55528 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

How about a project to get us back on track?



This is the DVD insert of Mulholland Drive I mentioned, oh, probably a month ago. On it, ten "clues" are printed that help guide the viewer through the process of unlocking the meaning and symbolism in the film---or, at least, get them following the right path towards their own interpretation. These points aren't explanations of the devices in the film; they are explicit, specific things to keep an eye out for in the process of doing so.

My question to the theorists is: if you were to design an insert like this to pop in the packaging for Mass Effect 3 GOTY Edition that told the viewer specific things to look for in terms of interpreting indoctrination symptoms, what would they be? We can stick to ten, but we could venture to a list a little bit longer than that, if necessary. I think that surface-level, digestible clues are crucial to this idea.

Let me start:

The codex entry for indoctrination mentions "oily shadows". Do you see any oily shadows in the game?

[HellishFiend]

Dwailing wrote...

Hey, that looks a lot like the view of the Reaper destroyer you see in the ending cutscene.  You know, the one at the 1:13 mark.  
 
 

It certainly does, doesnt it? Hmm.

[FreddyCast]

OK, so anytthing good I missed? Last time I was here it was page 533

[HellishFiend]

dreamgazer wrote...

How about a project to get us back on track?

*snip*

This is the DVD insert of Mulholland Drive I mentioned, oh, probably a month ago. On it, ten "clues" are printed that help guide the viewer through the process of unlocking the meaning and symbolism in the film---or, at least, get them following the right path towards their own interpretation. These points aren't explanations of the devices in the film; they are explicit, specific things to keep an eye out for in the process of doing so.

My question to the theorists is: if you were to design an insert like this to pop in the packaging for Mass Effect 3 GOTY Edition that told the viewer specific things to look for in terms of interpreting indoctrination symptoms, what would they be? We can stick to ten, but we could venture to a list a little bit longer than that, if necessary. I think that surface-level, digestible clues are crucial to this idea.

Let me start:

The codex entry for indoctrination mentions "oily shadows". Do you see any oily shadows in the game?

This seems like a fun activity, but to be honest, my answer would be that I wouldnt make an insert like that at all. It would sort of, in my opinion, defeat the point of the "player indoctrination" portion of the ending. 

[FreddyCast]

Also, I just found out that Chris Priestly made a poll on whether people believ in the IT or not. It has been up for a few weeks, so it's pretty recent.
Here's the link: http://www.holdtheli...on-theory.1909/
Bioware checking to see if IT is the right move, maybe?

[dreamgazer]

HellishFiend wrote...

This seems like a fun activity, but to be honest, my answer would be that I wouldnt make an insert like that at all. It would sort of, in my opinion, defeat the point of the "player indoctrination" portion of the ending. 

It can be for "internal purposes", if you want, OR for players on their second round.

[BleedingUranium]

HellishFiend wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

How about a project to get us back on track?

*snip*

This is the DVD insert of Mulholland Drive I mentioned, oh, probably a month ago. On it, ten "clues" are printed that help guide the viewer through the process of unlocking the meaning and symbolism in the film---or, at least, get them following the right path towards their own interpretation. These points aren't explanations of the devices in the film; they are explicit, specific things to keep an eye out for in the process of doing so.

My question to the theorists is: if you were to design an insert like this to pop in the packaging for Mass Effect 3 GOTY Edition that told the viewer specific things to look for in terms of interpreting indoctrination symptoms, what would they be? We can stick to ten, but we could venture to a list a little bit longer than that, if necessary. I think that surface-level, digestible clues are crucial to this idea.

Let me start:

The codex entry for indoctrination mentions "oily shadows". Do you see any oily shadows in the game?

This seems like a fun activity, but to be honest, my answer would be that I wouldnt make an insert like that at all. It would sort of, in my opinion, defeat the point of the "player indoctrination" portion of the ending. 

I agree, but it looks fun, and I honestly hope they include something like that with the EC, for all the people that don't get it.

[Dwailing]

BleedingUranium wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

How about a project to get us back on track?

*snip*

This is the DVD insert of Mulholland Drive I mentioned, oh, probably a month ago. On it, ten "clues" are printed that help guide the viewer through the process of unlocking the meaning and symbolism in the film---or, at least, get them following the right path towards their own interpretation. These points aren't explanations of the devices in the film; they are explicit, specific things to keep an eye out for in the process of doing so.

My question to the theorists is: if you were to design an insert like this to pop in the packaging for Mass Effect 3 GOTY Edition that told the viewer specific things to look for in terms of interpreting indoctrination symptoms, what would they be? We can stick to ten, but we could venture to a list a little bit longer than that, if necessary. I think that surface-level, digestible clues are crucial to this idea.

Let me start:

The codex entry for indoctrination mentions "oily shadows". Do you see any oily shadows in the game?

This seems like a fun activity, but to be honest, my answer would be that I wouldnt make an insert like that at all. It would sort of, in my opinion, defeat the point of the "player indoctrination" portion of the ending. 

I agree, but it looks fun, and I honestly hope they include something like that with the EC, for all the people that don't get it.

We could do it as a sort of introduction to Indoctrination Theory.  That way, people can look for our strongest, or at least most obvious, evidence in-game. 

[Arian Dynas]

dreamgazer wrote...

How about a project to get us back on track?

*snip*

This is the DVD insert of Mulholland Drive I mentioned, oh, probably a month ago. On it, ten "clues" are printed that help guide the viewer through the process of unlocking the meaning and symbolism in the film---or, at least, get them following the right path towards their own interpretation. These points aren't explanations of the devices in the film; they are explicit, specific things to keep an eye out for in the process of doing so.

My question to the theorists is: if you were to design an insert like this to pop in the packaging for Mass Effect 3 GOTY Edition that told the viewer specific things to look for in terms of interpreting indoctrination symptoms, what would they be? We can stick to ten, but we could venture to a list a little bit longer than that, if necessary. I think that surface-level, digestible clues are crucial to this idea.

Let me start:

The codex entry for indoctrination mentions "oily shadows". Do you see any oily shadows in the game?

Let's see... 10 clues eh?

1. Notice the boy. Doesn't he act a bit strange for a boy of 9?

2. Where is Harbinger?

3. Hmm, what's wrong with that gun? Try reloading it.

4. Did you see something behind you in the Collector hall? Turn around and look.

5. The Illusive Man isn't acting quite like himself, is he? I wonder why. And who is Anderson talking to?

6. The Illusive Man was really in favor of Control. Who supported Synthesis?

7. The Citadel looks really familiar, doesn't it?

8. I wonder what the significance of those dreams are. Why is there whispering? What are those shadows?

9. Shepard's eyes look strange in the Control and Synthesis endings. Maybe you should look a bit closer.

10. There are alot of bodies along the beam run. I wonder who they belong to.

[lex0r11]

dmay7 wrote...

[byne]

HellishFiend wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

How about a project to get us back on track?

*snip*

This is the DVD insert of Mulholland Drive I mentioned, oh, probably a month ago. On it, ten "clues" are printed that help guide the viewer through the process of unlocking the meaning and symbolism in the film---or, at least, get them following the right path towards their own interpretation. These points aren't explanations of the devices in the film; they are explicit, specific things to keep an eye out for in the process of doing so.

My question to the theorists is: if you were to design an insert like this to pop in the packaging for Mass Effect 3 GOTY Edition that told the viewer specific things to look for in terms of interpreting indoctrination symptoms, what would they be? We can stick to ten, but we could venture to a list a little bit longer than that, if necessary. I think that surface-level, digestible clues are crucial to this idea.

Let me start:

The codex entry for indoctrination mentions "oily shadows". Do you see any oily shadows in the game?

This seems like a fun activity, but to be honest, my answer would be that I wouldnt make an insert like that at all. It would sort of, in my opinion, defeat the point of the "player indoctrination" portion of the ending. 

You werent asked to like it, you were asked to add a point for such a list. Get started!

I'd say:

Anderson represents destroy, TIM represents control, can you think of anyone who represents synthesis?

Maybe with a follow up of:

If you thought of someone like that, are they similar to either Anderson or TIM in some way?

Edit: Ninja'd by Arian! *shakes fist*

Modifié par byne, 08 juin 2012 - 04:02 .

[HellishFiend]

BleedingUranium wrote...

I agree, but it looks fun, and I honestly hope they include something like that with the EC, for all the people that don't get it.

Good point. I'll think on it and see what I can come up with. 

[HellishFiend]

lex0r11 wrote...

Where were you 30 minutes ago? I dont have the same stomach for posting image memes that you do, and we really could have used one. 

[Arian Dynas]

HellishFiend wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...


*snip*

Where were you 30 minutes ago? I dont have the same stomach for posting image memes that you do, and we really could have used one. 

*Offers a comforting hug*

[Electra77]

TJBartlemus wrote...

...

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.

I don't think he can be a husk wuthout the nanites based on the Santuary explanation.  Unless the reaper beam is also an aerosol spray of husk creating nanites.

Anyone could do it?  I'm not sure about that.  What does the crucible even do?  And who came up with the idea?  The protheans said it wasn't them.  And we know that the reapers created the citadel and the mass relays.  How do we know that they didn't also create the original plans for the crucible that everyone is building on?  If they fear its use, why bring the citadel to Earth?  Why not send it to the other side of a relay the galaxy had not yet tested out?

The citadel going to Earth where reapers knew what the opposition's plans were would seem to support the indoctrination theory.

[Dwailing]

byne wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

How about a project to get us back on track?

*snip*

This is the DVD insert of Mulholland Drive I mentioned, oh, probably a month ago. On it, ten "clues" are printed that help guide the viewer through the process of unlocking the meaning and symbolism in the film---or, at least, get them following the right path towards their own interpretation. These points aren't explanations of the devices in the film; they are explicit, specific things to keep an eye out for in the process of doing so.

My question to the theorists is: if you were to design an insert like this to pop in the packaging for Mass Effect 3 GOTY Edition that told the viewer specific things to look for in terms of interpreting indoctrination symptoms, what would they be? We can stick to ten, but we could venture to a list a little bit longer than that, if necessary. I think that surface-level, digestible clues are crucial to this idea.

Let me start:

The codex entry for indoctrination mentions "oily shadows". Do you see any oily shadows in the game?

This seems like a fun activity, but to be honest, my answer would be that I wouldnt make an insert like that at all. It would sort of, in my opinion, defeat the point of the "player indoctrination" portion of the ending. 

You werent asked to like it, you were asked to add a point for such a list. Get started!

I'd say:

Anderson represents destroy, TIM represents control, can you think of anyone who represents synthesis?

Maybe with a follow up of:

If you thought of someone like that, are they similar to either Anderson or TIM in some way?

Edit: Ninja'd by Arian! *shakes fist*

How about this,

Most airvents seem to make a lot of noise when people crawl around inside them.  Can you think of any times where this isn't the case?

[BleedingUranium]

I now have literalists telling me, after telling them why the Catalyst can't be the Catalyst, and neither can the Citadel, that my point is irrelivant because Bioware might not care about the definition of Catalyst

To that I said, well, then they picked it because it sounded cool, which is just the "bad writing" argument again. They were then confused as to how those two ideas are related

[HellishFiend]

byne wrote...
You werent asked to like it, you were asked to add a point for such a list. Get started!

I'd say:

Anderson represents destroy, TIM represents control, can you think of anyone who represents synthesis?

Maybe with a follow up of:

If you thought of someone like that, are they similar to either Anderson or TIM in some way?

Edit: Ninja'd by Arian! *shakes fist*

That reminds me, Myst 4 came built in with a multi-level hint system that provided several different layers of help with the various puzzles in the game, ranging from subtle clues all the way up to the step-by-step. 

Something like that could potentially be fantastic for ME3. Something that can either subtly nudge you towards figuring out the clues during a subsequent playthrough (Think along the lines of the developer commentary in Portal, nodes of information that you can interact with along the way), or straight up tell you what the symbolism is in any particular situation. I'd pay money for that, if it were a DLC. 

[HellishFiend]

Electra77 wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

...

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.

I don't think he can be a husk wuthout the nanites based on the Santuary explanation.  Unless the reaper beam is also an aerosol spray of husk creating nanites.

Anyone could do it?  I'm not sure about that.  What does the crucible even do?  And who came up with the idea?  The protheans said it wasn't them.  And we know that the reapers created the citadel and the mass relays.  How do we know that they didn't also create the original plans for the crucible that everyone is building on?  If they fear its use, why bring the citadel to Earth?  Why not send it to the other side of a relay the galaxy had not yet tested out?

The citadel going to Earth where reapers knew what the opposition's plans were would seem to support the indoctrination theory.

I'm glad you noticed those things. Those are excellent points and hard questions that I also believe support IT. Me and several other posters also believe that the Crucible is either some form of trap, or a contingency plan if any particular cycle really has their act together. Possibly a mass-indoctrination device?

[Arian Dynas]

BleedingUranium wrote...

I now have literalists telling me, after telling them why the Catalyst can't be the Catalyst, and neither can the Citadel, that my point is irrelivant because Bioware might not care about the definition of Catalyst

To that I said, well, then they picked it because it sounded cool, which is just the "bad writing" argument again. They were then confused as to how those two ideas are related

I'm sure your "friends" there picked the words Cynic, Intellectual, Wise and Jaded because they sounded cool too.

[HellishFiend]

BleedingUranium wrote...

I now have literalists telling me, after telling them why the Catalyst can't be the Catalyst, and neither can the Citadel, that my point is irrelivant because Bioware might not care about the definition of Catalyst

To that I said, well, then they picked it because it sounded cool, which is just the "bad writing" argument again. They were then confused as to how those two ideas are related

Once again, Anti-IT must fall back and retreat to the tired old "Lazy Bioware Theory". 

If we are "grasping at straws", they are "milking the cow dry" with that excuse. At this point, the law of probability is against Bioware getting that many things wrong with ME3. 

[BleedingUranium]

HellishFiend wrote...

Electra77 wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

...

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.

I don't think he can be a husk wuthout the nanites based on the Santuary explanation.  Unless the reaper beam is also an aerosol spray of husk creating nanites.

Anyone could do it?  I'm not sure about that.  What does the crucible even do?  And who came up with the idea?  The protheans said it wasn't them.  And we know that the reapers created the citadel and the mass relays.  How do we know that they didn't also create the original plans for the crucible that everyone is building on?  If they fear its use, why bring the citadel to Earth?  Why not send it to the other side of a relay the galaxy had not yet tested out?

The citadel going to Earth where reapers knew what the opposition's plans were would seem to support the indoctrination theory.

I'm glad you noticed those things. Those are excellent points and hard questions that I also believe support IT. Me and several other posters also believe that the Crucible is either some form of trap, or a contingency plan if any particular cycle really has their act together. Possibly a mass-indoctrination device?

Me! lol

[dreamgazer]

HellishFiend wrote...

That reminds me, Myst 4 came built in with a multi-level hint system that provided several different layers of help with the various puzzles in the game, ranging from subtle clues all the way up to the step-by-step. 

Oh, crap.  There was a PC game that actually came with a sealed envelope full of helpful clues, but I can't remember which one it was---and, actually, I think I've seen it more than once.

[lex0r11]

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

lex0r11 wrote...


*snip*

Where were you 30 minutes ago? I dont have the same stomach for posting image memes that you do, and we really could have used one. 

*Offers a comforting hug*

*feels he failed to help a fellow*



*punishes himself with a 5 mile run while listening to this on a loop*

youtu.be/q4pqgBw_exw

[Arian Dynas]

HellishFiend wrote...

byne wrote...
You werent asked to like it, you were asked to add a point for such a list. Get started!

I'd say:

Anderson represents destroy, TIM represents control, can you think of anyone who represents synthesis?

Maybe with a follow up of:

If you thought of someone like that, are they similar to either Anderson or TIM in some way?

Edit: Ninja'd by Arian! *shakes fist*

That reminds me, Myst 4 came built in with a multi-level hint system that provided several different layers of help with the various puzzles in the game, ranging from subtle clues all the way up to the step-by-step. 

Something like that could potentially be fantastic for ME3. Something that can either subtly nudge you towards figuring out the clues during a subsequent playthrough (Think along the lines of the developer commentary in Portal, nodes of information that you can interact with along the way), or straight up tell you what the symbolism is in any particular situation. I'd pay money for that, if it were a DLC. 

Seconded.