152 réponses à ce sujet

[llbountyhunter]

memorysquid wrote...

jules_vern18 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

ucdcsteve wrote...

jules_vern18 wrote...

Sorry OP, but it looks like your post wasn't necessary - IT has already been debunked by the fact that it will (confirmed) not be featured in the EC.

Where did you see this confirmation? 

A Twitter message from Jessica Merizan confirmed that the EC will neither confirm nor deny its existence, only that one's interpretation shouldn't change based on the new content.  It does mean that the "theory" aspect of it has been somewhat dismissed, but it leaves the interpretation derived from the lore proper.  

Right.  It doesn't mean that you can't still believe in IT or use it to replace the current endings for yourself, but it looks like Bioware will not be confirming it as their intended ending.  In that same tweet, J.M. says that there shouldn't be anything in the EC that would prevent players from still believing in IT if they chose to either, meaning that it may be set up in a way that an IT believer could still view the entire ending sequence (including epilogues) as an indoc. hallucination.  Sounds like i's going to be harder to do, though (at least from my standpoint).

It should be a lot harder to do, after hearing the interview where they said they simply didn't anticipate people thinking everyone would starve or the relays would blow up the solar systems and wrote the EC to clarify things like that.  That means they didn't intend IT at all.

You again?

I'm pretty sure weekes said this has been the wprks and not a response.


But of course jessica is always contradicting heself...

[Aaleel]

I think the content of the EC will debunk the IT, whether they flat out say it or not. IF they have cinematics and epilogue scenes to explain the three endings, and show the consequences or your decision then the choices are real.

Why would Bioware devote so much time if the all of it isn't really happening. Honestly, would they make DLC based mostly on non reality to add onto already existing non reality, all the time still withholding the real ending to the game? If they go through the trouble of expanding upon all three choices, the choices are real.

[dreamgazer]

memorysquid 

It should be a lot harder to do, after hearing the interview where they said they simply didn't anticipate people thinking everyone would starve or the relays would blow up the solar systems and wrote the EC to clarify things like that.  That means they didn't intend IT at all.

It means they didn't intend for those points to be hallucinations, but it doesn't mean that Shepard wasn't suffering the symptoms and that they didn't influence the surreal nature of the Citadel/decision sequence. As the story stands in the original context, that's still a perfectly viable interpretation of the devices BioWare crafted, with or without the theory's follow-through.

Who knows what'll happen tomorrow, though.

[Darth_Trethon]

Kesak12 wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Speculation about speculation doesn't prove nor debunk anything.

Exactly this^^^^^

Please stop wasting your time trying to debunk anything. Keep the debunking nonsense to yourself....if you really must go cry to someone who gives a damn about your speculations as to why a theory is false. The IT is just that...a theory. It cannot be debunked without absolute proof and we wouldn't have theories if there was any of that floating around in the game. The EC releases in a few hours so suck it up and wait.

[Carlthestrange]

I tried to read it, but the red/yellow text made my eyes bleed. Sorry.

[llbountyhunter]

jules_vern18 wrote...

malakim2099 wrote...

jules_vern18 wrote...

malakim2099 wrote...

wryterra wrote...

malakim2099 wrote...

I only read the first few bits before my eyes started bleeding from the font color used, but if it's just TIM using "Lazarus Implants" to control Shepard... what about Anderson? Did TIM send some ninjas in and implant Anderson while he was sleeping or something, because he was controlled by TIM also?

Don't you remember the sequence where Anderson dies and Cerberus spend 2 years rebuilding him too? 

No, me either. 

You know, I just would like to know why SPACE MAGIC is okay, but the Indoctrination Theory is bad. Bad writing is acceptable, but fans trying to make sense of the nonsense is not?

And now it seems pretty much confirmed that SPACE MAGIC is the way to go with the EC... that's, better, than the IT?

Just because people don't like IT doesn't mean that they are saying Space Magic is okay.  You people and your false dichotomy.

Also, It is established on sanctuary that TIM has gained the ability to control people and that he's looking for a way to extend his power over the reapers.

Ah yes, "you people." Because anyone that vaguely supports IT at all is considered to be some sort of out-of-touch cultist who simply can't reason, right? <_<

(Not saying YOU in particular... but I've lost count of the number of times IT supporters have been called that.)

Didn't recall the bit about TIM controlling people, however, so thank you for that. Personally, I liked the idea of the Crucible as a Reaper trap. Think about it, these powerful cuttlefish from Dark Space come to trounce all the galaxy, and you're desperately looking for something to stop them... but lo and behold, there's this Miracle Device the previous cycle ALMOST completed! So instead of maybe innovating some new way to defeat them... you end up wasting your time and resources on the MacGuffin that the Reapers left for you in the first place.

To Clarify:  I didn't mean "you people" in a heavily derogatory manner, it was more like "sheesh, you guys again" while I was writing it.  And no, not all ITers believe in the whole false dichotomy between pro-enders and anti-IT...it's just frustrating for me as a person who dislikes both IT and the current endings.  I also would have liked the idea of the Crucible as a Reaper trap and fully expected it as i played through the game (boy was I wrong).

To Provide Closure:  I really don't have anything against IT and have changed my previously aggressive anti-IT stance.  I even hope that people who believe in IT can still do so after the EC comes out.  I just post news like this so people don't continue to get your hopes up - people who are still convinced that tomorrow's DLC will reveal IT to be true (that it was Bioware's intention) are going to be crushed.

And we just want literalists to not be so terribly shocked in case IT holds true.

...oh look, it seems we are all just trying to help each other cope...

[AlphaDormante]

Holy hell. I'd love to read this thing, especially since I see my own find about the bodies in there, but that bright mustard-and-ketchup coloring is trying to explode my eyeballs.

Anyway OP, it's really hard to debunk the Indoc Theory. I'm not taunting you or anything, it's just the nature of the theory...it's all speculation, so there's no way to prove it's "wrong" just like there's no way to prove it's "right". I like it IT myself (evidenced by how I contributed to it), but in the end, Mr. Walters got what he wanted: we're all just doing lots and lots of speculation.

All this with the caveat that I couldn't read the colored text in the first place, of course.

Modifié par AlphaDormante, 25 juin 2012 - 10:26 .

[llbountyhunter]

Aaleel wrote...

I think the content of the EC will debunk the IT, whether they flat out say it or not. IF they have cinematics and epilogue scenes to explain the three endings, and show the consequences or your decision then the choices are real.

Why would Bioware devote so much time if the all of it isn't really happening. Honestly, would they make DLC based mostly on non reality to add onto already existing non reality, all the time still withholding the real ending to the game? If they go through the trouble of expanding upon all three choices, the choices are real.

This argument supports IT becuase it makes sense to explain how this mental battle played out.

[memorysquid]

dreamgazer wrote...

memorysquid 

It should be a lot harder to do, after hearing the interview where they said they simply didn't anticipate people thinking everyone would starve or the relays would blow up the solar systems and wrote the EC to clarify things like that.  That means they didn't intend IT at all.

It means they didn't intend for those points to be hallucinations, but it doesn't mean that Shepard wasn't suffering the symptoms and that they didn't influence the surreal nature of the Citadel/decision sequence. As the story stands in the original context, that's still a perfectly viable interpretation of the devices BioWare crafted, with or without the theory's follow-through.

Who knows what'll happen tomorrow, though.

IT entails the ending is a hallucination; no reason to assume any of it occurs, especially destroy.  If they meant the endings literally, as they claimed in the interview, then the catalyst and resulting decisions and consequences were not a hallucination so IT is either false or has no impact. 

My bet, not being psychic that's the best I can do, is that tomorrow's EC will do exactly what they claimed it will do: expand on and clarify the endings and consequences.

[llbountyhunter]

memorysquid wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

memorysquid 

It should be a lot harder to do, after hearing the interview where they said they simply didn't anticipate people thinking everyone would starve or the relays would blow up the solar systems and wrote the EC to clarify things like that.  That means they didn't intend IT at all.

It means they didn't intend for those points to be hallucinations, but it doesn't mean that Shepard wasn't suffering the symptoms and that they didn't influence the surreal nature of the Citadel/decision sequence. As the story stands in the original context, that's still a perfectly viable interpretation of the devices BioWare crafted, with or without the theory's follow-through.

Who knows what'll happen tomorrow, though.

IT entails the ending is a hallucination; no reason to assume any of it occurs, especially destroy.  If they meant the endings literally, as they claimed in the interview, then the catalyst and resulting decisions and consequences were not a hallucination so IT is either false or has no impact. 

My bet, not being psychic that's the best I can do, is that tomorrow's EC will do exactly what they claimed it will do: expand on and clarify the endings and consequences.

? They never said the endings were meant to be taken at face value...could you post a link of this, because they didnt say that in the interview..


they said they werent going to change the endings.
IT doesnt change the endings.

EC is supposed to expand and clarify the endings... that again is what IT proposes.

It can go either way with IT, so stop acting like IT is false.

Modifié par llbountyhunter, 25 juin 2012 - 10:38 .

[dreamgazer]

memorysquid wrote...

IT entails the ending is a hallucination; no reason to assume any of it occurs, especially destroy.  If they meant the endings literally, as they claimed in the interview, then the catalyst and resulting decisions and consequences were not a hallucination so IT is either false or has no impact. 

My bet, not being psychic that's the best I can do, is that tomorrow's EC will do exactly what they claimed it will do: expand on and clarify the endings and consequences.

It was never stated that everything was to be taken at face-value.  More importantly, BioWare showed intent on wanting to generate speculation and interpretation, and the sequence on the Citadel has, in my opinion, more than a few surreal elements that suggest it's not to be taken purely as it's seen. 

Modifié par dreamgazer, 25 juin 2012 - 10:47 .

[Makrys]

IronSabbath88 wrote...

Why take so much time to do this when EC comes out tomorrow?

Exactly.

Lol. Such a waste of time.

[Bill Casey]

Captain Cornhole wrote...

When you talk to TIM, you get those weird black things at the edges of the screen."

Those "black things" represent TIM controlling you implants. If the weird black things, instead represent indoctrination why is it that they only appear during the scene where TIM is controlling Shepard and Anderson?

Those black things are labelled "Reaperindoc_blur"

[Bill Casey]

dreamgazer wrote...

and the sequence on the Citadel has, in my opinion, more than a few surreal elements that suggest it's not to be taken purely as it's seen.

Ya think?

Modifié par Bill Casey, 25 juin 2012 - 11:04 .

[dreamgazer]

Bill Casey wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

and the sequence on the Citadel has, in my opinion, more than a few surreal elements that suggest it's not to be taken purely as it's seen.

Ya think?

You know, just a few. 

[jpraelster93]

sorry not even the ec is going to disprove the IT

[Bill Casey]

dreamgazer wrote...

You know, just a few. 

I hope you're not talking about how Shepard was hearing voices, seeing tendrils on the screen  and shooting people against his will right before he passes out and reality fades away. About how you see Anderson and the Illusive Man enacting the choices, how the leader of the things you're fighting is also the thing you are seeking and the child from your recurring nightmares. How you're standing in outer space in your underwear talking to god and how every option is activated metaphorically. How sound effects play if you drop your gun. How you suddenly heal, walk straight into an explosion, and apparently don't die...

Because that's clearly what's happening...
You would be insane not to take that at face value...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 25 juin 2012 - 11:12 .

[Candidate 88766]

You put a lot of work into this OP, but wouldn't it have been easier just to wait 24 hours and use the EC to debunk the IT? Its obviously not going to confirm the IT, and no matter how vague they leave it if they don't have some scene of Shepard waking up and then going on to beat the Reapers for real then even the most die-hard believers will be forced to admit that they were wrong - Bioware never intended the IT. The real endings are the ones present in the game and being expanded on later today.

[Aaleel]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

You put a lot of work into this OP, but wouldn't it have been easier just to wait 24 hours and use the EC to debunk the IT? Its obviously not going to confirm the IT, and no matter how vague they leave it if they don't have some scene of Shepard waking up and then going on to beat the Reapers for real then even the most die-hard believers will be forced to admit that they were wrong - Bioware never intended the IT. The real endings are the ones present in the game and being expanded on later today.

I thought someone from Bioware said the breath scene occured on the Citadel.  So if they expand on the breath scene and Shepard wakes up on the Citadel that would pretty much be it.  But I doubt they would do that because it would knock them off the fence they're straddling.

Modifié par Aaleel, 25 juin 2012 - 11:17 .

[Candidate 88766]

Aaleel wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

You put a lot of work into this OP, but wouldn't it have been easier just to wait 24 hours and use the EC to debunk the IT? Its obviously not going to confirm the IT, and no matter how vague they leave it if they don't have some scene of Shepard waking up and then going on to beat the Reapers for real then even the most die-hard believers will be forced to admit that they were wrong - Bioware never intended the IT. The real endings are the ones present in the game and being expanded on later today.

I thought someone from Bioware said the breath scene occured on the Citadel.  So if they expand on the breath scene and Shepard wakes up on the Citadel that would pretty much be it.  But I doubt they would do that because it would knock them off the fence they're straddling.

The cables and materials Shepard is lying on are very Citadel-esque, although there is something in the background that looks a bit like a shelf from buildings in the London level. So its anyone's guess.

Frankly, the scene makes very little sense regardless of whether Shepard has ended up on Earth or is still on the Citadel. I think its meant to be treated more as an easter egg, and not as the 'best' ending - it seems they believed synthesis to be the best ending.

[llbountyhunter]

Aaleel wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

You put a lot of work into this OP, but wouldn't it have been easier just to wait 24 hours and use the EC to debunk the IT? Its obviously not going to confirm the IT, and no matter how vague they leave it if they don't have some scene of Shepard waking up and then going on to beat the Reapers for real then even the most die-hard believers will be forced to admit that they were wrong - Bioware never intended the IT. The real endings are the ones present in the game and being expanded on later today.

I thought someone from Bioware said the breath scene occured on the Citadel.  So if they expand on the breath scene and Shepard wakes up on the Citadel that would pretty much be it.  But I doubt they would do that because it would knock them off the fence they're straddling.

Even if shepard was on the citadel he still had to survive a explsion that completly engulfed him... followed by another larger explosion that destroyed the citadel.

Codex: the citadel is made from material able to survive the wake of a supernovae.

Modifié par llbountyhunter, 25 juin 2012 - 11:26 .

[Aaleel]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

You put a lot of work into this OP, but wouldn't it have been easier just to wait 24 hours and use the EC to debunk the IT? Its obviously not going to confirm the IT, and no matter how vague they leave it if they don't have some scene of Shepard waking up and then going on to beat the Reapers for real then even the most die-hard believers will be forced to admit that they were wrong - Bioware never intended the IT. The real endings are the ones present in the game and being expanded on later today.

I thought someone from Bioware said the breath scene occured on the Citadel.  So if they expand on the breath scene and Shepard wakes up on the Citadel that would pretty much be it.  But I doubt they would do that because it would knock them off the fence they're straddling.

The cables and materials Shepard is lying on are very Citadel-esque, although there is something in the background that looks a bit like a shelf from buildings in the London level. So its anyone's guess.

Frankly, the scene makes very little sense regardless of whether Shepard has ended up on Earth or is still on the Citadel. I think its meant to be treated more as an easter egg, and not as the 'best' ending - it seems they believed synthesis to be the best ending.

The scene never made sense to me.  Shepard was standing in the middle of an open area when the beam hit him/her.  But in the breath scene, the camera pans across all of this concrete, wires, supports before it even gets to Shepard who is buried and surround by more of this stuff.  Where did all that crap come from. 

The scene looks as if Shepard was in some structure that collpased on him/her, which would make sense if Shepard were on the Citadel.  But Shepard having survived outside of the best mass effect fields in the history of mass effect fields is far fetched lol.  So the scene just makes no sense.

[Aaleel]

Then there's also the question of if the breath scene is reality and the post beam hit up until the choice is not reality. Why the hell does Shepard have on the same armor in both scenes.

The breath scene makes absolutely no sense under any interpretation of the ending.

[Helios969]

Well, we still have the intoxication theory. No one can take that away:)

[The Smitchens]

I like that the first time I come back in months I find people are still posting these "why this can/cannot be the case" threads like we haven't seen these exact same posts already. Ugh... nothing new here. Nothing to see folks. May as well just wait until tomorrow.