209 réponses à ce sujet

[Wabajakka]

Bill Casey wrote...

O_o

[Dont Kaidan Me]

themaniac003 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Nahh.....thats just Bioware being lazy.....

Nahh.... thats just Anderson patting Shepard's belly full of blue babies.

[djspectre]

Shepard Wins wrote...

There is a moment during the ending sequence when Shepard is forced by TIM (?) to shoot Anderson in the side. Then we are shown Shepard bleeding from his own left side.

It's almost as if it's been taken from "Fight Club" and it seems like a very strong indicator that the sequence on the Citadel is not real, IT or not.

This little fragment cannot be dismissed as lazy design/writing on BioWare's part. When Shep is sitting there with Anderson the camera very purposefully lingers over his left side as he reaches for it with his hand and we can clearly see his hand covered in fresh blood.

This wound IS NOT, I repeat IS NOT from Marauder Shields's shot, because that hits Shepard in the right arm.

Now, I would very much like to believe IT but I'm seriously doubtful about it. This "wound in the side" thing is what could be considered a strong indicator the scene is not real. Any thoughts on this subject? Somebody have an explanation for this that doesn't involve a dream/hallucination?

I've seen a video that says Anderson is shot in his RIGHT side. That would render the whole thing mute, but it seems that Anderson is really hit in the left side. From the line of the gun it's hard to tell where the shot is aimed and Anderson clearly grabs his left side after being shot.

This very point was mentioned in the youtube documentary done on the indoctrination theory. Up till someone pointing out the similarity between where Anderson was shot and where Shepard is bleeding (which up to that point he was limping but never holding his side or bleeding) from the same place anderson was shot, I'd have never noticed it. 

[Ageless Face]

You do understand Shepard shot Anderson's right side, and Shepard is bleeding from the left side?

Modifié par HagarIshay, 22 mai 2012 - 05:21 .

[dreamgazer]

Damn. I always thought that early stomach-touching felt a little awkward and obvious, but I never picked up on that. That's either a ninja suggestion, or yet another "coincidence" that just so happens to connect with a heavily-suspect part of the ending.

Getting a little ridiculous with all the "happy accident" hints, ain't it? They do definitely like to draw your attention to visual cues.

[_aLucidMind_]

Shepard's armor was destroyed with only pieces still on him/her. It is obvious that metal shards from the armor likely broke and pushed in, causing a bad wound; or s/he either landed on or was hit by a sharp bit of debris that caused the wound. S/He was bleeding there when he got hit by Harbinger, not just when he was talking to TIM.

Modifié par _aLucidMind_, 22 mai 2012 - 05:29 .

[TobiTobsen]

Sheprad really should have listened to Hunter S Thompson before taking that Acid.

As soon as Harby's laser hits him he is in bat country.

[Destructorlio]

Bill Casey wrote...

Is there a youtube of this?!?

Bill Casey wrote...

It's just Bioware reusing hand locations...

 

 Bravo, sir.

Modifié par Destructorlio, 22 mai 2012 - 06:23 .

[Bill Casey]

HagarIshay wrote...

You do understand Shepard shot Anderson's right side, and Shepard is bleeding from the left side?

Anderson clutches his left abdomen when he gets shot...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 22 mai 2012 - 06:31 .

[UrgentArchengel]

Me1mN0t wrote...

Too much emphasis on Mr. Shields' shot placement (direct center view of screen, right shoulder), combined with acid-trip scene with TIM and Father Anderson= Harbinger (Star child) is attempting to mind rape you.

Say what you will about Bioware, but they don't make mistakes like that. Same with Sheps eyes after synth/control combined with Sheps newfound resolve when shooting at the Destroy pipe. He's breaking free. I believe IT, but some of the "evidence" reeks of desperation

This!  

Y'all can whine about the evidence all day, but don't let your emotions get in the way.  Why would the god Carnifax act like a Predator, and even turn into one when the explosion from destroy touches you.  Why would Shep wake up on Earth afterwards.  It's not like he just walked back through the whole thing, because the Citadel was blowing up.  And yes, It's Earth, there is a Mako tank flipped over in the background.  There are no makos anywhere you were at the end.  Yes, lots of evidence like the flashes of light, the reflections, and that map that are definiately borderline straw-grasping.  But there are things that do definiately not fit that category.  There are definite pieces of evidence thought they are swimming in a straw pool.  Learn to have a little hope, because you have more then you know. 

[Salient Archer]

Don't be angry with BioWare If the EC does happen to reveal that the IDT is true and it was always their intention to do it this way. For if it is true they have created a complex and convincing deception that has truly immersed us. No, if the IDT and EC was always intended we should be thankful to BioWare for giving us such a fanservice.

[jasonxxsatanna]

^ Totally agree

[jules_vern18]

Shepard Wins wrote...

There is a moment during the ending sequence when Shepard is forced by TIM (?) to shoot Anderson in the side. Then we are shown Shepard bleeding from his own left side.

It's almost as if it's been taken from "Fight Club" and it seems like a very strong indicator that the sequence on the Citadel is not real, IT or not.

This little fragment cannot be dismissed as lazy design/writing on BioWare's part. When Shep is sitting there with Anderson the camera very purposefully lingers over his left side as he reaches for it with his hand and we can clearly see his hand covered in fresh blood.

This wound IS NOT, I repeat IS NOT from Marauder Shields's shot, because that hits Shepard in the right arm.

Now, I would very much like to believe IT but I'm seriously doubtful about it. This "wound in the side" thing is what could be considered a strong indicator the scene is not real. Any thoughts on this subject? Somebody have an explanation for this that doesn't involve a dream/hallucination?

I've seen a video that says Anderson is shot in his RIGHT side. That would render the whole thing mute, but it seems that Anderson is really hit in the left side. From the line of the gun it's hard to tell where the shot is aimed and Anderson clearly grabs his left side after being shot.

Which is a more common-sense explanation?

1.)  Shepard was recently hit by a reaper beam and is covered in bleeding wounds.  One of them reopened/was unable to clot.  This is called bleeding out.  Perhaps a piece of shrapnel or debris was blocking the wound. 

2.)  The entire scene never happened.  Bioware has a trick up their sleeve of some kind and has refused to reveal it despite unprecedented backlash and fan outrage.

I'm gonna go with option 1. 

The bleeding wound is shown to reinforce the direness of the situation - shepard is on his last legs and is essentially dying.  Same with Anderson - stomach/side wounds are the one place a character can be shot and wounded severely enough for the situation to be dire but not severely enough for them to die immediately.  The fact that both of them have wounds in the same area is coincidence as a part of storytelling.

It's a narrative mechanic, not a conspiracy theory.

Modifié par jules_vern18, 22 mai 2012 - 05:53 .

[jsadalia]

 Shepard had that wound before meeting Anderson:




And you can also see him holding that area soon after waking up (www.youtube.com/watch), at about 2:58.

Modifié par jsadalia, 22 mai 2012 - 05:59 .

[dreamgazer]

jules_vern18 wrote...

Which is a more common-sense explanation?

1.)  Shepard was recently hit by a reaper beam and is covered in bleeding wounds.  One of them reopened/was unable to clot.  This is called bleeding out.  Perhaps a piece of shrapnel or debris was blocking the wound. 

2.)  The entire scene never happened.  Bioware has a trick up their sleeve of some kind and has refused to reveal it despite unprecedented backlash and fan outrage.

I'm gonna go with option 1. 

The bleeding wound is shown to reinforce the direness of the situation - shepard is on his last legs and is essentially dying.  Same with Anderson - stomach/side wounds are the one place a character can be shot and wounded severely enough for the situation to be dire but not severely enough for them to die immediately.  The fact that both of them have wounds in the same area is coincidence as a part of storytelling.

It's a narrative mechanic, not a conspiracy theory.

It can be both a narrative mechanic and an element of interpretation, you know.  If we boiled everything down to common sense, then we wouldn't have a narrative here.

Either way, you're feeding narrative into a scene that doesn't explicitly confirm or deny either one: you never see Shepard get hit with a shard, nor do you see the bullet enter into Shepard's abdomen. You infer on both accounts.  One just so happens to involve a plot device that stretches back to the very first game, while the other involves Shepard surviving a directly-aimed Reaper blast that, as we learn earlier in the game and is emphasized throughout, almost universally kills/vaporizes on contact.  Why did this one not?  Is it really another example of the now-parroted claim of "bad writing"?

[thehomeworld]

Shep was holding his/her side as soon as they landed on the citadel their gun was also several paces in front of them whose to say that the velocity of the beam detached the gun from shep's hand and when it discharged while hitting the floor conveniently shooting them above their hip on the same side Anderson was later shot in. Shep being disorientated already from the hit into the floor and the sheer throw of the beam didn't notice they were shot just held onto the area thinking it was a bruise till they had time to actually look at the wound.

[Wulfram]

Gallifreya wrote...

WOW. I uh...completely missed that.

I feel deep shame at this moment. Wow.

If you played FemShep like your avatar, you didn't miss it.  FemShep has a different animation using both hands at that moment.

[dreamgazer]

Wulfram wrote...

Gallifreya wrote...

WOW. I uh...completely missed that.

I feel deep shame at this moment. Wow.

If you played FemShep like your avatar, you didn't miss it.  FemShep has a different animation using both hands at that moment.

This is true, after thinking back. Emphasis is still placed on the general region by way of Anderson's hand, but FemShep's reaction isn't one-handed.

Edit: Eh, partially.  The left hand still hits first.  http://youtu.be/-FPPK3ljXP8?t=2m7s

Modifié par dreamgazer, 22 mai 2012 - 06:24 .

[SirCroft]

hoodaticus wrote...

darkchief10 wrote...

does no one remember marauder shields shot you there before you killed him? seriously?

Does no one read the OP? seriously?

Quoted for emphasis. If you're going to be a douchebag, do it right.

[jules_vern18]

Orange Tee wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

O_o

Are you seriously inferring that there's something of note here?

Anderson touches Shepard's side as part of his "soft around the edges" remark.  Shepard reacts to being touched.

And now, a quick lesson on how conspiracy theories are fed and developed:

The Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon
by Alan Bellows

You may have heard about Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon before.  In fact, you probably learned about it for the first time very recently.  If not, then you just might hear about it again very soon.  Baader-Meinhof is the phenomenon where one happens upon some obscure piece of information - often an unfamiliar word or name - and soon afterwards encounters teh same subject again, often repeatedly.  Anytime the phrase "That's so weird, I just heard about that the other day" would be appropriate, the utterer is hip-deep in Baader-Meinhof.

Most people seem to have experienced the phenomenon at least a few times in their lives, and many people encounter it with such regularity that they anticipate it upon the introduction of new information.  But what is the underlying cause?  Is there some hidden meaning behind Baader-Meinhof events?

The phenomenon bears some similarity to synchronicity, which is the experience of having a highly meaningful coincidence...such as having someone telephone you while you are thinking about them.  Both phenomena invoke a feeling of mild surprise, and cause one to ponder the odds of such an intersection.  Both smack of destiny, as though the events were supposed to occur in just that arrangement...as though we're witnessing yet another domino tip over in a chain of dominoes beyond our reckoning.

Despite science's cries that a world as complex as ours invites frequent coincidences, observation tells us that such an explanation is inadequate.  Observation shows us that Baader-Meinhof strikes with blurring accuracy, and too frequently to be explained away so easily.  But over the centuries, observation has also shown us that observation itself is highly flawed, and not to be trusted.

The reason for this is our brains' prejudice towards patterns.  Our brains are fantastic pattern recognition engines, a characteristic which is highly useful for learning, but it does cause the brain to lend excessive importance to unremarkable events.  Considering how many words, names, and ideas a person is exposed to in a given day, it is unsurprising that we sometimes encounter the same information again within a short tme.  When that occasional intersection occurs, the brain promotes the information because the two instances make up the beginnings of a sequence. What we fail to notice is the hundreds or thousands of pieces of information which aren't repeated, because they do not conform to an interesting pattern.  This tendency to ignore the "uninteresting" data is an example of selective attention.

In point of fact, coincidences themselves are usually just an artifact of perception.  We humans tend to underestimate the probability of coinciding events, so our expectations are at odds with reality.  And non-coincidental events to do not grab our attention with anywhere near the same intensity, because coincidences are patterns, and the brain actually stimulates us for successfully detecting patterns...hence their inflated value.  In short, patterns are habit-forming.

Remainder of article can be found here.

Happy straw-grasping!

[dreamgazer]

jules_vern18 wrote...

Are you seriously inferring that there's something of note here?

Anderson touches Shepard's side as part of his "soft around the edges" remark.  Shepard reacts to being touched.

And now, a quick lesson on how conspiracy theories are fed and developed:

*snip*

Remainder of article can be found here.

Happy straw-grasping!

Yeah, the "confirmation bias" argument. That gets tossed around a lot here, usually as a means of derision.

There's also an argument towards the nature of subtle psychological suggestion. (shrug)

[FOX216BC]

jsadalia wrote...

 Shepard had that wound before meeting Anderson:




And you can also see him holding that area soon after waking up (www.youtube.com/watch), at about 2:58.

only it isn't bleeding  so much at this point does it.

[Ecrulis]

It is an interesting notion, its just me and Im sure quite a few others simply don't have the faith in Bioware being that clever, especially with all the incoherent crap that is surrounding the endings (normandy crash and space grandpa) not to mention it is kind of infuriating that they would quite literally put out an incomplete game for the full price, Of course it doesnt help that there seems to be a gag order of sorts relating to all freaking information.

[jules_vern18]

dreamgazer wrote...

jules_vern18 wrote...

Are you seriously inferring that there's something of note here?

Anderson touches Shepard's side as part of his "soft around the edges" remark.  Shepard reacts to being touched.

And now, a quick lesson on how conspiracy theories are fed and developed:

*snip*

Remainder of article can be found here.

Happy straw-grasping!

Yeah, the "confirmation bias" argument. That gets tossed around a lot here, usually as a means of derision.

There's also an argument towards the nature of subtle psychological suggestion. (shrug)

Can you at least look at your conspiracy theory critically, or is the article just going to be dismissed like everything else that contradicts your "evidence?"  How about somebody reply to the guy who pointed out shepard holding his side before even shooting Anderson?

And the article doesn't need to be snipped.  If you don't post the content of an anti-IT link right in the forum, an Indoctrination Theorist will almost never read it.

[Vox Draco]

jules_vern18 wrote...
Happy straw-grasping!

Thanks! At least IT is a whole lot of fun to speculate on! And I love how creative some people have become inspired by this subject...for good or worse, still its fun and entertaining...especially if you can't play the game anymore due to the stupid ending ruining everything...

Still can't see anything bad about the theory....supporting synthesis on the other hand...well...that's another topic!