55528 réponses à ce sujet

[AmishAssassin]

I'm not sure why people are still of the mindset that the new Rejection ending strengthens IT...if anything it's the exact opposite. The entire cornerstone of IT is that Shepard is fighting a mental battle with Harbinger and that the only way to "win" and wake up to continue the fight is to resist accepting one of the choices presented and continue with the mission to destroy the Reapers.

You actually have the option to do that now by shooting the Starchild so Shepard immediately wakes up afterwards to finish the fight, right? No. You lose. The current cycle is defeated by the Reapers and you get no breath scene. Why would Bioware go through the trouble of making this new ending which basically allows you to do exactly what IT says you should and then still show you losing the fight instead of waking up. It even changes the Stargazer scene showing that your action was real and had real consequences.

I mean, come on, it was a really awesome effort by the fans to come together and try to make sense of the endings as they were, but I think it's probably time to stop over-analyzing everything and just accept it as your head canon.

[v0rt3x22]

EpyonX3 wrote...

monrapias wrote...

Here's a question.

Hacket radio'd in and said that no one made it to the beam.

Then why does he "radio" shepard?

In my playthough he says "someone" made it.

I know what you're talking about now - but the interesting part is that he could either be talking about Shepard or Anderson....that's interesting.

[llbountyhunter]

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

I would if anyone else got confused by what I said... but if your the only one.. .then perhaps my spelling isnt the issue:P

To be honest, I don't think anyone else is following. But if you will just explain what you mean: do you think that, if IT was truly BW's original plan, an interpretation of the ending using IT requires a different take at the plot and the focus of the ME series than if you take the ending literally?

Yeah i think its different from the literal interpertaion, but more true to the me lore.

Good, that's the point I was trying to make, it changes and can't be compared to an Inception ending.

But the technique used can. 

The technique of a dream can be used, yes of course. However you have to realise the differences in the effects of such a technique. Whether the end is a dream or not in Inception is not crucial in any way to the story; that can't be said if IT is true

But if IT itself is used to stop the reaper threat as I think is the case, then it could work very much like inception. Maybe.

You mean one man's rejection of indoctrination means everyone is saved just by that? Even if so, with inception it doesn't really matter if it is a dream. IT needs the ending to be a dream

He's not just resisting indoxtrination. Its amental battle. Its aso better explained in my thread...

Also is inception was still a dream, then you dont get the real ending.

Point I have been trying to make about Inception, dream or not, real or not, it doesn't ultimately matter. What the whole film is about, how exactly it is resolved, these do not change depending on whether you think it was a dream or not. This cannot be said for IT

If IT itself is used to end the threat then yes it can.

And as for inception, if he was dreaming then perhaps he never sees his kids or makes it back, and that the whole point of the movie.

[Deltateam Elcor]

Although my additions to this theory are several hundred pages back on the other thread, i will say this.

Indoctrination is not a seperate ending, it is a shadow arc of the story overall, it is the game within the game, It is unique to mass effect in a way, which is why i find anyone denouncing rather stupid.

With the EC now out, one no longer has to speculate the ending as being "false", since it is more black and white than before, it is now rightfully in its respectful position of being the that element of intrigue that shall never be fully explained...because it cannot, otherwise it is no longer what it is.

Put simply, it is the guy behind the scenes, for anyone that likes the lore enough to find him.

Modifié par Deltateam Elcor, 26 juin 2012 - 08:15 .

[Earthborn_Shepard]

Ok I'm confused. Origin downloaded something, but I just played the beam sequence and there were no changes.. so it must have been something else..

[llbountyhunter]

AmishAssassin wrote...

I'm not sure why people are still of the mindset that the new Rejection ending strengthens IT...if anything it's the exact opposite. The entire cornerstone of IT is that Shepard is fighting a mental battle with Harbinger and that the only way to "win" and wake up to continue the fight is to resist accepting one of the choices presented and continue with the mission to destroy the Reapers.

You actually have the option to do that now by shooting the Starchild so Shepard immediately wakes up afterwards to finish the fight, right? No. You lose. The current cycle is defeated by the Reapers and you get no breath scene. Why would Bioware go through the trouble of making this new ending which basically allows you to do exactly what IT says you should and then still show you losing the fight instead of waking up. It even changes the Stargazer scene showing that your action was real and had real consequences.

I mean, come on, it was a really awesome effort by the fans to come together and try to make sense of the endings as they were, but I think it's probably time to stop over-analyzing everything and just accept it as your head canon.

If you reject the choices then your rejecting the battle and refusing to fight. Logically you would lose. Destroy is the way to keep resisting.

Add the fact that the starbrat seens to be harbunger and this only further re-enforces the idea.

Modifié par llbountyhunter, 26 juin 2012 - 08:18 .

[Earthborn_Shepard]

Aaaah now I have it... great, so I'll have to play through London AGAIN

[EpyonX3]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

Did someone ask earlier about a noise that can be heard when Anderson says "Shepard?" on the citadel? It's definitely there. its strange.

That's what I'm talking about. It's his synthetics waking him up. You hear a defibrillator like sound.

[Chewy96]

I still don't understand why the star child looks like the kid from the beginning

[AmishAssassin]

llbountyhunter wrote...

AmishAssassin wrote...

I'm not sure why people are still of the mindset that the new Rejection ending strengthens IT...if anything it's the exact opposite. The entire cornerstone of IT is that Shepard is fighting a mental battle with Harbinger and that the only way to "win" and wake up to continue the fight is to resist accepting one of the choices presented and continue with the mission to destroy the Reapers.

You actually have the option to do that now by shooting the Starchild so Shepard immediately wakes up afterwards to finish the fight, right? No. You lose. The current cycle is defeated by the Reapers and you get no breath scene. Why would Bioware go through the trouble of making this new ending which basically allows you to do exactly what IT says you should and then still show you losing the fight instead of waking up. It even changes the Stargazer scene showing that your action was real and had real consequences.

I mean, come on, it was a really awesome effort by the fans to come together and try to make sense of the endings as they were, but I think it's probably time to stop over-analyzing everything and just accept it as your head canon.

If you reject the choices then your rejecting the battle and refusing to fight. Logically you would lose. Destroy is the way to keep resisting.

Add the fact that the starbrat seens to be harbunger and this only further re-enforces the idea.

No, rejecting the choices should break the indoctrination and make Shepard wake up according to the theory. Why would refusing to fight in his "dream" world result in losing the actual battle? Remember, none of this is actually happening according to IT.

And we've known literally since the day the game came out that the starchild is an emissary of the reapers who has taken a form that can communicate with Shepard. I'm not sure why people are so blown away by this.

[llbountyhunter]

Chewy96 wrote...

I still don't understand why the star child looks like the kid from the beginning

Even if taken literally that would mean that the reapers are in shepards mind.

[v0rt3x22]

Chewy96 wrote...

I still don't understand why the star child looks like the kid from the beginning

I could go on an IT rant - but I'm too tired....been holding the line for IT support all day.

[spotlessvoid]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

titusrsoooooo1337 wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Who's up for more speculation? I may not post here anymore, but I will lurk the hell out of it. It's been an honor, whether IT is the truth or not doesn't matter, we speculated, and that was the goal, not badmouthing, trolling, dissing, disrespect, or anything but speculation. Essentially, nothing is true, everything is permitted.

Haha I just tried to bump this thread and it said I wasn't permitted to


But on that note, I really didn't see anything to disprove this theory. Sure the cinematics were beatiful and all, but wasn't it part of the theory in the first place that the "endings" were reassurances given to shepards mind to help promote his indoctrination?

I agree - essentially the endings were the same when you think about it in terms of IT

The fact there is no change is a hit against It

To me, and I'm not in the most optimistic mindset currently, IT should have led to a reveal. If ec didn't do it, what are the chances? Honestly? Too much time has lapsed. After watching the various ec endings, I have to say that I see nothing new that lends creedence to IT. I think if IT was intended, they'd add in some more clues. I see none

why take the time to simply barely improve Shepards post choice dream sequences?


IT isn't 100% debunked, but we took a massive blow. Unless we're all missing something

[llbountyhunter]

AmishAssassin wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

AmishAssassin wrote...

I'm not sure why people are still of the mindset that the new Rejection ending strengthens IT...if anything it's the exact opposite. The entire cornerstone of IT is that Shepard is fighting a mental battle with Harbinger and that the only way to "win" and wake up to continue the fight is to resist accepting one of the choices presented and continue with the mission to destroy the Reapers.

You actually have the option to do that now by shooting the Starchild so Shepard immediately wakes up afterwards to finish the fight, right? No. You lose. The current cycle is defeated by the Reapers and you get no breath scene. Why would Bioware go through the trouble of making this new ending which basically allows you to do exactly what IT says you should and then still show you losing the fight instead of waking up. It even changes the Stargazer scene showing that your action was real and had real consequences.

I mean, come on, it was a really awesome effort by the fans to come together and try to make sense of the endings as they were, but I think it's probably time to stop over-analyzing everything and just accept it as your head canon.

If you reject the choices then your rejecting the battle and refusing to fight. Logically you would lose. Destroy is the way to keep resisting.

Add the fact that the starbrat seens to be harbunger and this only further re-enforces the idea.

No, rejecting the choices should break the indoctrination and make Shepard wake up according to the theory. Why would refusing to fight in his "dream" world result in losing the actual battle? Remember, none of this is actually happening according to IT.

And we've known literally since the day the game came out that the starchild is an emissary of the reapers who has taken a form that can communicate with Shepard. I'm not sure why people are so blown away by this.

You dont understand the thoery then. thats not what the theory says. your disproving something completly different from IT.

[v0rt3x22]

spotlessvoid wrote...

v0rt3x22 wrote...

titusrsoooooo1337 wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Who's up for more speculation? I may not post here anymore, but I will lurk the hell out of it. It's been an honor, whether IT is the truth or not doesn't matter, we speculated, and that was the goal, not badmouthing, trolling, dissing, disrespect, or anything but speculation. Essentially, nothing is true, everything is permitted.

Haha I just tried to bump this thread and it said I wasn't permitted to


But on that note, I really didn't see anything to disprove this theory. Sure the cinematics were beatiful and all, but wasn't it part of the theory in the first place that the "endings" were reassurances given to shepards mind to help promote his indoctrination?

I agree - essentially the endings were the same when you think about it in terms of IT

The fact there is no change is a hit against It

To me, and I'm not in the most optimistic mindset currently, IT should have led to a reveal. If ec didn't do it, what are the chances? Honestly? Too much time has lapsed. After watching the various ec endings, I have to say that I see nothing new that lends creedence to IT. I think if IT was intended, they'd add in some more clues. I see none

why take the time to simply barely improve Shepards post choice dream sequences?


IT isn't 100% debunked, but we took a massive blow. Unless we're all missing something

I had someone else say something similar earlier - but the fact that the star child seems to be controlled by the reapers (as indicated by the reject ending) - seems to strengthen the theories of IT.

[SirLugash]

So I guess nobody else encountered a conversation with Harby ?

[Chewy96]

@v0rt3x2

I agree with the IT theory but if its not true how do they explain the star child looking like the kid

[spotlessvoid]

Harbinger=Starchild is logical for BOTH endings

Anyway, I'm interested in seeing what Byne Rifneno Arian Dwailing Hellishfiend Maximized Lex0r and other stalwarts have to say. I trust if something is amiss one of ours will uncover it.

[llbountyhunter]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Harbinger=Starchild is logical for BOTH endings

Anyway, I'm interested in seeing what Byne Rifneno Arian Dwailing Hellishfiend Maximized Lex0r and other stalwarts have to say. I trust if something is amiss one of ours will uncover it.

No, it wouldnt.... how would it make sense?

[v0rt3x22]

Chewy96 wrote...

@v0rt3x2

I agree with the IT theory but if its not true how do they explain the star child looking like the kid

Well my point exactly. 

If IT isn't true - there's a lot of explaining to do. I can't explain why it looks like the child, if IT isn't true.

[AmishAssassin]

llbountyhunter wrote...

AmishAssassin wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

AmishAssassin wrote...

I'm not sure why people are still of the mindset that the new Rejection ending strengthens IT...if anything it's the exact opposite. The entire cornerstone of IT is that Shepard is fighting a mental battle with Harbinger and that the only way to "win" and wake up to continue the fight is to resist accepting one of the choices presented and continue with the mission to destroy the Reapers.

You actually have the option to do that now by shooting the Starchild so Shepard immediately wakes up afterwards to finish the fight, right? No. You lose. The current cycle is defeated by the Reapers and you get no breath scene. Why would Bioware go through the trouble of making this new ending which basically allows you to do exactly what IT says you should and then still show you losing the fight instead of waking up. It even changes the Stargazer scene showing that your action was real and had real consequences.

I mean, come on, it was a really awesome effort by the fans to come together and try to make sense of the endings as they were, but I think it's probably time to stop over-analyzing everything and just accept it as your head canon.

If you reject the choices then your rejecting the battle and refusing to fight. Logically you would lose. Destroy is the way to keep resisting.

Add the fact that the starbrat seens to be harbunger and this only further re-enforces the idea.

No, rejecting the choices should break the indoctrination and make Shepard wake up according to the theory. Why would refusing to fight in his "dream" world result in losing the actual battle? Remember, none of this is actually happening according to IT.

And we've known literally since the day the game came out that the starchild is an emissary of the reapers who has taken a form that can communicate with Shepard. I'm not sure why people are so blown away by this.

You dont understand the thoery then. thats not what the theory says. your disproving something completly different from IT.

Uhhh that is what the theory is about though. It's about resisting indoctrination by not giving in to the Reapers will. What could be more symbolic of your free will and you refusal to stop resisting than a pistol blast to the kid's dome? If anything, Refusal should be a better option to convey that than Destory, but Bioware decided not to run with it so what does that tell you?

[Zero132132]

People are still holding on to IT, even now? Damn.

One question I've been curious about the last couple of days... for IT fans, why is it that it's actually easier to reject synthesis and control when you have very few war assets? I mean, those options aren't even available then. Shepard doesn't wake up then, either, so how does indoctrination relate to war assets?

[SubAstris]

llbountyhunter wrote...


If IT itself is used to end the threat then yes it can.

And as for inception, if he was dreaming then perhaps he never sees his kids or makes it back, and that the whole point of the movie.

Briefly explain how this could possibly be the case, I'm really struggling

It doesn't matter if when seeing his kids at the end he is still dreaming; the point is he doesn't care any more. Hence why it doesn't matter if it is a dream or not, it is besides the point.

[llbountyhunter]

AmishAssassin wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

AmishAssassin wrote...

llbountyhunter wrote...

AmishAssassin wrote...

I'm not sure why people are still of the mindset that the new Rejection ending strengthens IT...if anything it's the exact opposite. The entire cornerstone of IT is that Shepard is fighting a mental battle with Harbinger and that the only way to "win" and wake up to continue the fight is to resist accepting one of the choices presented and continue with the mission to destroy the Reapers.

You actually have the option to do that now by shooting the Starchild so Shepard immediately wakes up afterwards to finish the fight, right? No. You lose. The current cycle is defeated by the Reapers and you get no breath scene. Why would Bioware go through the trouble of making this new ending which basically allows you to do exactly what IT says you should and then still show you losing the fight instead of waking up. It even changes the Stargazer scene showing that your action was real and had real consequences.

I mean, come on, it was a really awesome effort by the fans to come together and try to make sense of the endings as they were, but I think it's probably time to stop over-analyzing everything and just accept it as your head canon.

If you reject the choices then your rejecting the battle and refusing to fight. Logically you would lose. Destroy is the way to keep resisting.

Add the fact that the starbrat seens to be harbunger and this only further re-enforces the idea.

No, rejecting the choices should break the indoctrination and make Shepard wake up according to the theory. Why would refusing to fight in his "dream" world result in losing the actual battle? Remember, none of this is actually happening according to IT.

And we've known literally since the day the game came out that the starchild is an emissary of the reapers who has taken a form that can communicate with Shepard. I'm not sure why people are so blown away by this.

You dont understand the thoery then. thats not what the theory says. your disproving something completly different from IT.

Uhhh that is what the theory is about though. It's about resisting indoctrination by not giving in to the Reapers will. What could be more symbolic of your free will and you refusal to stop resisting than a pistol blast to the kid's dome? If anything, Refusal should be a better option to convey that than Destory, but Bioware decided not to run with it so what does that tell you?

That's called giving up and having a tantrum.... not very symbolic.

[clos]

IT remains the only thing that could have saved the game from itself. EC is garbage.