252 réponses à ce sujet

[Davik Kang]

 Hi, I'm Davik Kang. You may remember me for my notorious leadership of the Exchange crime syndicate presence on Taris.  I used to be a crime boss a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.

I also had custom-built armour:



It was purple.  Frickin' PURPLE!!  That is how gangsta I am.

Many people thought I perished on the Upper City in my own headquarters, but in fact I survived an attempt on my life, and the subsequent bombardment of the entire planet.  Severely injured, my assortment of collected goons, henchmen and evil scientists carried out my wishes that I be crygenically frozen in time, and it is by this virtue that I am able to appear today, to address you dandy folks on the Bioware Social Network forums.

Now, I had a mighty different impression to the ending of Mass Effect 3 than many folks on here.  I can't agree with the IT theorists because I don't see the ending as a dream.  In fact I think the final 3 (or 4) choices did happen (depending of course on which one you chose) and their consequences were real.  But I also don't agree with the Literal theorists either, because for me the ending was a pretty clear indoctrination attempt, and the Star Chamber section was a hallucination on Shepard's part.  Now there doesn't seem to be a thread dedicated to this view at the moment, and I can't believe I am the only one who saw it this way, so I'm gonna post this here.

The nice things about this interpretation are that:

- it doesn't require headcanon, because the endings really happened
- it doesn't spoil the narrative, because the kid and the organic v synthetic issue make sense and are resolved in the story
- it is quite straighforward, is based on what we actually see in the game, and doesn't require much speculation, outside of figuring out how much of the final scene is a hallucination

There must be more people on here who see it like this?  Speak up, we need your support!

Final events of ME3 in brief:

> Shepard survives the Reaper blast.  She is serverly physically and mentally drained, as shown by her posture and the dream-like visual effects, which mirror those in earlier dream sequences.

> Shepard meets Anderson and TIM on the Citadel.  Both die eventually.

> Shepard falls unconscious, and on re-awaking, is subject to a massive hallucination.  The Reaper AI within the Citadel is able to communicate with her, and she sees it as the child from her dreams, as it attempts to appeal to her desire to save the innocent, and her guilt for not always being able to do so.

> The Crucible is a high-energy power source that, if actiavted, would send a surge via the Citadel to all Mass Relays that would severely damage synthetic machinery in the vicinity of every active Mass Relay, killing any sentient life connected to, or a part of, those synthetics.

> Shepard is still able to activate the Crucible (Destroy), but under the indoctrination attempt, believes that she has three options.  The other two, Control and Synthesis, involve the indoctrination attempt succeeding and Shepard relinquishing herself and the Crucible to the Reapers.  Refuse has Shepard do nothing, leading to a straightforward Reaper victory.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 06 novembre 2012 - 02:20 .

[Davik Kang]

 Some additional comments:


The StarKid is NOT a Deus Ex Machina

A DEM is a device used since ancient Greek plays, where an omnipotent god character would be lowered onto the stage to resolve situations in the story that were otherwise unresolvable.  The term came to be used to describe similar plot devices in fiction, where a character or event would arrive completely unannounced and alter the story in a similar way.  

But the StarKid is not a DEM.  It is presented as one, if you take what he says as true.  But he is the product of an indoctrination attempt, and the control of the situation at the end is solely down to two factors: Shepard, and the Crucible.  We knew the Crucible did something amazing, but we didn't know what.  Shepard is the one who has the choice to use it.  The StarKid is a bystander.  It is essentially just a voice for the Reapers, trying at the last minute to save themselves, or even turn defeat into a dramatic improved victory.


Organics vs Synthetics: the end does not counteract what the story said so far

In the end, you are forced to cause the deaths of synthetic life to save the other races.  Some see this as being contrary to the earlier story elements involving the Geth conflicts.  But it isn't.

The StarKid explains that synthetics will always eventually advance beyond organics, to a point where conflict will necessarily arise.  He says that organics will eventually be destroyed by the superior synthetics in this way, as a matter of inevitability.  He uses this as a threat to explain why Destroy is a bad choice, because ultimately it will lead to the death of all organics.

By choosing Destroy, you refuse to accept his argument.  You say that you don't believe this conflict will arise, and you want to give them the chance to prove the StarKid wrong.  The genocide of the current cycle of Synthetics is a terrible thing - a consequence of the Crucible design, which is needed to stop the Reapers.  The Geth, EDI, and other synthetics will die, and they will never come back.  But more synthetics, VIs, etc., will be built, and without Reapers to kill everyone, it will be up to the civilisations of the future to coexist peacefully.  

If Shepard is wrong and the Kid is right, these new synthetics will eventually kill all organic life.  This is irrespective of whose fault it is that the wars begin again - we can see that some Quarians were very much to blame for a great deal of the Geth conflict.  But Shepard chooses to take that chance, and let organics and synthetics try to remain at peace.

[dreman9999]

But you said the consequences really happened. That means Shepard can control all the reaper and synthesis does combine organic and synthetic.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Everything is a dream. You are dreaming right now. Soon you will wake up realize that the year is still 2007 and a game called Mass Effect is soon to be released.

[essarr71]

This was fun to read until it was about ME.

[Davik Kang]

Sion1138 wrote...
Would you appreciate it if this scenario were expanded upon through post-ending DLC or are you content with how things are now?

Very content with how things are now.  I think maybe this is why people who interpreted the game like this don't post very much, because they were content with the game.

dreman9999 wrote...
But you said the consequences really happened. That means Shepard can control all the reaper and synthesis does combine organic and synthetic.

You could interpret that the StarKid is not an indoctrination attempt, in which case Con and Syn would happen exactly as depicted.  I see it differently and have gone into those endings in depth, but want to avoud doing so for now.  Short answers to your question:

In Control I think Shepard believes she is assuming control of Reapers, but is actually controlling a Reaper by becoming a Reaper (the Citadel being the Reaper's body).

In Synthesis yeah I think it's pretty much happening, but this is a Reaper goal.  It was forewarned many times in the trilogy that organics trying to reach a level high of synthesis too early would end in disaster.  But you could interpret that this was actually the right time for organics to attempt this.

[Bill Casey]

I just want to say that Shepard is not the best person to imprint onto the Reapers...

Even as a Paragon he spies on others' conversations, shoots the crap out of anyone who gets in his way, and operates outside of the law. In fact, in some ways, Paragon Shepard is worse because he thought rewriting the heretics was okay and his personality now has access to limitless indoctrination powers...

It doesn't even seem like it worked that well. He went from "we all need to work together" to "I will protect and sustain! For the many!"

[Davik Kang]

Sion1138 wrote...
You see, this is what I can't stomach. You can interpret things this way or that way...

I am hugely annoyed by this.

I have nothing against personal interpretations in principle. I have nothing against stories which explicitly require the audience to construct their own version of what really transpired.

For example, one of my favorite films of all time is "Donnie Darko". If you've seen it, you know what I mean.

Mass Effect was mostly straightforward, and for good reason. It's a role-playing game after all. But then they changed the narrative style in the last few minutes.

I get why people dislike it, and yeah I've seen Donnie Darko.

But I don't think the end changes the narrative style.  They had to present the end like that to make the indoctrination attempt well-executed.  If they made it obvious, it wouldn't have had any impact.  It was a fine line to tread, because making it too obvious would have spoilt the whole thing, but making less obvious had the effect of confusing and upsetting a lot of players.

[futurepixels]

This makes sense.

[Hydralysk]

Davik Kang wrote...

Sion1138 wrote...
You see, this is what I can't stomach. You can interpret things this way or that way...

I am hugely annoyed by this.

I have nothing against personal interpretations in principle. I have nothing against stories which explicitly require the audience to construct their own version of what really transpired.

For example, one of my favorite films of all time is "Donnie Darko". If you've seen it, you know what I mean.

Mass Effect was mostly straightforward, and for good reason. It's a role-playing game after all. But then they changed the narrative style in the last few minutes.

I get why people dislike it, and yeah I've seen Donnie Darko.

But I don't think the end changes the narrative style.  They had to present the end like that to make the indoctrination attempt well-executed.  If they made it obvious, it wouldn't have had any impact.  It was a fine line to tread, because making it too obvious would have spoilt the whole thing, but making less obvious had the effect of confusing and upsetting a lot of players.

If such a large amount of players missed it, and worse, when they had it explained to them they still refused to believe it, then regardless of whether or not it was Bioware's intention it was not well exectued.

[Davik Kang]

Hydralysk wrote...
If such a large amount of players missed it, and worse, when they had it explained to them they still refused to believe it, then regardless of whether or not it was Bioware's intention it was not well exectued.

Unfortunately I think you're right.  I'm not sure exactly how many players believe x or y because no poll or forum is a good representation of the proportions.  It's a shame because some players really enjoyed it.  It was ambitious at least, trying to do something original.

[dreman9999]

Davik Kang wrote...

Sion1138 wrote...
Would you appreciate it if this scenario were expanded upon through post-ending DLC or are you content with how things are now?

Very content with how things are now.  I think maybe this is why people who interpreted the game like this don't post very much, because they were content with the game.

dreman9999 wrote...
But you said the consequences really happened. That means Shepard can control all the reaper and synthesis does combine organic and synthetic.

You could interpret that the StarKid is not an indoctrination attempt, in which case Con and Syn would happen exactly as depicted.  I see it differently and have gone into those endings in depth, but want to avoud doing so for now.  Short answers to your question:

In Control I think Shepard believes she is assuming control of Reapers, but is actually controlling a Reaper by becoming a Reaper (the Citadel being the Reaper's body).

In Synthesis yeah I think it's pretty much happening, but this is a Reaper goal.  It was forewarned many times in the trilogy that organics trying to reach a level high of synthesis too early would end in disaster.  But you could interpret that this was actually the right time for organics to attempt this.

Then were at odds then...It's not a dream.  Even BW say the results are real. I would say there is an attempt of indoctriantion but the result of it changed because of the crucible. Synthesis is just a new way for the reaper to do there goal and control really lets Shepard control the reapers.

That just means only synthesisi is indoctrination.

[SpamBot2000]

So you discovered IT. Congrats.

I prefer the version in which Shep wakes up myself.

[Davik Kang]

SpamBot2000 wrote...
So you discovered IT. Congrats. 

I prefer the version in which Shep wakes up myself.

Fantastic.  This thread's first troll.  Did you see the bit where I said Shepard did wake up?

[Davik Kang]

dreman9999 wrote...
Then were at odds then...It's not a dream.  Even BW say the results are real. I would say there is an attempt of indoctriantion but the result of it changed because of the crucible. Synthesis is just a new way for the reaper to do there goal and control really lets Shepard control the reapers.

That just means only synthesisi is indoctrination.

Yeah I do think the results are real.  Shepard is just seeing it differently.  I'm not saying it's a dream, but it was a hallucination.  Basically I think Synthesis is a preferred option for the Reapers.  But both amount to indoctrination, because Shepard submits to the Reapers' will.  I don't think Shepard actually controls the Reapers as the Kid suggested; she only understands it that way, as she becomes part of the Reaper and her mind is combined with it.

[Xilizhra]

Davik Kang wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Then were at odds then...It's not a dream.  Even BW say the results are real. I would say there is an attempt of indoctriantion but the result of it changed because of the crucible. Synthesis is just a new way for the reaper to do there goal and control really lets Shepard control the reapers.

That just means only synthesisi is indoctrination.

Yeah I do think the results are real.  Shepard is just seeing it differently.  I'm not saying it's a dream, but it was a hallucination.  Basically I think Synthesis is a preferred option for the Reapers.  But both amount to indoctrination, because Shepard submits to the Reapers' will.  I don't think Shepard actually controls the Reapers as the Kid suggested; she only understands it that way, as she becomes part of the Reaper and her mind is combined with it.

I'm sorry, but I still find this theory loathsome for making genocide the only option, and refuse to accept it or any arguments based around it.

[SpamBot2000]

Davik Kang wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...
So you discovered IT. Congrats. 

I prefer the version in which Shep wakes up myself.

Fantastic.  This thread's first troll.  Did you see the bit where I said Shepard did wake up?

One does feel obligated to make the occasional reciprocal social call.

[Massa FX]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

Everything is a dream. You are dreaming right now. Soon you will wake up realize that the year is still 2007 and a game called Mass Effect is soon to be released.

Actually the world ended in year 2000. There is no Mass Effect videogame. We exist only in tangible ghost form living out our lost lives as they should have been, but will never be.

Y2K ended us all.

edit: sorry. im trying to be funny but it reads like trolling.

Modifié par Massa FX, 11 octobre 2012 - 07:17 .

[Davik Kang]

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm sorry, but I still find this theory loathsome for making genocide the only option, and refuse to accept it or any arguments based around it.

Plenty of other will agree with you.  No doubt genocide was an horrific choice.  And if Shepard wasn't being indoctrinated, the arguments against Destroy become much stronger.  But I'm pretty sure Shepard was being indoctrinated, and this is what I thought when I was playing, I hadn't visited these forums or heard anything about IT.

[Davik Kang]

Massa FX wrote...
edit: sorry. im trying to be funny but it reads like trolling.

I have to be honest, I make posts like this all the time too.

[Xilizhra]

Davik Kang wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm sorry, but I still find this theory loathsome for making genocide the only option, and refuse to accept it or any arguments based around it.

Plenty of other will agree with you.  No doubt genocide was an horrific choice.  And if Shepard wasn't being indoctrinated, the arguments against Destroy become much stronger.  But I'm pretty sure Shepard was being indoctrinated, and this is what I thought when I was playing, I hadn't visited these forums or heard anything about IT.

I propose a compromise: if you choose Destroy, your theory was right, whereas if I choose Control/Synthesis, mine was right. That way, both of us can be happy. Will this work?

[Bill Casey]

Xilizhra wrote...

I propose a compromise: if you choose Destroy, your theory was right, whereas if I choose Control/Synthesis, mine was right. That way, both of us can be happy. Will this work?

That requires throwing out the entire trilogy...