162 réponses à ce sujet

[UltimateTobi]

I honestly believe in the Indoc. Theory, and if it's true, it's a hell of a clue. BioWare would've tricked every player who understood what's indoc., and noticed that something is wrong at the end, but still chose blue (Paragon [Renegade]) nontheless, because they thought it's correct. (Though presented by TIM.) Like an indoctrinated person would do; excessivlely doing what you think is right, in favor to the Reapers.

[Matchy Pointy]

Buzz Kill, silly fanfic by unhappy fans. Which is fine with me, they can write any fanfic they want.

[elecmanexe001]

AlanC9 wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...
The idea of indoctrinating Shepard was not cut, in fact you can argue it is already in the current ending with TIM to some extent at face value. They cut the reapers taking movement control away from Shepard, the gameplay element they were attempting not the idea. There is no difinitive answer if they went with indoctrination or not, I read that snippett as well. 

Well, I didn't read it that way, but I'll take your word for it.

As I recall it was definitly gameplay removed but the other half isn't mentioned. It's not solid proof for or against IT thats all.

[WaffleCrab]

There is no pretty way to put this. but imho. It feels too far fetched.

[Jayleia]

Depends on how well they do it.

If they do it the way they did the end of ME3...Buzzkill and uninstall Origin and any EA products I have and ME1-3

If they do it the way they did ME1...that'd be awesome to the point of me screaming "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY FOR THE FREE DLC"

I'm betting closer to the former...but not QUITE that bad

If it was their plan from the beginning, or if they cribbed notes off of fans...they REALLY should be giving us much more info.

[DaJe]

It would be the least bad resolution to this whole mess, but still not close to satisfying.
The ending is incomplete and sucks in context of the whole series. It will forever be that and will forever remembered that way.

[elecmanexe001]

simfamSP wrote...





PEOPLE!

Have you even READ the IT?

No most don't and judge anyway. This causes the most arguments as they do not understand the entire idea behind IT.

[KDD-0063]

Overall I'd say IT is at least a way out, a way to "retcon" the current ending without sounding like brutally changing it. Not perfectly smooth but still pretty smooth.

The problem is the current ending is awful. The whole ME franchise has always been about how Shepard unites the galaxy against reapers, interactions with characters, there are so many powerful scenes in the game.

but in the end...the only thing that matters is something of unknown design that we have absolutely no personal understanding or feelings for. What? You pretty much have to retcon the final scene for ME3's ending to be good.

So what if IT is true?

I wouldn't say it's going to be a blast; there is still going to be controversy. However, it will be better than the alternative.

Modifié par KDD-0063, 10 mai 2012 - 01:26 .

[Candidate 88766]

I think it'd be a buzzkill.

This is a series about choice. Bioware never really punishes you for the choices you make - you save the galaxy no matter what, its just how you go about it.

And yet the IT requires that in the ending Bioware takes all choice away from you. Control and synthesis lead to you failing and inevitably going back to a save so you can pick the 'correct' choice of destroy. As they are, the endings all have their pros and cons (mostly cons), making choosing between them pretty difficult. The IT changes all that and flies in the face of the trilogy by giving players one correct option and two game over screens.

Bioware never tells you that your other choices are correct or incorrect. Morally right or wrong, sure, but not correct or incorrect. You're free to make choices as you see fit, and you rarely punished for them. The IT goes completely against this.

[i IIVIIorpheus]

If true, I think it COULD be a touchdown.

But even with IT, there are issues. A) then that does in fact mean that we didn't get the complete ending and B)why would they give you the option of the destroy ending? That would have to be explained...

[rolson00]

it would be gravy

[Deltakarma]

[quote]Repearized Miranda wrote...

[quote]Deltakarma wrote...

Hmmmmmmmm
*rubs his chin*

Weeeeeeeeeeell..... the game is pretty much point a sign at the whole indoc. thing..... So that side of me would be like, "Ok".

Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, it was cut in ME3..... so I would just look at the game on my menu screen on my 360 and watch into despair as I just know they added it to stop the complainers.

In all honestly, it needs to be pulled off like if it was the fist release of Mass Effect 3. It is close to impossible, but if pulled off, I will be happy.[/quote]

[quote]It was not cut. Where are you getting that? [/quote]

I only read up to that to answer you. It was said that they cut the fourth ending, the Indoctrination one, and just kept the RGB one we have now. I cant find the article which they state that. They said it was due to more cuts buisness wise. Thats why they couldnt put in a whole lot anyways and are saving it for free DLC.

Damn Forum Bug quoting everything....

Modifié par Deltakarma, 10 mai 2012 - 05:56 .

[dsl08002]

Considering how bad the ending was then the IT would be a touchdown, that also means that the ending might get more diversity

[Raizo]

For me it would be a major Buzz Kill. I did not sink 100's of hours into this franchise only to find out that everything I did in ME1, ME2 and ME3 was pointless because the bad guys end up winning in the end regardless of everything I did. I can't speak for everyone but it's very important to me that I feel like I've accomplished something when I have invested alot of my time into something. As it stands right now the current ME3 endings have made me very depressed, if Bioware confirmed the IT ending then it would probably push me over the edge to being border line suicidal.

[Kabl0wzasan]

Repearized Miranda wrote...

Kabl0wzasan wrote...

Buzz Kill. However the endings as they were are just terribly written (full of plot holes and inconsistencies) and were poorly executed, and robbed the player of everything they played for.

If it was Indoctrination then the end of the game all took place in Shepard's head. Basically a dream sequence, and Shepard died not stopping the Reapers (the goal of the entire series). And it was not by player choice or fault, like even though I did everything right and had the highest level of whatever (cause it didn't matter) it was written as, well Reapers got Shepard, they won. Thank you for spending $200 and 200 hours on our games hope you enjoyed the Reapers winning and Shepard dieing, cause that's what happened (if Indoctrination is correct).

Ok you say, but what if I pick the red ending, that means Shepard's alive and when the new dlc hits we can all get the new ending new scenes explaining stuff.  Then ::sigh:: that means that the blue and green endings are wrong, and that you must always pick the red path to access the dlc content or whatever.  Then WHAT WAS THE POINT of kjflagf agjmvklmafkjvoiwemav afjwoifeivnoivniowu .... you know what?  It doesn't matter.  It was, the whole thing was extremely sloppy no matter what angle you approach it from.

That is false though - given what follows as this is also what is upsetting people - because you do "defeat the Reapers and become a Legend!" and who can say no to the child that asks to hear "one more story"?

Also, with the blue and green being wrong. Well, what was your goal from the beginning - not to mention coming face to face with those endings in the previous games (Saren - green; TIM - blue) and telling them to stuff it?

But yes, at face-value something went wrong if you need to explain yourself or taking it at face-value is the actual problem. I would think it's the latter or they wouldn't do this.

Like I said no matter how you look at it, the endings were sloppy (all of Mass Effect 3 was sloppy).

The Indoctrination theory doesn't make things better, it's equally as sloppy.  If (Indoctrination is the true ending) the Devs planned this from the very beginning then shame on them.  Indoctrination Theory and all of the other endings or theroies of the endings undermine the entire Mass Effect series.

I can say no to the little kid.  One more story?  NO!  No more stories.  No Mass Effect 4, No to Mass Effect: The Next Generation.  Mass Effect was planned as a trilogy, a beginning, middle, and end.  Three.  Not 4 or 5 or 6.  3!!!

I can only theroize that EA or Bioware, made the endings the way they are so they could string people along to buy more dlc, or to buy the next Mass Effect #.

The Indoctrination Theory is terrible along with any other theory or explination because the writing is terrible! 

It's not like I want to hate the endings or Mass Effect 3, I'm not going out of my way to hate it or dislike it.  I do because it's sloppy!  But I digress.

Modifié par Kabl0wzasan, 10 mai 2012 - 06:18 .

[TOBY FLENDERSON]

slam dunk, hole in one, and touchdown all in one if done correctly.

[Ramus Quaritch]

Touchdown. It's brilliant is Bioware were to actually decode to go along with it. I'd pretend it was part of their plan all along. Maybe that makes me indoctrinated?? I do like how it turns everything on its head.

You are indoctrinated. As a player used to playing paragon, the blue, far-left option is to attempt to control the Reapers. I almost went for it. Then I stopped and thought of the Illusive Man and Anderson, and how both Control and Synthesis seemed like what the Reapers would want. So I went with Destroy. It's amazing how I was almost tricked like that. If, of course, Shepard were actually indoctrinated. I don't think Bioware will go with that, but it would be a brilliant move if they did.

[terrydertote]

The IT is nonsense as it stands. It's based completly on speculation and contradicts at least one fact from the game (VI on Thessia). Therefore, and ending based on this theory would be nonsense as well.

Maybe not as much nonsense as the acutal ending, but still nonsense.

[xsdob]

I would hate it because my choice, philosophical view, and personal beliefs would all be negated due to what amounts to fan service.

And before you take having IT be called fanservice as an insult, know that it is also the most accurate discription of adopting a fan theory into the game as the official and non-disputable cannon ending of mass effect.

Modifié par xsdob, 10 mai 2012 - 07:52 .

[LRBT]

Definitely a touchdown for me. Although if that's the way they're going, they should have announced it at PAX, which was pretty much the peak of the tension/excitement.

[Kreid]

Not anything against the IT fans, but, no please. The ending is bad because of the plotholes etc...but it shouldn't be changed and/or replaced.

Modifié par Creid-X, 10 mai 2012 - 07:59 .

[OdanUrr]

JBONE27 wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

1. You destroyed the CB as a paragon choice because the collectors liquified people to create more Reapers.  The Reapers have liquified countless people to create more Reapers and destroyed entire civilisations.  I'd say other than the potential sentiance, it's the same call.

2.  If you say that reprograming the Hertics is a form of slavery, then you're saying that education, upbringing, and corrective medication (anti-depressents, anti-psychotics, etc) are all forms of slavery.  I would like to see you make that argument.

3.  That is if you take the Star Child at his word, but he implies that Shepard dies with destruction.  (S)He does not.  It states that EDI dies with destruction.  She does not (I played through once, chose destruction; Joker exits, then Liara, and finally EDI).  Therefore we can assume that the only things that were actually destroyed were the Reapers, which you were trying to destroy since the first game and the mass relays, which get destroyed no matter which choice you make.  Therefore, your argument that the Geth, Reapers, EDI, Mass Relays, and Shepard are destroyed is invalid because it is untrue.

1. Not really. You could always tell them to hit the nearest sun later on, but I understand where you're coming from.

2. This guy explains it better: 

3. The Catalyst implies Shepard might die because of his synthetic implants, but he doesn't know for sure. If he did, he would have told Shepard so. Just because Shepard survives at the end doesn't mean the Geth will too. Any assumption based on this is merely that, an assumption. EDI surviving would certainly be suggestive but we know this particular scene is not quite foolproof. If EDI does indeed survive, one could make the case that maybe the Geth survive too, but only a scene depicting this can be considered proof.

1.  How is it any different?

2.  That doesn't actually explain anything.

3.  I already mentioned that it was the ending I got.  I cannot upload it since I use a 360, but it is still the ending I got.

1. The difference I see is that with Control you sacrifice only yourself and with Destroy there's the chance that the Geth will be destroyed too and that (some) technology will be adversely affected.

2. It did for me. Maybe you just don't agree with his explanation.

3. You misunderstand. I meant that we can only be certain the Geth survive if we actually see them survive. Anything else is speculation.

[Squallypo]

 not sure if this has been posted before but ill take my chances anyways its a Documentary video of the Indoctrination Theory stuff. check it out