616 réponses à ce sujet

[maxloef]

Bravo sir! great video!

[SubAstris]

Jacobss wrote...

My opinion of the documentary:

I'm sceptical about IT. The first 40-50 minutes of the documentary didn't convice me, because they rely on not important details like armors (I laughed when he compared the piles of bodies to Ashley and Kaidan armors from ME1), textures and Shepard changing place after "awakening". Even Shepard's burned armor is insignificant, because BioWare was lazy and they didn't bother to make others versions of it. Most of the arguments were just normal in video games - textures are always reused so it's normal. It doesn't support the theory. They also didn't bother to "awake" Shepard at the same place, where Harbinger shoot him, because they didn't care. Who cares really about something like that in first playthrough? The impossibility to shoot the Keeper also doesn't support the theory, because earlier in Mass Effect wo also couldn't kill someone, if we weren't in "fight mode", so that doesn't convince me.

For me it's all NITPICKING.

HOWEVER!

It started to become interest when we got to the Star Child. Here I started to see real arguments and not nitpicking on some reused textures or something like that.

1. It is stated in the codex that Indoctrination leads you to start trusting your enemy.  Do you think you would realize when you start to become indoctrinated? No. Saren didn't and neither are you. During the whole trilogy we know that we can never  trust the Reapers.  All who trusted, ended being killed, used, turned into the husk etc.  And here comes the Catalyst, who says you that he present's you three options, from which two are the bests. Ironically, those two options lead you to become one with the Reapers. We've heard that before from indoctrinated slaves. Shepard felt guilty about the boy - guilty because he couldn't rescue him and other people on earth. That's why the Reapers choose this body to convince Shepard. To trust them. To conclude, never trust anyone who has done bad things. Even if he said to you that everything he's doing is for "good". Catalyst presented himself as being one with the Reapers and we saw enough, what they do with people who trusted them. They are harvesting us for our own good? Haha, good one. Only naive child would believe that. So much suffering in so much cycles, only to help us? Right. They could come to us, talk with us and give us their technology to protect us from synthetics. Then they would not have to "save" us in the Reaper form.

2. Eyes. Saren and Illusive Man's eyes. Shepard gets those eyes only if he chooses to side with the Reapers. Undoubtful proof for being indoctrinated. It's good that the documentary stated how much effort BioWare put into those eyes. It can't be coincidence.
3. Reversed colors. Mass Effect trilogy relied always on blue and red. Those reversed colors and being led to the blue ending supports that control and synthesis are bad.

Those points convinced me to the IT. I hope when EC comes out, it would be clear .

2) Correction, he only gets it with Control and Synthesis (that we know, Shepard's eyes aren't actually seen at the end with Destroy). But even so, it does not come as a massive surprise because he comes into contact with Reaper tech. It is not a coincidence, but not evidence for IT either

3) BW realised that there would be some confusion, hence why they made sure that the player saw Anderson shooting destroy (as this is what he would have done) and TIM control respectively. You have to remember that the colour "red" is deeply connected to the idea of "destruction" in Western culture at least; I would be much more surprised if BW opted for Control being Red and Destroy blue instead.

Your point doesn't even cover synthesis so you can't just come to the conclusion that it is bad

[JShepard1992]

I totally agree with theory makes since for my ending of destroy when Shepard survives and the video is well done.

[NoSpin]

SubAstris wrote...



2) Correction, he only gets it with Control and Synthesis (that we know, Shepard's eyes aren't actually seen at the end with Destroy). But even so, it does not come as a massive surprise because he comes into contact with Reaper tech. It is not a coincidence, but not evidence for IT either

3) BW realised that there would be some confusion, hence why they made sure that the player saw Anderson shooting destroy (as this is what he would have done) and TIM control respectively. You have to remember that the colour "red" is deeply connected to the idea of "destruction" in Western culture at least; I would be much more surprised if BW opted for Control being Red and Destroy blue instead.

Your point doesn't even cover synthesis so you can't just come to the conclusion that it is bad

Sorry sir, but you can't just choose to change the meaning of red/blue in the ME universe. While on a general scale you are right, in ME red is renegade and blue is paragon. Period. They made control a paragon decision, you can't disbute that bit.

Modifié par NoSpin, 10 mai 2012 - 03:57 .

[byarru]

I hope it's more complicated. That's why I reject this red - "you're right !" and blue/green - "you jerk, how could you choose it?! Die!"
It's too simple and must be more complicated. Otherwise I see no reason to make three pseudo-endings. If IT theory is right then we would have green and red ending. What about the blue one?
Nah, let us have three different endings (at LEAST three!) so in every ending we can save the day but with different outcome. Two endings aren't good enough

[TOBY FLENDERSON]

That was an incredible video, hopefully the devs confirm IT otherwise the plot hole will remain unexplained.

[SubAstris]

NoSpin wrote...

SubAstris wrote...



2) Correction, he only gets it with Control and Synthesis (that we know, Shepard's eyes aren't actually seen at the end with Destroy). But even so, it does not come as a massive surprise because he comes into contact with Reaper tech. It is not a coincidence, but not evidence for IT either

3) BW realised that there would be some confusion, hence why they made sure that the player saw Anderson shooting destroy (as this is what he would have done) and TIM control respectively. You have to remember that the colour "red" is deeply connected to the idea of "destruction" in Western culture at least; I would be much more surprised if BW opted for Control being Red and Destroy blue instead.

Your point doesn't even cover synthesis so you can't just come to the conclusion that it is bad

Sorry sir, but you can't just choose to change the meaning of red/blue in the ME universe. While on a general scale you are right, in ME red is renegade and blue is paragon. Period. They made control a paragon decision, you can't disbute that bit.

I have explained thoroughly why BW might choose to do such a thing. You can't just ignore things outside the game. It is still unsure whether they made a paragon/renegade decision for the ending, because how exactly would synthesis (green) fit into such a spectrum?

[llbountyhunter]

SubAstris wrote...

NoSpin wrote...

SubAstris wrote...



2) Correction, he only gets it with Control and Synthesis (that we know, Shepard's eyes aren't actually seen at the end with Destroy). But even so, it does not come as a massive surprise because he comes into contact with Reaper tech. It is not a coincidence, but not evidence for IT either

3) BW realised that there would be some confusion, hence why they made sure that the player saw Anderson shooting destroy (as this is what he would have done) and TIM control respectively. You have to remember that the colour "red" is deeply connected to the idea of "destruction" in Western culture at least; I would be much more surprised if BW opted for Control being Red and Destroy blue instead.

Your point doesn't even cover synthesis so you can't just come to the conclusion that it is bad

Sorry sir, but you can't just choose to change the meaning of red/blue in the ME universe. While on a general scale you are right, in ME red is renegade and blue is paragon. Period. They made control a paragon decision, you can't disbute that bit.

I have explained thoroughly why BW might choose to do such a thing. You can't just ignore things outside the game. It is still unsure whether they made a paragon/renegade decision for the ending, because how exactly would synthesis (green) fit into such a spectrum?

things outside of the game point toward a proper explanation of the reversal of the colors.  
(paraphrasing, balance has the link to this..)

casey hudson: "players will choose one thing thinking they stopped the reapers, and it turns out to be something else"

[SubAstris]

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

NoSpin wrote...

SubAstris wrote...



2) Correction, he only gets it with Control and Synthesis (that we know, Shepard's eyes aren't actually seen at the end with Destroy). But even so, it does not come as a massive surprise because he comes into contact with Reaper tech. It is not a coincidence, but not evidence for IT either

3) BW realised that there would be some confusion, hence why they made sure that the player saw Anderson shooting destroy (as this is what he would have done) and TIM control respectively. You have to remember that the colour "red" is deeply connected to the idea of "destruction" in Western culture at least; I would be much more surprised if BW opted for Control being Red and Destroy blue instead.

Your point doesn't even cover synthesis so you can't just come to the conclusion that it is bad

Sorry sir, but you can't just choose to change the meaning of red/blue in the ME universe. While on a general scale you are right, in ME red is renegade and blue is paragon. Period. They made control a paragon decision, you can't disbute that bit.

I have explained thoroughly why BW might choose to do such a thing. You can't just ignore things outside the game. It is still unsure whether they made a paragon/renegade decision for the ending, because how exactly would synthesis (green) fit into such a spectrum?

things outside of the game point toward a proper explanation of the reversal of the colors.  
(paraphrasing, balance has the link to this..)

casey hudson: "players will choose one thing thinking they stopped the reapers, and it turns out to be something else"

I will taken this likely taken-out-of-context quote as evidence when I actually see it

[Ownaholic]

SubAstris wrote...

2) Correction, he only gets it with Control and Synthesis (that we know, Shepard's eyes aren't actually seen at the end with Destroy). But even so, it does not come as a massive surprise because he comes into contact with Reaper tech. It is not a coincidence, but not evidence for IT either

3) BW realised that there would be some confusion, hence why they made sure that the player saw Anderson shooting destroy (as this is what he would have done) and TIM control respectively. You have to remember that the colour "red" is deeply connected to the idea of "destruction" in Western culture at least; I would be much more surprised if BW opted for Control being Red and Destroy blue instead.

2) You see Shepard's eyes if you pick Destroy. It's in the video. His eyes are fine.

3) Bioware has openly stated that they want "SPECULATION FROM EVERYBODY". So. That's what they got.

[Ownaholic]

john_sheparrd wrote...

really good video love it bioware pay attention to this video?!!!!

Not entirely sure, but I do know they are at least aware of it.
I've gotten a message from Chris Priestly about it; but only from him. I'm not sure whether or not he spread it around the office.
But thanks!

[gendocrono]

Ownaholic wrote...

john_sheparrd wrote...

really good video love it bioware pay attention to this video?!!!!

Not entirely sure, but I do know they are at least aware of it.
I've gotten a message from Chris Priestly about it; but only from him. I'm not sure whether or not he spread it around the office.
But thanks!

So, why don't we send mp or mail to bioware to be sure they got it ?

[Deputy Secretary of Awesome]

Ownaholic wrote...

john_sheparrd wrote...

really good video love it bioware pay attention to this video?!!!!

Not entirely sure, but I do know they are at least aware of it.
I've gotten a message from Chris Priestly about it; but only from him. I'm not sure whether or not he spread it around the office.
But thanks!

That's awesome already. It's a great documentary, and it's good it's getting noticed. I think it's already speaking to the larger culture around gaming by having serious and interesting creations like what you've made.

Also, it's encouraging that at least Chris Priestly has taken notice of it. Whether or not IT is true, it's nice that this work is being acknlowedged. Are you allowed to post what he said to you?

[tobiasks]

Great video! I never really believed in the IT theory, but it is definitely a very interesting theory, and I certainly wouldn't mind if it turned out to be true!

[Krushiev01]

Hmmm, I stumbled on this video while randomly googling Mass Effect 3 (it was at the top of the page) this afternoon.

I actually linked the video to another thread maybe 10 -15 minutes ago... Wish I dropped by yesterday to see this piece.

Have to say though (like the other thread) I was never really a supporter of I.T. Now... I'm kinda on the fence leaning towards it.

Good points to the vid... Spares me from having to make my own

Modifié par Krushiev01, 10 mai 2012 - 05:57 .

[GeggaSWE]

Maybe someone already said this but, how can it be a Renegade move to save Anderson/yourself and kill TIM if it isnt a "dream"? (if you dont have enough paragon to convince him) Killing Udina and Kai Leng also is renegade moves i know, but you can ignore them and still save the Asari Counsilor/Yourself.

[Leafs43]

This video can make anyone on the fence about the IT lean towards the theory.

[Krushiev01]

GeggaSWE wrote...

Maybe someone already said this but, how can it be a Renegade move to save Anderson/yourself and kill TIM if it isnt a "dream"? (if you dont have enough paragon to convince him) Killing Udina and Kai Leng also is renegade moves i know, but you can ignore them and still save the Asari Counsilor/Yourself.

I think it boils down to a renegade interrupt being "shoot first, ask later" or impulsive response.  If you don't "give in" to that when speaking with TIM, you are expecting more or other options... Which there aren't any.

I think...  Anyways, just me thinking aloud

[Ownaholic]

Deputy Secretary of Awesome wrote...

Ownaholic wrote...

john_sheparrd wrote...

really good video love it bioware pay attention to this video?!!!!

Not entirely sure, but I do know they are at least aware of it.
I've gotten a message from Chris Priestly about it; but only from him. I'm not sure whether or not he spread it around the office.
But thanks!

That's awesome already. It's a great documentary, and it's good it's getting noticed. I think it's already speaking to the larger culture around gaming by having serious and interesting creations like what you've made.

Also, it's encouraging that at least Chris Priestly has taken notice of it. Whether or not IT is true, it's nice that this work is being acknlowedged. Are you allowed to post what he said to you?

Yeah it's pretty neat. I never expected to get over 30,000 views in roughly the first 36 hours. I had only expected like...10,000 is a week maybe? So that's pretty damn awesome. And I had to message Chris first, but he still took the time to watch and respond to it.
And sure, this is what he said :
"Thanks for pointing it out Julian. Nice work putting it together. I
can't say whether you are right or wrong or that sort of thing, but it
is well done".

I'm not ready to go crying wolf on it or anything, but it was very interesting to me that he, nor have any of the Bioware staff on Twitter or anything, openly denied the IT claims. If it were blatantly false, why would they have a problem with turning the theory down? Maybe it goes along with the "Speculation from everybody!" thing, or maybe there's something more to it.

But either way, it was just nice to get praise from someone in his position.

@gendocrono
I could sure use some help getting the word out to them! ;-)

Modifié par Ownaholic, 10 mai 2012 - 06:29 .

[SubAstris]

Ownaholic wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

2) Correction, he only gets it with Control and Synthesis (that we know, Shepard's eyes aren't actually seen at the end with Destroy). But even so, it does not come as a massive surprise because he comes into contact with Reaper tech. It is not a coincidence, but not evidence for IT either

3) BW realised that there would be some confusion, hence why they made sure that the player saw Anderson shooting destroy (as this is what he would have done) and TIM control respectively. You have to remember that the colour "red" is deeply connected to the idea of "destruction" in Western culture at least; I would be much more surprised if BW opted for Control being Red and Destroy blue instead.

2) You see Shepard's eyes if you pick Destroy. It's in the video. His eyes are fine.

3) Bioware has openly stated that they want "SPECULATION FROM EVERYBODY". So. That's what they got.

2) What I meant is that you don't see them when he wakes. And this doesn't invalidate what I said

[Bm Fahrtz]

The video was really good. I expect to see it in 3d at IMAX this summer.

[hchadw]

Ownaholic wrote...

It's finally finished and ready for your viewing pleasure; courtesy of CleverNoob.com

Over an hour and twenty minutes of straight up analysis surrounding the indoctrination theory. I just want to say thank you SO MUCH to everybody who has patiently awaited this documentary, and to everybody who takes the time to watch it.

Don't forget to watch in HD, and as always, enjoy! 

The Indoctrination Theory - A Documentary

Please use #IndocDoc on Twitter to talk about the documentary!

Please hold all discussions in this topic, on the video itself, or in our designated topic for the discussion on our homepage at CleverNoob.com

If any of you are interested in promoting the video, feel free to use this image in your signature, made by SirCroft here on the forums:


To use this in your signature, use the following code (REMOVE THE *'S):
[url*=http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/11942610][*img]http://i.imgur.com/Kdwfr.jpg[/img][/url]

How To Give Back:
Like Us On Facebook
Follow Us On Twitter
Subscribe to us on YouTube
Join Our Forums!


News Features and Official Mentions:
Check out our Kotaku feature!
International Business Times Article
Article on Complex Gaming

A message from Chris Priestly:
"Thanks for pointing it out Julian. Nice work putting it together. I
can't say whether you are right or wrong or that sort of thing, but it
is well done".

Nice Job. This was a great vid.............. bioware should hire you LOL you seem to now how to fill plot holes better than they do!

Very Informative Video one of the best i have seen on the subject.   Thank you for that bit !

One Key thing that i didnt see that was in the ending was the Starchild when he first sees Shepard  the first thing out of the starchilds mouth is "Wake Up"    so it must have been a dream!

Modifié par hchadw, 10 mai 2012 - 08:58 .

[FellishBeast]

Really good video.

Shield Marauder.

Modifié par FellishBeast, 10 mai 2012 - 09:05 .

[UltimateTobi]

I enjoyed the video. I love how you gathered every bit of information.

I might add, which adds to IT: how the hell did TIM get onto the Citadel? Theoretically, he must've sneaked after Shepard, Anderson and the rest of the forces, or he must've been already on the Citadel. Honestly, both doesn't make sense to me. So, TIM being there adds to the IT. He could've never been there, except it's a struggle in Shep's mind.