1238 réponses à ce sujet

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Hearing voices =/= indoctrination. Ask any real life PTSD affected soldier. Chances are, they too will hear voices. It's sad but it happens. PTSD can affect a person in strange ways.

The thing about IT's 'evidence' is that the conclusion that Shepard is indoctrinated came first and people took things from the game that fitted the theory and used it as evidence while leaving out things that contradicts it.

Bioware does want us to have different interpretation (Lots of speculations for everybody!) But they made a mistake by making it too ambiguous. Every interpreatation is valid but 'evidence' for a particular theory born out of the mistake of too much ambiguity does not make it 'fact'. Just a theory that you are free to believe in. As long as the OP can respect that, we should be fine. But judging by the hostile attitude which he has had since pretty much the begining of this thread, ...

[megamacka]

I sincerely doubt that PTSD is what they had in mind for the last 5 minutes of the game. Considering that shepard has also been having these dreams with the starbrat included in them. The evidence for indoctrination taking place is not '' mistakes '' that is effects put there on purpose. Neither are they hiding the starbrats goals, especially not with the upcoming Leviathan that will make control / synthesis even more questionable ( I have linked it multiple times ). Also I hardly doubt that the indoctrination theory came before the evidence. I for one ALWAYS questioned the starbrat and his intentions and then ofcourse when I went back I noitced more and more flaws in his logics and goals. But that guy on youtube '' Clevernoob'' is pretty full of ****. A LOT of his evidence .... Are not evidence at all just laziness and flaws in the design.

But now I gotta go outdoors for a few hours. This horrid wait for GW2 is getting out of hand. Spending hours and hours on forums...

Modifié par megamacka, 19 août 2012 - 01:32 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Not the last 5 minutes. The whole game. The last 5 minutes were probably meant to be real but the 'symptoms' of indoctrination like the dreams can also be explained by PTSD. Now I'm not saying that PTSD is the only explanation. It is an interpretation. IT is still valid as an interpretation too.

'It was all just a dream' This is usually one of the single biggest cop outs in media history so that the writers can do wild stuff but still maintain status quo. However, the last 10 minutes of ME3 were so bad that many felt it all being dream was a better ending. You still see many demotivational posters with the text "Still a better ending than Mass Effect 3" The 'evidence' was put together later when people started taking it more seriously.

[Hannah Montana]

PTSD? no my Shepard was fine.
A hateful bastard she was, she smiled when that shuttle blew up.
She doesn't even think he was real, looking back.

Modifié par Hannah Montana, 19 août 2012 - 01:57 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

^That's fine

However, no matter how slice it, Shepard displays many symptoms of PTSD. At many points, all dialouge options are extremely cynical, a classic symptom of PTSD.

I'm not saying it's the only explanation. It's just one of the many.

[Wayning_Star]

Hannah Montana wrote...

PTSD? no my Shepard was fine.
A hateful bastard she was, she smiled when that shuttle blew up.
She doesn't even think he was real, looking back.

Indoctrination DLC leaked to public.

[Hannah Montana]

Sounds like Indoctrination to me.
She is confused herself, she is in darkness now and wonders if she will wake up. 

[Wayning_Star]

Hannah Montana wrote...

Sounds like Indoctrination to me.
She is confused herself, she is in darkness now and wonders if she will wake up. 

why wake up, dreams are much better when engineered, through logic and exercisable reitteration. She's actually just communing with dark matter on a level so high, we cannot fathom it's reality.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Yeah, she's high

[Ausnuk]

When I played it the first time I really thought they were trying to indoctrinate me the gamer when I took the magic elevator up. I was struck by the loss of interactions and dialogue choices. I thought here are three choices two of which are ones my enemy has been wanting to do (Saren, TIM). I went with destroy because I felt this catalyst was lying to me and no, matter the cost I would stop them. When it went through the cut scene I was starting to lose hope than out of nowhere rubble, then a N& chest piece than a breathe then credits. I was so shocked at that point I thought WTF where am I, where the rest of the game.

I looked back and thought they had it all they had to do was have you look up at the console you collapse at and push a button or something but no nothing. I thought how cool would that of been if after Control or Synthesis you see your body at the console and you get up all eye glowing and face looking like TIM and just turn around and walk over Andersons dead body and go to cut scene of the reapers cleaning up and going WTF I cant believe after all this they tricked me into giving in to the Reapers.

That’s my head canon until the EC. Now I stick with that because for me all the EC does is well tell me that maybe that’s not what they were going for. It still is a valid interpretation IT but in the end no matter what you think happened they still were unable to finish Sherpards and indeed your story off properly.

[Wayning_Star]

Ausnuk wrote...

When I played it the first time I really thought they were trying to indoctrinate me the gamer when I took the magic elevator up. I was struck by the loss of interactions and dialogue choices. I thought here are three choices two of which are ones my enemy has been wanting to do (Saren, TIM). I went with destroy because I felt this catalyst was lying to me and no, matter the cost I would stop them. When it went through the cut scene I was starting to lose hope than out of nowhere rubble, then a N& chest piece than a breathe then credits. I was so shocked at that point I thought WTF where am I, where the rest of the game.

I looked back and thought they had it all they had to do was have you look up at the console you collapse at and push a button or something but no nothing. I thought how cool would that of been if after Control or Synthesis you see your body at the console and you get up all eye glowing and face looking like TIM and just turn around and walk over Andersons dead body and go to cut scene of the reapers cleaning up and going WTF I cant believe after all this they tricked me into giving in to the Reapers.

That’s my head canon until the EC. Now I stick with that because for me all the EC does is well tell me that maybe that’s not what they were going for. It still is a valid interpretation IT but in the end no matter what you think happened they still were unable to finish Sherpards and indeed your story off properly.

The IT always came at me as reinventing the wheel. The gist being somehow the whole thing was Shep being 'controlled' somehow from the first encounter with the beacon, to be increased as his exposure to reaper tech. To finish by making the endings all made up just to make the catalyst the Prime Mover of the decision making process.
( that is having the catalyst setting on his throne in the citadel, stamping another 'notch' on his computer case with one more civilization downed for the pattern/cycle...)

really tho, they'd have to have some form of communictions with organics in place, even if they're intention was to perpetuation of the pattern/cycle?

[Ausnuk]

Dont get me wrong I saw it this way but have no idea if they really wanted me to see it this way. The OP has gone into alot more thought than I needed to think on that level. It never felt right in the end because it never gave me a conclusion that fit. Had I chose the other endings I might have felt something different but I did not. Maybe that is my problem, I picked destroy first go. I accept it might not be their intention to begin with but this is no magic act were faith and wonder can substane you. It is at its core a story and as such I was hoping for a fantastic end to a great trilogy. What I got was not that.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Perhaps you should stop with the attitude. Your attitude is typical of internet griefers. Just a helpful suggestion. And until then, I'm done.

Now watch as you use this as 'evidence' of me giving up. Again.

Evidence? It's proof. You HAVE given up. This is evident in your failure to provide a plausible reason for Shepard to trust the Reapers.

Disagree with my thesis? Fine. Give me one good reason why Shepard would trust the Reapers. Just one reason. Just one teenie tiny itsy bitsy teenie weenie lil reason.

*room in absolute silence*

[megamacka]

Damn you jack and your headcanon PTSD! No but seriously, ever thought that maybe indoctrination was inspired by PTSD a bit? Some of the PTSD signs fit well with indoctrination anyway. Only that one is a humongous part of the ME series and one is not.

This theory isn't about the last five minutes not being real.... The last five minutes are very real....I don't understand why you brought up '' it was just a dream '' this is not the same indoctrination theory. The whole '' Clever '' noob IT is just pure stupido. '' Omg shep is just dreaming and naow bioware will give us a new ending with new gameplay QQ '' ..... Not going to happen, sowwy.

[megamacka]

oh hewwooo, Are u a reaperz?

Modifié par megamacka, 19 août 2012 - 05:54 .

[The Twilight God]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Why does this thread still exist? You ITers already have your own thread. Why don't you post this there? After all this is just a repetition of everything I've already seen and read in the IT thread(s).

If this is the "IT thread(s)" why are you surprised?

The "hallucination" thread isn't a thread. It's a chat room. I tried to discuss it but so many people are making so many inane chatty posts every sec it's pointless. I'm not searching through 30 pages to find replies to stuff I posted a day earlier.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 19 août 2012 - 06:02 .

[Fixers0]

Nice Write up!

[Ranger Jack Walker]

megamacka wrote...

Damn you jack and your headcanon PTSD! No but seriously, ever thought that maybe indoctrination was inspired by PTSD a bit? Some of the PTSD signs fit well with indoctrination anyway. Only that one is a humongous part of the ME series and one is not.

This theory isn't about the last five minutes not being real.... The last five minutes are very real....I don't understand why you brought up '' it was just a dream '' this is not the same indoctrination theory. The whole '' Clever '' noob IT is just pure stupido. '' Omg shep is just dreaming and naow bioware will give us a new ending with new gameplay QQ '' ..... Not going to happen, sowwy.

PTSD is just another explanation for the dreams. Let's leave it at that.

And the OP comes along to ruin good discussion. Why is that not surprising...


I'll say it again. No matter how you slice it, choosing destroy is still trusting the catalsyt. Not complete trust as Control and Synthesis requires but a little trust just the same. The catalyst makes it far too easy for Shepard to choose destroy. I find it hard to believe he is trying to stop you from choosing Destroy. The only remotely negative thing he says about Destroy is that Sheoard will die (and Shepard does die in atleast 2 of the 3 versions of Destroy) The Catalyst also makes it very clear that Shepard will die in the other endings too so dying being a negative is not exclusive to Destroy. The other 'negative' of Destroy which he says is "the chaos will return". However, this shouldn't really dissuade Shepard.

There are numerous things the Catalyst could have said to make Destroy seem worse than it actually is. He could say that it would also destroy earth or everything in close proximity or that it's still incomplete and it won't work. He does neither.

There are also several things he could do to stop Shepard once it's clear that Shepard is choosing Destroy. He could lower the platform as Shepard's walking towards destroy. He could even prevent the whole mess by not raising the platform which brings Shepard to him in the first place.

Then there's the ease of activating Destroy. This 'CSD' is far too easy to break. If it truly was something built to prevent the Crucible from firing then it should have multiple backups, failsafes, the like. It has none.

The Reapers make it far too easy.




















But how about this? We just accept that we both have different interpretations all of which are equally valid. Or is that too much to ask for?

[megamacka]

Imo. Those are small flaws that HAS to be in the game in order to make things work. The reapers don't want to be controlled either. Don't raise the platform for that either. It's a video game not real life. It would have been silly to just be like '' trololo you die '' when the player walks up to destroy.
Like I think I mentioned in another post, why not set an auto piloted shuttle or a suicide squad to take shep out easily? Cerby soldiers sacrificed themselves in the cerb base to stall shepard and buy the engineers time so they obviously don't care about dying. In mass effect 2 why doesn't the gigantic human reaper just smash the platforms so your whole squad falls to their death ? Why does he wait untill he dies to do that? There are a billion cheap ways that anyone could have killed shepard throughout the entire series.

As I see it, shepard receives three choices. Whatever or not you actually believe that these choices are presented in their actual form is debatable. And either way, it's canon. At least as it stands now and keeping in mind what Bioware has said. That's all about personal interpretation, I don't believe so but maybe you do there is no point in arguing that. But the fact that his trying to influence you into making the other choices is intriguing to me. And to me it's just so blatantly obvious whilst it's NOT for you. It's like religion. Some people think it's real and some people don't, no point in arguing that everyone is different. But please keep in mind what forum you are posting in.

If you go into a forum ABOUT indoctrination theories without real compelling evidence against it. (Imo the whole lowering platforms, he could be lying etc isn't enough imo) then just leave it.

As I see it,

Control: Questionable, how do we know that the reapers can't break free or that shepard just.... dies? SPOILER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--> the reaper in leviathan seemd to be able to break free? And what guarantee is there that shep wont just continue the cycle? Shep basically becomes immortal, things change.Organis will still create synthetics in the future that might go all crazy, will shep wipe out all of those ? That's not what reapers are about.

Synthetic: The reapers goal all along, immoral and goes against everything that I've ( shep ) been fighting for. In my interpretation, it removes everything that it means to be organic emotions etc. And hello to the overpopulated galaxy with immortal cyborgs. What guarantee is there that we don't become the reapers slaves? That we don't become like them?

Destroy: My goal all along, and what you've been striving for the entire series. The geth and EDI can be rebuilt? Dead reapers, geth bodies lying around. New technology etc, and lets be honest. They are machines, as much as I cared for the geth and Legion I wouldn't sacrifice all organics for a machine that can be reprogrammed into crazy psychopaths. Imo destroy is the safest bet and what I've been striving for, the risks of the future is worth it to keep what makes us '' human '' and the reaper threat is gone.

Refuse: Yeah.....Everyone dies.... Because you wouldn't fire the crucible :-). Now the next cycle has to do it instead.... Pretty pointless.

Long post, sowwy.

[megamacka]

By the way I am not trying to be an **** or something. If you think I make it out to be that way, it happens when I type quickly lol. You have the right to your interpretation as much as I do. But I don't see the reason of going into a forum about a theory and try to bash it.

I am a talimancers, but I don't go to the Miramancers forums and bash miranda .
There are bigger problems in the world than different interpretations, starvation, war etc ( no not really, MASS EFFECT IS MY LIFE!!!  )..

In all honesty, I was so mad when I finished the game the first time. I could not even describe it with words, if you've seen some of the reaction videos on youtube, that would probably have been me  but 100 times worse lol. But then I reverted the save and I started to question the starchild but it still wasn't enough. After the EC I feel like I have enough to make my way of seeing things come to life and I am once again in love with the series. 

Modifié par megamacka, 19 août 2012 - 09:49 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

I'm not trying to bash it at all even if it seems that way.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

The existence of a CSD is inferred, not proved. Inferred from the fact that activating Destroy requires shooting a pipe.

It is inferred as a much as a helium balloon floating in the air can infer that helium has a lesser atomic weight than oxygen.. If that was what this dicussion was about you would be arguing that a balloon rising doesn't prove it. That there could be something else.

If you believe the in-game events are circumstantial evidence, please share with us the alternatives (and their supporting evidence). If you cannot do this then you have no justification to call it circumstantial. 
 

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

It's supposed to be symbolic. Why else would grabbing two rods activate control? Wouldn't something like the machine we see in the Geth Consensus mission make more sense? Same with Destroy where a button would make more sense. But Bioware went for the symbolism route. The fact that they failed is a different matter altogether.

Symbolism, huh? The hallucination theorist look at it that way too.

Would you be so inclined as to share with us the evidence you've collected to support this idea? How have you inferred it is symbolic? I would think this would be difficult within a context of a game without interpretting events to be the product of a delusion.

Or is it just your headcanon?

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

And yes, this theory is different from IT but it is the same in purpose. That purpose is making Destroy seem like the only option where you win.

Ah, you've caught us!!! All this compiling of in-game events, dialog, plotpoints, etc. aren't meanto to deduce the nature of the events that transpired. No, it has always been to spread the glorious news that is Destroy. What reason do you think our cult is so focused on making Destroy the "best ending"? What do you think will happen when the Gospel of Destroy is carried in the hearts of all and song from the four corners of the world? Will the Maker return to us?

megamacka wrote...

His already said that synthesis/ control is not necessarily '' bad ''.

No, Control is a bad ending imo. Unless the eventual continuation of the cycle can be considered good.

Synthesis is a matter of personally opinion. As is Destroy considering the state of things following the Reaper's defeat. In my own personal opinion there are no good endings. There is just an order of personal preference. Any ending involving the relays being rendered non-functional is bad. As I've mention in relation to Control and Synthesis, the epiligue slides cannot be a genuine depiction of events to come. Even Destroy, which is self-contradicting to the established lore. 
 
Regardless of rather or not the endings play out at face value, Destroy would still be the only win ending. It is the only ending in which the Reapers are defeated. In Synthesis the Reapers are ultimately victorious, even if everyone wasn't indoctrinated. In Control, taken at face value, they would still be in charge of the galaxy and everyone would continue to bend to their will.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 19 août 2012 - 11:14 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

If you take the endings at face value then all of them are victories.

By the way, you've already made your views on the slides clear but what about the Normandy memoiral scene and the stargazer scene? Both scenes make it clear that all of the endings are victories.

Oh the mere concept of proving the existence of symbolism is ridiculous and contradictry. Symbolism by it's very nature is interpretation that can never be proven or disproven. I think Bioware wabted to go the symbolism route with the endings but just failed.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

The thing is indoctrination achieves nothing. If it's indoctrination of the 'player' it makes no sense for BW to do that as it achieves no purpose and is just a grand waste of time.

I suspect the intent was to give nothing and everything.  Though I think they aren't completely in sync with their public and overestimated the appeal of mediocre endings for the sake of open endings.  People want definitive endings with maximum closure.

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

If it's indoctrination of Shepard then it's the instant form of indoctrination as the slower (and better ) form takes years to do. The instant version also very quickly degrades the victims mind so it makes no sense for the reapers to indoctrinate shepard inly for him/her to quicky become a husk-like being.

You don't believe self-preservation is a great enough motive for expedient indoctrination?

Not to mention that Shepard has had plenty of contact with both reapers and reaper devices over the years. In Arrival it was at a level in which Harbinger could appear and speak to Shepard. It's not like all his exposure occured in the last 20 minutes.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 20 août 2012 - 01:13 .

[Tom1029]

All endings are IT endings.
Destroy= Shepherd dies from the struggle.
Refusal- Shepherd resists and is allowed to die.
Control= Reapers fully indoctrinate Shepherd.
Synthesis= Shepherd becomes Saren, a Reaper upgraded being that thinks it has resisted but leads the remaining Humans to become this cycles Collectors.