1238 réponses à ce sujet

[The Twilight God]

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

It is not verifiable. We have no acces to Shepard, and we cannot study him or her directly. We can make conclusions based on what we see, but that's different. [/quote]

It is verifiable. The narrative dictates it. The events in game prove it. If we cannot verify Shepard's indoctrination then we cannot verify alot of people's indoctrination. TIM (renegade), Kenson, the hanar diplomat, the salarian captives on Virmire, Rana Thanoptis, Kai Leng, etc. 

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

If Shepard is indoctrinated and highly susceptible to everything that Catalyst says, the Reapers are practically trying to commit suicide.[/quote]

Indoctrinated? No.
Highly susceptible? Yes. Shepard is still high susceptable even when picking Destroy. Highly susceptable isn;t the same as being controlled.

The Reapers are boned in low EMS with the reaper heart. Likewise, everyone else is boned in low EMS with the brain. It's not really up to the Kid one way or another. Refusal is the only other option and they have no alternative to tempt Shepard with. The options are a dialog wheel. The rest are greyed out. Maybe Shepard isn't in the compromising mood after seeing Steve and his squad bite it.

The only reason for it to converse with Shepard at all is 1.) to buy time for the Reapers to destroy the Crucible and 2. convince him to refuse to use the Crucible.

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

I haven't choosen Synthesis, but everyone who had choosen it is a living proof that "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" are not required to make someone choose it. The Reapers are not real and indoctrination is a plot device, therefore they couldn't influence the player itself. But many people still have choosen Synthesis.[/quote]

It doesn't matter what you, a person who does not actually have the fate of the galaxy in your hands, thinks. It is ultimately meaningless to you. It's just a game. Shepard is the character in the story. From that perspective it is not plausible for him to trust the Reapers unless he is undergoing an indoctrination attempt. It doesn;t matter why a player chooses an indoctrinated choice. all that matters is that such a choice proves that Shepard was indoctrinated upon making that choice. Disagree? Give me one rational explaination for why Shepard would blindly and absolutely trust the Reapers. Just one.

Any player who thinks Synthesis or Control is a good idea is indoctrinated. Player indoctrination obviously doesn't mean an actual reaper messed with their brain chemistry. It just means Biowared duped you and you continue to dupe yourself after the fact. The fact that you would even mention that shows how desperate you've become. And I thought claiming the relays still work was desperate. Geesh. 

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

Maybe some Shepards were convinced that it would be better that way. Reapers goal maybe fine (assuming it is "protect organics from synthetics") on its own. It is their MEANS (harvest, indoctrination etc.) are the problem. We had no idea about their ultimate goal for all three games, but their means made them enemies.[/quote]

So basically, you were indoctrinated into seeing things their way. Just what I said. You're making my case for me.

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

Also, after the recent DLC, Shepard knows that Reapers are being controlled by Leviathan's creation.  [/quote]

He doesn't "know" anything. The Leviathans' claims are not self evident. If we assume they are telling the truth that still doesn't make the Kid the Intelligence they spoke of. And as I'll point out in the Control analaysis update, the ending for control does not even make sense if Shepard was replacing the Intelligence. Especially after what the Leviathans said about the relays coming after they were usurped.

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

And by definition "indoctrination" is a way to corrupt organic mind. If Shepard is no longer organic, he or she cannot be indoctrinated.[/quote]

Yeah, but he becomes a synthetic AFTER being indoctrinated. So the synthetic mind that is created is formed from a being in agreement with Reaper ideals. Why do you think all the Reapers are all in agreement. You never wondered how there is no disagreement between them if they are indeed formerly organics who were harvested against their will? Shepard says he's, "Eternal. Infinite. immortal". Shepard knows this is an objective falsehood prior to the control prongs. Afterwards, he is as delusional as Sovereign.

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

Also, Destroy stems from the same source as control and synthesis. Why would Catalyst speak truth about Destroy, if he lies about Control and Synthesis? Why even tells Shepard about Destroy? "If where was no destroy, Shepard would be upset and refuse to cooperate" is not the reason, since Destroy maybe absent (low EMS, saved the Collector's base). We still have to take his word for it.[/quote]

Read the first post in this thread. If you're not even going to bother to read the subject material this is pointless. You don;t even know what you're arguing against.

Part I: Destroy Analysis

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

Or he could be trying to wake him up by reminding Shepard of the goal. Although, yes, my bad. It's just ambigous how the platform was activated. Still, trying to wake Shepard up and being cooperative with him or her about Destroy is not very smart move, if all they wanted was continuantion of their existence. Why not let him be unconsicious for some time, while blasting the Crucible?[/quote]

It's a very smart move. For one it wastes time for the Reapers to reach the crucble and can be used to convince Shepard to refuse. The likely alternative probably wouldn;t go in Shepard's favor.

Part I: Addendum: Low EMS Destroy-Only Scenario

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

Yes, you are right. Maybe I'm just too stick with that Paragon-Renegade dynamic. But, anyway, it is possible to have your Shepard to be organic supremacist who considers synthetic life to be inferior form of life... or not a life at all. I did that.[/quote]

Irrelevent. The death of the Geth is YOUR extraplotion based on what the Kid says. It's a reason for you personally to be averse to Destroy.  The Kid NEVER uses the Geth in particular to dissuade Shepard from Destroy. It says that ALL synthetics will be affected. Ships, omni-tools, computers, pacemakers, etc. Total technologcal apocalypse which would be seen as bad to anyone ("space stone age"). The fact that you ignored this implication and focused only on the geth is your personal reaction. It has no bearing on the intent of the Kid. I will not repeat myself again.

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

Well, we never had a clear defition of what "synthetic" according to Catalyst is. [/quote]

Yes, we do. When you ask for clarification (left dialog option) it is explicitely tells you what it means by syntheitcs; "Technology you rely on", which technically doesn't even include the Geth. Again, this is all in my first post. The fact that you made an emotional leap to "it will kill my friends" is not relevent. I ignored the facts and jumped to the same emotionally charged conclusion myself. I know where you're coming from.

[quote]Lord Goose wrote...

Admit it, the choice is easier, and it is the Reapers haven't devised ANY different reason to make Destroy heavier, if your Shepard killed the geth, even though they had fine amounts of time.[/quote]

A technological apocalypse bringing us to a virtual stone age is not easier. If only the Geth perish the world moves on. The choice was very easy for me when I thought the Geth would die. It would still be easy if it said the Earth would blow up. I am not siding with the Reapers. Especially after being against Control moments before and there is no way I'm letting Reapers put tech in everyone. Control and synthesis are completely absurd give the enemy we face. Anything siding with them or doing what they want is off the table. Period. Nothing hard about it. The last choice was the easiest one in the series.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 17 septembre 2012 - 09:42 .

[The Twilight God]

[quote]The Twilight God wrote...

Updated Part I: Destroy Analysis

Added more direct correlations to indoctrination
Demonstrates more clearly that Destroy is the only option that is completely counter to the desires of and does not compromise with Starbinger.
Exponded on why the Geth survive the Crucible in the Destroy ending.


Please give me your input on the changes.[/quote]

Updated - Part II: Control Analysis

Reorganized points.
Added comparison with Destroy.
Added more direct correlations to indoctrination with point by point break down.
Included notes on why dreams aren't PTSD and supposrting evidence that the dreams are reaper induced.
Further exposition of the Reaper motive starting from the Conduit Run.
Updated "The Control Ending" segment. Explaining how the endings contain no proof of a happy outcome.

Ple
ase give me your input on the changes. Or anything that could be added. [/quote]

[Lord Goose]

It is verifiable. The narrative dictates it. The events in game prove it. If we cannot verify Shepard's indoctrination then we cannot verify alot of people's indoctrination. TIM (renegade), Kenson, the hanar diplomat, the salarian captives on Virmire, Rana Thanoptis, Kai Leng, etc.

The narrative is not an absolute prequisition. Where are many instances where the story seemingly or really goes against it (not only in Mass Effect). TIM, hanar diplomat, Kenson are said to be indoctrinated in the game, but nothing was said about Shepard. I would rather compare him or her with Udina, whose case is ambigous (at least, for now).

The only reason for it to converse with Shepard at all is 1.) to buy time for the Reapers to destroy the Crucible and 2. convince him to refuse to use the Crucible.

I had this dialogue.

Catalyst: But be warned. The Crucible will not discriminate. All synthetics will be targeted. Even you are partly synthetic.
Shepard: But the Reapers would be destroyed?
Catalyst: Yes, but the peace won't last.
Shepard: We take our chances.
Catalytst: And you have no choice. You must realease the energy of the Crucible to end this cycle. The path is open, and where is only one way ahead.

Not only it is the shortest conversation with the Catalyst possible, but he is practically encouraging me to use the Crucible and kill all the Reaper, and all I had to do is not ask him about the details. If he was trying to make me refuse, when he should have been trying at least.

It doesn't matter what you, a person who does not actually have the fate of the galaxy in your hands, thinks. It is ultimately meaningless to you. It's just a game. Shepard is the character in the story.

Well, I would have choosen Control if I were Abaddon Shepard (my first run), or Destroy if I were Judith Shepard. These are my "canon" Shepards.

If we assume they are telling the truth that still doesn't make the Kid the Intelligence they spoke of. And as I'll point out in the Control analaysis update, the ending for control does not even make sense if Shepard was replacing the Intelligence. Especially after what the Leviathans said about the relays coming after they were usurped.

Highly-advanced AI who commanded Reapers and have: "protect organic life" as its goal. Also, while Shepard had to replace the Catalyst, while Catalyst clearly did not to replace anyone. Though, I don't wanna go into debate about mechanics, since I don't understand it.

So the synthetic mind that is created is formed from a being in agreement with Reaper ideals. Why do you think all the Reapers are all in agreement.

I don't think it was stated that Reapers are born from indoctrinated people, or that indoctrination of their raw material influences their way of thinking.

Shepard says he's, "Eternal. Infinite. immortal"

Mistake.

Shepard says that he or she truly understands these words.

Irrelevent. The death of the Geth is YOUR extraplotion based on what the Kid says. It's a reason for you personally to be averse to Destroy. The Kid NEVER uses the Geth in particular to dissuade Shepard from Destroy.

Mistake.

Pre EC-line: "You can destroy all synthetic life you want, including the geth". And EC is still not needed to finish ME3. Assuming that EC simply choose different words to tell us about it...

Yes, we do. When you ask for clarification (left dialog option) it is explicitely tells you what it means by syntheitcs; "Technology you rely on", which technically doesn't even include the Geth.

He makes clear difference between "technology" and "synthetic technology" in low-EMS Destroy (if that were not the case he should have said: "all technology, and those who rely on technology will be lost"). And he says: "technology you rely on will be affected, but those who survive shall have little difficulty repairing the damage". Doesn't sounds as virtual stone age for me.

Modifié par Lord Goose, 18 septembre 2012 - 04:09 .

[The Twilight God]

N7Gold wrote...

If destroying the Reapers is against the Intelligence's desires, why did he let Shepard go for it? Something tells me that the destruction of all synthetics is part of what the Catalyst wants to happen if he can't persuade Shepard into choosing Control or Synthesis because as you mentioned in the "Implications of the Leviathans" chapter, synthetics are a huge threat to the Leviathans because they can't be indoctrinated like organics, and that only a group of organics can be indoctrinated, not a whole population. With synthetics destroyed, that's not a total loss for the Leviathans, they can come back and control the so-called lesser species when they are ready to, and attack organics that are able to create synthetics before they get the idea to do so.

What is a hologram or hallucination going to do to stop Shepard? There is nothing it can do to Shepard besides indoctrinate him and stall him with idle chat.

Destroying the Geth would be inconsequential as it claims to believe that organics will just create more synthetics anyway. If it really wants to preserve life it would be stupid to eliminate existing peaceful AI's who in the past, when they did defeat their creators, let them live instead of whipping them out. However, such lines of though are irrelevent as it's not up to the Kid if the Geth die or not. The Crucible is a seperate object that does what it does with or without the Kid. The only functions it has any power over is synthesis and control. And even then, the only extent of that power is turning them on and off.

As far as the part about the Leviathans I agree that they would want synthetics dead. However, at the same time the Crucible would have to be designed to either pick out specific technology or all technology indiscriminately. It only targeted reaper tech as far as you or I can tell. We see no evidence whatsoever that it had any intentional effect on non-reaper technology. Only in low EMS which kills everything indiscriminately (which isn;t it's intended purpose) and in cetain situations in mid EMS (small ships caught while in FTL), which is the result of a damaged Crucible. However, the Normandy cockpit is on fire prior to the wave hitting so the Normandy may have been combat damaged  and structurally weakened which left it vulnerable to the sheer force of the wave. As the force of the mid EMS wave is enough to topple structurally weakened building like Big Ben.

[The Twilight God]

Gunners1001 wrote...

Spent the past 2 days trying to make sense of the ending, with and without EC. Your thread has been very helpful for understanding

I've read through this entire thread, and maybe just because it's 5am and I'm tired, but I don't remember you addressing the fact that the Prothean VI on Thessia didn't detect Shep as indoctrinated, so even if it was a long-term indoctrination, surely the VI would have detected it (as the one on Ilos did for Saren). Would this not mean that Shep would have had to only begun to become indoctrinated post-Thessia? That doesn't leave very much time for an indoctrination which doesn't result in rapid decay. Given that strength to the idea of the long-term indoctrination of Shep seems to come from the fact that Shep was involved with reaper tech from early on, that can't really be the case then, can it?

It's actually been addressed several times and is repeated at least twice in the first post alone.
 
Shepard is not indoctrinated. If he was the game would have been lost from the start. An earnest attempt to indoctrinate Shepard is being made upon Harbinger intentionally missing Shepard with its beam. Yes, Shepard has been around enough reaper artifacts to have the ground work set, but he is not indoctrinated until you, the player, go over to the Reapers' side and/or allow them to manipulate you into doing their work yourself. You dictate that Shepard is indoctrinated when you chose Control, Synthesis or Refuse. Beforehand, Shepard is just in the throes of an indoctrination attempt. There is no other explanation for Shepard to make such choices other than succumbing to the indoctrination attempt.
 
Using Synthesis as an example:
It was you who was convinced the Reapers could be trusted. You who believed that peace could only be achieved via Synthesis. And in choosing to force it on everyone it is you who gave all the deaths the Reapers have committed for over a billion years validity. Your action and newfound belief in their cause dictated that the Reapers actions were, in fact, justified. You entered the chamber ready to put an end to the Reapers and in the end you relented and sided with them. You did. And therefore your choice dictated that Shepard was indoctrinated.

Gunners1001 wrote...

Please explain when the indoctrination would have started post-Thessia to not cause such rapid decay, or how the VI did not detect Shep but did detect Kai Leng.

It started in earnest post-Harbinger blast. But it has been 3-years coming. Recall that Harbinger communicated with Shepard at the end of Arrival via a hallucination. Shepard's dreams also indicate indoctrination. The "serve us" sound Harbinger makes prior to firing the beam is in a dream sequence. So obviously Shepard had been affected enough for that to be possible. You're confusing the indoctrinated with a people undergoing indoctrination. For instance, in the Leviathan DLC the orbs require time to create a link between the Leviathan's and their victim. Before they acheive that link that person is in the throes of whatever it is that is changing their brain chemistry rather they realize it or not. But there is a difference between Shepard, who they could not control, and Ann, who they could control.

Kai Leng was fully indoctrinated (by the Reapers or TIM) and implanted with reaper tech. For all we know the VI's means of detecting indoctrination is the detection of reaper tech. In both cases the person a prothean VI indentifies has always been implanted. 

Gunners1001 wrote...

Thanks for your post OP, been very insightful so far

You're welcome. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

[The Twilight God]

Lord Goose wrote...

Just because the explanation exist outside the story, it doesn't makes this explanation flimsy. Where are many points which may support idea that the game has some quality issues, even besides the ending.

It's irrelevant. It's equivalent to publishing a theory that a puddle of water will not remain under a desert sun because god make it disappear in a scientific journal. It has nothing to do with evidence, deduction or even the subject matter itself. It's just a unfounded assertion that requires the proponent to knowingly and willfully ignore the evidence existing within the subject matter itself.

Being flimsy requires an actual argument. Bad Writting isn't an argument at all. It's just a groundless assertion based on the desire for the ending to be the result of bad writting. Nothing more.

Lord Goose wrote...

I'm pretty sure that judging capabilities of device by eye is not a way to go, especially if we are no experts on technology.

I'm no aeronautics engineer, but I think it's fairly safe to say this thing ain't flying if they fished it up to dry land. 

The relay is torn to shreds, the rings are inert and the blue glow within the rings is extinguished. You tried to argue that the end of mass relay transit doesn't dictate an end to galactic civilization as we know it for the forseeable fututre. You lost that argument. So now you're asserting that the relays are still functional? Seriously? So basically you'd rather sound like an idiot and pull ridiculous bs out of your ass rather than admit when you are wrong about something that isn't even a central idea in the topic of indoctrination theory? OK, good to know.

Lord Goose wrote...

Well, the slides are convcievable and were shown in game.

Pretty much anything is conceivable:. An elephant being lifted by a butterfly, Wrex sprouting wings and flying to Tuchanka, a Yahg invasion of the Salarian Union, etc. 

If you wish to extrapolate meaning from a slide show in which the game neither elaborates upon or discusses, so be it. That's your desired interepretation. You're entitled to believe whatever you wish.

Lord Goose wrote...

We still have warlike Wreav slide in Synthesis, if the genophage is cured and he is in charge.Definitely not peace-promising.

If that were true (not saying it is) I'd thank you for proving my point: The slide is just a picture. One of many interchangeable pictures that have no coorelation to what the narrator is saying.

Lord Goose wrote...

The Synthesis is supposedly solution to the problem of synthetics eventually wiping out organics, and we have evidence what relationship between them is shifted into better way.

What are you talking about?

Lord Goose wrote...

Bad Writing Theory, as you noted already, exists outside the plot. It cannot come into conflict with theory existing inside plot.

Calling it a theory is kind of a joke. It's just a baseless assertion. If it was bad wrtting, then it's not indoctrination. They are two mutually exclusive concepts. It can't be both.

Lord Goose wrote...

Shepard walking into the explosion, without good reason to do it, is part of the plot (as majority of cut-scenes is). He or she engulfed in explosion, and that's probably should have detrimental effect. Shepard had only shoot the tube, and Carnifex is a powerful pistol. Where was no need to getting so close to the blast.

Shepard is not engulfed in the flames. The explosion was actually weaker than most explosions he has survived. The one at the very beginning of the game that tosses him through the air as well as the one in Arrival. Both had far more force, which means far more pressure and thus a greater risk of collapsed lungs, ruptured capillaries, broken bones, disrupted heart functions, etc. If a protagonist surviving an explosion in a action based fiction is bad writting then you must think they're all bad writting.

However, it isn't part of the plot. It's a part of a cutscene. Shooting the power conduit is a part of the plot. Where Shepard is standing when he shoots it isn't relevant unless his position somehow effects how the story plays out. It doesn't. Shepard could shoot it from the platform he rides up in and it wouldn't effect the story or its outcome. That would be like saying the armor Shepard chooses to wear is important in the Grissom Academy plot.

Lord Goose wrote...

The Catalyst explains that Crucible may allow him or her to destroy the Reapers, for example, but he didn't have told what Shepard had to do in order to activate it. Instead, Shepard had a vision of Anderson shooting the tube while walking in explosion.  It can be explained, if Shepard was still indoctrinated, and Reapers were simply trying to kill him or her by making Shepard walking into the fire, for example. Visions are, after all, also one of the symptoms of indoctrination...

That only makes sense if shooting the power conduit didn't allow the Crucible to arm. Shepard's death would be irrelevent if the Reapers die anyway. Trying to influence Shepard into going down with them would be pettiness for the sake of being petty. Which is possible, I guess. When I beat the game I expected Shepard to die either way (I assumed that was why I'd heard about so much hate for the ending).

Assuming it is a vision and not something added for player convenience, it is not out of the question for Shepard to have been influenced by that vision. It doesn't make him indoctrinated. Similarly, Shepards very willingness to sit and listen to the Kid's spiel, unwillingness to argue against the Kid and inability to question the Kid's intent are all signs of being influenced by the Reapers. As I said in the very first post, he a highly susceptable to suggestion.

You're confusing being indoctrinated with undergoing an attempt to indoctrinate.

Lord Goose wrote...

Synthesis is even worse in that regard, since where is no explanation, why Shepard knows that he or she should jump into the beam.

I believe that's why they added those clips. Probably felt that showing Saren doing a swan dive would be off putting or people who didn't play ME1 wouldn't understand the association. Synthesis really had no champion in ME3 as the very concept isn't even introduced until the last 1 minute and 55 seconds of the game. I could see them putting EDI or Legion in that role in the future to make it seem that synthesis is what the Geth would want.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 20 septembre 2012 - 01:27 .

[megamacka]

Lol I didn't know. No one is cheering at the end of Synthesis ( dunno about control ) o.O. Surely if you had emotions you would be cheering that the war is over, even if you started having the feels for the reapers. Heard everything from '' oh, it's tactics blah blah. They are just wondering where the reaperz are going. Oh it's the most realistic reaction ''. I am not sure about control, but I do believe that people cheer in that ending? No?

  '' Oh people are now having the feels for the reapers and are sad for the losses '' .... Sorry, I am not buying it. If I was fighting humongous machines and they started to fly away I would be cheering, yay they are retreating! Yay maybe the crucible worked and they are trying to run away or something. But standing there all numb? Uuh....

   Or maybe they are just all like.... God DAMN IT shepard.... You DNA r a ped us all.....

Modifié par megamacka, 20 septembre 2012 - 09:23 .

[The Twilight God]

jasonxxsatanna wrote...

I was wondering can anyone tell me if EDI dies in all 3 destroy low ,med,high EMS,I watched a YouTube vid of the destroy ending and her name appears on the memorial wall,.
I have not played the destroy EC, only did control EC so far and I must say Shep(narrator) seems like a dictator hell bent on controlling the galaxy… or was I the only one who felt that way.

Destroy kills her regardless. An undamaged Crucible only targets reaper technology. EDI is built from parts taken from Soveriegn which makes her a reaper program in a sense. So she dies along with the Reapers.

[The Twilight God]

Lord Goose wrote...

The narrative is not an absolute prequisition. Where are many instances where the story seemingly or really goes against it (not only in Mass Effect). TIM, hanar diplomat, Kenson are said to be indoctrinated in the game, but nothing was said about Shepard. I would rather compare him or her with Udina, whose case is ambigous (at least, for now).

Kenson never claims to be indoctrinated nor does the hanar diplomat. TIM never says he is indoctrinated and doesn't vocally imply it unless you pick paragon dialog options. Rana Thanoptis nevers says she is indoctrinated. In most cases it is an observer making the assertion. Based on their actions, which are a divergence from their normal behavior. I think Shepard's bllind absolute trust in the Reapers, belief in their ideals and willingness to die for their cause is a big departure from his normal behavior. Don't you? Shepard is indoctrinated in choosing control, sysnthesis and refuse.  Within the confines of the story told by bioware, that is a fact.

If you disagree you can easily defend your position by giving me one good reason for Shepard to trust the Reapers. If you cannot then you either have to willfully ignore the the fact that reaper are habitual indoctrin assert it's bad writing or acknowledge that an indoctrination attempt is taking place. It's that black and white. 

Lord Goose wrote...

I had this dialogue.

[...]

Not only it is the shortest conversation with the Catalyst possible, but he is practically encouraging me to use the Crucible and kill all the Reaper, and all I had to do is not ask him about the details. If he was trying to make me refuse, when he should have been trying at least.

It's simply stating the obvious. Encouragement isn't necessary.

The entire conversation is an attempt to convince Shepard that synthetics will wipe out organics and that the Reapers' actions are justified. You cannot avoid this conversation. Intentionally skipping the rest of the dialog to arrive at a desired interpretation is on you. The doom and gloom dialog exists. If your Shepard's resolve is so great that makes no further inquiries and rushes head first to destroy then I guess he's too strong willed to be convinced to lay down and died. As I said before, the Reapers are boned in low EMS destroy.

Lord Goose wrote...

Highly-advanced AI who commanded Reapers and have: "protect organic life" as its goal. Also, while Shepard had to replace the Catalyst, while Catalyst clearly did not to replace anyone. Though, I don't wanna go into debate about mechanics, since I don't understand it.

What point are you trying to make here?

The Kid may or may not have been an AI on the Citadel. Nothing in your reply demonstrates that the thing Shepard was talking to was the Intelligence the Leviathans mentioned. 

Lord Goose wrote...

I don't think it was stated that Reapers are born from indoctrinated people, or that indoctrination of their raw material influences their way of thinking.

Reapers are organic minds transferred to immortal machine bodies. This is stated in ME2.

Lord Goose wrote...

Shepard says he's, "Eternal. Infinite. immortal"

Mistake.

Shepard says that he or she truly understands these words.

How can you truly understand those words if they don't apply to you? You think Shepard just puled some random words out of the dictionary and decided to state that he understands their meaning? "Would it make just as much sense if he said "toolbox, alegbra, duck-billed platypus".

Lord Goose wrote...

Mistake.

Pre EC-line: "You can destroy all synthetic life you want, including the geth". And EC is still not needed to finish ME3. Assuming that EC simply choose different words to tell us about it...

Pre-EC is irrelevent. Furthermore, you have been discussing post-EC this entire time.

The EC isn't  some addtional mission, addtional story or change to the story. It is a glorified patch intended to fix a mistake. The EC is canon. You either acknowledge the EC or you don't. I find it funny that you have made several arguments which include EC material and now you want to pick and choose when it is applicable to fit your current failed argument.

Lord Goose wrote...

He makes clear difference between "technology" and "synthetic technology" in low-EMS Destroy (if that were not the case he should have said: "all technology, and those who rely on technology will be lost"). And he says: "technology you rely on will be affected, but those who survive shall have little difficulty repairing the damage". Doesn't sounds as virtual stone age for me.

In low EMS destroy the galaxy is literally reduced to the stone age. Literally. All the worlds are reduced to rubble and there are few survivors. I doubt they are composed of all farmers, doctors, architects, engineers and scientists. There will be great difficulty repairing the damage as you'll have a few random dispersed people struggling just to survive.

In mid and high EMS the Crucible still focuses on the Reapers. Little difficulty repairing the damage means nothing in this scenarios as the Crucible doesn't target synthetics indiscriminately. The ships, omni-tools, etc. are fine. So low EMS and mid-high EMS Crucible blasts are drastically different. Low EMS hits everything. 

"Even you are partly synthetic."

That disctates that Shepard is partly synthetic. So are you asserting that Shepard is partially an AI?

"All technology and those who rely on synthetic technology for their survival, will be lost, including yourself."

It says "those who rely on synthetic technology for their survival" as opposed to "all synthetic life". And who are those who rely on synthetic technology? People with implants, artificial organs, etc. That is what the phrase "synthetic technology" means. That phrase is speaking about organics. He is emphasizing Shepard's death, the deaths of countless millions and probably the Quarian's death. The Geth are included in the first two words: "All technology". There is no need to specify further. "All technology" includes geth platforms/servers (programs die with them). In high EMS the Crucible doesn't do that. It doesn't target non-reaper tech.

[The Twilight God]

megamacka wrote...

Lol I didn't know. No one is cheering at the end of Synthesis ( dunno about control ) o.O. Surely if you had emotions you would be cheering that the war is over, even if you started having the feels for the reapers. Heard everything from '' oh, it's tactics blah blah. They are just wondering where the reaperz are going. Oh it's the most realistic reaction ''. I am not sure about control, but I do believe that people cheer in that ending? No?

  '' Oh people are now having the feels for the reapers and are sad for the losses '' .... Sorry, I am not buying it. If I was fighting humongous machines and they started to fly away I would be cheering, yay they are retreating! Yay maybe the crucible worked and they are trying to run away or something. But standing there all numb? Uuh....

   Or maybe they are just all like.... God DAMN IT shepard.... You DNA r a ped us all.....

Hmph. Never noticed that difference.

First human group cheers and krogan cheer in control and destroy.
First human group don't cheer and neither do krogan in synthesis.
In both ending they see Reapers rise, but have different reactions. Bioware deliberately made these different.

You have an asari smiling for no reason as Coats tells her where to put a crate. It's a very out of place smile. Like she drunk the special kool-aid. The Reaper just stand around like task masters. I wonder if they are helping rebuild the processing facilities.

[Fedi.St]

synthesis is a very ****ED UP ending.

[megamacka]

The Twilight God wrote...

megamacka wrote...

Lol I didn't know. No one is cheering at the end of Synthesis ( dunno about control ) o.O. Surely if you had emotions you would be cheering that the war is over, even if you started having the feels for the reapers. Heard everything from '' oh, it's tactics blah blah. They are just wondering where the reaperz are going. Oh it's the most realistic reaction ''. I am not sure about control, but I do believe that people cheer in that ending? No?

  '' Oh people are now having the feels for the reapers and are sad for the losses '' .... Sorry, I am not buying it. If I was fighting humongous machines and they started to fly away I would be cheering, yay they are retreating! Yay maybe the crucible worked and they are trying to run away or something. But standing there all numb? Uuh....

   Or maybe they are just all like.... God DAMN IT shepard.... You DNA r a ped us all.....

Hmph. Never noticed that difference.

First human group cheers and krogan cheer in control and destroy.
First human group don't cheer and neither do krogan in synthesis.
In both ending they see Reapers rise, but have different reactions. Bioware deliberately made these different.

You have an asari smiling for no reason as Coats tells her where to put a crate. It's a very out of place smile. Like she drunk the special kool-aid. The Reaper just stand around like task masters. I wonder if they are helping rebuild the processing facilities.

Idd, this wasn't a '' mistake '' from the developers. 
And I don't buy the explanations that some people have, '' oh they are now allied with the reapers and they've got a message or whatever telling them that the war is over and they are sad over the losses ''. '' Oh they are in shock blah blah ''..... Whatever they are in shock or not. If you see your enemies leave even if you are aware that they are now your allies. Perhaps a cheer that the war is over at least?

Modifié par megamacka, 24 septembre 2012 - 02:12 .

[The Twilight God]

Fedi.St wrote...

synthesis is a very ****ED UP ending.

For the sake of argument let's use modern day nanomaterials to calculate an estimate energy requirement for Synthesis. One form of modern day nanomaterial is a carbon nanotube (CNT). It's standard quantity is 500 carbon atoms. In a more complicated nanorobotic device it would only be a single component analogous to wiring. Another form of nanomaterial is a Buckminsterfullerene, also called a buckyball (BB). It is composed of 60 carbon atoms. It's uses can range from imaging, diagnostics and tracing to name a few. We see a similar structures of nanites encasing DNA in the CGI opening of EDI's narration: Lines (CNT) and dots (BB). The Citadel in combination with the Crucible would have to produce at least 48 BBs and 116 CNTs per DNA base pairs based on what we are shown. Using the standard units of each nanomaterial we have a grand total of 60,880 carbon atoms. Every atom holds an amount of energy relative to a nuclear detonation.  
 
Let's do the math:

60,880 atoms per DNA base pair
6.34 billion base pairs per DNA strand
46 strands per human cell
100 trillion human cells
 
Alright, 60,880... carry the one... calculate pi... divide by two... *cough* = 1.7 nonillion
 
The nuclear energy of a uranium atom is 2,500,000 times greater than carbon. So if we divide the total by this amount we get an estimate based on the yield of a uranium based nuclear explosions we're familiar with: 710 sextillion nuclear detonations. 

710, 201,728,000,000,000,000,000 nuclear explosions worth of energy just to synthesis a single human being. The galaxy contains trillions of humanoid sapients. And we can't forget other flora and fauna. Consider the fact that the energy of the blast expands in all directions, the majority of its energy is lost and/or wasted on empty space and lifeless worlds. If 90% of the galaxy is dark matter, only 10% of the energy will reach solid matter. And perhaps less than 1% will reach a habitable world. On top of that the overall energy per "square light year" is reduced the farther out the blast wave expands from the epicenter. So less than 1% of the synthesis blast must contain 710 sextillion nuclear detonations multiplied by untold trillions worth of energy.  Again, that's less than 1% of the blast energy. Synthesis, as described by the Kid, simply cannot work. The energy requirements are just too great.

The CGI shows a superficial application to the eyes and dermis in the form of circuitry. You literally see the nanites painted over the surface of the Major Coats's eye. If it targeting people on the genetic level it shouldn't be visually apparent. The only other scene we see involving nanite is near the end of EDI's narration in which neurons are being covering in nanites.  Synthesis implants the brain and fortifies the skin. Hmm, reaper tech in the brain.... good times.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 24 septembre 2012 - 07:01 .

[Fedi.St]

It is not possible within the mass effect's psevdoscientific basis THIS KIND OF SYNTHESIS could happen.

The slides are more and more likely just a vision of the future and not what actually happens.
It is so simple.

Modifié par Fedi.St, 24 septembre 2012 - 06:13 .

[Bill Casey]

Lord Goose wrote...

We still have warlike Wreav slide in Synthesis, if the genophage is cured and he is in charge.Definitely not peace-promising.

Bill Casey wrote...

According to datamining on Hold the Line, there is no synthesis version of the "War Debate" or "War Rally" slides...

www.holdtheline.com/threads/le-datamining-now-with-ec-too.2073/page-5

There is a Synthesis version of Wreav landing in a shuttle, though...
So there's that...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 24 septembre 2012 - 06:54 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

^ There is no Control version of it either.

[Bill Casey]

Why would Control have a different version?

[Bill Casey]

War Debate in Control

[Fiery Phoenix]

sveners wrote...

Wow. That was a lot of words to present your headcanon as fact.

It's not though. But good for you if it gives you the ability to enjoy the ending.

It's literally impossible for me to get past any of the endings without some form of headcanon. As a matter of fact, that's apparently exactly what we're supposed to do.

[Bill Casey]

War Rally in Control

[teh DRUMPf!!]

^ I stand corrected.

[RiouHotaru]

An interesting read, but your entire assertion hinges on a few statements that you assume are factual:

1)Shepard is being indoctrinated or is somehow being influenced
Probably the biggest assertion. There's no way to clearly define if it's taking place. We observe it occuring to others, but Shepard appears largely immune. To me it would seem a gross mistake on Bioware's part to allow indoctrination to affect Shepard, precisely for the fact it would imply a removal of agency, no matter how subtle.

2)The Catalyst is acting with deceptive/hostile/malevolent intent
Probably the second biggest, or tied with the first. Several of the IT theorists and other posters (like TAO) continue to assert the Catalyst is being purposefully misdirective and lying to get Shepard to fulfill it's agenda. Leviathan outright proves that the Catalyst isn't malfunctioning or acting rampant, further backed up by it's own explanation for why it acted in the manner that it did.

Also, can you explain why it would state TIM couldn't control them, but Shepard can? TIM's disqualification was Indoctrination. So why is Shepard exempt?

[mass perfection]

I choose Control so now I'm indoctrinated.Now in my head,I use them to build the Crucible and choose Synthesis which is another indoctrination.Now I'm super indoctrinated.I'll call this level of indoctrination.....Super Indoctrination.You can achieve Super Indoctrination by getting indoctrinated.....twice.

Modifié par mass perfection, 24 septembre 2012 - 09:39 .

[The Twilight God]

RiouHotaru wrote...

An interesting read, but your entire assertion hinges on a few statements that you assume are factual:

1)Shepard is being indoctrinated or is somehow being influenced
Probably the biggest assertion. There's no way to clearly define if it's taking place. We observe it occuring to others, but Shepard appears largely immune. To me it would seem a gross mistake on Bioware's part to allow indoctrination to affect Shepard, precisely for the fact it would imply a removal of agency, no matter how subtle.

Shepard cannot be immune to indoctrination. Its effects are physicological and psychological. The dreams and hallucinations he has had demonstrate it has effected him. The only thing shown to give any immunity to indoctrination is to be linked to the minds of non-indoctrinated people.  

However, Shepard's indoctrination is ultimately on the player, not Bioware. Rather you think their approach was a gross mistake is irrelevent.

The Twilight God wrote...

Using Synthesis as an example:
It was you who was convinced the Reapers could be trusted. You who believed that peace could only be achieved via Synthesis. And in choosing to force it on everyone it is you who gave all the deaths the Reapers have committed for over a billion years validity. Your action and newfound belief in their cause dictated that the Reapers actions were, in fact, justified. You entered the chamber ready to put an end to the Reapers and in the end you relented and sided with them. You did. And therefore your choice dictated that Shepard was indoctrinated.

How do we know Shepard is in the throes of an indoctrination attempt? The narrative dictates it. The only explanation is indoctrination. Disagree? Give me a single reason for Shepard to trust the Reapers. Don't waste your time because there is none.  Bad writting requires one to ignore established game lore, which states reapers indoctrinate, in order to intentionally come to the conclusion of bad writting. It exist solely to assert the synthesis and control endings turn out well.  You don't jump to bad writting until you've exhausted all possibilities. So it isn't valid.

Shepard entered the Citadel with the intent to destroy the Reapers. Throughout the entire game, from Mars up to the point that the Kid presents Control as an option, Shepard has been against it. We're even told that in every cycle the people the Reapers indoctrinated always favored trying to control the Reapers. As far as we know Shepard has been opposed to synthesis as well. At the end of ME1 Shepard declares that synthesis is slavery and that he would rather die than live like that. There is nothing in the game to indicate his opinion changed. In fact, his reaction to the Cerberus troopers and Kai Leng's augmentations is indicative of that fact that he is still against reaper tech being put inside anyone. His comments on Sanctuary dictate he is against forcing such modifications on people.

And then out of the blue Shepard is all for it? Force reaper upgrades on everyone? Sure, why not! Control the Reapers? Sure! Who cares if I wasn't willing to bet humanities existence on it 5 minutes prior. And this change of heart is because a freaking Reaper said it was cool? The same group that habitually indoctrinates? Now we're supposed to believe that the Reapers  made a special exception and turned the indoctrination to snooze mode for Shepard when he's in a possition to end them once and for all? Of all the times to push the indoctrination envelope it is in their most dire moment that the Reapers turn it off? Really???

How do we identify indoctrinated people? A change in behavior and beliefs? Like when Kenson built a rocket on an asteroid to destroy a mass relay and then changed her mind. Deciding instead to help the Reapers and sacrifice her own life to that end. I think Shepard's blind absolute trust in the Reapers, belief in their ideals and willingness to die for their cause is a big departure from his normal behavior. Don't you? Shepard is indoctrinated in choosing control, sysnthesis and refuse. Within the confines of the story told by bioware, it isn't an assumption, it's a fact. There is no alternative explanation.

RiouHotaru wrote...

2)The Catalyst is acting with deceptive/hostile/malevolent intent
Probably the second biggest, or tied with the first. Several of the IT theorists and other posters (like TAO) continue to assert the Catalyst is being purposefully misdirective and lying to get Shepard to fulfill it's agenda. Leviathan outright proves that the Catalyst isn't malfunctioning or acting rampant, further backed up by it's own explanation for why it acted in the manner that it did.

No, that's an assumption on your part. At no point do the Leviathans state the Intelligence is located on the Citadel. If you believe the Leviathans, it is implied that the Intelligence existed before the mass relays and the Citadel is a mass relay. For all you know the Kid is just Harbinger communicating with Shepard via hallucination like it did at the end of the Arrival DLC. The second assumption you make is that the Leviathans are 100% honest and incapable of lies, lies of ommision or half-truths. This is the same error people make in dealing with the Kid. The Kid is a liar. Fact. I've proven it and if you disagree feel free to try and rebute my assertions.
 
The Kid makes several blatant lies which are covered in Part V: The Catalyst's Deceptions in particular. In parts 1-3 my deductive processes are included in the form of a numbered list. In these segments I demonstrate the fact that the Kid is being dishonest. Now rather or not it's intentions are "good" is up for debate. However, I personally find it highly improbable that an entity would lie to you, try to indoctrinate you and then destroy the Crucible if you procrastinate for too long if its intentions were good. Especially given its billion year record of genocide, physiciological mutilation and psychlogical manipulation.

RiouHotaru wrote...

Also, can you explain why it would state TIM couldn't control them, but Shepard can? TIM's disqualification was Indoctrination. So why is Shepard exempt?

To convince Shepard to try and control the Reapers. 

Shepard isn't "exempt".  I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this, but I assume you mean "Why can't Shepard take control". If you'd read Part II of the thesis you'd understand that rather an indiovidual is indoctrinated or not isn't relevent. The Reapers are not going to build a device of their own votiliton for the express purpose of letting one guy take command of them. It's an absurd idea.
 
When you inititate Control, Shepard gets the TIM eyes and his face converted into a husk-like fascimile. TIM got those eyes from a reaper device that rapidly transformed the victim into a reaper avatar. It also performed this transformation via arcs of energy.



Let me ask you a question: Can you explain why Harbinger lets Shepard live? Why a Reaper controlled TIM was trying to convince Shepard of the necessity of control?

Harbinger allowed Shepard to live. Why would he do that if he had no ulterior motive? The beam he fires at Shepard's 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/or it saw the Normandy despite the stealth drive it stands to reason it did not blow it up for fear of Shepard being killed by the explosion. Shepard had to have been unconscious and vulnerable for a bit as the battlefield was different when he awoke indicating fighting occurred while he was out. And you think Harbinger allowed Shepard to live and carry on without any ulterior motive? It seems obvious to me that it wanted Shepard to make it through the Conduit before the Crucible ever docked. The Illusive Man, under reaper control, was lying in wait. He used dominate to hold Shepard in place while the Reapers hammered away at Shepard; all the while trying to convince Shepard that control is viable and the only way.

[megamacka]

Have you seen this? : http://www.clevernoo...timetable-leak/

I call it obvious trollcrap. But if it would somewhy prove to be true. Then this would be the biggest sell out I have ever witnessed in history of.... anything....
'' Hey guys! Buy all of our DLCs for an extra 60-100£for the game that you already paid for in order to get this super DLC ''.....