80611 réponses à ce sujet

[estebanus]

[quote]demersel wrote...

[quote]estebanus wrote...

Why is Hackett talking in the end?
[/quote]uhm... Because Hackett represents the destroy choice? How's that so hard to understand?
[/quote]

Hackett is giving a Destroy narration, because supposedly, he's the only one alive, to that we know, with the authority to give it.  (in control - shepard is dead but becomes the mind of reapers, so it is his voice.)
In synthethis Shepard is dead, but EDI is alive - and out of shapard's closest circle she seems as if shehas the most to say on the subject (if legion was alive it would be him)
In destroy everyone is dead, including shepard, and EDI, and the normandy is stranded annd cut off for a long time, anderson is dead, so it leaves only hackett alive, that we know about. 

[/quote][/quote]Pretty much, yeah.

I also think it's because of all the end choices, destroy represents loyalty. Loyalty to Hackett, the alliance, and your allies. To me, it would follow that Shepard's commander, fellow soldier and mentor would narrate the destroy choice, considering you indeed did get the job done, just as Hackett told you to.

Control... Well, the new catalyst's sudden change of Shepard kinda symbolizes selfishness, doesn't it? That thing you see there isn't Shepard anymore, nor anything like him/her. This is most obvious when you hear it praise itself as the light that will lead life into the heavens("I will lead the many into a future greater than any of them could imagine").

As for Synthesis... Well, I can kinda see why that's supposed to be EDI. It is obviously selfish, wanting to experience the joy of life more than wanting to end the reaper threat once and for all.

EDIT: I'm on top!

Modifié par estebanus, 04 septembre 2012 - 04:26 .

[demersel]

DarthSliver wrote...

demersel wrote...

Big G13 wrote...
TOM (The Other Menace) is the beuraucrat behind the throne. LOL

yes. Exactly my point. And with the PR puppet (Harbinger) taken out of the picture he will have to step out of his comfort zone (the shadows) and face you directly. 

He was also the who attacked shepard in the prologe - Destroyed the admiral board meeting chamber, and shot beams at shepard, and the buildin he was in. Also he was the one who projected the vent kid into shepards brain in the first place. 

Im pretty sure it was that Reaper you saw coming down on the city that shot the building, you know the one you see walking around. IT is a good theory but its also bad because it really does cause people to things out their arse  like this beginning scene just to try and validate their own theory.

Take your time, and read some more. Maybe then you'll be able to understand what was the particular conversation ou commented on all about. 

[estebanus]

masseffect420 wrote...

estebanus wrote...

masseffect420 wrote...

estebanus wrote...

masseffect420 wrote...Indoctrination Theory is not real, it was not a dream, it is a attempt to Indoctrinat your mind and to Mind rape you! Grow up live with the ending we got and be happy!

That's a damning accusation. Got anything to back that up? If not, your statement is nothing but slander, which is highly frowned upon in civilized society. You like considering yourself civilized, right? Well, then I'd like to request you'd act accordingly.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fLEEHhnBgAWhy is Hackett talking in the end?

uhm... Because Hackett represents the destroy choice? How's that so hard to understand? 

Ok, why doesn't shepdog wake up in bed and say WOW that was a bad dream???!☢ ☢ ☢ ☢ ☢ ☣ ☣ ☣ ☣ ☣ ☣ ☣ 

Because that would outright confirm IT, which obviously wouldn't be BioWare's intention?
Haven't you noticed by now that they want to keep the speculations ongoing? "Shepard could be dead, but could also be alive", "IT is a valid interpretation", "There is no canon ending", etc.

If this doesn't scream "Speculations", then I dunno what would.

[GethPrimeMKII]

Ithurael wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

 Well, this might help ease the sting of Jessica's comments: http://twitter.com/B...970473493831681

IT is a valid interpretation. IT is as valid as the 'brown ending' or the face value ending.

One of the problems arises when people believe that the IT is actually canon - that the ending was really a hallucination and there is more to come.

Merizan, Priestly, and Ackland have all stated there is no more to come. If your interpretation of IT requires more content after the breath scene you will be sadly disappointed.

Any interpretation is valid to the person to whom it belongs. Bioware has shown us how they want to end the series. We can interpret that in any way we want, but that is where it has to end as there is no more content down the road. Bioware ended Mass Effect with RGB. We can see that anyway we want but it doesn't change the established canon of what bioware presented.

IT draws all of its evidence from what is already there in the games, books, and comics. Its validity does not depend on what may or may not be released. 

[demersel]

estebanus wrote...
***snip***

also EDI giving a Synthesis narration would be as a reward for a playe for picking synthesis - synthesys is for somebody who doesn't want control, because they don't  believe in it, but at the same time doesn't want destroy, cause it kills off EDI and the geth. You then pick synthesis - and whadoyaknow - it is EDI who narrates it for you, since you love her so much, you wouldn't choose destroy because it kills her (it can't be the geth, since after legions death, you don't know any geth personally).

all this further prooves that the slide show and narration is also made up only from the shepards own memories, and is just a figment of his mind - and still part of the hallucination. 

[Rifneno]

What I don't get is how so many people think synthesis would make everyone equal in everyone's eyes. Krogans and salarians will all get along because they both have circuits in their pubes now, for some reason?

[Ithurael]

GethPrimeMKII wrote...


IT draws all of its evidence from what is already there in the games, books, and comics. Its validity does not depend on what may or may not be released. 

That part I know. And it is valid and does not depend on anything to be valid. Do you get what I'm saying? IT is an interpretation of the endings - drawing from the lore and the events the player interprets the ending via IT, face value, other.

The thing I was trying to get across is that there is no more post ending content planned for ME3 (no post breath dlc or shep wakes up dlc) Bioware stated that they believe that IT is valid view of the endings, but they are not going to move in that direction - keeping to the RGB ending instead.

This doesn't invalidate IT Dream or Con. But it may put some stipulations on IT Dream, as there will be no more ME3 content to show what happens after the breath scene. ME4 - maybe. But overall, bioware's vision was not to move in the direction of IT as the ending. Though IT is still a clever interpretation and view - even if bioware is not going in that direction.

[demersel]

Every human bilogically is exactly the same, yet humans don't even get along with eachother.

[demersel]

Ithurael wrote...

This doesn't invalidate IT Dream or Con. But it may put some stipulations on IT Dream, as there will be no more ME3 content to show what happens after the breath scene. ME4 - maybe. But overall, bioware's vision was not to move in the direction of IT as the ending. Though IT is still a clever interpretation and view - even if bioware is not going in that direction.

IT-con is just pile of mindless rumlings. 

[estebanus]

Rifneno wrote...

What I don't get is how so many people think synthesis would make everyone equal in everyone's eyes. Krogans and salarians will all get along because they both have circuits in their pubes now, for some reason?

Because some idiots don't know what a synthesis is. And that which we see in ME3 is not the result of a technological singularity, nor will it ever be.
A synthesis would not change DNA, it would not cause peace between anyone, it won't make us understand synthetic life better, and it sure as hell won't create a utopia where everyone is equal(bleugh, communism). Not only is that impossibly, but it goes against the very nature of life itself, which is conflict.

[Home run MF]

demersel wrote...

estebanus wrote...
***snip***

also EDI giving a Synthesis narration would be as a reward for a playe for picking synthesis - synthesys is for somebody who doesn't want control, because they don't  believe in it, but at the same time doesn't want destroy, cause it kills off EDI and the geth. You then pick synthesis - and whadoyaknow - it is EDI who narrates it for you, since you love her so much, you wouldn't choose destroy because it kills her (it can't be the geth, since after legions death, you don't know any geth personally).

all this further prooves that the slide show and narration is also made up only from the shepards own memories, and is just a figment of his mind - and still part of the hallucination. 

Also the Normandy pick up scene could add up to that point of view, since there is people who think the indoctrination attempt started in the transport crash. So the people he/she cares about are safe and out of the picture.

[Rifneno]

Ithurael wrote...

GethPrimeMKII wrote...


IT draws all of its evidence from what is already there in the games, books, and comics. Its validity does not depend on what may or may not be released. 

That part I know. And it is valid and does not depend on anything to be valid. Do you get what I'm saying? IT is an interpretation of the endings - drawing from the lore and the events the player interprets the ending via IT, face value, other.

The thing I was trying to get across is that there is no more post ending content planned for ME3 (no post breath dlc or shep wakes up dlc) Bioware stated that they believe that IT is valid view of the endings, but they are not going to move in that direction - keeping to the RGB ending instead.

This doesn't invalidate IT Dream or Con. But it may put some stipulations on IT Dream, as there will be no more ME3 content to show what happens after the breath scene. ME4 - maybe. But overall, bioware's vision was not to move in the direction of IT as the ending. Though IT is still a clever interpretation and view - even if bioware is not going in that direction.

Have you seen the list of other things they told us they would or wouldn't do that were lies?

[estebanus]

demersel wrote...

Every human bilogically is exactly the same, yet humans don't even get along with eachother.

That's because human biology and nature isn't one and the same thing.

[DarthSliver]

demersel wrote...

DarthSliver wrote...

demersel wrote...

Big G13 wrote...
TOM (The Other Menace) is the beuraucrat behind the throne. LOL

yes. Exactly my point. And with the PR puppet (Harbinger) taken out of the picture he will have to step out of his comfort zone (the shadows) and face you directly. 

He was also the who attacked shepard in the prologe - Destroyed the admiral board meeting chamber, and shot beams at shepard, and the buildin he was in. Also he was the one who projected the vent kid into shepards brain in the first place. 

Im pretty sure it was that Reaper you saw coming down on the city that shot the building, you know the one you see walking around. IT is a good theory but its also bad because it really does cause people to things out their arse  like this beginning scene just to try and validate their own theory.

Take your time, and read some more. Maybe then you'll be able to understand what was the particular conversation ou commented on all about. 

Eh well I just saw you trying to point Harbinger as the one shooting the Admiral Board when we clearly see a Reaper come down on the city from the sky, its also the same one you see walking around as you go along the building. When it comes to the house part with the husk, its either that same Reaper or a new one that shot that building. But Harbinger is different he has glowing yellow eyes not normal for other Reapers.

As for Harbinger not shooting the Normandy in the EC when it was picked up, saw another person mention it, that is plain and simple it was an oversight. Bioware fixed one mistake with another one simple as that, only jokes about Harby's love for Shepard can fix that 

[demersel]

Home run MF wrote...

Also the Normandy pick up scene could add up to that point of view, since there is people who think the indoctrination attempt started in the transport crash. So that he would think that the people he/she cares about are safe and out of the picture.

There. Fixed it for you. 

[GethPrimeMKII]

The very least of a synthesized galaxy's problems would be the stagnation of culture and progress much like what Mordin observed with the Collectors.

And if everything is synthesized to create a new dna, wouldn't all races and synthetics come out looking exactly the same? Its hardly believable that the peak of evolution is us, exactly as we are now, except with glowin green viens and eyes. 

Modifié par GethPrimeMKII, 04 septembre 2012 - 04:46 .

[BatmanTurian]

masseffect420 wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

masseffect420 wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

TSA_383 wrote...
https://twitter.com/...735454584833Hah

Ain't that the frakking truth?  If they seriously thought that was a good way to end this great series, they were sadly mistaken.

You people are just super space out worst than being on drugs!Go out, get life, have fun, get a man or women and have kids also buy more Bioware and EA games!

Says the guy talking to us on a game board.

BatmanTurian wrote...
*fingers in ears*LALALALA LA LALA LALALALALA LALALALALALA LALALA LALA

This comes from a 50 old guy with Batman in name?
:pinched::pinched::pinched::pinched::devil::devil::bandit::bandit::O

I'm 32 and married, troll. The reference is to Garrus taking the name Arcangel in Omega. if you'd played the games you'd know that.


Also the LALALA had to do with Hangman. You're not the center of the universe.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 04 septembre 2012 - 04:48 .

[masseffect420]

[quote]estebanus wrote...
[quote]masseffect420 wrote...
[quote]BatmanTurian wrote...
[quote]masseffect420 wrote...
[quote]Dwailing wrote...
[quote]TSA_383 wrote...
https://twitter.com/...735454584833Hah[/quote]Ain't that the frakking truth?  If they seriously thought that was a good way to end this great series, they were sadly mistaken.[/quote]
You people are just super space out worst than being on drugs!Go out, get life, have fun, get a man or women and have kids also buy more Bioware and EA games![/quote]
Says the guy talking to us on a game board.[/quote]
[quote]BatmanTurian wrote...
*fingers in ears*LALALALA LA LALA LALALALALA LALALALALALA LALALA LALA  [quote]This comes from a 50 old guy with Batman in name?[/quote]
Batman is a bigger classic than Mass Effect ever will be, but your username is nothing but the title of the video game itself. His statement is essentially the same as what you've been doing the whole damn time. You've been sticking your fingers in your ears, calling everyone here stupid or on drugs. This just proves that something must be fundamentally wrong with your psyche, or your perception of reality.
[/quote]
Batman is cool as H ELL and is a classic. As for my screen name, it's the Mass Effect 3 Forums. If guy's keep talking about this for years to come maybe Mass Effect 4 will be out. Their is nothing Fundamentally wrong with me. Bat boy was the one with his Fingers in his ears so you were wrong learn how to read ok!

[demersel]

Yes, let's not use such hursh language as "Synthesis" in here anymore. It is not called for. Swearing like that might get this thread locked.

[Rifneno]

BatmanTurian wrote...

I'm 32 and married, troll. The reference is to Garrus taking the name Arcangel in Omega. if you'd play the games you'd know that.

The reason the Illusive Man wants to control the Reapers is that he thinks he's finally found something that could protect him from Garrus Vakarian.  ...  He's wrong.

[Ithurael]

Rifneno wrote...


Have you seen the list of other things they told us they would or wouldn't do that were lies?

Whether or not they would or wouldn't lie is subjective. Just because MaCasey lied about almost the entire game doesn't mean that everyone in bioware lies LOL. Bioware isn't a law firm!

Besides, I think [My opinion] they just do not want to get caught lying anymore. Or at least they want to be more direct with the fanbase - which I for one greatly appreciate. This entire incident came out of the fact that bioware may have 'hyped" ME3 a bit too much (I call it Molyneux syndrome). Now, they have to be more direct with the fan base to avoid being mis quoted or mis-understood.

Ms. Merizan's tweet string here is pretty direct.
twitter.com/sirj87/status/240644694235807744

"Shepard waking up is not saved for a future game either. This is the end
of Shepard. What you saw is all you'll get on the matter."

"No "Shep wakes up" DLC FYI. If your version of IT relies on future DLC,
your interpretation is not our intent. The end is the end."

Just because bioware won't make a post breath future DLC where shepard wakes up does not invalidate your interpretation. It just means Bioware will not capitalize on IT.

:wizard:

[DarthSliver]

I said this once and ill say it again, I like IT and how it looks like the theory can be true. But there is one flaw in the Theory i dont think anyone of you guys accounted it for, it would mean Bioware sold us a game without an ending and that is probably the one reason why IT will just be a theory. I like the whole of ME3 until the end but a complete remake of the game is probably the only thing that can truly fix the endings of ME3.

[Mikey-]

I've been a long time lurker of these boards, this thread in particular because I find the Indoctrination Theory fascinating... so, hello!

Whether or not the theory proves to be true, I love it as an interpretation of the ending. I always choose Destroy because in my head-canon at least, Shepard doesn't believe a word of the Starchild's nonsense. EDI and the Geth are fine.

[Big G13]

DarthSliver wrote...

demersel wrote...

DarthSliver wrote...

demersel wrote...

Big G13 wrote...
TOM (The Other Menace) is the beuraucrat behind the throne. LOL

yes. Exactly my point. And with the PR puppet (Harbinger) taken out of the picture he will have to step out of his comfort zone (the shadows) and face you directly. 

He was also the who attacked shepard in the prologe - Destroyed the admiral board meeting chamber, and shot beams at shepard, and the buildin he was in. Also he was the one who projected the vent kid into shepards brain in the first place. 

Im pretty sure it was that Reaper you saw coming down on the city that shot the building, you know the one you see walking around. IT is a good theory but its also bad because it really does cause people to things out their arse  like this beginning scene just to try and validate their own theory.

Take your time, and read some more. Maybe then you'll be able to understand what was the particular conversation ou commented on all about. 

Eh well I just saw you trying to point Harbinger as the one shooting the Admiral Board when we clearly see a Reaper come down on the city from the sky, its also the same one you see walking around as you go along the building. When it comes to the house part with the husk, its either that same Reaper or a new one that shot that building. But Harbinger is different he has glowing yellow eyes not normal for other Reapers.

As for Harbinger not shooting the Normandy in the EC when it was picked up, saw another person mention it, that is plain and simple it was an oversight. Bioware fixed one mistake with another one simple as that, only jokes about Harby's love for Shepard can fix that 

yeah, you DO have a sense of humor.

[BatmanTurian]

DarthSliver wrote...

I said this once and ill say it again, I like IT and how it looks like the theory can be true. But there is one flaw in the Theory i dont think anyone of you guys accounted it for, it would mean Bioware sold us a game without an ending and that is probably the one reason why IT will just be a theory. I like the whole of ME3 until the end but a complete remake of the game is probably the only thing that can truly fix the endings of ME3.

Yeah, we've heard this argument before. It's not a flaw, it's a feature. Get over it.