332 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaelef]

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

Ah, the ol' if-they-don't-agree-with-me-it's-because-they-just-don't-understand-like-i-do fallacy.  Tends to go hand-in-hand with religious arguments like these.

[elecmanexe001]

vurtual3 wrote...

The biggest problem with IT is that it isn't in ME3. I guess that's a problem to people who really want it to be because they don't like synthesis (which was explained ,for want of a better word ,really poorly imo but also imo was clearly meant to be a good ending). But mostly it's a problem because Shep is not indoctrinated!

Really? Indoctrination has existed in ever game and is most prevalent in ME3. Udina, TIm, Kai Leng, every Cerberus agent, let alone those from previous games. Indoctrination has always been a huge part of ME why would it not be possible for Shepard to have been recieving an attempt to be indoctrinated by the reapers at the end? No matter what you say it is possible and that means IT is plausable.

Reapers think they are **** out of luck.
Reapers have been slowly trying to get to Shepard.
Reapers decide at the end when Shepard is getting close to maybe winning to go all out with indoctrination, the 'fast version'.
You are now resisting this at the end as your whole world is uncertain.

Read up on indoctrination, it is totally plausable to happen this way.

[EsterCloat]

Kaelef wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

Ah, the ol' if-they-don't-agree-with-me-it's-because-they-just-don't-understand-like-i-do fallacy.  Tends to go hand-in-hand with religious arguments like these.

Strange how ITers are using the same argument to defend their theory as Bioware is using in defense of their ending.

Modifié par EsterCloat, 12 mai 2012 - 10:22 .

[Darth_Trethon]

Kaelef wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

No, the biggest problem with IT is that it's 215% speculation.

Or is it? As per the Final Hours app BioWare fully intended to make a sequence at the end of the game where the player would lose control of Shepard who would fall under reaper influence.

Yes. But. They. Didn't. Do. That.

They claim so but all the evidence in the game suggests they did. As I said, they probably ran out of time, planned to finish it in DLC and underestimated the lashback they would face.....from there they were forced in a PR game nobody likes.

[7he Island Head]

elecmanexe001 wrote...

vurtual3 wrote...

The biggest problem with IT is that it isn't in ME3. I guess that's a problem to people who really want it to be because they don't like synthesis (which was explained ,for want of a better word ,really poorly imo but also imo was clearly meant to be a good ending). But mostly it's a problem because Shep is not indoctrinated!

Really? Indoctrination has existed in ever game and is most prevalent in ME3. Udina, TIm, Kai Leng, every Cerberus agent, let alone those from previous games. Indoctrination has always been a huge part of ME why would it not be possible for Shepard to have been recieving an attempt to be indoctrinated by the reapers at the end? No matter what you say it is possible and that means IT is plausable.

Reapers think they are **** out of luck.
Reapers have been slowly trying to get to Shepard.
Reapers decide at the end when Shepard is getting close to maybe winning to go all out with indoctrination, the 'fast version'.
You are now resisting this at the end as your whole world is uncertain.

Read up on indoctrination, it is totally plausable to happen this way.

Udina didn't seem indoctrinated!

[vurtual3]

elecmanexe001 wrote...

7he Island Head wrote...

Chevreau wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

No, the biggest problem with IT is that it's 215% speculation.

Yep. It's a cluster of hypotheses that have yet to be definitely proven.

I see what you did there.

Anyway, as several people have said, every Shepard had the same mission regardless of their paragon/renegade path: blow the reapers to hell. There is nothing paragon or renegade about picking the destroy option. Forget the colors.

I can't go color blind. Nor can I forget that red and blue are associated with a core mechanic of gameplay and story telling, that being the renegrade/paragon points. 

The main reason IT has the theory of renegade and paragon not mattering or being reversed is due to the fact that Shepard lives in the red one. So people are throwing out the conventional wisdom the game has given us based on color to actually think about their actions. You can argue blue should be this and red should be that, but people are looking at it from a results point of view not color point of view. Regardless looking at it from a color point of view, you get the best ending with red, renagade, and paragon is screwed with or without IT.

I reckon Shepard will end up living in all 3 endings. But not as a human and not until the next Mass Effect game.

[7he Island Head]

EsterCloat wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

Ah, the ol' if-they-don't-agree-with-me-it's-because-they-just-don't-understand-like-i-do fallacy.  Tends to go hand-in-hand with religious arguments like these.

Strange how ITers are using the same argument to defend their theory as Bioware is using in defense of their ending.

Artistic integrity?

[elecmanexe001]

Kaelef wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

Ah, the ol' if-they-don't-agree-with-me-it's-because-they-just-don't-understand-like-i-do fallacy.  Tends to go hand-in-hand with religious arguments like these.

Read my 'clarification' some posts back if you want, however you can't honestly tell me half these threads that pop up to say IT is wrong (Again I am not discrediting those who have read and make actual arguments against it) that these people have simply not read all or most of IT and just don't get the entire idea. If you have a debate with someone on a subject, you make sure to do your research yea? Why shouldn't that apply here? IT supporters sure did a hell of a lot to find instances within the series and lore to give credit to the idea you can at least read through it before judging it and saying it's false without havving a complete grasp of what people are offereing.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

Lizardviking wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

How so?

Now bear with me here, a lot of forumites, are holding steadfast that is there is no other way to explain, what we were shovel-fed in the last 10 minutes, of the game.

PRO-ITers' try to understand by taking IN-GAME lore, and run with it, wherever it may lead, PROenders'(some anyway), prefer to take the lumps, and be content to rip up any other opinions.

If anyone, and I mean ANYONE could PROVE "IT" isn't PLAUSIBLE/POSSIBLE, be my guest, but instead we get to suffer through, peeps like cavscout,et al, ad Nauseum.

[jijeebo]

EsterCloat wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

Ah, the ol' if-they-don't-agree-with-me-it's-because-they-just-don't-understand-like-i-do fallacy.  Tends to go hand-in-hand with religious arguments like these.

Strange how ITers are using the same argument to defend their theory as Bioware is using in defense of their ending.

It's all a giant conspiracy so Bioware can maintain their artistic integrity.

ITers are indoctrinated Bioware agents who are trying to convince us that Bioware is brilliant', rather than the biggest threat to the known galaxy.

[7he Island Head]

vurtual3 wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

7he Island Head wrote...

Chevreau wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

No, the biggest problem with IT is that it's 215% speculation.

Yep. It's a cluster of hypotheses that have yet to be definitely proven.

I see what you did there.

Anyway, as several people have said, every Shepard had the same mission regardless of their paragon/renegade path: blow the reapers to hell. There is nothing paragon or renegade about picking the destroy option. Forget the colors.

I can't go color blind. Nor can I forget that red and blue are associated with a core mechanic of gameplay and story telling, that being the renegrade/paragon points. 

The main reason IT has the theory of renegade and paragon not mattering or being reversed is due to the fact that Shepard lives in the red one. So people are throwing out the conventional wisdom the game has given us based on color to actually think about their actions. You can argue blue should be this and red should be that, but people are looking at it from a results point of view not color point of view. Regardless looking at it from a color point of view, you get the best ending with red, renagade, and paragon is screwed with or without IT.

I reckon Shepard will end up living in all 3 endings. But not as a human and not until the next Mass Effect game.

That doesn't even make sense 

[Kaelef]

Darth_Trethon wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

No, the biggest problem with IT is that it's 215% speculation.

Or is it? As per the Final Hours app BioWare fully intended to make a sequence at the end of the game where the player would lose control of Shepard who would fall under reaper influence.

Yes. But. They. Didn't. Do. That.

They claim so but all the evidence in the game suggests they did. As I said, they probably ran out of time, planned to finish it in DLC and underestimated the lashback they would face.....from there they were forced in a PR game nobody likes.

It doesn't matter if they changed their minds, ran out of time, were forced at gunpoint, or had a brain hemohrrage on the way to typing in the code in their computers: They. Didn't. Do. That.

[elecmanexe001]

7he Island Head wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

vurtual3 wrote...

The biggest problem with IT is that it isn't in ME3. I guess that's a problem to people who really want it to be because they don't like synthesis (which was explained ,for want of a better word ,really poorly imo but also imo was clearly meant to be a good ending). But mostly it's a problem because Shep is not indoctrinated!

Really? Indoctrination has existed in ever game and is most prevalent in ME3. Udina, TIm, Kai Leng, every Cerberus agent, let alone those from previous games. Indoctrination has always been a huge part of ME why would it not be possible for Shepard to have been recieving an attempt to be indoctrinated by the reapers at the end? No matter what you say it is possible and that means IT is plausable.

Reapers think they are **** out of luck.
Reapers have been slowly trying to get to Shepard.
Reapers decide at the end when Shepard is getting close to maybe winning to go all out with indoctrination, the 'fast version'.
You are now resisting this at the end as your whole world is uncertain.

Read up on indoctrination, it is totally plausable to happen this way.

Udina didn't seem indoctrinated!

They flat out said he was unless I miss interperated something. Having Udina indoctrinated also goes back to the codex entry in ME1 about indoctrinating government officials to cause chaos, it literally happens word for word in 3.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

elecmanexe001 wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

I should rephrase though, some who hate it. There are others who can disagree without telling someone they are wrong to actually admit, as well I know I do, that it is only a possibility among many and may or may not happen and we are discussing rather how likely it is to happen instead of why it can or can not happen.

I was only referring to those who would eventually take offence to my statement.

[Kaelef]

jijeebo wrote...

EsterCloat wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

Ah, the ol' if-they-don't-agree-with-me-it's-because-they-just-don't-understand-like-i-do fallacy.  Tends to go hand-in-hand with religious arguments like these.

Strange how ITers are using the same argument to defend their theory as Bioware is using in defense of their ending.

It's all a giant conspiracy so Bioware can maintain their artistic integrity.

ITers are indoctrinated Bioware agents who are trying to convince us that Bioware is brilliant', rather than the biggest threat to the known galaxy.

That, actually, makes a lot more sense than most of the tripe here!

[elecmanexe001]

jijeebo wrote...

EsterCloat wrote...

Kaelef wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

Ah, the ol' if-they-don't-agree-with-me-it's-because-they-just-don't-understand-like-i-do fallacy.  Tends to go hand-in-hand with religious arguments like these.

Strange how ITers are using the same argument to defend their theory as Bioware is using in defense of their ending.

It's all a giant conspiracy so Bioware can maintain their artistic integrity.

ITers are indoctrinated Bioware agents who are trying to convince us that Bioware is brilliant', rather than the biggest threat to the known galaxy.

I support IT, I also do not like the current ending. Can't explain that.

[Iwillbeback]

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

[quote]Iwillbeback wrote...

[quote]7he Island Head wrote...

The biggest problem with the IT, is that control is a renegade option. That means that being a renegade is not a viable way to fight the reapers. If the IT is true is another unfair treatment of renegade players. Just like the rachni and everything else!
   [/quote]


Destroy was considered the Renegade option.

[/quote]
In the IT is is flipped to confuse Shep. This means the IT supports that aragon Shep wins and renegade Shep loses.
[/quote]

I don't see it as Renegade or Paragon or Neutral.
A shepard that succumbs to the will of the Reapers will always lose.
A shepard who stands his ground and knows what to do will survive and have a chance to destroy the Reapers.

[/quote]
Nope. The IT theory assumes that paragon options are always the best, and that is why the destroy ending is red to confuse Shep. It's not about what you think. It is about what the IT theory says. And it says the renegade Sheps can't win.

[/quote]

I would need a link to this official IT theory and where you got this quote from

[quote]The IT theory assumes that paragon options are always the best[/quote]


Can't say I care  either way, but I will have an argument with whoever made it.
[/quote]

http://www.youtube.c...FFhBn2U#t=3684s
Here is a link, it is only  talked about for a few moments

[/quote]

That is merely a documentary.
Ignoring the colors as they don't matter.
What matters is what you do.

[quote]

I don't see it as Renegade or Paragon or Neutral.
A shepard that succumbs to the will of the Reapers will always lose.
A shepard who stands his ground and knows what to do will survive and have a chance to destroy the Reapers.
[/quote][/quote]
Then why did bioware color code the options? 

[/quote]

Probably to weed out weak shepards.
A strong shepard will know what to do and will not be tricked by lies.

[/quote]
So you're saying that Bioware lied to the players? Just to weed out weak Sheps? 

[/quote]

I would not say lied.
Weak shepards chose their own faith, their knowledge was lacking because they did not understand the Indoctrination examples presented to them throughout their journey.


[/quote]
But you did say lies!!!!

[/quote]

That was referring to what the Catalyst said.

[/quote]
Bioware wrote what the Catalyst said thought 

[/quote]

Doesn't mean Bioware was lying.

[/quote]
They were lying via proxy!

[/quote]

Probably, though I can't say I care as my shepards are all strong.

[/quote]
Or you mean that they all took the red option, or the paragon optition under the IT labels 

[/quote]

Some indoctrinated shepard may consider it Renegade, some strong shepard's may consider it Paragon.
It is what it is. a way to say no.
Doesn't matter what color is coming out of it a strong shepard will know what to do after listening to the Catalyst.

[/quote]
I think the red option is a paragon option. They show you Anderson in the destroy option, and he is a paragon. Why reject the reengade/paragon system in the last minute of the game? If it wasn't renegade/paragon they could have used different colors.

[/quote]

I don't usually base my decisions on wherever it is red or blue.
I look at facts and make a judgement.

But sure maybe it was a way to trick people who only choose Paragon into thinking they're doing the right thing despite what the catalyst said.
Another example of this would be a pure paragon shepard who was made in ME2 without doing anything in ME1.
Pure Paragon is punished on the Rachni choice for not making a good judgement.

Modifié par Iwillbeback, 12 mai 2012 - 10:29 .

[EsterCloat]

7he Island Head wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

vurtual3 wrote...

The biggest problem with IT is that it isn't in ME3. I guess that's a problem to people who really want it to be because they don't like synthesis (which was explained ,for want of a better word ,really poorly imo but also imo was clearly meant to be a good ending). But mostly it's a problem because Shep is not indoctrinated!

Really? Indoctrination has existed in ever game and is most prevalent in ME3. Udina, TIm, Kai Leng, every Cerberus agent, let alone those from previous games. Indoctrination has always been a huge part of ME why would it not be possible for Shepard to have been recieving an attempt to be indoctrinated by the reapers at the end? No matter what you say it is possible and that means IT is plausable.

Reapers think they are **** out of luck.
Reapers have been slowly trying to get to Shepard.
Reapers decide at the end when Shepard is getting close to maybe winning to go all out with indoctrination, the 'fast version'.
You are now resisting this at the end as your whole world is uncertain.

Read up on indoctrination, it is totally plausable to happen this way.

Udina didn't seem indoctrinated!

Udina's a toss up. It's possible he could have been indoctrinated sometime during the series but there's no real proof that's what happened. It's very possible that, like the codex suggests, Udina was just frustrated with the Council's lack of movement in dealing with the Reaper threat and indifferent handling of Earth and turned to Cerberus as a last ditch effort to wrest control away from the other Council members and grant himself emergency powers to force the galaxy to fight the Reapers.

[7he Island Head]

elecmanexe001 wrote...

7he Island Head wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

vurtual3 wrote...

The biggest problem with IT is that it isn't in ME3. I guess that's a problem to people who really want it to be because they don't like synthesis (which was explained ,for want of a better word ,really poorly imo but also imo was clearly meant to be a good ending). But mostly it's a problem because Shep is not indoctrinated!

Really? Indoctrination has existed in ever game and is most prevalent in ME3. Udina, TIm, Kai Leng, every Cerberus agent, let alone those from previous games. Indoctrination has always been a huge part of ME why would it not be possible for Shepard to have been recieving an attempt to be indoctrinated by the reapers at the end? No matter what you say it is possible and that means IT is plausable.

Reapers think they are **** out of luck.
Reapers have been slowly trying to get to Shepard.
Reapers decide at the end when Shepard is getting close to maybe winning to go all out with indoctrination, the 'fast version'.
You are now resisting this at the end as your whole world is uncertain.

Read up on indoctrination, it is totally plausable to happen this way.

Udina didn't seem indoctrinated!

They flat out said he was unless I miss interperated something. Having Udina indoctrinated also goes back to the codex entry in ME1 about indoctrinating government officials to cause chaos, it literally happens word for word in 3.

His wiki page doesn't say anything about him being indoctrinated, pluse he doesn't have the crazy eyes
http://masseffect.wi...ki/Donnel_Udina 

[Darth_Trethon]

Kaelef wrote...

It doesn't matter if they changed their minds, ran out of time, were forced at gunpoint, or had a brain hemohrrage on the way to typing in the code in their computers: They. Didn't. Do. That.

I think the more appropriate way to put it is that they didn't finish it.

Yet they never denied it after the game was released.....the only meaningful thing BioWare said about the IT was from Patrick Weekes who said that any coment regarding the IT from them would be spoilers. We ARE here because we are waiting on the Extended Cut and I fully believe this is what they are going to implement with it....maybe not the exact way we think but the overall indoctrination plot is likely to be adopted.

Modifié par Darth_Trethon, 12 mai 2012 - 10:30 .

[Agugaboo]

Renegades can choose not to go renegade at any point in the game. It's always an option. It's also true that decisions have consequences. Truly though the choices are not presented as unquestionably paragon/ renegade. It is up to the player's interpretation. If unerringly renegade shepard chooses control because he thinks that is the renegade thing to do, that is his end. On the other hand if he thinks destroy sounds like "I'll take you down with me you wispy blue f** fetus!," according to IT then, he gets to keep his filthy brain.

Modifié par Agugaboo, 12 mai 2012 - 10:30 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

ohupthis wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

How so?

Now bear with me here, a lot of forumites, are holding steadfast that is there is no other way to explain, what we were shovel-fed in the last 10 minutes, of the game.

PRO-ITers' try to understand by taking IN-GAME lore, and run with it, wherever it may lead, PROenders'(some anyway), prefer to take the lumps, and be content to rip up any other opinions.

If anyone, and I mean ANYONE could PROVE "IT" isn't PLAUSIBLE/POSSIBLE, be my guest, but instead we get to suffer through, peeps like cavscout,et al, ad Nauseum.

I dislike IT because replacing poor writing with even more poor writing is not what EC should do. IT will ruin what little good there is in the current ending by completely removing any emotional meaning to the showdown with TIM and the goodbye with Anderson by reducing it "It was all a dream".

[Raiil]

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

The biggest problem with those who hate IT; They don't understand IT.

Or want too.

I'm gonna bet, it has more to do with lacking the ability to see beyond the confines, of the itsy-bitsy world they live in.

I should rephrase though, some who hate it. There are others who can disagree without telling someone they are wrong to actually admit, as well I know I do, that it is only a possibility among many and may or may not happen and we are discussing rather how likely it is to happen instead of why it can or can not happen.

I was only referring to those who would eventually take offence to my statement.

I take offence to your statement. Not because you're Pro-IT, but because you seem to think that anyone who doesn't agree with you is a small-minded idiot. You know nothing of any one person's reasoning to not believe in IT, and your statement is condenscending and as close-minded as the people it purports to illustrate.

[vurtual3]

elecmanexe001 wrote...

vurtual3 wrote...

The biggest problem with IT is that it isn't in ME3. I guess that's a problem to people who really want it to be because they don't like synthesis (which was explained ,for want of a better word ,really poorly imo but also imo was clearly meant to be a good ending). But mostly it's a problem because Shep is not indoctrinated!

Really? Indoctrination has existed in ever game and is most prevalent in ME3. Udina, TIm, Kai Leng, every Cerberus agent, let alone those from previous games. Indoctrination has always been a huge part of ME why would it not be possible for Shepard to have been recieving an attempt to be indoctrinated by the reapers at the end? No matter what you say it is possible and that means IT is plausable.

Reapers think they are **** out of luck.
Reapers have been slowly trying to get to Shepard.
Reapers decide at the end when Shepard is getting close to maybe winning to go all out with indoctrination, the 'fast version'.
You are now resisting this at the end as your whole world is uncertain.

Read up on indoctrination, it is totally plausable to happen this way.

Sorry,didn't mean that there's no indoctrination in ME3,or that it's not important. IT is just about Shep being indoctrinated though,and while I don't think it's impossible at all ,or that IT is dumb or anything like that I just think that the whole game is geared towards synthesis if you play as a Shepard that resolves the geth wars and likes edi . I think whether people like it or not the catalyst /citadel/I don't really know what is representing a higher intelligence that is't understandable by organics and sythnesis is the start of the process of achieving this understanding,not by peace immediately following the choice but much much further down the line.

[elecmanexe001]

7he Island Head wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

7he Island Head wrote...

elecmanexe001 wrote...

vurtual3 wrote...

The biggest problem with IT is that it isn't in ME3. I guess that's a problem to people who really want it to be because they don't like synthesis (which was explained ,for want of a better word ,really poorly imo but also imo was clearly meant to be a good ending). But mostly it's a problem because Shep is not indoctrinated!

Really? Indoctrination has existed in ever game and is most prevalent in ME3. Udina, TIm, Kai Leng, every Cerberus agent, let alone those from previous games. Indoctrination has always been a huge part of ME why would it not be possible for Shepard to have been recieving an attempt to be indoctrinated by the reapers at the end? No matter what you say it is possible and that means IT is plausable.

Reapers think they are **** out of luck.
Reapers have been slowly trying to get to Shepard.
Reapers decide at the end when Shepard is getting close to maybe winning to go all out with indoctrination, the 'fast version'.
You are now resisting this at the end as your whole world is uncertain.

Read up on indoctrination, it is totally plausable to happen this way.

Udina didn't seem indoctrinated!

They flat out said he was unless I miss interperated something. Having Udina indoctrinated also goes back to the codex entry in ME1 about indoctrinating government officials to cause chaos, it literally happens word for word in 3.

His wiki page doesn't say anything about him being indoctrinated, pluse he doesn't have the crazy eyes
http://masseffect.wi...ki/Donnel_Udina 

you dont get crazy eyes when you are indoctrrinated until the reapers decide to give you implants. And as someone stated he may or may not  be. Regardless thats a maybe and there are plenty others who are indoctrinated.