153 réponses à ce sujet

[WhiteKnyght]

Bill Casey wrote...

Are you people ****ting me?
Did you play Leviathan?

Is there some sort of alternate Leviathan DLC that doesn't end with Shepard blacking out and the Leviathan invading his mind with full bodied apparitions constructed from his memories?

Exactly. When Leviathan entered Shepard's mind, he became immune to Reaper indoctrination. Because he was already bonded to Leviathan. You cant be controlled by two entities at the same time, and Leviathan's control is stronger than the Reapers, because he can usurp control from them.

IT goes on the notion that Shepard was indoctrinated by the Reapers. Which is proven untrue because in Leviathan, Shepard learns everything about the Catalyst, its purpose, and methods, and gains an immunity to Reaper indoctrination because his brain has already been conditioned by Leviathan.

And if you skip Leviathan, everything still happens the same way minus two new dialogues, meaning that the ending isn't a dream caused by Leviathan either.

[Bill Casey]

What?
The. Reapers. invade. Shepard's. mind. at. the. end. of. Mass. Effect. 3...
It's the same ****ing thing we saw Leviathan do...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:30 .

[The Twilight God]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Cheesesack wrote...

It seems to me like IT is becoming less and less an alternate theory and more just a vauge explanation of events. By that I mean, it seems to currently state that StarChild is trying to present Control and Synthesis as better options by indoctrinating shepard. This is to try and prevent him from choosing Destroy which will kill the reapers.

Uh, well, yeah? That's literally what that scene is. It's StarChild giving Shepard some options, but presenting Destroy in a negative way. That's not some amazing theory, that's what actually happens in the game.

Funny how people can't seem to piece that together. It literally, by definition, attempts to indoctrinate the player. The moment you player believes in the Kid's spiel and makes a choice based on the belief in the Kid they have been indoctrinated. They are in agreement with the Kid. They are validating its actions by acknowledging the necessity of synthesis.

The Reapers are habitual indoctrinators. They indoctrinate people. It is implied that soveriegn was indoctrinating the people on Eden Prime even though there was no intent for them to survive. They indoctrinate people for sh*ts and giggles, but when their very continued existence is on the line they turn it off? Absurdity.

Except there's no evidence he's being idoctrinated. Even if he was, what difference does it make? The ending happens the way it's going ot happen, regardless of whether  Shepard makes the decision because of the Catalyst or by his own free will.

Yes, there is PLENTY of evidence. Heck, there is absolutely no in-game reason for Shepard to trust the Kid. He was literally against Control 5 minutes before it's brought up. Last we knew Shepard conpared synthesis to slavery and said he'd rather die. It's introduced a whole whopping 1:55 seconds before the endings and now Shepard is all aboard. And Shepard now sudden has complete absolute blind faith in the Reaper Ambassor that is not explained in any way, shape or form in-game. so much faith that he will kill himself to further their agenda (synthesis) or kill himself to do the very thing the Reapers indoctrinated people into seeking in every prior cycle (control)? It isn't narratively plausible outside of indoctrination.

Not to mention that Reapers indoctrinate... habitually. There is no point where Reapers don't indoctrinate. The endings make no sense otherwise.

You are basically 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.

[The Twilight God]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
The slides are all about hopes and intents for the future, not necessarily what the future holds. 

No, the VO is about hopes and dreams for the future, the slides show the future itself (in other words, the slides validate the VO's speech). There's no trickery here.

You assume they do. You have no proof and the burden of proof is on you.

Samara returning to Thessia in her lifetime? Highly unlike at FTL speeds.
Grunt returning to Tuchanka without fully developed plates? Highly unlikely at FTL speeds.

[TheRealBugz]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...
"Man didn't land on the moon Theory" is still alive.

It's not a theory if it has proof...

[WhiteKnyght]

The Twilight God wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Ithurael wrote...
How?

Bioware has stated several times there is no more post ending dlc coming

They have stated that ME3 is the end of sheps jouney and story. No shepard in ME4

Merizan even stated that if your version of IT needs more content post breath scene - that is not the interpretation of bioware nor will it be delivered upon as they are done with the endings.

So...shep wake up and then....?

No more post ending DLC
No ME4 with shepard

inb4biowarelies

Yep. IT-Con doesn't require more DLC for you to have an ending -- the Destroy ending is true, and the other endings are lies  -- or is Refuse real? Don't ask me why an indoctrinated Shepard is hearing fake EDI and Sheplyst talking while in Destroy it's really Hackett VOing for the player, but if you buy this, then you've had your ending. IT-Dream is the Sopranos ending on steroids.

Control is what you see. Synthesis is what you see. The thing is, people make quick assumptions beyond what is actually said by the narrators. ME3 doesn't have an epilogue. The narrators does not describe the picture slides. The slides are all about hopes and intents for the future, not necessarily what the future holds. 

Part I: Destroy Analysis
Even Destroy is deceptive in it's implications. The Geth do not die, but the relays aren't just magically fixed. Hackett can make claim whatever he wants (he's an optimist), but nobody knows how to fix relays and even if they did they still have to FTL to all of them. It would take 22-27 years to FTL across the galaxy in a straight line with no stops.Galactic civilization is cut off and rebuilding will have to occur. Rough time are ahead. There are no roses and butterflies in the aftermath.

Part II: Control Analysis
However, IT-Con is ultra literal. Most people assume everyhting turns out well. However, the Shepard AI never actually does anything. It simply says "I will do this" and "I will do that". Just like TIM beforehand keep saying "I will..." when he thought he was in control and wasn't. Even Shepards first words: Immortal infinite. Eternal are typical reaper spiel. Shepard knows for a fact that the reapers have none of those qualities and then suddenly he' talking like Soveriegn. Sure, the Reapers fix the relays, but that doesn't mean they won't continue the harvest. They had to fix the relays anyway.

Part III: Synthesis Analysis
Synthesis is narrated by an Reaper influenced EDI. As everyone, both organic and synthetic, are indoctrinated and imnplanted with Reaper tech. Like the shepard AI, EDI speaks about what she thinks will happen next. Rather or not her hopes and expectation come to pass is another story. I'm not going to go into it here but everything in-game points to the fact that the Reapers do not really want Synthesis as a final solution. It's simply preferrable to their destruction.

Part IV: Refuse Analysis
Refuse is what you see. Shepard giving up and thinking it's his idea. Pure indoctrination: The betrayal of allies. 

Bull. IT is just a hoax dreamed up by a bunch of self-proclaimed psychologists who really know no more than any other person

Refuse, while the most freaking stupid choice you could ever make, directly contradicts the whole premise of the IT anyway.

I read IT, the idea is that Shepard is trapped in a dream where choosing control or synthesis is Shepard falling for the Catalyst's deceptions and allows the Reapers to take over his mind. And destroy, which is actively opposing the Reapers, is the way to resist.

It was supported by several nitpicky details that were patched up by Extended Cut.

1. The fact that Shepard just wakes up on the Citadel after walking into the beam. - New scene shows the other side of the conduit spitting him out and him being shocked awake by Anderson's voice like two seconds later.

2. The fact that Hackett mysteriously knew about Shepard being alive and on the Citadel when Coats pronounced him dead.  - New scene showed Hackett getting a later update about Shepard's survival and success("Holy sh*t, he did it")

3. The fact that you could not question the Catalyst about itself or the choices it tells you about. - Extended Cut implemented this and you can now learn what he is, what the Reapers are, and can question and express dislike for the choices given.

4. The fact that you could not refuse to use the Crucible at all. - Refuse ending was added.

5. The fact that nothing about the future of the galaxy was shown. - A whole narative epilogue was added.

So yeah, Extended Cut did nothing but attack the foundations of the bogus Indoctrination Theory. The devs got a chuckle out of it and let you believe what you want to believe, but even they say if your IT depends on a new DLC being added to add to the ending, it ain't happening. The reason? Because to them, IT as as bogus as it is to people like me.

[Legion of 1337]

The Twilight God wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Cheesesack wrote...

It seems to me like IT is becoming less and less an alternate theory and more just a vauge explanation of events. By that I mean, it seems to currently state that StarChild is trying to present Control and Synthesis as better options by indoctrinating shepard. This is to try and prevent him from choosing Destroy which will kill the reapers.

Uh, well, yeah? That's literally what that scene is. It's StarChild giving Shepard some options, but presenting Destroy in a negative way. That's not some amazing theory, that's what actually happens in the game.

Funny how people can't seem to piece that together. It literally, by definition, attempts to indoctrinate the player. The moment you player believes in the Kid's spiel and makes a choice based on the belief in the Kid they have been indoctrinated. They are in agreement with the Kid. They are validating its actions by acknowledging the necessity of synthesis.

The Reapers are habitual indoctrinators. They indoctrinate people. It is implied that soveriegn was indoctrinating the people on Eden Prime even though there was no intent for them to survive. They indoctrinate people for sh*ts and giggles, but when their very continued existence is on the line they turn it off? Absurdity.

Except there's no evidence he's being idoctrinated. Even if he was, what difference does it make? The ending happens the way it's going ot happen, regardless of whether  Shepard makes the decision because of the Catalyst or by his own free will.

Yes, there is PLENTY of evidence. Heck, there is absolutely no in-game reason for Shepard to trust the Kid. He was literally against Control 5 minutes before it's brought up. Last we knew Shepard conpared synthesis to slavery and said he'd rather die. It's introduced a whole whopping 1:55 seconds before the endings and now Shepard is all aboard. And Shepard now sudden has complete absolute blind faith in the Reaper Ambassor that is not explained in any way, shape or form in-game. so much faith that he will kill himself to further their agenda (synthesis) or kill himself to do the very thing the Reapers indoctrinated people into seeking in every prior cycle (control)? It isn't narratively plausible outside of indoctrination.

Not to mention that Reapers indoctrinate... habitually. There is no point where Reapers don't indoctrinate. The endings make no sense otherwise.

You are basically 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.

Er, no, because indoctrination is a slow process.  Shepard no symptoms of indoctrination prior to the very end. He doesn't begin to sympathize with the Reapers, he doesn't ever side with TIM (who is indoctrinated), there's no whisperings in the back of his head. And again, even if he was, it wouldn't matter anyway because the endings play out the same way regardless. If Shepard chooses Synthesis because the Reapers made him do it...ok, well, if he made the decision himself, the same thing happens anyway, so the whole theory is basically pointless.

[The Twilight God]

TheRealBugz wrote...

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...
"Man didn't land on the moon Theory" is still alive.

It's not a theory if it has proof...

Lots of theories have proof. It depends on the context.

It is a misconception that theory = unproven.

[Legion of 1337]

The Twilight God wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
The slides are all about hopes and intents for the future, not necessarily what the future holds. 

No, the VO is about hopes and dreams for the future, the slides show the future itself (in other words, the slides validate the VO's speech). There's no trickery here.

You assume they do. You have no proof and the burden of proof is on you.

Samara returning to Thessia in her lifetime? Highly unlike at FTL speeds.
Grunt returning to Tuchanka without fully developed plates? Highly unlikely at FTL speeds.

So, what, you want to believe BW made all that up just to make you think eveyrthing was going to be fine when in fact everything will go to ****? What would be the point of that?

[Bill Casey]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Shepard no symptoms of indoctrination prior to the very end.

Lie...

[The Twilight God]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

I read IT, the idea is that Shepard is trapped in a dream where choosing control or synthesis is Shepard falling for the Catalyst's deceptions and allows the Reapers to take over his mind. And destroy, which is actively opposing the Reapers, is the way to resist.

As you clearly have no clue about IT-con (or waking hallucination) there is no point is discussing this further. As Alan asked about IT-Con, NOT Dream theory, my post addressed IT-Con. Feel free to read the links accompanying the blurbs.

IT-Con:
Part I: Destroy Analysis
Part II: Control Analysis
Part III: Synthesis Analysis
Part IV: Refuse Analysis

Otherwise, we have nothing to discuss. I don't believe in Dream Theory so arguing against Dream Theory is pointless as we are in agreement that it isn't valid.

[WhiteKnyght]

The Twilight God wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
The slides are all about hopes and intents for the future, not necessarily what the future holds. 

No, the VO is about hopes and dreams for the future, the slides show the future itself (in other words, the slides validate the VO's speech). There's no trickery here.

You assume they do. You have no proof and the burden of proof is on you.

Samara returning to Thessia in her lifetime? Highly unlike at FTL speeds.
Grunt returning to Tuchanka without fully developed plates? Highly unlikely at FTL speeds.

Mass Relays can be repaired.

Destroy has Hackett saying the Relays are only severely damaged, not destroyed. And he also goes on to saying that they will rebuild. If the Galaxy's best can build something as large as the Crucible in a short amount of time by working together, they can repair a damaged Mass Relay.

Patrick Weekes also said they don't even really need the Mass Relays. 16 lightyears per day is cruising speed, not top speed. Plus they can reverse engineer the Reaper tech to make upgrades(Reapers go more than twice as
fast as the normal FTL ship) I'll take the word of an ME writer over a crazy conspiracy theorist any day.


Control specifically shows the Reapers repairing the mass relays. They can work faster and more efficiently than any combined effort by the Galaxy's races.

Synthesis frees the Reapers from the Catalyst's control, who help to rebuild the galaxy. Which would include the Mass Relays.

Also saying we have no proof when all your so called "evidence" is subjective, circumstantial, and taken out of context.

The biggest fact, if the indoctrination theory were real, there would have been no reason to make the extended cut at all. It would also make Bioware/EA guilty of false advertising again. And being deliberately self destructive is bad for business. So I don't think they would purposely do it twice.

[Legion of 1337]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
The slides are all about hopes and intents for the future, not necessarily what the future holds. 

No, the VO is about hopes and dreams for the future, the slides show the future itself (in other words, the slides validate the VO's speech). There's no trickery here.

You assume they do. You have no proof and the burden of proof is on you.

Samara returning to Thessia in her lifetime? Highly unlike at FTL speeds.
Grunt returning to Tuchanka without fully developed plates? Highly unlikely at FTL speeds.

Mass Relays can be repaired.

Destroy has Hackett saying the Relays are only severely damaged, not destroyed. And he also goes on to saying that they will rebuild. If the Galaxy's best can build something as large as the Crucible in a short amount of time by working together, they can repair a damaged Mass Relay.

Patrick Weekes also said they don't even really need the Mass Relays. 16 lightyears per day is cruising speed, not top speed. Plus they can reverse engineer the Reaper tech to make upgrades(Reapers go more than twice as
fast as the normal FTL ship) I'll take the word of an ME writer over a crazy conspiracy theorist any day.


Control specifically shows the Reapers repairing the mass relays. They can work faster and more efficiently than any combined effort by the Galaxy's races.

Synthesis frees the Reapers from the Catalyst's control, who help to rebuild the galaxy. Which would include the Mass Relays.

Also saying we have no proof when all your so called "evidence" is subjective, circumstantial, and taken out of context.

The biggest fact, if the indoctrination theory were real, there would have been no reason to make the extended cut at all. It would also make Bioware/EA guilty of false advertising again. And being deliberately self destructive is bad for business. So I don't think they would purposely do it twice.

At this point I'm seriously considering not arguing with them anymore. Their first theory is completely proven wrong, and their update is a pathetically weak attempt to keep it alive. I have a whole "this is how religions started and continue today" speil abotu this but I've typed it up enough times already.

[The Twilight God]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Er, no, because indoctrination is a slow process.  Shepard no symptoms of indoctrination prior to the very end. He doesn't begin to sympathize with the Reapers, he doesn't ever side with TIM (who is indoctrinated), there's no whisperings in the back of his head. And again, even if he was, it wouldn't matter anyway because the endings play out the same way regardless. If Shepard chooses Synthesis because the Reapers made him do it...ok, well, if he made the decision himself, the same thing happens anyway, so the whole theory is basically pointless.

Shepard has had more contact with Reaper objects than anyone alive and still themselves. At the end of Arrival Harbinger was able to communicate via hallucination. The dreams are clearly reaper related (ignore them if you wish). Don't pretend like Shepard was never exposed to indocrinating effects prior to th elast 30 minutes of the series. 

If Shepard chooses syntehsis everyone is indoctrinated with Reaper tech. The fate of the galaxy is ambiguous.
If Shepard chooses Control the harvest continues. Shepard sees things from a reaper perspective and thinks he's in control.
If Shepard choses Refuse the harvest continues.

[WhiteKnyght]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Er, no, because indoctrination is a slow process.  Shepard no symptoms of indoctrination prior to the very end. He doesn't begin to sympathize with the Reapers, he doesn't ever side with TIM (who is indoctrinated), there's no whisperings in the back of his head. And again, even if he was, it wouldn't matter anyway because the endings play out the same way regardless. If Shepard chooses Synthesis because the Reapers made him do it...ok, well, if he made the decision himself, the same thing happens anyway, so the whole theory is basically pointless.

You also forgot to mention that rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes rapid neural decay. And Shepard is in control of his mental faculties until the very end.

[Bill Casey]

Leviathan doesn't support your con theory...
When Leviathan is in Shepard's head talking to him, Shepard is blacked out...

[Legion of 1337]

The Twilight God wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Er, no, because indoctrination is a slow process.  Shepard no symptoms of indoctrination prior to the very end. He doesn't begin to sympathize with the Reapers, he doesn't ever side with TIM (who is indoctrinated), there's no whisperings in the back of his head. And again, even if he was, it wouldn't matter anyway because the endings play out the same way regardless. If Shepard chooses Synthesis because the Reapers made him do it...ok, well, if he made the decision himself, the same thing happens anyway, so the whole theory is basically pointless.

Shepard has had more contact with Reaper objects than anyone alive and still themselves. At the end of Arrival Harbinger was able to communicate via hallucination. The dreams are clearly reaper related (ignore them if you wish). Don't pretend like Shepard was never exposed to indocrinating effects prior to th elast 30 minutes of the series. 

If Shepard chooses syntehsis everyone is indoctrinated with Reaper tech. The fate of the galaxy is ambiguous.
If Shepard chooses Control the harvest continues. Shepard sees things from a reaper perspective and thinks he's in control.
If Shepard choses Refuse the harvest continues.

BUT he doesn't exhibit any signs of indoctrination. You must stay in proximity to a Reaper for an extended period to be indoctrinated - most of the Reapers Shepard comes across end up dead. There is insufficient exposure time . There is no reason to suspect he is indoctrinated, and therefore no reason not to take the endings at face value. Other than you don't want to. I mean, that's fine if you don't, but that doesn't make your theory true.

Modifié par Legion of 1337, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:53 .

[Bill Casey]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

BUT he doesn't exhibit any signs of indoctrination.

Except for headaches, buzzing and ringing, paranoia, and recurring nightmares...

[WhiteKnyght]

The Twilight God wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Er, no, because indoctrination is a slow process.  Shepard no symptoms of indoctrination prior to the very end. He doesn't begin to sympathize with the Reapers, he doesn't ever side with TIM (who is indoctrinated), there's no whisperings in the back of his head. And again, even if he was, it wouldn't matter anyway because the endings play out the same way regardless. If Shepard chooses Synthesis because the Reapers made him do it...ok, well, if he made the decision himself, the same thing happens anyway, so the whole theory is basically pointless.

Shepard has had more contact with Reaper objects than anyone alive and still themselves. At the end of Arrival Harbinger was able to communicate via hallucination. The dreams are clearly reaper related (ignore them if you wish). Don't pretend like Shepard was never exposed to indocrinating effects prior to th elast 30 minutes of the series. 

If Shepard chooses syntehsis everyone is indoctrinated with Reaper tech. The fate of the galaxy is ambiguous.
If Shepard chooses Control the harvest continues. Shepard sees things from a reaper perspective and thinks he's in control.
If Shepard choses Refuse the harvest continues.

Except you forget one big thing. Throughout Mass Effect 2, the Reapers are obsessed with getting Shepard for study. Harbinger wanted his body and mind intact because he was an interesting specimen.

The scenes in Leviathan also show that shields can block the indoctrination wave/signal. Hence why Shepard hoped that the piece of Sovereign was shielded and used the shields to sever Leviathan's connection to Ann Bryson. Shepard's armor comes equipped with shields and if you noticed, all the people who become indoctrinated don't. Like Dr Kenson, the Chandana's crew aboard the Derelict Reaper, the Illusive Man, Shiala, and so forth.

[Legion of 1337]

Bill Casey wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

BUT he doesn't exhibit any signs of indoctrination.

Except for headaches, buzzing and ringing, paranoia, and recurring nightmares...

It's PTSD.

None of those ever try to change his convictions, make him sympathize with the Reapers, betray his friends, or anything of the sort. 

[Reptilian Rob]

Red Dust wrote...

OR...Or. Shepard never left the Leviathans, they kept him on their planet as a thrall and everything else from that point is a hallucination.

I'm calling it Leviathan Theory, and I'll need to have some banners made. Preferably with a hypnotic cuttlefish GIF.

****ing win. 

+1000

[The Twilight God]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...
The slides are all about hopes and intents for the future, not necessarily what the future holds. 

No, the VO is about hopes and dreams for the future, the slides show the future itself (in other words, the slides validate the VO's speech). There's no trickery here.

You assume they do. You have no proof and the burden of proof is on you.

Samara returning to Thessia in her lifetime? Highly unlike at FTL speeds.
Grunt returning to Tuchanka without fully developed plates? Highly unlikely at FTL speeds.

So, what, you want to believe BW made all that up just to make you think eveyrthing was going to be fine when in fact everything will go to ****? What would be the point of that?

Hard to indoctrinate a player when you spill the beans. Your not liking the fact that you were duped doesn;t change the fact. If Control and synthesis ended like Refuse everyone would just reload and pick Destroy. Then they'd rage about how the game has 1 ending. The game itself dictates that nothing good can come of Control.

The Twilight God wrote...

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

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

They wouldn't.

The game itself dictates that Synthesis is not what the Reapers really want.

The Twilight God wrote...

1. The Crucible docks, but is not arming.
2. Shepard leaps into the beam and an energetic aura engulfs his surroundings.
3. The Crucible arms itself and fires.
4. It is thus inferred that Shepard's presence within the contraption's energy cocktail was in accordance with the overall contraption's intended purpose.
5. It can thus be further inferred that the beveled synthesis array, and by association the entire contraption, were constructed with the intent of interacting with the Crucible.
6. It has been confirmed in the very opener of the segment that the contraptions at eye level are NOT a part of the Crucible.
7. The contraptions are built into and plugged into the Citadel.
8. If the contraptions were built by the Citadel's organic inhabitants, per the Crucible's schematics, it would be known that the Citadel was a component beforehand. That is not the case.
9. The Citadel is of Reaper construction.
10. Conclusion: the Reapers built the Contraption.
11. If the Reapers built a contraption that interfaces with the Crucible, the Reaper must have some technical details on the Crucible in order to have the understanding of how it works in order to build a device tailored to interfacing with the Crucible.
12. Given all of the above, the Crucible did not create new possibilities. It merely allowed for premeditated functionalities to be actualized.
13. Given the above fact, it is inferred that they must already be aware of the viability of Synthesis prior to the Crucible docking if, in fact, all the Crucible does is provide power [for this option]. As the only limiting factor prior to the Crucible docking is power. Everything else was already built and ready to go.

The question emerges: If the Reapers are familiar with the Crucible design, have built a premeditated means to harness the Crucible's energy and ultimately desire for Synthesis to occur; why would they resist its docking? If it truly is a superior solution, why struggle to prevent it?

The only reason I can fathom is that it is NOT the ideal solution to the Reapers' hypothetical problem or it does not achieve the goals of whatever true (unexplained) objective they may have. It is simply viewed as preferable to the annihilation of the Reapers altogether.

Refuse seems to be what they really want.

The Twilight God wrote...

It has already been established in parts II and III of this thesis that the contraption within the docking chamber is a reaper contingency in the event the Crucible was ever to dock. It has been established that Control is a deception and Synthesis is not the Reapers' ideal outcome. Refusal to use the Crucible is tantamount to it never docking at all which is exactly what the Reapers wanted to begin with. Everything they have done up to this point supports this conclusion.

1. The Reapers retrieve the Citadel to prevent the Crucible from docking.
2. The Reapers consolidate forces around the Citadel to prevent the Crucible from docking.
3. The Reapers will inflict severe damage upon the Crucible, if Shield cannot hold them off, as it attempts to dock.
4. The Reapers do not drag an unwilling participant into the synthesis array if Shepard refuses. They shut down the array.
5. The Reapers destroy the Crucible after it has docked if Shepard dallies for too long without making a decision.

[WhiteKnyght]

Bill Casey wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

BUT he doesn't exhibit any signs of indoctrination.

Except for headaches, buzzing and ringing, paranoia, and recurring nightmares...

How often does Shepard get headaches? They're supposed to be constant.

The buzzing and ringing are also supposed to be constant. But you only hear it in the hangar because you are right below the engine room.(Next you'll be saying the game's background music is proof)

Paranoia? You lead the galaxy against impossible odds and tell me you're never going to be afraid of failure.

Also, everybody has nightmares. Especially soldiers who see a lot of death. It's called post traumatic stress disorder. Shepard saw a child die because he didn't get him to safety and he's haunted by it and all the people he lost.

You're only arguments are that he's human and not some perfect mary-sue.

Modifié par The Grey Nayr, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:02 .

[Bill Casey]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

BUT he doesn't exhibit any signs of indoctrination.

Except for headaches, buzzing and ringing, paranoia, and recurring nightmares...

It's PTSD.

Quoted so he can't edit...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:05 .

[WhiteKnyght]

Bill Casey wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

BUT he doesn't exhibit any signs of indoctrination.

Except for headaches, buzzing and ringing, paranoia, and recurring nightmares...

It's PTSD.

None of those ever try to change his convictions, make him sympathize
with the Reapers, betray his friends, or anything of the sort. 

Quoted so he can't edit...

Legion of 1337's right. If you read Mass Effect Retribution, you'd know that your opinions changing and being sympathetic towards the Reapers are early signs.

If Shepard were being indoctrinated, he wouldn't be doubting whether or not he can win and save the galaxy, he'd be doubting whether or not he was right to oppose the Reapers at all.(Indoctrinated people generally believe that the Reapers have the right idea about things.)