Shepard is an L3 biotic, even if you don't take a biotic class...
I suppose that explains the bonus powers...
Why Indoctrinating Shepard Does Not Make Sense
Débuté par
JShepppp
, nov. 30 2012 07:48
Retour en haut
#52
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 10:56
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 765 messages
HellishFiend wrote...
Stay tuned to my "Choose Wisely" videos. I wont "spit it out" in them either, but I will be talking about considerations necessary to discover the truth.
You're a smart, creative person, Hellish, but that kind of thing is really off-putting.
Here's hoping your audience will appreciate whatever it is that you cook up.
#53
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:03
BatmanTurian
-
- Members
- 4 735 messages
OP is clueless. OP, read the indoctrination codex entry again. Seriously. Not enough headdesks in the world.
Modifié par BatmanTurian, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:12 .
#54
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:04
demersel
-
- Members
- 3 868 messages
Ok, I get it, immaculate concepton by eazo, Shepard is our savior and stuff. Sheprd-Jesus thing is lame.
#55
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:04
davishepard
-
- Members
- 669 messages
We got a believer over here.BatmanTurian wrote...
OO is clueless. OO, read the indoctrination codex entry again. Seriously. Not enough headdesks in the world.
#56
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:07
masster blaster
-
- Members
- 7 278 messages
This list has been compiled to enable an easy access to The Indoctrination Theory. While there are many other aspects, hints and signs throughout Mass Effect 3 and the entire trilogy that may also point to The Indoctrination Theory,
the concepts presented in this list are - to the best of my knowledge -
the most compelling ones. Take into account that my role in this
undertaking was mainly the role of an editor, though many broader
suggestions I found to be convincing, made it into the list. The vast
majority of the points listed below were reported by fellow associates
of The Indoctrination Theory and they deserve the correspondent gratitude.
The order of the list was determined through surveys and polls that can be found here.
I) Indoctrination in general :
1. Regarding IT, Shepard is in the process of indoctrination and the outcome is decided by the final decision taken.
2. The concept of indoctrination is a crucial part throughout the trilogy and nothing new to the player (link 1 and 2).
3. Rana Thanoptis is an example of how subtle and slow indoctrination can be.
4. Shepard knocked out for two days by a Reaper artifact that indoctrinated an entire facility.
5. Logs on the derelict Reaper illustrate the reactions of victims of indoctrination.
6. Paul Grayson's indoctrination show its effects on someone's mind.
7. Harbinger's smacktalk (link 1 and 2).
II) The Breath Scene :
1. London rubble.
2. Mako in the background.
3. Citadel explosion (link 1 and 2).
III) The Dreams :
1. Dream sequences and post-beam sequence share the same game mechanics.
2. Reality-nonreality transition after beam shot (post-beam, dreams, Geth Consensus).
3. Oily shadows and whispering.
4. Nightmares are mentioned in the Arrival by subjects being indoctrinated.
5. Chambers and Asari having PTSD as comparison between PTSD & Shepard's dreams.
IV) Leviathan :
1. Harbinger/the Reapers perfected enthrallment to indoctrination.
2. Enthrallment uses memories of its victim.
3. Similarities between Leviathan end and decision chamber.
4. Zap sound as a sign to enter/leave virtual reality (link 1 and 2).
5. Note the file name of the sixth murder that can be found in Bryson's lab.
V) The Choices :
1. Shepard on his knees happened only during/after some mind control.
2. The Guardian is aligned to the Reapers.
3. Control and Synthesis being supported by indoctrinated characters.
4. A swap in the colours (TIM = Paragon; Anderson = Renegade).
5. Huskification during Control/Synthesis vs. Shepard gaining strength while shooting the tubes.
6. Guardian losing it when you refuse ("SO BE IT!").
7. Decision chamber looks like a dialogue wheel from an aerial view.
8. Decision chamber resembling beam scenery (link 1 and 2).
9. Ambiguous end dialogue (Control/Synthesis).
10. Slide shows in Control/Synthesis/Destroy illustrate future possibilities, not facts that already happened.
11. Soldiers in Destroy fighting fiercely while in Control/Synthesis they are losing (note: no cheering in Synthesis).
VI) The Kid :
1. Moves from one roof to another during an invasion (all links).
2. It can open a door that is marked as locked.
3. It survives a blast from a Reaper laser.
4. It is not seen by anyone else.
5. There always are warning symbols around it.
6. It disappears without making any noise.
7. It does not behave like a normal kid ("You cannot save me!").
8. The Guardian has the same form as the kid.
VII) Anderson & TIM :
1. How did Anderson follow Shepard?
2. How can Anderson reach the control first?
3. Why did no one else follow Anderson?
4. From where did TIM shows up?
5. TIM's scars are only present at the end of the game.
6. Anderson may be addressing Shepard ("They are controlling you!").
7. Shepard is dominated by TIM and thus through him by the Reapers.
8. Anderson and Shepard have wounds at the same place (link 1 and 2).
9. Reaper horn played in the background (at 1/2 speed).
VIII) The Guardian :
1. It has the same shape as the kid ( thus an extraction of Shepard's memories).
2. It speaks with femshep's and maleshep's voice.
3. Harbinger's line in the MP trailer (link 1 and 2).
IX) The Beam Run :
1. Harbinger is pin-pointing everyone and everything but Shepard.
2. Harbinger does not destroy the Normandy.
3. Shepard survives a blast that should one-shot Makos and Gunships.
4. Harbinger just leaves.
X) The Citadel :
1. The Citadel resembles events of the past.
2. You can find Coats dead on the Citadel.
3. The illumination without a specific source.
I
would again like to thank everyone that has contributed to this list
and if only a single person gains a broader perspective of The Indoctrination Theory
through this list, the porpuse of this undertaking has been fulfilled
and not in vain. This list may seem to be complete, but there are
certainly going to be new discoveries in the course of exploring new
content and I will try to adjust this list accordingly.
Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...
The Catalyst in Mass Effect 3 is lying, not just as in deceiving you, it is lying and going against its own core programming as said by the Leviathans and itself. In the following bit I will explain why.
"Mandate to preserve life at any cost" - Leviathan
This is how the Leviathan describes the Intelligence it created, the one which turned upon them and harvested them. One could easily see the flaw in such a programming and why it went haywire. It saw the Leviathans as live to be preserved as well and thought broad, wanting to preserve all life which would come into existence, not just the current.
The problem is the Catalyst we meet does not follow that mandate even though it itself claims to do so. First to be completely sure that we can be certain it is this mandate it is following look at these two quotes from it.
"Storing the old life in reaper form" - Catalyst
"Reapers harvest all life - organic and synthetic - preserving them before they are forever lost to this conflict" - Catalyst
Simple enough and in line with the original mandate. Especially notice the "all" in the second part, there are no exceptions to the harvest. Problem is the Catalysts actions do not support its words.
First let us look at its servants, the Reapers. They are in charge of the harvest yet if we look at their actions it would seem they didn't get the memo from the Catalyst regarding preserving all life.
One of the first time line indications of this is the Rachni Wars. There is a heavy implication that Sovereign caused the Rachni wars through the queens comments about a "sour yellow note from space" and it is all but confirmed by ME3 with the line: "The machines came. They heard our song. The shriek of sour notes drowned us out."
The problem is the Rachni Wars caused the Rahcni's near extinction with only the queen surviving by a miracle . In short the Reapers just destroyed a race which according to the Catalyst self stated purpose should be harvested.
This one can be explained in that the Rachni were harvested during the Prothean cycle where they were also around, but the next example cannot be explained in that way.
Mass Effect 3 pits the Quarians against the Geth in their final battle and as we learn the Reapers are the ones controlling the Geth. problem is that without Shepard's either the Geth or the Quarian's are wiped out…completely. Even with interference there is a high possibility of this outcome anyway removing a race which should have been harvested.
Again I refer you to the fact that the Catalyst says "all life" even emphasizing that it includes Synthetics. There is no explanation for this breach of programming for the Catalyst.
It only gets stranger when you remember the lines Harbinger could speak during the final battle in ME2 against the Proto Reaper. These lines depended on what species of squad mate you had with you.
“Quarian; considered due to cybernetic augmentation, weakened immune system too debilitating.”
“Drell; useless, insufficient numbers.”
“Asari; reliance upon alien species for reproduction shows genetic weakness.”
“Salarian; insufficient lifespan, fragile genetic structure.”
“Geth; an annoyance, limited utility.”
“Krogan; sterilized race, potential wasted.”
“Turian; you are considered...too primitive.”
Did Harbinger, the original Reaper not get the memo on harvesting all life? Sounds more like any other species than humanity is going to be wiped out.
But let us move on from the Reapers and to the Catalyst himself as two of the three options you can make at the end goes directly against his mandate.
"Soon your children will create Synthetics and then the chaos will come back" - Catalyst
Look above, isn't it nice when he spells out the problem in his own offer himself? No, I don’t refer to the synthetics
coming back, I refer to the fact that if Destroy truly isn't a permanent solution then why is he offering it?
His mandate was to preserve all life at any cost, but if Shepard goes through with Destroy not only will every single
Reaper and the life it represents get wiped out, but he will also halt any future harvests and even according to this line cause the death of everything as the Synthetics rise up again. It even kills the Geth wiping out another race it
should preserve. It is the ultimate failure of his purpose and programming, yet he is allowing it.
Control is the same though less so. If Shepard takes control of the Reapers then the harvest will stop, no more
species will be preserved and every dead species will be lost forever. It is less of a break, but the catalyst mandate is still to preserve "all" life (funny how a single word can bite you in the ass so many times. I would call it a slip of tongue was it not an AI supercomputer talking).
Obviously this is only the case if Reaper Shepard doesn't reach the same conclusion as the catalyst and starts up the cycle again.
You might assume that the Catalyst simply did not have any choice regarding this, that he had to tell Shepard due to the Crucible and couldn’t stop him in any way. That would be true until the Extended Cut rolled around and gave us the Refuse ending.
In this ending the Catalyst walks away and disappears, the lights go dark and the Crucible shuts down. lacking any other visible factors we have to assume it was the Catalyst cause. If he could shut down the Crucible at will, why allow Destroy to happen?
Also finally this is unrelated to his direct trust, but I think I got that point across already as we are clearly shown the Catalyst and its supposed minions going against its supposed purpose and mandate several times.
But consider that the catalyst takes the form of a child Shepard sees on Earth. The only logical explanation there is for it taking this form is that it knows about the child, but how? How does it know about this child which Shepard saw on Earth and had nightmares about, how does it know the child is significant to Shepard?
The only explanation is that it has accessed Shepard´s mind at some point seeing this. That would mean it has been in your head without you knowing and as it furthermore takes the shape of a child instead of trusted person from Shepard's memories mean it is trying to use symbol of innocence and guilt, most likely to manipulate Shepard as using a form with those meanings make little sense else.
And then there is the fact that the Catalyst reveals itself to be the leader of the Reapers, you know the killing machines directly aiming to kill you for three games straight and are known for deception and mind control? Can you really trust it?
Especially considering Harbinger was firing at you moments before, Shepard only surviving by a miracle. Then you encounter TIM who tries to kill you and quote on quote from the Catalyst, "we already controlled him."
Again you are probably going to say the Crucible changed the Catalyst, but how? It is just a giant battery, no one even knew of the catalyst being an AI (The Catalyst directly says you are the first person to make it that far) so the Crucible was not designed to alter it and even if it altered it, it clearly did not alter its core programming as the Catalyst states its purpose twice after the Crucible connects.
"Storing the old life in reaper form" - Catalyst
"Reapers harvest all life - organic and synthetic - preserving them before they are forever lost to this conflict" - Catalyst
And even then we have the Reapers going against the Catalyst "purpose" before the Crucible was even close to
the Citadel.
What does this mean? I will leave the conclusions to you, I just want to point out that this "benevolent" Catalyst is not speaking a lot of truths during its conversation and is not following the programming it says it has, so why can you trust it?
the concepts presented in this list are - to the best of my knowledge -
the most compelling ones. Take into account that my role in this
undertaking was mainly the role of an editor, though many broader
suggestions I found to be convincing, made it into the list. The vast
majority of the points listed below were reported by fellow associates
of The Indoctrination Theory and they deserve the correspondent gratitude.
The order of the list was determined through surveys and polls that can be found here.
----------The Ten Most Important Concepts Supporting The Indoctrination Theory----------
I) Indoctrination in general :
1. Regarding IT, Shepard is in the process of indoctrination and the outcome is decided by the final decision taken.
2. The concept of indoctrination is a crucial part throughout the trilogy and nothing new to the player (link 1 and 2).
3. Rana Thanoptis is an example of how subtle and slow indoctrination can be.
4. Shepard knocked out for two days by a Reaper artifact that indoctrinated an entire facility.
5. Logs on the derelict Reaper illustrate the reactions of victims of indoctrination.
6. Paul Grayson's indoctrination show its effects on someone's mind.
7. Harbinger's smacktalk (link 1 and 2).
II) The Breath Scene :
1. London rubble.
2. Mako in the background.
3. Citadel explosion (link 1 and 2).
III) The Dreams :
1. Dream sequences and post-beam sequence share the same game mechanics.
2. Reality-nonreality transition after beam shot (post-beam, dreams, Geth Consensus).
3. Oily shadows and whispering.
4. Nightmares are mentioned in the Arrival by subjects being indoctrinated.
5. Chambers and Asari having PTSD as comparison between PTSD & Shepard's dreams.
IV) Leviathan :
1. Harbinger/the Reapers perfected enthrallment to indoctrination.
2. Enthrallment uses memories of its victim.
3. Similarities between Leviathan end and decision chamber.
4. Zap sound as a sign to enter/leave virtual reality (link 1 and 2).
5. Note the file name of the sixth murder that can be found in Bryson's lab.
V) The Choices :
1. Shepard on his knees happened only during/after some mind control.
2. The Guardian is aligned to the Reapers.
3. Control and Synthesis being supported by indoctrinated characters.
4. A swap in the colours (TIM = Paragon; Anderson = Renegade).
5. Huskification during Control/Synthesis vs. Shepard gaining strength while shooting the tubes.
6. Guardian losing it when you refuse ("SO BE IT!").
7. Decision chamber looks like a dialogue wheel from an aerial view.
8. Decision chamber resembling beam scenery (link 1 and 2).
9. Ambiguous end dialogue (Control/Synthesis).
10. Slide shows in Control/Synthesis/Destroy illustrate future possibilities, not facts that already happened.
11. Soldiers in Destroy fighting fiercely while in Control/Synthesis they are losing (note: no cheering in Synthesis).
VI) The Kid :
1. Moves from one roof to another during an invasion (all links).
2. It can open a door that is marked as locked.
3. It survives a blast from a Reaper laser.
4. It is not seen by anyone else.
5. There always are warning symbols around it.
6. It disappears without making any noise.
7. It does not behave like a normal kid ("You cannot save me!").
8. The Guardian has the same form as the kid.
VII) Anderson & TIM :
1. How did Anderson follow Shepard?
2. How can Anderson reach the control first?
3. Why did no one else follow Anderson?
4. From where did TIM shows up?
5. TIM's scars are only present at the end of the game.
6. Anderson may be addressing Shepard ("They are controlling you!").
7. Shepard is dominated by TIM and thus through him by the Reapers.
8. Anderson and Shepard have wounds at the same place (link 1 and 2).
9. Reaper horn played in the background (at 1/2 speed).
VIII) The Guardian :
1. It has the same shape as the kid ( thus an extraction of Shepard's memories).
2. It speaks with femshep's and maleshep's voice.
3. Harbinger's line in the MP trailer (link 1 and 2).
IX) The Beam Run :
1. Harbinger is pin-pointing everyone and everything but Shepard.
2. Harbinger does not destroy the Normandy.
3. Shepard survives a blast that should one-shot Makos and Gunships.
4. Harbinger just leaves.
X) The Citadel :
1. The Citadel resembles events of the past.
2. You can find Coats dead on the Citadel.
3. The illumination without a specific source.
----------Epilogue----------
I
would again like to thank everyone that has contributed to this list
and if only a single person gains a broader perspective of The Indoctrination Theory
through this list, the porpuse of this undertaking has been fulfilled
and not in vain. This list may seem to be complete, but there are
certainly going to be new discoveries in the course of exploring new
content and I will try to adjust this list accordingly.
Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...
The Catalyst in Mass Effect 3 is lying, not just as in deceiving you, it is lying and going against its own core programming as said by the Leviathans and itself. In the following bit I will explain why.
"Mandate to preserve life at any cost" - Leviathan
This is how the Leviathan describes the Intelligence it created, the one which turned upon them and harvested them. One could easily see the flaw in such a programming and why it went haywire. It saw the Leviathans as live to be preserved as well and thought broad, wanting to preserve all life which would come into existence, not just the current.
The problem is the Catalyst we meet does not follow that mandate even though it itself claims to do so. First to be completely sure that we can be certain it is this mandate it is following look at these two quotes from it.
"Storing the old life in reaper form" - Catalyst
"Reapers harvest all life - organic and synthetic - preserving them before they are forever lost to this conflict" - Catalyst
Simple enough and in line with the original mandate. Especially notice the "all" in the second part, there are no exceptions to the harvest. Problem is the Catalysts actions do not support its words.
First let us look at its servants, the Reapers. They are in charge of the harvest yet if we look at their actions it would seem they didn't get the memo from the Catalyst regarding preserving all life.
One of the first time line indications of this is the Rachni Wars. There is a heavy implication that Sovereign caused the Rachni wars through the queens comments about a "sour yellow note from space" and it is all but confirmed by ME3 with the line: "The machines came. They heard our song. The shriek of sour notes drowned us out."
The problem is the Rachni Wars caused the Rahcni's near extinction with only the queen surviving by a miracle . In short the Reapers just destroyed a race which according to the Catalyst self stated purpose should be harvested.
This one can be explained in that the Rachni were harvested during the Prothean cycle where they were also around, but the next example cannot be explained in that way.
Mass Effect 3 pits the Quarians against the Geth in their final battle and as we learn the Reapers are the ones controlling the Geth. problem is that without Shepard's either the Geth or the Quarian's are wiped out…completely. Even with interference there is a high possibility of this outcome anyway removing a race which should have been harvested.
Again I refer you to the fact that the Catalyst says "all life" even emphasizing that it includes Synthetics. There is no explanation for this breach of programming for the Catalyst.
It only gets stranger when you remember the lines Harbinger could speak during the final battle in ME2 against the Proto Reaper. These lines depended on what species of squad mate you had with you.
“Quarian; considered due to cybernetic augmentation, weakened immune system too debilitating.”
“Drell; useless, insufficient numbers.”
“Asari; reliance upon alien species for reproduction shows genetic weakness.”
“Salarian; insufficient lifespan, fragile genetic structure.”
“Geth; an annoyance, limited utility.”
“Krogan; sterilized race, potential wasted.”
“Turian; you are considered...too primitive.”
Did Harbinger, the original Reaper not get the memo on harvesting all life? Sounds more like any other species than humanity is going to be wiped out.
But let us move on from the Reapers and to the Catalyst himself as two of the three options you can make at the end goes directly against his mandate.
"Soon your children will create Synthetics and then the chaos will come back" - Catalyst
Look above, isn't it nice when he spells out the problem in his own offer himself? No, I don’t refer to the synthetics
coming back, I refer to the fact that if Destroy truly isn't a permanent solution then why is he offering it?
His mandate was to preserve all life at any cost, but if Shepard goes through with Destroy not only will every single
Reaper and the life it represents get wiped out, but he will also halt any future harvests and even according to this line cause the death of everything as the Synthetics rise up again. It even kills the Geth wiping out another race it
should preserve. It is the ultimate failure of his purpose and programming, yet he is allowing it.
Control is the same though less so. If Shepard takes control of the Reapers then the harvest will stop, no more
species will be preserved and every dead species will be lost forever. It is less of a break, but the catalyst mandate is still to preserve "all" life (funny how a single word can bite you in the ass so many times. I would call it a slip of tongue was it not an AI supercomputer talking).
Obviously this is only the case if Reaper Shepard doesn't reach the same conclusion as the catalyst and starts up the cycle again.
You might assume that the Catalyst simply did not have any choice regarding this, that he had to tell Shepard due to the Crucible and couldn’t stop him in any way. That would be true until the Extended Cut rolled around and gave us the Refuse ending.
In this ending the Catalyst walks away and disappears, the lights go dark and the Crucible shuts down. lacking any other visible factors we have to assume it was the Catalyst cause. If he could shut down the Crucible at will, why allow Destroy to happen?
Also finally this is unrelated to his direct trust, but I think I got that point across already as we are clearly shown the Catalyst and its supposed minions going against its supposed purpose and mandate several times.
But consider that the catalyst takes the form of a child Shepard sees on Earth. The only logical explanation there is for it taking this form is that it knows about the child, but how? How does it know about this child which Shepard saw on Earth and had nightmares about, how does it know the child is significant to Shepard?
The only explanation is that it has accessed Shepard´s mind at some point seeing this. That would mean it has been in your head without you knowing and as it furthermore takes the shape of a child instead of trusted person from Shepard's memories mean it is trying to use symbol of innocence and guilt, most likely to manipulate Shepard as using a form with those meanings make little sense else.
And then there is the fact that the Catalyst reveals itself to be the leader of the Reapers, you know the killing machines directly aiming to kill you for three games straight and are known for deception and mind control? Can you really trust it?
Especially considering Harbinger was firing at you moments before, Shepard only surviving by a miracle. Then you encounter TIM who tries to kill you and quote on quote from the Catalyst, "we already controlled him."
Again you are probably going to say the Crucible changed the Catalyst, but how? It is just a giant battery, no one even knew of the catalyst being an AI (The Catalyst directly says you are the first person to make it that far) so the Crucible was not designed to alter it and even if it altered it, it clearly did not alter its core programming as the Catalyst states its purpose twice after the Crucible connects.
"Storing the old life in reaper form" - Catalyst
"Reapers harvest all life - organic and synthetic - preserving them before they are forever lost to this conflict" - Catalyst
And even then we have the Reapers going against the Catalyst "purpose" before the Crucible was even close to
the Citadel.
What does this mean? I will leave the conclusions to you, I just want to point out that this "benevolent" Catalyst is not speaking a lot of truths during its conversation and is not following the programming it says it has, so why can you trust it?
Modifié par masster blaster, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:08 .
#57
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:10
Bill Casey
-
- Members
- 7 609 messages
If Shepard has his own indoctrination power, that takes a game about ethics and makes the whole of it highly unethical...
#58
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:10
Restrider
-
- Members
- 1 986 messages
Stay on-topic, please.
Do not list any hints and try to explain why indoctrinating Shepard is not a waste of resources for the Reapers.
Do not list any hints and try to explain why indoctrinating Shepard is not a waste of resources for the Reapers.
#59
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:12
davishepard
-
- Members
- 669 messages
When I want to read that garbage, I know where to find it. Keep IT indocrination on its own thread, please.masster blaster wrote...
*wall of garbage*
Modifié par davishepard, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:13 .
#60
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:13
masster blaster
-
- Members
- 7 278 messages
davishepard wrote...
When I want to read that garbage, I know where to find it. Keep IT indocrination on its thread, please.masster blaster wrote...
*wall of garbage*
that's what they all say.
Thus I mad an argument and you don't want to answer it. Thus showing you can't.
Plus it's about IT, so not crap.
Modifié par masster blaster, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:15 .
#61
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:14
BatmanTurian
-
- Members
- 4 735 messages
davishepard wrote...
We got a believer over here.BatmanTurian wrote...
OP is clueless. OP, read the indoctrination codex entry again. Seriously. Not enough headdesks in the world.
I'm simply stating the codex directly states in less than a few paragraphs why the OP's textwall is wrong and all one has to do is read it.
#62
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:14
Ithurael
-
- Members
- 3 196 messages
davishepard wrote...
When I want to read that garbage, I know where to find it. Keep IT indocrination on its own thread, please.masster blaster wrote...
*wall of garbage*
This is an IT themed thread...
For IT discussion...
#63
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:15
davishepard
-
- Members
- 669 messages
I don't need to answer. You, on the other hand, seems to need to force your delusional interpretation about the endings on other people.masster blaster wrote...
that's what they all say.
Thus I mad an argument and you don't want to answer it. Thus showing you can't.
#64
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:17
masster blaster
-
- Members
- 7 278 messages
davishepard wrote...
I don't need to answer. You, on the other hand, seems to need to force your delusional interpretation about the endings on other people.masster blaster wrote...
that's what they all say.
Thus I mad an argument and you don't want to answer it. Thus showing you can't.
The ops asked Why Indoctrinating Shepard Does Not Make Sense
I take that back I explained how it's possible for Shepard going under Indoctrination.
Modifié par masster blaster, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:20 .
#66
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:22
dreamgazer
-
- Members
- 15 765 messages
Regurgitating a giant wall of text like that isn't convincing anyone of anything. It looks more like passing agenda pamphlets out. Use your own words, if you have a perspective.
#67
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:22
masster blaster
-
- Members
- 7 278 messages
Restrider wrote...
And here we go...
Again.
#68
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:22
BatmanTurian
-
- Members
- 4 735 messages
davishepard wrote...
I don't need to answer. You, on the other hand, seems to need to force your delusional interpretation about the endings on other people.masster blaster wrote...
that's what they all say.
Thus I mad an argument and you don't want to answer it. Thus showing you can't.
It's a thread addressing IT. If you don't like IT, there are other threads you can read. No one is forcing an interpretation on anyone, merely discussing them. If you wish to disrupt discussion on a story discussion forum, you are doing it wrong.
#69
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:22
davishepard
-
- Members
- 669 messages
Read the OP. He asked nothing. He stated that indocrinating Shepard doesn't make sense in his opinion. Posting that wall of garbage by copying and pasting the first post from the IT thread answers nothing.masster blaster wrote...
The ops asked Why Indoctrinating Shepard Does Not Make Sense
I take that back I explained how it's possible for Shepard going under Indoctrination.
Modifié par davishepard, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:23 .
#70
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:23
BatmanTurian
-
- Members
- 4 735 messages
Restrider wrote...
And here we go...
The cycle continues.
#71
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:23
ElSuperGecko
-
- Members
- 2 317 messages
Great post, and interesting argument JShepppp. You make a very solid case for your argument.
One question for you. While there are hints and suggestions at Shepard undergoing the indoctrination process from the Arrival DLC right through ME3, one of the thoughts about Shepard's possible indoctrination is that it's a last-ditch attempt to stop Shepard from activating the Crucible, or to persuade him to use it to further the Reaper's own ends.
The idea is that once Shepard boards the Citadel - once he leaps into the beam - he his effectively beyond the reach of the Reapers. They can no longer physically prevent Shepard from activating the Crucible. So they turn to the other weapon in their arsenal, and attack Shepard's mind. Effectively, the events following the encounter with the Illusive Man become the indoctrination attempt, with the Reapers trying to influence Shepard's decision in the Catalyst chamber.
How would you respond to this interpretation?
One question for you. While there are hints and suggestions at Shepard undergoing the indoctrination process from the Arrival DLC right through ME3, one of the thoughts about Shepard's possible indoctrination is that it's a last-ditch attempt to stop Shepard from activating the Crucible, or to persuade him to use it to further the Reaper's own ends.
The idea is that once Shepard boards the Citadel - once he leaps into the beam - he his effectively beyond the reach of the Reapers. They can no longer physically prevent Shepard from activating the Crucible. So they turn to the other weapon in their arsenal, and attack Shepard's mind. Effectively, the events following the encounter with the Illusive Man become the indoctrination attempt, with the Reapers trying to influence Shepard's decision in the Catalyst chamber.
How would you respond to this interpretation?
#72
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:26
Ithurael
-
- Members
- 3 196 messages
Restrider wrote...
And here we go...
We really should stop all this fighting, or else we'll miss the fireworks
#73
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:26
davishepard
-
- Members
- 669 messages
No, its not. Point to me where in the OP the words "Indocrination Theory" can be seen.BatmanTurian wrote...
It's a thread addressing IT. If you don't like IT, there are other threads you can read. No one is forcing an interpretation on anyone, merely discussing them. If you wish to disrupt discussion on a story discussion forum, you are doing it wrong.
#74
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:27
JShepppp
-
- Members
- 1 607 messages
I did not realize this would become an IT thread - I explicitly wanted to avoid this and flaming, as I noted in the first line of the OP. Clearly and regrettably, I was unable to avoid the flaming and hate. But this is BSN, so I will accept it.
There seems to be some misunderstanding on what I posted - the idea is not that indoctrinating Shepard is useless. The idea is that it's inefficient relative to killing Shepard - killing Shepard is easier and gives similar benefits. The so-called benefits of indoctrinating Shepard are not really that useful, and killing Shepard should be the choice. This does NOT diminish Shepard's importance. Shepard's importance and uniqueness is an inherent assumption.
The idea that a single indoctrinated individual can bring down organizations or nations is apparently what the Codex says, but we don't see this happen at all in-game - this was what my first section was about, showing how indoctrinated people, even someone as charismatic and compelling as TIM (from ME2 at least), still must indoctrinate their followers and operate on the fringes of society. This is for high-profile people. Shepard cannot do any of those two things, and thus his supposed usefulness as an indoctrinated avatar is really not that great - it's a one-time deal only. As for getting information about what Shepard's doing, they could hack Alliance computers and comm networks and use a bunch of other ways to get what they want. They're on Earth - they could indoctrinate an assistant of Anderson and learn everything that way. The point is that Shepard is resistant (NOT immune - we have no proof) to indoctrination, and given the sparse benefits over death, death is a more efficient choice. Again, I said this in my OP - apologies if it was unclear.
The reason why this was not meant to be IT related, aside from possible flaming (not ITers, but rather IT vs non-ITers - the interaction is what causes flaming), is because IT discusses the process by which Shepard could be indoctrinated. My opinion - note again, OPINION, not fact, as I noted in the OP (which means I'm not saying I'm right or wrong) - is only relevant to WHY indoctrination is the desired option over death. I am not talking about HOW he became indoctrinated, or WHAT the stage of his indoctrination is, nor am I even talking about WHERE or WHEN he may have been indoctrinated. I am just talking about why, over death, indoctrination would be preferred.
Unfortunately, I can't respond to everyone here, though I would like to somehow.
There seems to be some misunderstanding on what I posted - the idea is not that indoctrinating Shepard is useless. The idea is that it's inefficient relative to killing Shepard - killing Shepard is easier and gives similar benefits. The so-called benefits of indoctrinating Shepard are not really that useful, and killing Shepard should be the choice. This does NOT diminish Shepard's importance. Shepard's importance and uniqueness is an inherent assumption.
The idea that a single indoctrinated individual can bring down organizations or nations is apparently what the Codex says, but we don't see this happen at all in-game - this was what my first section was about, showing how indoctrinated people, even someone as charismatic and compelling as TIM (from ME2 at least), still must indoctrinate their followers and operate on the fringes of society. This is for high-profile people. Shepard cannot do any of those two things, and thus his supposed usefulness as an indoctrinated avatar is really not that great - it's a one-time deal only. As for getting information about what Shepard's doing, they could hack Alliance computers and comm networks and use a bunch of other ways to get what they want. They're on Earth - they could indoctrinate an assistant of Anderson and learn everything that way. The point is that Shepard is resistant (NOT immune - we have no proof) to indoctrination, and given the sparse benefits over death, death is a more efficient choice. Again, I said this in my OP - apologies if it was unclear.
The reason why this was not meant to be IT related, aside from possible flaming (not ITers, but rather IT vs non-ITers - the interaction is what causes flaming), is because IT discusses the process by which Shepard could be indoctrinated. My opinion - note again, OPINION, not fact, as I noted in the OP (which means I'm not saying I'm right or wrong) - is only relevant to WHY indoctrination is the desired option over death. I am not talking about HOW he became indoctrinated, or WHAT the stage of his indoctrination is, nor am I even talking about WHERE or WHEN he may have been indoctrinated. I am just talking about why, over death, indoctrination would be preferred.
Unfortunately, I can't respond to everyone here, though I would like to somehow.
Modifié par JShepppp, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:28 .
#75
Posté 30 novembre 2012 - 11:28
The Heretic of Time
-
- Members
- 5 612 messages
OdanUrr wrote...
demersel wrote...
JSheppp - come to our thread - will discuss things. You seems to be open for a civil discussion.
This discussion is 100% IT related and should be proceeding in the main IT topic.
I can't believe what I'm reading here...
Are you trying to hijack his thread?
It's quite obvious what is going on here. They want him to come to their thread so they can tear him apart on their ground.
I hope the OP doesn't fall for it. It be best to discuss this in this thread, where everyone will watch. No-one who doesn't believe in the IT bothers to even look at the IT thread (unless you're a stubborn fella like I am), the OP will be isolated there without others to back him up, while the ITers will all be gathered togethere there to tear the OP a new one.
Demersel is trying the exact same thing here as the Catalyst is trying to do to Shepard according to the Indoctrination Theory. Don't fall for it OP, your thread is just as welcome here on the BSN as the IT thread.
