80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Restrider]

Well, dead Reapers in a literal Destroy as the situation in ME4 are not compatible with IT. They are however with Deception Theory, your's and ealeander's, as I also stated earlier. Btw, all these three theories are very similar too each other.
But you cannot mix literal Destroy with IT.
It. Is. Not. Possible.
Maybe ealeander meant with IT his theory, but in general IT=IT Dream.
And again, you cannot mix IT with literal POVs.

[demersel]

Restrider wrote...

Well, dead Reapers in a literal Destroy as the situation in ME4 are not compatible with IT. They are however with Deception Theory, your's and ealeander's, as I also stated earlier. Btw, all these three theories are very similar too each other.
But you cannot mix literal Destroy with IT.
It. Is. Not. Possible.
Maybe ealeander meant with IT his theory, but in general IT=IT Dream.
And again, you cannot mix IT with literal POVs.

Actually you can mix the reapers and literal destroy, if you really want to. If you can wrap your mind around literal destroy it isn't such a strech if there are reapers left after it. (like in the dark space - destroy only affects relay network space)

[ealeander]

Restrider wrote...

How will they do that?
You cannot be ambiguous with the endings in a ME4, unless you go far far into the future making the choices - and with that the whole trilogy - pointless.
If you canonize literal Destroy there are no Reapers left alive. If that's the case, you can say that there has been no IT as discussed in this thread (unless you have some kind of Deception Theory going on).
If there are still Reapers after Destroy, it basically is IT.
But you cannot mix them up, at least I do not see a possible way to do that.

As I see it, if the Reapers are destroyed, it still leaves open the possibility that Shepard woke up from hallucination-IT, ran into the beam and finished the job. It won't be confirmed, but hallucination-IT won't be disproven either, you can just as well assume that Shepard (or someone) managed to activate the Crucible.

Similarly, for literal Synth and Control, the fact that canon Shepard chose Destroy doesn't necessarily suggest Synth and Control were indoctrination attempts. It leaves what actually happened at the end ambiguous enough for everyone to play ME4 under the impression that their interpretation was right aside from those who want ME4 to build on a utopian Synth/Control ending.

[FifthBeatle]

So, in preparation for Omega, I decided to start a new playthrough (starting from ME1) and I noticed something in the Citadel Tower that may or may not have IT implications.

If you remember, when you get to the decision chamber at the end of ME3 there are reflections of trees on the ground that are not physically present in the room. There has been speculation that this is either cut content from when the decision chamber was called the "Guardian's Garden" or that the trees are recreated from Shepard's memory of the beam run/dreams. However, in the Citadel Tower there happens to be a garden underneath where the Citadel panel is (the one where you fight Saren's reanimated corpse) and trees surrounding the entire room. If the entire ending is taking place in Shepard's mind and Harbinger/Starchild is recreating the space from his memories (similar to what the Leviathans do), this could help explain why those trees are present in the decision chamber at all.

Then again, it could just be Bioware being lazy...

[Davik Kang]

Restrider wrote...
Well, dead Reapers in a literal Destroy as the situation in ME4 are not compatible with IT. They are however with Deception Theory, your's and ealeander's, as I also stated earlier. Btw, all these three theories are very similar too each other.
But you cannot mix literal Destroy with IT.
It. Is. Not. Possible.
Maybe ealeander meant with IT his theory, but in general IT=IT Dream.
And again, you cannot mix IT with literal POVs.

Yes I know, sorry if I implied otherwise.  I just thought you might not be aware that his interpretation was not a dream theory.  We agree so I'll shut up.

But guys.  Please listen up.  I just found something.  I know I don't see eye to eye with IT but I don't want to be your enemies.  I'm keeping my theories out of your thread because I don't want to become a new troll.  But I'd really like to hear your opinions on something.  Will post ASAP.  Currently finishing the post in the Refuse thread.

[Davik Kang]

 EMS - Crucible Idea

So, here's the idea I had about EMS and the Crucible.  Cut short, I thought that maybe a higher EMS would mean that the Alliance team would be able to build a more complete Crucible before deadline day of Priority:Earth.

I was talking to Twilight God about the effects of Destroy and he mentioned something about synthetic material being vaporized.  So I watched the endings again.  Watch what happens to the human soldiers when the Destroy wave comes.

Destroy Low EMS - see 31:00 until 32:15

Destroy High EMS - see 1:40 until 2:50

In high EMS, the soldiers live.  But in low EMS, the soldiers are vaporized.  This fits with my idea about EMS and the Crucible.  Not necessarily contradicting IT, but regardless, I'd really like to know what you think.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 15 octobre 2012 - 04:27 .

[Restrider]

Restrider wrote...

As I already mentioned earlier, I wanted to create some kind of IT FAQ. Since I do not really know what the frequently asked questions might be, I skipped that idea and tried to make a list of the ten most important concepts of IT. As you can see I highlighted the general concept and backed it up with additional information. I will try to include links to important posts further backing up the concepts (please post it/pm me if you have links to share). I am still not sure what the last two concepts could be to add to the in-game list. Please post your opinions.
Here is the post with all the polls!

----------The Ten Most Important Reasons Supporting The Indoctrination Theory----------

       I) Indoctrination in general :

          1.   Regarding IT, Shepard is in the process of indoctrination and the outcome is decided by the final decision taken.
          2.   The concept of indoctrination is a crucial part throughout the trilogy and nothing new to the player (link 1and 2).
          3.   Rana Thanoptis is an example of how subtle and slow indoctrination can be.
          4.   Shepard knocked out for two days by a Reaper artifact that indoctrinated an entire facility.
          5.   Logs on the derelict Reaper illustrate the reactions of victims of indoctrination.
          6.   Paul Grayson's indoctrination show its effects on someone's mind.
          7.   Harbinger's smacktalk (link 1 and 2).
 
      II) The Breath Scene :

          1.   London rubble.
          2.   Mako in the background.
          3.   Citadel explosion (link 1 and 2).

     III) The Dreams :
         
          1.   Dream sequences and post-beam sequence share the same game mechanics.
          2.   Reality-nonreality transition after beam shot (post-beam, dreams, Geth Consensus).
          3.   Oily shadows and whispering.
          4.   Nightmares are mentioned in the Arrival by subjects being indoctrinated.
          5.   Chambers and Asari having PTSD as comparison between PTSD & Shepard's dreams.

      IV) Leviathan :
          1.   Harbinger/the Reapers perfected enthrallment to indoctrination.
          2.   Enthrallment uses memories of its victim.
          3.   Similarities between Leviathan end and decision chamber.
          4.   Zap sound as a sign to enter/leave virtual reality (link 1 and 2).
          5.   Note the file name of the sixth murder that can be found in Bryson's lab.

List of in-game reasons:

 1) The Kid :
   - teleportation in Vancouver
   - opens a door that is marked as locked
   - survives blast
   - not seen by anyone else
   - warning symbols

 2) The Citadel :
   - resembling events of the past
   - Coats dead on the Citadel

 3) Anderson & TIM :
   - how did Anderson follow Shepard?
   - how can Anderson reach the control first?
   - why did no one else follow Anderson?
   - from where did TIM shows up?
   - TIM's scars
   - Anderson addressing Shepard ("They are controlling you!")
   - Shepard being dominated by TIM and thus through him by the Reapers
   - Anderson's wound (link 1 and 2)
   - Reaper horn played in the background (at 1/2 speed)

 4) The Choices :
   - Shepard on his knees happened only during/after some mind control
   - the Guardian is aligned to the Reapers
   - Control and Synthesis being supported by indoctrinated characters
   - a swap in the colours (TIM = Paragon; Anderson = Renegade)
   - huskification during Control/Synthesis vs. Shepard gaining strength while shooting the tubes
   - Guardian losing it when you refuse ("SO BE IT!")
   - decision chamber looks like a dialogue wheel from an aerial view
   - decision chamber resembling beam
   - ambiguous end dialogue (Control/Synthesis)
   - slide shows in Control/Synthesis/Destroy illustrate future possibilities, not facts that already happened
   - soldiers in Destroy fighting fiercely while in Control/Synthesis they are losing (on a side note: no cheering in Synthesis)

 5) The Beam Run :
   - Harbinger pin-pointing everyone and everything but Shepard
   - Harbinger not destroying the Normandy
   - Shepard surviving the blast that one-shots Makos and Gunships
   - Harbinger leaving

 6) The Guardian :
   - has the same shape as the kid (extraction of Shepard's memories)
   - speaks with femshep's and broshep's voice
   - Harbinger's line in the MP trailer (link 1 and 2)

You know what this means... The results are up and this is just backup, so why did you even bother to read this?!

[Ghrelt]

Restrider, I love your compilation. There's a few things in there that I wasn't aware of. You give me hope that Bioware's gonna give me a proper ending. I dislike you a bit for that. My headcanon ending was working just fine until I read that!

Just kidding. (Mostly.) Keep up the good work.

[Ithurael]

ealeander wrote...

Restrider wrote...

How will they do that?
You cannot be ambiguous with the endings in a ME4, unless you go far far into the future making the choices - and with that the whole trilogy - pointless.
If you canonize literal Destroy there are no Reapers left alive. If that's the case, you can say that there has been no IT as discussed in this thread (unless you have some kind of Deception Theory going on).
If there are still Reapers after Destroy, it basically is IT.
But you cannot mix them up, at least I do not see a possible way to do that.

As I see it, if the Reapers are destroyed, it still leaves open the possibility that Shepard woke up from hallucination-IT, ran into the beam and finished the job. It won't be confirmed, but hallucination-IT won't be disproven either, you can just as well assume that Shepard (or someone) managed to activate the Crucible.

Similarly, for literal Synth and Control, the fact that canon Shepard chose Destroy doesn't necessarily suggest Synth and Control were indoctrination attempts. It leaves what actually happened at the end ambiguous enough for everyone to play ME4 under the impression that their interpretation was right aside from those who want ME4 to build on a utopian Synth/Control ending.

Well technically the crucible cannot fire in the IT Dream as shep is still dreaming on earth and hasn't gotten to the citadel to open the arms - thus allowing the crucible to dock.

The main goal of priority earth was to get someone to the beam to open the citadel and thus allow the crucible to dock. In IT Dream, shep is blasted asleep and never makes it to open the citadel. So while he/she is dreaming the citadel is - in the real world - still closed and the crucible is not docked and thus cannot fire.

[ealeander]

OK, perhaps I am missing something... why would it be incompatible with IT to assume that Shepard woke up and finished the job? As I understand it, that's what pure IT advocates want from the final DLC anyway, but even if that doesn't happen, it could still be taken as the implication of an ME4 where the Reapers are no more, particularly if you believe IT is the only possible way to interpret ME3.

Ithurael wrote...

Well technically the crucible cannot
fire in the IT Dream as shep is still dreaming on earth and hasn't
gotten to the citadel to open the arms - thus allowing the crucible to
dock.

The main goal of priority earth was to get someone to the
beam to open the citadel and thus allow the crucible to dock. In
IT Dream, shep is blasted asleep and never makes it to open the citadel.
So while he/she is dreaming the citadel is - in the real world - still
closed and the crucible is not docked and thus cannot fire.

Yes, but what prevented Shepard from going into the beam and firing the Crucible after waking up? Even if an ME3 DLC doesn't show that, it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Thus, if you take IT as the obvious ending to ME3, an ME4 with no Reapers would imply IT + Shepard wakes up and finishes the mission.

Modifié par ealeander, 15 octobre 2012 - 04:35 .

[Ithurael]

ealeander wrote...

OK, perhaps I am missing something... why would it be incompatible with IT to assume that Shepard woke up and finished the job? As I understand it, that's what pure IT advocates want from the final DLC anyway, but even if that doesn't happen, it could still be taken as the implication of an ME4 where the Reapers are no more, particularly if you believe IT is the only possible way to interpret ME3.

That isn't incompatible, that is exactly what IT is.

Shep shoots the tube

Shep wakes up

[The fight is finished]<-- Missing part

End

[Restrider]

Ladies and Gentlemen,
I proudly present the results of the fifth poll and would also like to remind you that the sixth poll and my long-time survey regarding the first-playthrough chioces are opened for votes.

[ealeander]

Ithurael wrote...

That isn't incompatible, that is exactly what IT is.

Shep shoots the tube

Shep wakes up

[The fight is finished]<-- Missing part

End

OK, that's what I thought. My point is that an ME4 that starts with the Reapers destroyed wouldn't imply that this didn't happen. I suppose I wasn't clear what I meant by "Destroy" (I'm new here so excuse my imprecision with the jargon). I didn't mean "literal Destroy" but simply "the Reapers get destroyed" as opposed to "the Reapers get controlled" or "life gets synthesized." A broad, ambiguous, not-necessarily-literal "Destroy" foundation for ME4 would still leave plenty of room for IT being the case in ME3.

Modifié par ealeander, 15 octobre 2012 - 04:49 .

[CoolioThane]

What's up everyone? New faces galore.

[Restrider]

ealeander wrote...

OK, perhaps I am missing something... why would it be incompatible with IT to assume that Shepard woke up and finished the job? As I understand it, that's what pure IT advocates want from the final DLC anyway, but even if that doesn't happen, it could still be taken as the implication of an ME4 where the Reapers are no more, particularly if you believe IT is the only possible way to interpret ME3.

Yes, but what prevented Shepard from going into the beam and firing the Crucible after waking up? Even if an ME3 DLC doesn't show that, it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Thus, if you take IT as the obvious ending to ME3, an ME4 with no Reapers would imply IT + Shepard wakes up and finishes the mission.

Yes, that would be possible, but also cheap as hell. It's like leaving the last section of a novel or the last 30 minutes of a movie.
Especially if you are indeed making a sequel.

Modifié par Restrider, 15 octobre 2012 - 04:44 .

[Davik Kang]

ealeander wrote...
OK, perhaps I am missing something... why would it be incompatible with IT to assume that Shepard woke up and finished the job? As I understand it, that's what pure IT advocates want from the final DLC anyway, but even if that doesn't happen, it could still be taken as the implication of an ME4 where the Reapers are no more, particularly if you believe IT is the only possible way to interpret ME3.

It's not incompatible, it's a subtle difference of interpretation amongst IT supporters.  Some say that the game is complete, that Shepard can be assumed to go ahead and finish the job, and that the important bit was the mental struggle, which is why it ends there.  But it also allows for speculation so as not just to insult players who didn't pick Destroy.

Some IT supporters however came to support IT because they were so disappointed with the endings.  For them IT is the saving grace that shows Bioware did not insult them with a confusing ending.  Instead it means the fight will go on.  So many people who initially hated the endings support IT as hope that future ME material, such as DLC or a new game, will complete the story.

Not criticising either camp btw.  Nor am I saying that these groups cover all IT supporters.  But amonst these, the first lot would agree with you, while the second lot would say the idea you expressed misses the point of IT.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 15 octobre 2012 - 04:45 .

[paxxton]

CoolioThane wrote...

What's up everyone? New faces galore.

Hey, long time no see! Omega's out on November 27th.

[Restrider]

Ellythe wrote...

Restrider, I love your compilation. There's a few things in there that I wasn't aware of. You give me hope that Bioware's gonna give me a proper ending. I dislike you a bit for that. My headcanon ending was working just fine until I read that!

Just kidding. (Mostly.) Keep up the good work.

Nice to hear that.

[Ithurael]

ealeander wrote...

Ithurael wrote...

That isn't incompatible, that is exactly what IT is.

Shep shoots the tube

Shep wakes up

[The fight is finished]<-- Missing part

End

OK, that's what I thought. My point is that an ME4 that starts with the Reapers destroyed wouldn't imply that this didn't happen. I suppose I wasn't clear what I meant by "Destroy" (I'm new here so excuse my imprecision with the jargon). I didn't mean "literal Destroy" but simply "the Reapers get destroyed" as opposed to "the Reapers get controlled" or "life gets synthesized." A broad, ambiguous, not-necessarily-literal "Destroy" foundation for ME4 would still leave plenty of room for IT being the case in ME3.

That sounds suspiciously like the Deception Theory.

Remember, the reapers can only be destroyed if the crucible docks with the citadel. And to dock the crucible someone needs to get to the control panel to open it up.

[ealeander]

Restrider wrote...

Yes, that would be possible, but also cheap as hell. It's like leaving the last section of a novel or the last 30 minutes of a movie.
Especially if you are indeed making a sequel.

Would it? For me, one of the things that makes the ME3 ending so compelling (even after I've completed it) is the ambiguity and the way it asks players to rely on their intuitions about what's really happening. An ambiguous start to ME4 would preserve that mystique and preserve the central dramatic tension of the ending of ME3 in post-ME4 playthroughs. This is, after all, an interactive medium, not a novel or movie. Wouldn't holding our hand and saying "Yes, yes, it was IT" kill a lot of the fun?

Then again, I'm a huge David Lynch fan, so I personally love a bit of ambiguity anyway.

Ithurael wrote...

That sounds suspiciously like the Deception Theory.

Remember,
the reapers can only be destroyed if the crucible docks with the
citadel. And to dock the crucible someone needs to get to the control
panel to open it up.

And again, I don't see how IT and an ambiguous start to ME4 means that someone, presumably a woken Shepard, didn't get up there to do that.

Modifié par ealeander, 15 octobre 2012 - 05:16 .

[Cyberfrog81]

ealeander wrote...

Restrider wrote...

Yes, that would be possible, but also cheap as hell. It's like leaving the last section of a novel or the last 30 minutes of a movie.
Especially if you are indeed making a sequel.

Would it? For me, one of the things that makes the ME3 ending so compelling (even after I've completed it) is the ambiguity and the way it asks players to rely on their intuitions about what's really happening. An ambiguous start to ME4 would preserve that mystique and preserve the central dramatic tension of the ending of ME3 in post-ME4 playthroughs. This is, after all, an interactive medium, not a novel or movie. Wouldn't holding our hand and saying "Yes, yes, it was IT" kill a lot of the fun?

No. With no reveal, I'll continue to dislike the ME3 ending. I see no particular reason to assume that ME4 is happening anyway.

And again, I don't see how IT and an ambiguous start to ME4 means that someone, presumably a woken Shepard, didn't get up there to do that.

Headcanon doesn't cut it.

[masster blaster]

Sooooo. What do you think about Harbinger being the same as Shepard. Both Shepard and Harbinger are similar in a way. Both lead their allys, and people to victory. Harbinger fights to harvest all life, while Shepard protects all life. In a way Harbinger is the anti Shepard good, and bad.

Harbinger can't kill the Normandy crew in ME2 because he needed them for the human Reaper, but if Harbinger had a good side could this be it.

I am not saying Harbinger is good, but you can see Shepard, and Harbinger are a like.

Harbinger was once like Shepard. Looking for a way to stop Synthetics, and Organics, and bring peace. The problem with Harbinger is that he never had us, or friends.

haven't you ever notice that your Shepard is always worried about his/her friends, until we assume control of Shepard, and change his/her behavior. Anyways Harbinger was the Shepard of his time/cycle, but his mind went to a dark place.

If you were born in war like Javik then all you know is war, hate, bitterness.

Yet for Shepard he, or she had a messed up history, yet we can tell Shepard what to do. We are Shepards voice, his/her angel, and demon.

And what do you think tells Shepard what to do at the end. We believe what we want ot believe, and don't care about Shepard and what he/she wants. We only care about saving everyone, and killing the Reapers no matter what the cost, yet what does Shepard want.

We tell him/her what he should do, but never do we let him/her think for him/her self. Yes Shepard does things on his/her own, yet when something major is about to happen we either help Shepard, or let it unfold.

I know I am not making sense, but we are Indoctrinating Shepard at the end. We promise Shepard that he/she made the right choice. " We Organics are driven by emotions instead of logic." Saren

Imagin at the end if we agree with the Catalyst logic. What would happen then.

Are we not driven by our emotions in Destroy, and refuse.

You can say the same as in Synthesis, and Control, but that is logic.

" Maybe you be in heaven in the next half our before the devil knows your dead."

[Ithurael]

ealeander wrote...

And again, I don't see how IT and an ambiguous start to ME4 means that someone, presumably a woken Shepard, didn't get up there to do that.

If you want to headcanon the ending of a 5 year trilogy go for it, I would prefer to know how the story ends personally.

[masster blaster]

Also I think Paragon, and Renegade actions are Indoctrination actions. Think about Paragon. Paragon gains the trust of everyone in the galaxy, and Paragon is always worried, and doesn't know what to do at times.

What if the Reapers want Shepard to save more lives?

The more lives Shepard saves, the more of the harvest the Reapers get.
The more lives Shepard takes if you go Renegade, the more of a chance the Reaper win.

So in the end you have helped the Reapers.

They have the Citadel, the control the mass relays. They traped us in the sol system, the made us bring almost all of the militarys galaxy to one system. They gave us false hope. The crucible if IT comes true.

So the way I see it Conventinal victory is left. Many people will die, but they die for freedom, they die for the right to live, they fight for a future for everyone.

[Restrider]

Restrider wrote...

Ladies and Gentlemen,
I proudly present the results of the fifth poll and would also like to remind you that the sixth poll and my long-time survey regarding the first-playthrough chioces are opened for votes.

Edit: You know why...

Modifié par Restrider, 15 octobre 2012 - 06:30 .