896 réponses à ce sujet

[Jadebaby]

Erield wrote...

Ah. no. That would be me being tired and misreading. Whoops. Oh well. Only another 10 minutes, then I will have successfully switched from first to third shift sleep schedule and I can pass out.

hugs* I used to do shift-work. I feel your pain.

[Candidate 88766]

SauliusL wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The problem with the IT is that 'believers' came to the conclusion first, and then started twisting evidence to suit their conclusion when the majority of it can be far more simply explained with reused assets or a developer overlooking something.

Its clear now that the IT was never intended from the start:

The entire story of ME3 leaked out twice before the game did, and yet there is never even the slightest mention of anything suggesting the IT in either script - and the second script is pretty much identical to the finished story. Not to mention that so far all the MP DLCs have been leaked prior to release. Information about the MP itself leaked out well ahead of its announcement. And yet, despite how leaky this project has been, there is yet to be a single leak with evidence even hinting at the IT.

If a 'real' ending had been planned all along, then:
-Why has it taken so long to bring out?
-Why has no-one from Bioware, either officially or unofficially, come out to say that they have something up their sleeve to placate the fanbase and the media? Given the sheer amount of hate coming their way, surely placating the fanbase is a greater priority than keeping the 'surprise' of the ending from being spoiled. This is a videogame with a very dedicated fanbase, not an April Fools joke.
-Why do the voice-actors think the fact that they're coming back to record new dialogue is noteworthy enough to tweet about? If a new ending had been planned, the dialogue would've either been recorded with all other dialogue, or the VAs would've been informed they'd be coming back in very soon after ME3's release.


Fans that are waiting for some 'real' ending are just setting themselves up for a catastrophic disappointment. The IT is a very interesting interpretation of the ending, but all but the most dedicated IT believers must realise that it obviously wasn't intended from the start and in all likelihood won't be used in the EC.

What?? I stopped reading at "But the idea that all the tweets, official statements, in-game
confirmations, and developer comments are all a titanic fakeout ploy is
beyond reasonable believability. "

Did you miss the part that Bioware was extensively experimenting on gameplay mechanics with Shepard indoctrinated, but canceled that as not possible to execute properly??

They also considered a dark energy plot from as early as ME2, but it didn't come to fruition. Saying that Bioware chose not to don something neither supports or contradicts the theory.

And are you seriously telling me that both Bioware and EA are putting up with all this hate, all this backlash - from fans and the media - simply for the sake of a 'suprise' which, if true, has been completely ruined already?

Just think about that for a minute. Because basic business sense would tell you that it is beyond all reasonable believeablity. No company would go through this for the sake of a 'surprise' which has already been ruined (and isn't actually a very good surprise - it turns out the obvious ending is actually the right ending, while the two evil endings are wrong), and EA would not let them as they are feelling the backlash too - which is rather unfair seeing as they didn't write the ending.

[Candidate 88766]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The problem with the IT is that 'believers' came to the conclusion first, and then started twisting evidence to suit their conclusion when the majority of it can be far more simply explained with reused assets or a developer overlooking something.

Sorry, stopped reading there, but already that's incorrect.

Indoctrination is present in the very first scene of ME3. The kid running around the garden with the toy.

Look back through the anals of BSN and you will find Indoctrination conspiracies surrounding this from the ME3 demo.

You misunderstand me.

I meant the conclusion that the entire ending is an indoctrination-induced hallucination.

There is a massive leap between 'indoctrination plays a part in ME3' (which there are actually some compelling hints for) to 'the entire ending sequence is a hallucination in which the Reapers are playing mindgames with Shepard and trying to trick him with his own subconscious'.

Thats the conclusion I was referring to - that the ending isn't real. Thats where a lot of the IT seems to have started, and then evidence has been twisted to meet this conclusion. 

The conclusion that indoctrination will play a roe, which you are referring to, started with some evidence - no-one reacts to the boy - which then lead to the conclusion that perhaps the boy indicates Shepard is being indoctrinated. This is the right way to go about it.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 16 juin 2012 - 11:41 .

[Nightwriter]

EnemyD wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I have a healthy respect for ambitious creative undertakings, but sometimes I think writers try too hard to be innovative and artsy. It makes my nose wrinkle. They start doing things like adding grimdark for the sake of grimdark, calling it "mature" or "artistic," and flake on answering the important questions their stories created, all in the name of tasteful ambiguity or open-ended interpretation.

They don't get points in my book for doing something new. They get points for doing something new and doing it well.

I loled at this. Not because I disagree but because you say it with a Lisa Simpson Avatar who looks like she just walked out of an art convention in Manhatten.

Summer of 4 Ft. 2 was a glorious episode. Lisa was trying too hard, poor thing, but she learned a valuable lesson. The trendy kids accepted her in the end and loved her for her nerdiness. The moral of this story is that when no one signs your yearbook you should dress like a beatnik until people decorate your car with seashells.

Seems rather shallow.

Well of course it is. Don't you know that cartoon characters must first do shallow things to try and fit in before they can learn that they are fine the way they are and don't need to pretend? Pshh. You need to watch more 'toons.

And Bart got them to sign her yearbook. Brings a tear to the eye.

[RADIUMEYEZ]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

SauliusL wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The problem with the IT is that 'believers' came to the conclusion first, and then started twisting evidence to suit their conclusion when the majority of it can be far more simply explained with reused assets or a developer overlooking something.

Its clear now that the IT was never intended from the start:

The entire story of ME3 leaked out twice before the game did, and yet there is never even the slightest mention of anything suggesting the IT in either script - and the second script is pretty much identical to the finished story. Not to mention that so far all the MP DLCs have been leaked prior to release. Information about the MP itself leaked out well ahead of its announcement. And yet, despite how leaky this project has been, there is yet to be a single leak with evidence even hinting at the IT.

If a 'real' ending had been planned all along, then:
-Why has it taken so long to bring out?
-Why has no-one from Bioware, either officially or unofficially, come out to say that they have something up their sleeve to placate the fanbase and the media? Given the sheer amount of hate coming their way, surely placating the fanbase is a greater priority than keeping the 'surprise' of the ending from being spoiled. This is a videogame with a very dedicated fanbase, not an April Fools joke.
-Why do the voice-actors think the fact that they're coming back to record new dialogue is noteworthy enough to tweet about? If a new ending had been planned, the dialogue would've either been recorded with all other dialogue, or the VAs would've been informed they'd be coming back in very soon after ME3's release.


Fans that are waiting for some 'real' ending are just setting themselves up for a catastrophic disappointment. The IT is a very interesting interpretation of the ending, but all but the most dedicated IT believers must realise that it obviously wasn't intended from the start and in all likelihood won't be used in the EC.

What?? I stopped reading at "But the idea that all the tweets, official statements, in-game
confirmations, and developer comments are all a titanic fakeout ploy is
beyond reasonable believability. "

Did you miss the part that Bioware was extensively experimenting on gameplay mechanics with Shepard indoctrinated, but canceled that as not possible to execute properly??

They also considered a dark energy plot from as early as ME2, but it didn't come to fruition. Saying that Bioware chose not to don something neither supports or contradicts the theory.

And are you seriously telling me that both Bioware and EA are putting up with all this hate, all this backlash - from fans and the media - simply for the sake of a 'suprise' which, if true, has been completely ruined already?

Just think about that for a minute. Because basic business sense would tell you that it is beyond all reasonable believeablity. No company would go through this for the sake of a 'surprise' which has already been ruined (and isn't actually a very good surprise - it turns out the obvious ending is actually the right ending, while the two evil endings are wrong), and EA would not let them as they are feelling the backlash too - which is rather unfair seeing as they didn't write the ending.

How dare you defend evil corporations! They are ruining the world!

[SauliusL]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

SauliusL wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The problem with the IT is that 'believers' came to the conclusion first, and then started twisting evidence to suit their conclusion when the majority of it can be far more simply explained with reused assets or a developer overlooking something.

Its clear now that the IT was never intended from the start:

The entire story of ME3 leaked out twice before the game did, and yet there is never even the slightest mention of anything suggesting the IT in either script - and the second script is pretty much identical to the finished story. Not to mention that so far all the MP DLCs have been leaked prior to release. Information about the MP itself leaked out well ahead of its announcement. And yet, despite how leaky this project has been, there is yet to be a single leak with evidence even hinting at the IT.

If a 'real' ending had been planned all along, then:
-Why has it taken so long to bring out?
-Why has no-one from Bioware, either officially or unofficially, come out to say that they have something up their sleeve to placate the fanbase and the media? Given the sheer amount of hate coming their way, surely placating the fanbase is a greater priority than keeping the 'surprise' of the ending from being spoiled. This is a videogame with a very dedicated fanbase, not an April Fools joke.
-Why do the voice-actors think the fact that they're coming back to record new dialogue is noteworthy enough to tweet about? If a new ending had been planned, the dialogue would've either been recorded with all other dialogue, or the VAs would've been informed they'd be coming back in very soon after ME3's release.


Fans that are waiting for some 'real' ending are just setting themselves up for a catastrophic disappointment. The IT is a very interesting interpretation of the ending, but all but the most dedicated IT believers must realise that it obviously wasn't intended from the start and in all likelihood won't be used in the EC.

What?? I stopped reading at "But the idea that all the tweets, official statements, in-game
confirmations, and developer comments are all a titanic fakeout ploy is
beyond reasonable believability. "

Did you miss the part that Bioware was extensively experimenting on gameplay mechanics with Shepard indoctrinated, but canceled that as not possible to execute properly??

They also considered a dark energy plot from as early as ME2, but it didn't come to fruition. Saying that Bioware chose not to don something neither supports or contradicts the theory.

And are you seriously telling me that both Bioware and EA are putting up with all this hate, all this backlash - from fans and the media - simply for the sake of a 'suprise' which, if true, has been completely ruined already?

Just think about that for a minute. Because basic business sense would tell you that it is beyond all reasonable believeablity. No company would go through this for the sake of a 'surprise' which has already been ruined (and isn't actually a very good surprise - it turns out the obvious ending is actually the right ending, while the two evil endings are wrong), and EA would not let them as they are feelling the backlash too - which is rather unfair seeing as they didn't write the ending.

First - I just pointed out that what you wrote in the first post was a lie - "The entire story of ME3 leaked out twice before the game did, and yet
there is never even the slightest mention of anything suggesting the IT
in either script ". If they experimented extensively with gameplay mechanics with Shepard under indoctrination - how could you say there was nothing in scripts and plans with IT??

Secondly - all bold moves in history required risks to be taken. Not everything they are doing now is success, but if they pull out IT, you will see where Mass effect will stand in the gaming history All the haters will be forgotten, as usually they are

And thirdly - with IT, and in Mass effect in general - there are no bad endings. If you are indoctrinated, but the world is saved, it's just a bittersweet ending

[KaeserZen]

Most likely false and not happening, the Indoctrination Theory is still a clearly better and more elegant ending that what we are likelyto be offered by the Extended Cut.

[M Hedonist]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

And are you seriously telling me that both Bioware and EA are putting up with all this hate, all this backlash - from fans and the media - simply for the sake of a 'suprise' which, if true, has been completely ruined already?

I don't think you understand what really makes a plot twist good. It's not about the 'surprise'. It's much more satisfying if it was foreshadowed.
Plus, IT doesn't give answers to every question. Maybe only parts of the end are indoctrination attempts, maybe all of it. And who was the one trying to indoctrinate Shepard? Harbinger? Maybe even the Illusive Man?
There are still many details that are complete unknowns.

[Candidate 88766]

SauliusL wrote...

First - I just pointed out that what you wrote in the first post was a lie - "The entire story of ME3 leaked out twice before the game did, and yet
there is never even the slightest mention of anything suggesting the IT
in either script ". If they experimented extensively with gameplay mechanics with Shepard under indoctrination - how could you say there was nothing in scripts and plans with IT??

That didn't appear in either script. That was something they talked about in the 'making of' thing by Geoff Keighley. To my knowledge neither leak had even the vaguest hint of the IT - that the ending wasn't real and was in fact an indoctrination attempt.

Secondly - all bold moves in history required risks to be taken. Not everything they are doing now is success, but if they pull out IT, you will see where Mass effect will stand in the gaming history All the haters will be forgotten, as usually they are

The writers will be remembered for annoying a massive portion of their fanbase for the sake of a surprise that a. has already been ruined and b. isn't very good. Everything in the game points to Anderson and destroy being the 'correct' option. If it is a deception, its an incredibly obvious deception. It isn't some amazing twist that will go down in gaming history. 

And thirdly - with IT, and in Mass effect in general - there are no bad endings. If you are indoctrinated, but the world is saved, it's just a bittersweet ending

If Shepard is indoctrinated, he cannot save the world. Indoctrination is where your brain has been changed to the point that you agree with the Reapers. If Shepard is indoctrinated then he won't stop the Reapers. Besides, the endings as they are are already bittersweet. The IT wouldn't change anything in this case.

[SauliusL]

Sauruz wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

And are you seriously telling me that both Bioware and EA are putting up with all this hate, all this backlash - from fans and the media - simply for the sake of a 'suprise' which, if true, has been completely ruined already?

I don't think you understand what really makes a plot twist good. It's not about the 'surprise'. It's much more satisfying if it was foreshadowed.
Plus, IT doesn't give answers to every question. Maybe only parts of the end are indoctrination attempts, maybe all of it. And who was the one trying to indoctrinate Shepard? Harbinger? Maybe even the Illusive Man?
There are still many details that are complete unknowns.

^ Great answer

[Candidate 88766]

Sauruz wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

And are you seriously telling me that both Bioware and EA are putting up with all this hate, all this backlash - from fans and the media - simply for the sake of a 'suprise' which, if true, has been completely ruined already?

I don't think you understand what really makes a plot twist good. It's not about the 'surprise'. It's much more satisfying if it was foreshadowed.
Plus, IT doesn't give answers to every question. Maybe only parts of the end are indoctrination attempts, maybe all of it. And who was the one trying to indoctrinate Shepard? Harbinger? Maybe even the Illusive Man?
There are still many details that are complete unknowns.

If its not about the surprise, then why has no-one from Bioware come and said that the IT is right - either officially or through leaking it?

And the IT is not a good plot twist. All it is is saying that the obviously correct answer - destroying the Reapers - is the correct choice, and the two choices that come from nowhere are wrong.

And if the IT leaves so much unanswered, is it really better than the current endings? One of our main problems is the lack of explanation for anything thats going on.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 16 juin 2012 - 11:53 .

[Jadebaby]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The problem with the IT is that 'believers' came to the conclusion first, and then started twisting evidence to suit their conclusion when the majority of it can be far more simply explained with reused assets or a developer overlooking something.

Sorry, stopped reading there, but already that's incorrect.

Indoctrination is present in the very first scene of ME3. The kid running around the garden with the toy.

Look back through the anals of BSN and you will find Indoctrination conspiracies surrounding this from the ME3 demo.

You misunderstand me.

I meant the conclusion that the entire ending is an indoctrination-induced hallucination.

There is a massive leap between 'indoctrination plays a part in ME3' (which there are actually some compelling hints for) to 'the entire ending sequence is a hallucination in which the Reapers are playing mindgames with Shepard and trying to trick him with his own subconscious'.

But there isn't because they coincide with each other....

Thats the conclusion I was referring to - that the ending isn't real. Thats where a lot of the IT seems to have started, and then evidence has been twisted to meet this conclusion. 

I know what arguement you're trying to present, it's the fallacy of the theory that all IT hinges on is 'the breath scene' then all other pieces are looked back upon to fill in the blanks, instead of happening the other way around.
But that all depends on how much attention one pays throughout the game and when it finally 'clicks' for them.

The conclusion that indoctrination will play a roe, which you are referring to, started with some evidence - no-one reacts to the boy - which then lead to the conclusion that perhaps the boy indicates Shepard is being indoctrinated. This is the right way to go about it.

Agreed. So if indoctrination is present throughout the game why is it such a far right idea that the ending could be in Shepard's subconscious as s/he lies there unconscious?

[SauliusL]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

SauliusL wrote...

First - I just pointed out that what you wrote in the first post was a lie - "The entire story of ME3 leaked out twice before the game did, and yet
there is never even the slightest mention of anything suggesting the IT
in either script ". If they experimented extensively with gameplay mechanics with Shepard under indoctrination - how could you say there was nothing in scripts and plans with IT??

That didn't appear in either script. That was something they talked about in the 'making of' thing by Geoff Keighley. To my knowledge neither leak had even the vaguest hint of the IT - that the ending wasn't real and was in fact an indoctrination attempt.

Secondly - all bold moves in history required risks to be taken. Not everything they are doing now is success, but if they pull out IT, you will see where Mass effect will stand in the gaming history All the haters will be forgotten, as usually they are

The writers will be remembered for annoying a massive portion of their fanbase for the sake of a surprise that a. has already been ruined and b. isn't very good. Everything in the game points to Anderson and destroy being the 'correct' option. If it is a deception, its an incredibly obvious deception. It isn't some amazing twist that will go down in gaming history. 

And thirdly - with IT, and in Mass effect in general - there are no bad endings. If you are indoctrinated, but the world is saved, it's just a bittersweet ending

If Shepard is indoctrinated, he cannot save the world. Indoctrination is where your brain has been changed to the point that you agree with the Reapers. If Shepard is indoctrinated then he won't stop the Reapers. Besides, the endings as they are are already bittersweet. The IT wouldn't change anything in this case.

Who cares if it was removed from the script or was not yet on the script while they were experimenting with gameplay mechanics? The main thing is it was being thought of, even in development stages. So it is far from fan fiction and has at least some credibility even to the biggest cynic.

You don't know what the writers will be remembered for because if IT is not true, you don't even have a hint what EC will be about. If IT will be true, I would bet with you, they would not be remember for some angry fans, who cry that they chose control and it was not the best ending. In my first playthrough of ME2 I also lost half of my team. I didn't write petitions, I started game from begging and for second playthrough got the perfect ending. I don't see how it could be different with this situation. Let's say your Shepard get's indoctrinated, but sacrifices himself (Like Saren, or TIM) and because of that half of the fleet dies, half of squad members die, but as you have enough EMS the galaxy is saved. It would be a good ending, bitttersweet, but good. Not the best ofcourse, because you got tricked by indoctrination and many died, but reaper threat ended. Do you see my point?

Modifié par SauliusL, 16 juin 2012 - 12:00 .

[Jadebaby]

Nightwriter wrote...

EnemyD wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I have a healthy respect for ambitious creative undertakings, but sometimes I think writers try too hard to be innovative and artsy. It makes my nose wrinkle. They start doing things like adding grimdark for the sake of grimdark, calling it "mature" or "artistic," and flake on answering the important questions their stories created, all in the name of tasteful ambiguity or open-ended interpretation.

They don't get points in my book for doing something new. They get points for doing something new and doing it well.

I loled at this. Not because I disagree but because you say it with a Lisa Simpson Avatar who looks like she just walked out of an art convention in Manhatten.

Summer of 4 Ft. 2 was a glorious episode. Lisa was trying too hard, poor thing, but she learned a valuable lesson. The trendy kids accepted her in the end and loved her for her nerdiness. The moral of this story is that when no one signs your yearbook you should dress like a beatnik until people decorate your car with seashells.

Seems rather shallow.

Well of course it is. Don't you know that cartoon characters must first do shallow things to try and fit in before they can learn that they are fine the way they are and don't need to pretend? Pshh. You need to watch more 'toon

yea so then the next episode they can somehow forget their new-found confidence in being themselves and go back to the nerdy insecure type who goes out of there way to be accepted....

[Candidate 88766]

Jade8aby88 wrote...
Agreed. So if indoctrination is present throughout the game why is it such a far right idea that the ending could be in Shepard's subconscious as s/he lies there unconscious?

Because indoctrination in the game is simply the changing of brain functions via signals until the subject obeys the Reapers.

The indoctrination in the IT, however, causes Shepard to have to fight his own subconcsious mind, which is being manipulated and controlled by the Reapers and if he makes the right choice he will somehow fight off these subliminal signals and electromagnetic waves through willpower. Its a sort of meta mindgame that breaks the fourth wall to trick the player. Indoctrination isn't a trick though - its nothing more than signals. Trying to stop these signals through willpower is like trying to stop soundwaves reaching your ears through willpower. its just not possible, and yet the IT demands it. Its just so different to how indoctrination has been presented throughout the trilogy that I don't believe it.

[Jadebaby]

SauliusL wrote...

Who cares if it was removed from the script or was not yet on the script while they were experimenting with gameplay mechanics? The main thing is it was being thought of, even in development stages. So it is far from fan fiction and has at least some credibility even to the biggest cynic.

Full. Of. Win

[M Hedonist]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

If its not about the surprise, then why has no-one from Bioware come and said that the IT is right - either officially or through leaking it?

Then it would be too obvious. There would be no reason to debate and search for clues anymore. They may prefer to build up the tension.

And the IT is not a good plot twist. All it is is saying that the obviously correct answer - destroying the Reapers - is the correct choice, and the two choices that come from nowhere are wrong.

Yet there are many people on this forum who support the two "evil" choices.
It would be even more if less people believed in IT.

And if the IT leaves so much unanswered, is it really better than the current endings? One of our main problems is the lack of explanation for anything thats going on.

That may be true. However, another one of the main problems is the Catalyst himself. Any theory that says he's part of some kind of hallucination or is lying removes some of the most major problems of the ending.

[SauliusL]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...
Agreed. So if indoctrination is present throughout the game why is it such a far right idea that the ending could be in Shepard's subconscious as s/he lies there unconscious?

Because indoctrination in the game is simply the changing of brain functions via signals until the subject obeys the Reapers.

The indoctrination in the IT, however, causes Shepard to have to fight his own subconcsious mind, which is being manipulated and controlled by the Reapers and if he makes the right choice he will somehow fight off these subliminal signals and electromagnetic waves through willpower. Its a sort of meta mindgame that breaks the fourth wall to trick the player. Indoctrination isn't a trick though - its nothing more than signals. Trying to stop these signals through willpower is like trying to stop soundwaves reaching your ears through willpower. its just not possible, and yet the IT demands it. Its just so different to how indoctrination has been presented throughout the trilogy that I don't believe it.

What about Rachni queen, which resisted indoctrination?

As I see it, even the Geth consensus level was created for that purpose - to see that with Shepard's mind we can make changes in AI mind.

[Candidate 88766]

SauliusL wrote...

Who cares if it was removed from the script or was not yet on the script while they were experimenting with gameplay mechanics? The main thing is it was being thought of, even in development stages. So it is far from fan fiction and has at least some credibility even to the biggest cynic.

Thats not proof that its true. At one point they considered the dark energy plot. That doesn't make that true. In one of the earlier scripts, you encounter the VS on Thessia and have to choose between them an Liara. That doesnt make that true. 

You don't know what the writers will be remembered for because if IT is not true, you don't even have a hint what EC will be about. If IT will be true, I would bet with you, they would not be remember for some angry fans, who cry that they chose control and it was not the best ending. In my first playthrough of ME2 I also lost half of my team. I didn't write petitions, I started game from begging and for second playthrough got the perfect ending. I don't see how it could be different with this situation. Let's say your Shepard get's indoctrinated, but sacrifices himself (Like Saren, or TIM) and because of that half of the fleet dies, half of squad members die, but as you have enough EMS the galaxy is saved. It would be a good ending, bitttersweet, but good. Not the best ofcourse, because you got tricked by indoctrination and many died, but reaper threat ended. Do you see my point?

In ME2, your failure was a reults of your choices. You don't prepare your team enough, and your team suffers. Choice and consequence. Its a fantastic ending - the death of your squadmates is directly linked to the player's choices. Its your fault if they die.

In the IT, you're given three choices that are all justifiable in some way and then, regardless of your choices, the game simply tells you that you're right or you're wrong.  You could've prepared the greatest military in the galaxy, brokered peace with on Rannoch, saved the krogan, but none of it matters when deciding if you succeed or fail. In the real endings, the impacts of your choice are less damaging if you've done well throughout the game. In the IT, your choices have literally zero impact. In two of the three choices, regardless of how justifiaible they are, Bioware just tells the player that they're wrong. its not a consequence of anything you've done previously, its just completely out of the blue. If ME2 had ended with three different coloured buttons and the game had told that two of the three, regardless of your previous actions, cause a game over you'd be pretty pissed. Thats the IT.

[Jadebaby]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...
Agreed. So if indoctrination is present throughout the game why is it such a far right idea that the ending could be in Shepard's subconscious as s/he lies there unconscious?

Because indoctrination in the game is simply the changing of brain functions via signals until the subject obeys the Reapers.

The indoctrination in the IT, however, causes Shepard to have to fight his own subconcsious mind, which is being manipulated and controlled by the Reapers and if he makes the right choice he will somehow fight off these subliminal signals and electromagnetic waves through willpower. Its a sort of meta mindgame that breaks the fourth wall to trick the player. Indoctrination isn't a trick though - its nothing more than signals. Trying to stop these signals through willpower is like trying to stop soundwaves reaching your ears through willpower. its just not possible, and yet the IT demands it. Its just so different to how indoctrination has been presented throughout the trilogy that I don't believe it.

Sorry but I can't agree, if Indoctrination is presented the way you say it is, my Shepard would never have been able to talk Saren into committing suicide.
And in your light that's less believable than you, yourself resisting Indoctrination, it's talking someone else into resisting it.
The problem here is we are never presented as to how indoctrination works on a fundamental level. But if I were to assume how, it would be something like that ending.
For instance, Amanda Kenson got indoctrinated firstly because she spent too much time around the object (silly lady) but the indoctrination manifested in her by triggering her 'paragon' mentality that she was doing something terrible by destroying the system and killing hundreds of thousands of people. So she gave in to that 'paragon' stance and chose to work with the Reapers.

[Candidate 88766]

SauliusL wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...
Agreed. So if indoctrination is present throughout the game why is it such a far right idea that the ending could be in Shepard's subconscious as s/he lies there unconscious?

Because indoctrination in the game is simply the changing of brain functions via signals until the subject obeys the Reapers.

The indoctrination in the IT, however, causes Shepard to have to fight his own subconcsious mind, which is being manipulated and controlled by the Reapers and if he makes the right choice he will somehow fight off these subliminal signals and electromagnetic waves through willpower. Its a sort of meta mindgame that breaks the fourth wall to trick the player. Indoctrination isn't a trick though - its nothing more than signals. Trying to stop these signals through willpower is like trying to stop soundwaves reaching your ears through willpower. its just not possible, and yet the IT demands it. Its just so different to how indoctrination has been presented throughout the trilogy that I don't believe it.

What about Rachni queen, which resisted indoctrination?

As I see it, even the Geth consensus level was created for that purpose - to see that with Shepard's mind we can make changes in AI mind.

The rachni minds work very differently to Shepard's mind. Saren tries to resist, but can only break free by shooting himself. TIM tries to resist, but can only break free by shooting himself. Benezia - an asari matriarch - can only resist for a few minutes. The asari on Virmire remains indoctrinated and eneds up killing people in ME3 if she lives. Indoctrination is permanent. You cannot simply break free of it by willpower.

[Aiyie]

Adugan wrote...

Cameltoedis makes lots of posts like this. Maybe he thinks he is trolling, maybe he doesnt. This still is trolling though.

thats the most disturbing thing.  can't tell if serious or not.

as for IT... there's no evidence to support it being planned, and in fact, real world business reality tends to work against it.

but...

the endings were left intentionally vague, there's nothing actually in-game to disprove it.  there may not be absolute proof of IT in-game, but neither is there absolute dis-proof.

that said though, cameltoedis has a habit of making broad sweeping generalizations and confusing those generalizations as absolute truths that are uncontestable.

doesn't exactly help his case when his logic is perpetually flawed due to myopic vision.

[NoSpin]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

SauliusL wrote...

Who cares if it was removed from the script or was not yet on the script while they were experimenting with gameplay mechanics? The main thing is it was being thought of, even in development stages. So it is far from fan fiction and has at least some credibility even to the biggest cynic.

Full. Of. Win

THIS.

It was part of the plan. Whether it was completely removed or not, indoctrination is hinted at (WHY even include the inky shadows line by the Rachni Queen? Oh, because of the inky shadows in Sheps DREAMS).

IT believers are interpreting the ending. That's it. It may be wrong, it may be right, but they are allowed their interpretation.

The hate and malice brought out by threads like these is disgusting. The only weak minded people are those who shut themselves off to other possibilites (nahnahnah IT is wrong nahnahnah).

[AsheraII]

I think the endings are fine as they are, and de not agree with the Indoctrination Theory. It's a nice idea, but I simply don't see anything in game that really supports it beyond "suggestion".
I doubt the DLC will leave any ground for the Indoctrination Theory to exist, but rather close all plotholes that might even remotely point in that direction.

The thing the Mass Effect endings missed, was closure.
Remember Dragon Age 1 and 2? What component of the endings in those games gave closure?
It's pretty simple. It wasn't the actual ending itself. It was the Epilogue. Those screens AFTER the ending, which gave a short synopsis of what happened to key characters after finishing the game.
No need to include those for characters who died before the ending, the player already knows those are dead. But short closure of what happens to the most important characters, and where they end up. And there's a LOT of those important characters, and the three major ending flavors can have a lot of effect on how they end up.

It'd basically be a list of what happens to the surviving key characters for all missions.
What happens to Jona?
What happens with Falare or Samara?
Where did Liara's father and Barla Von go after the Cerberus attack? Did they even survive?
How does the ending affect things like space travel, trade, remote colonies (in general).

A lot of things happened along the way, and the player has a lot of opportunity to alter what happens during play, and the final endings can have a lot of effect on all that as well.

We don't need "happily ever after" closure on all those things, but, for example:
-Falare and Samara could be "closed" with a simple statement that they're rebuilding the monastary.
-What exactly happened to the Mass Relays, and how far are the Asari with developing their own Mass Relays, is there any idea whether space travel "as we know it" will be available again in the next 10/50/100/500 years?

Short questions, short and short term answers, generic enough to give the player a feeling of accomplishment on those matters, or to answer the first questions that arise, not enough answers to limit the possibilities for any future Mass Effect games taking place after the trilogy. And yes, it's even okay to answer those things in plain on-screen text during the creditroll. Credits on left side of the screen, synopsis on the right side.

Modifié par AsheraII, 16 juin 2012 - 12:16 .