80611 réponses à ce sujet

[401 Kill]

Lokanaiya wrote...

Interesting. I had never seen that picture from Leviathan.

As for what the Reapers are doing in London, I'd say that at least a part of it would be setting a trap for the Resistance and, later, for the returning fleets. After all, if there are a lot of resistance members, including the leader, in one area, it would be a lot easier to sneak an indoctrinated agent in (Say, Coates) and/or indoctrinate the people there without attracting as much attention because hey, more people, and it would be easier to ignore strange behaviors or blame them on stress. For the fleets returning, the Reapers would probably prefer the main battles be in one area they prepared than guerrilla attacks across the entire world.

Admittedly, I know that isn't really enough explanation and doesn't offer a reason why it's specifically London, but it's a start. Maybe it'll make someone else think of something.

Seems as good an explanation as any. The problem with crafting an explanation as to why the reapers focus so heavily on London is that we don't have much to go on in the first place, aside from the fact that it was hit first on Earth. Edit: it seems I have reached the top, so I shall depart with the message from above.

Modifié par 401 Kill, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:03 .

[Bill Casey]

Rob Psyence wrote...

or maybe...the queen is a reaper!? *gasp* XD

President Huerta's brain is driven by a VI and makes Geth noises...
Politicial allies say he's still alive, but the hospital staff says he's dead...
This is one of those conversations you can weigh in on during the game...
Is President Huerta still around?


It's thematic!

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:03 .

[Davik Kang]

Couple of questions about IT:

Why is it called a Theory? I can see why some players would argue that Shep is not being indoctrinated, and/or that the conversation with the Catalyst is entirely physically real and not imaginary. But surely the possibility of Indoctrination is abundantly clear? Even if some players didn't see it straight off, it is pretty blatant that it's something that the player need be wary of, especially with a whole conversation about TIM's indoctrination only moments before your choice.

Secondly, if we accept for a moment that Shep is being indoctrinated, the how much of the Citadel events are physically happening, and how much is in Shep's mind?

Some say that the whole thing is a dream, which makes sense as the post-blast bit is presented very much like a dream, where you shoot a few husks before entering the beam. It also explains why Shep wakes up on Earth, and why Anderson and TIM randomly appear on the Citadel, as they could be figurative imaginations of Shepard's good conscience and bad conscience, or at least the main influencing factors from Shep's career, from ME1 and ME2 respectively.

But this would then suggest that Shep's actions on the Citadel were nul, as the whole thing was just a dream?

So we could then assume that Shep did have some contact with the Citadel and the Catalyst, and also did have some measure of control as to making the final decision. This way, some of the things she saw would be imaginary representations of his / her telekinetic connection to the Catalyst and the Citadel, so that she could make sense of them. But does this mean she contacted the Citadel from Earth by mind control? There wasn't really a precedent for this in the series afaik.

So then we could go a step further and say that most of what happened on the Citadel did actually physically happen as it is shown. Perhaps only the StarChild conversation is imaginary, as Shepard's attempt to activate the Catalyst via the control panel are undermined by a last-ditch Reaper attempt at heavy indoctrination. This would also make Shep's last conversation with Anderson genuine, which is what most would probably prefer to be the case.

But then we come full circle, because how then does Shepard wake up on Earth? And how did TIM and Anderson show up on the Citadel at that moment?

Sorry if these have been discussed in depth already, these threads cover over 5000 pages I think.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:04 .

[NebuchadnezzaRT]

Dont worry we love explaining it I'm sure a an IT rep or WNT rep will be around shortly but im in the middle of a Gold match so cant help sorry!

[BleedingUranium]

Lokanaiya wrote...

Interesting. I had never seen that picture from Leviathan.

As for what the Reapers are doing in London, I'd say that at least a part of it would be setting a trap for the Resistance and, later, for the returning fleets. After all, if there are a lot of resistance members, including the leader, in one area, it would be a lot easier to sneak an indoctrinated agent in (Say, Coates) and/or indoctrinate the people there without attracting as much attention because hey, more people, and it would be easier to ignore strange behaviors or blame them on stress. For the fleets returning, the Reapers would probably prefer the main battles be in one area they prepared than guerrilla attacks across the entire world.

Admittedly, I know that isn't really enough explanation and doesn't offer a reason why it's specifically London, but it's a start. Maybe it'll make someone else think of something.

About Coats, aside from him being as likely to be not indoctrinated as the literal ending, I think he's positioned there due to then Reapers essentially not being able to indoctrinate Anderson. The basic result of all indoctrinated people's beliefs is that the Reapers continue to live, that they don't fight them.

Saren believed we couldn't beat them, so we might as well joing them. He was aware of what the Reapers were and was working directly for them.

The Illusive Man believes that it's possible to control the Reapers, and will fight a war with the galaxy and kill anyone getting in his way. Unlike Saren, however, he believes he's still opposing them; but the bottom line is he's killing all those who want to kill the Reapers.

Dr. Kenson believed that, because the Reapers had come through before, but there was still life in the galaxy, how could we assume that they were coming to kill us all? Instead of using the means of slowing or stopping the Reapers we have in front of us, we should do nothing.

Two points at once here, first: Saren is Synthesis (siding with the Reapers), TIM is Control (being tricked by the Reapers), and Kenson...

Is Refuse! Arrival is choosing between a lot of innocent people dying by your hand, or stopping (slowing) the Reapers.

Collector base was Destroy vs Control; Arrival was Destroy vs Refuse, but without the choice. Why no choice? Because Shepard's someone who acts, and no matter how Paragon, will get the job done no matter the cost!

My second point is, Indoctrination, at it's most basic, it identical to Inception: planting the very basic seed of an idea in someone's head, so they think it was their own. It has to be a really simple premise. Saren: Reapers are unbeatable, TIM: Control is possible, Kenson: We shouldn't assume the Reapers mean doom.

Now, how would you convince Anderson the Reapers need to survive in some fashion? The specific idea is not important, so long as a result of it is the Reapers not dying. Or Hackett? Or Javik?  These are people who I could never, ever see indoctrinated. We're told that no one ever resists (other than Shep at the end), but I find it very unlikely every living being ever would fall for this.

[Bill Casey]

But this would then suggest that Shep's actions on the Citadel were nul, as the whole thing was just a dream?

If you consider whether or not Commander Shepard gets indoctrinated at a critical moment in time "null"...
I personally consider that kind of important...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:13 .

[Davik Kang]

Bill Casey wrote...

But this would then suggest that Shep's actions on the Citadel were nul, as the whole thing was just a dream?

If you consider whether or not Commander Shepard gets indoctrinated at a critical moment in time "null"...
I personally consider that kind of important...

It's not critical if Shepard is unconscious in London though.  If it's purely a dream, then Shep has no influence on the battle at all, so it's not a critical moment.  The importance of Shepard's indoctrination only makes sense if Shepard actually has an important choice to make, so some of the contact with the Citadel / Catalyst must be genuine... and the cycle goes on...

[BansheeOwnage]

Bill Casey wrote...

But this would then suggest that Shep's actions on the Citadel were nul, as the whole thing was just a dream?

If you consider whether or not Commander Shepard gets indoctrinated at a critical moment in time "null"...
I personally consider that kind of important...

Funny. To add to that, I think this would be a much better way to end the game series too. Instead of ending with a massive decision, you would have one near the end, then (through an IT end obviously) see the culmination of all of your previous choices. The decision chamber would remain the last meaningful decision.

[Lokanaiya]

401 Kill wrote...

Lokanaiya wrote...

Interesting. I had never seen that picture from Leviathan.

As for what the Reapers are doing in London, I'd say that at least a part of it would be setting a trap for the Resistance and, later, for the returning fleets. After all, if there are a lot of resistance members, including the leader, in one area, it would be a lot easier to sneak an indoctrinated agent in (Say, Coates) and/or indoctrinate the people there without attracting as much attention because hey, more people, and it would be easier to ignore strange behaviors or blame them on stress. For the fleets returning, the Reapers would probably prefer the main battles be in one area they prepared than guerrilla attacks across the entire world.

Admittedly, I know that isn't really enough explanation and doesn't offer a reason why it's specifically London, but it's a start. Maybe it'll make someone else think of something.

Seems as good an explanation as any. The problem with crafting an explanation as to why the reapers focus so heavily on London is that we don't have much to go on in the first place, aside from the fact that it was hit first on Earth.

True. Kind of wish they had dropped a few hints on that..

Also, more thoughts about why London: It's harder to get on and off of (because on an island), it's a place that the Reapers would want to target in the first place (making it seem less like a trap to the Resistance and letting the Reapers do productive things while waiting for the Resistance to come investigate) it has lots of deserted buildings for the Resistance to hide in (it would also provide an explanation for why every building in London hasn't been leveled yet... the Reapers want the Resistance to be there) and, as far as I know, London and Tokyo are the only places to meet all of those requirements. However, I'm pretty sure Japan is fairly mountainous, with plenty of places for people to hide in and wage guerrilla war from. The Reapers are also probably thinking that it would be easier to laser London and be done with it than send lots of troops into the mountains surrounding Japan because the marks of giant lasers would be noticed by the next cycle.

Does all of that make sense?

[spotlessvoid]

Nice post Davik

The other question still remains if it's indoctrination AND happening in some way, why are there options on the crucible that the Reapers/Starchild are advocating. And if the answer to that question is it's a trap-why destroy? And why this cycle gets to use it? Because one shmuck makes it past Rambo Harbinger's run-o-fun?

And of course how is he back on earth breathing?

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:39 .

[Bill Casey]

Davik Kang wrote...

It's not critical if Shepard is unconscious in London though.  If it's purely a dream, then Shep has no influence on the battle at all, so it's not a critical moment.  The importance of Shepard's indoctrination only makes sense if Shepard actually has an important choice to make, so some of the contact with the Citadel / Catalyst must be genuine... and the cycle goes on...

Yeah, it's not critical if Shepard gets indoctrinated...
Are you ****ting me?

It's the difference between the galaxy having a chance and the reapers outright winning...
Shepard is the most influential person in this cycle. If they turn him, game over...

He will divide the fleets...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:29 .

[BansheeOwnage]

Davik Kang wrote...

It's not critical if Shepard is unconscious in London though.  If it's purely a dream, then Shep has no influence on the battle at all, so it's not a critical moment.  The importance of Shepard's indoctrination only makes sense if Shepard actually has an important choice to make, so some of the contact with the Citadel / Catalyst must be genuine... and the cycle goes on...

Dream just isn't a great word. Hallucination is more fitting. The choice is by far the most important decision made thus far, and Shepard does not have to be in contact with the citadel at all.

[Dwailing]

So, before I hit the sack, are there any major revelations that I need to hear, or are we just waiting now until Omega comes out?

[BleedingUranium]

Davik Kang wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

But this would then suggest that Shep's actions on the Citadel were nul, as the whole thing was just a dream?

If you consider whether or not Commander Shepard gets indoctrinated at a critical moment in time "null"...
I personally consider that kind of important...

It's not critical if Shepard is unconscious in London though.  If it's purely a dream, then Shep has no influence on the battle at all, so it's not a critical moment.  The importance of Shepard's indoctrination only makes sense if Shepard actually has an important choice to make, so some of the contact with the Citadel / Catalyst must be genuine... and the cycle goes on...

See, you're attempting to fit IT and the game ending all into one. Don't.

If IT is true, there is no ending as of now.

[Dwailing]

In response to Mr. Kang's first point (Since Banshee and Bill have already covered the second point): we call this a theory because it is a theory in the scientific sense. A hypothesis (That Shepard is in the process of indoctrination and that the end sequence is the pivotal moment) supported by a LOT of evidence/data (The great majority of those 5250+ or so pages). We won't know if IT is actually true or not until BioWare says one way or the other.

[BansheeOwnage]

Dwailing wrote...

So, before I hit the sack, are there any major revelations that I need to hear, or are we just waiting now until Omega comes out?

We proved that the literalists are 100% wrong, if you count that.  No.

Seriously.

And the more I think about each choice, the more I see why you get indoctrinated if you don't pick destroy. There are many finely-crafted layers of evidence that support this. It's remarkable. I'm liking Bioware more each day. That's why I have trouble believing they didn't intend IT. The IT and puzzle theory are great, and are not mutually exclusive. It gives me hope.

[Bill Casey]

Quote time...

Garrus:"And for every soldier you add, your enemy loses two. The one you converted and his buddy on the other side who can't pull a trigger on a friend."

Ensign Copeland: "You sound like you admire them"

Garrus: "Same way I admire a virus or a thresher maw: They've adapted perfectly to their situation."

Ensign Copeland: "But the Reapers want to destroy us"

Garrus: "And I have no intention of letting them. But if you don't respect your enemies capabilities, you're in for one nasty surprise after another."

I'm just saying...
Reapers indoctrinate...
Respect your enemies' capabilities...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:36 .

[Dwailing]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

So, before I hit the sack, are there any major revelations that I need to hear, or are we just waiting now until Omega comes out?

We proved that the literalists are 100% wrong, if you count that.  No.

Seriously.

And the more I think about each choice, the more I see why you get indoctrinated if you don't pick destroy. There are many finely-crafted layers of evidence that support this. It's remarkable. I'm liking Bioware more each day. That's why I have trouble believing they didn't intend IT. The IT and puzzle theory are great, and are not mutually exclusive. It gives me hope.

Really?  I can't quite tell if that's sarcasm or not.  If not, then that's great news.  If it is, good one.

[paxxton]

Starchild: Did that all really make sense?
Stargazer: Yes, but it was totally messed up. It all happened before BSN exploded with vitriol.
Starchild: When can I understand it?
Stargazer: One day, my sweet.
Starchild: What will I have to pay for it?
Stargazer: Everything you can spare. The Trilogy has 3 games and every game has a special price of its own.
Starchild: Noooo!!!

$59.99 for the PC version. Outrageous.

Modifié par paxxton, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:56 .

[Davik Kang]

About the reason the Reapers are directing their forces at London, maybe it's a really strategically important location on Earth?  Like maybe a key military stronghold, or a place with a very high human population density, or a combination of both? 

spotlessvoid wrote...

Nice post Davik

The other question still remains if it's indoctrination AND happening in some way, why are there options on the crucible that the Reapers/Starchild are advocating. And if the answer to that question is it's a trap-why destroy? And why this cycle gets to use it? Because one shmuck makes it past Rambo Harbinger's run-o-fun?

Well I think you have to take a lot of what is said literally, otherwise the ending becomes totally meaningless.  So this cycle succeeds simply because it was able to build the Catalyst in time.  And what the Catalyst is capable of, well that was alwasy a mystery throughout ME3, so I think it's ok to suppose that it can somehow do all those things.  But it's difficult to say exactly what's real and what's a dream, that's why I'm looking forward to the other guy's explanation once he's done with Gold hunting.

Bill Casey wrote...

Yeah, it's not critical if Shepard gets indoctrinated...
Are you ****ting me?

It's the difference between the galaxy having a chance and the reapers outright winning...
Shepard is the most influential person in this cycle. If they turn him, game over...

He will divide the fleets...

Whoa relax, I guess I didn't exlpain well enough.  What I mean is, if Shepard is unconscious and failed to get to the beam in time, then they won't be able to use the Catalyst to destroy the Reapers.  So Shepard won't be able to help any more, alive or dead, unless you're saying she / he could still win the war from the ground in London.

I can try to explain each of the 3 scenarios more fully, but I gotta sleep now.  Back tomorrow.

[BleedingUranium]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

So, before I hit the sack, are there any major revelations that I need to hear, or are we just waiting now until Omega comes out?

We proved that the literalists are 100% wrong, if you count that.  No.

Seriously.

And the more I think about each choice, the more I see why you get indoctrinated if you don't pick destroy. There are many finely-crafted layers of evidence that support this. It's remarkable. I'm liking Bioware more each day. That's why I have trouble believing they didn't intend IT. The IT and puzzle theory are great, and are not mutually exclusive. It gives me hope.

I support the premise of the Puzzle Theory, but not with Refuse. We'll be getting a more complete picture through all of the DLC, but I can't see anything other than Destroy being right.

Modifié par BleedingUranium, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:44 .

[BansheeOwnage]

Dwailing wrote...

Really?  I can't quite tell if that's sarcasm or not.  If not, then that's great news.  If it is, good one.

No, I'm serious. The literalists see the entire game at face-value. They take any Bioware comments literally too. Bioware said there are some parts of ME3 are ment to be non-literal. Literalists create a paradox in which they view the game that has non-literal elements literally.

Modifié par BansheeOwnage, 27 septembre 2012 - 03:49 .

[Dwailing]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

So, before I hit the sack, are there any major revelations that I need to hear, or are we just waiting now until Omega comes out?

We proved that the literalists are 100% wrong, if you count that.  No. 

Really?  I can't quite tell if that's sarcasm or not.  If not, then that's great news.  If it is, good one.

No, I'm serious. The literalists see the entire game at face-value. They take any Bioware comments literally too. Bioware said there are some parts of ME3 are ment to be non-literal. Literalists create a paradox in which they view the game that has non-literal elements literally.

That makes perfect sense!  You know, the Literalists may call us elitist, intellectual snobs, but frankly (And no offence to the more reasonable Literalists like Epyon), I think we do have the intellectual high ground on a regular basis.  And I'm not trying to be arrogant, I'm just stating the facts as I see them.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Davik Kang wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

But this would then suggest that Shep's actions on the Citadel were nul, as the whole thing was just a dream?

If you consider whether or not Commander Shepard gets indoctrinated at a critical moment in time "null"...
I personally consider that kind of important...

It's not critical if Shepard is unconscious in London though.  If it's purely a dream, then Shep has no influence on the battle at all, so it's not a critical moment.  The importance of Shepard's indoctrination only makes sense if Shepard actually has an important choice to make, so some of the contact with the Citadel / Catalyst must be genuine... and the cycle goes on...

My theory is as follows:

In the first part after the beam run (when Shep is on the Citadel up to and including TIM/Anderson conversation), it is a dream. Everything we see is made entirely from Shepard's memories, which is why we see many reused assets and places that are reminiscent of places Shepard has visited.

Also, in dreams, time goes much slower than in reality, which is why that Reaperish sound effect that you hear in the TIM confrontation is actually a Reaper horn when you play it at double speed. (Check my signature) It is actually Harbinger that you hear.

The second part, when Shep reaches the decision chamber and the child says  "Wake up", is when Shep comes to, still in London. (S)he's still looking at the beam, only his/her perception is being altered. This is why the decision chamber looks so much like the London beam surroundings.



When Shep picks destroy, (s)he starts shooting at something in London. The explosion causes him/her to be thrown back and be covered in debris, hence why (s)he ends up in the rubble in the breath scene.

Whether Shep still needs to fnish the Reapers, or (s)he just hit a critical part of the beam conduit, which caused it to overload and send a huge discharge towards the citadel that ends up setting off the Crucible (which is simply a huge synthetics-killing device), remains a question.

In this (admittedly, a little weak) scenario, everything plays out exactly as in the destroy ending, and it is Anderson who went up to the Citadel to open the arms and let the Crucible dock. Because Hackett says  "Holy ****, (s)he did it. Someone made it to the Citadel." Why Anderson? Because his name is on the memorial in the destroy ending, and because it would mirror what happens in the dream.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 27 septembre 2012 - 12:06 .

[MegumiAzusa]

401 Kill wrote...

@Bill Casey- By "pushing synthesis" I mean using the synthesis we see at the end of ME3 in any way that results in the entire galaxy merging DNA between organics and Synthetics to end the war, so the reapers wouldn't have to harvest them. Synthesis is a reaper way, I have no problem with the Reapers themselves advocating Synthesis, because it just adds to the fact that it is a terrible thing. I'm sorry, I can get carried away with bashing Synthesis because I do not like it.

Liara disagrees with your assessment.