Aller au contenu

Photo

Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark III!

Débuté par byne , juil. 30 2012 07:09

  • Ce sujet est fermé Ce sujet est fermé
80611 réponses à ce sujet

#40401
BatmanTurian
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 06:49

BatmanTurian
  • Members
  • 4 735 messages

starlitegirlx wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...
Ah well, you guys are free to think what you like. My interpretation is the lack of choice is part of the symptoms of indoctrination: we, the players, are Shepard's ego and, increasingly, we lose control over Shepard over the course of ME3. It's part of the whole meta concept that we are Shepard and even we get indoctrinated etc.

To be honest I don't actually mind the lack of dialogue options in this game.  Quite often in ME1 a conversation would remain completely unchanged irrespective of which option you picked.  So ME3 just took out what was at times a pointless mechanic.  

I only play ME for the story btw, if it weren't for ME3 Multiplayer I probably never would've figured out the system behind the combat mechanics properly.  So I am invested in the sotry exclusively.  And I took a lot of time over dialogue choices to make ones that matched Shepard's (my Shepard's) character.  So it's not cos I don't care about the choice factor.  It's one of the most important bits imo.  I just don't think it suffered that much in ME3 just because you had less (pointless) intermediate options to select.


I play for the story and the combat system. But people did have a problem with the long cutscenes and some things that were out-of-character for Shepard. I'm saying, that's why we're in a thread about that. I mean " So the Illusive Man was right." anyone? Great example right there.


Well, that one screams indoctrination in process. Unless shepard's mind is weakened, there's no way he/she would ever think illusive man was right given all his actions. Even throughout ME2 when he was helping save human from abductions, shepard never even thought illusive man was right, though I did hate how they added in dialogue where shepard would suggest asking illusive man something we all knew he would like about or suggest telling illusive man to stay out of something we know he wouldn't the minute he heard about it. Heck, they turned shepard into a lapdog in ME2 with those type of responses. MY shepard would have never even suggested those things. MY shepard would have said, "I don't tell him anything." But I guess I'm one of the few that felt allied with the enemy and never doubted that throughout the entire game. I was furious he even had the audacity to bring shepard back to serve his purposes and given the choice, I'd have hunted him down and killed him on general principal of not letting shepard rest in peace. That's some crazy balls he had there and there's no way someone who does that is not going to head into some dangerous, really dangerous territory considering the experiments we saw in ME1 that miranda tries to make sound good and clean and noble. I hated him all the way through the game and wanted him dead (except I loved how they made him look and that martin sheen was his voice - the only saving grace of that character). I wonder if they chose Martin Sheen because he played a paragon character in West Wing.


Well, that and he's based on the Cigarette-Smoking Man from X-files.

I understand your distaste, but it seemed Shepard was at least somewhat grateful. He gets a chance at a second life and a chance to continue his goal to stop the reapers. On the other hand, Shepard continuously loses trust in TIM and so does Miranda, who was his biggest cheerleader.

Really, though, killing shepard and bringing him back was to make it more personal against the Reapers and turn Shepard into a literal cyborg. And there may be other disturbing reasons we may find out in Omega.

#40402
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 06:52

Guest_SwobyJ_*
  • Guests

shadoww6021 wrote...

Restrider wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The thing is it's a long personalized trilogy with a huge emotional investment in all the characters, especially the protagonist. It's not some trippy movie where you don't know exactly what is really going on, but you're not that attached to the characters that it supersedes your appreciation of the art factor of the ambiguous ending. The highly emotional impact of the characters and their relationship with the protagonist you've been shaping for hundreds of hours shouldn't be abandoned in the name of artsy vagueness, especially when there is that tremendous amount of ambiguity about everything. I understand letting things run their course, but the point has been made and this story deserves more answers than what we got


Shameless,I know.

My point is the indoctrination of the player base has been wildly successful. Time to take the next step and blow their minds. There really should be an explanation provided on what actually happened because it's too open ended. Things need to be clarified at least somewhat


That's my thinking. Also, it then is elevated beyond what it is. Any media that can pull off such a masterfully done mindscrew to the point where only a minority got it until the final reveal is truly one that people will never forget and will have a kind of legendary status.

Who knows, if this was really intentional, fleshed out and planned, this might have impact even in sciences like psychology, anthropology and political studies.
You have a large number of test-subjects, you have the numbers (legacy save, polls etc.) and then you can start to work through all the data.
It really may be a good way to study RL-indoctrination and propaganda...

It's truly amazing when a game can be seen from a social science perspective. Even if the indoctrination theory is not true (personally i believe it is) we could study the various endings and the way people react to them, such as a person may see synthesis as a means to better the universe, though another would believe that it is against all sense of freedom and moral obligation. And if the indoctrination theory is true we can see that some people will sit down and believe everything that is being shown to them, much like someone who is indoctrinated, where as others would see the holes and similarities to other indoctrination attempts, such as the dreams. i would like to see how this plays out from this perspective.


My boyfriend (sadly) sees himself as philosophically/intellectually autistic (which I hate, as it demeans himself), but as I watch him play the series (he's finished Mars now), I can see what he means. He even claims that he quickly forgets details of the story and dialogue and while he hates when I accidently spoil anything, he clearly forgets about spoilers by the time he reaches that point of the story himself.

It seems that anything that isn't superliminal or liminal, passes by his head. He sees how Amanda Kenson acts and is shown to be indoctrinated, but then quickly forgets about it and really does assume every other character is a good guy until shown directly in the narrative to be indoctrinated.

In a way, it reminds me of some of the posters who pop into here and insist that their choice of Synthesis or Control should be 100% true and valid. It's like all previous Mass Effect story experiences don't count, only the immediate situation does.

I say how the Collector Ship might be a trap by the Illusive Man, and he won't believe me until it comes up and is admitted in conversation with the Illusive Man himself. I say how Arrival could be a trap by Harbinger (as the only proof that the Alpha Relay reaches everywhere is from Kenson herself or the fallable Codex that calls Sovereign a geth ship), and he still disbelieves without giving any arguments on his own side.

The great part about him though, is that he does NOT just fall for things just because they claim to be true. I mean, he's both politically and religiously agnostic, and does enjoy getting any new info about things. He chose to save the Collector Base, but takes it in stride that it was a manipulation win by Illusive Man.

It makes him both predictable in thought, but unpredictable in action. Half of me thinks he'll pick Sythesis or Control, but another is convinced he'll stick with Destroy. =]

#40403
spotlessvoid
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 06:55

spotlessvoid
  • Members
  • 3 497 messages
I hope for your relationships sake he doesn't choose synthesis. ;p

#40404
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 06:56

Guest_SwobyJ_*
  • Guests

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Guys, I just had some kind of epiphany about the meaning of the Crucible.

It's because of all the dialogue I've been collecting, that I'm suddenly seeing more theme consistency.

(Again, this is from the discussion with Seival, keep in mind)

It is the promise of power that corrupts. That is the Reapers' weapon. That is why power hungry people will keep the collector base. Tens of thousands of people were processed there to create the human Reaper, but the end justifies the means. The promise of power, to defeat the Reapers by using their own technology against them.

But in doing so, we once again take the path the Reapers set out for us. We must defeat them on our own terms. We must reach a technology level on our owns terms. I think that is why the relays were destroyed in the original ending. It was a symbol for freeing ourselves from Reaper tech, the paths laid out before us by others. We need to achieve our own future, like Legion says.

Just look at what Legion says after destroying the Collector base:

Legion: an interesting choice, Shepard Commander. Your species was offered everything Geth aspire to. True unity. Understanding. Transcendence. You rejected it. You even refused the possibility of using the Old Machines' gifts to achieve it on your species' own terms. You are more like us than we thought.

True unity, understanding, transcendence... sound familiar? That is exactly what the Reapers are offering you in the synthesis ending, all on their terms. The path the Reapers lay out for us.

The fact that we build the Crucible without knowing what it does, is symbolic for the fact that organics literally aren't ready. By building the Crucible, we are again following the path others laid out for us. Technology beyond our comprehension. Using it will lead to our doom. That is why we literally need to blow it up.


Bumpity.

Also, in the last bit, I'm talking about blowing the crucible up metaphorically, within the illusion, just as the mass relays were destroyed inside the illusion.


Agreed.

It's not that we need to instantly abandon the Citadel, but that we need to establish several capitals that don't stand as sitting ducks, unlike the Citadel at the end of ME1.

It's not that we need to instantly abandon the Mass Relays, but we need to push forward into ways of transportation that don't require them, and could in fact expand into dark space/other galaxies (let's exit this petri dish of a planet - the relays are the walls of the maze we run around in).

It's not that we need to instantly abandon the Crucible. The tech from it will be useful, but we need to develop our own innovative ways of destroying the Reapers.

#40405
Guest_starlitegirlx_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 06:56

Guest_starlitegirlx_*
  • Guests

BatmanTurian wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Davik Kang wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...
Ah well, you guys are free to think what you like. My interpretation is the lack of choice is part of the symptoms of indoctrination: we, the players, are Shepard's ego and, increasingly, we lose control over Shepard over the course of ME3. It's part of the whole meta concept that we are Shepard and even we get indoctrinated etc.

To be honest I don't actually mind the lack of dialogue options in this game.  Quite often in ME1 a conversation would remain completely unchanged irrespective of which option you picked.  So ME3 just took out what was at times a pointless mechanic.  

I only play ME for the story btw, if it weren't for ME3 Multiplayer I probably never would've figured out the system behind the combat mechanics properly.  So I am invested in the sotry exclusively.  And I took a lot of time over dialogue choices to make ones that matched Shepard's (my Shepard's) character.  So it's not cos I don't care about the choice factor.  It's one of the most important bits imo.  I just don't think it suffered that much in ME3 just because you had less (pointless) intermediate options to select.


I play for the story and the combat system. But people did have a problem with the long cutscenes and some things that were out-of-character for Shepard. I'm saying, that's why we're in a thread about that. I mean " So the Illusive Man was right." anyone? Great example right there.


Well, that one screams indoctrination in process. Unless shepard's mind is weakened, there's no way he/she would ever think illusive man was right given all his actions. Even throughout ME2 when he was helping save human from abductions, shepard never even thought illusive man was right, though I did hate how they added in dialogue where shepard would suggest asking illusive man something we all knew he would like about or suggest telling illusive man to stay out of something we know he wouldn't the minute he heard about it. Heck, they turned shepard into a lapdog in ME2 with those type of responses. MY shepard would have never even suggested those things. MY shepard would have said, "I don't tell him anything." But I guess I'm one of the few that felt allied with the enemy and never doubted that throughout the entire game. I was furious he even had the audacity to bring shepard back to serve his purposes and given the choice, I'd have hunted him down and killed him on general principal of not letting shepard rest in peace. That's some crazy balls he had there and there's no way someone who does that is not going to head into some dangerous, really dangerous territory considering the experiments we saw in ME1 that miranda tries to make sound good and clean and noble. I hated him all the way through the game and wanted him dead (except I loved how they made him look and that martin sheen was his voice - the only saving grace of that character). I wonder if they chose Martin Sheen because he played a paragon character in West Wing.


Well, that and he's based on the Cigarette-Smoking Man from X-files.

I understand your distaste, but it seemed Shepard was at least somewhat grateful. He gets a chance at a second life and a chance to continue his goal to stop the reapers. On the other hand, Shepard continuously loses trust in TIM and so does Miranda, who was his biggest cheerleader.

Really, though, killing shepard and bringing him back was to make it more personal against the Reapers and turn Shepard into a literal cyborg. And there may be other disturbing reasons we may find out in Omega.


Hopefully we get some good story out of omega because otherwise, I could give a rat's ass about getting it back for aria. The only thing that would put me on her side is as someone here suggested, she is undercover spectre or something along those lines, though spectre would be the best. In that case, I could actually like her and might return to recruiting her mercs which I don't do anymore now that I have like 8k assets. Almost 3k from MP promotes :)

I hadn't really thought about smoking man. I barely remember what he was like. It's been a long time since I watched xfiles. Might have to rewatch that series now.

#40406
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 06:58

Guest_SwobyJ_*
  • Guests

Rankincountry wrote...

Restrider wrote...

Rankincountry wrote...

I had a thought on the topic of is Hackett indoctrinated, and it applies to other characters that we might be suspicious of but have no proof. One function of indoctrination that we haven't discussed much is that its mere existence could spread as much fear, panic and havoc behind the lines as the indoctrinated agents themselves. Think about it - it can affect anyone, its symptoms can be undetectable or attributed to stress for a long time. Anyone - friends, colleagues, family - anyone, could suddenly turn and no-one is immune.

Imagine the fear and mistrust this would cause - across the galaxy, whole communities will be tearing themselves apart over no more than suspicion. Those keen to settle scores could make accusations - mud sticks at the best of times, and think what a well-placed whisper could do in the environment of ME3.

For a real-world example, the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) from World War II is a good one. They leaked details of fictional missions that caused as much disruption to the Germans as the real ones they undertook (here's a wikipedia link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Operations_Executive). Almost certainly, as well as the Reapers setting us at each others' throats via the mere concept of indoctrinated forces, indoctrinated agents are themselves undertaking deception and psychological operations behind the lines.

So to bring it back to Hackett - it's most likely Hackett is exactly what he seems, a loyal Alliance Admiral doing his level best to win a war of survival. But with a few deceiving clues here and there that actually amount to blind alleys, the writers have us doubting our own CO.

Yes, ME3 lacked this kind of paranoia, where you cannot be sure who is a sleeper-agent or not.
Another good example of what you described would be the first seasons of BSG, where the survivors of the genocide found out that the Cylons are able to infiltrate the fleet through sleeper-agents, which did not know that they were evil themselves. It ended in some kind of witch hunt and full paranoia for some characters, who did not trust themselves anymore.


It was in ME3 to some extent, with the indoctrinated Hanar, Rana Thanoptis and the like - but I'm surprised that they didn't have an indoctrinated Normandy crew member just to scare things up. It wouldn't have needed to be a key character to have the desired effect.

I think though, that Bioware have got us doing it for them - look back on this thread and we are variously suspicious of characters even including Liara, James, Anderson and Hackett. 2 of our best friends (one of them is maybe our lover) our mentor and our fleet admiral. Crikey.  On our playthroughs we're watching conversations for the slightest tick, picking apart their lines for any trace of inconsistency or untruth. I just started a new playthrough of ME3 last night and realised I'm watching everyone.

It also made me realise what an incredibly dark and creepy game ME3 is. The atmosphere is so oppresive and the way it builds through the game is brilliantly done. Bad writing? F*** off with that, this is some of the best video game writing (and acting for that matter) you'll find. ME3 a bad game? So why do I keep going back for more?


Agreed. Especially if the beam run is a hugely successful trap by the Reapers and everyone is sitting around Earth, waiting to die.

#40407
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:02

Guest_SwobyJ_*
  • Guests

Restrider wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

I think the disdain many have for synthesis and it's supporters is more complex then a disagreement over a video game ending. The narcissism and faux intellectualism displayed In advocating for the complete and irreversible usurping of freedom of choice and annihilation of natural life, is in my opinion deeply unsettling. It shows a truly pretentious worldview and a deep disdain for humanity. People who think imposing their beliefs on others is not only justified, but morally superior, are profoundly conceited and dangerous to a free society. It is reprehensible and deserves to be called out for what it is. The fact that it's done with no assurance of it even being possible, and no knowledge of the consequences is even more appalling.

Agreed.
The problem with Synthesis and especially with its zealous supporters are the implications to the real world.
Free will and self determination are the highest goods there are, at least in my view.
Overruling these with some kind of agenda other's happen to depict as the best solution not only gives me a sour taste in the mouth, but actually scares me a bit. There are many examples in history, where this attitude leads to the biggest atrocities commited.


I find it interesting how I first chose Synthesis.

While I'm the biggest advocate for investigation, critisism, deduction, understanding context, individual freedom, and allll of that.

I know I also have a darker(?) side that just wants everyone to bend under my moral will and do what I say. I only didn't pick Control because I don't want to be a dictator, but simply more of a ...mind controller.

While that sounds kind of crazy, I'm pretty sure everyone has their dark side that they internally combat. I love the ME3 ending because it illustrates that, but it also allows redos :unsure: haha.

It's been high-EMS Destroy ever since. As, I also learn from my mistakes and betrayals of my heart and mind.

#40408
Guest_starlitegirlx_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:08

Guest_starlitegirlx_*
  • Guests

SwobyJ wrote...

Rankincountry wrote...

Restrider wrote...

Rankincountry wrote...

I had a thought on the topic of is Hackett indoctrinated, and it applies to other characters that we might be suspicious of but have no proof. One function of indoctrination that we haven't discussed much is that its mere existence could spread as much fear, panic and havoc behind the lines as the indoctrinated agents themselves. Think about it - it can affect anyone, its symptoms can be undetectable or attributed to stress for a long time. Anyone - friends, colleagues, family - anyone, could suddenly turn and no-one is immune.

Imagine the fear and mistrust this would cause - across the galaxy, whole communities will be tearing themselves apart over no more than suspicion. Those keen to settle scores could make accusations - mud sticks at the best of times, and think what a well-placed whisper could do in the environment of ME3.

For a real-world example, the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) from World War II is a good one. They leaked details of fictional missions that caused as much disruption to the Germans as the real ones they undertook (here's a wikipedia link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Operations_Executive). Almost certainly, as well as the Reapers setting us at each others' throats via the mere concept of indoctrinated forces, indoctrinated agents are themselves undertaking deception and psychological operations behind the lines.

So to bring it back to Hackett - it's most likely Hackett is exactly what he seems, a loyal Alliance Admiral doing his level best to win a war of survival. But with a few deceiving clues here and there that actually amount to blind alleys, the writers have us doubting our own CO.

Yes, ME3 lacked this kind of paranoia, where you cannot be sure who is a sleeper-agent or not.
Another good example of what you described would be the first seasons of BSG, where the survivors of the genocide found out that the Cylons are able to infiltrate the fleet through sleeper-agents, which did not know that they were evil themselves. It ended in some kind of witch hunt and full paranoia for some characters, who did not trust themselves anymore.


It was in ME3 to some extent, with the indoctrinated Hanar, Rana Thanoptis and the like - but I'm surprised that they didn't have an indoctrinated Normandy crew member just to scare things up. It wouldn't have needed to be a key character to have the desired effect.

I think though, that Bioware have got us doing it for them - look back on this thread and we are variously suspicious of characters even including Liara, James, Anderson and Hackett. 2 of our best friends (one of them is maybe our lover) our mentor and our fleet admiral. Crikey.  On our playthroughs we're watching conversations for the slightest tick, picking apart their lines for any trace of inconsistency or untruth. I just started a new playthrough of ME3 last night and realised I'm watching everyone.

It also made me realise what an incredibly dark and creepy game ME3 is. The atmosphere is so oppresive and the way it builds through the game is brilliantly done. Bad writing? F*** off with that, this is some of the best video game writing (and acting for that matter) you'll find. ME3 a bad game? So why do I keep going back for more?


Agreed. Especially if the beam run is a hugely successful trap by the Reapers and everyone is sitting around Earth, waiting to die.


It's definitely not bad (except I'm damn tired of so many cut scenes), but it's really bleak and depressing and dark as stated. I played it a bit last night. Did rannoch and got the geth and quarians. I have more than 8k war assets and am around 98% readiness and as I looked at those numbers I felt really sad because I know how it ends.

Truth is that I can believe it's IT but when I play the game I HAVE TO, ABSOLTUELY HAVE TO imagine my shepard's breath breaks her out of IT and that destroy was truly the destruction of them like just as simple as flipping a switch which she did that triggered the crucible and is probably somewhere on that damaged citadel and will figure out how to navigate through it and call for help. I just can't watch the end of it thinking they all die anyway. I'm just too invested. Hundreds and hundreds of hours invested in my shepard and her saving the universe and I cannot play the game and let it end like that. If it were only one game, I could. But I'm too attached. So I believe otherwise. I don't choose the pretty option. I choose the best one. But I imagine a different outcome.

Modifié par starlitegirlx, 27 octobre 2012 - 07:09 .

#40409
BatmanTurian
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:09

BatmanTurian
  • Members
  • 4 735 messages

starlitegirlx wrote...

Hopefully we get some good story out of omega because otherwise, I could give a rat's ass about getting it back for aria. The only thing that would put me on her side is as someone here suggested, she is undercover spectre or something along those lines, though spectre would be the best. In that case, I could actually like her and might return to recruiting her mercs which I don't do anymore now that I have like 8k assets. Almost 3k from MP promotes :)

I hadn't really thought about smoking man. I barely remember what he was like. It's been a long time since I watched xfiles. Might have to rewatch that series now.




And yeah, I do think Aria really is a Spectre. She seems really canny and it seems to me that it would be a smart move for the Council to get a spectre to infiltrate Omega, a lawless place they have no control over, to influence events there after climbing up the ranks to pirate queen. She seems to put up a front, acts all cool and aloof, but you can tell she wants to help Shepard in ME2 but just can't without breaking her cover.

Of course, it may just be confirmation bias, but as I'm playing Me2 over again and talking to Aria, she seems more and more like an undercover cop just playing a role, the role of her life. Even keeping Patriarch alive seems like something an undercover cop would do.

#40410
spotlessvoid
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:10

spotlessvoid
  • Members
  • 3 497 messages
I dont believe in a"dark side" to people.
Humans are still mammals and those sections of the brain drive these primal urges. The fancy grey part of your brain is the tool that can help you rise above that entirely. Honest self analysis and knowledge of how the mind works leads to enlightenment and universal compassion for all living beings, even the ones you "hate"

#40411
BatmanTurian
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:18

BatmanTurian
  • Members
  • 4 735 messages

spotlessvoid wrote...

I dont believe in a"dark side" to people.
Humans are still mammals and those sections of the brain drive these primal urges. The fancy grey part of your brain is the tool that can help you rise above that entirely. Honest self analysis and knowledge of how the mind works leads to enlightenment and universal compassion for all living beings, even the ones you "hate"


The amygdala and the reptile brain near the spine are what you're talking about that control the primal urges. Those are our dark sides' homes but also where we get our instinctual fears and our fighting spirit. Amygdala also produces the enzymes that control many of our emotions.

#40412
Guest_starlitegirlx_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:22

Guest_starlitegirlx_*
  • Guests

BatmanTurian wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...

Hopefully we get some good story out of omega because otherwise, I could give a rat's ass about getting it back for aria. The only thing that would put me on her side is as someone here suggested, she is undercover spectre or something along those lines, though spectre would be the best. In that case, I could actually like her and might return to recruiting her mercs which I don't do anymore now that I have like 8k assets. Almost 3k from MP promotes :)

I hadn't really thought about smoking man. I barely remember what he was like. It's been a long time since I watched xfiles. Might have to rewatch that series now.




And yeah, I do think Aria really is a Spectre. She seems really canny and it seems to me that it would be a smart move for the Council to get a spectre to infiltrate Omega, a lawless place they have no control over, to influence events there after climbing up the ranks to pirate queen. She seems to put up a front, acts all cool and aloof, but you can tell she wants to help Shepard in ME2 but just can't without breaking her cover.

Of course, it may just be confirmation bias, but as I'm playing Me2 over again and talking to Aria, she seems more and more like an undercover cop just playing a role, the role of her life. Even keeping Patriarch alive seems like something an undercover cop would do.


Who is Patriarch? Do you mean archangel? And that she knows who it really is and that he helped with sovereign? That would make a lot of sense. She is pretty adamant and you'd better move fast without saying it.

The one thing that leans me towad this suspicion is that you get that email from anderson somewhere right after you return from omega and upon arriving at omega the first thing that is demanded is meeting her, which would fall in line with what a spectre would want to do. See if it is shepard then report back and then Anderson sends an email.

I hope she is undercover because that would be a fantastic twist and might even explain why she's pissed about omega being taken. As an undercover, Illusive Man now has control of a place she was supposed to keep in line. bad news. Also, she would be undercover because it's the terminus systems and if you remember, council loved the idea of having shepard be in the terminus systems and Udina could see the logic of it. So while they may not have trusted shepard fully, they still had some faith in him/her or perhaps if they didn't aria would likely be able to give them some intel as to what shepard was really doing if she's in the terminus system and presuming aria has a network of contacts.

Also, I wonder if this is a connection to the datapad with the intel to kill Aria. At the time it seemed nothing, but if she is undercover, then that would might put that into a different light. Not necessarily, but didn't all the ones who were planning it get killed during recruitment of garrus?

#40413
BatmanTurian
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:29

BatmanTurian
  • Members
  • 4 735 messages

starlitegirlx wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

starlitegirlx wrote...

Hopefully we get some good story out of omega because otherwise, I could give a rat's ass about getting it back for aria. The only thing that would put me on her side is as someone here suggested, she is undercover spectre or something along those lines, though spectre would be the best. In that case, I could actually like her and might return to recruiting her mercs which I don't do anymore now that I have like 8k assets. Almost 3k from MP promotes :)

I hadn't really thought about smoking man. I barely remember what he was like. It's been a long time since I watched xfiles. Might have to rewatch that series now.




And yeah, I do think Aria really is a Spectre. She seems really canny and it seems to me that it would be a smart move for the Council to get a spectre to infiltrate Omega, a lawless place they have no control over, to influence events there after climbing up the ranks to pirate queen. She seems to put up a front, acts all cool and aloof, but you can tell she wants to help Shepard in ME2 but just can't without breaking her cover.

Of course, it may just be confirmation bias, but as I'm playing Me2 over again and talking to Aria, she seems more and more like an undercover cop just playing a role, the role of her life. Even keeping Patriarch alive seems like something an undercover cop would do.


Who is Patriarch? Do you mean archangel? And that she knows who it really is and that he helped with sovereign? That would make a lot of sense. She is pretty adamant and you'd better move fast without saying it.

The one thing that leans me towad this suspicion is that you get that email from anderson somewhere right after you return from omega and upon arriving at omega the first thing that is demanded is meeting her, which would fall in line with what a spectre would want to do. See if it is shepard then report back and then Anderson sends an email.

I hope she is undercover because that would be a fantastic twist and might even explain why she's pissed about omega being taken. As an undercover, Illusive Man now has control of a place she was supposed to keep in line. bad news. Also, she would be undercover because it's the terminus systems and if you remember, council loved the idea of having shepard be in the terminus systems and Udina could see the logic of it. So while they may not have trusted shepard fully, they still had some faith in him/her or perhaps if they didn't aria would likely be able to give them some intel as to what shepard was really doing if she's in the terminus system and presuming aria has a network of contacts.

Also, I wonder if this is a connection to the datapad with the intel to kill Aria. At the time it seemed nothing, but if she is undercover, then that would might put that into a different light. Not necessarily, but didn't all the ones who were planning it get killed during recruitment of garrus?


Patriarch is the krogan warlord that ran Omega before Aria. Aria let him live as a " trophy" and a "warning" but I have a feeling it was for more than that.

Damn, and that anderson thing is genius. I didn't even think of that. That is a great point. Aria would have checked you out, then sent word back to the council and the Alliance, for a fee of course.
Yeah, the ones who were planning to kill her were the then bosses of Blood Pack, Blue Suns, and Eclipse. You wipe them out, Aria is safe. Maybe Aria knew and that's why she sent you after Archangel.

Yeah, Aria is way more than she seems and clever enough to have fooled Shepard and made Shepard do her dirty work: curing the plague, stopping the blood pack from moving in on Blue Sun turf, then taking all of the current leaders of the gangs out in one full swoop while getting Archangel, a thorn in her side and constant annoyance, off the station. Wow.

EDIT: Then she makes Shepard take out the leaders AGAIN in ME3 to tighten her grip on them, perhaps so the Council can manipulate them through Aria. Damn, this story could be way deeper than we thought.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 27 octobre 2012 - 07:35 .

#40414
spotlessvoid
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:33

spotlessvoid
  • Members
  • 3 497 messages
The function of the R complex and the additional complexities added by the mammalian parts of our brain is truly fascinating, but it's besides the point. Meta cognition is the defining characteristic of higher life forms. My point is that through proper training, these lower brain functions can be controlled to an astounding degree. If you have doubts of the power of the higher brain, google Thich Quang Duc.

All I was saying was that these primal urges are not an inescapable reality. Humans can and must learn how to surpass these basic mental states

#40415
BatmanTurian
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:35

BatmanTurian
  • Members
  • 4 735 messages

spotlessvoid wrote...

The function of the R complex and the additional complexities added by the mammalian parts of our brain is truly fascinating, but it's besides the point. Meta cognition is the defining characteristic of higher life forms. My point is that through proper training, these lower brain functions can be controlled to an astounding degree. If you have doubts of the power of the higher brain, google Thich Quang Duc.

All I was saying was that these primal urges are not an inescapable reality. Humans can and must learn how to surpass these basic mental states


Agreed, and most of us do.

#40416
Humakt83
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:38

Humakt83
  • Members
  • 1 893 messages
Heh.

"If I die Shepard, I will haunt you." - Jack

Somewhat funny considering the dreams.

#40417
spotlessvoid
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:38

spotlessvoid
  • Members
  • 3 497 messages
Most of us are using a broken umbrella in a category 5 hurricane.

#40418
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:48

Guest_SwobyJ_*
  • Guests

spotlessvoid wrote...

Real life propaganda isn't hard. It's been one of the most powerful weapons ever created.

It's a well known thing in psychology that most people can only handle one to two crisis in their life at a time. Imagine if you were diagnosed with cancer, lost your job, and found out your spouse was cheating all in a short period of time. Most people would go in the fetal position.

It works the same way on a national level. Induce primal emotions, namely fear, and watch the people shut down mentally. TV and movies are perfect for this. Make people feel like the world is terrifying and beyond their control. What can you do personally about terrorism, crime, pollution, war, etc etc?

It's called the Hegellian dialectic

Problem/reaction/solution

Create the problem, guide the reaction, offer the solution.

It's governments foremost tool against the masses.

Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, people will refuse to believe it unless it comes from an authority figure. Almost the entire planet is indoctrinated. Is it really hard to understand why people trust starchild?
Submission to authority is what they've been conditioned for their whole lives.

Control education and the media and government can shape reality. It's up to the individual to question what he sees and hears. Unfortunately, mindless entertainment and schools designed to teach data retention instead of critical thinking has brought us to this point


And when you focus on data retention without actual cause/passion to drive that goal, you have even data retention as a difficulty in students.

Good critical thinking *inspires* people to remember what they see and hear.

#40419
BatmanTurian
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:52

BatmanTurian
  • Members
  • 4 735 messages

spotlessvoid wrote...

Most of us are using a broken umbrella in a category 5 hurricane.


Man, you are kind of a downer today. :pinched:

#40420
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:54

Guest_SwobyJ_*
  • Guests

spotlessvoid wrote...

I hope for your relationships sake he doesn't choose synthesis. ;p


My first choice was Synthesis.

I actually wouldn't mind him picking that or Control, as it opens up the conversation to me showing him my Youtube Indoctrination Theory playlist ;)
(He already knows I will be, haha)

He's a mostly blindly Paragon player, as I've often been. Only exception is that he can turn suddenly Renegade when he sees clear injustice being done to him or another. He renegade interrupted Khalisah al-Jilani in ME3 after paragoning her in ME1-ME2. Why? Because she was speaking badly to him when he was just visiting the unhelping Council and the seemingly helpful Udina...

Yet he didn't mean to and is redoing the Citadel level in order to Paragon her.

It really makes things unpredictable. He may pick Destroy out of nowhere, or Control because he was sufficiently convinced it would be a proper 'paragon' option, or Synthesis because he wasn't paying attention.

#40421
Arashi08
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:55

Arashi08
  • Members
  • 612 messages
Hello beautiful people! anything interesting going on today in the world of IT?

#40422
Home run MF
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:56

Home run MF
  • Members
  • 805 messages

SwobyJ wrote...

And when you focus on data retention without actual cause/passion to drive that goal, you have even data retention as a difficulty in students.

Good critical thinking *inspires* people to remember what they see and hear.


Is that why I remember a bunch of Mass Effect quotes but forgot the Lensmaker's equation during an exam last week? :P

#40423
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:56

Guest_SwobyJ_*
  • Guests
Aria doesn't even need to be a Spectre. Just a power broker that has contacts with the Asari, in order to keep Omega and the Terminus Systems untouched. I use 'power broker' lightly, as she might even have a sort of loyalty to the Council overall, even if she is mostly her own agent.

#40424
BatmanTurian
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:58

BatmanTurian
  • Members
  • 4 735 messages

Arashi08 wrote...

Hello beautiful people! anything interesting going on today in the world of IT?


Ah different things. Starlite and I are discussing Aria being a possible Spectre and adding up clues. I mentioned that I could confirm that the implants used to revive shepard definitely looked like Reapertech, blue metal and everything.

#40425
Arashi08
Posté 27 octobre 2012 - 07:59

Arashi08
  • Members
  • 612 messages
oh btw isn't this latest operation scheduled to be the one we are supposed to fail?
Retourner dans Story, Campaign, and Characters


  1. The BioWare Forum
  2. → Mass Effect
  3. → Mass Effect 3
  4. → Story, Campaign, and Characters