55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Billyg3453]

Why does the crew not putting up Shepards name fuel IT?

[Simon_Says]

CoolioThane wrote...

It seems literalists are still trying to convince us we're wrong on a thread that believers of the IT made to discuss the IT. If you don't agree then go elsewhere, please.

Calm down boyo. SubAstris has already expressed an opinion that IT is a clever idea. Unless that was somene else. Still, I don't recall Sub pulling a RampantAndroid and calling IT trash. He's not a supporter, but he's not a troll I think. Not anymore at least.

leonia42 wrote...

Do you discount the Memorial scene by supporting IT?

I think part of my reluctance to entertain the notion of the theory is that it would mean a lot of great, emotional moments never happened like the conversation with Anderson. Unless you assume only some bits are dreams and others actually happened.

Note that because EC changed the facts about the Citadel's destruction, a "Shepard is still on Earth" hypothesis is not strictly neccesary anymore. Hellish doesn't like to think so but it's now plausible to imagine a situation where Shepard did go onto the Citadel, did activate the Crucible, woke up the in Citadel rubble, and everything we saw involving Hackett and the Normandy was all actually happening. Weird crap still happens. No doubt there are elements that are still hallucinations, such as the dream trees, Anderson/TIM, etc.

The only problem that remains is that the breath scene is almost certainly on Earth. Someone linked Bioware's confirmation that it was on Earth, I think. Can the person who did post it again?

It could also be that Shepard was connected to a two-way simulation much like the geth consensus. Remember how in that mission symbolic action within the dream still had measurable effects in the real world? Then the space scenes could still be real as Shepard's hallucination plays out. But now the only question being who got on the Citadel that Hackett refers to.

MaximizedAction wrote...

twitter.com/JessicaMerizan/status/220013144565751808
"it's assumed that the Catalyst is appearing as something familiar to Shepard because it's an AI and likely has no form."

If the Catalyst hasn't been inside of Shepard's head, then at least some Reaper must've observed them interacting at some point.

Besides, out of all the things familiar to Shepard it could've appeared as, it's this damn kid.

You mean the reapers saw that one interaction between Shepard and Ventboy, despite the fact that they were both indoors and one was in a vent? And they managed to see this, but not gift them a thanix beam? Riiight.

Andromidius wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

I think what he is trying to say is that Shepard doesn't even consider anything but destroy to be an option right until the endings. If IT weretrue, you would expect some change from the start to the middle to the end in his feelings to the Reapers.

Hense process of indoctrination, not full indoctrination.  The idea to not destroy the Reapers is planted in Shepard's head by Starbinger, that's when the final stages of the indoctrination process are beginning - the moment where Shepard's mind is ready to be seized.

The fact Shepard goes from 'must destroy the Reapers' to 'hmm, maybe I shouldn't destroy them after all' based on a <5 minute conversation with an AI in league with the Reapers should be very telling in this regard.  The ground work to soften him/her up had already been done, otherwise Shepard won't have entertained the concept for even a moment.

Remember Anderson? "Too bad it took the Reapers to bring us together" Then when the squadmate corrects him that it was Shepard's doing and Anderson: "That's exactly what I meant!"

From small seeds do great things grow. Shepard was still hellbent on destryoing the reapers right until presented the option not to. But Shepard was softened up before being presented that option. And remember, many players actually fell for it. Gladly. Despite sharing Shepard's own journey for three games.

[EpyonX3]

niravital wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

LI knows Shepard is dead because they find his body among the Citadel Wreckage and the crew is informed.
In the High EMS ending, Shepard, at that moment, is pronounced missing, giving hope that he could still be alive somewhere in some form.


EDIT: My opinion not saying this is true. Just one possibility.

Yes, but...
In case the events of the ending are true events....
The problem is...
And check this out...


Ready?







THERE IS NO BODY OF SHEPARD LEFT!
He is absorbed into the crucible's energy.
Therefore, he cannot be pronounced dead, he can only be missing!


Well, unless, of course, he used to Reapes to leave a note to the other squad-mates
"guys, I'm dead, everything's fine, go ahead with your life".

That's exactly what happened. Just not as comical lol. EDI says the reapers share their knowledge with organics since they're all the same now. Synergics (Thanks Paxxton!) now know everything reapers and all of the civilizations they harvested. This includes Shepard's act of jumping into the beam.

[macrocarl]

Lokanaiya wrote...

@iconoclaste
Doesn't the memorial scene happen before they leave Random Jungle Planet? How would they know what happened to Shepard while being stranded somewhere with no outside contact?

Well time had elapsed for sure. We see the slide show of Wrex having a baby, Illium rebuilt, London looking all fancy etc. The time sequence kind of jumps around so we can assume when they repaired the Normandy they got their radio thingy working too and checked in with the fleet. I mean, we can assume that if you take the ending literally!

[CoolioThane]

Billyg3453 wrote...

Why does the crew not putting up Shepards name fuel IT?

Because how the hell would they know any different in the destroy ending than they do in the control and synthesis?

There's no new information the crew receive...ergo we think it's because it's in Shep's mind. When they place the name up, they accept death, but when they don't, "BOOM" he wakes up...

[Billyg3453]

CoolioThane wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

Why does the crew not putting up Shepards name fuel IT?

Because how the hell would they know any different in the destroy ending than they do in the control and synthesis?

There's no new information the crew receive...ergo we think it's because it's in Shep's mind. When they place the name up, they accept death, but when they don't, "BOOM" he wakes up...

I would say it is much more likely that Bioware is insinuating that your LI doesn't believe Shepard is dead, further driving home the point with the breath that he isn't and a reunion is possible.

And that doesn't explain how it is IT proof. Because they don't put his name on the wall, Shepard wakes up? Where is that supported in any game's examples of indoctrination?

Modifié par Billyg3453, 03 juillet 2012 - 03:47 .

[CoolioThane]

Billyg3453 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

Why does the crew not putting up Shepards name fuel IT?

Because how the hell would they know any different in the destroy ending than they do in the control and synthesis?

There's no new information the crew receive...ergo we think it's because it's in Shep's mind. When they place the name up, they accept death, but when they don't, "BOOM" he wakes up...

I would say it is much more likely that Bioware is insinuating that your LI doesn't believe Shepard is dead, further driving home the point with the breath that he isn't and a reunion is possible.

And that doesn't explain how it is IT proof. Because they don't put his name on the wall, Shepard wakes up? Where is that supported in any game's examples of indoctrination?

They don't put his name on the wall in his mind, because shepard feels he is not dead and so doesn't accept death...and subsequently wakes up. There are plenty examples of dreams and hallucinations been caused by indoctrination.

[EpyonX3]

CoolioThane wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

It seems literalists are still trying to convince us we're wrong on a thread that believers of the IT made to discuss the IT. If you don't agree then go elsewhere, please.

I don't believe in IT but what you're suggesting is a terrible idea. Literist vs ITer debates can actually strengthen the thoery buy plugging holes that ITers would otherwise miss. You should be glad that there are those willing to debate from an opposing side.

It's not the debating that's bad. It's the way some try to convince us we're wrong or that we're stupid "I told you so" threads and the like.

For the record, I'm not having a go at you or Sub for the debating, I'm pointing out (poorly, as I'm awul at words) that a lot of the stuff we are debating has been debated before and it becomes a bore (me, personally, especially having had mass debates (lol) on Facebook and stuff about it.)

I realise I might be coming across dismissive, I apologise, for I know you're a good person and just trying to understand. Plus I'm also really ****ing tired 

Ahh thanks for clarifying!

[zigamortis]

SubAstris wrote...


That may be true, the "hardcore" fans who read all the books, comics are most emotionally attached to the series and therefore cannot bear to see BW write a bad ending.  The fact that there is the difference though should tell you that BW have failed in their goal of making their meaning clear. I have played all the games several times yet do not believe in IT; if one has to go to other materals outside the games, BW have failed as storywriters

I understood perfectly fine without going to other materials. what i mean is that people who have read the books and comics etc have an easyer time of understanding.

[Billyg3453]

CoolioThane wrote...

They don't put his name on the wall in his mind, because shepard feels he is not dead and so doesn't accept death...and subsequently wakes up. There are plenty examples of dreams and hallucinations been caused by indoctrination.

So if they put his name on the wall, Shepard accepts death and dies?
And what indoctrination dream or hallucination has been like this? The Cerberus team on the derelict Reaper were seeing things, but they weren't having extensive dreams including conversations and galaxy altering decisions to be followed by fully voiced epilogues and different scenes.

[MaximizedAction]

Simon_Says wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

twitter.com/JessicaMerizan/status/220013144565751808
"it's assumed that the Catalyst is appearing as something familiar to Shepard because it's an AI and likely has no form."

If the Catalyst hasn't been inside of Shepard's head, then at least some Reaper must've observed them interacting at some point.

Besides, out of all the things familiar to Shepard it could've appeared as, it's this damn kid.

You mean the reapers saw that one interaction between Shepard and Ventboy, despite the fact that they were both indoors and one was in a vent? And they managed to see this, but not gift them a thanix beam? Riiight.

No, I agree! No matter how you twist or turn this, it always comes down to the AI/Reapers being in Shepard's head, no matter if you're literalist or ITist.

[CoolioThane]

Billyg3453 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

They don't put his name on the wall in his mind, because shepard feels he is not dead and so doesn't accept death...and subsequently wakes up. There are plenty examples of dreams and hallucinations been caused by indoctrination.

So if they put his name on the wall, Shepard accepts death and dies?
And what indoctrination dream or hallucination has been like this? The Cerberus team on the derelict Reaper were seeing things, but they weren't having extensive dreams including conversations and galaxy altering decisions to be followed by fully voiced epilogues and different scenes.

Everybody has different dreams and will be affected by indoctination in different ways. Everyone has different strength of will, and each person has their own weaknesses the Reapers exploit. Shepard's weakness is that he needs to complete his quest, and will do. How else do you explain the Starchild being the "kid" shep saw killed?

[MaximizedAction]

Billyg3453 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

They don't put his name on the wall in his mind, because shepard feels he is not dead and so doesn't accept death...and subsequently wakes up. There are plenty examples of dreams and hallucinations been caused by indoctrination.

So if they put his name on the wall, Shepard accepts death and dies?
And what indoctrination dream or hallucination has been like this? The Cerberus team on the derelict Reaper were seeing things, but they weren't having extensive dreams including conversations and galaxy altering decisions to be followed by fully voiced epilogues and different scenes.

They haven't mentioned conversations.
But just imagine if Shepard got to tell someone what the AI told him about how the Reapers are galactic peacekeepers and especially that analogy about how the Reapers are like fire.
And while he's telling this cool story, some Reapers are deconstructing dreadnaughts all over the galaxy.

In retrospect, no big difference to the "A dead god can dream" logfile.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:02 .

[zigamortis]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Schachmatt wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

I have already addressed and acknowledge this. However, just because something isn't to be taken at face value
doesn't mean it shouldn't be clear. If I tell a sarcastic joke, then it is obviously not to be taken at face value, but my intention should be clear nonetheless if it is to be effective.

There's a difference between a sarcastic joke and a person which is supposed to be indoctrinated. The joke is meant to be noticed, in case of indoctrination the indoctrinated person is not to be supposed to notice the effect. What's the point in playing an indoctrinated character if you know he is? One would certainly never choose an option that would harm him or others.

I disagree. Indoctrinated individuals know something is up but are in denial of that change. Not only that but their actions are radically different. If Shepard is in the process, he'd be less willing to destroy the reapers throughout the game and more willing to allow the cycle to continue. This isn't something that can happen in the last ten minutes of the game. This would be rapid indoctrination which would kill Shepard anyway.

Shepard's indoctrination according to IT is very different to what we know about indoctrination.

Not at all. Not all people being indoctrinated are consiously aware that their is a change. subconsiously they are aware but indoctrination would not work if it was just a big blinking light going "IMA TAKE CONTROL OF U HEHE" it wouldnt work. just look at all of the indoctrinated characters in the series. None of them knew that they were being controlled untill they did something or were told. like saren he didnt actualy realise that he was indoctrinated until later when you use the speech option.

[Rifneno]

Auralius Carolus wrote...

Shape up, kid. If the other Honey Badgers see you they'll burn you at the stake.

Hmmm... This aught to do it. www.youtube.com/watch

Don't be silly, honey badgers don't use fire. They use something far worse. They go for the crotch first when battling a larger mammal.
*clicks* Awwww...

leonia42 wrote...

*looks up planets in the Arcturus System which is the only place the Sol relay connects with*

Yeah, I still have no fraking idea on that planet. It felt like it was supposed to be real though, they went through the trouble of showing that the Normandy is no longer stranded there. Why bother if it it's supposed to be a dream planet?

Because EC was made to appease the angry literalists and one of the things they were pissed about was the Normandy being stranded on the set of Survivor?

HellishFiend wrote...

Yes, open space. It is the default "empty space" space that is present for any area that is not actively loaded. But the circumstances of it seem to suggest that Bioware was well aware of it and left it there intentionally, even calling attention to it by putting it directly behind the video console, where you would be sure to notice it.

You think a starry background is the default empty space? ... Turn off clipping sometime and go through a wall into an area that isn't there sometime. The graphics engine pretty much throws up in your lap, but there's no starry background in that vomit.

ThisOneIsPunny wrote...

I don't know about that. Going from Mass Effect 2 to Mass Effect 3, it kind of seems like the paragon routes in dialogue really play up how badly everything's affecting Shepard whereas they didn't before. Or at least not to such an obvious point. The dialogue with Liara after LOTSB, where she asks you how you feel or whatever "and not just what you say to keep morale up" and the paragon route there is a confident answer despite all the crap Shepard's had to deal with as opposed to the renegade option to speak honestly(and angrily). There are similar conversations like this with Liara in Mass Effect 3 where those two routes flip. Suddenly it's the renegade routes where you're withholding how Shepard really feels.

That's just my interpretation though.

And you know when that started? Arrival. Chatting with Harby at the end, the paragon route is "maybe we are doomed, but we're going to give it our damnedest anyway" and the renegade route is "I'm going to violate you with your own tentacles."

CoolioThane wrote...

It seems literalists are still trying to convince us we're wrong on a thread that believers of the IT made to discuss the IT. If you don't agree then go elsewhere, please.

I'd disagree if they made an intelligent counterpoint but that's very, very rarely the case.

[Leonia]

It could just be a coincidence that the LI doesn't put up Shepard's name in Destroy, maybe a bit of a foreshadow before the breath scene. I'm still not convinced it indicates anything about Jungle Planet being a dream world and Shepard is acknowledging his or her own death. For one, Shepard seems rather surprised when that breath is taken and probably doesn't even realise they are still alive until that moment. But if one looks at it through IT goggles it does make the memorial scene more appealing as a clue and something more than "Aww, love kept Shepard alive!"

Modifié par leonia42, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:12 .

[Billyg3453]

CoolioThane wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

They don't put his name on the wall in his mind, because shepard feels he is not dead and so doesn't accept death...and subsequently wakes up. There are plenty examples of dreams and hallucinations been caused by indoctrination.

So if they put his name on the wall, Shepard accepts death and dies?
And what indoctrination dream or hallucination has been like this? The Cerberus team on the derelict Reaper were seeing things, but they weren't having extensive dreams including conversations and galaxy altering decisions to be followed by fully voiced epilogues and different scenes.

Everybody has different dreams and will be affected by indoctination in different ways. Everyone has different strength of will, and each person has their own weaknesses the Reapers exploit. Shepard's weakness is that he needs to complete his quest, and will do. How else do you explain the Starchild being the "kid" shep saw killed?

But everyone who has been indoctrinated in the past has never been like this.

The catalyst looking like the kid is good evidence of IT. I always admit this. It is directly in line with the indoctrination codex entry. But the idea that Shepard is subconciously "dreaming" all this is much less believeable and supported in game.

[zigamortis]

Andromidius wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

SubAstris wrote..

Yes, but that doesn't mean that what Epyon is saying shouldn't be there. For example, on Virmire, Saren knows that something is up, hence why he studies indoctrination, but he isn't fully indoctrinated at that point.

Shepard hasn't exactly had any free time to set up research facilities for self-examination but the player can see things Shepard cannot.

Shepard has a fair amount of self-doubt as well, including an existance crisis.  Symtoms seem to vary a bit depending on the person (the stronger the will, the longer they last), but the same general pattern occurs in nearly every instance.  Only two which seem slightly different are TIM (unclear why) and Shiala (due to Therion).

Most likely due too the reaper artifact he came in contact with in the first contact war. thats how he got the glowey eyes as well.

[niravital]

EpyonX3 wrote...

That's exactly what happened. Just not as comical lol. EDI says the reapers share their knowledge with organics since they're all the same now. Synergics (Thanks Paxxton!) now know everything reapers and all of the civilizations they harvested. This includes Shepard's act of jumping into the beam.

You are right, it does explain the Synthesis ending.
Still no explanation for the Control ending though.

[CoolioThane]

Billyg3453 wrote...


But everyone who has been indoctrinated in the past has never been like this.

The catalyst looking like the kid is good evidence of IT. I always admit this. It is directly in line with the indoctrination codex entry. But the idea that Shepard is subconciously "dreaming" all this is much less believeable and supported in game.

Dreams are a very common part of indoctrination. This is evident in Arrival. 

It's already been discussed that perhaps it is not a dream, but rather a waking nightmare, as noted elsewhere in the game. 

[zigamortis]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Schachmatt wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

I disagree. Indoctrinated individuals know something is up but are in denial of that change. Not only that but their actions are radically different. If Shepard is in the process, he'd be less willing to destroy the reapers throughout the game and more willing to allow the cycle to continue. This isn't something that can happen in the last ten minutes of the game. This would be rapid indoctrination which would kill Shepard anyway.

Shepard's indoctrination according to IT is very different to what we know about indoctrination.

Interesting you brought that up, that's exactly what I assumed in certain discussions on other boards, that people who denied IT with really weird arguments and/or rejected the whole idea with noticeble irrationality, are in some form of denial. As if they were knowing that there is something going on ... but can't stand the thought that Shepard could somehow be indoctrinated or is undergoing it - and outright rejected the idea.

However I have to disagree to the rest of your post. According to IT, Shepard is not indoctrinated but is undergoing indoctrination.

Besides Shepard having three dreams over the course of I believe six months of time, there's no real change in his behavior. They even corrected Shepard's inability to question the Catalyst by adding dialog in EC.

A real shepard would be able to tell the godkid that he has reunited the geth and quarians making peace and yet thats not in there either.

[Billyg3453]

CoolioThane wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...


But everyone who has been indoctrinated in the past has never been like this.

The catalyst looking like the kid is good evidence of IT. I always admit this. It is directly in line with the indoctrination codex entry. But the idea that Shepard is subconciously "dreaming" all this is much less believeable and supported in game.

Dreams are a very common part of indoctrination. This is evident in Arrival. 

It's already been discussed that perhaps it is not a dream, but rather a waking nightmare, as noted elsewhere in the game. 

It would be different if IT was based on the idea that the catalyst doesn't exist and is only on the crucible trying to sway Shepard from destroy. But most ITers argue that the whole sequence from the Harby Beam --> Breath scene is a dream and the end hasn't actually happened.

That is extremely hard to believe and requires some pretty close-minded dedication to IT

[TSA_383]

Billyg3453 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

Why does the crew not putting up Shepards name fuel IT?

Because how the hell would they know any different in the destroy ending than they do in the control and synthesis?

There's no new information the crew receive...ergo we think it's because it's in Shep's mind. When they place the name up, they accept death, but when they don't, "BOOM" he wakes up...

I would say it is much more likely that Bioware is insinuating that your LI doesn't believe Shepard is dead, further driving home the point with the breath that he isn't and a reunion is possible.

And that doesn't explain how it is IT proof. Because they don't put his name on the wall, Shepard wakes up? Where is that supported in any game's examples of indoctrination?

You're missing the point somewhat.

The point is that whatever you choose, Shepard believes his work is done and that he's saved the galaxy, and you get essentially a dream sequence showing what you'd see as the future of your chosen scenario... and then you die, or become a reaper slave, or something similar...

Unless, that is, you've got the strength and resolve (which is represented by EMS, hence why saving anderson gains you 1000 EMS) to push on, in which case Shepard has the strength of will to fight on, at which point the squadmates (who are part of the vision here) do not believe that shepard is dead, because Shepard doesn't believe he/she is... and then he/she wakes up.

(And then EA/Bioware make us wait several more months for a satisfying conclusion to a trilogy that's already spanned several years )

[monrapias]

Criddle wrote...

Yay half way done to page 2000

I didn't know 1500 was half of 2000.

[CoolioThane]

Billyg3453 wrote...


It would be different if IT was based on the idea that the catalyst doesn't exist and is only on the crucible trying to sway Shepard from destroy. But most ITers argue that the whole sequence from the Harby Beam --> Breath scene is a dream and the end hasn't actually happened.

That is extremely hard to believe and requires some pretty close-minded dedication to IT

I've always believed the Starchild is not real. It's only in his mind. Surely with the whole sequence being a dream there is no evidence to suggest the Starchild is real? 

It's not close-minded, it is belief in an ending more fitting with  Mass Effect. If you don't like it, then leave! The breath scene itself is on Earth, and we argue the ending has not happened yet, and will take place after Shep wakes up after beating indoctrination.