1238 réponses à ce sujet

[Wayning_Star]

The Twilight God wrote...

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*

Because it's the ONLY choice he has, other than to quit the game and let others do his job. The reapers have the MEU by the short'n curlies, but they don't need or cannot even attempt to indoctrinate the entire MEU. Shepard has his day, and it's to communicate his needs to his adversary, the first one to actually meet it one on one. All evidence points to the fact that if Shepard was indoctrinated by the reapers, he'd of not made it to the citadel at all, no need. He would be theirs, just like TIM.

Besides, the IT has to be external to the game to work at all. IT changes too much game mechanics to accomplish the indoctrination to the point removing the choices as to replace them with ideas of those, that don't mean what they represent. Alters the reality of the game to the point the game has lost all continuity, other than for the IT. That is gone so this can be. Those don't work, cause this does that. etc. In effect, rewriting the gamescript to fit IT. It doens't even try to fit IT into the game at all.

In reality, Shep doesn't have to trust the catalyst at all, he has to end the pattern with the tools at hand. The Catalyst is the only tool available to invoke the crucible,so he orders it to do his bidding, what ever that is, and thus, altering the pattern,his biggest job in the game. The IT wipes that objective out, replacing it with stoolie Shepard, indoctrinated Shepard, loser Shepard.

((shrugg))

Edit: it actually gets worse..ie 'NO Shepard'.. end of game.

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 19 août 2012 - 11:14 .

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

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.

The Normandy memorial only demonstrates that the Normandy crash/emergency landed on an unspecified world. If the Reapers are still harvesting (Control). if everyone is indoctrinated (Synthesis) or if they can ever reunite with Shepard in their lifetime (Destroy) isn't known.

The Stargazer scene depicts an unspecidied species conversing in an unspecified location at an unspecified time. What transpires between the end of ME3 and that scene is unknown. It appears to be intentional ambiguous.

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

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 agree. Which is why I included the "delusion" bit.

My point is, it has no place in this discussion. It is, as you might say, "a cop out". And as I would say, "handwaving". This thread is about evidence and logical deduction. It's a scientific approach to analyzing in-game content. Your comments amount to "God did it".

[megamacka]

Swap out the bike for ending instead. That's how I feel when people come to this thread to try and ruin the game for me. LEAAAAVEE BRIT....*cough* MY ENDING ALONEEEE

Modifié par megamacka, 20 août 2012 - 12:44 .

[anmiro]

I think there are a lot of really interesting aspects of indoctrination theory. I think Shepard battling his own indoctrination would have made for a more compelling ending to ME3. But do you believe this (IT) is really the story Bioware intended to tell?

[Ausnuk]

anmiro wrote...

I think there are a lot of really interesting aspects of indoctrination theory. I think Shepard battling his own indoctrination would have made for a more compelling ending to ME3. But do you believe this (IT) is really the story Bioware intended to tell?

I do but they still failed because they should of revealed that in the end to make it work.  As such I can only assume thats what they were trying to do.  This is what I expected them to do at the time.

Shepard after your destroy choice wakes and looks up at the console he collapsed at and pushes a button or something. 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 while Hackett is still calling to you to fire the crucible and go to cut scene of the reapers cleaning up.

That is what should of happened to make the IT just the I.  They did not and then they gave us the EC and now I just dont know if that was what they were doing in the first place and because of the backlash thought it best not to say they were trying to screw with our minds and just filled in the gaps with the EC.

[Bill Casey]

anmiro wrote...

I think there are a lot of really interesting aspects of indoctrination theory. I think Shepard battling his own indoctrination would have made for a more compelling ending to ME3. But do you believe this (IT) is really the story Bioware intended to tell?

Their intention is to make it ambiguous...

[Cashless-Nick]

Considering the IT doesn't have much proof now, Synthesis and Control are clearly the best endings, although I believe synthesis is better because it makes everyone wiser.

[anmiro]

Bill Casey wrote...

anmiro wrote...

I think there are a lot of really interesting aspects of indoctrination theory. I think Shepard battling his own indoctrination would have made for a more compelling ending to ME3. But do you believe this (IT) is really the story Bioware intended to tell?

Their intention is to make it ambiguous...

I agree, I think some one was unhappy with the ending and had it edited with intention of making it more ambiguous. I think in order to understand the story Bioware was trying to tell than you need to assume that everything the Catalyst tells you is true.

[The Twilight God]

anmiro wrote...

I think there are a lot of really interesting aspects of indoctrination theory. I think Shepard battling his own indoctrination would have made for a more compelling ending to ME3. But do you believe this (IT) is really the story Bioware intended to tell?

I could care less what they intended to tell. This is what they did tell.

And things fit alittle to well for me to think it is a chain of random mistakes by incompetent writers. But that's neither here or there.

[The Twilight God]

Ausnuk wrote...

anmiro wrote...

I think there are a lot of really interesting aspects of indoctrination theory. I think Shepard battling his own indoctrination would have made for a more compelling ending to ME3. But do you believe this (IT) is really the story Bioware intended to tell?

I do but they still failed because they should of revealed that in the end to make it work.  As such I can only assume thats what they were trying to do.  This is what I expected them to do at the time.

Shepard after your destroy choice wakes and looks up at the console he collapsed at and pushes a button or something. 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 while Hackett is still calling to you to fire the crucible and go to cut scene of the reapers cleaning up.

That is what should of happened to make the IT just the I.  They did not and then they gave us the EC and now I just dont know if that was what they were doing in the first place and because of the backlash thought it best not to say they were trying to screw with our minds and just filled in the gaps with the EC.

You really think they could have gotten away with 2 (now 3) "critical fail" endings? Which would essential reduce the amount of endings down to 1 in the eyes of most players.  

[Ausnuk]

The Twilight God wrote...

Ausnuk wrote...

anmiro wrote...

I think there are a lot of really interesting aspects of indoctrination theory. I think Shepard battling his own indoctrination would have made for a more compelling ending to ME3. But do you believe this (IT) is really the story Bioware intended to tell?

I do but they still failed because they should of revealed that in the end to make it work.  As such I can only assume thats what they were trying to do.  This is what I expected them to do at the time.

Shepard after your destroy choice wakes and looks up at the console he collapsed at and pushes a button or something. 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 while Hackett is still calling to you to fire the crucible and go to cut scene of the reapers cleaning up.

That is what should of happened to make the IT just the I.  They did not and then they gave us the EC and now I just dont know if that was what they were doing in the first place and because of the backlash thought it best not to say they were trying to screw with our minds and just filled in the gaps with the EC.

You really think they could have gotten away with 2 (now 3) "critical fail" endings? Which would essential reduce the amount of endings down to 1 in the eyes of most players.  

Yes I do.  We got one in ME2 why not 2 or three in the last game if indeed they intended IT.  To be honesy I do not see the distinction between them pre-EC anyways so in essence we got one ending.  As for the EC well I dont like it but thats only because I dont feel they did what they wanted only what we asked for and for me I would rather try and understand their orignal intent.  

The endings are endings are they not.  If you take my idea of them it is in no way a critcal failure in game mechanic terms but in the story.  You were indocrinated you lost.  I found the fact it was so easy to see the other two endings given the auto-save file that indeed all that finished it could go back and just choose another if they made the wrong choice.  Here is the kicker in the ending pre-ec. Where was the wrong choice if there was one.  I only assumed given what I witness with the breathe scence that I chose wisly.  The three endings are indentical so where is the correct choice.  Most would never of scene the breathe scence so to them it was the same.  That is why I understand why they were so takenback by the endings because their was no differnce in them hence one ending.  It does not make a differnce if they saw IT or any other theory the result was the same bar one easter egg that only some got when playing through the first time.

[anmiro]

The Twilight God wrote...

I could care less what they intended to tell. This is what they did tell.

To each their own. I think the ending is what it is. I like IT, but in my mind there is a difference between canon and fan fiction.

Modifié par anmiro, 20 août 2012 - 06:01 .

[The Twilight God]

Ausnuk wrote...

Yes I do.  We got one in ME2 why not 2 or three in the last game if indeed they intended IT.  To be honesy I do not see the distinction between them pre-EC anyways so in essence we got one ending.  As for the EC well I dont like it but thats only because I dont feel they did what they wanted only what we asked for and for me I would rather try and understand their orignal intent.  

The endings are endings are they not.  If you take my idea of them it is in no way a critcal failure in game mechanic terms but in the story.  You were indocrinated you lost.  I found the fact it was so easy to see the other two endings given the auto-save file that indeed all that finished it could go back and just choose another if they made the wrong choice.  Here is the kicker in the ending pre-ec. Where was the wrong choice if there was one.  I only assumed given what I witness with the breathe scence that I chose wisly.  The three endings are indentical so where is the correct choice.  Most would never of scene the breathe scence so to them it was the same.  That is why I understand why they were so takenback by the endings because their was no differnce in them hence one ending.  It does not make a differnce if they saw IT or any other theory the result was the same bar one easter egg that only some got when playing through the first time.

They never promised 16 endings for ME2. They still had to plan for future games. Not to mention, like low EMS, there is no way to achieve it other than intentionally trying to fail.

Although one great ending would be better than 3 mediocre endings. This is what I hate about the indoctrination stuff. They made ALL endings mediocre because they can't ellaborate on any one ending of characters in real-time without showing their cards. Everything is just a narrator talking about what they'd like the future to be from their personal perspective. So EVERYTHING has to be mediocre so people can have delusions of sunshine and butterflies. It was a bad idea. There should have nothing but variations of Destory and Synthesis (which I think can be sen as good or bad). No Control other than an obvious fail ending due to low EMS, being an evil Shep or completely change how it works so that it's out plan, not the Reapers'.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 20 août 2012 - 12:01 .

[Ausnuk]

The Twilight God wrote...

Ausnuk wrote...

Yes I do.  We got one in ME2 why not 2 or three in the last game if indeed they intended IT.  To be honesy I do not see the distinction between them pre-EC anyways so in essence we got one ending.  As for the EC well I dont like it but thats only because I dont feel they did what they wanted only what we asked for and for me I would rather try and understand their orignal intent.  

The endings are endings are they not.  If you take my idea of them it is in no way a critcal failure in game mechanic terms but in the story.  You were indocrinated you lost.  I found the fact it was so easy to see the other two endings given the auto-save file that indeed all that finished it could go back and just choose another if they made the wrong choice.  Here is the kicker in the ending pre-ec. Where was the wrong choice if there was one.  I only assumed given what I witness with the breathe scence that I chose wisly.  The three endings are indentical so where is the correct choice.  Most would never of scene the breathe scence so to them it was the same.  That is why I understand why they were so takenback by the endings because their was no differnce in them hence one ending.  It does not make a differnce if they saw IT or any other theory the result was the same bar one easter egg that only some got when playing through the first time.

They never promised 16 endings for ME2. They still had to plan for future games. Not to mention, like low EMS, there is no way to achieve it other than intentionally trying to fail.

Although one great ending would be better than 3 mediocre endings. This is what I hate about the indoctrination stuff. They made ALL endings mediocre because they can't ellaborate on any one ending of characters in real-time without showing their cards. Everything is just a narrator talking about what they'd like the future to be from their personal perspective. So EVERYTHING has to be mediocre so people can have delusions of sunshine and butterflies. It was a bad idea. There should have nothing but variations of Destory and Synthesis (which I think can be sen as good or bad). No Control other than an obvious fail ending due to low EMS, being an evil Shep or completely change how it works so that it's out plan, not the Reapers'.

True they did not promise 16 endings for ME2. What we got though was a variation on the ending via characters living/dieing which was derived from a mix of loyalty missions and upgrades.  They failed to apply this to ME3 through the war assets which I assumed playing it they would count like that in some way.  They did not. 

The endings pre-EC and I say pre-EC because that was their orignal intent are left to so much speculation as to make the endings null and void.  I believe in great story telling where the last moments are left for your to ponder.

Patriot Games-Do they have boy or a girl
Inception-DId that top woble and fall or just wobble.

In both of these cases one of which could not be a better example of how to end something because its all about a dream they were able to conclude the story as to not leave anything but the most minute plot unaswered(Patriot Games) and the other left the very idea in your head that he might be in a world conjured up of his own mind and in reality comatosed on a chair in a plane.

The lack of closure for the ends in line for IT is why they failed to covey it to the masses and I suspect the motivation of leaving the series open so that they may go where they wanted was part of it to.  They left to many questions open to leave almost everything up to speculation.  Now those players look back through the game to get answer and all they see is the flaws of other plot lines and so forth. 

I went through the game loving it and up until the second the credits rolled.  In that second everything was gone, shock took over as I thought of what should of happened and did'nt.  I was left with not being to understand why they could not complete it.  I know the IT is the only theory that can explain the ends but that does not make them true.  What I mean by true is that there was no need to headcanon the end even if you did not believe in IT.  They could of made a canon end in either case they chose not to. In doing so they had to make the EC.

[RainbowDazed]

Jojojo wrote...

Rambow's dad wrote...

Nun-lover666 wrote...

You mad, bro? Refusal is the only real ending! You're all indocrinated! 

^This FTW

True words. Lock this thread. End of discussion.

I agree with these well-articulated fellows that have posted before me.

[megamacka]

Why are people so freaking butthurt about this? If you don't like it then just get out of this forum thread? What is the probl.... oh wait.... It's the interwebs.....

Modifié par megamacka, 20 août 2012 - 04:37 .

[Baa Baa]

AlanC9 wrote...

Like I said before, this is pretty good. IT with about 70% less crazy

[The Twilight God]

LOL! Never knew about this. That's just great.

Oh, man... Starbinger should go into comedy. Crucible totally changed him!

[megamacka]

The Twilight God wrote...

LOL! Never knew about this. That's just great.

Oh, man... Starbinger should go into comedy. Crucible totally changed him!

The crucible changed me, created new possibilities.My solution wont work anymore, that you're standing here proves that. '' Secretly orders reapers to destroy the crucible ''.

  Lolololo, he actually believed me you guys! 

[The Twilight God]

Wayning_Star wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

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.

Because it's the ONLY choice he has, other than to quit the game and let others do his job.

Trusting the Reapers is not Shepard's only option. 2 options require blind absolute faith in the Reapers, 1 requires rolling over and 1 does what you came to do. That fact the the Reapers are quick to grab Shepard's attention and chat him up doesn't change anything. 

Wayning_Star wrote...

The reapers have the MEU by the short'n curlies, but they don't need or cannot even attempt to indoctrinate the entire MEU. Shepard has his day, and it's to communicate his needs to his adversary, the first one to actually meet it one on one. All evidence points to the fact that if Shepard was indoctrinated by the reapers, he'd of not made it to the citadel at all, no need. He would be theirs, just like TIM.

No one says Shepard is indoctrinated. What is said is that an attempt at indoctrination takes place. It's up to the player if that attempt succeeds or not.

Wayning_Star wrote...

Besides, the IT has to be external to the game to work at all. IT changes too much game mechanics to accomplish the indoctrination to the point removing the choices as to replace them with ideas of those, that don't mean what they represent. Alters the reality of the game to the point the game has lost all continuity, other than for the IT. That is gone so this can be. Those don't work, cause this does that. etc. In effect, rewriting the gamescript to fit IT. It doens't even try to fit IT into the game at all.

My thesis is based on in-game events, dialog and lore. I have no need to rewrite anything. If you disagree, by all means, share your rebuttal with us all.  There is only IT or incompetent writers. Take your pick.

Wayning_Star wrote...

In reality, Shep doesn't have to trust the catalyst at all, he has to end the pattern with the tools at hand. The Catalyst is the only tool available to invoke the crucible,so he orders it to do his bidding, what ever that is, and thus, altering the pattern,his biggest job in the game. The IT wipes that objective out, replacing it with stoolie Shepard, indoctrinated Shepard, loser Shepard.

All I get from this is "I like Control so I disagree with you". OK, whatever floats your boat. Believe whatever you like.

[The Twilight God]

anmiro wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

I could care less what they intended to tell. This is what they did tell.

To each their own. I think the ending is what it is. I like IT, but in my mind there is a difference between canon and fan fiction.

The thing is, to take the endings at face value requires one to presume the writers are grossly incompetent and the application of alot of handwaving.  Verses taking what was written, what's in game, and coming to a logical conclusion based on events. Non-ITers essential ignore the story and game events in favor of handwaving. For me, handwaving is a last resort, not the first thing I do.

I think people want to handwave so strongly because the ambiguity allows them to maintain a sunshine and butterflies approach to all endings. Bioware thought they could get away with avoiding to reveal what happens afterward. When Bioware was pushed into releasing the EC they realized they could do just that. People were quick to take everything at face value because it made them happy.  They overlooked that the slides were presented as a possibility vs a guarantee. There are actually clues added into the EC that further imply IT. Details that really served no practical purpose.

Everything that is wrong with the endings could be fixed by having Vendetta loaded to the Crucible. Having him dictate what is and isn't viable. The Kid could still be around to throw in his 2 cents, but only as a passive observer. Instead, they choose to leave it as is where Shepard has to demonstrate blind absolute faith in the Reapers. If Dr. Kenson was indoctrinated in Arrival, then Shepard is indoctrinated if he suicides himself to further the Reaper's agenda in ME3.   

[The Twilight God]

Updated Part IV to be Refuse Analysis. I'll add the Catalyst Decevier part back later after a few edits.

[megamacka]

Was a while since I played, but didn't Vendetta say '' I will upload myself into the crucible '' and then shepard acts like a turd and just leaves vendetta at the cerby base?

Is my memory clouded or is shepard truly retarded?
Senile? ...... * looks to the skies * I love pudding.....

Pretty much like in the beginning on the normandy when you are leaving earth..... If ANYONE knew the stakes then it would be shepard, and he/she is all like '' Noes I will stay at earth and fight, not go and unite the galaxy so that we actually stand a chance ''. And andersson has to talk him/her down..... Forgot whom the reapers are? Forgot what you spent the last two games doing? Forgot that you are the only chance to unite people? Forgot your name too?

- We fight or we die..... Oh? Not unite the galaxy? Call for help?....
Andersson! I haz to stay and fight!.... No? You have to go grab help....
NOOOO!!! I WANTZ FIGHT

Modifié par megamacka, 22 août 2012 - 02:03 .

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...

Was a while since I played, but didn't Vendetta say '' I will upload myself into the crucible '' and then shepard acts like a turd and just leaves vendetta at the cerby base?

He was saying that on Thessia right before Kai Leng showed up and then Vendetta curled up into a ball and hid.  Apparently Shepard forgot all about this after reuniting with Vendetta. I guess it would be hard to indoctrinate the player when there is a VI onboard who can detect the effects of indoctrination and tell Shepard that the Crucible isn't meant to do anything but destroy synthetics.