223 réponses à ce sujet

[JShepppp]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

JShepppp wrote...

TL;DR: It is much more efficient for the Reapers to kill Shepard than indoctrinate him - thus trying to indoctrinate Shepard is pointless.

You wasted a lot of time on this, I feel sorry for you because of that.

If you played ME2, you'd know that Harbinger wants to *dominate* Shepard. Not kill him/her.

It would strike a much more significant blow to the galaxy if their top soldier became indoctrinated and started fighting for the other side, rather than just simply being killed.

It seems I was unclear in the OP, so I apologize for that.

My point is that Harby's interest in "dominating" Shepard is unwarranted because the significance of indoctrinating Shepard versus killing him is not that different, and it is easier to kill, if it were not for blatant plot immunity and luck. 

It does not make sense to indoctrinate Shepard. 

[Fedi.St]

Reapers need shepard alive to use him as reaper material. They don't want to kill him. If you don;t understand that then you don't really understand the point of harvesting in the first place.

[AlanC9]

One guy is that important when a Reaper is made up of millions?

[The Heretic of Time]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

No it isn't. It seems you don't even understand your own theory.

The IT assumes the endings aren't real. What I was talking about is someone who accepts the endings are  real, yet also believes the reapers tried to indoctrinate Shepard. Completely different thing bro.

And IT makes more sense than that.

That is just your opinion friend. Don't try to sell your opinions as facts, because they aren't.


I happen to disagree. The IT doesn't make any sense at all in my opinion.

But if it involves indoctrination of Shepard, then it falls under IT. It might be slightly different, such as TTG's Con theory but it comes down to the same deal.

I disagree. The core motivation of the IT seems to be that the endings don't make much sense, the IT tries to make sense of it by stating that the endings aren't real but just a hallicunation, which is the reason why they supposedly don't make sense.

"The endings aren't real" seems to be the most important premise of the theory. Without that premise there isn't much left of the IT. 

My friend thinks the reapers tried to indoctrinate Shepard (but the reapers failed). He does not believe in the premise "the endings aren't real". He accepts the endings for what they are. He acknowledges the endings are literal, real endings. Therefor he's not an IT supporter. He doesn't even like IT.


Edit: Now that I think more about it, I think I actually agree with my friend. It's obvious that The Illusive Man tried to indoctrinate Shepard on the Citadel (with his new reaper powers), but he either fails or he commits suicide, depending on your dialogue choices.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 01 décembre 2012 - 06:44 .

[Wayning_Star]

the idea of indoctrination is overblown. Its just not efficient enough. You have to be willing to indoctrinated to fall into the catagory. Shep is impervious to indoctrination. Implants and will and too many distractions from the goals of indoctrination and it's implimentation. It would seem that Shepard is an empath of sorts, to be able to 'link' with the prothean beacons from jump, and survive. Saren was already mostly there, so thats how he communed with them and survived. Others just burn out rather quickly, under the mechanical influence, especially if they resist. TIM "wanted" to be indoctrinated to find out more about reaper tech, that was his folly. He couldn't control the reapers.

[Wayning_Star]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

No it isn't. It seems you don't even understand your own theory.

The IT assumes the endings aren't real. What I was talking about is someone who accepts the endings are  real, yet also believes the reapers tried to indoctrinate Shepard. Completely different thing bro.

And IT makes more sense than that.

That is just your opinion friend. Don't try to sell your opinions as facts, because they aren't.


I happen to disagree. The IT doesn't make any sense at all in my opinion.

But if it involves indoctrination of Shepard, then it falls under IT. It might be slightly different, such as TTG's Con theory but it comes down to the same deal.

I disagree. The core motivation of the IT seems to be that the endings don't make much sense, the IT tries to make sense of it by stating that the endings aren't real but just a hallicunation, which is the reason why they supposedly don't make sense.

"The endings aren't real" seems to be the most important premise of the theory. Without that premise there isn't much left of the IT. 

My friend thinks the reapers tried to indoctrinate Shepard (but the reapers failed). He does not believe in the premise "the endings aren't real". He accepts the endings for what they are. He acknowledges the endings are literal, real endings. Therefor he's not an IT supporter. He doesn't even like IT.


Edit: Now that I think more about it, I think I actually agree with my friend. It's obvious that The Illusive Man tried to indoctrinate Shepard on the Citadel (with his new reaper powers), but he either fails or he commits suicide, depending on your dialogue choices.

I've always thought that Hanar, he's 'showing off' his new "power" and it's benefits..but..well, we all now know how that turned out for him.

[BatmanTurian]

Wayning_Star wrote...

the idea of indoctrination is overblown. Its just not efficient enough. You have to be willing to indoctrinated to fall into the catagory. Shep is impervious to indoctrination. Implants and will and too many distractions from the goals of indoctrination and it's implimentation. It would seem that Shepard is an empath of sorts, to be able to 'link' with the prothean beacons from jump, and survive. Saren was already mostly there, so thats how he communed with them and survived. Others just burn out rather quickly, under the mechanical influence, especially if they resist. TIM "wanted" to be indoctrinated to find out more about reaper tech, that was his folly. He couldn't control the reapers.

Complete bulls***

[BatmanTurian]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

No it isn't. It seems you don't even understand your own theory.

The IT assumes the endings aren't real. What I was talking about is someone who accepts the endings are  real, yet also believes the reapers tried to indoctrinate Shepard. Completely different thing bro.

And IT makes more sense than that.

That is just your opinion friend. Don't try to sell your opinions as facts, because they aren't.


I happen to disagree. The IT doesn't make any sense at all in my opinion.

But if it involves indoctrination of Shepard, then it falls under IT. It might be slightly different, such as TTG's Con theory but it comes down to the same deal.

I disagree. The core motivation of the IT seems to be that the endings don't make much sense, the IT tries to make sense of it by stating that the endings aren't real but just a hallicunation, which is the reason why they supposedly don't make sense.

"The endings aren't real" seems to be the most important premise of the theory. Without that premise there isn't much left of the IT. 

My friend thinks the reapers tried to indoctrinate Shepard (but the reapers failed). He does not believe in the premise "the endings aren't real". He accepts the endings for what they are. He acknowledges the endings are literal, real endings. Therefor he's not an IT supporter. He doesn't even like IT.


Edit: Now that I think more about it, I think I actually agree with my friend. It's obvious that The Illusive Man tried to indoctrinate Shepard on the Citadel (with his new reaper powers), but he either fails or he commits suicide, depending on your dialogue choices.

Said I wasn't going to argue about this with you anymore (at least in this thread).

[The Heretic of Time]

BatmanTurian wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

No it isn't. It seems you don't even understand your own theory.

The IT assumes the endings aren't real. What I was talking about is someone who accepts the endings are  real, yet also believes the reapers tried to indoctrinate Shepard. Completely different thing bro.

And IT makes more sense than that.

That is just your opinion friend. Don't try to sell your opinions as facts, because they aren't.


I happen to disagree. The IT doesn't make any sense at all in my opinion.

But if it involves indoctrination of Shepard, then it falls under IT. It might be slightly different, such as TTG's Con theory but it comes down to the same deal.

I disagree. The core motivation of the IT seems to be that the endings don't make much sense, the IT tries to make sense of it by stating that the endings aren't real but just a hallicunation, which is the reason why they supposedly don't make sense.

"The endings aren't real" seems to be the most important premise of the theory. Without that premise there isn't much left of the IT. 

My friend thinks the reapers tried to indoctrinate Shepard (but the reapers failed). He does not believe in the premise "the endings aren't real". He accepts the endings for what they are. He acknowledges the endings are literal, real endings. Therefor he's not an IT supporter. He doesn't even like IT.


Edit: Now that I think more about it, I think I actually agree with my friend. It's obvious that The Illusive Man tried to indoctrinate Shepard on the Citadel (with his new reaper powers), but he either fails or he commits suicide, depending on your dialogue choices.

Said I wasn't going to argue about this with you anymore (at least in this thread).

Your choice man. I'm not going to take this to the IT thread though if that's what you want. I really needed a break from that thread, so that's what Im doing; taking a break from the IT thread. I don't know when I'll return, or even if  I'll ever return. We'll see.

[The Heretic of Time]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Now that I think more about it, I think I actually agree with my friend. It's obvious that The Illusive Man tried to indoctrinate Shepard on the Citadel (with his new reaper powers), but he either fails or he commits suicide, depending on your dialogue choices.

I've always thought that Hanar, he's 'showing off' his new "power" and it's benefits..but..well, we all now know how that turned out for him.

Yeah indeed. The Illusive Man no doubt tried to indoctrinate Shepard. Rapid indoctrination that is. TIM tried to assume direct control over Shepard and at the same time he tried to persuade Shepard to see things from his point of view. Whether TIM was acting on his own or on behalf of the reapers is unknown. Both is possible I suppose. I think the idea that TIM acted on behalf of the reapers is more likely though.

Anyway, TIM was the last barrier between Shepard and the Catalyst and he failed. Shepard defied all odds and managed to get the Crucible docked to the Citadel. Then the elevator is activated and takes Shepard to the decision chamber. This is where things start to get weird, but actually make sense if you think about it.


A lot of Indoctrination Theorists believe that it's the Catalyst that activates the elevator and takes Shepard to the decision chamber, but I think this is not true. I think it's the docking of the Crucible activates the elevator.

Consider this: If you have low EMS, the Catalyst asks Shepard: "Why are you here?"

Why would the Catalyst even ask this if he supposedly just took Shepard there himself? The only logical answer is that the Catalyst DIDN'T take Shepard up but something else did (the Crucible perhaps?).


This makes me believe that The Illusive Man was the last barrier between Shepard and the Catalyst. After the Illusive Man was dealt with there was nothing left to stop Shepard from reaching the Catalyst. As soon as he opened the Citadel and docked the Crucible, Shepard was taken to the Catalyst chamber. At this point the Catalyst didn't have much of a choice anymore. Shepard was about to use the Crucible and the Catalyst knew it. All he could do now is talk to Shepard, explain things and try to convince Shepard to pick the option that he preferred.

The Catalyst obviously doesn't want the reapers to be destroyed, because he believes the reapers are the solution. So he rather hopes that Shepard picks a solution that doesn't destroy the reapers (Control or Synthesis). Synthesis is obviously his preferred solution, as Synthesis is what he tried to achieve himself. He believes Synthesis is the best solution, that much is obvious.

In the end, it's not the Catalyst that can make the decision, only Shepard can. All the Catalyst could do is voice his opinion on the 3 avaliable solutions and hope Shepard will pick the best solution.



Folks, I think I just managed to make (almost) perfect sense of the endings without using a conspiracy theory (the Indoctrination Theory). The only thing that I can't really put my finger on is the elevator ride up to the Catalyst. What caused the elevator to activate?

[masster blaster]

Why Indoctrinate Shepard? Why Indoctrinated anyone simple.

The Reapers needed to activate the Citadel manual, but if Nazara where to have just shown up alone, the Citadel would have been shut before Nazara could get into the Citadel.

So He needed Saren the best specter before Shepard comes in, the one everyone one does not want as an enemy, and the person that has an dark ego/ easier to manipulate. To find a way in, hence they use saren to find the Conduit. Now Saren is going to need help/ Nazara is going to need a fleet to distract the fleet guarding the Citadel.

So Nazara hacked the geth ( half of the Geth) with a math error in their systems, and thus the stage is set.

Yet it the plan failed, so Harbinger uses the plan be card. uses Indoctrinated Collectors to gather humanity and start to make the human Reaper for this cycle.

Saren/ the Geth Indoctrinated

yet it fails.

TIM is now their plan c card. TIM has been slowly fighting Indoctrination, but the Reapers use TIM's ego as they did Saren's to use technology to Control the reapers/ help humanity. Thus time begins to implant reaper tech into his own troops, so it gives them an edge when the war is about to start. TIM's job is to start to causes havoc across the galaxy, and give the galaxy's forces a run for their money. TIM's job is to also plant the idea of Shepard can Control the Reapers. TIM Indoctrinated

Kenson's job was to allow the Reapers to arrive early, and thus the galaxy could be caught of guard by 6 months. Kenson Indoctrinated.

Yet failed.

Now Shepard is the prime target. Shepard has gathered the galaxy's best of the best troops,fleets, and the best people to take back Earth. Shepard is weakening the other races chances of holding back the reapers because he, or she is having the other races spare their troops to go help retake Earth.

If the Reapers Indoctrinate Shepard, then they would make Shepard undo all that he/she accomplish, and make the galaxy's greatest hero fail. In as sense it would be like harvy Dents turned into a Dark knight because of the Jokers influence. Shepard is turned into a Dark knight because of the Catalyst/ Reapers influence. Either way weather it's killing Shepard, or Indoctrinating Shepard the Reapers gain something.

[masster blaster]

Also if the Reapers kill Shepard, then Shepard will become a symbol to the galaxy. In a sense it may cause the galaxy set back, but it will strengthen their willpower because even though Shepard died, he/she died fighting, and accomplish a lot before he/she died.

Yet if Shepard joined the reapers/ Indoctrinated, then the galaxy will think. if a person like Shepard became Indoctrinated, what hope do they have.

[mackan__s]

Well... isnt Indoctrination long-terned? And he actually did beat it becouse of his strong willed mind in destroy? Wich you've heard i dont know.. many times through out the game series, and i cant count how many.

Control - Full indoctrination

Synthetics - The ones you've trying to stop troughpit the whole series wins, The Reapers, the synthetics

Destroy - You win

Who have said that if he is Indoctrinated he will be turned into a traitor direct. You dont know when and were in the game series he was indoctrinated, IF he even was.

Modifié par mackan__s, 01 décembre 2012 - 08:40 .

[masster blaster]

mackan__s wrote...

Well... isnt Indoctrination long-terned? And he actually did beat it becouse of his strong willed mind in destroy? Wich you've heard i dont know.. many times through out the game series, and i cant count how many.

Control - Full indoctrination

Synthetics - The ones you've trying to stop troughpit the whole series wins, The Reapers, the synthetics

Destroy - You win

Who have said that if he is Indoctrinated he will be turned into a traitor direct. You dont know when and were in the game series he was indoctrinated, IF he even was.

Um the ending for Control, and Synthesis leads Shepard to become Indoctrinated. Shepard is under going Indoctrination in ME3, only the end is a test weather Shepard can kill the Reapers, or become Indoctrinated.

Modifié par masster blaster, 01 décembre 2012 - 08:48 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

Codex entry on Indoctrination:

Indoctrination can create perfect deep cover agents. A Reaper's "suggestions" can manipulate victims into betraying friends, trusting enemies, or viewing the Reaper itself with superstitious awe. Should a Reaper subvert a well-placed political or military leader, the resulting chaos can bring down nations.

Shepard is like the most important person in the galaxy. You're acting as if it wouldn't be useful to indoctrinate the most important person in the galaxy.

By that logic, why would the Reapers indoctrinate anyone at all?

Why do Reapers even indoctrinate? It doesn't make sense! Much easier to kill everyone!

Bioware gave the Reapers a useless power!

Do you see how little sense this standpoint makes? I mean, just read the codex entry.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 01 décembre 2012 - 11:18 .

[Rynocerous]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Codex entry on Indoctrination:

Indoctrination can create perfect deep cover agents. A Reaper's "suggestions" can manipulate victims into betraying friends, trusting enemies, or viewing the Reaper itself with superstitious awe. Should a Reaper subvert a well-placed political or military leader, the resulting chaos can bring down nations.

Shepard is like the most important person in the galaxy. You're acting as if it wouldn't be useful to indoctrinate the most important person in the galaxy.

By that logic, why would the Reapers indoctrinate anyone at all?

Why do Reapers even indoctrinate? It doesn't make sense! Much easier to kill everyone!

Bioware gave the Reapers a useless power!

Do you see how little sense this standpoint makes? I mean, just read the codex entry.

The Codex also says Soverign was a geth ship.  It's written from an in-universe standpoint.

Furthermore, I'm sorry, but no. Indoctrination NEVER made any sense from a logical standpoint. I'm not sure what kind of fantasy-land crap you people think happens in real life, but when superior officers start acting even a little bit flaky, they get looked at, hard. When someone leads people into a trap they get command taken away. Shepard indoctrinated would have to be extremely careful not to tip his hand. And frankly, after seeing how loopy Saren acted, and how Paulson acted? No sell. His friends would have picked up on it almost immediately.

Indoctrination is great at lower and mid levels. The reason indoctrination worked so well against the Protheans is not because they went after the leaders , like Javik. They went after his crew, after the rank and file.

Indoctrinating Shepard wasn't a goal. If it  happened, then I'm sure they'd be more than pleased, but the ugly fact is NONE of you know why Harby wanted to capture Shepard. It he was interested in the guy when he was freaking DEAD, it doesn't stand to reason he needs him alive.

OP: Good post. The IT folks are going to dissect and attack it because it flies in the face of the very linchpin of the argument they use. The use of Hanlon's Razor to explain the endings is very good.

[JShepppp]

Rynocerous wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Codex entry on Indoctrination:

Indoctrination can create perfect deep cover agents. A Reaper's "suggestions" can manipulate victims into betraying friends, trusting enemies, or viewing the Reaper itself with superstitious awe. Should a Reaper subvert a well-placed political or military leader, the resulting chaos can bring down nations.

Shepard is like the most important person in the galaxy. You're acting as if it wouldn't be useful to indoctrinate the most important person in the galaxy.

By that logic, why would the Reapers indoctrinate anyone at all?

Why do Reapers even indoctrinate? It doesn't make sense! Much easier to kill everyone!

Bioware gave the Reapers a useless power!

Do you see how little sense this standpoint makes? I mean, just read the codex entry.

The Codex also says Soverign was a geth ship.  It's written from an in-universe standpoint.

Furthermore, I'm sorry, but no. Indoctrination NEVER made any sense from a logical standpoint. I'm not sure what kind of fantasy-land crap you people think happens in real life, but when superior officers start acting even a little bit flaky, they get looked at, hard. When someone leads people into a trap they get command taken away. Shepard indoctrinated would have to be extremely careful not to tip his hand. And frankly, after seeing how loopy Saren acted, and how Paulson acted? No sell. His friends would have picked up on it almost immediately.

Indoctrination is great at lower and mid levels. The reason indoctrination worked so well against the Protheans is not because they went after the leaders , like Javik. They went after his crew, after the rank and file.

Indoctrinating Shepard wasn't a goal. If it  happened, then I'm sure they'd be more than pleased, but the ugly fact is NONE of you know why Harby wanted to capture Shepard. It he was interested in the guy when he was freaking DEAD, it doesn't stand to reason he needs him alive.

OP: Good post. The IT folks are going to dissect and attack it because it flies in the face of the very linchpin of the argument they use. The use of Hanlon's Razor to explain the endings is very good.

Rynocerous - these were my thoughts exactly; I agree. That Codex entry doesn't make sense, and part of my OP was showing why it doesn't make sense. Indoctrination only is efficient on the lower people - and this is why, for example, it'd be better to try to indoctrinate weak-willed people around strong ones, such as Diana Allers, or one of Hackett's aides, janitor at a facility, etc., because they aren't looked at that much. As soon as people got suspicious with Shepard, it'd be over. It's a one-time deal for the Reapers to use Shepard. 

Having the spotlight is a reason why high profile individuals must operate on the fringes of society, and this is bad for Shepard because it removes him from the very resources that  make him useful in the first place. It may be useful for some situations - like the Hanar, who have everything automated so all you need is a password to access their defenses - but Shepard doesn't have direct access to a lot of stuff, he only has indirect access (through other people). 

[DoomsdayDevice]

Again:

It makes sense to Garrus.

Soldier: But converting other life forms into Reapers... I can't wrap my head around that.
Garrus: Makes sense to me. It ensures you never run out of cannon fodder. Eliminates any local resistance. And for every soldier you add, your enemy loses two: the one you converted, and his buddy on the other side who can't pull the trigger on a friend. (...)
Soldier: But the Reapers want to destroy us.
Garrus: And I have no intention of letting them. But If you don't respect your enemy's capabilities, you're in for one nasty surprise after another.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Also, my guess is they want Shepard as the consciousness of the human Reaper they are building. (You know, every harvest ends with the construction of a new capital Reaper, made out of the best genetic material the cycle has to offer).

[RiouHotaru]

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.

Vendetta is one VI, designed to make sure indoctrinated agents don't get a hold of sensitive information (aka the Catalyst).  It wasn't suppose to be a cure-all Indoctrination detection deterrent.

[IMNOTCRAZYiminsane]

i think indoctrinating Shepard would have been awesome ! not at the end but through-out the whole third game i used this example in another tread if you hate the example then think of it not indoctrinating Shepard but adding the catalyst into the story so the ending with the catalyst popping up at the last 2 mins wouldn't ****** ppl off so much

just so the catalyst have some form into the ME3 game and ME story instead of 2 mins at the ending every time Shepard woke up from a dream the catalyst would "speak" to you about the major choices from all three games (see choices do matter), and would try to convince you the good harvesting does for advance organics, but not using that idiotic reasoning "created will always rebel against their creators" come on! an actual reason for the reapers.

cant find a reason for the reapers dont make them have a meaning instead the catalyst would test the players moral > make you the player think about what you have chosen and have the reapers be shown in a better light

And the player would have choices to either agree, disagree, or remain silent and by the time the ending come around you are fully tested and the choices you chosen while speaking to the catalyst would come up reminding Shepard's moral stands about the reapers during their chats

if you agreed with the reapers then disagree at the end the epilogue would look or seem much different then if you agreed all the way for example

Now i can't lie when it comes to IT im for and against it

Of course with the way ME3 played out indoctrinating Shepard makes no sense

[JShepppp]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Again:

It makes sense to Garrus.

Soldier: But converting other life forms into Reapers... I can't wrap my head around that.
Garrus: Makes sense to me. It ensures you never run out of cannon fodder. Eliminates any local resistance. And for every soldier you add, your enemy loses two: the one you converted, and his buddy on the other side who can't pull the trigger on a friend. (...)
Soldier: But the Reapers want to destroy us.
Garrus: And I have no intention of letting them. But If you don't respect your enemy's capabilities, you're in for one nasty surprise after another.

Three things that I apologize for being unclear about in the OP.

1. Indoctrination is a valid strategy, and Shepard indoctrinated would be a good thing. But it would NOT be much better than his death, and his death is easier, so indoctrination doesn't make sense relative to death. 

2. If the goal is cannon fodder, then it doesn't make sense to indoctrinate Shepard - any footsoldier would do because that'd be easier and less obvious. 

3. Shepard, if found out to be indoctrinated, would immediately lose his value to the Reapers as organics would completely isolate him and/or kill him, regardless of who he is - things just don't work nicely. 

These were all iterated in the OP.

[masster blaster]

JShepppp wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Again:

It makes sense to Garrus.

Soldier: But converting other life forms into Reapers... I can't wrap my head around that.
Garrus: Makes sense to me. It ensures you never run out of cannon fodder. Eliminates any local resistance. And for every soldier you add, your enemy loses two: the one you converted, and his buddy on the other side who can't pull the trigger on a friend. (...)
Soldier: But the Reapers want to destroy us.
Garrus: And I have no intention of letting them. But If you don't respect your enemy's capabilities, you're in for one nasty surprise after another.

Three things that I apologize for being unclear about in the OP.

1. Indoctrination is a valid strategy, and Shepard indoctrinated would be a good thing. But it would NOT be much better than his death, and his death is easier, so indoctrination doesn't make sense relative to death. 

2. If the goal is cannon fodder, then it doesn't make sense to indoctrinate Shepard - any footsoldier would do because that'd be easier and less obvious. 

3. Shepard, if found out to be indoctrinated, would immediately lose his value to the Reapers as organics would completely isolate him and/or kill him, regardless of who he is - things just don't work nicely. 

These were all iterated in the OP.

If Shepard dies, then the war assets Shepard gathers will fight on. Their hero is dead okay. Many will be hurt at first, but Shepard would then become a symbol to  the war assets.  Shepard will become a battle cry, and the squadmates of Shepard will take charge. However is Shepard was indoctrinated, then thaat means. the galaxy's greatest hero can fall ubnder Indoctrination, which would case untrust in the ranks. Shepard was the best the galaxy had to offer, and now the reapers have him, or her.  the Reapers would use Shepard as....

Harbinger: Your commander Shepard belong to me. You can not resist. Surrender now
as Shepard did. HE, or she saw that it was inevitable to defeat us. Do
this and you will be spared. Do this and join us for the ascension.


The men, and woman would begin to doubt, and wonder " Maybe he's right
maybe we can't win. If Shepard has fallen to Indoctrination, then what chance do we have. The leaders of the fleets/ ground forces would be in
shock that Shepard was comprised, and your squad mates/ crew would be on
their knees crying. indoctrination is ( in my opinion) worse than
death itself.

You barley have any control over your body, 
Shepard is mostly likely to kill his/her squad mates/ Li, and Shepard
would turn everything Shepard loved/ did to ash, and dust.

Thus in the end he/she would want to put a bullet to his/her head, but harbinger/ The reapers would not allow it to happen. Sure Shepard will do it, but it's going to take his/her squadmates/Li to break the hold for just a brief momunt.

Modifié par masster blaster, 02 décembre 2012 - 04:27 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

JShepppp wrote...

Shepard, if found out to be indoctrinated, would immediately lose his value to the Reapers as organics would completely isolate him and/or kill him

You mean after Shepard sends the entirety of the galactic fleets to their doom.

"Guys, I retrieved the coordinates to the secret Reaper base in dark space, just follow me through this relay!"

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 02 décembre 2012 - 04:36 .

[AshenShug4r]

Fedi.St wrote...

Reapers need shepard alive to use him as reaper material. They don't want to kill him. If you don;t understand that then you don't really understand the point of harvesting in the first place.

They don't *need* him though. It is never explicitly revealed why the Reapers, namely Harbinger, want Shepard alive or his body intact.