1238 réponses à ce sujet

[The Twilight God]

Lord Goose wrote...

I just have serious douts that Hackett will care about Zaeed, Samara and Reela, or Jack specifically.

It has never been stated that Hackett does care about Zaeed, Samara, Reela or Jack. You are the one implying an erroneous correlation between the slides and Hackett's narration. The narration is the same no matter what choices you make or what pictures appears on sceen. I don't know how else to convey to you that the slides are meaningless in and off themselves and require you, the player, to presume meaning. You are effectively arguing with yourself.

Lord Goose wrote...

I assume what you are no expert of Mass Relay technology. I am neither. Therefore the debate about them is fruitless, since you don't have capacity to know how exactly Mass Relays works and how hard it will be to rebuild them after Destroy. And even if you do, I do not have capacity to verify it, since it requires knowledge that I am lacking.

We don't have to be "experts of Mass Relay technology" to know that no living species other than the Reapers understand how they work.

The ME3 codex states, "Mass relays were in fact created by the Reapers using technology far beyond that of other living species." Furthermore, mass relays couldn't be taken apart practically because they are "protected by a quantum shield that renders them nearly impervious to damage by locking their structure in place at the subatomic level."

You're trying to handwave these fact because you know you're on the wrong side of this discussion.

Lord Goose wrote...

However, since it is fictional universe, where many unrealistic events did occur, I don't see any reason why another unrealistic from our stand point event will.

More handwaving. If the only thing your going to do is dismiss whatever you don't like and make declarations tantamount to "god did it", there is no point in you being here.  There is no point in an unscientific debate in which you fabricate favorable possibilities that aren't supported by the series' lore. This thread takes a logical approach to the endings. If your veiws are not based in logic and amount to blind speculation for the purpose of arriving at a preconceived conclusion your contributions lie outside theme of this thread.

Lord Goose wrote...

So, you admit that your take on the endings is different from that Bioware staff (including writers) said about it?

It's different than what Patrick Weekes supposedly told Mike Gamble.

Lord Goose wrote...

It could be depiction of the future, or that narrator thinks is going to happen, or Reaper-induced happy dream. Or regular dream. Or part of the fictional story told by Stargazer.

But in the absense of speculation and personal hope it amounts to nothing but pretty pictures for our benefit.

At PAX the Bioware panel clarified some things. "The main purpose of the extended scenes is to add 'a sense of personalization'. When you complete it, we hope you'll have the information and the context you need to feel satisfied." Mike Gamble went on to tweeted, "As i've said before,we do this for you! EC was our gift to the fans.Hope you enjoyed."

The EC is a reaction to a complaint. It was never intended and only served to placate the fanbase. Bioware was true to their word for the most part when they stated the endings would not change. The only change was retconning Mac Walters' wasteland.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

@TTG Stop editing other people's post. Onlyy makes you look like a raving lunatic who sees what he wants to see and ignores the rest.

You have eyes. You saw his posts and you can come to your own conclusions concerning my paraphrase. Notice it says "Fixers0 paraphrased" as opposed to "Fixers0 wrote..." I was not quoting him. 

His entire reply was filled with nothing but blatant denial, ignorance, handwaving and ad hominems. I will not entertain butthurt Bad Writting theory fanatics who can't handle the fact that there are no good endings. If he wants to seriously rebute my thesis he is welcome to try.

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

I think TTG is incapablle of understanding that sometimes, writers just screw up. That not everything is an elaborate idea that uses both lore and meta.

And what proof do you have that they "just screwed up'?

Exactly. You have none. You are making a deliberate choice to ignore the existence of indoctrination in order to claim that something that makes sense, doesn't make sense. You WANT that to be the case because otherwise you can't have your good ending.

Why do you think the Reapers wouldn't attempt to indoctrinate Shepard?

Modifié par The Twilight God, 07 septembre 2012 - 04:53 .

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...

You see, this is how I interpreted the ending post EC DLC and it actually helped me sleep better at night and not cry in the shower and yell WHY. Unless Bioware comes forth and confirms anything, Both you and I are just as much wrong/right as the other. They even said ( can't remember who ) in an interview ( that is on youtube, If you really really want leave a comment and I'll find it for you ) that they don't want to change or affect how people interpret the ending, basically. We are both right. The difference is, that some come here trying to RUIN the ending for me and a lot of people. I think that this is wrong, if you don't want to believe in this then fine. Goodbye, but don't come here and bash it trying to destroy what little hope remains for this series to me. That's just called being a douche.

They aren't ruining anything. They have not made a single rebuttal to any part of my thesis. Just blanket denial.

"It's bad writing so why it's bad writting doesn't have to be explained because it's just bad and you just have to accept it it is bad because we say so." 
 
 
They are claiming "The Force was not used by a force user in a Star Wars universe".

Carl: That scene is bad writing. Why are they trying to high five each other. Do they have magnets in thier hands or something preventing it? LOL! Did the magnets push them away? Makes no sense! George Lucas sucks.
Bob: Obi Wan and Anakin are obviously using the force. It's a pretty important part of the Star Wars universe.
Carl: No, there is no force powers in the scene. It's just bad writing.
Bob: No, the force is an established plot device. Both Obi Wan and Anakin are force users. It only makes sense if the force was in play. Using the force is pretty much what force users do.
Carl: Headcanon. Pure speculation on your part. Sure they CAN use the force, but they decided not to in that scene. You just need to accept that the Star Wars writers suck.
Bob: No, the lore supports the fact that the force was used. You're intentionally ignoring the one obvious reason for the scene playing out the way it does.
Carl: Lalalalalalalalalalalala - BAD WRITING - Lalalalalalalalalalalalala - CAN'T HEAR YOU!!! - Lalalalalalalalalalalala!!!!

Same difference. Claiming Reapers (habitual indoctrination users) didn't use indoctrination in a life or death situation in the Mass Effect universe.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 07 septembre 2012 - 08:48 .

[Lord Goose]

We don't have to be "experts of Mass Relay technology" to know that no living species other than the Reapers understand how they work.

On the other hand, we have to be experts to understand how much Mass Relays network was damaged in Destroy ending, and to make valid estimation how much time and resources reconstruction will take.

More handwaving.

I am not saying that unrealistic event definitely did occur. But we can't dismiss the possibility of it, just because explanation seems to be flimsy to us. Since we are no experts on Mass Relays technology and all that stuff.

It's different than what Patrick Weekes supposedly told Mike Gamble.

Chris Priestly. It was Chris Priestly, who asked Patrick Weeks, who said it.

So, just to clarify, your take on the endings is not the same as that one which was voiced by Bioware staff (and writers)?

At PAX the Bioware panel clarified some things. "The main purpose of the extended scenes is to add 'a sense of personalization'. When you complete it, we hope you'll have the information and the context you need to feel satisfied." Mike Gamble went on to tweeted, "As i've said before,we do this for you! EC was our gift to the fans.Hope you enjoyed."

This information helps us to determine purpose of these slides. But it is meaningless, since we argue about their nature. They still could be meaningless pretty pictures inserted for players satisfaction. Or they could be depictions of the future in Mass Effect Universe inserted for players satisfaction. Or they could be part of the Reaper-induced dream, normal dreams...

Modifié par Lord Goose, 07 septembre 2012 - 05:44 .

[Ranger Jack Walker]

The Twilight God wrote...

Why do you think the Reapers wouldn't attempt to indoctrinate Shepard?

Indoctrination comes in 2 forms. The fast type where the victim becomes little more than a husk and the slow type which takes a long time.

Now Shepard been in contact with Reaper tech lots of times. So slow indoctrination is possible. However, nothing in the game states that the Reapers must force it at the last minute for it to be succesful. We know that if the reapers force the indoctrination, the victim becomes a mindless husk. So forcing it at the last minute would not only be wasteful in Shepard's case but also negate all the instances where Shepard has been in contact with reaper tech.
 
What I mean is that either Shepard is already indoctrinated at that point in which case, its already hopeless since there's no one to make him/her realize it and the reapers are wasting their time since they've already acheived their 'goal' or Shepard isnt indcotrinated at that point and forcing it at the last minute will only turn Shepard into a husk in which case, the reapers are wasting their time. The reapers don't need to force indoctrination on someone whos been slowly indoctrinated as that would ruin everything. At what point do they 'start' the 'final step'? When he reaches the citadel? So why isn't every single person who ever spent time on the citadel also indoctrinated?

So are the Reapers wasting their time? Or are they wasting their time and previous efforts as well?

Also, te Leviathans have flat out stated that the Catalyst exists and it's mandate is to preserve life and prevent it's own self-destruction. They also state that it's different from the reapers.


I find it very strange that you are accusing others of handwaving facts and ignoring contradictions when you yourself are the single biggest culprit of fact ignoring that I've ever had the misfortune of coming across. I've long since lost the hope of having an intelligent converstaion with you what with your blatant double standard that not even funny anymore.

Modifié par Ranger Jack Walker, 07 septembre 2012 - 05:52 .

[kazE]

This was simpy a fascinating read TTG, I appreciate the hard work and time you put into this thesis [and subsequent replies]. After finishing ME3 for the first time yesterday this explanation logically explains a lot of questions I had regarding the ending. While sure it's all technically speculation at this point, this will remain my belief until proven otherwise. The ending still remains a painful disappointment, but this does paint the final events in a much better light. Like you said, I'd rather choose to believe "nu-IT" than atrociously horrendous writing.

Modifié par kazE, 08 septembre 2012 - 12:58 .

[Robert-42]

When the Citadel fired we didn't see the portal to the orion-nebula open. So if the Reaper have left something there (Maybe even the Reaper KI itself?) It won't be touched by any of the endings.

So all endings could be just there to pretend the repaers have lost in order to have time to develop a Plan B

Modifié par Robert-42, 08 septembre 2012 - 11:32 .

[The Twilight God]

Zagardal wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
My guess: Because if the Reapers set up a fool proof plan the protagonist couldn't win. No one wants to play
a game, much less a trilogy, in which their defeat was set in stone from the very get go.

If it serves as a setting for a future game, and things are explained properly, I wouldn't mind. I don't mind that on books or movies either. The sens of hopelessness at the end of a story can be quite powerful.

I agree. I was actually expecting an ending akin to the second Matrix movie. The Crucible, in addtion to being a MacGuffin, trivilizes the Reapers. It simply didn't feel like a war. The Reapers have been harvesting species for millions of years and the extermination of species is typically drawn out for centuries. We beat the Reapers in a few months. The fact that the Reaper could not detect a prothean base on Mars I found questionable. Also the fact that there was no pop-up stating "ATTENTION: THE REAPERS ARE COMING!!! CLICK HERE FOR CRUCIBLE SCHEMATIC!!!" every time someone accessed the archive made no sense. Liara's beacons got right to the point. You would think something that important would be given the priority it deserves. There were so many ways I could think of to stop the reapers.

ME3: rally the races, Crucible trap
ME4: Figure out how to stop the reapers, meet the leviathans, stop the Reapers

I wouldn't mind if Shepard died in a way that Aeris died in Final Fantasy 7. Whatever his sacrifice is it opens the door for whatever eventual victory would come in later installments.
 

[The Twilight God]

Pitznik wrote...

Introducing indoctrination and not revealing it would be what then, good writing? Kick the indoctrination out of your theory and it is probably the most logical interpretation of the ending that ever happened on those forums.

That's like saying kick the natural selection from my evolution theory.

Reapers apply indoctrination habitually. How on Earth anyone can think they would not continue that practice on Shepard when their very existence is on the line is beyond me.  It's an absurd notion.


"Reaper “indoctrination” is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, “reprogramming” the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper’s resulting control over the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestion.
...
A Reaper’s “suggestions” can manipulate victims into betraying friends, trusting enemies, or viewing the Reaper itself with superstitious awe."

[The Twilight God]

Book of Mazarbul wrote...

The bomb went off, and everyone was blinded by the cloud of grit and rubble. The difference between you and everyone else is that we've opened our eyes and are patching our wounds, and you're still trying to put the pin back in the grenade. 

What I never understood is this idea that indoctrination somehow makes the ending great. I have never said I like the route Bioware took with the endings. I am simply calling it how I see it. It is you and your ilk who seem to believe Indoctrination Theory = fantastic ending. And the idea that the ending is sensical and narratively sound seems to bother you. For all your rhetoric about me not "patching wounds" it is you who is harboring all the frustration and anger. It is you who is so angry with Bioware for not making the game you wanted that you feel the need to **** over their work. You're the one making a conscious decision to ignore the fact that reapers use indoctrination in order to come to a preconceived conclusion in order to assert such and such writers suck. Boo-hoo. You're mad at Bioware. Maybe if you keep insulting them they change it just for. We get it. Get over it.

[megamacka]

Introducing indoctrination and not revealing it would be what then, good writing? Kick the indoctrination out of your theory and it is probably the most logical interpretation of the ending that ever happened on those forums.

Actually yes.... It would be FANTASTIC writing.
Tricking the player ( aka indoctrinating the player ) successfully without them knowing it = awesome writing. Bioware have AMAZING writers on their team, I find it difficult to believe that they actually managed to write an awful ending to their top and award winning series....

And what do you mean with '' introducing '' ? Indoctrination has been around and has been the main plot device since ME1.... And obviously they wouldn't reveal it, what would be the point in tricking /indoctrinating the player if they would just go '' oh and btw, we fooled you lolz ''. They wanted you to speculate, what is there to speculate about if the ending is actually what it appears?

   Whatever or not it makes the ending fantastic is another story. I never liked the whole crucible thing anyway.
I think that the crucible should have been revealed to be a trap or not exist at all and you manage to destroy the reapers with the full might of the combined galaxy ( maybe with the Leviathans help ) or some kind of '' anti reaper weapons/ canon '' I dunno really. It kinda would've been a '' hah, jokes on you reapers. The crucible united us ''.

  The last scene fighting the reaper imo should have been Harbringer landing infront of Shepard and then having Shepard have a speech in the line with '' We may seem so insignificant to you but guess what, we prevailed! Now.... F YOU!'' ( I am not a writer, but some epic speech ) and then have all the fleets lock on to Harbringer ( his the last one standing ) and then see him get obliterated. The whole series was always about friendship and bringing people together, everyone combined fighting the reapers would have been awesome ( we never really got this, Earth kinda felt rushed as hell ).

   Low EMS could have been you and your squad dying/ getting overrun or whatever down on earth but still have the fleets wiping out the reapers with HEAVY losses tho. And then the High EMS you and your squad survives and get this '' F YOU '' speech from shepard to Harbringer.

  I also believe that the Epilogue should've covered the SERIES not just ME3. I didn't feel like anyones sacrifice or any choice really mattered. It would've been cool to have had shepard looking at the memorial wall and then touching it looking all sad or something, not saying anything tho. It would have been a great way to show that their sacrifices mattered and would have added a lot.

Modifié par megamacka, 08 septembre 2012 - 08:34 .

[Zagardal]

The Twilight God wrote...
The fact that the Reaper could not detect a prothean base on Mars I found questionable. Also the fact that there was no pop-up stating "ATTENTION: THE REAPERS ARE COMING!!! CLICK HERE FOR CRUCIBLE SCHEMATIC!!!" every time someone accessed the archive made no sense. Liara's beacons got right to the point. You would think something that important would be given the priority it deserves. There were so many ways I could think of to stop the reapers.

I found that a bit out of place too, but the hole Javik arc explains that their methods of communications were much more advanced and they expected the same from the dominant species of the next cycle. In their eyes, the beacon was all we needed. Either way, if Liara was intelligent enough to translate the message in every known language and dialect, so should have been the protheans (you could blame it on their arrogance, but I don't know if that's the case). To me, that's an oversight on the side of the writers, but a necessity as well; prophecies of doom need to be cryptic enough so that only a few can be aware of them, making them the "misunderstood mesiahs" if you will. If everybody knew since the original ME that the cyborg cuttlefish were gunning for the whole galaxy, that would make shep's journey much less interesting as a challenge for the audience.

[The Twilight God]

Lord Goose wrote...

On the other hand, we have to be experts to understand how much Mass Relays network was damaged in Destroy ending, and to make valid estimation how much time and resources reconstruction will take.

No, we don't have to be experts on that either. Mainly because it doesn't matter how long it takes to figure out mass relay technology. Even if they did know how to fix them there is still the issue of long term self-sufficient FTL flotillas. That will require the construction of liveships, training and the transport of large quantities of materials for repairs (relays are huge). This involves gathering raw materials, capable manpower, establishing surface-to-orbit supply chain, constructing orbital infrastructure (i.e. shipyards), building mobile fuel refinery ships, mobile material processing ships, mobile helium-3 extractor ships and liveships. Basically, coordinating everything necessary for long term self-sustained space travel. And even then they can't travel in a straight line as they will have to zig-zag stopping in systems with planets suitable for drive core discharge and hydrogen skimming.

There is alot of risk in this because they will be traveling through uncharted territory. Times may come where they have to send smaller scout ships ahead because they can't risk taking larger ships to a new system that has no suitable worlds for a larger vessels to discharge. It will be a slow arduous journey. Even at 12 LY per day it will take 22-27 years to cross the galaxy if traversed in a straight line with no stops. Zig-zagging, fuel collection and processing and then the relay repairs themselves. It's gonna take awhile. The codex says centuries. Reaper cores might cut that time in half. Hopefully quarian plants can grow on earth soil or the Turians are going to be fighting the Quarians for food rations.

Lord Goose wrote...

So, just to clarify, your take on the endings is not the same as that one which was voiced by Bioware staff (and writers)?

You mean writer (singular). I don't know what any writer's take is as they aren't honest or straight forward enough for me to take anything they say seriously. Obviously, he wouldn't tell people its intent is to placate the fanbase so it's a moot point.

However, if Patrick Weekes's honest take on them were that they were visions of the future I'd have to disagree with him as it isn't possible within the game world the writers wrote.

For the sake of perspective, here are some other quotes from that same Q&A:

"Yes, the Extended Cut should not affect the overall IT as I understand it (however, there are multiple iterations of this popular theory and it's possible that some speculations have been proven untrue). I actually have a dedicated saved game in which I play keeping IT in mind and I have another game that I view as a strictly literal interpretation."

"The team went to great lengths to put meaning and layers of metaphor into the game. There's a lot of cool symbolism if you take the time to look for it. Definitely intentional and we want players to decide what those meanings are for themselves."

"You see a mix of literal and symbolic meanings within ME3 and it's up to you to determine which is which."

Modifié par The Twilight God, 09 septembre 2012 - 03:24 .

[Lord Goose]

Mainly because it doesn't matter how long it takes to figure out mass relay technology.

We have to understand extents of the damage done to Mass Relays by Destroy wave in order to make any valid estimations about how much time, effort and resources their reconstruction will require.

Where are also issue about how much ending slides are tied to Mass Relays. Zaeed's for example is perfectly possible in a few days after the victory.

You mean writer (singular). I don't know what any writer's take is as they aren't honest or straight forward enough for me to take anything they say seriously. Obviously, he wouldn't tell people its intent is to placate the fanbase so it's a moot point.

Well, Bioware staff including at least one writer. But, I see. You mean, that if their take is different from yours, they are either dishonest or mistaken?

For the sake of perspective, here are some other quotes from that same Q&A:

Well, it was said by Jessica Meritzan... But if you are agree with her, here is full quote.

"Yes, the Extended Cut should not affect the overall IT as I understand it (however, there are multiple iterations of this popular theory and it's possible that some speculations have been proven untrue). I actually have a dedicated saved game in which I play keeping IT in mind and I have another game that I view as a strictly literal interpretation.

The team went to great lengths to put meaning and layers of metaphor into the game. There's a lot of cool symbolism if you take the time to look for it. Definitely intentional and we want players to decide what those meanings are for themselves. These games are all about player agency so we feel that it would be wrong to provide a "canon" path or one "true" narrative. Ultimately, the work has to stand on its own and players decide what they think is happening."

If we take what statement as it is, you free do think that slides are funny meaningless pictures, "mainstream" ITers free to think that they are Reaper-induced dreams, and I'm going to stick with idea, that they are visions of the new galaxy as seen by rogue Reaper, who was controlling Shepard throught all three games, and managed to survive Destroy by deactivating himself prematurely.

And, are you sure what she was talking about your Indoctrination Theory? Because, as I remember, you adopted this name fairly recently.

[SubAstris]

TwilightGod is the definition of arguing with a brick wall, has to be said.

[megamacka]

Ultimately, the work has to stand on its own and players decide what they think is happening

Absolutely fantastic! So what the heck is the problem coming here to try and bash other people? All of this is getting repetitive, you guys don't answer a simply put question by Twilight and then you claim that his ignoring your questions and then the circle commences. You put out evidence against, and then twilight counters and then circle logics commences again.

'' I am right because you are wrong.... ''

Oh but jolly time! Jolly time indeed! That quote was candy, now please get out of this thread and stick to YOUR way of interpretating the ending.

http://gifsoup.com/i...p?id=852722&t=o

Modifié par megamacka, 09 septembre 2012 - 01:27 .

[Lord Goose]

Oh but jolly time! Jolly time indeed! That quote was candy, now please get out of this thread and stick to YOUR way of interpretating the ending.

Well, I wouldn't be arguing if someone said: "This is my interpretation of the ending, and it is as valid as yours". Usually it is: "I am right, and everyone who speaks otherwise is either lying, or mistaken", so...

[The Twilight God]

Lord Goose wrote...

Where are also issue about how much ending slides are tied to Mass Relays. Zaeed's for example is perfectly possible in a few days after the victory.

Yes, it plausible. No doubt. But then we'd be picking and choosing. I'm not saying he doesn't relax somewhere or that Jacob and Shepard can't go to a bar in Rio or whatever. Just saying those slides aren't the future as they (as a whole) contradict the state of the galaxy. Rannoch is on the other side of the galaxy. There will be no cities on Rannoch for a Looooooooong time. The main problem is they are showing character on their homeworlds who either should have died before a route is established or be far older than they are shown.

Lord Goose wrote...

Well, Bioware staff including at least one writer. But, I see. You mean, that if their take is different from yours, they are either dishonest or mistaken?

Christ and Mike aren't writters. They only know and report what they are told. They tow the company line. 

The entire point of indoctrinating the player is defeated if you reveal it. Therefore, they cannot do anything to burst that bubble. They can't say anything that in any way deprives players of their post credit impressions of the endings. So if someone asks about a slide they certainly aren;t going to say "Oh, that stuff doesn't actually happen. Ignore it" or "Yeah, these pictures are genuine, but those other ones are just what they are hoping will happen".

In that regard, yes, they are being dishonest. Not simply because they make states that aren't 100% aligned with my thesis. They have been dishonest about alot fo things that have nothing to do with endings. Their integrity capital is worthless now. Project X was a mere rumor, but Christ Preistly denies it and now it's practically a confirmation for alot of people. It's really sad where this company has gone.

Lord Goose wrote...

Well, it was said by Jessica Meritzan... But if you are agree with her, here is full quote.

"[...]Ultimately, the work has to stand on its own and players decide what they think is happening."

Yes, what they think is happening. People are free to believe whatever they want, but that doesn't make all veiws equally valid. There are certain facts which dictate what is definitively happening. People insist on being willfully ignorant. Look at the "conventional victory" people. They KNOW they are full of it, but yet they keep at it regardless because they want to believe it. Even if it's ridiculous and can be proven wrong. Now Refusal isn't a defeat. We actually won and the female stargazer is just one of the current cycles descendants 10K yars after the battle over Earth. Sorry, but that just isn't a valid veiw. People are free to believe it, but it isn't valid.

Quite frankly, there are easy and obvious methods to ensure no indoctrination could have occured. Kill off the Reapers in every ending. Control would actually make sense if Shep is only controlling empty reaper dreadnaughts and synthesis could just effect the people in the local cluster. They don't become synthesized themselves, but their offspring will be. The new DNA will then spread "naturally" from generation to generation until eventually in the distant future everyone will be improved and these new supermen will propell the galaxy to new heights. Destroy would just be destroy, but Shepard lives and gets a reunion. Making it a selfish "renegade" choice. The other two feel like real sacrifices like Dragon Age: Origin vs semi-forced. Control could actually have Shepard wake up after 10 years or so at the end to replace the Stargazer (sort of like a breath scene). Both Synthesis and Control could have big funerals (although control would be a mock funeral as the body is technically still alive) aired across the galaxy showing all the different planets and races watching. Wrex, Garrus, EDI, etc. as paul bearers. Squad saying their dues, etc. I sure as heck don't like the fact that I only have one ending to chose from. I'd love a sacrifice ending that wasn't in vain. They could have put Vendetta on the Crucible so he could varify the validity of synthesis and control and ensure that no funny business was going on. This doesn't take genius level writters.

But this wasn't done in ME3. It blatantly cries out "SHEPARD IS INDOCTRINATED!!!". Nothing is introduced to explain his newfound absolute blind faith and trust in the Reapers. It is narratively impossibnle for indoctrination not to be the cause. It would be like Ripley at the end of Aliens tossing Newt to the Queen to distract the Queen long enough to save her own hide. She cared so much for the girl and put her life on the line too many times for that to make any sense. It would be completely out of character. That's what ME3 ending is without indoctrination. But Reapers do indoctrinate. It is what they do habitually. To say no indoctrination occurred is like saying Obi Wan has magnets implants that makes his lightsaber fly over into his hands. Or that he's just extremely lucky when he blocks blaster bolts. Because no way a jedi is using the force, right?

Lord Goose wrote...

And, are you sure what she was talking about your Indoctrination Theory? Because, as I remember, you adopted this name fairly recently.

No. I never implied that anything she said has anything to do with my thesis in particular. Just pointing out that they say many things. Much of which is contradicting. They've said Shepard dies in high EMS destroy, that the breathe scene is in the tower, that Shepard feel onto a ward, that reaper Shepard is Shepard, that reaper Shepard is just a copy, etc. etc.

[The Twilight God]

SubAstris wrote...

TwilightGod is the definition of arguing with a brick wall, has to be said.

And I suppose you have alot of experience arguing with brick walls. I take it you're constantly outwitted.

It all makes sense now.

[SubAstris]

The Twilight God wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

TwilightGod is the definition of arguing with a brick wall, has to be said.

And I suppose you have alot of experience arguing with brick walls. I take it you're constantly outwitted.

It all makes sense now.

It's FACT, not opinion. Your taking offense to it doesn't make it any less true.

But hurry along, I guess you have to "argue" with the few people who you have not completely alienated so far.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Indoctrination comes in 2 forms. The fast type where the victim becomes little more than a husk and the slow type which takes a long time.

Now Shepard been in contact with Reaper tech lots of times. So slow indoctrination is possible. However, nothing in the game states that the Reapers must force it at the last minute for it to be succesful. We know that if the reapers force the indoctrination, the victim becomes a mindless husk. So forcing it at the last minute would not only be wasteful in Shepard's case but also negate all the instances where Shepard has been in contact with reaper tech.

How is ensuring their continued existence wasteful? You expect the Reapers do roll over and die rather than "waste" Shepard? Wouldn't their continued existence outweight the risks of attempting to acquire an intact Shepard?

Shepard has proven quite resistent to indoctrination. As Liara says, he is a very strong willed individual. But there is a limit. Proximity to Harbinger has been prove in the past to intensify the effects. The chat with Harbinger at the end of Arrival and (possibly) the chat with Harbinger in the guise of a kid. Harbinger allowed Shepard to live. Why would he do that if he had no plan in mind to bend his will? Was he going to let Shepard win? The beam he fires at Shepard path is to the left of Shepard (changed in the EC) as not to strike him. Yet he knocks aircraft out of the sky with pinpoint accuracy. There are two soldiers running ahead of Shepard who Harbinger blasts away in two pinpoint shots. If Reapers have eyes and it saw the Normandy dispite the stealth drive it stands to reason it did not blow it up for fear of Shepard being killed by the explosion. And you think it allowed Shepard to live and carry on without any ulterior motive?

Since when do Reapers not use indoctrination? I've seen nothing to suggest that reaper are even capable of not indoctrinating. I think it's automatic (purely speculation). It's hinted that Soveriegn was indoctrinating the people on Eden Prime dispite the fact that there was never any intent to stick around long enough to make them useful or keep them alive. 

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

What I mean is that either Shepard is already indoctrinated at that point in which case, its already hopeless since there's no one to make him/her realize it and the reapers are wasting their time since they've already acheived their 'goal' or Shepard isnt indcotrinated at that point and forcing it at the last minute will only turn Shepard into a husk in which case, the reapers are wasting their time. The reapers don't need to force indoctrination on someone whos been slowly indoctrinated as that would ruin everything. At what point do they 'start' the 'final step'? When he reaches the citadel? So why isn't every single person who ever spent time on the citadel also indoctrinated?

You're ignoring all data that is in conflict with your preconceived notions.

Harbinger spoke to Shepard via Hallucination at the end of Arrival. It was around 24 minutes out, traveling at at least 30 LY/per day. That's somewhere around 2.9 million miles away. He's alot closer to Shepard during the Battle of Earth. So he is within range to affect Shepard.

As I have said repeatedly, an indoctrination attempt is afoot. Rather or not it fails or succeeds is up to the player. Do you let the Reapers convince you (i.e. indoctrinate you) to see things their way or do you stick to your guns? 5 minutes prior Shepard as against Control. He had been against Control the entire game. No reason is given for this sudden change of heart and blind absolute trust in the Reapers. Synthesis wasn't even on the table prior to literally 1:55 before the ending cutscenes. Shepard dismissed it in ME1 as a form of slavery. Furthermore stating he'd rather die than be synthesized by the Reapers. Now he wants to do the Reapers work for them?

Synthesis: They indoctrinate you into veiwing the conflict from the perspective they want you to. They convince you that organics will always fight synthetics and synthetics will always kill organics. They convince you to kill yourself to further their goals. They convince you that they have our best interests in mind. Your choice to follow through with Synthesis is a validation of everything they've done in the past as the necessity of synthesis validates the Kid's logics. This is exactly what happens. There is no way you can seriously deny this. This is textbook indoctrination. 

Control: They indoctrinate you into believing you can control the Reapers. Just as they indoctrinated TIM into thinking he could control the Reapers; that he was in control when you encountered him on the Citadel. You, the player, believed in the Reapers and acted in a way that proves you trusted them. This is textbook indoctrination.

"Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology. It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned. As such the term may be used pejoratively, often in the context of education, political opinions, theology or religious dogma."

I am critically thinking and questioning the Kid. You are not.


"Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper's resulting control over the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestions."
Organics undergoing indoctrination may complain of headaches and buzzing or ringing in their ears. As time passes, they have feelings of "being watched" and hallucinations of "ghostly" presences. Ultimately, the Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify its signals, manifesting as "alien" voices in the mind.
Indoctrination can create perfect deep cover agents. A Reaper's "suggestions" can manipulate victims into betraying friends, trusting enemies, or viewing the Reaper itself with superstitious awe. Should a Reaper subvert a well-placed political or military leader, the resulting chaos can bring down nations.
Long-term physical effects of the manipulation are unsustainable, Higher mental functioning decays, ultimately leaving the victim a gibbering animal. Rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes this decay in days or weeks. Slow, patient indoctrination allows the thrall to last for months or years."

Even if the Reapers are making the final push to indoctrinate Shepard it's not going to instantly melt his brain and turn him into a drooling idiot as that can take days; definitely more than 30 minutes. The fact that you can resist in the form of the Destroy ending shows that Shepard is not completely lost. Again, I must reiterate that an indoctrination attempt is afoot. Rather or not it fails or succeeds is up to the player.

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Also, te Leviathans have flat out stated that the Catalyst exists and it's mandate is to preserve life and prevent it's own self-destruction. They also state that it's different from the reapers.

Leviathan is very speculatory. They state alot of things. Some of which can be construed as contradictory.

None of which proves the Kid is the Intelligence. None of which states the Intelligence is "different from the Reapers". In fact, Leviathan says it is responsible for everything. It is what gives the Reapers their mandate. The Reapers are the suicide bombers of Al-Qaeda and the Intelligence is Osama ibn Laden who inspires them. The Kid claims this itself.

Furthermore, Leviathan introduces reason to believe the Citadel was created after the fact, which would indicate the Citadel is not its home. ME1's entire plot dictates that there is no AI controlling the Citadel. And the catalyst is the Citadel. The Kid is completely unneccessary to the use of the Crucible for its intended purpose which I have proven in my thesis. As you have not debunked my thesis or offered any rational alternative, you are in de facto agreement with it within the context of this thread.

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

I find it very strange that you are accusing others of handwaving facts and ignoring contradictions when you yourself are the single biggest culprit of fact ignoring that I've ever had the misfortune of coming across. I've long since lost the hope of having an intelligent converstaion with you what with your blatant double standard that not even funny anymore.

I have never ignore anything. That is a blatant lie and you KNOW it.

List all the things I've ignored. I dare you. As you know I'll address every single thing and prove you wrong on the spot.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Hey, you just ignored the point that Reapers don't need to force the final indoctrination for it to be succesful. So what I'm saying about you ignoring stuff is not a blatant lie. Not only is it true, but you've convinced yourself that it isn't. Kind of like, oh I don't know, indoctrinated slaves?

Forcing Indoctrination quickly at the last minute would not instantly melt Shepard's brain but it would ruin the main purpose of slow indoctrination: To create deep cover agents who don't cause suspicion until it's too late.

[The Twilight God]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Hey, you just ignored the point that Reapers don't need to force the final indoctrination for it to be succesful. So what I'm saying about you ignoring stuff is not a blatant lie. Not only is it true, but you've convinced yourself that it isn't. Kind of like, oh I don't know, indoctrinated slaves?

Forcing Indoctrination quickly at the last minute would not instantly melt Shepard's brain but it would ruin the main purpose of slow indoctrination: To create deep cover agents who don't cause suspicion until it's too late.

Yes, it is a blatant lie as I addressed your statements with a counter question.

I'm not sure what you mean by "force indoctrination". There is a more rapid indoctrination, but forced? By definition, you can't force it. Indoctrination implies you make the choice. The reaper just providea the influence to get you to the point where your choices reflect its desires. So your statement is completely moot. If they could force it there would be no way to come to a favorable outcome. That would be the Leviathan form of control.

Here is another statement: Reaper's wear clothing on their terminator bodies inside the cuttefish ships. Like this example, you haven't made your case. Notice how I actually explain my points. I don't just make up claims out of thin air and assert they are valid for no other reason than that I choose to believe in them. I have actual arguments. Actual evidence. An order of locigical deduction in my thesis.

Your reply put forth the argument that because the Reapers have tried to take Shepard as intact as possible in the past, that they would not do anything that might harm Shepard or, as you put it, waste him. I countered this assertion by asking, "How is ensuring their continued existence wasteful? You expect the Reapers to roll over and die rather than "waste" Shepard [via rapid indoctrination]? Wouldn't their continued existence outweight the risks of attempting to acquire an intact Shepard?"

Please answer that question. Don't think for a second that I'm not aware you are trying to sidestep the points I made in my last reply. You conveniently ignore because you know it isn't going to go in your favor. This is my problem with you and your ilk. You know you are wrong and yet you insist on arguing a point you know you have lost. You're in a debate you know you can't win. My thesis is founded on indisputable facts which you could not, cannot and will not rationally dispute because it isn't possible. Its foundation is apparently that airtight. Water is wet and you know you can't prove it's dry.

So what are you doing? Why are you arguing against something you know for a fact you can't debunk and that you know is correct? If I wanted the world to be flat dispite all evidence to the contrary I sure wouldn't keep arguing the point against spherical earthers and astronauts. Especially if I know I'm wrong and am deliberately deluding myself.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 10 septembre 2012 - 07:06 .

[The Twilight God]

Lord Goose wrote...

Well, I wouldn't be arguing if someone said: "This is my interpretation of the ending, and it is as valid as yours". Usually it is: "I am right, and everyone who speaks otherwise is either lying, or mistaken", so...

But what if your "interpretation" isn't as valid as mine and I can prove it isn't?

[N7Gold]

A thought just came to me. I don't think there's an indoctrination scheme on Shepard afoot in ME3 until the Illusive Man confrontation on the Citadel. If the Reapers managed to indoctrinate Shepard, he/she wouldn't be able to control the Reapers or manifest Synthesis, he would be like Illusive Man, believing in control but can't really do it because the Reapers and Catalyst already control him/her. The Catalyst simply tries to play mind games on Shepard by making Destroy sound bittersweet, not sugarcoating Control too much and labeling Synthesis as the ideal solution.

Shepard: "So, The Illusive Man was right after all."

Intelligence: "Yes, but he could never have taken control, because we already controlled him."

As an indoctrinated puppet of the Catalyst, Illusive Man's goal with his mind controlling ability is to control Shepard's mind, force him/her to believe in Control and not destroy the Catalyst's work in manifesting the Synthesis solution.

Illusive Man: "I underestimated you, Shepard. I warned you, control is the means to survival, control of the Reapers, and of you, if necessary."

Shepard (renegade dialogue): "Why waste your time with us when you can control the Reapers?"

Illusive Man: "Because... I need you to believe."

Shepard (paragon dialogue): "Controlling me is a lot different than controlling a Reaper."

Illusive Man: "Have a little faith..."


A different form of indoctrination is needed to persuade Shepard. That's why Illusive Man didn't want Miranda to plant a control chip in Shepard's brain, he wanted Shepard to believe in Cerberus's cause... The Catalyst's cause without putting limitations or damaging his/her strong will or personality. If he did that, Shepard wouldn't be a valuable tool for the Reapers and Catalyst to achieve the ideal solution.

Modifié par N7Gold, 11 septembre 2012 - 03:51 .