867 réponses à ce sujet

[ThinkIntegral]

Because Shepard has been resisting and successful in all of her goals but somehow not on the very last one? Then the game ends leaving absolutely no resolution to the main goals of the story? You really want that crap method of story telling? You think they would've ended the series with that crap level of story telling after touting it's the "end of Shepard's story"?

Is Vega or Ashley going to take over now? And don't give me some excuse with the EC. You know damn well they never would've released it absent the outcry from the public.

[OblivionDawn]

TIM controlling Shepard is not indoctrination.

If you listen to all the logs in Sanctuary, you can hear for yourself how control of other people is possible.

Barring that, control of other people through biotic fields has been happening since ME2 (the "Dominate" ability*).

Modifié par OblivionDawn, 17 mai 2012 - 09:33 .

[dreman9999]

OblivionDawn wrote...

TIM controlling Shepard is not indoctrination.

If you listen to all the logs in Sanctuary, you can hear for yourself how control of other people is possible.

Barring that, control of other people through biotic fields has been happening since ME2 (the "Dominate" ability*).

I have...All forms of people being control have them implanted with reaper tech...That's still indoctrination

[dreman9999]

ThinkIntegral wrote...

Because Shepard has been resisting and successful in all of her goals but somehow not on the very last one? Then the game ends leaving absolutely no resolution to the main goals of the story? You really want that crap method of story telling? You think they would've ended the series with that crap level of story telling after touting it's the "end of Shepard's story"?

Is Vega or Ashley going to take over now? And don't give me some excuse with the EC. You know damn well they never would've released it absent the outcry from the public.

It called forshadowing. Beating the reapers means dealing with there strongest weapon, indoctrination. I make no sense for the reaperto not try it.

[Wyatt Shepard]

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

[Bill Casey]

They shouldn't have made recurring nightmares a symptom of indoctrination, then...

[dreman9999]

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

Indoctrination is subtle...You would not think that using a ptsd dream of the kid wouldnot be good coverfor indoctriantion.
Also, you mising the fact the TIM controls Shepardin the end of the game woth indoctriantion...Indoctriantion has to be in ired toa person first to be used.

[Wyatt Shepard]

dreman9999 wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

Indoctrination is subtle...You would not think that using a ptsd dream of the kid wouldnot be good coverfor indoctriantion.
Also, you mising the fact the TIM controls Shepardin the end of the game woth indoctriantion...Indoctriantion has to be in ired toa person first to be used.

We know it's subltle, which is in the favor of IT theory. However, there is no reason that the dreams are nothing more than a manifestation of Shepard being under tremendous stress. What I am suggesting is that IT is possible, but other explainations are just as likely.

[balance5050]

Wyatt Shepard wrote...


We know it's subltle, which is in the favor of IT theory. However, there is no reason that the dreams are nothing more than a manifestation of Shepard being under tremendous stress. What I am suggesting is that IT is possible, but other explainations are just as likely.

K.. the last dream has Shepard seeing another version of himself embracing the child, the other Shepard gave me a suspicious smirk right along with the child, then you see them go up in flames, you see yourself burn.

The next time you see the kid is on the citadel, if you choose either control or synthesis, you see your skin being burned away, much like in the previous dream, but you DON'T burn if you choose destroy.

Modifié par balance5050, 18 mai 2012 - 09:56 .

[Wyatt Shepard]

balance5050 wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...


We know it's subltle, which is in the favor of IT theory. However, there is no reason that the dreams are nothing more than a manifestation of Shepard being under tremendous stress. What I am suggesting is that IT is possible, but other explainations are just as likely.

K.. the last dream has Shepard seeing another version of himself embracing the child, the other Shepard gave me a suspicious smirk right along with the child, then you see them go up in flames, you see yourself burn.

The next time you see the kid is on the citadel, if you choose either control or synthesis, you see your skin being burned away, much like in the previous dream, but you DON'T burn if you choose destroy.

Yup. Again, I am not saying IT is not true. IT depends on these sorts of sutble connections, which is why I find it compelling.

However, at the same time you can say that Shep and the kid smile because REAL Shep has just caught up to them to save them. But they burn because he fears he cannot save the kid or himself from what is coming. 

The distingeration of Shep during the Control/Synthesis is actuall not a visual parallel to the dream at all. In the dream, we see the flames, but not the result. In fact, the kid (and later other shep) don't burn before our eyes. They are just staring, all creepy like, as the flames get them. You could say its a metaphoric connection, but it is not a visual one.

[balance5050]

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...


We know it's subltle, which is in the favor of IT theory. However, there is no reason that the dreams are nothing more than a manifestation of Shepard being under tremendous stress. What I am suggesting is that IT is possible, but other explainations are just as likely.

K.. the last dream has Shepard seeing another version of himself embracing the child, the other Shepard gave me a suspicious smirk right along with the child, then you see them go up in flames, you see yourself burn.

The next time you see the kid is on the citadel, if you choose either control or synthesis, you see your skin being burned away, much like in the previous dream, but you DON'T burn if you choose destroy.

Yup. Again, I am not saying IT is not true. IT depends on these sorts of sutble connections, which is why I find it compelling.

However, at the same time you can say that Shep and the kid smile because REAL Shep has just caught up to them to save them. But they burn because he fears he cannot save the kid or himself from what is coming. 

The distingeration of Shep during the Control/Synthesis is actuall not a visual parallel to the dream at all. In the dream, we see the flames, but not the result. In fact, the kid (and later other shep) don't burn before our eyes. They are just staring, all creepy like, as the flames get them. You could say its a metaphoric connection, but it is not a visual one.

I like mine better.

[dreman9999]

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

Indoctrination is subtle...You would not think that using a ptsd dream of the kid wouldnot be good coverfor indoctriantion.
Also, you mising the fact the TIM controls Shepardin the end of the game woth indoctriantion...Indoctriantion has to be in ired toa person first to be used.

We know it's subltle, which is in the favor of IT theory. However, there is no reason that the dreams are nothing more than a manifestation of Shepard being under tremendous stress. What I am suggesting is that IT is possible, but other explainations are just as likely.

In ME2, Shepard saw people being turn to pulp. unlaw full test of children, facesaspace vanpire that took control of his body, and found out what reapers really do to organics.....Where was my reacurring night mares then?
Added, How is TIM controling Shepardat the end of ME3?

[dreman9999]

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...


We know it's subltle, which is in the favor of IT theory. However, there is no reason that the dreams are nothing more than a manifestation of Shepard being under tremendous stress. What I am suggesting is that IT is possible, but other explainations are just as likely.

K.. the last dream has Shepard seeing another version of himself embracing the child, the other Shepard gave me a suspicious smirk right along with the child, then you see them go up in flames, you see yourself burn.

The next time you see the kid is on the citadel, if you choose either control or synthesis, you see your skin being burned away, much like in the previous dream, but you DON'T burn if you choose destroy.

Yup. Again, I am not saying IT is not true. IT depends on these sorts of sutble connections, which is why I find it compelling.

However, at the same time you can say that Shep and the kid smile because REAL Shep has just caught up to them to save them. But they burn because he fears he cannot save the kid or himself from what is coming. 

The distingeration of Shep during the Control/Synthesis is actuall not a visual parallel to the dream at all. In the dream, we see the flames, but not the result. In fact, the kid (and later other shep) don't burn before our eyes. They are just staring, all creepy like, as the flames get them. You could say its a metaphoric connection, but it is not a visual one.

But that's not the only proof to consider....What about TIM controling Shepard at the end of ME3?

[Dont Kaidan Me]

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

I approve of this assessment. The simplest explanation is usually the right one. The rest of the game belies the fact that there shouldn't be too much read into those events and they are to be taken more at face value.

[dreman9999]

Dont Kaidan Me wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

I approve of this assessment. The simplest explanation is usually the right one. The rest of the game belies the fact that there shouldn't be too much read into those events and they are to be taken more at face value.

Even if we do use the simplest explination it's still Indoctriantion. Case in point, the last scene with TIM. He is using indoctrination to control Shepard and Anderson....They have to be in the process of indoctrination first to be controled like that.

[Wyatt Shepard]

dreman9999 wrote...

Dont Kaidan Me wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

I approve of this assessment. The simplest explanation is usually the right one. The rest of the game belies the fact that there shouldn't be too much read into those events and they are to be taken more at face value.

Even if we do use the simplest explination it's still Indoctriantion. Case in point, the last scene with TIM. He is using indoctrination to control Shepard and Anderson....They have to be in the process of indoctrination first to be controled like that.

Yah, except that in all the examples of Indocination we have seen, that kind of puppet master control isn't seen at all. Either one becomes a mindless drone like  Husk if indoctrination happens quickly, or its like Saren, it happens slowly and one is not aware of it happening. What the TIM does is something we have no seen before, and is the result, if taken on face value, of his having reaper tech implants. But it may, or not may be connected to indoctrination.

[Wyatt Shepard]

Dont Kaidan Me wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

I approve of this assessment. The simplest explanation is usually the right one. The rest of the game belies the fact that there shouldn't be too much read into those events and they are to be taken more at face value.

Well yah they are symbolic of things, but perhaps not of indoctrination. The dreams, it seems to me, are a manifestion of someone who is under huge stress, and his fears are playing out as he sleeps. Makes more sense to me than the early stages of indoctrination.

[Wyatt Shepard]

dreman9999 wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Wyatt Shepard wrote...

I really like IT, I just think that parts of it go too far or, at least, there are other reasonable explanations which put it in doubt, or parts of it anyway. I'm not saying IT is wrong, just saying there are alternative, just as likely, ideas.

For instance: the kid. IT says the kid was NEVER real and uses the fact the no one helps him on the shuttle as proof of that. However, from a film making point of view, one can point out that the reason no one is near the kid is not because he is a figment of Shep's mind, but as a way to draw a direct connection between the kid and Shep. (think the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List) The kid is isolated from everyone else because he is the focus of Shep's attention, and so our attention. The kid looks up directly at Shep because he is about to become the face of Shep's failure to stop the Reaper invasion and save everyone. That direct connection to Shep (and the player) is necessary and effectively done by having no one around the kid, making the sole connection between those two.

Which then brings us to the dreams. The shadowy (oily) figures, the whispers, and the burning kid are all used as evidence that IT is true and this is the early stages of indoctrination starting to have an effect on Shep. Maybe. However, there is another possibility. The kid represents Shep's fears and failures. That is why the kid always burns at the end. Shep cannot save everyone, and he fears he cannot save Earth. He burns with the kid in the end because he fears he cannot even save himself. The whispers, if you listen to them, are not the two reapers we know. They are all Shep's friends and squad mates. They are things the said in ME3 and the other two games. The shadows? The faceless and countless numbers of people killed by the reapers that shep failed to save.

This is why the star child takes the form of the kid (and where IT actually becomes a stronger idea.) The image of the kid is obviously plucked from Shepard's mind and used to manipulate him. In my view, IT doesn't actually start until post Harbingers' beam (if IT is true at all) and not before. In the final attempt to mind screw Shep, whatever is trying to manipulate him takes the form of the child who has come to represent his greatest failure and fears. There is no accident the form the star child takes is that of this kid.

Maybe IT is true. Not saying it isn't. But also saying it is easy enough to explain some of these things without it being the result of indoctrination.

Indoctrination is subtle...You would not think that using a ptsd dream of the kid wouldnot be good coverfor indoctriantion.
Also, you mising the fact the TIM controls Shepardin the end of the game woth indoctriantion...Indoctriantion has to be in ired toa person first to be used.

We know it's subltle, which is in the favor of IT theory. However, there is no reason that the dreams are nothing more than a manifestation of Shepard being under tremendous stress. What I am suggesting is that IT is possible, but other explainations are just as likely.

In ME2, Shepard saw people being turn to pulp. unlaw full test of children, facesaspace vanpire that took control of his body, and found out what reapers really do to organics.....Where was my reacurring night mares then?
Added, How is TIM controling Shepardat the end of ME3?

Ok you are really hung up on TIM and his magic powers. All I am saying is that they don't funcation in line with indocrination of as we know it.

as for ME2 and no nightmares. FIrst, we don't know he didn't have them, they were just not important to the story. More importantly, however, is that the conflict in ME1 and ME2 are markedly different than in ME3. In ME1, no one really knows the scope of what they are facing until right before the end. In ME2, the battles are smaller and more personal, no involving any fleets. Just Shep and his team on a crazy mission. But ME3 starts with an entire planet, Earth, being crushed. Shep's home and billions of people, being crushed by the Reapers. Then he seens Palvin burning. Depending on how you play, you might cause the destruction of the Hanar homeworld (I did once. booo, lazy Shep) and no on. The scale and the stakes in ME3 are much greater than in the previous two games. Shep did not experience nightmares then because, as a soldier, he could cope. But with the shear scale of the events of ME3 are different and so impact him in a more dramatic way.