55528 réponses à ce sujet

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Perhaps, but no one is in for more of a shock than the pro-control and pro-synthesis camp. Many of them not only genuinely believe them to be true, but they want them to be true. Thats why I came up with the sig I did. Indoctrination takes advantage of your desires. Those who want Control or Synthesis badly enough will blind themselves to the possibility that they are being deceived, and will then be blindsided by the revelation and consequences. 

And those who choose Destroy desperately want to destroy the Reapers. The only reason that might be better in EC than the other choices is that the game's overarching theme was to destroy the Reapers. Mass Effect indoctrinates the players to think it's the best option to destroy everythink that opposes them.

Yes, but you may be confusing "indoctrination" with "Indoctrination". One is a proper noun that stands for the Reapers' "Insidious method of corrupting organic minds", the other simply stands for a process of swaying someone towards a specific belief or beliefs. DJBare tried to exemplify that distinction a while back, but it was largely lost on people. 

You are correct, ME "indoctrinates" players into believing the Reapers must be destroyed, but I believe that "indoctrination" is correct and legitimate. The bait and switch at the very end to try and sway you towards believing in Control or Synthesis is the insidious "Indoctrination" with a capital I. 

If I remember I debunked DJBare's theory that Shepard was indoctrinating other characters by talking with them and merely asking for information or a favor.

What does that have to do at all with what I just said? You are merely proving my statement that DJBare's attempt at explaining the distinction between the two was lost on people. 

Seriously, go look up the literal definition of the word indoctrination, setting aside the proper noun lore definition of "Indoctrination" in the mass effect universe. After reading it, then think about what DJBare was saying. Hopefully it will make sense. 

The point is, anytime you are trying to convince someone of something they do not currently believe, you are attempting to indoctrinate them in a literal sense. 

If you're doing it showing them arguments and they conciously analyze them then it is not indoctrination.

[llbountyhunter]

Control: you switch sides and aid the reapers to "victory"

Synthesis: as a result of your high ems maybe you can realize your indoctrinated and try to momentarily broeak free, and maybe your LI will have to kill you. Or you have to sacrifice yourself in a way that helps your team

Modifié par llbountyhunter, 06 juin 2012 - 08:07 .

[Turbo_J]

HellishFiend wrote...

MaximizedAction wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...


Perhaps, but no one is in for more of a shock than the pro-control and pro-synthesis camp. Many of them not only genuinely believe them to be true, but they want them to be true. Thats why I came up with the sig I did. Indoctrination takes advantage of your desires. Those who want Control or Synthesis badly enough will blind themselves to the possibility that they are being deceived, and will then be blindsided by the revelation and consequences. 

Is it possible to come up with a story continuation that lets the player continue in his/her 'indoctrinated' point of view, aka a Reaper win scenario not seem as bad as to those (most of us here) who are sure that Destroy is the 'right' choice? Or, do Controllers or Synthesizers (that's right, I wrote it) have to feel blindsided?

I certainly do hope there is a good amount of content for choosers of Control or Synthesis, and there are certainly ways they could pull it off. The problem is, if Shepard becomes indoctrinated, that suggests the player has lost control of him. Therefore it is unlikely that there could be any gameplay, unless it branches off into a Darkspawn Chronicles style affair, where you openly accept the idea that you are now helping the bad guys win. While I personally think it would be cool, I dont think that sort of thing would fly well with people who wanted the blue and green options to be real...

Yeah. That would be cool, but kind bad.

I think it will be a 'rock falls, everybody dives out of the way' situation. However, I do suspect there will be consequences based on choice. Perhaps for all of us. I mean, really, what if some how control is... nah.

I'm sure we will be blown away regardless of what we picked. Think about it - months for cut scenes and an epilogue? Just remember the first 97% of the game... and then the last 3% with Indoctrination eyes wide open...

[MaximizedAction]

Turbo_J wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Mass Effect indoctrinates the players to think it's the best option to destroy everythink that opposes them.

Maybe for renegades, to a degree, but even they can be peace makers depending on their moral choices. I have a Renegade that didn't kill a single unarmed free willed organic or synthetic that didn't threaten them.

'Ruthless' is a choice, not a requirement.

I agree! I chose Destroy intuitively and stubbornly, even though in my Paragon playthrough. I usually dig alternative solutions for a problem, and want to avoid killing or destroying someone -- I even chose to save the Geth.
Control & Syth represent alternative solutions.
But ME3 marked the first time in ME where I chose to remain stubborn and do what I came to do, no compromises.

And it still felt Paragon.

[HellishFiend]

balance5050 wrote...


I think it should be your best friend or LI, so for me it would either be Garrus or Liara.... I could live with that (although, I'm not ruling out Liara's possible indoctrination.)

When it comes to IT, there are not very many things that we can legitimately rule out. The biggest one I can think of, is that it'ts ruled out that Shepard is fully indoctrinated or implanted with any significant Reaper tech prior to the ending, because Vendetta does not detect either to be the case during his first conversation with him. 

Other things, like subtle indoctrination of Shepard, or subtle indoctrination of any squadmates, can not be truly ruled out until we find out the definitive answer. 

[Turbo_J]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Perhaps, but no one is in for more of a shock than the pro-control and pro-synthesis camp. Many of them not only genuinely believe them to be true, but they want them to be true. Thats why I came up with the sig I did. Indoctrination takes advantage of your desires. Those who want Control or Synthesis badly enough will blind themselves to the possibility that they are being deceived, and will then be blindsided by the revelation and consequences. 

And those who choose Destroy desperately want to destroy the Reapers. The only reason that might be better in EC than the other choices is that the game's overarching theme was to destroy the Reapers. Mass Effect indoctrinates the players to think it's the best option to destroy everythink that opposes them.

Yes, but you may be confusing "indoctrination" with "Indoctrination". One is a proper noun that stands for the Reapers' "Insidious method of corrupting organic minds", the other simply stands for a process of swaying someone towards a specific belief or beliefs. DJBare tried to exemplify that distinction a while back, but it was largely lost on people. 

You are correct, ME "indoctrinates" players into believing the Reapers must be destroyed, but I believe that "indoctrination" is correct and legitimate. The bait and switch at the very end to try and sway you towards believing in Control or Synthesis is the insidious "Indoctrination" with a capital I. 

If I remember I debunked DJBare's theory that Shepard was indoctrinating other characters by talking with them and merely asking for information or a favor.

What does that have to do at all with what I just said? You are merely proving my statement that DJBare's attempt at explaining the distinction between the two was lost on people. 

Seriously, go look up the literal definition of the word indoctrination, setting aside the proper noun lore definition of "Indoctrination" in the mass effect universe. After reading it, then think about what DJBare was saying. Hopefully it will make sense. 

The point is, anytime you are trying to convince someone of something they do not currently believe, you are attempting to indoctrinate them in a literal sense. 

If you're doing it showing them arguments and they conciously analyze them then it is not indoctrination.

But it is. It's just free choice vs manipulated...

indoctrination is a word. A word with a meaning. It is not evil, nor good... It's just a word.

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

If I remember I debunked DJBare's theory that Shepard was indoctrinating other characters by talking with them and merely asking for information or a favor.

What does that have to do at all with what I just said? You are merely proving my statement that DJBare's attempt at explaining the distinction between the two was lost on people. 

Seriously, go look up the literal definition of the word indoctrination, setting aside the proper noun lore definition of "Indoctrination" in the mass effect universe. After reading it, then think about what DJBare was saying. Hopefully it will make sense. 

The point is, anytime you are trying to convince someone of something they do not currently believe, you are attempting to indoctrinate them in a literal sense. 

If you're doing it showing them arguments and they conciously analyze them then it is not indoctrination.

Yes, it is. Sorry but you're wrong on this one... Teaching and informing are forms of indoctrination. Even if all you do is present someone with the information necessary to draw their own conclusion, that is still literally and technically indoctrination. 

http://dictionary.re...se/indoctrinate 

[DJBare]

paxxton wrote...
As far as I remember I debunked DJBare's theory that Shepard was indoctrinating other characters by talking with them and merely asking for information or a favor.

You did not debunk it, what you did was to show another term for indoctrination, but no matter which way you cut it, Shepard has the power of persuasion, Shepard has always been able to get people to see things differently(assuming high enough speech, renegade or paragon), this is how reapers use indoctrination but more effectively, they get inside the mind and twist the desires of the victims through persuasive thought processes until the victim "sees things differently"; apart from getting inside the mind this is what Shepard does, he convinces until the person sees things differently, many a time I've seen a person say "I never thought of it that way" after passing a speech check.

Now we can play semantics all day, but the fact is, Shepard has the ability to get people to see things differently and that's one of the reasons I believe the reapers have an interest in Shepard.

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

If I remember I debunked DJBare's theory that Shepard was indoctrinating other characters by talking with them and merely asking for information or a favor.

What does that have to do at all with what I just said? You are merely proving my statement that DJBare's attempt at explaining the distinction between the two was lost on people. 

Seriously, go look up the literal definition of the word indoctrination, setting aside the proper noun lore definition of "Indoctrination" in the mass effect universe. After reading it, then think about what DJBare was saying. Hopefully it will make sense. 

The point is, anytime you are trying to convince someone of something they do not currently believe, you are attempting to indoctrinate them in a literal sense. 

If you're doing it showing them arguments and they conciously analyze them then it is not indoctrination.

Yes, it is. Sorry but you're wrong on this one... Teaching and informing are forms of indoctrination. Even if all you do is present someone with the information necessary to draw their own conclusion, that is still literally and technically indoctrination. 

http://dictionary.re...se/indoctrinate 

Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."

Modifié par paxxton, 06 juin 2012 - 08:15 .

[HellishFiend]

DJBare wrote...

paxxton wrote...
As far as I remember I debunked DJBare's theory that Shepard was indoctrinating other characters by talking with them and merely asking for information or a favor.

You did not debunk it, what you did was to show another term for indoctrination, but no matter which way you cut it, Shepard has the power of persuasion, Shepard has always been able to get people to see things differently(assuming high enough speech, renegade or paragon), this is how reapers use indoctrination but more effectively, they get inside the mind and twist the desires of the victims through persuasive thought processes until the victim "sees things differently"; apart from getting inside the mind this is what Shepard does, he convinces until the person sees things differently, many a time I've seen a person say "I never thought of it that way" after passing a speech check.

Now we can play semantics all day, but the fact is, Shepard has the ability to get people to see things differently and that's one of the reasons I believe the reapers have an interest in Shepard.

The possibility also exists that one particular line of the codex entry could be at work:

"The Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify it's signals"

It is not beyond the realm of feasibility that in ME3, this is exactly what is happening. People are listening to and being swayed by Shepard because of a signal being amplified through him.  I'm not completely sold on the idea, but its on the table. 

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."

Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often". 

[DJBare]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."

Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often". 

This fits Shepard in my opinion.

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/inculcate
To induce understanding or a particular sentiment in a person or persons.

[HellishFiend]

DJBare wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."

Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often". 

This fits Shepard in my opinion.

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/inculcate
To induce understanding or a particular sentiment in a person or persons.

Exactly. 

[Ravereth]

Does anyone have a screenshot of Shepard's armor before the confrontation with Maruder Shields? I want to check something, but I can't, because I don't know how to enable flycam in ME3 

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."

Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often". 

It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].

[Rosewind]

MaximizedAction wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Mass Effect indoctrinates the players to think it's the best option to destroy everythink that opposes them.

Maybe for renegades, to a degree, but even they can be peace makers depending on their moral choices. I have a Renegade that didn't kill a single unarmed free willed organic or synthetic that didn't threaten them.

'Ruthless' is a choice, not a requirement.

I agree! I chose Destroy intuitively and stubbornly, even though in my Paragon playthrough. I usually dig alternative solutions for a problem, and want to avoid killing or destroying someone -- I even chose to save the Geth.
Control & Syth represent alternative solutions.
But ME3 marked the first time in ME where I chose to remain stubborn and do what I came to do, no compromises.

And it still felt Paragon.

I chose Destroy first time and didn't even feel bad, well I did but Shepard is N7 she/he makes the hard choices sometimes you have to make the hard choice to kill 10 million so 20 million can live.

[HellishFiend]

Ravereth wrote...

Does anyone have a screenshot of Shepard's armor before the confrontation with Maruder Shields? I want to check something, but I can't, because I don't know how to enable flycam in ME3 

I know that Shepard's armor was flycammed before and after the hit from Marauder Shields and screenshots taken, but for the life of me I cant remember what conclusions were drawn from it. 

Anyone?

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."

Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often". 

It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].

I'm going to have to say that I'm done trying to explain it. I dont need you to agree with me to know that I'm right about this. 

I will say this though, "often" is the easier of the two words to understand, and yet you are completely ignoring it by skipping it and underlining/bolding the part after it. If I often eat pizza, does that mean I always eat pizza? Come on, paxxton. 

But in any case, like I said, I'd like to move on from this topic. 

[D.Sharrah]

Rosewind wrote...

Can we stick to one name for that star child we should make a poll OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO we should make a poll!!!

I thought we had...and he had forever been deemed, "ReaperBieber the StarBinger".

[HellishFiend]

Rosewind wrote...


I chose Destroy first time and didn't even feel bad, well I did but Shepard is N7 she/he makes the hard choices sometimes you have to make the hard choice to kill 10 million so 20 million can live.

Yep, nowhere is this highlighted better in ME3 than in the friendship conversation you have with Vega in your quarters. That specific topic is raised, and while you can offer a couple of different opinions, the point of hard choices being part of the job is very clear. 

[dreamgazer]

I understand where you're coming from, DJBare, even if I think you're woefully overlooking the connotative emphasis in most standard definitions of indoctrination---negative, brainwashing, sectarian motives.

"In common discourse, indoctrination is often associated with negative connotations, while socialization refers to cultural or educational learning."

And yes, I do think that the Reapers are interested in Shepard for his ability to rally and persuade those around him. But not because of his ability to blindly pull their interest.

[balance5050]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."

Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often". 

It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].

No one really questions Shepard.... Shepard asks the questions here.....

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."

Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often". 

It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].

I'm going to have to say that I'm done trying to explain it. I dont need you to agree with me to know that I'm right about this. 

I will say this though, "often" is the easier of the two words to understand, and yet you are completely ignoring it by skipping it and underlining/bolding the part after it. If I often eat pizza, does that mean I always eat pizza? Come on, paxxton. 

But in any case, like I said, I'd like to move on from this topic. 

Fine. Let me just say that the word "often" introduces ambiguity into that definition. I suppose it comes from the fact that people's views and opinions aren't mathematically exact/strict and differ somewhat unpredictably.

[balance5050]

dreamgazer wrote...

I understand where you're coming from, DJBare, even if I think you're woefully overlooking the connotative emphasis in most standard definitions of indoctrination---negative, brainwashing, sectarian motives.

"In common discourse, indoctrination is often associated with negative connotations, while socialization refers to cultural or educational learning."

And yes, I do think that the Reapers are interested in Shepard for his ability to rally and persuade those around him. But not because of his ability to blindly pull their interest.

I prefer to think of Shepard's effect on people as "anti" indoctrination, he gives people a beliefe in hope that makes them harder to indoctrinate.....

I don't believe indoctrination is the right word for this... but I get where DJBare is coming from.

[Turbo_J]

HellishFiend wrote...

DJBare wrote...

paxxton wrote...
As far as I remember I debunked DJBare's theory that Shepard was indoctrinating other characters by talking with them and merely asking for information or a favor.

You did not debunk it, what you did was to show another term for indoctrination, but no matter which way you cut it, Shepard has the power of persuasion, Shepard has always been able to get people to see things differently(assuming high enough speech, renegade or paragon), this is how reapers use indoctrination but more effectively, they get inside the mind and twist the desires of the victims through persuasive thought processes until the victim "sees things differently"; apart from getting inside the mind this is what Shepard does, he convinces until the person sees things differently, many a time I've seen a person say "I never thought of it that way" after passing a speech check.

Now we can play semantics all day, but the fact is, Shepard has the ability to get people to see things differently and that's one of the reasons I believe the reapers have an interest in Shepard.

The possibility also exists that one particular line of the codex entry could be at work:

"The Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify it's signals"

It is not beyond the realm of feasibility that in ME3, this is exactly what is happening. People are listening to and being swayed by Shepard because of a signal being amplified through him.  I'm not completely sold on the idea, but its on the table. 

The implants help the enemy too, unless Shepard is in 'control' oooo, if you recall my saying: Oh great, I'm my own crew's worst nightmare. - about 30 pages ago.

Now, you guys just may have broken something wide open.

I used to kid about Shep being a collector in ME2 - running around doing the good half of Collector work, forming a team.

What if that is THE main reason Harbinger wants Shepard so badly... that ability to have people follow you without any 'goddam' reason at all.

Shep would improve the Reapers indoctrination ability; when used to 'upgrade' billions upon billions of programs... That would mean that someone with a will many times stronger than Shepard would have to come along in a cycle to even have a glimmer of hope at stopping the Reapers.