1238 réponses à ce sujet

[megamacka]

Shepard Commander - The Senile Spectre *legion voice

Modifié par megamacka, 22 août 2012 - 03:10 .

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...

Shepard Commander - The Senile Spectre *legion voice

Apparently, he has full alzheimers considering he forgot his chat with TIM 5 minute earlier when he was so against Control. Suddenly now believes in the viability of Control if you choose it.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Actually, it depends on your dialouge. If you choose certain dialouge options, Shepard sounds like he/she is opposing the Illusive Man because he is indoctrinated rather than opposing Control.

It isn't perfect and that conversation wasn't written in a way that you can outright support TIM's ideas. Atbest, you can, make shepard sound conflicted. Shepard certainly seemed to be considering TIM's ideas but greatly rejecting his methods before the very end with the whole "Cerberus was supposed to be humanity's sword, not a dagger in our back" dialouge.

Modifié par Ranger Jack Walker, 23 août 2012 - 09:46 .

[spotlessvoid]

Just read your op. Excellent job. Need some time to think through it before I offer any additional feedback. Reall great work

[megamacka]

Saren - Lets be friends with the reapers.... Oh snap, bad idea ( Shoots himself )
Illusive man - Oh I can control the reapers...... yeah bad idea ( Shoots himself )

* Reaper AI appears * 

WAIT!!!! SHEPIRD STAHP!..... I knuw u wan destroi us. Lewts be friendz? Or...
U can haz control of us..... Gooby plz?

Shepard - HERP DERP

Modifié par megamacka, 23 août 2012 - 10:41 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

I always saw the dialouge at the end as a rejection of the Illusive Man because he was indoctrinated and not because Control is wrong or something. Sure you can choose one of the dialouge options where Shepard says Control is wrong but it's still only one of atleast 4 possible dialouge outcomes.

And your jokes are as poor as ever.

I also think that the second outcome (the one where TIM doesn't shoot himself) is a better conclusion to his character.

Modifié par Ranger Jack Walker, 23 août 2012 - 10:49 .

[megamacka]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Yeah, she's high

not

Modifié par megamacka, 23 août 2012 - 10:52 .

[Baa Baa]

Flog61 wrote...

I like this theory

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Actually, it depends on your dialouge. If you choose certain dialouge options, Shepard sounds like he/she is opposing the Illusive Man because he is indoctrinated rather than opposing Control.

The difference between the paragon lines and the renegade lines is not the intent behind the dialogue, but the method. Renegade attempts to make TIM aware of his indoctrination by goading him into attempting to do something Shepards knows he cannot. Paragon attempts to make TIM aware of his indoctrination by explaining to him that it is a bad idea due to the stakes. 

Both conversations are anti-control. Not to mention every other conversation in which Shepard denounces TIM's plan to control the Reapers. Mars, Thessia, Cronos Station and the Citadel; In all cases Shepard is aganst ccontrol. There is no variation of Shepard that ever supports Control.

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

It isn't perfect and that conversation wasn't written in a way that you can outright support TIM's ideas. Atbest, you can, make shepard sound conflicted. Shepard certainly seemed to be considering TIM's ideas but greatly rejecting his methods before the very end with the whole "Cerberus was supposed to be humanity's sword, not a dagger in our back" dialouge.

That particular line has nothing to do with supporting or considering Control. That is a comment on Cerberus's activities as a whole. Shepard's dialogue in that conversation on Thessia is wholly pro-destroy. There is no dialog even remotely ambiguous in that regard, renegade or paragon.

[megamacka]

Twilight have you read the leaked script for Leviathan or are you waiting untill saturday? ( it's saturday it's released right? ) WIll you add the content to your thesis page?

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Not all of the dialouge options are anti-control. Most are just anti-TIM.

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...

Twilight have you read the leaked script for Leviathan or are you waiting untill saturday? ( it's saturday it's released right? ) WIll you add the content to your thesis page?

I've seen some of it.

I don't know if you plan to play it so I won't spoil anything, but it explains the origins of the Reapers. It doesn't really change the viability of any endings though from what I can tell. Once it is released I'll update the thesis accordingly. Although, there shouldn't be much to update as it doesn't realy effect the indoctrination theory.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Not all of the dialouge options are anti-control. Most are just anti-TIM.

Mars: All options are pro-destroy and anti-control.
Thessia: All options are pro-destroy and anti-control (including auto-dialog) 
Cronos Station: All options are pro-destroy and anti-control (including auto-dialog)
Citadel: One you could choose to look at as only anti-TIM, anti-control or both (but not pro-control), the other is definitively anti-control

Shepard has been anti-control the whole game. And there is nothing in the last conversation with TIM to indicate that opinion has changed.

The Control Ending can be summed up as this:

Reapers: You can control us. We even made a station over there for you to do just that... oh, but we wouldn't like it if you did that. That's why we made it in the first place.. because we DON'T want anyone to use it.

Shepard: Derp! Uh, ok.. I guess TIM was right afterall because you say so Mr. Reaper who indoctrinated people to seek Control in every other cycle. Derp!

[Ranger Jack Walker]

You're right about there not being a pro-control option but to me, the focus seems to be less on Control being dumb and more on control not being possible and TIM not being able to control them even it were possible.

[megamacka]

Maybe it's something that they want to add later on. Allow you to give Vendetta to Hackett so that they can upload him into the crucible. It just seems like a humongous miss.... Considering that they wrote the dialogue with Vendetta themselves...... And then just, forgot it in the last minute <.<.

Or perhaps they just stopped caring about the series, half of the game just lacked the same passion that was put into ME1 and 2. The side missions were just a choir with a few minutes of dialogue people set in the multiplayer levels, basically - Here is a small cage, now go fight the enemies. With occasional meet up with old squad mates side missions. ( Not really, you talk to them for like 10 seconds anyway ). Tuchanka and Rannoch was awesome imo, Mars, sanctuary and Thessia ( probably more but I cba to think of em ) was just a choir and didn't deliver any emotion at all it was just poorly written. No Liara hate but it was just badly handled, the whole thessia situation and the aftermatch.

  Yes all of the side mission weren't that deep in ME1 and 2 but the galaxy actually felt like a galaxy and not small rooms. EA wanted to turn the series into a shooter and a multiplayer game so that they could sell ingame items weapons and multiplayer DLCs..... Sad truth but I just think that like half of the team just didn't care.


  Oh and the Illusive man chat at the end. I always go with the Paragon one and it's not really '' anti control '' so to speak. It's more like, we are not ready and especially not you illusive man. It's not like '' CONTROL IS THE BADZ CHOICE '' but he kinda hints at something like it.

Modifié par megamacka, 24 août 2012 - 10:56 .

[The Twilight God]

Part I: Destroy Analysis
Part II: Control Analysis
Part III: Synthesis Analysis
Part IV: Refuse Analysis
Part VI: The Implications of the Leviathans

The Catalyst's Deceptions

This should not be a surprise to anyone. It claims to be the collective intelligence of the Reapers, in effect, making it the embodiment of the Reapers. And yet people swallowed its lies whole without even bothering to chew.
 
We have witnessed enough evidence to counter the Catalyst's claims concerning the Reapers; 2.9 games worth of established lore. What makes the claims of the "Reaper Ambassador" in the last 10 minutes more valid than the last 119 hours and 50 minutes? Do you honestly believe Sovereign and Harbinger’s attitudes would be the best approach to take if the Reapers want to survive this encounter? Do you think the Reapers are stupid enough to think they could ever convince anyone to not Destroy them if they were as brutally honest as they have been when they believed themselves unassailable?



1. The Catalyst's first lie: "I am the Catalyst".

Shepard replies, "I thought the Citadel was the Catalyst?"
The Kid answers, "No, the Citadel is part of me."

"Catalyst" is just a designation the Protheans used to hide the fact that it was the Citadel. The term "catalyst" is either read from The Illusive Man's or Shepard's mind. Similar to how the likeness of the little boy was pulled from Shepard's mind (and probably placed there by the Reapers in the first place). How else would it even know to refer to itself as the Catalyst?

The Crucible never required the Kid. The Crucible required the Citadel. As the endings illustrate, the relays are necessary to distribute the Crucible's payload across the galaxy. The Citadel, being the master controller of the relay network, allows for this outcome.
 
The idea that anyone would build a weapon to defeat an enemy reliant upon said enemy's willing collaboration to work is absurd. This would involve fighting through the Reapers’ forces and praying that they would simply capitulate and suicide themselves if anyone managed to dock the Crucible. That does not makes any sense. Even if the Crucible is intended to be constructed and set in place before the harvest begins there is still the issue of convincing the enemy to collaborate in their own destruction, but you also notify them of your intentions. If anyone knew about the Kid, would it not make sense to simply detonate the Crucible within the vicinity of the Citadel prior to adapting it to work with the Citadel and cut of the head of the snake?  Regardless, it is "Starbinger" who needs the Crucible to make its own agenda a reality. 
 
 
2. The Kid's second lie: "The device you refer to as the Crucible is little more than a power source".
 
The Kid claims the Crucible is little more than a battery. This is only true in relation to its own suggestions: Control and Synthesis.
 
The notion that it is just a battery is contradicted by Vendetta who states. "At some point --it is difficult to pinpoint when--the Crucible plans were adapted to incorporate the use of the [Citadel]. Presumably, the Crucible was not sufficiently powerful enough to defeat the Reapers." This indicates that the Crucible is more than just a power source, but a weapon in and of itself. 

The Crucible cannot defeat the Reapers because it does not have an effective range great enough to cover the entire galaxy at once. By itself it could only eliminate the Reapers in a relatively small portion of the galaxy. As the endings illustrate, the relays are necessary to distribute the Crucible's payload across the galaxy. The Citadel, being the master controller of the relay network, allows for this outcome.
 
 
3. The Kid's third lie: "You have altered the variables."

Shepard asks, "What do you mean?
The Kid answers, "The Crucible changed me. Created new possibilities."


The Kid has not been changed by the Crucible in the slightest. We already establish in Parts II and III of this thesis that the possibility for Synthesis and Control exist on the Citadel prior to the addition of the Crucible seeing as the Crucible serves as "just a battery" for those functionalities. The Kid claims to control the Reapers, the Reapers are still engaging both Sword and Shield fleets and if Shepard dallies for too long the Reapers will destroy the Crucible. Therefore, its modus operandi remains unaltered after the Crucible docks with the Citadel. So how exactly has the Kid changed? It hasn't. 
 
The lie continues: "The Crucible changed me. Created new possibilities."
 
It was established in Parts II and III of this thesis that the Kid must have had prior awareness of the viability of Synthesis and Control before the Crucible ever docked if all the Crucible does is provide power. The only limiting factor prior to the Crucible docking is power. Obviously, the Control prongs and Synthesis array did not spring into existence out of thin air moments after the Crucible docked; they were previously constructed. Therefore, the Crucible allows for pre-existent functionalities to be actualized instead of creating new possibilities.
 
So how can the variables be altered, when the very existence of the Control prongs and Synthesis array demonstrate that the Reapers planned for the possibility of the Crucible docking? Clearly, it was an anticipated variable.
 
 
4. The Kid's fourth lie: " I do not look forward to being replaced by you, but I would be forced to accept it"
 
The Kid claims that it does not look forward to being controlled/replaced by Shepard if he comments on Control are negatively slanted. This is seemingly intended to convey the false impression that attempting to replace the Kid is something it finds distasteful. However, the circumstances dictate otherwise.

Shepard says, "I didn't fight this war to give up everything I have."
The Kid replies, "And I do not look forward to being replaced by you, but I would be forced to accept it"

No, it would not be forced to accept. It is the Kid who activates the Control prongs. When the Control prongs are first shown, they are deactivated. It is not until Shepard approaches them that the Kid activates them right before your eyes. If the Kid can turn the Control prongs on and off at will how is it "forced to accept it"? It isn't. It has been established in Part II of this thesis the absurdity of the Reapers devoting resources to create a device of their own volition that performs a function they are opposed to.
 
 
5. The Kid's fifth lie: "It is the ideal solution. Now that we know it is possible, it is enviable we will reach synthesis"
 
The Kid, and by extension the Reapers, asserts that Synthesis is an ideal solution to the hypothetical problem plaguing organics and synthetics. It has been established that the Reapers are aware of the viability of Synthesis prior to the Crucible's docking. So why do the Reapers resist the docking of the Crucible and, if Sword and Shield forces aren't strong enough to hold them back, damage it to a point where Synthesis isn't viable? Why do the Reapers continue putting up resistance after the Crucible docks? Why do the Reapers destroy the Crucible if (given enough time to break through Sword and Shield defenses) Shepard procrastinates for too long? The answer is simple: The ideal solution, from the Reaper perspective, is the continuation of the cycle.

The lie continues: "It is the ideal solution. Now that we know it is possible, it is enviable we will reach synthesis."
 
Despite this statement, the Reapers continue harvesting organic and synthetic life if you refuse to use the Crucible. They will not allow synthesis to occur at our own pace and on our own terms. If the Kid is sincere about the inevitability of Synthesis, why does it continued the harvest if you refuse to use the Crucible?  The destruction of organics eliminates the inevitability of Synthesis.
 
But I guess it's only a partial lie. Becoming a Reaper is a form of synthesis. Upon arrival within the central chamber of the Collector Base, EDI informs Shepard that the Reapers are both organic and synthetic.
 
EDI: The tubes are feeding into some kind of super-structure. It is emitting both organic and non-organic energy signatures
EDI: Shepard, if my calculations are correct, the super-structure... is a Reaper.
EDI: It appears the Collectors have processed tens of thousands of humans. significantly more will be required to complete the Reaper.
 
Given the fact that the super-structure itself was being infused directly with humanity goo and given the appearance of the reaper embryo it can be assumed that the Reaper actually grows in a manner akin to organic life. At least to some extent. But clearly, given the context of the conversation, the intent of that statement was meant to refer to individualized synthesis as opposed to amalgamated synthesis in reaper form.
 
6. All synthetic will be targeted. 

This will be incuded in a future update. For now, see the bottom section of the Destroy analysis for details.
Part I: Destroy Analysis

 

Conclusion

 

Bioware has affectively indoctrinated the player. The Bioware writers pulled a fast one on many of you. After 100s of hours of game play with the sole focus of stopping the Reapers, in the last ten minute they changed the protagonist's motives from "destroy the reapers" to "assist the Reapers with their galactic social studies assignment." It's a clever way to end the series as indoctrination is the enemy's most insidious weapon. It is fitting that it would constitute Shepard's final obstacle.  
 
As I have illustrated in Parts I thru III of this thesis the Control and Synthesis endings are intended to draw players away from Destroy. Destroy is presented negatively; being the only ending with collateral damage and a return to "chaos", while the other two depict sunshine and butterflies with synthetics and organics living happily ever after. Even the coloration of the decisions are tailored to draw paragon players (who make up the majority) toward Control (blue) and paint Destroy (red) as renegade. Synthesis then takes up the center of the conversation wheel as the "Rally the Crowd" option.  

So of course a typical argument against any indoctrination theory is, "But the Extended Cut disproves anything and everything involving indoctrination. Everything turns out great. In fact, things turn out better in the Control and Synthesis endings than they do in Destroy. All Praise the Reapers for their truth and honesty!”

But do things turn out better in Control and Synthesis? 
 
This is never definitively elaborated upon. All of the epilogue slides involve a narrator speaking about what they foresee will happen, want to happen, hope will happen or plan to make happen. The slides do not actually occur in real-time. Nothing in the slides actually occur in-game. The endings don't happen in the future. The endings are in the present. No time travel takes place. The EC slides are intended to placate angry fans by showing them pretty pictures. Ignore the slides and just listen to what the narrator actually says. The narrator does not describe what is on screen. The narrator cannot know if any of that stuff would happen as the narrator is speaking from the perspective of a person in the present. It is merely an individual talking about their hopes for the future in a general manner. No direct mention of krogan babies, geth-quarian peace, Jack becoming the headmaster of Grissom, Miranda becoming president of Earth, or anything else of that sort. Bioware counts on people to see what they want to see. Many players assume everything in the slides is an actual depiction of the future. There is no evidence of this being true. There cannot be as the endings take place int he present.

Even the Stargazer scene, which takes place in an unspecified place and time, involving an unspecified species is ambiguous. The Stargazer says, "Some of the details have been lost in time. It all happened so very long ago", so for all we know whatever ending the player chooses is just his telling of the legend. Even if the player chooses Control or Synthesis, Destroy can still be what actually occurred "so very long ago". Also, we don't know what occurred between the end of ME3 and the Stargazer scene. It's possible the galaxy, in another cycle, had to battle the "Shreapards" or there was a guerilla war to break free from synthesis indoctrination (Matrix style).  

Another argument is the blurb which pops up after every ending states "Congratulations on bringing an end to the Reaper threat..." First, this is something that exists outside the game itself. It's in the same category as the main screen where you pick New Game, Load Game, etc. Second, it says the same thing after the Refuse ending in which nothing Shepard nor the player does brings an end to the Reaper threat.
 
Control

The only thing we know occurs in real-time regarding the Reapers is that they cease their immediate attack and begin repairs on the relays. The narrator is speaking about what they will do; Not what has been done. The epilogue may be narrated by a Shepard flavored Starbinger whose goals are identical to its predecessor. When it says it will give the many hope and a voice in their future, when it says it will protect the many, it could very well mean ascending them into reaper form to protect them from being forever lost in a hypothetical synthetic ushered apocalypse. Or it could be a delusional Shepard within the great Reaper super consciousness deceived into believing it is in control. And although it has a positive outlook for the future, none of it ever comes to pass.
 
During the conversation on the Citadel with The Illusive Man, Shepard can say, "Then open the arms, let the Crucible dock, and use it to end this."
The Illusive Man 's reply to this is, "I... I will."
 
The entire narration by the Shepard AI in the epilogue amounts to "I will do this and that", not "I have done this and that".
 
Shepard then goads The Illusive man shouting, "Do it!"
The Illusive Man reacts by saying, " I... know it will work."
Shepard continues to taunt him with, "You can't can you? They won't let you do it."
The Illusive Man protests, "No, I'm in control. No one is telling me what to do."


The Shepard AI is convinced that it is in control.

The Illusive Man continues his protests, "No. No! The two of you, so self-righteous. Do you think power like this comes easy? There are sacrifices..."
 
Apparently, Control supporters think it is easy.

Shepard: You sacrificed too much.
TIM: Shepard: I... I only wanted to protect humanity. The Crucible can control them. I know it can. I just...
 
Yes, and the Shepard AI also wants to protect humanity. But can it?
 
Imagine if an ending to Mass Effect 3 was The Illusive Man shooting Anderson and Shepard dead followed by a near identical narration to the Shepard AI.  Just substitute The Illusive Man's voice for Shepard's voice. How confident would you be that the galaxy was truly safe? So why should we be sure that the galaxy is any better or worse under Shepard, who has an astonishing change in opinion on Control five minutes after opposing it? Factor in his use of a reaper device that makes no sense functioning as advertised.  It has been established in Part II of this thesis that there is no reason whatsoever for the Reapers to construct a device that relinquishes their ability to pursue their intended goals. There is simply no way anything good can come of Control. It is a narrative and thematic nigh impossibility. Any cease-fire can only have been temporary. The Reapers would inevitably continue the harvest once the relay network was reestablished. Given the power of their forces such an interlude isn't detrimental to them and with the Citadel firmly in their control resistance is all but eliminated. The relays could have simply been a higher priority. They had to be fixed at some point anyway and this way they have more manpower to repair them vs. waiting until after the fighting is concluded. The writers perpetuate the indoctrinated perspective on the player even after the credits have rolled.
 
 
Eternal. Infinite. Immortal.
The man I was used these words, but only now do I truly understand them.
Through his death, I was created. Through my birth, his thoughts are freed. They guide me now, give me reason, direction.
There is power in control. There is wisdom in harnessing the strengths of your enemy.
 
Here I'll end it with Shepard reiterating The Illusive Man's reaper induced views about controlling them. Not unsurprising that now he "understands" after his interaction with the reaper device. His "understanding" appears nothing more than the same erroneous self image we've seen before from the likes of Sovereign and Harbinger.
 
Created, and yet infinite? Simply multi-present and yet infinite? Immortal and yet killable? If he understands these words, why do they betray him?
 
Reapers are not infinite. Not individually or collectively. They have a beginning and they have all the time in the universe to find an end. Ask Sovereign. It made the same assumption about itself before it was destroyed.  
 

Synthesis


"My mind is still my own... for now. But the transformation from ally to servant can be subtle."
"Sovereign's manipulating you and you don't even know it! You're already under its power!"
 
The epilogue slides are narrated by a reaper influenced EDI whose perceives the galaxy in the way the Reapers desire her to.  Like the Control narrator, EDI speaks in terms of what will be; not what is. EDI seems sure that peace will reign across the galaxy in a grand utopia. Dr. Kenson also envisioned this Reaper ushered utopia while she was indoctrinated. Saren envisioned a grand destiny for organics brought on by synthesis while under the influence of indoctrination. How does EDI arrive at this conclusion if everyone's free will remains intact? Why would she assume anything will be different if no one has been fundamentally changed psychologically? She has to know something we don't, consciously or otherwise.
 
I conclude that free will as we know it, the "petty freedoms" that Saren points out, are removed from the equation. This can be taken as a good or bad thing. One could argue that we never had free will. We act and react according to chemistry. Mother Nature dictates our motivations and the illusion of choice is merely our predisposition to identify with the will of nature.  Instead of maintaining conscious objectivity and knowing "this form requires chemical energy", we are identified with the natural world and think, "I am hungry". But in nature there is the survival of the fittest. Traits designed to make us successful in a dog eat dog world. There is fear, selfishness and anger. These are things which result in conflict and suffering. Instead of mother nature to guide our supposed free will the Reapers guide it in a way that is more appropriate for our level of advancement. Synthesis is therefore not an abrogation of free will. As there was never any genuine free will to begin with. Synthesis is therefore the replacement of an outdated pre-industrial psychology for a newer, more appropriate, psychology for the modern age. You will still have people who are certain that they are special and different than every other creature in the natural order. They will insist they do, in fact, possess genuine free will and will view the Reaper modifications as an abrogation of their supposed right to self-determinate. Ignorance is bliss. But some people will insist that ignorance is immoral. Ultimately, it is up to the player to decide if Synthesis is good or bad.
 
Of course, this all hinges on rather or not the cycle continues or the Reapers view the current situation as satisfactory. It has been established in Part III of this thesis that Synthesis is not the Reapers' ideal outcome. Is there a possibility that the Reapers will continue the cycle in a non-violent manner or  work to reverse synthesis so that life, and the cycles, can continue as it was? Conceivably, yes, but there is nothing in the ending to substantiate the claim definitively.  But it seems likely to me. For one, ALL life is synthesized. Therefore, evolution has been stifled throughout the entire galaxy. The cavemen of our day will forever be cavemen. The toad lizards of Omicron Persei 8 may never evolve into the space faring Omicronian race as their DNA is "perfected" in synthesis. Plants and beasts cease to adapt and change. The possible advent of immortality may result in a return to the cycles for the sake of population control. The only difference being that everyone agrees to become Reapers. That or all life is halted as is and no new life is ever allowed to come to fruition. Both are unappealing in my opinion. Where Control is definitely a continuation of the cycle, Synthesis is more vague in terms of exactly what happens next. Regardless, the writers perpetuate the indoctrinated perspective on the player even after the credits have rolled.
 
Overall, I would say that Destroy is Freedom, Synthesis is Enslavement and Control is Destruction. Refuse represents Defeatism which is the antithesis of the entire series.
 
 
Why deceive the player?

If Control and Synthesis ended like the Refusal Ending it would invalidate those endings for the majority of players. Refuse was only added because players requested the option (albeit with a different outcome in mind). The player must be allowed to believe in the endings or else everyone would simply reload and pick Destroy. It would defeat the effort put into making the endings. Shepard falling prey to indoctrination, although not the ideal conclusion, is still a narratively sound outcome. And in this way the writers keep those endings valid by having the epilogue continue from the indoctrinated perspective. Who would pick an indoctrinated ending otherwise? Not many.


 
Speculation for Everyone!
 
Note that the Reapers chose to present themselves in the form of the child Shepard encounters for a few brief moments on Earth. A child that no other person sees or interacts with. A child that, for some unknown reason, haunts Shepard's dreams instead of others he has lost who were actually close to him. Dreams full of whispers and oily shadows. The very fact that Starbinger is appearing in this form demonstrates that it is in Shepard's head. What other technology is capable of reading a man's mind in the Mass Effect universe? Not to mention its voice is overlaid with Shepard's own voice whispering each line into his subconscious. I doubt there was even an AI on the Citadel. It was just Harbinger or a collective of reapers speaking to Shepard via hallucination like Harbinger does at the end of the Arrival DLC. It claims to be a part of the Citadel yet it cannot control the Citadel relay, the mass relay network or any of the Citadel's systems. The only thing it can control is the reaper device in the docking chamber, but reapers controlling reaper devices regardless of distance is nothing new.
 
The final battle is against indoctrination. It is a battle of will and conviction. Some of us won. Some of you lost. 

Modifié par The Twilight God, 15 septembre 2012 - 07:33 .

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

You're right about there not being a pro-control option but to me, the focus seems to be less on Control being dumb and more on control not being possible and TIM not being able to control them even it were possible.

And as we stand before Starbinger in the docking chamber we still have no legitimate reason whatsoever to believe control is possible. In fact, we have every reason not to believe it.

The Twilight God wrote...

Here is the logical deduction:

1. The Crucible docks, but is not doing anything.
2. Shepard interacts with the prongs.
3. The Crucible arms itself and fires.
4. It is thus inferred that Shepard's interaction with the control prongs was in accordance with the overall contraption's intended purpose.
5. It can thus be further inferred that the control prongs, and by association the entire contraption, were constructed with the intent of interacting with the Crucible.
6. It has been confirmed in the very opener of the segment that the contraptions at eye level are NOT a part of the Crucible.
7. The contraptions are built into and plugged into the Citadel.
8. If the contraptions were built by the Citadel's organic inhabitants, per the Crucible's schematics, it would be known that the Citadel was a component beforehand. That is not the case.
9. The Citadel is of Reaper construction.
10. Conclusion: the Reapers built the Contraption.
11. If the Reapers built a contraption that interfaces with the Crucible, the Reaper must have some technical details on the Crucible in order to have the understanding of how it works in order to build a device tailored to interfacing with the Crucible.

A question emerges: Why would the Reapers build a device of their own volition with the sole purpose of interfacing with the Crucible in order to give a single person the capability to take control of the Reaper Collective?

They wouldn't.

Do you disagree with me? If so, would you mind pointing out where I've made a gross error in logic.

[megamacka]

Speculation for Everyone! 

Were those leaked ending notes confirmed to be real? That right there ...... lol
Tbh, if they would come out and confirm this theory ( they wont, people will get butthurt ) then.... Bravo, genius.
A great success, there was speculation indeed...

Modifié par megamacka, 25 août 2012 - 01:31 .

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...


Speculation for Everyone! 

Were those leaked ending notes confirmed to be real? That right there ...... lol
Tbh, if they would come out and confirm this theory ( they wont, people will get butthurt ) then.... Bravo, genius.
A great success, there was speculation indeed...

I only saw the squadmate lines on the EC files. You found something more?

[Fixers0]

The Twilight God wrote...
 The only thing it can control is the reaper device in the docking chamber

And the Crucible itself, to be correct.

The Twilight God wrote...
The final battle is against indoctrination. It is a battle of will and conviction. Some of us won. Some of you lost.

I have to ask: why the difference.

And wouldn't it be a much more easier conclusion that  the endings we're just really lousy written and that the Concepts of Control and synthesis don't make any sense on  a basic level.

And one other question, with Control and synthesis is that  you claim that Shepard has no prior data that  grabbing the control prongs/jumping into the beam will do nothing but kill him, and i have to ask, isn't the same applicable to destroy?, you shoot the tube, explosion follows, Shepard dead, Reapers continue. 

Modifié par Fixers0, 25 août 2012 - 07:31 .

[dreman9999]

Fixers0 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
 The only thing it can control is the reaper device in the docking chamber

And the Crucible itself, to be correct.

The Twilight God wrote...
The final battle is against indoctrination. It is a battle of will and conviction. Some of us won. Some of you lost.

I have to ask: why the difference.

And wouldn't it be a much more easier conclusion that  the endings we're just really lousy written and that the Concepts of Control and synthesis don't make any sense on  a basic level.

And one other question, with Control and synthesis is that  you claim that Shepard has no prior data that  grabbing the control prongs/jumping into the beam will do nothing but kill him, and i have to ask, isn't the same applicable to destroy?, you shoot the tube, explosion follows, Shepard dead, Reapers continue. 

1. the docking chamber is part of the crucible.
2.Control makes sense. It's a mass rewrite of the reapers and catalyst systems.
Added you need to understand that the catalystis forced to help Shepard. The catalyst is not lieing.

[Reptilian Rob]

Wow, great read! Looking forward to more, keep it up!

[Fixers0]

dreman9999 wrote...

2.Control makes sense. It's a mass rewrite of the reapers and catalyst systems.
Added you need to understand that the catalystis forced to help Shepard. The catalyst is not lieing.

I still can't comprehend grabbing to electrified handles, makes you control the reapers.

Modifié par Fixers0, 25 août 2012 - 08:05 .

[dreman9999]

Fixers0 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2.Control makes sense. It's a mass rewrite of the reapers and catalyst systems.
Added you need to understand that the catalystis forced to help Shepard. The catalyst is not lieing.

I still can't comprehend grabbing to electrified handles, makes you control the reapers.

The same way an organic mind can interface with a geth consesus.

[Fixers0]

dreman9999 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

2.Control makes sense. It's a mass rewrite of the reapers and catalyst systems.
Added you need to understand that the catalystis forced to help Shepard. The catalyst is not lieing.

I still can't comprehend grabbing to electrified handles, makes you control the reapers.

The same way an organic mind can interface with a geth consesus.

Nonsensecial writing, then.