Aller au contenu

Photo

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


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

#12426
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

D.Sharrah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

An unsettling idea (if IT isn't true). What if the mediocre ending is a consequence of DLC-based model? I mean it's not fully comprehensible because we don't have the full context which DLCs are supposed to provide. This (the lack of all the details) also allows BioWare to tease fans with "not denying, not proving IT" comments, even though they already now how the ending should be viewed.



You could say that from a certain point of view...

What do you mean?

Modifié par paxxton, 21 août 2012 - 05:40 .


#12427
legaldinho

legaldinho
  • Members
  • 359 messages

paxxton wrote...

An unsettling idea (if IT isn't true). What if the mediocre ending is a consequence of DLC-based model? I mean it's not fully comprehensible because we don't have the full context which DLCs are supposed to provide. This (the lack of all the details) also allows BioWare to tease fans with "not denying, not proving IT" comments, even though they already now how the ending should be viewed.


This is the best extra-textual analysis of the endings. It doesn't make sense of them based on in-game events, lore, etc... But it does make sense of them.

This is why I believe IT is a valid interpretation. I believe an indoctrination interpretation was intended- lots of speculations- but chiefly as a device to keep people talking and interested. And buying DLC. They did not see the furore coming.

Leviathan will provide another piece of the (literal) puzzle, but will not "debunk" IT. It will throw more fuel to the fire, I think.

#12428
D.Sharrah

D.Sharrah
  • Members
  • 1 579 messages

paxxton wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

An unsettling idea (if IT isn't true). What if the mediocre ending is a consequence of DLC-based model? I mean it's not fully comprehensible because we don't have the full context which DLCs are supposed to provide. This (the lack of all the details) also allows BioWare to tease fans with "not denying, not proving IT" comments, even though they already now how the ending should be viewed.



You could say that from a certain point of view...

What do you mean?


It's a quote from a certain cryptic person...thought putting the quotation marks on it was too obvious...

But what I mean, is that there is a part of me that agrees...but another part that thinks this may be where games are evolving - and I am not sure that is a bad thing.  A truly interactive expierence - where the company crafts the conclusion from a conglermation of fan feedback - is that really a bad thing?

#12429
demersel

demersel
  • Members
  • 3 868 messages

JasonSic wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Does anyone see a possibility for IT to play out through refuse?

I do.

By the time EC was released, Bioware was fully aware that a lot of fans, maybe a majority, love the idea of IT and want it in ME3. Just look at this poll.

Back in 2011, before ME3 came out, Casey Hudson said something about after releasing a game, Bioware really, REALLY pays attention to fan feedback. Bioware then creates something similar to what fans want, but not exactly as fans want because it would ruin surprise.

All the dedication us Theorists have put into IT plus that poll Chris Priestly made, among other things, leads me to think that Bioware will make some sort of Indoctrination related ending to ME3.

Since Bioware wouldn't want to create exactly what IT says, they might make refuse the only option to break free of indoctrination, rather than destroy. Refuse was added in EC, long after Bioware knew about IT. This also ties into your theory, the Puzzle Theory, because even after choosing refuse and breaking indoctrination, there is no way to defeat the Reapers conventionally... yet. Leviathan and other future DLC may or may not change that, only time will tell.


The problem with Rufuse being the true ending - it doesn't have breath scene. And they could have easili added that, or changed it so destroy doesn't have it and refuse does. 

Also, ypu're thinking about it from the wrong angle.
We used to have three options, now we have four. 
High EMS destroy has breath scene at the end. 
Before EC people chose destroy for two reasons: 
1 - they truly wanted to destroy the reapers at all costs. 
2 - they liked the other two options even less. 

Now, after the EC release - only people who want to chose destroy, chose it. Others, those who are not commited, or who doesn't like the options given have refuse, which really does nothing. 
Imagine, you struggle through countless hordes of enemies, with one goal - do destroy the reapers, and then, the catalyst says," OK, you've gone so far, you've done so many thing, now you have three options - you can destroy us at all costs, as you wanted; you can try to control us, as illusive man suggested, OR! Power option! You can fuse all organic life in the galaxy with the machines some how! And go - naah,, i don't feel like doing anything. 

Addition of refuse in the EC has two purposes:

1- to make a treat to the community - We do listen you! We give you what you want! (and they did EXACTLY what the community asked for - add an option to tell the catasyst off with an epic speach! Let it be the lose option, but give us an opportunity to go with a blast.

2 - futher test the resolve of true fans, who want to wake up and fight off indoctrination. 

Modifié par demersel, 21 août 2012 - 05:56 .


#12430
ice-vision

ice-vision
  • Members
  • 18 messages

ebuchala wrote...

Ok, so I found the scene where you meet Liara on Mars.

I think that will go right to the part that talks about the crucible and why everyone ended up on Mars at that moment. It's all very vague--Liara said that Hackett asked her to use her resources as Shadow Broker to find something to stop the reapers and she said that by process of elimination, her search led her to Mars. So there's no specific reference to either Glyph or really anyone specific knowing about the crucible before Liara showed up and dug the info up.

*I know I'm behind in the conversation--there was some discussion a few pages back about why they searched the archives for the info to begin with.


Is it ever said how Admiral Hackett knows Liara is the Shadow Broker? 'cause I think that's a pretty big secret to have someone like Hackett know.

On the Liara/Glyph/Finding-Crucuible thing.:
Liara said her agents crossed paths with Cerberus agents which lead to her base being compromised, maybe since Liara is information itself as SB, TIM (after agents told him that Liara went to Mars) thinks maybe she's found something important in the Mars Archives to personally go there herself and so dispatches Eva to find out what was discovered.

#12431
BansheeOwnage

BansheeOwnage
  • Members
  • 11 290 messages
If they had a breath scene in refuse, it would have been so f***ing obvious it's not even funny.

#12432
BansheeOwnage

BansheeOwnage
  • Members
  • 11 290 messages

ice-vision wrote...

Is it ever said how Admiral Hackett knows Liara is the Shadow Broker? 'cause I think that's a pretty big secret to have someone like Hackett know.

On the Liara/Glyph/Finding-Crucuible thing.:
Liara said her agents crossed paths with Cerberus agents which lead to her base being compromised, maybe since Liara is information itself as SB, TIM (after agents told him that Liara went to Mars) thinks maybe she's found something important in the Mars Archives to personally go there herself and so dispatches Eva to find out what was discovered.

Liara being the Shadow Broker is like the Crucible. They're extremely secret things that everyone knows about. Wouldn't read too much into that. But did everyone miss my post yesterday where I confirmed that Hackett's scar is on the wrong side of his face in the Mars vidcom only? It's normal in all the other vidcoms, the QECs, and in person.

Something is definitely up.

Modifié par BansheeOwnage, 21 août 2012 - 06:00 .


#12433
D.Sharrah

D.Sharrah
  • Members
  • 1 579 messages
Anyone want to guess who I was quoting?

#12434
BansheeOwnage

BansheeOwnage
  • Members
  • 11 290 messages

D.Sharrah wrote...

Anyone want to guess who I was quoting?

Posted Image

#12435
D.Sharrah

D.Sharrah
  • Members
  • 1 579 messages

BansheeOwnage wrote...

ice-vision wrote...

Is it ever said how Admiral Hackett knows Liara is the Shadow Broker? 'cause I think that's a pretty big secret to have someone like Hackett know.

On the Liara/Glyph/Finding-Crucuible thing.:
Liara said her agents crossed paths with Cerberus agents which lead to her base being compromised, maybe since Liara is information itself as SB, TIM (after agents told him that Liara went to Mars) thinks maybe she's found something important in the Mars Archives to personally go there herself and so dispatches Eva to find out what was discovered.

Liara being the Shadow Broker is like the Crucible. They're extremely secret things that everyone knows about. Wouldn't read too much into that. But did everyone miss my post yesterday where I confirmed that Hackett's scar is on the wrong side of his face in the Mars vidcom only? It's normal in all the other vidcoms, the QECs, and in person.

Something is definitely up.


Whoah...do you have screenshots?

#12436
D.Sharrah

D.Sharrah
  • Members
  • 1 579 messages

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Anyone want to guess who I was quoting?

Posted Image


Right universe...wrong person...

#12437
BansheeOwnage

BansheeOwnage
  • Members
  • 11 290 messages

D.Sharrah wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Anyone want to guess who I was quoting?

*snip*


Right universe...wrong person...

Oops :/

#12438
demersel

demersel
  • Members
  • 3 868 messages

ice-vision wrote...

ebuchala wrote...

Ok, so I found the scene where you meet Liara on Mars.

I think that will go right to the part that talks about the crucible and why everyone ended up on Mars at that moment. It's all very vague--Liara said that Hackett asked her to use her resources as Shadow Broker to find something to stop the reapers and she said that by process of elimination, her search led her to Mars. So there's no specific reference to either Glyph or really anyone specific knowing about the crucible before Liara showed up and dug the info up.

*I know I'm behind in the conversation--there was some discussion a few pages back about why they searched the archives for the info to begin with.


Is it ever said how Admiral Hackett knows Liara is the Shadow Broker? 'cause I think that's a pretty big secret to have someone like Hackett know.

On the Liara/Glyph/Finding-Crucuible thing.:
Liara said her agents crossed paths with Cerberus agents which lead to her base being compromised, maybe since Liara is information itself as SB, TIM (after agents told him that Liara went to Mars) thinks maybe she's found something important in the Mars Archives to personally go there herself and so dispatches Eva to find out what was discovered.


Later, on the normandy Liara says that it was GLYPH, that found the crucible date, by extensive filtering, and that if it wasn't for him, she would never even knew it was there. 

#12439
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

legaldinho wrote...

paxxton wrote...

An unsettling idea (if IT isn't true). What if the mediocre ending is a consequence of DLC-based model? I mean it's not fully comprehensible because we don't have the full context which DLCs are supposed to provide. This (the lack of all the details) also allows BioWare to tease fans with "not denying, not proving IT" comments, even though they already now how the ending should be viewed.


This is the best extra-textual analysis of the endings. It doesn't make sense of them based on in-game events, lore, etc... But it does make sense of them.

This is why I believe IT is a valid interpretation. I believe an indoctrination interpretation was intended- lots of speculations- but chiefly as a device to keep people talking and interested. And buying DLC. They did not see the furore coming.

Leviathan will provide another piece of the (literal) puzzle, but will not "debunk" IT. It will throw more fuel to the fire, I think.

I still hope for IT to be true. What I wrote above is a more business-centric, if you will, explanation for why ME3 is the way it is. The DLC-based dev model allows for story fragmentation which may result in obscuring important details until a later time.

#12440
D.Sharrah

D.Sharrah
  • Members
  • 1 579 messages

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Anyone want to guess who I was quoting?

*snip*


Right universe...wrong person...

Oops :/


No reason for the oops...impressive that you got the right universe - one last hint: think sequel.

#12441
spotlessvoid

spotlessvoid
  • Members
  • 3 497 messages
D Sharrah

Yes I think it's a bad thing. I pay them to tell me a story. I'm not coming up with the damn ending for them. If they want to do alternative endings via dlc, great. But the story needs to come complete

Let me add that I'm not referring to the potentially ground breaking meta indoctrination mechanism. They'd be off the hook on that

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 21 août 2012 - 06:23 .


#12442
BansheeOwnage

BansheeOwnage
  • Members
  • 11 290 messages

D.Sharrah wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Liara being the Shadow Broker is like the Crucible. They're extremely secret things that everyone knows about. Wouldn't read too much into that. But did everyone miss my post yesterday where I confirmed that Hackett's scar is on the wrong side of his face in the Mars vidcom only? It's normal in all the other vidcoms, the QECs, and in person.

Something is definitely up.


Whoah...do you have screenshots?

Here's Hackett in person.
Posted Image
Here is where his scar is mirrored.

Here is the same vidcom setup from a random N7 mission with the scar back to normal.
His voice also sounds a bit off on Mars but that could be nothing.

#12443
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

D.Sharrah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

An unsettling idea (if IT isn't true). What if the mediocre ending is a consequence of DLC-based model? I mean it's not fully comprehensible because we don't have the full context which DLCs are supposed to provide. This (the lack of all the details) also allows BioWare to tease fans with "not denying, not proving IT" comments, even though they already now how the ending should be viewed.



You could say that from a certain point of view...

What do you mean?


It's a quote from a certain cryptic person...thought putting the quotation marks on it was too obvious...

But what I mean, is that there is a part of me that agrees...but another part that thinks this may be where games are evolving - and I am not sure that is a bad thing.  A truly interactive expierence - where the company crafts the conclusion from a conglermation of fan feedback - is that really a bad thing?

IMO the DLC-based model is not about getting fan feedback and crafting the game accordingly. It's more about fragmentation of the dev process (separating a game into well-defined chunks which can be developed and released separately). Plus, you can charge for each DLC (in addition to the base game) which boosts revenues.

Modifié par paxxton, 21 août 2012 - 06:11 .


#12444
ice-vision

ice-vision
  • Members
  • 18 messages

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Liara being the Shadow Broker is like the Crucible. They're extremely secret things that everyone knows about. Wouldn't read too much into that. But did everyone miss my post yesterday where I confirmed that Hackett's scar is on the wrong side of his face in the Mars vidcom only? It's normal in all the other vidcoms, the QECs, and in person.

Something is definitely up.


True.

Yeah, the mirrored Hackett is definately suspect, but it would have been a massive reveal in the debriefing when we told him that," it was a good call to send us to the Archives" and he repies with, "I never told you to go to Mars"

#12445
demersel

demersel
  • Members
  • 3 868 messages

paxxton wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

paxxton wrote...

An unsettling idea (if IT isn't true). What if the mediocre ending is a consequence of DLC-based model? I mean it's not fully comprehensible because we don't have the full context which DLCs are supposed to provide. This (the lack of all the details) also allows BioWare to tease fans with "not denying, not proving IT" comments, even though they already now how the ending should be viewed.


This is the best extra-textual analysis of the endings. It doesn't make sense of them based on in-game events, lore, etc... But it does make sense of them.

This is why I believe IT is a valid interpretation. I believe an indoctrination interpretation was intended- lots of speculations- but chiefly as a device to keep people talking and interested. And buying DLC. They did not see the furore coming.

Leviathan will provide another piece of the (literal) puzzle, but will not "debunk" IT. It will throw more fuel to the fire, I think.

I still hope for IT to be true. What I wrote above is a more business-centric, if you will, explanation for why ME3 is the way it is. The DLC-based dev model allows for story fragmentation which may result in obscuring important details until a later time.


Well, they are not the first to employ this business model. And it is not even a first time they do that - The DLC for ME2 each also provide crucial parts to the story, especially LOtSB and Arrival.   Why not make DLC even more story relevant - they sell you main game as Pilot of sorts - if you like it you can buy new episodes later, and you won't feel as if they are tucked on, or just speculation or useless, no they will continue the story you love, or give you a new angle on it. If you don't like the pilot - the main game you just don't buy DLC. that way everyone gets what he wants. 

Few years ago game industry already tryied to adapt episodic business model  - Valve did it with Half-life's two add'ons. and there also was Sin Episodes. Also other developers work on episodic model - back to the future, sam and max etc. 

#12446
Lokanaiya

Lokanaiya
  • Members
  • 685 messages

D.Sharrah wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Anyone want to guess who I was quoting?

*snip*


Right universe...wrong person...

Oops :/


No reason for the oops...impressive that you got the right universe - one last hint: think sequel.


Yoda, he says "Truth that is, from a certain point of view" or something along those lines in response to Luke's accusation that he said that Vader killed his father.

#12447
demersel

demersel
  • Members
  • 3 868 messages

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Liara being the Shadow Broker is like the Crucible. They're extremely secret things that everyone knows about. Wouldn't read too much into that. But did everyone miss my post yesterday where I confirmed that Hackett's scar is on the wrong side of his face in the Mars vidcom only? It's normal in all the other vidcoms, the QECs, and in person.

Something is definitely up.


Whoah...do you have screenshots?

Here's Hackett in person.
Posted Image
Here is where his scar is mirrored.

Here is the same vidcom setup from a random N7 mission with the scar back to normal.
His voice also sounds a bit off on Mars but that could be nothing.


WOW!!! Mind = blown. I knew there was something up with the mars mission!  And GLYPH is Evil! But that is no secret. 

we really need to search the game for any other instanses where something is mirrored. That mirrored artwork of Anderson might not be so random after all!

Modifié par demersel, 21 août 2012 - 06:32 .


#12448
BansheeOwnage

BansheeOwnage
  • Members
  • 11 290 messages

demersel wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

Liara being the Shadow Broker is like the Crucible. They're extremely secret things that everyone knows about. Wouldn't read too much into that. But did everyone miss my post yesterday where I confirmed that Hackett's scar is on the wrong side of his face in the Mars vidcom only? It's normal in all the other vidcoms, the QECs, and in person.

Something is definitely up.


Whoah...do you have screenshots?

Here's Hackett in person.
Posted Image
Here is where his scar is mirrored.

Here is the same vidcom setup from a random N7 mission with the scar back to normal.
His voice also sounds a bit off on Mars but that could be nothing.


WOW!!! Mind = blown. I knew there was something up with the mars mission!  And GLYPH is Evil! But that is no secret. 

Combined with this this is really starting to pick up steam!

#12449
BansheeOwnage

BansheeOwnage
  • Members
  • 11 290 messages
I approve of all the new MP balance changes!

:D

#12450
jojon2se

jojon2se
  • Members
  • 1 018 messages

smokingotter1 wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

question regarding control

scenario one: Starchild is in full control of the Reapers yet refuses to simply follow Shepards orders, instead forcing his annihilation as a human being. Clearly then he isn't benevolent towards Shepard

scenario two: Starchild is not in full control of the Reapers and cannot simply execute Shepards commands. In that case how these he even know control can work, since he can'teven control them


Also this from awhile ago I posted (with current edits), analysis of the control panels:

Posted Image

Shepard gets "control" of the reapers by grabing on to the control panels. My concern: why are there four handles?

1.First Shepard can't take full control of the reaper no matter how hard he tries. He does not have four hands. This hints that taking full control of the reapers is a impossible task, even for Shepard.
2. Second again we see doubling implying control is an illusion.
3. The positioning of the higher handles that Shepard is not grabing might imply subordination to the higher ups? If Shepard wants to take control wouldn't it be symbolic for him to grab the higher ones, not the lower ones?
4. Why the **** is there an active current going through controls? Implies a trap?

Symbolism! :wizard:


I can't resist going off topic, leaving the symbolism and metaphysics aside, and write a rather boring, dry and irrelevant techno-babble post, given this half-opportunity. Sorry - should be easy to ignore... :P

Let's, for the time being, say that the Ending-o-tron 3000 apparatus is real, that it looks just the way we see it and that Shepard is indeed there and interacting with it...

In this case, I'd say that the "control handles" are, in truth, exactly what they look like; Spark gap electrodes.

Why are they there, then?

-Well, there was one forumite (Can't remember the guy's handle, off the top of my head), who posited that the whole assembly, while affixed to the Citadel, is actually a new feature, which was brought by the Crucible and transferred to the Citadel during the docking procedure.

Let's assume this is true. Then let's try to come up with a guess as to what sort of function it could be there to fill.
The guy had an idea, which slips my mind, but for my part, I'd imagine what seems to me the simplest and most obvious one: It's an alignment device; there to "funnel" the beam, so that it stays centered.

It would putatively do this simply through some sort of Mass Effect equivalent of induction, with the beam inducing an opposing and repelling mass effect field in any sector of the alignment ring, that it might be straying towards. In addition to affecting the position of the beam directly, the force would extend up along it and physically correct the alignment of the entire Crucible, by "pushing" against its abutments (i.e. the four sparkly electrodes).

Any induced power that is too great for the aperture's buffer resistors to handle, would be diverted and grounded through the spark gap. The only thing you'd accomplish by touching it, would be to electrocute yourself.

The red tube could be part of a coolant circulation system for the eezo coil(s), or even house them, maybe we are dealing with a pipe toroid, filled with a suspension of eezo particles -- Either way, destroying it, would render the apparatus inoperable and result in the beam wandering around, potentially damaging both the Citadel and the Crucible and coming to "bounce" through any relay conduit and exit non-axially, like a signal in an optical fiber, rather than travelling along its core.

Phew... That should be enough trekkie-ism for the entire week. :P