223 réponses à ce sujet

[BatmanTurian]

davishepard wrote...

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.

No, its not. Point to me where in the OP the words "Indocrination Theory" can be seen.

The thread is about why indoctrinating shepard doesn't make sense. Do the math.

[Applepie_Svk]

masster blaster wrote...

-bang-

Dafaq Dolan ??? 

[JShepppp]

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. 

It's not IT-related in my opinion, though I would be happy to discuss it further. There are only two issues that would prevent my usefulness in the IT thread:

1. I'm not familiar with the specifics of indoctrination theory;

2. I'm not on enough, I think, to reply in time, given how fast the IT thread moves. 

The latter may be an issue in discussions if I went to the IT thread.

[Tibbur]

Shepard has access to every high ranking officer in the alliance and council perfect sense to have him indoctrinated.

[OdanUrr]

masster blaster wrote...

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.

You're not making an argument. The OP started with a premise: let's assume the Reapers are trying to indoctrinate Shepard. Then he proceeded to ponder the reasons why the Reapers would do this and came to the conclusion such an attempt would be pointless.

You didn't try to counter his points, you merely brought up IT and asked people to debunk it.

[BatmanTurian]

JShepppp wrote...

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.

I understand what you are saying. The Reapers would like to do both but preferably kill, but Shepard is a cockroach and keeps escaping, surviving, and coming back . So if you can't kill the cockroach, you can trap it and then kill it at your leisure or use it for some other end.

[The Heretic of Time]

JShepppp wrote...

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.

To add to this:


The ITers believe that, during the beam run at the end of ME3, Habringer toned down his laser when he shot Shepard, or in other words; deliberately didn't kill Shepard at the end during the beam run.

In other words, the ITers believe Harbinger could have killed Shepard if he wanted, but deliberately chose not to do this in order to indoctrinate Shepard.

This means that the counter-argument from the ITers, that the reapers are unable to kill Shepard and therefor try to indoctrinate him instead is bollocks. It's simply not true. Harbinger could have killed Shepard right there right then.

[BatmanTurian]

JShepppp 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. 

It's not IT-related in my opinion, though I would be happy to discuss it further. There are only two issues that would prevent my usefulness in the IT thread:

1. I'm not familiar with the specifics of indoctrination theory;

2. I'm not on enough, I think, to reply in time, given how fast the IT thread moves. 

The latter may be an issue in discussions if I went to the IT thread.

understandable.

[Kabooooom]

I agree with most of your points, except one: hindering the war effort physically.

The Reapers know that there is a non-zero probability that the Crucible will succeed in docking with the Citadel, and they also know that there is a high probability that Shepard will personally lead the team that boards the Citadel to enable this. And they also know that the Crucible will not work without Shepard's input.

Therefore there is a perfectly legitimate reason why indoctrinating him would be valuable. Note that this would have the same effect if they simply killed him. However, I would argue that if they fail to succeed in killing him, indoctrination is a nice fallback plan.

And the Reapers are nothing, if not thorough. Try to kill Shepard: check. Plan B? Indoctrination seems like a good Plan B to me.

Modifié par Kabooooom, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:34 .

[BatmanTurian]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

JShepppp wrote...

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.

To add to this:


The ITers believe that, during the beam run at the end of ME3, Habringer toned down his laser when he shot Shepard, or in other words; deliberately didn't kill Shepard at the end during the beam run.

In other words, the ITers believe Harbinger could have killed Shepard if he wanted, but deliberately chose not to do this in order to indoctrinate Shepard.

This means that the counter-argument from the ITers, that the reapers are unable to kill Shepard and therefor try to indoctrinate him instead is bollocks. It's simply not true. Harbinger could have killed Shepard right there right then.

And yet he didn't. the normandy is floating right there with Shepard next to it. Harbinger can pinpoint kill Hammer, but ignores the space ship and the human he's had a hard-on for for two games. He even turns to watch the Normandy fly off and does NOTHING. Then, when he finally does shoot shepard, he doesn't even bother to make sure Shepard is dead.

Modifié par BatmanTurian, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:37 .

[Eterna]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

This doesn't need a long explanation, JShepppp.

'You do not have the taint of indoctrination in you' -Vendetta.

I laughed so hard. IT has been disproven. 

[The Heretic of Time]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

JShepppp wrote...

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.

To add to this:


The ITers believe that, during the beam run at the end of ME3, Habringer toned down his laser when he shot Shepard, or in other words; deliberately didn't kill Shepard at the end during the beam run.

In other words, the ITers believe Harbinger could have killed Shepard if he wanted, but deliberately chose not to do this in order to indoctrinate Shepard.

This means that the counter-argument from the ITers, that the reapers are unable to kill Shepard and therefor try to indoctrinate him instead is bollocks. It's simply not true. Harbinger could have killed Shepard right there right then.

And yet he didn't. the normandy is floating right there with Shepard next to it. Harbinger can pinpoint kill Hammer, but ignores the space ship and the human he's had a hard on for for two games. He even turns to watch the Normandy fly off and does NOTHING. Then, when he finally does shoot shepard, he doesn't even bother to make sure Shepard is dead.

Exactly. Doesn't that look very dumb to you? That's because it is. It's really dumb. There are 2 problems here besides the fact that it's dumb:

1) Why would the reapers try to indoctrinate Shepard with the chance that they might fail (it's not garanteed that they will succesfully indoctrinate Shepard), while Harbinger could have easily killed Shepard right there right then? BAM! Problem solved. Doesn't this look dumb to you?

2) How is Shepard supposed to get indoctrinated? We see Harbinger fly away. As far as I know, reapers can't idoctrinate from a distance. You need to be near reapers or near reaper tech to become indoctrinated.

[masster blaster]

dreamgazer wrote...

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.

I do.

Reason why the Reapers want to Indoctrinate Shepard.

1. Shepard is the galaxy's greatest hero. Shepard has bested the Reapers battle after battle. Shepard has done the impossible, and it's made Shepard very important person to indoctrinate.

2. If you look at ME2 if Miranda say " If we loose Shepard humainity may as well follow." IF the reapers Indoctrinate Shepard at the end. then the galaxy may as well follow. hence the choices have an impact on not just Shepard, but the galaxy.

3. Shepard is garhering war assets to take back Earth. The more assets Shepard gather, the more vauable SHepard becomes.

4. It makes logical sense the your enemy would want to have you on their side. take this as an example. If Shepard is finally Indoctrinated in Control, and Synthesis, then the reapers now have Shepard. With Shepard in their Control, they can use Shepard to make everyone stand down or tell the fleet's/ hammer where to go, so the Reapers can spring a trap. Also Shepard's makes a very good undercover agent for the Reapers.

5.During the beam Charge Harbinger has every second to kill Shepard, but doesn't. Harbinger could have killed Shepard right then and there, but didn't. That even goes with when the normandy comes down from space, and lands right in front of Harbinger's blasting vision sight. Why does Harbinger not blow up the Normandy and kill both Shepard, and the nOrmandy for good? Because Harbinger want's Shepard alive to Indoctrinate him, or her.

6. Again if the reapers Indoctrinate Shepard, you know how much of a blow that would be to the fleets', hammer team, and Shepard's crew/ LI. Very huge that most of them would loose all hope, and either surrender to teh reapers, or panic in fear because if Shepard fails, then they all will die. In a sense Shepard represent's the galaxy's hero. If Shepard were to been Indoctrinated, it would be like when byne makes a speech about Harvy Dent. revealing Shepard as a false hero that can be broken.

Modifié par masster blaster, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:47 .

[BatmanTurian]

Eterna5 wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

This doesn't need a long explanation, JShepppp.

'You do not have the taint of indoctrination in you' -Vendetta.

I laughed so hard. IT has been disproven. 

And yet it is a valid interpretation. It can't be disproven and valid at the same time.

[JShepppp]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

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?

I think it's a very valid interpretation, though my counter argument would be why they helped Shepard up to the Catalyst in the first place (Shepard wouldln't have made it to the Crucible without the Catalyst's help). 

My guess is that in the Citadel, rather than stop Shepard from activating the Crucible, the Reapers/Catalyst realized Shepard was trapped, injured, and weak, and this lowers the cost of indoctrinating him (my argument in my OP is that the cost of indoctrinating Shepard is too high versus the benefits). As Shepard can't do any more damage in the Citadel, they tried to indoctrinate him, but failed because TIM was too strong, giving Shepard time to react either physically (shoot) or otherwise (convince TIM to kill himself). 

Basically, looking specifically at the window of the Citadel at Earth, indoctrination is different because it's much easier to do and has much lower costs and potential backfiring ramifications. As it is, down next to Harbinger, Marauder Shields tried to kill - not wound - Shepard. So it is only while ON the Citadel - where, in retrospect, Shepard can't really do much - that they turn to indoctrination over death. 

Then Shepard collapsed and died - no big deal, until the Catalyst realized it needed Shepard to activate the Crucible, which provided better options. Then the ending happened. 

That is my personal opinion. Not sure if it makes sense.

[BatmanTurian]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

JShepppp wrote...

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.

To add to this:


The ITers believe that, during the beam run at the end of ME3, Habringer toned down his laser when he shot Shepard, or in other words; deliberately didn't kill Shepard at the end during the beam run.

In other words, the ITers believe Harbinger could have killed Shepard if he wanted, but deliberately chose not to do this in order to indoctrinate Shepard.

This means that the counter-argument from the ITers, that the reapers are unable to kill Shepard and therefor try to indoctrinate him instead is bollocks. It's simply not true. Harbinger could have killed Shepard right there right then.

And yet he didn't. the normandy is floating right there with Shepard next to it. Harbinger can pinpoint kill Hammer, but ignores the space ship and the human he's had a hard on for for two games. He even turns to watch the Normandy fly off and does NOTHING. Then, when he finally does shoot shepard, he doesn't even bother to make sure Shepard is dead.

Exactly. Doesn't that look very dumb to you? That's because it is. It's really dumb. There are 2 problems here besides the fact that it's dumb:

1) Why would the reapers try to indoctrinate Shepard with the chance that they might fail (it's not garanteed that they will succesfully indoctrinate Shepard), while Harbinger could have easily killed Shepard right there right then? BAM! Problem solved. Doesn't this look dumb to you?

2) How is Shepard supposed to get indoctrinated? We see Harbinger fly away. As far as I know, reapers can't idoctrinate from a distance. You need to be near reapers or near reaper tech to become indoctrinated.

I want to argue points with you, but I'm going to respect the OP when he says he didn't want this to be an IT-Discussion thread.  We can discuss this in the other thread if you wish.

[Eryri]

@JShepppp

Another point that might be worth considering is the length of time a cycle actually takes. It took the Reapers over a century to completely eradicate the Protheans.

Humans are scattered throughout the galaxy. It will be incredibly difficult, even for the Reapers to find and kill every pocket of humanity. Particularly if they revert to a primitive existence and don't use technology that might broadcast any signals to give their positions away. The most efficient way to ferret out the last pockets of human resistance might indeed be by creating indoctrinated sleeper agents.

According to the codex, an indoctrinated agent can rebroadcast the control signal to infect others around him. As Shepard is such a charismatic leader, and naturally inspires trust (at least as a paragon) the reapers may be planning to use this charisma to lure people in, and create an army of indoctrinated agents.

Anyway, that's just my personal thoughts on the matter.

[abnocte]

HellishFiend wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Not indoctrinating Shepard doesn't make sense...

Given how easily others have succumbed to indocrination, one would think that Shepard would have been indoctinated long ago. Are you absolutely sure it is even possible for the Reapers to do so? Keep an open mind. 

Remember Rana Thanoptis?
She worked for Saren in ME, studying indoctrination on Vermirie, you can kill her or let her live.
She appears in ME2 once again if alive. Now she works for Okeer.
In ME3 you get this e-mail:

ANN Alert: New Article on "Indoctrination"
From: Alliance News Network Information Partners

Thessia
- Asari scientist Rana Thanoptis has died in custody, allegedly
committing suicide after she was arrested for the murder of multiple
asari military officials.

Prior to her death, investigators said Thanoptis spoke of voices in her
head, which they believed to be indicative of her indoctrination. The
voices foretold the ascension of the asari--and told Thanoptis that
anyone fighting the Reapers "needed to die."


Thanoptis worked for a top-secret project for former Spectre
Saren Arterius several years ago, where she likely became
indoctrinated. She received a pardon from the asari government in
exchange for providing research assistance on Reaper technology.

Thanoptis was believed responsible for planting a makeshift device that
detonated at a research center, killing five visiting asari military
officers along with four civilians. The attack seriously wounded a dozen
more and caused significant damage to the facility.

Investigators say they are not seeking any more suspects in the case.

Remember Shiala? The asari that gives Shepard the Cipher back in ME?
If alive you get this e-mail in ME3:

From: Shiala

Dear Commander Shepard:

I don't know if you've seen the articles, but the people of Zhu's Hope
are fighting again. This time it's the Reapers instead of the geth.

I'm not sure if you remember me, but you helped me back on lllium. The
Thorian is dead now. I can confirm that. But the spores in our bodies
remain, and on some level, we are still connected.

This is not necessarily a bad thing. As we fight back the Reapers, we
feel each other, and act with one mind, ignoring pain when the need
arises. I'm sure I'm still indoctrinated. I remember Sovereign's voice
in my mind when I went willingly to the Thorian as its thrall. But my
connection to the people of Zhu's Hope is stronger. It drowns out the
Reaper voices.

This situation is imperfect, and dangerous. Perhaps the colonists should
separate, for their own safety. But with one mind, the untrained fight
with the skill of veteran commandos. Our force is strong.

I have not forgotten how you helped us, how you spared me. We are
leaving Feros soon, and when the time comes, we will fight with you.

Shiala

Whoops!

Modifié par abnocte, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:47 .

[masster blaster]

JShepppp 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. 

It's not IT-related in my opinion, though I would be happy to discuss it further. There are only two issues that would prevent my usefulness in the IT thread:

1. I'm not familiar with the specifics of indoctrination theory;

2. I'm not on enough, I think, to reply in time, given how fast the IT thread moves. 

The latter may be an issue in discussions if I went to the IT thread.

Not really.

But the point is Shepard isn't Indoctrinated until you make your choice for Shepard at the end. Shepard is undergoing Indoctrination, but the final push for Shepard to become Indoctrinated is only if you pock Control, and Synthesis. Destroy is Shepard breaking free, hence the breath scene. Refuse we are still debating about it, but most of us agree, it's a moral victory of breaking Indoctrination. yet you can't wake up yet.

Modifié par masster blaster, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:46 .

[dreamgazer]

Eterna5 wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

This doesn't need a long explanation, JShepppp.

'You do not have the taint of indoctrination in you' -Vendetta.

I laughed so hard. IT has been disproven. 

By Prothean VI technology that didn't detect indoctrinated sleeper agents when their empire came crumbling down?

Several things hinder the interpretation, but that's not one of 'em. 

[Conniving_Eagle]

Andromidius wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

This doesn't need a long explanation, JShepppp.

'You do not have the taint of indoctrination in you' -Vendetta.

Indeed.  With technology like that we know that the Protheans were completely immune to being infilitrated and brought down from within by indoctrinated agents!

...

...

...

Oh wait, they were.  Your argument is invalid.

Your argument is invalid. It doesn't refute the fact that Vendetta (and Vigil) were able to tell if someone was indoctrinated. And after that part, no more going through Reapers, no more whispers, and no more creepy dreams.

[Conniving_Eagle]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

This doesn't need a long explanation, JShepppp.

'You do not have the taint of indoctrination in you' -Vendetta.

I laughed so hard. IT has been disproven. 

And yet it is a valid interpretation. It can't be disproven and valid at the same time.

Anything is valid, according to Bioware. You know, cause we're supposed/allowed to make our own endings via headcanon?

[Eryri]

dreamgazer wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

This doesn't need a long explanation, JShepppp.

'You do not have the taint of indoctrination in you' -Vendetta.

I laughed so hard. IT has been disproven. 

By Prothean VI technology that didn't detect indoctrinated sleeper agents when their empire came crumbling down?

Several things hinder the interpretation, but that's not one of 'em. 

And even if Prothean indoctrination detection was 100% reliable (which is doubtful) it would only mean that Shepard wasn't indoctrinated yet. While back on Thessia, before visiting Cronos station and clambering around in the guts of the dead baby reaper for half an hour. 

[masster blaster]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

This doesn't need a long explanation, JShepppp.

'You do not have the taint of indoctrination in you' -Vendetta.

Indeed.  With technology like that we know that the Protheans were completely immune to being infilitrated and brought down from within by indoctrinated agents!

..
...

...

Oh wait, they were.  Your argument is invalid.

Your argument is invalid. It doesn't refute the fact that Vendetta (and Vigil) were able to tell if someone was indoctrinated. And after that part, no more going through Reapers, no more whispers, and no more creepy dreams.

.I believe it only works if they become fully Indoctrinated, and
remember Shepard is undergoing Indoctrination. The endings are Shepard's
final test, to see if he, or she would let the Reapers live.

Modifié par masster blaster, 30 novembre 2012 - 11:52 .

[dreamgazer]

Anyway, I don't think I've said it yet, but I greatly appreciated your post/article, JShepppp, and the work you put into the rationale. I disagree with the overall assertion, but you make a compelling case.