I would like to bring up the subject about where exactly the breath scene was again. I know, I know, you don't want to go back to that, and this is probably way too late, but please hear me out.
The EC changed the data we had to work with. Before, we developed the dream sequence hypothesis because it was the best way to explain Shepard surviving an explosion that was clearly depicted as breaking the entire Citadel apart, Shepard showing much less of their inquisitive nature when talking with the Catalyst, as well as Normandy's retreat, among other things. Yet now that isn't the case because EC has in some way or another touched upon these reasons, isn't a dream sequence now not strictly necessary for Indoc Theory?
Yes, I believe the breath scene still makes more sense as being on Earth. (Though I’m unsure whether or not the game’s ending took place on Earth in a dream sequence given what else we see in the EC. This is a tricky subject that I think merits more discussion.) I'll try to find the images to prove it, but the breath scene contains assets identical in shape and texture to concrete blocks found on Earth and Benning. It's visibly obvious that it's concrete. These assets are never shown citadel locations. Additionally, I cannot recall evidence of the existence of concrete-like materials anywhere on the Citadel, in any of the games or other media. Not to mention that the existence of concrete on an alien space station as anything more than decorative or for extremely minor applications is simply not plausible.
As for the cables, as mentioned before, cables of similar design are present throughout the game in both single and multiplayer, including areas where such cables are obviously not of reaper origin. Even though loose cables such as those have not been discovered on the Earth missions yet, one must remember that reapers and reapertech
were strewn throughout London. The cables could feasibly be from, say, the conduit.
Not that this matters, as I've explained before. Since the dream sequence isn't a neccesary part of Indoctrination Theory anymore, debunking the claim that Shepard was still on Earth is not going to debunk Indoctrination Theory as a whole. Yes, the title of the thread asks if Mass Effect 3's climax was a hallucination, but the real core of Indoc Theory is the idea that Shepard's mind is under attack throughout the game and most particularily during the final sequences, and that Shepard/The Player must overcome that to achieve true victory. That much hasn't changed.
Oh, and generally to folks such as Peytl who want to come here and claim that Indoctrination Theory is debunked based on a single piece of evidence, extraordinary claims regarding extraordinary theories require extraordinary proof. In this case I refer to IT as an extraordinary theory in that from the literary side of things Indoctrination Theory
is a compelling and comprehensive explanation of the events we're presented throughout Mass Effect 3. It draws numerous powerful and sound arguments from lore found throughout the franchise. Refuting the theory from a literary standpoint will require much more than a single minor argument that can be easily countered.
As for the meta standpoint, i.e. "Did Bioware intend Indoctrination Theory to be the exclusive canon," I think we can all agree that whatever the case, Bioware's intent at this point is to sit on the fence and watch us speculate our guts out, without truly supporting any side. What has been added lends credence to both literalist and theorist interpretations. For instance, EDI's monologue can be viewed either as a genuine celebration of the dawn of a Brave New World that many literalists argued, or it could be viewed as horrid propaganda to an indoctrinated galaxy. IT hasn't been confirmed as canon. But It hasn't been confirmed not to be valid interpretation of the ending.
So at this point I think it's high time we made an important separation regarding Indoc Theory. We must separate Indoc Theory's value as a literary interpretation of the ending, and whether or not Indoc Theory was/is Bioware's plan for Mass Effect 3's canon. It's an important distinction that too many, including myself, have fallen into the trap of forgetting. Remember when people attacked IT saying that aspects of Indoc Theory could be easily explained as developer laziness? Or the people who desperately argued that Indoc Theory has to be more than fancanon because, basically, "the theory is too beautiful not to be"? That's because this distinction wasn't recognized. We have to start recognizing it, lest we keep making asses of ourselves to each other and the world at large.
TL:DR version (also known as the Rifneno version)
- Whether the breath scene was on Earth or not is irrelevant now because the dream sequence hypothesis isn't necessary anymore.
- The breath scene as presented still makes more sense as being on Earth than on the Citadel. I don't know what exactly to make of this.
- Indoc Theory wasn't about the dream sequence, ergo it's still alive.
- One weak argument can't debunk a theory built on many strong arguments.
- Extended Cut still supports IT but does not confirm or deny it.
- There's a difference between questioning Indoc Theory's merit as a canon vs. questioning Indoc Theory's being the canon. And we better grow up and understand that.
Modifié par Simon_Says, 30 juin 2012 - 02:58 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
And it's not ALWAYS Batman's fault that the Joker comes back. That son of a shisno has come back from the dead so many times that he has a TROPE named after him. Joker Immunity. 
