616 réponses à ce sujet

[FBI-Azzurri]

This is awesome! A job well done!

[balance5050]

Ownaholic wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Aaleel wrote...


1) Vega saying do you hear that humming. Shepard is the one who is being indoctrinated, he/she and he/she only would hear the humming. Vega hearing humming would make sense if Vega were the one being indoctrinated.
 

Hearing strange humming is mentioned in the indoctrination codex.

Yeah by the person being indcotrinated.  Vega is not being slowly indoctrinated, Shepard is.  Shepard would be the one hearing the humming.

Sigh... then there is no reason, it's random, no meaning whatsoever..... unless, you know, the Normandy has reaper tech in it, like the reaper IFF.

I cannot for the life of me come up with where I am getting this next statement from, but I recall hearing/reading that Vega has been in close contact with Reaper tech before.
Besides, even fighting Reaper forces is enough to jump start the indoctrination process.
Not to mention, there's no reason the indoctrination attempts can't have a "splash" effect; in that because Shepard is standing RIGHT THERE, Vega would begin to hear humming. Remember how every Salarian soldier on the Virmire base became indoctrinated in a matter of hours? Same reasoning.

Bioware said that Vega was meant to orientate n00bs, he's the new guy. So you are correct with your assertion, and it is known that people can be walking conduits for indoctrination, so Sheps vicinity could be a factor. 

[Sepharih]

Aaleel wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

That said, within the context of indoctrination theory, it makes sense if you think about it in the context of being a dream.  Shepard only saw the surrounding area arround him briefly before he was hit by the beam...so it makes sense his projected version of the world has slight discrepencies.  His armor....it's a bit more of a stretch...but it's still the same principle.

Subtle changes I can see.  But I don't care who you are, if you fall asleep in one set of clothes and wake up in another, that will be something that makes any person say WTF lol.

Actually in this regard I suspect that it makes more sense for Shepard than it does for us..being in the third person.  Remember, it's been burnt beyond all recognition either way, and shepard doesn't really have a mirror to realize "wait.....this isn't the chestplate I had equipped."

[hand-o_death547]

It's pretty late where I am right now but I'll bookmark the page and watch it after school tomorrow.

[Aaleel]

Well I'm off to bed. I'll watch the rest of this tomorrow. But to the OP, in the part that I watched you presented two contradictory lines or reasoning.

You can't on one hand say as proof that the reapers added husks and Marauder Shields to keep things as realistic as possible, and then on the other turn around and say changing the surroundings by adding trees, changing the armor, and adding piles of bodies is also proof.

Either they're trying to keep it realistic or not. I personally don't think you'd make all these changes if you're trying to convince someone they're still in their reality. So any proof of changes really goes against the IT IMHO.

But good night all. Regardless of whether I agree with it or not, it's a solid presentation so far OP.

[Miss Vader]

Just finished watching it- very excellent job!

[Oni Changas]

Just finished the vid. Mad props and there are some great points made and backed up but many can be explained away. I'll try going into that later, so for now I'll say I hope BioWare will roll with this idea in some way or that they really had it planned all along. Otherwise, if they're not changing RGB then Mass Effect is a massive failure that will have gone out with a soft, Simple Jack, full retard, whimper.

[Unschuld]

Awesome video.

[Tom Lehrer]

It is clear a lot of work was put into that video. I disagree with IT as a whole but you still put a lot of work into an interesting vid so congrats on that.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

Sepharih wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

I've never understood three things people use a proof.

1) Vega saying do you hear that humming. Shepard is the one who is being indoctrinated, he/she and he/she only would hear the humming. Vega hearing humming would make sense if Vega were the one being indoctrinated.

2) Trees that weren't there. If you're trying to trick someone into thinking they're still in reality, why would you add things that would make them question where they are. You would want to make it exactly like it was.

3) Different armor. See #2, and multiply times 100.

1) I've never really thought much of Vega hearing "humming" personally.  Always though it was reaching too much.  Shepard hearing humming though....that's more intersting.

2 & 3)As usually, I'll state that I think the more likely explination is being rushed for release and conserving resources.  The run to the beam and the walk towards it are treated as two seperate maps so the chance of some continuity errors appearing is completely understandable, and it was probably judged to be a poor use of resources to create a seperate "burned" version of each shepard armor permutation.

That said, within the context of indoctrination theory, it makes sense if you think about it in the context of being a dream.  Shepard only saw the surrounding area arround him briefly before he was hit by the beam...so it makes sense his projected version of the world has slight discrepencies, and that it would overlap with his nightmares in some respects.
His armor....it's a bit more of a stretch...but it's still the same principle.

Please excuse my interjection, but this would be a reasonable sequence, simply because, if I were to be the one dreaming this area, I would be thinking "huh, at least all I lost was my armor", ha ha and my guns, HUD, helmet, radio, omni-tool.LOL

As for the humming, that would be FAR too obvious, if we were able to "hear" the humming for real(that would be very annoying), as opposed to one of our crew, just in passing asking us, if we "hear it", then that would be a subliminal message, that we ALL missed.

Modifié par ohupthis, 09 mai 2012 - 04:10 .

[Xellith]

A lot of good points. However I dont agree with everything.

[CavScout]

If odd graphical reflections are proof of Indocrination Theory, do these screenshots prove this game has IT going too?

Or are graphical glitches just glitches.

[Ownaholic]

Aaleel wrote...

Well I'm off to bed. I'll watch the rest of this tomorrow. But to the OP, in the part that I watched you presented two contradictory lines or reasoning.

You can't on one hand say as proof that the reapers added husks and Marauder Shields to keep things as realistic as possible, and then on the other turn around and say changing the surroundings by adding trees, changing the armor, and adding piles of bodies is also proof.

Either they're trying to keep it realistic or not. I personally don't think you'd make all these changes if you're trying to convince someone they're still in their reality. So any proof of changes really goes against the IT IMHO.

But good night all. Regardless of whether I agree with it or not, it's a solid presentation so far OP.

This is my personal take on that, but I don't believe it's contradictory at all.
The reason? Shepard is dreaming. The Reapers are merely influencing that dream. Because Shepard is not fully indoctrinated yet, the Reapers cannot fully control his mind, and therefore Shepard is imagining a lot of this on his own.

[CavScout]

Ownaholic wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

Well I'm off to bed. I'll watch the rest of this tomorrow. But to the OP, in the part that I watched you presented two contradictory lines or reasoning.

You can't on one hand say as proof that the reapers added husks and Marauder Shields to keep things as realistic as possible, and then on the other turn around and say changing the surroundings by adding trees, changing the armor, and adding piles of bodies is also proof.

Either they're trying to keep it realistic or not. I personally don't think you'd make all these changes if you're trying to convince someone they're still in their reality. So any proof of changes really goes against the IT IMHO.

But good night all. Regardless of whether I agree with it or not, it's a solid presentation so far OP.

This is my personal take on that, but I don't believe it's contradictory at all.
The reason? Shepard is dreaming. The Reapers are merely influencing that dream. Because Shepard is not fully indoctrinated yet, the Reapers cannot fully control his mind, and therefore Shepard is imagining a lot of this on his own.

That's the beauty of Indoctrination Theory.. anything that debunks it is said to be part of Indoctrination Theory (it's fake!) and so can't be used against Indoctrination Theory proper!

[SirCroft]

I think there are two lines here. How much BioWare wants it to look like a dream to US, and how much Harbinger wants it to look like it's real to SHEPARD.
Stuff that we notice certainly wouldn't be noticed by Shepard.

[Jorji Costava]

Some constructive criticisms:

1. The argument that synthetics don't have "souls" at 55:00 seems unpersuasive. It's true that they are made with metal and electricity, but it's true of human beings that they are made of cells; when enough of those cells die off, we no longer exist. So the question is, what is so special about being made of biological material? Do cells have the special capacity to emanate "soul stuff" that metals and electricity do not? Why think this? Also, the analogy to a computer is unsuccessful. The reason why it's foolish to think a computer has any moral worth (I think this is a better term than "soul") is because it isn't conscious, cannot form goals and plans, cannot engage in intelligent conversation with you, etc. None of these considerations apply to the Geth or EDI.

Also, the claim that synthetics lack souls seems to be falsified by the game itself, at least if we consistently apply what appears to be one of the key assumptions of the indoctrination theory: If TIM says p, then the developers don't want you to believe p. In one of the VLogs at the Cerberus base, we see that TIM regards EDI as nothing more than a piece of hardware: "a cyber warfare suite, nothing more" (http://www.youtube.c...?v=TcQklK6VXG8; skip to 3:45). Is the suggestion that TIM was wrong about controlling the reapers, but right about synthetics having no moral value? I seriously doubt the developers would go about presenting their ideas this way.

2. I'd be leery about citing the Strategy Informer article as far as the dark energy ending. The headline (that the Dark Energy storyline was the original ending) has been explicitly denied by Karpyshyn, who maintains that Dark Energy was merely one among many possibilities considered.

http://www.gameranx....ies-conclusion/

The quote was from a posting on the Something Awful forums, so I don't think it can be directly attributed to Karpyshyn himself as the Strategy Informer article does. I only mention this because I was (rightfully) called out for making the same mistake a while back, and I'd hate for you to repeat that mistake. Not a big deal as far as the overall argument of your video.

Otherwise, I'm impressed with both the content and the presentation of your video. I'm still not persuaded of IT, as I think there's a substantial amount of evidence against it (don't want to go into that in this post), but what you've created here is a valuable resource.

[Ownaholic]

I've updated the first post with the code to use the signature; with a link back to this topic.
It would be awesome if everybody here using it could update their signatures with the link included! Thanks so much!

@CavScout, I see what you mean, but I believe that in this particular theory, the fact is valid. Half of the theory is based around the fact that this is going on in Shepard's mind, and therefore his mind is perfectly capable of re-creating a lot of this imagery, however inaccurate it may be.
We already know the dream sequences were a dream, and those had warning to Shepard. Why is it now all of a sudden that we can't see the same thing?

Modifié par Ownaholic, 09 mai 2012 - 04:34 .

[Simon_Says]

CavScout wrote...

That's the beauty of Indoctrination Theory.. anything that debunks it is said to be part of Indoctrination Theory (it's fake!) and so can't be used against Indoctrination Theory proper!

Maybe. But it still paints a more coherent and consistent narrative than the face-value interpretation.

[balance5050]

 You missed at least one huge clue, the tree reflections during the catalyst sequence.

http://i.imgur.com/RIIzj.jpg 




http://img72.imagesh...5148/treees.png 


  

[Ownaholic]

osbornep wrote...

Some constructive criticisms:

1. The argument that synthetics don't have "souls" at 55:00 seems unpersuasive. It's true that they are made with metal and electricity, but it's true of human beings that they are made of cells; when enough of those cells die off, we no longer exist. So the question is, what is so special about being made of biological material? Do cells have the special capacity to emanate "soul stuff" that metals and electricity do not? Why think this? Also, the analogy to a computer is unsuccessful. The reason why it's foolish to think a computer has any moral worth (I think this is a better term than "soul") is because it isn't conscious, cannot form goals and plans, cannot engage in intelligent conversation with you, etc. None of these considerations apply to the Geth or EDI.

Also, the claim that synthetics lack souls seems to be falsified by the game itself, at least if we consistently apply what appears to be one of the key assumptions of the indoctrination theory: If TIM says p, then the developers don't want you to believe p. In one of the VLogs at the Cerberus base, we see that TIM regards EDI as nothing more than a piece of hardware: "a cyber warfare suite, nothing more" (http://www.youtube.c...?v=TcQklK6VXG8; skip to 3:45). Is the suggestion that TIM was wrong about controlling the reapers, but right about synthetics having no moral value? I seriously doubt the developers would go about presenting their ideas this way.

2. I'd be leery about citing the Strategy Informer article as far as the dark energy ending. The headline (that the Dark Energy storyline was the original ending) has been explicitly denied by Karpyshyn, who maintains that Dark Energy was merely one among many possibilities considered.

http://www.gameranx....ies-conclusion/

The quote was from a posting on the Something Awful forums, so I don't think it can be directly attributed to Karpyshyn himself as the Strategy Informer article does. I only mention this because I was (rightfully) called out for making the same mistake a while back, and I'd hate for you to repeat that mistake. Not a big deal as far as the overall argument of your video.

Otherwise, I'm impressed with both the content and the presentation of your video. I'm still not persuaded of IT, as I think there's a substantial amount of evidence against it (don't want to go into that in this post), but what you've created here is a valuable resource.

1) I state after I make that argument that you don't have to agree with me. It doesn't really lend much to the theory or the point I was making either way. The following point in the video after that was the point I was getting at. I never expected most people to believe that belief of mine.

2) I didn't realize it came from somewhere else. I was just citing the article I reference.

Regardless, thank you so much for watching! Keep nit-picking, I appreciate criticisms of all kinds.


*edit*
@Balance
I didn't miss it. I left it out deliberately. I do not believe in the tree reflections because it is not explicitly noticeable by the player without using the out-of-cam view.
Further, it was stated that the original Crucible was meant to be a place much like the final planet, and therefore they may have constructed it initially with trees, but forgot to remove the reflections.

Modifié par Ownaholic, 09 mai 2012 - 04:37 .

[Makrys]

I'll just copy and paste my YT comment:

"Ok. That was amazing. I was a believer before, and I think I'm an even stronger one now. GREAT JOB! And thank you for taking the time to do this. I know it was a pain in the ass to complete, so we really appreciate your hard work! Bravo, good sir! Give yourself a pat on the back! You deserve it!"

Also, if someone could make that same sig with the "Wake up, Shepard" but with MaleShep's eyes, I'd be all over that! Just not a femshep user myself...

But once again, GREAT JOB, OP! I honestly do not understand how someone could sit through the entirety of that video and come away still disbelieving the theory. There was some very, very compelling evidence. Especially, the 'dream foliage', I'm not joking when I say that as soon as you presented that, I began laughing and a slow clap followed. I was amazed at that find.

However, there were two other pieces of information I was surprised you left out.

1. During the scene with TIM and Anderson, someone found the file name for that scene (much like the dream foliage) and it apparently had 'indoctrination' in the title. This, I believe, is represented in Parabolee's blog. Pretty convincing stuff there.

2. Also, from Parabolee's blog, the destroy ending is the ONLY ending that creates 3 plot flags/IDs. So, it would seem, pick destroy, Shep lives and has a future. That is interesting stuff. And definitely backs up the IT further. Why else would Shep live only in the destroy ending? Would've liked to hear you bring that up and comment on it as I think it is a worthy argument, whether you deem it true or plausible. I think it is pretty telling, IMO.

Those are really the only two things that I felt like were missed, in an absolutely amazing and obviously critiqued documentary. Seriously, this was top notch stuff, and I personally would give you a high five followed by a bro hug if we were in the same room at the moment. You deserve high praise for the research, and hard work you put into this! It's absolutely evident throughout, so props to you!

Once again, thank you! I hope this flies around the intrawebs and gets much deserved attention. Personally, I think it will. Stuff this good doesn't just stay hidden. Especially when Acavyos' video is insanely popular yet is less indepth than your's (only at around 20 mins).

Go grab yourself a beer, or whatever beverage suits your pink taster and relax! Also, take a deep breath. Its done. Now... go get some damn sleep! 

Modifié par Makrys, 09 mai 2012 - 04:38 .

[CavScout]

Ownaholic wrote...

I've updated the first post with the code to use the signature; with a link back to this topic.
It would be awesome if everybody here using it could update their signatures with the link included! Thanks so much!

@CavScout, I see what you mean, but I believe that in this particular theory, the fact is valid. Half of the theory is based around the fact that this is going on in Shepard's mind, and therefore his mind is perfectly capable of re-creating a lot of this imagery, however inaccurate it may be.
We already know the dream sequences were a dream, and those had warning to Shepard. Why is it now all of a sudden that we can't see the same thing?

What you mean is your mind is made-up evidence or not...

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

 You missed at least one huge clue, the tree reflections during the catalyst sequence.

http://i.imgur.com/RIIzj.jpg 

http://img72.imagesh...5148/treees.png   

If odd graphical reflections are proof of Indocrination Theory, do these screenshots prove this game has IT going too?

Or are graphical glitches just glitches.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

What you mean is your mind is made-up evidence or not...

So is yours. Stop going into I.T. related threads if you have nothing constructive to say.

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

 You missed at least one huge clue, the tree reflections during the catalyst sequence.

http://i.imgur.com/RIIzj.jpg 

http://img72.imagesh...5148/treees.png   

If odd graphical reflections are proof of Indocrination Theory, do these screenshots prove this game has IT going too?

Or are graphical glitches just glitches.

Different game, different team, unrelated.