55528 réponses à ce sujet

[HellishFiend]

 Also, I am disappoint in you guys. I fully expected one of you to come up with "HellishFiend has become a legend by ending the Literalist threat." by now 

I kid, but hey, it came to mind, and I had to share since no one else did. 


edit: yay, top of the page, here you go people! 
Sounds of Possession

Modifié par HellishFiend, 19 juin 2012 - 02:24 .

[paxxton]

FellishBeast wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I think what you all trying to say is that the second mention of Anderson being born in London is a hidden message. The real Anderson is still there and tries to communicate with Shepard but the indoctrination doesn't allow him to speak straight so he has to resort to speaking figuratively.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but I do think that second mention is rather fishy. Like Manhattan's Chinatown fishy.

I mean that the real Anderson's free mind is trapped/obscured by the indoctrinated part of his mind. Still he tries to warn Shepard that the man with whom he speaks is an impostor.

[UrgentArchengel]

HellishFiend wrote...

 Also, I am disappoint in you guys. I fully expected one of you to come up with "HellishFiend has become a legend by ending the Literalist threat." by now 

I kid, but hey, it came to mind, and I had to share since no one else did. 


edit: yay, top of the page, here you go people! 
Sounds of Possession

Well, your like one of the Expendibles, along with Arian, Byne, and others that have been kicking butt lately.  But I don't expect any threat ending till EC is finally released.

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

FellishBeast wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I think what you all trying to say is that the second mention of Anderson being born in London is a hidden message. The real Anderson is still there and tries to communicate with Shepard but the indoctrination doesn't allow him to speak straight so he has to resort to speaking figuratively.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but I do think that second mention is rather fishy. Like Manhattan's Chinatown fishy.

Basically what paxxton is saying is that we feel that it means something. And I agree with that. The possibilities are quite numerous. To start off, if we assume it means something, it could be the good part of Anderson trying to reach out, or a slip up of some kind from the new, Reaper doomsday device version of Anderson. From there, it completely branches out into a tree of different scenarios. And we have little evidence to use with which to narrow it down. The only thing we'd be able to do is list out all the possibilities. We'd never be able to single one out as the most likely. 

Also, we can't analyze the frequency spectrum because Anderson always appears in scenes with Coats.

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juin 2012 - 02:27 .

[HellishFiend]

UrgentArchengel wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

 Also, I am disappoint in you guys. I fully expected one of you to come up with "HellishFiend has become a legend by ending the Literalist threat." by now 

I kid, but hey, it came to mind, and I had to share since no one else did. 


edit: yay, top of the page, here you go people! 
Sounds of Possession

Well, your like one of the Expendibles, along with Arian, Byne, and others that have been kicking butt lately.  But I don't expect any threat ending till EC is finally released.

I know, thats why I said I kid! 

[Nightingale]

HellishFiend wrote...

FellishBeast wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I think what you all trying to say is that the second mention of Anderson being born in London is a hidden message. The real Anderson is still there and tries to communicate with Shepard but the indoctrination doesn't allow him to speak straight so he has to resort to speaking figuratively.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but I do think that second mention is rather fishy. Like Manhattan's Chinatown fishy.

Basically what paxxton is saying is that we feel that it means something. And I agree with that. The possibilities are quite numerous. To start off, if we assume it means something, it could be the good part of Anderson trying to reach out, or a slip up of some kind from the new, Reaper doomsday device version of Anderson. From there, it completely branches out into a tree of different scenarios. And we have little evidence to use with which to narrow it down. The only thing we'd be able to do is list out all the possibilities. We'd never be able to single one out as the most likely. 

But other than the infrasound-following-Coats-like-a-theme-song-and-Anderson's-the-only-other-one-to-acknowledge-him thing, do we even have any evidence of Anderson being indoctrinated? I wholeheartedly agree that it's weird he'd mention being born in London again but does that necessarily mean he's indoctrinated? I've probably missed something here, in which case I apologize, but it really could just be a minor slip up by the writing team. They could've intended to cut the original part where he says he was born in London and not realized that they'd decided to leave it in when they wrote London. Or vise-versa, I suppose. And before anybody kills me for doubting the writers, I'm not saying they're incompetent, just saying they could've made a minor mistake. And again, I'm probably just missing something here

Edit: I know it's a lot of people to overlook it, but it wouldn't be the first time.

Modifié par DrTsoni, 19 juin 2012 - 02:33 .

[HellishFiend]

DrTsoni wrote...

But other than the infrasound-following-Coats-like-a-theme-song-and-Anderson's-the-only-other-one-to-acknowledge-him thing, do we even have any evidence of Anderson being indoctrinated? I wholeheartedly agree that it's weird he'd mention being born in London again but does that necessarily mean he's indoctrinated? I've probably missed something here, in which case I apologize, but it really could just be a minor slip up by the writing team. They could've intended to cut the original part where he says he was born in London and not realized that they'd decided to leave it in when they wrote London. Or vise-versa, I suppose. And before anybody kills me for doubting the writers, I'm not saying their incompetent, just saying they could've made a minor mistake. And again, I'm probably just missing something here

We do have another bit of evidence, actually, that supports the idea that he's now a Reaper doomsday device:

Immediately after the infamous "born in london" line, he proceeds to say "Too bad it took the Reapers to bring us together." Not only is that line suspect in and of itself, but in addition, no negative inflection is placed on the word "Reapers". Very suspicious. 

[paxxton]

DrTsoni wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

FellishBeast wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I think what you all trying to say is that the second mention of Anderson being born in London is a hidden message. The real Anderson is still there and tries to communicate with Shepard but the indoctrination doesn't allow him to speak straight so he has to resort to speaking figuratively.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but I do think that second mention is rather fishy. Like Manhattan's Chinatown fishy.

Basically what paxxton is saying is that we feel that it means something. And I agree with that. The possibilities are quite numerous. To start off, if we assume it means something, it could be the good part of Anderson trying to reach out, or a slip up of some kind from the new, Reaper doomsday device version of Anderson. From there, it completely branches out into a tree of different scenarios. And we have little evidence to use with which to narrow it down. The only thing we'd be able to do is list out all the possibilities. We'd never be able to single one out as the most likely. 

But other than the infrasound-following-Coats-like-a-theme-song-and-Anderson's-the-only-other-one-to-acknowledge-him thing, do we even have any evidence of Anderson being indoctrinated? I wholeheartedly agree that it's weird he'd mention being born in London again but does that necessarily mean he's indoctrinated? I've probably missed something here, in which case I apologize, but it really could just be a minor slip up by the writing team. They could've intended to cut the original part where he says he was born in London and not realized that they'd decided to leave it in when they wrote London. Or vise-versa, I suppose. And before anybody kills me for doubting the writers, I'm not saying their incompetent, just saying they could've made a minor mistake. And again, I'm probably just missing something here

I'm not sure if this is a minor mistake. Those mentions are parts of the main story, the core of Mass Effect 3. It was surely revised many times. So it could be a hint at something big.

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juin 2012 - 02:34 .

[HellishFiend]

Oh, and to add on to that, its not really evidence per se, but from a narrative standpoint, it would be necessary to give Anderson a form of vindication to make up for him being forcibly used by the antagonists at the very end of the trilogy. To do otherwise would seriously ****** off an audience. Anderson representing Shepard's willpower and having a heartfelt chat with him in his mind serves that purpose perfectly.

[BatmanTurian]

FellishBeast wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

Wow, I've missed...like 30 pages! Something happen or are we just feeling more talkative today?

We had a lot of off-topic discussion. I scanned it and saw mostly bragging about high IQ's and how many countries people have been too.

I said I didn't want to brag.... and he asked a question.....

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

Oh, and to add on to that, its not really evidence per se, but from a narrative standpoint, it would be necessary to give Anderson a form of vindication to make up for him being forcibly used by the antagonists at the very end of the trilogy. To do otherwise would seriously ****** off an audience. Anderson representing Shepard's willpower and having a heartfelt chat with him in his mind serves that purpose perfectly.

I don't get it why would it ****** off the audience. Don't they know that indoctrination is irresistible? Everyone's invited.

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juin 2012 - 02:37 .

[Nightingale]

HellishFiend wrote...

DrTsoni wrote...

But other than the infrasound-following-Coats-like-a-theme-song-and-Anderson's-the-only-other-one-to-acknowledge-him thing, do we even have any evidence of Anderson being indoctrinated? I wholeheartedly agree that it's weird he'd mention being born in London again but does that necessarily mean he's indoctrinated? I've probably missed something here, in which case I apologize, but it really could just be a minor slip up by the writing team. They could've intended to cut the original part where he says he was born in London and not realized that they'd decided to leave it in when they wrote London. Or vise-versa, I suppose. And before anybody kills me for doubting the writers, I'm not saying their incompetent, just saying they could've made a minor mistake. And again, I'm probably just missing something here

We do have another bit of evidence, actually, that supports the idea that he's now a Reaper doomsday device:

Immediately after the infamous "born in london" line, he proceeds to say "Too bad it took the Reapers to bring us together." Not only is that line suspect in and of itself, but in addition, no negative inflection is placed on the word "Reapers". Very suspicious. 

Lol Reaper doomsday device, huh? Interesting way to put it. But yes, you squadies reaction would support this, as well.

paxxton wrote...
I'm not sure if this is a minor mistake.
Those mentions are parts of the main story, the core of Mass Effect 3.
It was surely revised many times. So it could be a hint at something
big.

Isn't the first time he mentions it an optional conversation though? Maybe they wanted everyone to know it and just forgot to change the second part of it if the player has already heard the first conversation. I can't (and wouldn't want to) argue about what you said, though. It definitely has potential to be something huge.

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Oh, and to add on to that, its not really evidence per se, but from a narrative standpoint, it would be necessary to give Anderson a form of vindication to make up for him being forcibly used by the antagonists at the very end of the trilogy. To do otherwise would seriously ****** off an audience. Anderson representing Shepard's willpower and having a heartfelt chat with him in his mind serves that purpose perfectly.

I don't get it why would it ****** off the audience. Don't they know that indoctrination is irresistible? Everyone's invited.

Good thing I'm familiar with paxxtonese, or I'd be obligated to write a few paragraphs on what would happen if samwise turned on frodo at the very end of Return of the King. 

[Vaya]

This may not really belong in the IT thread, it's a distinct departure from IT, but the reason I started looking into this started here.

I started looking into this beacuse a few posters who wanted to look at Chronos station more closely. At the same time I'd been going through the game looking for anything that might be a clue, anything jarring or out of place or symbolic.

All of the oddities that I've found pointed to two separate plot lines. The Cerberus mole and Shepard's indoctrination. The problem I'm having is I can not figure out the motive.

I appologise in advance if this is a bit rambling.

I was looking at the dream sequences because they seem to be fairly obviously somebody trying to get into Shepards mind.

At the end of the second dream sequence, when Shepard wakes up. Shepard is fully dressed, standing, and holding a blank communications panel. The whole cut lasts only a couple of seconds, and it's mostly lost in a long auto sequence sandwitched between the end of Tuchanka and the beginning of the Cerberus Citadel invasion.

This is in many ways the key point, because while the dreams almost certainly point at indoctination, this manchurian candidate moment almost certainly implies that the Cerberus mole is not one of the crew, but rather Shepard.

So the speculation has been that the starchild/deadchild is a manifestation of Harbinger trying to get into Shepard's mind, but I'm comming to the conclusion that it is not Harbinger, but TIM. (does anybody know what color TIM's eyes were before his encounter with the reaper artifact? I think the child's eyes are brown. The hair and large head match though.)

The third (?) conversation with Miranda was on my list of oddities because she brings up the idea of a control chip in conversation. It's been/being talked about on the forums in another thread, but that subject was an itch I could'nt scratch back whan I first played ME2. Bringing it up in the current game just seemed to be to remind me about the original discussion.

Miranda did not put a control chip into Shepard becasue the Illusive man told her not to. He told her not to because he wanted Shepard "as is". But that did'nt seem to be in his character, he always wants to control things at the smallest levels. Even when he claims that he didnt know what was really going on at Pragia or project Overlord, I dont believe a word. So he didn't want to put a control chip in Shepard becasue of some mushy "pure Shepard" reasoning, or because HE ALREADY HAD PUT ONE IN. There was another brilliant mind working on reconstruction, Wilson.

Of course, Wilson was working for the Shadow Broker and sabatoged his masterwork at the last minute to kill Shepard because of jelousy for Miranda. Well, that or the Illusive man set things up to kill off any loose ends like he did with the scientists at Arrae. ( anybody have any information on Dr Horrace Armstrong? hes a bit of an enigma).

Mind you, SHepard was already hacked once in the game, during project Overlord, David Archer as the VI hybrid is able to take control of Shepard through her omni tool/implants at the very least.

There are all sorts of unresolved plot lines pointing to a Cerberus infiltrator on the crew, and the clues point at Vega, Ashley, Kaiden, Liara, EDI, Traynor, Allers, Anderson, Chakwas, Bailey and Joker. But in the end, I think it points at Shepard.

In one of the Kai Leng entries on Chronos staion, TIM says something to the effect of " I havent given up on Shepard yet". The log entry would be chronologically after Thessia I think.

And in the end of the last room in Chronos station, you walk into what is blatently a virtual reality chamber. you have black mirrored floors walls and ceilings. The window on the wall looking out at the space battle is clearly a projection, you can see the edges of the tiles at the fringes of the camera.

There is a virtual reality theatre seat in the lounge area of the Normandy. (somebody left it playing the "sexy video" from hotel azure) and the only other time I remember seeing them is at the beginning of the game in the room detroyed by the reaper where you find the child in the vent. There are two seats in the rubble, for no apparent reason.

The toothed edges of the ramp leading into the room and the geared wall panels out the outside of the room imply that the whole construct moves, the moving walls are even mentioned by "Anderson" at the end sequence. The "green screen" walls with the handles around the outside even look like a soundstage.

And you enter that area through a corridor that looks exactly like the Normandy airlock without the pink lights. I don't know why that would be reused unless they wanted you to know you were going "outside the ship" or that it was a separate vessel from Chronos station.

My conclusion is that Shepard never left Chronos station, the assuault was never launched on Earth, Kai leng is still sulking and the Illusive man is still waiting. I just don't know why. Or maybe im just reading more into things than are there.

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Oh, and to add on to that, its not really evidence per se, but from a narrative standpoint, it would be necessary to give Anderson a form of vindication to make up for him being forcibly used by the antagonists at the very end of the trilogy. To do otherwise would seriously ****** off an audience. Anderson representing Shepard's willpower and having a heartfelt chat with him in his mind serves that purpose perfectly.

I don't get it why would it ****** off the audience. Don't they know that indoctrination is irresistible? Everyone's invited.

Good thing I'm familiar with paxxtonese, or I'd be obligated to write a few paragraphs on what would happen if samwise turned on frodo at the very end of Return of the King. 

But if it were consistent with the lore, why not? In fact it'd be a tremendous story twist. A shock!

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juin 2012 - 02:46 .

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Oh, and to add on to that, its not really evidence per se, but from a narrative standpoint, it would be necessary to give Anderson a form of vindication to make up for him being forcibly used by the antagonists at the very end of the trilogy. To do otherwise would seriously ****** off an audience. Anderson representing Shepard's willpower and having a heartfelt chat with him in his mind serves that purpose perfectly.

I don't get it why would it ****** off the audience. Don't they know that indoctrination is irresistible? Everyone's invited.

Good thing I'm familiar with paxxtonese, or I'd be obligated to write a few paragraphs on what would happen if samwise turned on frodo at the very end of Return of the King. 

But if it were consistent with the lore, why not? In fact it'd be a tremendous story twist. A shock!

You forgot the smiley in that post... right? 

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Oh, and to add on to that, its not really evidence per se, but from a narrative standpoint, it would be necessary to give Anderson a form of vindication to make up for him being forcibly used by the antagonists at the very end of the trilogy. To do otherwise would seriously ****** off an audience. Anderson representing Shepard's willpower and having a heartfelt chat with him in his mind serves that purpose perfectly.

I don't get it why would it ****** off the audience. Don't they know that indoctrination is irresistible? Everyone's invited.

Good thing I'm familiar with paxxtonese, or I'd be obligated to write a few paragraphs on what would happen if samwise turned on frodo at the very end of Return of the King. 

But if it were consistent with the lore, why not? In fact it'd be a tremendous story twist. A shock!

You forgot the smiley in that post... right? 

Nope.

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juin 2012 - 02:51 .

[HellishFiend]

 Looks like a great post, Vaya! I'll probly need a bit to read, absorb, and respond to it though, so be patient with me. 

[HellishFiend]

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Oh, and to add on to that, its not really evidence per se, but from a narrative standpoint, it would be necessary to give Anderson a form of vindication to make up for him being forcibly used by the antagonists at the very end of the trilogy. To do otherwise would seriously ****** off an audience. Anderson representing Shepard's willpower and having a heartfelt chat with him in his mind serves that purpose perfectly.

I don't get it why would it ****** off the audience. Don't they know that indoctrination is irresistible? Everyone's invited.

Good thing I'm familiar with paxxtonese, or I'd be obligated to write a few paragraphs on what would happen if samwise turned on frodo at the very end of Return of the King. 

But if it were consistent with the lore, why not? In fact it'd be a tremendous story twist. A shock!

You forgot the smiley in that post... right? 

Nope.

[ZerebusPrime]

Continuing playthrough, just reached second dream. Turned off the music and raised the volume and now I must say...

...those oily shadows are obnoxiously loud (duh, I turned up the volume). Near the end when they gather together around the boy they sound decidedly mechanical. But we know this already.

I noticed that when Liara talks to her father, the writers made a point to remind us of Benezia's description of what it's like to be indoctrinated: hitting on the glass while watching your body act against your will. Very similar to players punching the television sets during the sequence with the Starchild. Yeah, so we think those ten minutes were bad? Imagine Benezia's point of view...

Anyhow, I had a thought. Someone mentioned that Indoctrination may involve nanid(t)es. As I was playing the Tuchanka mission I was once again confronted with the question of what that Reaper destroyer was doing at the Shroud. They stated that the Reapers were using the shroud to poison the atmosphere of the planet, but the question is: poison it with what? If indoctrination can occur through nanotech spores, then it seems to me that the Shroud is a perfect mechanism for rapidly dispensing such spores across the planet.

[paxxton]

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

paxxton wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Oh, and to add on to that, its not really evidence per se, but from a narrative standpoint, it would be necessary to give Anderson a form of vindication to make up for him being forcibly used by the antagonists at the very end of the trilogy. To do otherwise would seriously ****** off an audience. Anderson representing Shepard's willpower and having a heartfelt chat with him in his mind serves that purpose perfectly.

I don't get it why would it ****** off the audience. Don't they know that indoctrination is irresistible? Everyone's invited.

Good thing I'm familiar with paxxtonese, or I'd be obligated to write a few paragraphs on what would happen if samwise turned on frodo at the very end of Return of the King. 

But if it were consistent with the lore, why not? In fact it'd be a tremendous story twist. A shock!

You forgot the smiley in that post... right? 

Nope.

LOL. Maybe in LoTR it wouldn't make sense but in Mass Effect definately. Even more so considering that the current ending is not at the real end of the game. Also, friend betrayal is what is caused by indoctrination, isn't it?

Modifié par paxxton, 19 juin 2012 - 02:52 .

[BleedingUranium]

paxxton wrote...

FellishBeast wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I think what you all trying to say is that the second mention of Anderson being born in London is a hidden message. The real Anderson is still there and tries to communicate with Shepard but the indoctrination doesn't allow him to speak straight so he has to resort to speaking figuratively.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but I do think that second mention is rather fishy. Like Manhattan's Chinatown fishy.

I mean that the real Anderson's free mind is trapped/obscured by the indoctrinated part of his mind. Still he tries to warn Shepard that the man with whom he speaks is an impostor.

I thought that's what it seemed like on my first playthrough, that it came across as meaning something else, but I didn't think anything of it then. I said a long time ago on this thread, well, the other one, that I thought Anderson's "I was born here" meant "The Anderson you see now, the indoctrinated one, became indoctrinated in London; "born" there."

That, coupled with the fact that we got a very, very nice goodbye scene with our mind's Anderson, even if he's in our head, he got to say goodbye to the "true" Anderson that we knew for years, means I find it very likely Anderson, as well as Coats, will turn out to be indoctrinated in EC.

Not only would it make canon sense for the Reapers to want to indoctrinate him, but Bioware set up the possibility from the story side of things by giving us a proper goodbye.

[Nightingale]

ZerebusPrime wrote...

Continuing playthrough, just reached second dream. Turned off the music and raised the volume and now I must say...

...those oily shadows are obnoxiously loud (duh, I turned up the volume). Near the end when they gather together around the boy they sound decidedly mechanical. But we know this already.

I noticed that when Liara talks to her father, the writers made a point to remind us of Benezia's description of what it's like to be indoctrinated: hitting on the glass while watching your body act against your will. Very similar to players punching the television sets during the sequence with the Starchild. Yeah, so we think those ten minutes were bad? Imagine Benezia's point of view...

Anyhow, I had a thought. Someone mentioned that Indoctrination may involve nanid(t)es. As I was playing the Tuchanka mission I was once again confronted with the question of what that Reaper destroyer was doing at the Shroud. They stated that the Reapers were using the shroud to poison the atmosphere of the planet, but the question is: poison it with what? If indoctrination can occur through nanotech spores, then it seems to me that the Shroud is a perfect mechanism for rapidly dispensing such spores across the planet.

Very good point. I thought it was a different kind of indoctrination (the difference between being TIM/Saren and a husk) but it's possible that would work the same way. Considering how resiliant the Krogan are, it could take them longer to get indoctrinated and there's several theories floating around about the squadies being indoctrinated, too. There are several opportunities but this makes so much sense, it's actually worrisome.

Also, for some reason the way you worded this post made me giggle

[paxxton]

BleedingUranium wrote...

paxxton wrote...

FellishBeast wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I think what you all trying to say is that the second mention of Anderson being born in London is a hidden message. The real Anderson is still there and tries to communicate with Shepard but the indoctrination doesn't allow him to speak straight so he has to resort to speaking figuratively.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but I do think that second mention is rather fishy. Like Manhattan's Chinatown fishy.

I mean that the real Anderson's free mind is trapped/obscured by the indoctrinated part of his mind. Still he tries to warn Shepard that the man with whom he speaks is an impostor.

I thought that's what it seemed like on my first playthrough, that it came across as meaning something else, but I didn't think anything of it then. I said a long time ago on this thread, well, the other one, that I thought Anderson's "I was born here" meant "The Anderson you see now, the indoctrinated one, became indoctrinated in London; "born" there."

That, coupled with the fact that we got a very, very nice goodbye scene with our mind's Anderson, even if he's in our head, he got to say goodbye to the "true" Anderson that we knew for years, means I find it very likely Anderson, as well as Coats, will turn out to be indoctrinated in EC.

Not only would it make canon sense for the Reapers to want to indoctrinate him, but Bioware set up the possibility from the story side of things by giving us a proper goodbye.

So Shep says goodbye and after waking up gives him a headshot. Nice friendship.

[Golferguy758]

Hey guys. not sure how many of you actually remember me, but it's been hectic at work hence the lack of, well, anything from me. Looks like I have a lot of reading to do, but it's good to see some familiar faces.

Keep up the good work. Hopefully the payout is worth the speculation.