Aller au contenu

Photo

Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark II!


55528 réponses à ce sujet

#14526
Turbo_J

Turbo_J
  • Members
  • 1 217 messages

Electra77 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

...

Yes, that is correct. The fact that Shepard survives Harbinger's beam at all is a contextual inconsistency, and has several well-established contradictory precedents. That boils down to, in plain English, that could not have happened in reality unless Harbinger specifically wants Shepard alive. 

We went through all this effort to control you, and now we are only giving you the choice to destroy us (aka escape indoctrination). That seems odd to me. 

That is only partially true. If you imported an ME2 save where you kept the collector base, and then proceed to have a low EMS outcome, you will be offered only the Control ending. That fact bears many implications, which are also a point of contention. I'll let you think about it, and let me know if you have any further questions on the subject. 

How fast or slow does indoctrination work? I'll have to go back, but I thought the Illusive Man's eyes were always that way. If they were that way in ME2, was he indoctrinated then? On the eye theory, were Matriarch Benezia's eye's cybernetic blue? I can't recall. 

TIM got his "indoctrinated eyes" from indirect contact with a powerful Reaper indoctrination device in the very first Mass Effect comic.  

According to the codex, "Rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes mental decay in days or weeks. Slow, patient indoctrination enables the thrall to last for months or years". There are numerous points of contention regarding the indoctrination of both TIM and Shepard, with regard to the progression of their indoctrination.



What are the well-established contradictory precedents?  And can Harbinger set his beams to stun (his I guess is a silly question since anything is possible)?

On control option, so if you side with TIM and save the Collector base, is that implying you succumb to indoctrination earlier and so only getting control in ME3 is just a formality?

So, if TIM is indoctrinated in ME2, why is he pursuing a course against the collectors?  Have reapers just gotten tired of their enslaved quasi-protheans?  And why specifically tell Miranda not to implant a control chip in Shepard's head? 


Splinter groups are part of the Reapers tactics and are used in each cycle (vendetta tells Shep this on Thessia). It may manifest differently, but the results are the same; divide and conquer.

#14527
dmay7

dmay7
  • Members
  • 368 messages

MegumiAzusa wrote...

dmay7 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Uhm some people here don't seem to know how fog works, it dissolves the light and shadow and distributes them uniformly so you can't make out silhouettes after a certain distance. We even have trouble to identify stuff that is near the camera and not completely fogged and you seriously believe you could see a building a few hundred meters away? For example cars have special fog lamps because without in a fog like that it would be invisible until it nearly hits you.


Lol, I love how people are comparing to the fog in the scene to real fog, and forget to realize that the fog in the video is digitally created in every single sense, every single pattern, shape, and shadow was created by a digital artist.

Uhm no, you set up a particle emitter and it uses random values to distribute these particles and make each unique. Manually setting up all of that... have fun for a month or more.


My bad, I am quite tired at the moment, I didn't realized how much of an idiot I sounded like.

#14528
HellishFiend

HellishFiend
  • Members
  • 5 546 messages

Electra77 wrote...

What are the well-established contradictory precedents?  And can Harbinger set his beams to stun (his I guess is a silly question since anything is possible)?

On control option, so if you side with TIM and save the Collector base, is that implying you succumb to indoctrination earlier and so only getting control in ME3 is just a formality?

So, if TIM is indoctrinated in ME2, why is he pursuing a course against the collectors?  Have reapers just gotten tired of their enslaved quasi-protheans?  And why specifically tell Miranda not to implant a control chip in Shepard's head? 


A couple of the contradictory precedents would be everything around him getting vaporized or obliterated when being hit by the beam during the run. Another would be Shepard's instant death when hit by a Destroyer's beam (which is no doubt weaker than Harbinger's) in the same fashion and angle-of-approach on Rannoch. There are more, too, but those should be sufficient.

On the control-only ending, yes, that would have to be my guess as well. Though its just a guess since there is really no way to have any supporting evidence for a conclusion, that I'm aware of. 

For the TIM in ME2 thing, there are different theories about that. My favorite is that the Reapers actually want Shepard's consciousness to somehow be implanted as the consciousness for the Human Reaper (a control chip would have rendered him useless for that purpose). It would explain, among other things, why TIM and the collectors were obsessed with finding his corpse and bringing him back to life. It would also explain why Shepard is seemingly maneuvered towards being "delivered" to the collector base. I think they were hoping to capture him there, rather than him blow it up. But, thats just my favorite theory. There are others. 

#14529
Jadebaby

Jadebaby
  • Members
  • 13 229 messages

HellishFiend wrote...


love your sig

#14530
Andromidius

Andromidius
  • Members
  • 2 997 messages
Its entirely possibly the highlighted cicular object (whatever it is) was brightened on purpose to be more visible through the fog effects. As a very vague hint to spark discussion.

Yeah, its thin. But hey. Its 4:15am in the morning, and thin seems pretty good to me right now.

#14531
Arian Dynas

Arian Dynas
  • Members
  • 3 799 messages

HellishFiend wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

And that's fine, speculate away. I'm just letting you know that it will be viewed as weak. That's the other side of healthy speculation, which is calling into question every piece of evidence and weighing its validity. If we were all patting each other on the back and agreeing with every bit of "evidence" that was found, we'd have a few good things and mountain of crap on top of it.


If you pay attention at all to my posts you know that I dont do that, nor does anyone else here, to my knowledge. People like that are long since gone. 


Hellish STOP JUMPING DOWN OUR THROATS.

We are not implying you are syncophantic, self congratulating or anything of the above, so stop being so defensive, we're still your buddies and we're not trying to attack you.

Unschuld and I are right now acting as he said, the other side of good specultion, the people who can curb the excitement and sometimes rush that comes with a discovery, you've done it too, we're helping to keep people grounded, otherwise we COULD end up going tetris effect and seeing patterns everywhere, which is something that can happen to anyone, it's the nature of the human brain.

#14532
HellishFiend

HellishFiend
  • Members
  • 5 546 messages

Unschuld wrote...

And unless we keep questioning things objectively, we run the risk of devolving back into that. Everyone is capable of putting forth bad theories, everyone here including myself. Even if the theory seems good at first, or if the poster has genuine intentions. Lulling ourselves into a state of complacency because "all 'those people' are gone" is a dangerous proposition.


You must not read the vast majority of my posts because otherwise you would know that I am not like that at all. Also, I made it quite clear to you that I understood your stance several pages ago. So the fact that you are choosing to continue to press an issue with me that I already understand, despite the fact that I politely asked you to stop, is quite simply annoying. I'm done with this subject, thanks. 

Modifié par HellishFiend, 08 juin 2012 - 03:17 .


#14533
Makrys

Makrys
  • Members
  • 2 543 messages
Guessing everyone saw the tweet from Gamble about showing 'stuff' at comic con.

Modifié par Makrys, 08 juin 2012 - 03:18 .


#14534
Turbo_J

Turbo_J
  • Members
  • 1 217 messages

Unschuld wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

And that's fine, speculate away. I'm just letting you know that it will be viewed as weak. That's the other side of healthy speculation, which is calling into question every piece of evidence and weighing its validity. If we were all patting each other on the back and agreeing with every bit of "evidence" that was found, we'd have a few good things and mountain of crap on top of it.


If you pay attention at all to my posts you know that I dont do that, nor does anyone else here, to my knowledge. People like that are long since gone. 


And unless we keep questioning things objectively, we run the risk of devolving back into that. Everyone is capable of putting forth bad theories, everyone here including myself. Even if the theory seems good at first, or if the poster has genuine intentions. Lulling ourselves into a state of complacency because "all 'those people' are gone" is a dangerous proposition.


complacency?

In a thread that moves 10-20 pages every few hours? Not sure I'm in the same place as you. And we peer review each other even if it's painful. You want to be a cop, go be a cop somewhere else. We don't need policing.

#14535
Arian Dynas

Arian Dynas
  • Members
  • 3 799 messages

Electra77 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

...

Yes, that is correct. The fact that Shepard survives Harbinger's beam at all is a contextual inconsistency, and has several well-established contradictory precedents. That boils down to, in plain English, that could not have happened in reality unless Harbinger specifically wants Shepard alive. 

We went through all this effort to control you, and now we are only giving you the choice to destroy us (aka escape indoctrination). That seems odd to me. 

That is only partially true. If you imported an ME2 save where you kept the collector base, and then proceed to have a low EMS outcome, you will be offered only the Control ending. That fact bears many implications, which are also a point of contention. I'll let you think about it, and let me know if you have any further questions on the subject. 

How fast or slow does indoctrination work? I'll have to go back, but I thought the Illusive Man's eyes were always that way. If they were that way in ME2, was he indoctrinated then? On the eye theory, were Matriarch Benezia's eye's cybernetic blue? I can't recall. 

TIM got his "indoctrinated eyes" from indirect contact with a powerful Reaper indoctrination device in the very first Mass Effect comic.  

According to the codex, "Rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes mental decay in days or weeks. Slow, patient indoctrination enables the thrall to last for months or years". There are numerous points of contention regarding the indoctrination of both TIM and Shepard, with regard to the progression of their indoctrination.



What are the well-established contradictory precedents?  And can Harbinger set his beams to stun (his I guess is a silly question since anything is possible)?

On control option, so if you side with TIM and save the Collector base, is that implying you succumb to indoctrination earlier and so only getting control in ME3 is just a formality?

So, if TIM is indoctrinated in ME2, why is he pursuing a course against the collectors?  Have reapers just gotten tired of their enslaved quasi-protheans?  And why specifically tell Miranda not to implant a control chip in Shepard's head? 


*sigh* someone find Salient Archer's analsyis, he put it very well.

#14536
HellishFiend

HellishFiend
  • Members
  • 5 546 messages

Arian Dynas wrote...

Hellish STOP JUMPING DOWN OUR THROATS.

We are not implying you are syncophantic, self congratulating or anything of the above, so stop being so defensive, we're still your buddies and we're not trying to attack you.

Unschuld and I are right now acting as he said, the other side of good specultion, the people who can curb the excitement and sometimes rush that comes with a discovery, you've done it too, we're helping to keep people grounded, otherwise we COULD end up going tetris effect and seeing patterns everywhere, which is something that can happen to anyone, it's the nature of the human brain.


On the contrary, you guys need to stop jumping down my throat. You're missing the point. Do I need to make a bulleted list of the situation?
  • I made it clear that I understood his objection to this particular piece of evidence we were investigating
  • I asked him nicely to stop interjecting on the grounds that we were fully aware of his stance on the issue
  • He continued to try and impress his stance upon us
Why is that ok? How is that being friendly? If all he was doing was trying to keep me grounded, I straight up told him that I understood his stance on the validity of this particular piece of evidence. Why is it ok for him to keep attacking it even after we understand? Where does it stop? 

#14537
HellishFiend

HellishFiend
  • Members
  • 5 546 messages

Jade8aby88 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...


love your sig


Thanks, I appreciate the comment. :lol:

#14538
liggy002

liggy002
  • Members
  • 5 337 messages

Makrys wrote...

Guessing everyone saw the tweet from Gamble about showing 'stuff' at comic con.


I just logged on and saw it though if IT is real, I don't know if they will show it there.

#14539
Turbo_J

Turbo_J
  • Members
  • 1 217 messages
Two words.

Splinter Group.

#14540
MegumiAzusa

MegumiAzusa
  • Members
  • 4 238 messages

HellishFiend wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

We have nothing but time to waste until the EC is released. Why do you care how we do it? What does how we are perceived have anything to do with you? Why does it bother you at all? If your intent is to somehow make us more productive, you are failing by argue about everything discussed. Your contribution is nothing more than diversion. We don't need it.


Thank you, that is a very well worded way of making the point I've been trying to make.

If you don't discuss your speculations it just piles up, one wrong speculation can get the basis of a new speculation etc. Sure you can waste your time but seriously questioning yourself if what you're stating can even be true doesn't hurt sometimes. This is an example of a willfully placed effect that only occurs one frame, but trying to see Big Ben in that image is nonsense.

#14541
TJBartlemus

TJBartlemus
  • Members
  • 2 308 messages

HellishFiend wrote...

...

Yes, that is correct. The fact that Shepard survives Harbinger's beam at all is a contextual inconsistency, and has several well-established contradictory precedents. That boils down to, in plain English, that could not have happened in reality unless Harbinger specifically wants Shepard alive. 



I have to agree. In everything else, prominently the battle with the Reaper on Rannoch, being hit with reaper beam means death.

Also if they are trying to indoctrinate him, why kill him? I am sure if they are trying to indoctrinate him Harbinger I am sure would not approve of killing him. Now if to them it is a win win situation, sheperd dies/ shepard is husk, that would make sense.

And why at the end are they even trying to indoctrinate him anymore? The fleet are here and the crucible is on the way. It's not like they can stop him from uniting the galaxy anymore. And it doesn't even need to be shepard to open the citadel. Anyone could do it.

Modifié par TJBartlemus, 08 juin 2012 - 03:25 .


#14542
Andromidius

Andromidius
  • Members
  • 2 997 messages
No need to defend a hypothetical concept in any case. Especially when its something as subjective as 'seeing patterns in fog'. Nothing worth arguing over, especially when we're not even considering it evidence. Heck, I don't even consider it a clue - barely an interesting potential hint.

And if no-one else sees it, that's fine. But it interests me.

#14543
Makrys

Makrys
  • Members
  • 2 543 messages

liggy002 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

Guessing everyone saw the tweet from Gamble about showing 'stuff' at comic con.


I just logged on and saw it though if IT is real, I don't know if they will show it there.


Either way... I can't wait. I need SOMETHING. Though I'm glad they're taking their time and hope they continue to do so. I will most happily wait for the best possible result.

I think an august release is likely.

Modifié par Makrys, 08 juin 2012 - 03:24 .


#14544
HellishFiend

HellishFiend
  • Members
  • 5 546 messages

Arian Dynas wrote...

*sigh* someone find Salient Archer's analsyis, he put it very well.


Really, Arian? You are acting exasperated again, this time towards a new poster in the thread. And you are getting after me for my behavior?

Are you having a bad day?

#14545
BleedingUranium

BleedingUranium
  • Members
  • 6 118 messages

Electra77 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

...

Yes, that is correct. The fact that Shepard survives Harbinger's beam at all is a contextual inconsistency, and has several well-established contradictory precedents. That boils down to, in plain English, that could not have happened in reality unless Harbinger specifically wants Shepard alive. 

We went through all this effort to control you, and now we are only giving you the choice to destroy us (aka escape indoctrination). That seems odd to me. 

That is only partially true. If you imported an ME2 save where you kept the collector base, and then proceed to have a low EMS outcome, you will be offered only the Control ending. That fact bears many implications, which are also a point of contention. I'll let you think about it, and let me know if you have any further questions on the subject. 

How fast or slow does indoctrination work? I'll have to go back, but I thought the Illusive Man's eyes were always that way. If they were that way in ME2, was he indoctrinated then? On the eye theory, were Matriarch Benezia's eye's cybernetic blue? I can't recall. 

TIM got his "indoctrinated eyes" from indirect contact with a powerful Reaper indoctrination device in the very first Mass Effect comic.  

According to the codex, "Rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes mental decay in days or weeks. Slow, patient indoctrination enables the thrall to last for months or years". There are numerous points of contention regarding the indoctrination of both TIM and Shepard, with regard to the progression of their indoctrination.



What are the well-established contradictory precedents?  And can Harbinger set his beams to stun (his I guess is a silly question since anything is possible)?

On control option, so if you side with TIM and save the Collector base, is that implying you succumb to indoctrination earlier and so only getting control in ME3 is just a formality?

So, if TIM is indoctrinated in ME2, why is he pursuing a course against the collectors?  Have reapers just gotten tired of their enslaved quasi-protheans?  And why specifically tell Miranda not to implant a control chip in Shepard's head? 


No, if you save the base you just save the base. But you're kind of agreeing with TIM. A Shepard who saved the base ismore likely to pick control, it fits their personality.

He doesn't seem to be super indoctrinated until ME3, but it's entirely possible the Reapers are thinking something like this: "If Shepard defeats the Collectors, and he can get Shepard on out side, that's better than having the Collectors, but if Shepard fails, then he wasn't worth it and we still have the Collectors."

As for the chip, TIM, and the Reapers too, if they influenced that decision, want the true Shepard, not a puppet.

#14546
dmay7

dmay7
  • Members
  • 368 messages

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Hellish STOP JUMPING DOWN OUR THROATS.

We are not implying you are syncophantic, self congratulating or anything of the above, so stop being so defensive, we're still your buddies and we're not trying to attack you.

Unschuld and I are right now acting as he said, the other side of good specultion, the people who can curb the excitement and sometimes rush that comes with a discovery, you've done it too, we're helping to keep people grounded, otherwise we COULD end up going tetris effect and seeing patterns everywhere, which is something that can happen to anyone, it's the nature of the human brain.


On the contrary, you guys need to stop jumping down my throat. You're missing the point. Do I need to make a bulleted list of the situation?
  • I made it clear that I understood his objection to this particular piece of evidence we were investigating
  • I asked him nicely to stop interjecting on the grounds that we were fully aware of his stance on the issue
  • He continued to try and impress his stance upon us
Why is that ok? How is that being friendly? If all he was doing was trying to keep me grounded, I straight up told him that I understood his stance on the validity of this particular piece of evidence. Why is it ok for him to keep attacking it even after we understand? Where does it stop? 


I thoroughly believe that Commander Shepard is in fact indoctrinated at the end of Mass Effect 3. There is a lot of evidence supporting this theory. Everyone feel free to post your opinions and or any evidence you may find supporting this theory.

#14547
Arian Dynas

Arian Dynas
  • Members
  • 3 799 messages

HellishFiend wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Hellish STOP JUMPING DOWN OUR THROATS.

We are not implying you are syncophantic, self congratulating or anything of the above, so stop being so defensive, we're still your buddies and we're not trying to attack you.

Unschuld and I are right now acting as he said, the other side of good specultion, the people who can curb the excitement and sometimes rush that comes with a discovery, you've done it too, we're helping to keep people grounded, otherwise we COULD end up going tetris effect and seeing patterns everywhere, which is something that can happen to anyone, it's the nature of the human brain.


On the contrary, you guys need to stop jumping down my throat. You're missing the point. Do I need to make a bulleted list of the situation?
  • I made it clear that I understood his objection to this particular piece of evidence we were investigating
  • I asked him nicely to stop interjecting on the grounds that we were fully aware of his stance on the issue
  • He continued to try and impress his stance upon us
Why is that ok? How is that being friendly? If all he was doing was trying to keep me grounded, I straight up told him that I understood his stance on the validity of this particular piece of evidence. Why is it ok for him to keep attacking it even after we understand? Where does it stop? 


Because what I know of Unschuld he is far from the most tactful of people, much like yourself and myself, who is very skilled at coming across as curt even when that is not his intention? Likely right now he sees this as wasting time, much like how you veiw off topic jabber as wasting time, this is looking in smoke for pictures that could be entirely random. 

#14548
HellishFiend

HellishFiend
  • Members
  • 5 546 messages

MegumiAzusa wrote...

If you don't discuss your speculations it just piles up, one wrong speculation can get the basis of a new speculation etc. Sure you can waste your time but seriously questioning yourself if what you're stating can even be true doesn't hurt sometimes. This is an example of a willfully placed effect that only occurs one frame, but trying to see Big Ben in that image is nonsense.


I already do that. I did it the first time Turbo brought it up. I'd dig up the posts where I contested the issue a day or two ago, but I really dont care at this point, because I really, really want to move on past this subject. 

#14549
Arian Dynas

Arian Dynas
  • Members
  • 3 799 messages

Arian Dynas wrote...

Electra77 wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

...

Yes, that is correct. The fact that Shepard survives Harbinger's beam at all is a contextual inconsistency, and has several well-established contradictory precedents. That boils down to, in plain English, that could not have happened in reality unless Harbinger specifically wants Shepard alive. 

We went through all this effort to control you, and now we are only giving you the choice to destroy us (aka escape indoctrination). That seems odd to me. 

That is only partially true. If you imported an ME2 save where you kept the collector base, and then proceed to have a low EMS outcome, you will be offered only the Control ending. That fact bears many implications, which are also a point of contention. I'll let you think about it, and let me know if you have any further questions on the subject. 

How fast or slow does indoctrination work? I'll have to go back, but I thought the Illusive Man's eyes were always that way. If they were that way in ME2, was he indoctrinated then? On the eye theory, were Matriarch Benezia's eye's cybernetic blue? I can't recall. 

TIM got his "indoctrinated eyes" from indirect contact with a powerful Reaper indoctrination device in the very first Mass Effect comic.  

According to the codex, "Rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes mental decay in days or weeks. Slow, patient indoctrination enables the thrall to last for months or years". There are numerous points of contention regarding the indoctrination of both TIM and Shepard, with regard to the progression of their indoctrination.



What are the well-established contradictory precedents?  And can Harbinger set his beams to stun (his I guess is a silly question since anything is possible)?

On control option, so if you side with TIM and save the Collector base, is that implying you succumb to indoctrination earlier and so only getting control in ME3 is just a formality?

So, if TIM is indoctrinated in ME2, why is he pursuing a course against the collectors?  Have reapers just gotten tired of their enslaved quasi-protheans?  And why specifically tell Miranda not to implant a control chip in Shepard's head? 


*sigh* someone find Salient Archer's analsyis, he put it very well.


Oh by the way. Found it. If you're reading this, thanks for sticking it in your sig Salient.

Salient Archer wrote...
Posted this ages ago (about 1000 pages ago) but have severely updated and can't really find it back there (and want to link it), I've include more info about how I feel it all relates and if you've read it before most of the revised and new stuff is from 2800-3999 onwards. ... btw, it's a WALL.

What is the EMS system really about?
So from what I’ve worked out so far, I believe that the EMS rating relates directly to Shepard’s resolve and hence willpower. I feel this is most evident in how the crucible presents new options with slightly improved outcomes as the EMS rating starts to increase. Not only increasing Shepard’s hope or desire to survive but also the Reapers desire to indoctrinate Shepard due to his military, political and social influence on others.

The Crucible
Considering the crucibles construction is independent to Shepard’s military strength and regardless of most choices, is always built the same way (even if you did or didn’t take the options of having the Rachni or Geth working on it). 

Not only this but the options the crucible presents to you are always tied directly into your EMS, for example with a low EMS (and a destroyed collector base) Shepard’s only option is ‘Destroy the reapers’ (more on this later).

The Choices
But how would a construct suddenly present you with less or more options because of your effective military strength? How would it logically be able to determine this? Did the StarChild take a gander outside, do a quick head count, checked to see how the N7 spec op teams are doing and then based on this information decided to turn a few options off just because he felt Shep did a pretty crap job of rallying the galaxy together!?

When does reality become fantasy?
Now, if we chose to believe that everything from Harbingers beam onward is just happening in Shepard’s head and that he’s actually heading down the slippery slopes of indoctrination, than we can assume that everything that takes places in the citadel onwards; from the arguments with Anderson and TIM to the choices Shepard can make, are just illusionary fictions.

A different interpretation of EMS
Now for arguments sake lets stop thinking of EMS as Effective Military Strength and start thinking of it as Shepard’s Will Power and to help illustrate this point I will break down each level. 

With a Destroyed Collector Base from ME2 (I’ll talk about the opposite later)

0-1749
So with the lowest EMS Shepard can only choose this option to destroy the reapers. Not only this, but the StarChild treats Shepard with more indifference than usual. So why the one option? and why is it destroy? Simply put the Reapers feel that Shepard has no worth, influence or value. He couldn’t rally the galaxy to defend earth and hence his death or indoctrination doesn’t carry a consequence for them. Essentially they just don’t give a frak and although Shepard’s resolve is high his will power is too low and doesn’t have the strength to survive the journey back from indoctrination.

1750-2049
The Reapers treat Shepard are little more seriously this time. He might not have rallied the Galaxy to the full potential he could have, but he was still more successful than any organic before him. The Reapers now offer him an additional choice: Control (become indoctrinated) because as a servant to the Reaper cause; Shepard could now potentially influence the amassed galaxy forces. 

Notes: Codex clearly states that the Reapers chose to indoctrinate those in key positions of power and influence, Who fits this bill better than Commander Shepard?

The the two handles Shepard holds in the control option are labeled BadEnding in the game design map.

Shepard’s eyes not only glow bright blue in the control ending but his iris’ also have identical patterns to those of the illusive man.

2050-2799
These present increasingly better versions of the above two options, each improvement representing both Shepard’s increase in will power (Destroy option) or the Reaper’s desire for Shepard as an asset (Control option) hence why he starts to envision better outcomes due to the Reaper’s trying to solidify their hold on him or Shepard being closer to breaking free of the indoctrination process.

The notable improvements happen at these stages.
2050 - Earth is only ravaged and the Normandy crew now survives in Destroy ending.
2350 - Earth now survives opposed to being ravaged in the control ending
2650 - Earth now survives opposed to being ravaged in the destroy ending

2800 - 3999
Shepard by this stage has proven how valuable he really is as an asset to the Reapers, not only this but by this stage the Reapers realize how powerful Shepard’s will is becoming and hence they fear he might break free of the indoctrination process.

Fearful of loosing their best potential asset, the Reapers pull out their big guns and present another tempting choice: The synthesis of Organics and Synthetics. This choice is not only the moral high-ground but also seems incredibly amazing due to implications it has of galactic peace for both Synthetics and Organics for all eternity and essentialy ends the cycle and removes the need of the Reapers. It represents the hope of a permanent end to the  cycle of destruction and the dawn of the next evolutionary step for galactic life. To bad it’s a big fat lie.

Pause and think about what Synthesis and final evolution is to the Reapers; well to be honest it's more Reapers. Think about Sovereign’s conversation with Shepard or any of the taunts Harbinger gives you in ME2, both reapers state that "they are our destiny, they are the final evolution". Also take note that during the suicide mission EDI points out that the human reaper was both made from organic and non-organic materials, which would be the very definition of Synthesis from a Reaper's perspective.

This added choice is also the Reapers attempt to get Shepard to see things their way, just as they did with Jack Harper and Saren. Indoctrination isn't about being told what to do or being controlled, it's more subtle than that, it's design is more like inception in that it makes the individual full heartedly believe that the Reapers are to be revered, and that the individual came to this conclusion themselves, this creates the distinction of the control they have of the husks and the conviction of their indoctrinated mouth pieces such as Saren. Indoctrination is to truly believe that whatever thought they've planted in your head is your own.

What about Synthesis being the last additional choice as far as being a game mechanic?, aren’t ‘we’ as players expected to be rewarded for more work and accomplishments? Well, yes we are!, We’ve been conditioned time and time again for this to be the case! So wouldn’t it stand to reason that if BioWare wanted to indoctrinate “us the player” that they would use a game mechanic and typical reward system as their last best chance to throw us off the right path?

Notes: When picking this option Shepard seems to morph into an almost husk like appearance complete with glowing blue eyes which also share the same iris pattern as the Illusive man.












4000 (or 5000)
The only notable difference with an EMS of 4000+ is that Shepard now survives after the Destroy ending. Hence alluding to the fact that his will power is now strong enough to overcome the indoctrination process.

Also, this threshold is knocked up to 5000 if Anderson doesn’t survive his encounter with TIM, once again proving how EMS is directly related to Shepard’s will to survive.

The indoctrination alternative
So if the events on the Crucible are real than Shepard can apparently survive coping a face full of explosion (about 1,000,000,000 that of TNT) from  the complete destruction of the crucible/catalyst/citadel, he also hurtles through the vacuum of space (without a breathing mask?), manages to avoid his circulatory system from stoping after the first 90 seconds of exposure, than also manages to propel himself at around 50,000kph (31068mph) so he only takes 13 hours to reach earths outer atmosphere and resists temperatures of up to 1480 degrees C (2700 F) to than also survive the 200 mile drop to the ground by magically coming to a slow gentle stop in a neat little pile of rubble, and despite all this he takes a deep breath?.

Or, the events all took place in his mind, and because his will is strong enough and has the desire to keep fighting he breaks free of the indoctrination process, takes a deep breath and wakes up in the rubble of London where Harbinger’s beam struck him.

I know which I feel is more likely and sticks much more tightly to the lore of the ME universe.

Also, here' a very in-depth rubble comparison of the ending scene done by Gunslinger_ruiz: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9727423/2140#11951474


So, what if you kept the collector base in ME2?

Well, nothing, seriously...  It’s been said that the control option is available first when you have a really low EMS and chose to save the base; and many use this as an argument against the indoctrination theory. 

But, I look at this way; if Shepard made the immoral choice of retaining a technology that is that perverse and than decides to freely handed it over to the most sinister man in the whole galaxy, it’s pretty clear that Shepard’s resolve to destroy the Reapers has started to wane.

It’s interesting to see that what was once considered a renegade action now leads to the “paragon-colored” conclusion to the series. Which I guess is where I’ll start to dissect it a little bit; I guess the first point most raise is that Shepard’s perception of what is right and wrong has now been clouded by the Reaper indoctrination (much like how the Codex points out) and hence why he doesn’t actually see this option for what it really is, but that also raises another issue, which is “why would Shepard actually care if it was blue, red, purple, tangerine or pink with plaid stripes?” the simple answer is: he wouldn’t, the blue paragon and red renegade options are only something us the player are witnesses too, it’s a system for us to judge quickly and easily what those options are. So if we separate the colors out of the equation, we could look at it from the point of view that Shepard had already once sided with the illusive man (an agent of the reapers) and potentially could see the value in the dangled carrot of power that is the “control ending”, not only this but Shepard also showed he was able to help secure one of the most crucial bits of tech in the universe and that he was willing to sacrifice humanities soul to do so, proving that he was malleable and more willing to see things from the enemies perspective, not only making him easier to indoctrinate but that he had enough clout to keep around as an asset due to his outcome focussed attitude. This might also have been the easiest way for the reapers to get Shepard out of the picture and remove him as a liability in their war against organics.

This could be paralleled with the alternative low EMS option of Destroy being the only option, demonstrating Shepard’s desire to overcome the Reapers but never actually having the strength to do so. Either way the Reapers win their psychological battle with Shepard and in both cases plays to Shepard’s weaknesses to take him out of the picture one way or another depending on his moral stance. This could possibly just be demonstrating their desire to take the path of least resistance.

Other things to keep into consideration: 

The illusive man (Jack Harper) was altered by a Reaper Artifact on Shanxi during the first contact war (about 3 decades before ME2) Not only did this encounter change his eyes (that’s right, they’re not implants), it also makes him able to sense Reaper artifacts and also gave him the ability to speak every alien dialect including that of the Reapers themselves. It’s also to be noted that he started Cerberus after this and that it’s possibly an idea that Reapers implanted into him... he’s also indoctrinated.

Shepard’s encounter with Object Rho is considered Canon by ME3 lead writer Mac Walters as stated in his comic ME:Conviction. 
Object Rho is considered only one of the many possible points in which Shepard’s indoctrination could begin, although it’s the most obvious considering this artifact affects Shepard much in the same way the Arch Monolith affected Jack Harper (by putting him in a coma). 
The illusive man is the only person (other than Reaper-Child) to consider Control as a viable option, and considering he’s indoctrinated would you really consider this to be a wise choice?
Only Saren and maybe Kai Leng consider Synthesis to be the only way forward, but yet again “Indoctrinated”
All you most trusted friends and allies (even EDI and the Geth) would consider Destroy to be the only option... and none of them are indoctrinated.

All through ME2 Harbinger wants to capture Shepard as mentioned in all of his comments to the commander, not only this but it’s shown in ME:Redemption that the Collectors want Shepard’s body. So why doesn’t the illusive man just hand Shep’s body over to them? Simple: He’s indoctrinated, not a husk, the Reapers have planted subtle ideas in his head not assumed control of him, The Illusive man still has some degree of free will and in all honesty he believes that what he is doing is right, unfortunately the Reapers have clouded his judgement.

The meaning of the word Catalyst:

1. Chemistry: a substance that causes or accelerates a chemical reaction without itself being affected.2. something that causes activity between two or more persons or forces without itself being affected.3. a person or thing that precipitates an event or change.4. a person whose talk, enthusiasm, or energy causes others to be more friendly, enthusiastic, or energetic. 


Modifié par Arian Dynas, 08 juin 2012 - 03:27 .


#14550
Turbo_J

Turbo_J
  • Members
  • 1 217 messages

MegumiAzusa wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Turbo_J wrote...

We have nothing but time to waste until the EC is released. Why do you care how we do it? What does how we are perceived have anything to do with you? Why does it bother you at all? If your intent is to somehow make us more productive, you are failing by argue about everything discussed. Your contribution is nothing more than diversion. We don't need it.


Thank you, that is a very well worded way of making the point I've been trying to make.

If you don't discuss your speculations it just piles up, one wrong speculation can get the basis of a new speculation etc. Sure you can waste your time but seriously questioning yourself if what you're stating can even be true doesn't hurt sometimes. This is an example of a willfully placed effect that only occurs one frame, but trying to see Big Ben in that image is nonsense.


Opinion noted