55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Billyg3453]

TSA_383 wrote...

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 )

But this is not in line with indoctrination. This is a dream.
My point is that we are told and see indoctrinition is the Reapers gaining power over one's mind with the ability to suggest and twist logic into certain paths (Saren, Illusive Man). We see in Arrival and on the Derelict Reaper people Indoctrinated beyond repair, yet they still are actively awake and moving in their environment.

IT after extended cut is suggesting Shepard is having dreams of what his dreamed decision will have. And based on the outcome of his dream, he either dies/becomes a reaper slave, or he wakes up and.... we don't know.

I feel like better arguments could be made for Shepard being indoctrinated. Extended dream sequences voiced by Hackett, Edi, and himself are not those arguments.

[Lokanaiya]

@Rifneo
There's actually two places in Cronos that have holes to outer space with no force field. One by the first video console describing Project Lazarus and another right before the Proto-Reaper room by the video console with Kai Leng that is much more obvious.

Fun little fact: Try firing powers into each. The first has yours keep going past the opening for a few seconds before hitting, but the second guides all powers to a point on the wall that keeps you from walking into the hole... Much like the walkway up to TIM's room. Fire powers there, and they go all wonky and always land somewhere on the walkway, either on the edge or in the middle.

[Billyg3453]

CoolioThane wrote...

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.

I mean that the star child is the only thing that isn't real in the ending sequence, but everything else does happen. This is something I could believe, and very well might, as it is supported in game and in the lore (in fact, I think I actually like this idea).

The breath scene is confirmed by no one to be on Earth, and just because there is concrete debris does not confirm it like many people say it does.

I feel like too many stretches have to be made to still believe in the full indoctrination theory, and then believe a second ending DLC is incoming to prove it is correct.

[niravital]

TSA_383 wrote...
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...

Yes, and it is even implied (at least) that "seeing the future" can happen inside indoctrinated people's minds:
If you kill TIM by gunshot at the end, he says "Earth... I wish you could see it like I do, Shepard... It is perfect".
Hmmm... and then we imagine that perfect future ourselves if we choose control, right before turning reaper-zombie (which also possible, it appears under the Indoc entry in the codex)

[CoolioThane]

Billyg3453 wrote...

But this is not in line with indoctrination. This is a dream.
My point is that we are told and see indoctrinition is the Reapers gaining power over one's mind with the ability to suggest and twist logic into certain paths (Saren, Illusive Man). We see in Arrival and on the Derelict Reaper people Indoctrinated beyond repair, yet they still are actively awake and moving in their environment.

IT after extended cut is suggesting Shepard is having dreams of what his dreamed decision will have. And based on the outcome of his dream, he either dies/becomes a reaper slave, or he wakes up and.... we don't know.

I feel like better arguments could be made for Shepard being indoctrinated. Extended dream sequences voiced by Hackett, Edi, and himself are not those arguments.

This is a dream brought on by indoctrination/indoctrination attempts. 

That's the whole point of the decision chamber - the reapers are trying to suggest and twist logic inside Shep's mind to go for "control" and "synthesis" which will mean he finally succumbs to indoctrination. The "deaths" after Control and synthesis are just Shepard giving up who he was, and becoming a thrall. No longer himself. 

He's justifying his own choice in his head with the epilogues. Hackett because he's led the fight from the stars and "won", EDI because she "becomes perfect" and Shep because "his mind is still alive" yeah...

[Leonia]

It's hard to believe any more ending DLC is coming given that EC is supposedly the definitive end, are they going to move the goal posts every time a new DLC comes out and require us to go through the ending sequence each time to see a few more clues until they are ready to release the real defintive, defintive ending?

[TSA_383]

leonia42 wrote...

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!"

Honest question whilst we're discussing the end sequences:


-Who puts up (or not) the memorial if Shepard's spent the last 3 games romancing their right hand?

[TSA_383]

leonia42 wrote...

It's hard to believe any more ending DLC is coming given that EC is supposedly the definitive end, are they going to move the goal posts every time a new DLC comes out and require us to go through the ending sequence each time to see a few more clues until they are ready to release the real defintive, defintive ending?

Who knows? But we know they have multiple SP DLC's planned, and it's hard to think how they'll do that without altering the ending in some way...

[CoolioThane]

Billyg3453 wrote...

CoolioThane wrote...

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.

I mean that the star child is the only thing that isn't real in the ending sequence, but everything else does happen. This is something I could believe, and very well might, as it is supported in game and in the lore (in fact, I think I actually like this idea).

The breath scene is confirmed by no one to be on Earth, and just because there is concrete debris does not confirm it like many people say it does.

I feel like too many stretches have to be made to still believe in the full indoctrination theory, and then believe a second ending DLC is incoming to prove it is correct.

Ignoring every single clue...okay. It still disengages the player from Shep, and is not the character he has been throughout the series. I understand your idea and see how that could work. The only way to beat the Reapers is by using the crucible, and if he "refuses" he does not use it and therefore everyone dies...but it's still a huge leap from the themes of the series.

It is on Earth, no matter what you say, it is on Earth. Look at it and tell me it isn't.

The EC wasn't planned in the eyes of many of us. They made it to satiate the angry and then continue with the DLC plans...involving the IT 

[EpyonX3]

niravital wrote...

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.

Citadel is in tact and no sign of Shepard. Harbinger could have also spoken to the galaxy on Shepard's behalf.

[Leonia]

TSA_383 wrote...

Honest question whilst we're discussing the end sequences:


-Who puts up (or not) the memorial if Shepard's spent the last 3 games romancing their right hand?

I believe the "default" LI Liara with her magical plot armour does this for single Shepards.

[Schachmatt123]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Schachmatt wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Yes but she could tell if something was different about him presumably. which is what NPCs should have done in-game

And they did. E.g., after the Thessia Mission it is Joker who clearly noticed it. In addition he said that Anderson asked him to keep an eye on Shepard.

This was due to stress levels based on suit readings and conversations with Anderson. Shepard was bothered by the defeat on Thessia. Joker, in his usual fashion tried to cheer him with his humor. If they sensed indoctrination, Joker wouldn't have told him a joke and would have grilled him with questions instead. As a friend.

The argument wasn't about someone senses indoctrination on Shepard. It was about if someone senses if there is something different about Shepard. And there certainly is.

[niravital]

Billyg3453 wrote...
I feel like too many stretches have to be made to still believe in the full indoctrination theory, and then believe a second ending DLC is incoming to prove it is correct.

As for the first part, I think there are A LOT of "evidence" even prior to the starchild appearance.
but there was an idea that it's reality-hallucination mix, which is interesting in my opinion.

As for the second part, why not? It actually makes perfect sense from a business point of view. I posted this earlier so I hope it wasn't in this thread to avoid repost, but anyway, imagine the following process:

1. Release "finished" game with an ending.
2. Release a number of paid for DLC that add more clues and raise more question marks about the ending that we got.
3. Release ONE FINAL DLC (free, I hope) which is the definite conclusion to the trilogy, and blows your mind.
4. Go down in history as best game-franchise and also a major business trick.

What else would you release as your final DLC if not something that make your brain explode?
Bioware were stated that they had huge plans for the post-game material even before the EC.

I think that they planned it, but wasn't expecting THAT much of an angry response like they got, and therefore the EC.

[Schachmatt123]

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 do not agree. As long someone is not trolling but instead asks critical questions, the hole discussion will benefit. It will prevent people who are convinced that the ending is "not right" to become biased.

Modifié par Schachmatt, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:53 .

[MaximizedAction]

If I may intervene with something that made me raise the eyebrow the first time I heard it? Shepard's following line:

"The defining characteristic of organic life is that we think for ourselves."

When I heard him say that I was like "erm...okay..."

I just now thought about it again and I find this line kinda out-of-character.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since when did Shepard become such a philosopher? Or are all people in the future aware of the basic definitions of life, organics, synthetics and all? Because he uttered that line as if someone asked him about the color of the sky.

Besides that line actually being 'racist' and strange for Shepards who chose to save the Geth, it seems strange to me that Shepard was able to define 'the characteristics' of organics so quickly.

So my point is, could that be a sign that Shepard is not entirely himself?

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 03 juillet 2012 - 04:59 .

[Schachmatt123]

TSA_383 wrote...

Honest question whilst we're discussing the end sequences:


-Who puts up (or not) the memorial if Shepard's spent the last 3 games romancing their right hand?

In my first playthrough "I" romanced Miranda, and the task was up to Ash. Though I don't know if it has to do with her status as highest ranking officer now onboard the normandy or due to the fact that I dated her in ME1.

[WandySilva]

hey everyone,
I apologize if this has already been discussed, but before the extended cut, there was an overturned mako(or kodiak) in the breath scene, is it still there post ec?

[EpyonX3]

Schachmatt wrote...

EpyonX3 wrote...

Schachmatt wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Yes but she could tell if something was different about him presumably. which is what NPCs should have done in-game

And they did. E.g., after the Thessia Mission it is Joker who clearly noticed it. In addition he said that Anderson asked him to keep an eye on Shepard.

This was due to stress levels based on suit readings and conversations with Anderson. Shepard was bothered by the defeat on Thessia. Joker, in his usual fashion tried to cheer him with his humor. If they sensed indoctrination, Joker wouldn't have told him a joke and would have grilled him with questions instead. As a friend.

The argument wasn't about someone senses indoctrination on Shepard. It was about if someone senses if there is something different about Shepard. And there certainly is.

What's different about Shepard?

[niravital]

leonia42 wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...

Honest question whilst we're discussing the end sequences:


-Who puts up (or not) the memorial if Shepard's spent the last 3 games romancing their right hand?

I believe the "default" LI Liara with her magical plot armour does this for single Shepards.

There are videos on Youtube showing the memorial with no romanced Shep.

In control and synthesis, it's Traynor who puts his name on the board.
In destroy, it is "cannon" Ashley who puts it there.

by his description, this is not the highest EMS ending (Shepard is dead in destroy), but high enough for not letting Earth burn. He also says that he did go after Traynor (which doesn't work as we know).




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_jUzMXzKOI

[niravital]

EpyonX3 wrote...

niravital wrote...

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.

Citadel is in tact and no sign of Shepard. Harbinger could have also spoken to the galaxy on Shepard's behalf.

Yes but it's still just speculating.
And wasn't the point of destroy being "we didn't find Shepard, he might be alive"?

[Schachmatt123]

EpyonX3 wrote...

Schachmatt wrote...

The argument wasn't about someone senses indoctrination on Shepard. It was about if someone senses if there is something different about Shepard. And there certainly is.

What's different about Shepard?

Ask Joker. Or Anderson
They are the ones noticing it - and this is what the whole argument is about. So we are talking about established lore in this case.

[Turbo_J]

MaximizedAction wrote...

If I may intervene with something that made me raise the eyebrow the first time I heard it? Shepard's following line:

"The defining characteristic of organic life is that we think for ourselves."

When I heard him say that I was like "erm...okay..."

I just now thought about it again and I find this line kinda out-of-character.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since when did Shepard become such a philosopher? Or are all people in the future aware of the basic definitions of life, organics, synthetics and all? Because he uttered that line as if someone asked him about the color of the sky.

Besides that line actually being 'racist' and strange for Shepards who chose to save the Geth, it seems strange to me that Shepard was able to define 'the characteristics' of organics so quickly.

So my point is, could that be a sign that Shepard is not entirely himself?

It's a converation between Adams and The 'Doc' you have on board.

IIRC 'organic' was never used. (S)he said. 'Genetics doesn't make us alive. It's our capacity to evolve...'

Unless of course this is different if you renegade EDI earlier when you chat with her, but I don't think so.

It's always played out the same regardless of my Shep's alignment.

Point being, Shepard is supporting all forms of free willed life in this instance, not just organics.

Modifié par Turbo_J, 03 juillet 2012 - 05:28 .

[MaximizedAction]

Turbo_J wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

If I may intervene with something that made me raise the eyebrow the first time I heard it? Shepard's following line:

"The defining characteristic of organic life is that we think for ourselves."

When I heard him say that I was like "erm...okay..."

I just now thought about it again and I find this line kinda out-of-character.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since when did Shepard become such a philosopher? Or are all people in the future aware of the basic definitions of life, organics, synthetics and all? Because he uttered that line as if someone asked him about the color of the sky.

Besides that line actually being 'racist' and strange for Shepards who chose to save the Geth, it seems strange to me that Shepard was able to define 'the characteristics' of organics so quickly.

So my point is, could that be a sign that Shepard is not entirely himself?

It's a converation between Adams and The 'Doc' you have on board.

IIRC 'organic' was never used. (S)he said. 'Genetics doesn't make us alive. It's our capacity to evolve...'

Unless of course this is different if you renegade EDI earlier when you chat with her, but I don't think so.

It's always played out the same regardless of my Shep's alignment.

Point being, Shepard is supporting all forms of free willed life in this instance, not just organics.

Sorry I meant something different. Shepards says that (pre-EC and post-EC) to the Catalyst.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 03 juillet 2012 - 05:36 .

[paxxton]

MaximizedAction wrote...

If I may intervene with something that made me raise the eyebrow the first time I heard it? Shepard's following line:

"The defining characteristic of organic life is that we think for ourselves."

When I heard him say that I was like "erm...okay..."

I just now thought about it again and I find this line kinda out-of-character.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since when did Shepard become such a philosopher? Or are all people in the future aware of the basic definitions of life, organics, synthetics and all? Because he uttered that line as if someone asked him about the color of the sky.

Besides that line actually being 'racist' and strange for Shepards who chose to save the Geth, it seems strange to me that Shepard was able to define 'the characteristics' of organics so quickly.

So my point is, could that be a sign that Shepard is not entirely himself?

Nope, that definition he gave is nothing sophisticated, nothing a pre-schooler can't say. Also, it is oversimplified to the point of being incorrect.
EDIT: Well, maybe a pre-schooler can't say that.

Modifié par paxxton, 03 juillet 2012 - 06:00 .

[Turbo_J]

MaximizedAction wrote...

Sorry I meant something different. Shepards says that (pre-EC and post-EC) to the Catalyst.

Right. I do recall. However I didn't interpret it the same way. Even with Geth now fully evolved AI and EDI's embracing of 'life' they still are not organic and it's not possible to group them as such. Not yet. The Reapers may use artificial life to their advantage where possible, but their goal is to wipe out organic life first and foremost.

The Reapers don't let synthetic life mature much past basic AI from what we can gather, really... 3-4 hundred years of existence in our cycle; give or take 100-200 from Javik's maybe (it's never defined). In fact, it seems that the birth of self aware AI is what triggers they cycle. Not sure how that happens to be around the 50K mark every time though. Just another unanswered question.

It could be part of the self perpetuating cycle. An element of the equation that lends strength to the Reapers circular logic; constant conflict between organics and synthetics. The problem with this cycle, is it's run longer than originally designed. AI have not only evolved, but they have become allies. Something that may not have happened in previous cycles.