes the most sense compared to the other possibilities. However, there are a number of holes in it, as has clearly already been established. It seems that the indoctrination theory assumes that Shepard has gradually become indoctrinated from his long term exposure to the Reapers and their technology.

However, if this is the case, why did the Prothean VI detect an "Indoctrinated Presence" only when Kai Leng arrived? Wouldn't it have done the same thing if Shepard had been indoctrinated? If so, then the indoctrination theory would have to assume Shepard becomes indoctrinated after those events occur, which leaves a very small window for indoctrination that goes against the fact that we know indoctrination typically takes a long time.

Any thoughts on this?

I'm not a confirmed IT believer, but if I were my take on this would be: 

The reapers have been attempting to indoctrinate Shepard since the events of ME2, but having a hard time of it given Shepard's uniquely strong will (Hence the strange dreams and lines like, "Harbinger speaks of you. You resist, but you will fail.") 

During Shepard's trip to the Sanctuary we learn that the Illusive Man has discovered how to indoctrinate people using the same control methods as the Reapers. The research terminals also make a point of highlighting that adrenaline can be used to rapidly accelerate the indoctrination process.

Cut to the final race to the beam, and Shepard's stress and adrenaline levels have to be at an all time high, making her/him more susceptible to indoctrination.  Not to mention that taking a reaper beam to the face has got to hurt. In any event, the Illusive Man uses this to his advantage and takes control of Shepard. We see this happen; there's nothing ambiguous about it.

Since the Illusive Man is himself under the control of the Reapers, this effectively means that Shepard is under their control as well. At this point, Shepard resists some more but is clearly struggling. The Catalyst steps in where the Illusive Man leaves off and tries to cement the process, either ultimately succeeding (Control or Synthesis) or failing (Destroy) once and for all.

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

rachellouise wrote...

I Soya I wrote...

I honestly think that the best evidence for this theory is the differences in the child's dialogue depending on your EMS. If you have a high enough EMS to get the ending where Shepard wakes up, then the child greets Shepard by saying"Wake Up" instead of "Why are you here?" Why waste time and resources to change one line of dialogue that would go by completely unnoticed unless people had reason to believe Shepard was not awake? My thought is because it was meant to be noticed. I have yet to see any argument for this =/ but maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Takers?

I don't really understand what you mean? Shepard is dreaming, so dream kid says "wake up" because he's asleep?


I take it as though "why are you here", he doesn't think you're worthy and can't change anything, but "wake up" he is accepting that you may actually be able to do somethign.

He's pandering to you more, all of his dialogue is more "friendly", or "brown nosey" with high EMS.

So a change in a single line (which can be interpreted in either way) means that those with high EMS get a much more  friendly reception by than those who don't? Talk about grasping at straws...

PFFT! that was just one example here:

High:
 “You don't need hope. The fact that you are standing here, the first organic ever, proves it. But it also proves my solution won't work anymore.” 

low: 
“You have hope. More than you think. The fact that you are standing here, the first organic ever, proves it. But it also proves my solution won't work anymore.” 

High: 
“The Reapers are mine. I control them. They are my solution.”
 
low: “Perhaps. I control the Reapers. They are my solution.” 

“Chaos. You bring it on yourselves. The created will always rebel against their creators. But we found a way to stop that from happening. A way to restore order for the next cycle.” 

“Chaos. The created will always rebel against their creators. But we found a way to stop that from happening. A way to restore order for the next cycle.” 

“That depends on you.” 

 “We find a new solution.” 

[SubAstris]

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

rachellouise wrote...

I Soya I wrote...

I honestly think that the best evidence for this theory is the differences in the child's dialogue depending on your EMS. If you have a high enough EMS to get the ending where Shepard wakes up, then the child greets Shepard by saying"Wake Up" instead of "Why are you here?" Why waste time and resources to change one line of dialogue that would go by completely unnoticed unless people had reason to believe Shepard was not awake? My thought is because it was meant to be noticed. I have yet to see any argument for this =/ but maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Takers?

I don't really understand what you mean? Shepard is dreaming, so dream kid says "wake up" because he's asleep?


I take it as though "why are you here", he doesn't think you're worthy and can't change anything, but "wake up" he is accepting that you may actually be able to do somethign.

He's pandering to you more, all of his dialogue is more "friendly", or "brown nosey" with high EMS.

So a change in a single line (which can be interpreted in either way) means that those with high EMS get a much more  friendly reception by than those who don't? Talk about grasping at straws...

PFFT! that was just one example here:

High:
 “You don't need hope. The fact that you are standing here, the first organic ever, proves it. But it also proves my solution won't work anymore.” 

low: 
“You have hope. More than you think. The fact that you are standing here, the first organic ever, proves it. But it also proves my solution won't work anymore.” 

High: 
“The Reapers are mine. I control them. They are my solution.”
 
low: “Perhaps. I control the Reapers. They are my solution.” 

“Chaos. You bring it on yourselves. The created will always rebel against their creators. But we found a way to stop that from happening. A way to restore order for the next cycle.” 

“Chaos. The created will always rebel against their creators. But we found a way to stop that from happening. A way to restore order for the next cycle.” 

“That depends on you.” 

 “We find a new solution.” 

Where exactly is this over-the-top flattering from the Catalyst trying to smooth-talk you into Control/Synthesis?