Ce sujet est ferméI'm not against the list. I'm more against people saying that everything that supports destroy supports the IT, because that's just not true. It just validates destroy more and more.Dwailing wrote...
Well, I see things are a bit... heated right now. I find myself sympathizing more with DD on this one. I think the list is a good idea. Would it be nice if it could be done in, shall we say, and more systematic and thorough way? Yes. But does DD have the technology and time to DO it in said way? No.
Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark III!
Débuté par
byne
, juil. 30 2012 07:09
#42551
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:36
estebanus
-
- Members
- 5 987 messages
Retour en haut
#42552
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:38
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Guest_SwobyJ_*
-
- Guests
smokingotter1 wrote...
Domanese wrote...
FifthBeatle wrote...
smokingotter1 wrote...
@doomsday Stargazer: "Yes, but some of the details have been lost in time"
We are starting to get some of those details, EC, Leviathan, now what will Omega add?
My modular theory, in order for Shepard to defeat Harbinger he's going to need a few things, like the deathly hallows (Harry Potter reference)
1. Leviathan to take down Harbinger
2. Aria's fleet to help provide cover for Leviathan?
3. ????
4. Profit! (or win the game)
Edit: Remember even if IT is true Shepard is still in bad shape with Harbinger hovering over him. Can't wait for Omega.
Precisely, there were a few questions that remained after the original ending that we are geting answers to through the DLC. Namely:
-Why didn't the Protheans succeed? Answered in From Ashes.
-What are the Reapers and how does Indoctrination work? Answered in Leviathan.
-What really is the Crucible? Presumably answered in Take Back Omega DLC.
-What really is the Catalyst/Citadel? Presumably answered in the CItadel DLC uncovered in the Leviathan files.
The Citadel DLC? Anyone have a link to where I can view it over the web so i can see where this is coming from? So if the Citadel DLC is that then what the heck is Project X?
Based on theories, patterns, and IT in general the presence of the Citadel DLC to paraphrase Vendetta AI: " its presence is inferred rather than observed."
The fact that the VI even USED the word 'inferred', set off alarm bells with me. It basically said:
-Bioware knows that inference is now a part of the narrative
-Bioware has used inference before in its stories
-Using the word 'inferred' here, means I should pay attention to INFERRED ideas in the story
(sorry everyone, I'm catchin up to the past posts over the last 20 hours..)
#42553
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:38
estebanus
-
- Members
- 5 987 messages
Then you might as well put in how TIM advocates controlling the reapers and say, "This helps IT!"BleedingUranium wrote...
I'll sum this us simply; there are two prerequisites for understanding IT:
-An understanding of the characters, lore, and themes of the Mass Effect Universe.
-A belief that Bioware has good enough writers and story tellers to create something as elaborate and in-depth as IT.
If you don't have the former, you'll never understand what IT is, or why it's important and makes sense. If you don't have the latter, you won't believe IT is what actually happened.
Doomsday is trying to compile a list that helps with the former. If you fully understand those things, the logical place it takes you is that the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate you at the end. So, while the quotes don't directly support IT, they are what makes the universe and themes, and that is the most important supporting aspect of IT.
#42554
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:38
jojon2se
-
- Members
- 1 018 messages
spotlessvoid wrote...
...
...If people weren't so busy trying to make nice with people obviously trolling then I would be more than happy to ignore them. I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is to tell me to grow up and stop feeding them and then proceed to feed them politely for a hours and hours. At least I'm not acting all high and mighty about it.
Ok, I guess I did miss something after all; I can't recall anybody singling you out, other than Restrider's mild, not unfriendly, reaction a page back.
Maybe we could all start over and try to not extrapolate pointed intent, where none may be -- there seem to be a bit of "you called me dumb", "no, it was YOU who called ME dumb", going on here. It seems more reasonable to conclude that none of the two meant anything of the sort, than to expect the worst and let things escalate.
Anyway; I have wasted more than enough page space on pointless unintended bickering, so... *stops typing*
#42555
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:41
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Guest_SwobyJ_*
-
- Guests
Restrider wrote...
Another Hanar preaching against IT in this thread... I see a pattern.Lazengan wrote...
indoct theory is just a bad fanfic
sorry guys, the franchise is over. Bioware is now salvaging what money they can from the ToRtanic, and using Mass effect revenue to fund dragon age 3, which will hopefully be a good game
All hail the Enkindlers! The Enkindlers are the Collectors, and thus we must follow the Reapers! *praise them!*
#42556
Guest_A Bethesda Fan_*
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:42
Guest_A Bethesda Fan_*
Guest_A Bethesda Fan_*
-
- Guests
BleedingUranium wrote...
I'll sum this us simply; there are two prerequisites for understanding IT:
-An understanding of the characters, lore, and themes of the Mass Effect Universe.
-A belief that Bioware has good enough writers and story tellers to create something as elaborate and in-depth as IT.
If you don't have the former you'll never understand what IT is, or why it's important and makes sense. If you don't have the latter, you won't believe IT is what actually happened.
Doomsday is trying to compile a list that helps with the former. If you fully understand those things, the logical place it takes you is that the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate you at the end. So, while the quotes don't directly support IT, they are what makes the universe and themes, and that is the most important supporting aspect of IT.
I don't believe the latter so I don't believe IT was intended even though loads of things support IT.
It's been about 8 months(I think).
How much longer can you guys hold out this belief, when do you stop?
I believe Bioware are lazy and just fed us bad endings that made no sense.
I would headcanon Indoctrination but that is about it.
Not going to waste my time getting my hopes up again to be only disappointed.
Modifié par A Bethesda Fan, 02 novembre 2012 - 05:44 .
#42557
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:44
BleedingUranium
-
- Members
- 6 118 messages
A Bethesda Fan wrote...
BleedingUranium wrote...
I'll sum this us simply; there are two prerequisites for understanding IT:
-An understanding of the characters, lore, and themes of the Mass Effect Universe.
-A belief that Bioware has good enough writers and story tellers to create something as elaborate and in-depth as IT.
If you don't have the former you'll never understand what IT is, or why it's important and makes sense. If you don't have the latter, you won't believe IT is what actually happened.
Doomsday is trying to compile a list that helps with the former. If you fully understand those things, the logical place it takes you is that the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate you at the end. So, while the quotes don't directly support IT, they are what makes the universe and themes, and that is the most important supporting aspect of IT.
I don't believe the latter so I don't believe IT was intended even though loads of things support IT.
It's been about 8 months(I think).
How much longer can you guys hold out this belief, when do you stop?
I believe Bioware are lazy and just fed us bad endings that made no sense.
I would headcanon Indoctrination but that is about it.
Not going waste my time getting my hopes up again to be only disappointed.
Don't you mean the latter, not the former?
#42558
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:45
BleedingUranium
-
- Members
- 6 118 messages
*double post*
Modifié par BleedingUranium, 02 novembre 2012 - 05:45 .
#42559
Guest_A Bethesda Fan_*
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:48
Guest_A Bethesda Fan_*
Guest_A Bethesda Fan_*
-
- Guests
^ Ninja edit
It does help IT, because it allows you to understand Indoctrination better.
estebanus wrote...
Then you might as well put in how TIM advocates controlling the reapers and say, "This helps IT!"BleedingUranium wrote...
I'll sum this us simply; there are two prerequisites for understanding IT:
-An understanding of the characters, lore, and themes of the Mass Effect Universe.
-A belief that Bioware has good enough writers and story tellers to create something as elaborate and in-depth as IT.
If you don't have the former, you'll never understand what IT is, or why it's important and makes sense. If you don't have the latter, you won't believe IT is what actually happened.
Doomsday is trying to compile a list that helps with the former. If you fully understand those things, the logical place it takes you is that the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate you at the end. So, while the quotes don't directly support IT, they are what makes the universe and themes, and that is the most important supporting aspect of IT.
It does help IT, because it allows you to understand Indoctrination better.
Modifié par A Bethesda Fan, 02 novembre 2012 - 05:49 .
#42560
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:48
plfranke
-
- Members
- 1 404 messages
Nothing supports destroy. Synthesis is the canon ending. Estebanus, you should know this better than anyone.
#42561
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:50
estebanus
-
- Members
- 5 987 messages
Oh rly? How so?plfranke wrote...
Nothing supports destroy. Synthesis is the canon ending. Estebanus, you should know this better than anyone.
#42562
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:51
BleedingUranium
-
- Members
- 6 118 messages
estebanus wrote...
Then you might as well put in how TIM advocates controlling the reapers and say, "This helps IT!"BleedingUranium wrote...
I'll sum this us simply; there are two prerequisites for understanding IT:
-An understanding of the characters, lore, and themes of the Mass Effect Universe.
-A belief that Bioware has good enough writers and story tellers to create something as elaborate and in-depth as IT.
If you don't have the former, you'll never understand what IT is, or why it's important and makes sense. If you don't have the latter, you won't believe IT is what actually happened.
Doomsday is trying to compile a list that helps with the former. If you fully understand those things, the logical place it takes you is that the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate you at the end. So, while the quotes don't directly support IT, they are what makes the universe and themes, and that is the most important supporting aspect of IT.
Something I've noticed both you and Megumi not understanding is that that mindset only works in real life. This is a fictional story, and in fictional stories there are good guys and villains.
It's not just "a group of people" that support destroy, it's every single person that isn't indoctrinated. Likewise, every single supporter of Synthesis has been indoctrinated. Most Control supporters are too, but Control is less agreeing with the Reapers, and more being on a fool's errand.
The Reapers are villains, their ideas or methods are bad.
Saren is a villain, his ideas or methods are bad.
TIM is a villain, his ideas or methods are bad.
Anderson is your father figure, his ideas and methods are good.
All of your squadmates and shipmates are your friends, their ideas and methods are good.
This is fiction. This is how it works.
#42563
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:52
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Guest_SwobyJ_*
-
- Guests
byne wrote...
Lazengan wrote...
masster blaster wrote...
Hanar still here not fanfict. If IT was, then we would be in fanfict already. So Also what end did you choice, because if it's synthesis, and Control then you got your answer already.
Also Oh and Harbinger " You have failed we will find another way."
Destroy Shepard has failed, and now they will have to find another way because Harbinger had to release Control of Shepard's mind because the explosion could kill him. Meaning Shepard could have disabled Harbinger like he/she did Nazar.
I always pick destroy because synthesis is an affront to everything evolution stands for, and with control - what is to stop sheppard from seeing the organics synthetics problem from the reapers' point of view (since he is now a metaphysical reaper) and starting the cycle all over again
I'm glad someone else agrees with me that if literal, Control is still a horrible idea. Thats the exact thing I'm worried about with control in the literal endings.
Sidenote:
From an IT perspective, I've noticed that Bioware wrote Paragon and Renegade VERY carefully:
Renegade = You're not privy to most of the hints about 'theories' and 'speculation', but you're much more directly opposing your possible indoctrination process. It's pure force of will. Players picking mostly Renegade will usually pick Destroy (2nd place Control, of course), but many will decry 'bad writing' and openly bash IT.
Paragon = You ARE playing a Shepard that questions what he sees (I notice Paragon Shepard especially questions the Crucible and what the Reapers are doing), but you're also the more naively optimistic, hoping for a positive resolution. I think less Paragon players picked Destroy, and were more spread out over the 3 endings.
So I find it ironic that the side with the most IT clues (Paragon) is the one where Shepard himself is more likely to be indoctrinated, instead of persistently insisting that the Reapers be outright destroyed (Renegade).
Tricky Bioware..
Remember the line ""We did present them with a lot of unknowns. They're feeling threatened and want immediate solutions, not theories." is a PARAGON choice.
#42564
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:53
DoomsdayDevice
-
- Members
- 2 357 messages
spotlessvoid wrote...
Bethesda...
It's important,
not for ITs sake, but because foreshadowing against control and
synthesis is relevant to all interpretations. It's as much a part of IT
as the hallucination, but it's useful to also present it separately
Doomsday is fully aware of the difference between foreshadowing of the
it hallucination and foreshadowing against control and synthesis. I know
this for a fact because it's he and Simon Says that made a point to
differentiate the two quite a while back. I specifically remember
because the three of us got into a lengthy discussion on the difference
between the hallucination narrative device and the pro destroy thematic
elements.
Exactly. It seems every time this is brought up, it causes a wealth of misunderstandings.
BleedingUranium wrote...
I'll sum this us simply; there are two prerequisites for understanding IT:
-An understanding of the characters, lore, and themes of the Mass Effect Universe.
-A belief that Bioware has good enough writers and story tellers to create something as elaborate and in-depth as IT.
If you don't have the former, you'll never understand what IT is, or why it's important and makes sense. If you don't have the latter, you won't believe IT is what actually happened.
Doomsday is trying to compile a list that helps with the former. If you fully understand those things, the logical place it takes you is that the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate you at the end. So, while the quotes don't directly support IT, they are what makes the universe and themes, and that is the most important supporting aspect of IT.
Exactly.
I don't understand how people can just focus solely on on the 'circumstantial evidence', so to speak. I mean, I'm all for analyzing the location of the breath scene and what not, but surely we cannot ignore the story aspects.
All that destroy-supporting quotes illustrate, is that your allies want the Reapers destroyed, while control and synthesis are almost exclusively supported by your INDOCTRINATED enemies. Why is that so hard to understand for some people?
#42565
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:54
MegumiAzusa
-
- Members
- 4 238 messages
And good fiction has characters which are neither but can be seen as either. One good example: Gaius Baltar. Especially if you look at the episodes with the Baltar trial as it's execution is just one of the best things in that show.BleedingUranium wrote...
estebanus wrote...
Then you might as well put in how TIM advocates controlling the reapers and say, "This helps IT!"BleedingUranium wrote...
I'll sum this us simply; there are two prerequisites for understanding IT:
-An understanding of the characters, lore, and themes of the Mass Effect Universe.
-A belief that Bioware has good enough writers and story tellers to create something as elaborate and in-depth as IT.
If you don't have the former, you'll never understand what IT is, or why it's important and makes sense. If you don't have the latter, you won't believe IT is what actually happened.
Doomsday is trying to compile a list that helps with the former. If you fully understand those things, the logical place it takes you is that the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate you at the end. So, while the quotes don't directly support IT, they are what makes the universe and themes, and that is the most important supporting aspect of IT.
Something I've noticed both you and Megumi not understanding is that that mindset only works in real life. This is a fictional story, and in fictional stories there are good guys and villains.
It's not just "a group of people" that support destroy, it's every single person that isn't indoctrinated. Likewise, every single supporter of Synthesis has been indoctrinated. Most Control supporters are too, but Control is less agreeing with the Reapers, and more being on a fool's errand.
The Reapers are villains, their ideas or methods are bad.
Saren is a villain, his ideas or methods are bad.
TIM is a villain, his ideas or methods are bad.
Anderson is your father figure, his ideas and methods are good.
All of your squadmates and shipmates are your friends, their ideas and methods are good.
This is fiction. This is how it works.
If we go back to ME I would say Wreav is a villain. Does that change you more or less work with him? Is he indoctrinated?
Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 02 novembre 2012 - 05:57 .
#42566
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:54
CmdrShep80
-
- Members
- 1 900 messages
smokingotter1 wrote...
DoomsdayDevice wrote...
snip*
And no, that doesn't prove IT. But nothing proves IT. Things can only support it at best.
Edit:
Also another useful thing about the quotes supporting all choices (although 95% probably support destroy) is that they provide a useful point of reference. If the ending is indoctrination and Shepard is being affected than at a certain even he/she becomes an unreliable resource.
The end choice is up to the player to objectively make the decision for Shepard who's character has been compromised. This is the same Shepard that sacrificed a entire Batarian colony just to slow the reapers down. The player (you) are not given a choice. Now tell me again what choice Cmdr Shepard (not you, Shepard) would make?
*thinks its about me lol
#42567
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:54
plfranke
-
- Members
- 1 404 messages
Didn't Jessica Merizan tell you that?estebanus wrote...
Oh rly? How so?plfranke wrote...
Nothing supports destroy. Synthesis is the canon ending. Estebanus, you should know this better than anyone.
#42568
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:55
estebanus
-
- Members
- 5 987 messages
You don't say.BleedingUranium wrote...
estebanus wrote...
Then you might as well put in how TIM advocates controlling the reapers and say, "This helps IT!"BleedingUranium wrote...
I'll sum this us simply; there are two prerequisites for understanding IT:
-An understanding of the characters, lore, and themes of the Mass Effect Universe.
-A belief that Bioware has good enough writers and story tellers to create something as elaborate and in-depth as IT.
If you don't have the former, you'll never understand what IT is, or why it's important and makes sense. If you don't have the latter, you won't believe IT is what actually happened.
Doomsday is trying to compile a list that helps with the former. If you fully understand those things, the logical place it takes you is that the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate you at the end. So, while the quotes don't directly support IT, they are what makes the universe and themes, and that is the most important supporting aspect of IT.
Something I've noticed both you and Megumi not understanding is that that mindset only works in real life. This is a fictional story, and in fictional stories there are good guys and villains.
It's not just "a group of people" that support destroy, it's every single person that isn't indoctrinated. Likewise, every single supporter of Synthesis has been indoctrinated. Most Control supporters are too, but Control is less agreeing with the Reapers, and more being on a fool's errand.
The Reapers are villains, their ideas or methods are bad.
Saren is a villain, his ideas or methods are bad.
TIM is a villain, his ideas or methods are bad.
Anderson is your father figure, his ideas and methods are good.
All of your squadmates and shipmates are your friends, their ideas and methods are good.
This is fiction. This is how it works.
#42569
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:56
estebanus
-
- Members
- 5 987 messages
Jessica Merizan doesn't know what is and isn't canon one way or the other.plfranke wrote...
Didn't Jessica Merizan tell you that?estebanus wrote...
Oh rly? How so?plfranke wrote...
Nothing supports destroy. Synthesis is the canon ending. Estebanus, you should know this better than anyone.
#42570
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 05:59
BleedingUranium
-
- Members
- 6 118 messages
CmdrShep80 wrote...
smokingotter1 wrote...
DoomsdayDevice wrote...
snip*
And no, that doesn't prove IT. But nothing proves IT. Things can only support it at best.
Edit:
Also another useful thing about the quotes supporting all choices (although 95% probably support destroy) is that they provide a useful point of reference. If the ending is indoctrination and Shepard is being affected than at a certain even he/she becomes an unreliable resource.
The end choice is up to the player to objectively make the decision for Shepard who's character has been compromised. This is the same Shepard that sacrificed a entire Batarian colony just to slow the reapers down. The player (you) are not given a choice. Now tell me again what choice Cmdr Shepard (not you, Shepard) would make?
*thinks its about me lol
What would CmdrShep80 do?
#42572
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 06:01
Guest_SwobyJ_*
Guest_SwobyJ_*
-
- Guests
Lazengan wrote...
byne wrote...
Lazengan wrote...
If IT was indeed intentional, then for what reason? To make future content for Mass effect? Bioware said they are done with the franchise
You do realize they're already announced Mass Effect 4, right?
damn didnt see that
soooo what. The IT theory is to leave you all speculating until the next release?
If Bioware plays on with the IT theory in ME4, it would not be an intentional goal 10 years in the making.
You cannot seriously think they had planned this all along since the begining, or even at the begining of mass effect 3 development
-Bioware has a history of messing with narrative/the main character's perceptions of the world (Revan-KOTOR, Master-Jade Empire).
-Bioware makes game that heavily involves mind control and the main character having a particularly strong will.
-Main character is then exposed to many mind altering experiences throughout trilogy.
You're just laughable.
Seriously, for all we know, the Dark Energy plot idea was Drew's original 'Reaper excuse' that was changed to 'organics vs. synthetics' by Mac Walters, and indoctrination, in some form, was intended from the start.
Or at least ME2-ME3, as Bioware did admit they at LEAST planned indoctrination as a GAMEPLAY MECHANIC, in the Final Hours app...
#42573
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 06:01
Ithurael
-
- Members
- 3 196 messages
estebanus wrote...
Oh rly? How so?plfranke wrote...
Nothing supports destroy. Synthesis is the canon ending. Estebanus, you should know this better than anyone.
It is the ideal solution
#42574
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 06:03
DoomsdayDevice
-
- Members
- 2 357 messages
If quotes from Project Overlord illustrate how someone committed to synthesis in an effort to control the Geth, in order to avoid a destructive war (a "victory without casualties"), and that person ended up being enslaved by the machine instead of the other way round, then I'd say, yes, these quotes support IT.
Because IT believes the endings aren't to be taken at face value. Most of us think the scenarios for control and synthesis aren't quite like how they are depicted in game.
Anyway, I'm off for now.
TTYL guys, and thanks for the support, everybody.
Because IT believes the endings aren't to be taken at face value. Most of us think the scenarios for control and synthesis aren't quite like how they are depicted in game.
Anyway, I'm off for now.
TTYL guys, and thanks for the support, everybody.
Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 02 novembre 2012 - 06:05 .
#42575
Posté 02 novembre 2012 - 06:04
estebanus
-
- Members
- 5 987 messages
It's not.Ithurael wrote...
estebanus wrote...
Oh rly? How so?plfranke wrote...
Nothing supports destroy. Synthesis is the canon ending. Estebanus, you should know this better than anyone.
It is the ideal solution
EDIT: top.
Modifié par estebanus, 02 novembre 2012 - 06:04 .
