100 réponses à ce sujet

[Artifex_Imperius]

here's one lets ask the author? was shep indoctrinated or being indoctrinated in the finale. author: "nope!". there we have an answer.

[Obadiah]

SwobyJ wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

You forget that indoctrination is very subtle. you don't realize that you're losing your ability to think for yourself, you think that what the Reapers whisper into your mind makes sense, you think your actions aren't out of the ordinary, but your friends will think so.

Nope, not exactly. An individual undergoing indoctrination actually amplifies the 'signal' (originating from nanites rewriting the brain) to those around them. The more one spends around someone who is being indoctrinated through more cyber means (nanites, implants), the more they will side with that person and be wrapped up in their signal.
The case example is the 'Benezia <--> Saren' connection, but there's other more separate examples of such an idea happening in both organic and synthetic forms of control over minds.

If you mean 'friends that haven't seen you in a while' instead, like the 'Nihlus <--> Saren' connection, then nevermind

I think the nanides only come into play with the physical transformation or huskification process. Individuals can be indoctrinated just by the Reaper signal, similar to what Leviathan does.

[SwobyJ]

Obadiah wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

You forget that indoctrination is very subtle. you don't realize that you're losing your ability to think for yourself, you think that what the Reapers whisper into your mind makes sense, you think your actions aren't out of the ordinary, but your friends will think so.

Nope, not exactly. An individual undergoing indoctrination actually amplifies the 'signal' (originating from nanites rewriting the brain) to those around them. The more one spends around someone who is being indoctrinated through more cyber means (nanites, implants), the more they will side with that person and be wrapped up in their signal.
The case example is the 'Benezia <--> Saren' connection, but there's other more separate examples of such an idea happening in both organic and synthetic forms of control over minds.

If you mean 'friends that haven't seen you in a while' instead, like the 'Nihlus <--> Saren' connection, then nevermind

I think the nanides only come into play with the physical transformation or huskification process. Individuals can be indoctrinated just by the Reaper signal, similar to what Leviathan does.

It seems to me that by the end of ME3, there's different concepts:

1)Signal Indoctrination - Sort of like a long-range domination (think Morinth) over time. Only changes your mind, but it opens footholds for the enemy into locations, facilities, individuals etc.
Used for: Infiltration, Sleeper agents, Interrogation.
Able to resist?: Yes, but you will inevitably fail, as it turns your (still organic) mind into a mess.

2)Implant Indoctrination - Puts tech (nanites, pieces, etc) into the body in order to outright rewrite the mind instead of nudge it in directions. Seems risky, as with resistance, the subject may turn the indoctrination around and either go rogue, or subvert it for their own aims. Keeps the mind itself working. If starting as nanites, they eventually grow into larger visible implants and slow huskification of the body.
Used for: Soldiers, agents, experiments.
Able to resist?: Yes actually, but only with a very strong will. Unknown if able to resist for a very long period, and you're inevitably going to at least adopt Reaper mentality itself, even if you oppose them...

3)Agent Indoctrination - Mixture of Signal and Implant Indoctrination, but used in a more refined manner in order to not huskify or brain-melt the subject. The subject is allowed mostly free will, but becomes increasingly unable to turn against the other's goals and motives. The degree this happens is fine tuned by the Reaper. This is the most 'indoctrination' (instilling doctrine) type of Indoctrination, where the purpose is more to 'enlighten' than to more directly manipulate.
Used for: Agents, seemingly specifically Prime Agents (so to speak)
Able to resist?: IMO yes, but it's never been done before. IT or at least my view is that Shepard is undergoing this in a grand test, and while all 3 choices involve indoc and Refuse successfully fully rejects it, only Very High Destroy fully walks that line between Submission and Extinction, into Victory. All endings are of hope though, and the narrative makes clear that even getting to London was a sort of victory in itself.

4)Husk Indoctrination - Ultimate result of Implant Indoctrination. People are either compelled by signal to go to the Dragons' Teeth, or forced by others (husks themselves, or geth in ME1, etc) to be impaled, the resulting adrenaline rushing the implant indoctrination into turning a person much more quickly into a 'husk' of a body than otherwise, to be often as shock troops.
Used for: Cheap Troops, for most part
Able to resist?: Not directly at all. Jack Harper only did because he got the shadow of the signal+nanitres, not the full blast, and likely resisted its influence for years and years, turning it (for a while) towards his own benefit.

5)Direct Control - While Implant and Husk Indoctrination may allow degrees of direct control by the operator (Reaper), it is easier to utterly possess a person or entity that is either specifically replicated for the purpose via tech (Collectors) or is nearly completely tech themselves (Saren). That doesn't mean it isn't possible to possess organics, but it is a more shaky interaction and one that it seems is more the Leviathans' (more limited) domain even if the Reapers can do it.
Used for: Assuming direct intervention over a fight, action, plan
Able to resist?: Nope. There's nothing of 'you' left to resist this. All that might be left is a form of genetic memory, if we take the Awakened Collectors as legit..


-All of these tactics use a form of QE tech to basically rewrite existing minds into something else, except for Direct Control/Domination. Indoctrination itself is more about turning someone towards your goal (extreme and forced form of Charm), instead of indefinite possession and domination (extreme and forced form of Intimidate).
-It's a matter of my personal speculation on where the subjects' 'real mind portions' go when indoctrinated. Is it totally gone? Is it just rewritten? Or is it preserved elsewhere, and in what way would that be expressed?


So I guess what I'm talking about is Implant+Agent Indoctrination, the important one. The signal in itself is important but not relevant to my post, because someone under a slow and patient form of it will still seem normal to everyone until they strike.
But if someone is under Agent or Implant Indoctrination, they might weird out NEW people, but those who spend time around them will gradually fall under their Signal Indoctrination sway (Benezia is more directly influenced by Saren than Sovereign, even if the source of it all is Sovereign).

Modifié par SwobyJ, 27 novembre 2013 - 02:56 .

[KaiserShep]

I don't suppose it really matters. If Shepard is completely indoctrinated, then he/she is already defeated. I just fire the Carnifex and hope for the best.

[Ryzaki]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

But I don't understand... why doesn't Shepard, at this point, start to question whether or not he's being indoctrinated?

I very much doubt Shepard is even capable of thought.

Where are you going with this? Logically Shepard should question the integrity of his thoughts at this point, therefore some assumption must be wrong - e.g. you might conclude that Shepard doesn't question whether he is indoctrinated because the conversation is taking part in a simulated reality where Shepard's doubts have been "disabled".

Sorry, but I'm going to pick "bad writing" over that idea every time.

Agreed.

I mean even if Shep dismisses the idea he should at least be able to question whether he's being indoctrinated. Freaky dreams with oily shadows about starbrat and he doesn't even go "wait a minute..." when the Catalyst chooses that form? 

[KaiserShep]

But do we really want a soliloquy from Shepard questioning whether or not he/she is indoctrinated? Can't ask the Catalyst, because it's the only one that can be responsible for it anyway. Maybe Shepard can break out in song, and the Catalyst just takes the gun and shoots itself. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 27 novembre 2013 - 03:43 .

[SwobyJ]

KaiserShep wrote...

I don't suppose it really matters. If Shepard is completely indoctrinated, then he/she is already defeated. I just fire the Carnifex and hope for the best.

I think we're fine.

[KaiserShep]

Shepard wakes up in an Alliance hospital, and Javik walks in.

"Commanda, are you indoctrinated yet?"

"It wasn't funny yesterday; it's not funny today. You should go."

[Ryzaki]

KaiserShep wrote...

But do we really want a soliloquy from Shepard questioning whether or not he/she is indoctrinated? Can't ask the Catalyst, because it's the only one that can be responsible for it anyway. Maybe Shepard can break out in song, and the Catalyst just takes the gun and shoots itself. 

LOL That'd be an improvement over what we got.

[Probe Away]

OP, TIM and Saren initially refused to believe they were indoctrinated and only began to realize at the end when Shepard confronted them with overwhelming evidence. Kensen didn't even realize it at all. I think Benezia was going in an out of lucidity because her indoctrination was through Saren (as explained in a previous post).

The point is, if Shepard felt like he was in his right mind then he had no choice but to trust in that. He was half dead and wasn't going to get another chance to use the Crucible. If he started saying "well I ok but then again I have no idea what it feels like to be indoctrinated" then that won't achieve anything. The reapers win if he does nothing so he has to trust his judgment.

I guess the question isn't so much whether Shepard suspects he might be indoctrinated, but whether he has any choice but to go ahead with the plan anyway.

I supposed he could always refuse out of principle and let down the entire galaxy... (eye roll)

[Probe Away]

Probe Away wrote...

OP, TIM and Saren initially refused to believe they were indoctrinated and only began to realize at the end when Shepard confronted them with overwhelming evidence. Kensen didn't even realize it at all. I think Benezia was going in an out of lucidity because her indoctrination was through Saren (as explained in a previous post).

The point is, if Shepard felt like he was in his right mind then he had no choice but to trust in that. He was half dead and wasn't going to get another chance to use the Crucible. If he started saying "well I feel ok but then again I have no idea what it feels like to be indoctrinated" then that wouldn't have achieved anything. The reapers win if he does nothing so he has to trust his judgment.

I guess the question isn't so much whether Shepard suspects he might be indoctrinated, but whether he has any choice but to go ahead with the plan anyway.

I supposed he could always refuse out of principle and let down the entire galaxy... <_<

[wirelesstkd]

Probe Away wrote...

I supposed he could always refuse out of principle and let down the entire galaxy... (eye roll)

You know that it would let the galaxy down because you've played the game (or watched the Youtube endings) and you know how each ending plays out... but Shepard doesn't. It seems to me that, for Shepard, the most logical choice would be to choose Refuse and go for a conventional victory... but that choice is a losing choice.

There are some paradoxes here... and maybe there's a (unintentional) genius in it by the writers. But the paradox is this:

     * If Shepard is NOT indoctrinated, then he should think he IS indoctrinated and would refuse, which leads to the harvesting of the cycle.

     * If Shepard IS indoctrinated, then he should think he is NOT indoctrinated and he would choose one of the options, but that is tantamount to accepting indoctrination and leads to the harvesting of the cycle (I think we all agree that this isn't the case, but it's the flip side of the coin).

In a way, the "logical" choice in either scenario is the one that leads to the cycle continuing. It seems like Shepard either needs to be oblivious to the fact that he could be indoctrinated (unlikely, IMO) or the player needs to metagame in order to win (post EC, anyway).

[N7Gold]

wirelesstkd wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

You forget that indoctrination is very subtle. you don't realize that you're losing your ability to think for yourself, you think that what the Reapers whisper into your mind makes sense, you think your actions aren't out of the ordinary, but your friends will think so.

That's interesting. So you're saying that because the choices are so blunt, someone like Shepard might have assumed that the star child was telling the truth, given indoctrination is known to happen slower? 

So an internal dialogue for Shepard after being told to choose might look something like this: "wait a minute, aren't these the promises the Reapers made to indoctrinate TIM and Saren? Maybe I'm being indoctrinated... no, no... my very ability to question that means that I'm not."

That's a stretch, but it's the closest thing I've got to a reasonable explanation

I'm saying Shepard was never indoctrinated. Illusive Man never believed that he was indoctrinated until Shepard kept telling him so. The Catalyst is simply playing mind games on Shepard, getting him/her to believe that harvesting organic life is his solution, even though you should know otherwise if you played the Leviathan DLC (his creators did NOT create him to harvest organic life).

Remember the Catalyst telling Shepard that Illusive Man could never control the Reapers because he and the Reapers already controlled him? If they controlled Shepard as well, how could Shepard possibly choose to control the Reapers, or choose synthesis when he is forced to do so not of his/her own merit? This is why Illusive Man never put a control chip in Shepard's brain, and why he/she was never indoctrinated, the Reapers need Shepard in full control of his/her mind to manifest the solution they need to fulfill their purpose. Shepard must willingly choose the solution they want.


(In Citadel during the war on Earth)

Shepard (red renegade dialogue): "Why waste your time with us when you can control the Reapers?"

Illusive Man: "Because... I need you to believe."

Wait. Does he mean he needs Shepard to believe, or do the Reapers who control him? If Illusive Man was in full control of himself, he wouldn't need to try to convince Shepard that destroying the Reapers is the wrong choice, he could do it himself. Since the Reapers control him, it is they who want Shepard to control them instead of destroying them.

There's no way a puppet can control a puppet master.

Just because Saren's beliefs (when he was indoctrinated by Sovereign) are in alignment with Synthesis and Illusive Man's beliefs are obviously aligned with controlling everything, does not mean Shepard is indoctrinated, it means the Reapers through Saren and Illusive Man need Shepard to do something their indoctrinated puppets cannot, which is to either create a so-called utopia for organics and synthetics, or to control the Reapers so they'll live to one day break free from Shepard's control and have another chance trying to reach Synthesis.


The only way to beat the Catalyst and Reapers is to use the Crucible to kill them, despite the fact that you kill all synthetic life in the process. Remember that the right choice is not always the one that makes you feel like a hero, and like Javik says to Shepard on Earth, "Victory is not always won without making a difficult choice".

If you made peace between the quarians and geth and allowed Joker to romance EDI, killing all synthetic life with the Reapers is not a choice that'll make you feel good about yourself, but it is not supposed to, there is no other option to win. Control and Synthesis are solutions that the Reapers favor (which is why Shepard's eyes become machine blue like Illusive Man's when you choose them) Don't let your doubts and fears about sacrifices discourage you from freeing the galaxy from the manipulative control of the Reapers.

Modifié par N7Gold, 27 novembre 2013 - 02:04 .

[AlexMBrennan]

If they controlled Shepard as well, how could Shepard possibly choose to control the Reapers

He could still fail trying to control the Reapers - do you think Timmy would have been physically unable to touch the glowing blue things? Of course not, he'd just have been electrocuted with no effect on the reapers.
Unless you are counting the epilogue in which case - duh, of course Shepard isn't indoctrinated.

even though you should know otherwise if you played the Leviathan DLC (his creators did NOT create him to harvest organic life).

Seems like a pretty standard example of a zeroth law rebellion - he can enact his plan because he's not killing organics he's supposed to look after, he's just preserving them.

Wait. Does he mean he needs Shepard to believe, or do the Reapers who control him? If Illusive Man was in full control of himself, he wouldn't need to try to convince Shepard that destroying the Reapers is the wrong choice, he could do it himself. Since the Reapers control him, it is they who want Shepard to control them instead of destroying them

Or maybe Timmy is just a massive Shepard fanboy? You know, the same reason they decided to bring back a "bloody icon"?

It seems to me that, for Shepard, the most logical choice would be to choose Refuse and go for a conventional victory... but that choice is a losing choice

Shepard has spent the entire bloody game trying to get everyone to spare resources that could have been used to fight the Reapers conventionally to build some Hail Mary doomsday weapon, so unilaterally deciding at the 11th hour not use the result would be complete betrayal.

Further, it is made abundantly clear that we do not have the numbers to win - the Baterians have been crushed, Arcturus station has been crushed, Earth is overrun by Reapers and to Shepard personally since we are only ever able to kill individual Reapers with ludicrously accurately concentrated fire (what are you going to do, send guys with laserpointers in space suits to float 10ft from the enemy spaceships so we can hit them?).
At the final briefing, it is made clear again that all the assembled fleets cannot defeat the enemy but are simply there to distract the Reapers.
Shepard would have to be as delusional as your average BSN dweller to believe our to believe that the fleets, which have been utterly curb-stomped at every encounter, are just waiting for word from Shepard to stop sucking.

The choice is really quite simple - refuse, and suffer certain death or use the crucible and some people might survive if the plans were accurate and catalyst is telling the truth.

[ElSuperGecko]

Personally, I believe that it's not Shepard who is being indoctrinated. It's the player themselves.

There's the old well-known story of how the "Final Hours" app discusses how the developers dropped a segment of the ending where Shepard would "fall entirely under Reaper control" because they couldn't find a way to make the game mechanics work (or something). So it's blatantly obvious that Shepard's (potential) indoctrination was something they were working on right throughout the development of the game, but they changed approach at the last second. Something like that would have been incredible obvious and hard to miss, so I personally believe that the Catalyst conversation and the ending choices is a more eloquent, subtle method of accomplishing the same thing.

Shepard (as in, the player) makes the beam run and races to the Citadel with the express intention of activating the Crucible, which he/she believes will Destroy the Reapers. I don't care who you are, if you were spoiler free, the first time you played the game, that was the plan. We then spend a good amount of time in the company of Anderson trying to convince the clearly-indoctrinated Illusive Man that Control is a pipe dream.

A couple of minutes later, everything changes. We're told.. no... Control is NOT a pipe dream - YOU CAN DO IT! Even better, we're presented with a universal, unprovable and hypothetical problem by a fundamentally flawed and illogical being, and told if we sacrifice ourselves it will be THE PERFECT SOLUTION. (less than) Three minutes of exposition, and everything apparently changes. (less than) three minutes of sketchy monologues, veiled threats, circular logic, vague explanations, vague assurances, palm-waving and platitudes and suddenly some of us decide we no longer want to Destroy the Reapers.

...and THAT is where the indoctrination comes in. If we're not careful, we (as the players) end up doing something that nobody else wanted, something that we ourselves argued against, and convince ourselves that it's a good idea. We find increasingly convoluted ways to believe that we're actually doing the right thing.

Well played, Bioware. that's some serious next-level mindbending storytelling, right there.

[dorktainian]

Because....



in before lock and honey badgers

Modifié par dorktainian, 27 novembre 2013 - 04:20 .

[AlanC9]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Shepard (as in, the player) makes the beam run and races to the Citadel with the express intention of activating the Crucible, which he/she believes hopes will Destroy the Reapers. I don't care who you are, if you were spoiler free, the first time you played the game, that was the plan. We then spend a good amount of time in the company of Anderson trying to convince the clearly-indoctrinated Illusive Man that Control is a pipe dream.

Fixed. I don't know about your Shepards, but mine had no idea what the damn thing did. They figured it was suupposed to be bad for the Reapers, but exactly  how... no clue. After TIM's proof-of-concept on Horizon, some of them were prepared to accept that Control was conceivable. And any means of stopping the Reapers was fine with them. Destroying them was an obvious means, sure, but the means was not really the point.

I forget.... are you out of the closet as an ITer yet? You haven't really claimed the label in any post I've seen, though I've seen you dance around it a bit.

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 novembre 2013 - 07:05 .

[N7Gold]

SwobyJ wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

You forget that indoctrination is very subtle. you don't realize that you're losing your ability to think for yourself, you think that what the Reapers whisper into your mind makes sense, you think your actions aren't out of the ordinary, but your friends will think so.

Nope, not exactly. An individual undergoing indoctrination actually amplifies the 'signal' (originating from nanites rewriting the brain) to those around them. The more one spends around someone who is being indoctrinated through more cyber means (nanites, implants), the more they will side with that person and be wrapped up in their signal.
The case example is the 'Benezia <--> Saren' connection, but there's other more separate examples of such an idea happening in both organic and synthetic forms of control over minds.

If you mean 'friends that haven't seen you in a while' instead, like the 'Nihlus <--> Saren' connection, then nevermind

That is what I meant, friends you haven't seen in a while, or those who were nowhere near Reaper tech.

[SwobyJ]

N7Gold wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

N7Gold wrote...

You forget that indoctrination is very subtle. you don't realize that you're losing your ability to think for yourself, you think that what the Reapers whisper into your mind makes sense, you think your actions aren't out of the ordinary, but your friends will think so.

Nope, not exactly. An individual undergoing indoctrination actually amplifies the 'signal' (originating from nanites rewriting the brain) to those around them. The more one spends around someone who is being indoctrinated through more cyber means (nanites, implants), the more they will side with that person and be wrapped up in their signal.
The case example is the 'Benezia <--> Saren' connection, but there's other more separate examples of such an idea happening in both organic and synthetic forms of control over minds.

If you mean 'friends that haven't seen you in a while' instead, like the 'Nihlus <--> Saren' connection, then nevermind

That is what I meant, friends you haven't seen in a while, or those who were nowhere near Reaper tech.

Ok! I'm with you.

~~~
However, what if we're playing in the POV of Shepard? Might everything be interpreted in a different way than what we see? Going meta here a bit, and my mind is flashing back to things like the Citadel Coup. We need to get Ash/Kaidan to 'trust us' enough to stand down.

[Probe Away]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

It seems to me that, for Shepard, the most logical choice would be to choose Refuse and go for a conventional victory... but that choice is a losing choice

Shepard has spent the entire bloody game trying to get everyone to spare resources that could have been used to fight the Reapers conventionally to build some Hail Mary doomsday weapon, so unilaterally deciding at the 11th hour not use the result would be complete betrayal. 

Further, it is made abundantly clear that we do not have the numbers to win - the Baterians have been crushed, Arcturus station has been crushed, Earth is overrun by Reapers and to Shepard personally since we are only ever able to kill individual Reapers with ludicrously accurately concentrated fire (what are you going to do, send guys with laserpointers in space suits to float 10ft from the enemy spaceships so we can hit them?).
At the final briefing, it is made clear again that all the assembled fleets cannot defeat the enemy but are simply there to distract the Reapers.
Shepard would have to be as delusional as your average BSN dweller to believe our to believe that the fleets, which have been utterly curb-stomped at every encounter, are just waiting for word from Shepard to stop sucking.

The choice is really quite simple - refuse, and suffer certain death or use the crucible and some people might survive if the plans were accurate and catalyst is telling the truth.

THIS.

I was thinking about how to reply but you've basically summed it up. Refuse = zero possibility of defeating reapers, R/G/B = some possibility of success (however uncertain it may be).

If I was a soldier fighting the reapers in London and Shepard came back down from the citadel and said, "sorry, I wasn't sure whether it would work so I didn't push the button, let's try to grind this one out" I would probably shoot him myself.

Modifié par Probe Away, 27 novembre 2013 - 09:58 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

It's pretty simple really. Shepard was written as a schizoid brick so the character would be a self-insert for the player. All they did differently in ME3 was give Shepard some sort of personality. It is up to the player to make the determination whether or not they're indoctrinated.

[ElSuperGecko]

AlanC9 wrote...
I forget.... are you out of the closet as an ITer yet? You haven't really claimed the label in any post I've seen, though I've seen you dance around it a bit.

I'm more than happy to accept your amendement - by this stage of the war and having thrown all our eggs into one basket, hope's pretty much all we've got.

I'm a pragmatist.  The Alliance constructed the Crucible with the intent of Destroying the Reapers.  Intent in viewpoint counts for a lot - all those scientists, engineers and experts, all building the Crucibel with the express intention of using it's power to Destroy the Reapers and end the cycle for good.

As for Control, as you rightly point out, the Illusive Man's research IS proof of concept and he's had more than enough time on the Citadel to implent whatever tech he's devised (as evidenced by it being the first available option should you hand Cerberus the Reaper base).  I don't however believe a race as long-lived, as insidious, as deceptive and as manipulative as the Reapers can be Controlled however; especially when the human psyche is not designed to exist forever.  How long can on man'smind stay sane, when surrounded by nothing but machines whispering in it'sear?  Control holds no temptation for me; I don't desire that kind of power, nor do I trust myself with it, especially knowing what I know about the Reapers and their methods.  For me, the Illusive Man is testament enough to the futility of pursuing Control.  In a battle of wills, the Reapers always win.

Synthesis comes entirely out of left field - courtesy of the Reapers.  We don't see anybody entertain the notion other than the Reapers (and their indoctrinated subjects) themselves.  Almost every instance of organic fusing with synthetic we've seen throughout the trilogy has served as a warning.  Furthermore,I don't accept the Catalyst or Levithan's arguments of synthetic/organic conflict being truly inevitable - the Levithan were a domineering race who attempted to subjugate the galaxy, rebellion against their regime (against ANY oppressive regime, for that matter) is inevitable.  Even if I accepted the premise, the Catalyst's original solution was horrifying in scope and sufficently flawed for me to err on the side of caution.  This is not an association fallacy, nor is it luddism, it's simple pragmatism.

The "chaos" the Catalyst describes is unproven, and is not our immediate problem.  The Reapers are.  The evidence is all around us as we talk to the Catalyst - the desperate, futile battle our allies are fighting.  Should the problem the Catalyst describes actually exist, the surviving species of the galaxy can face it together, with the lessons of history to draw from.  And if synthesis is truly inevitable, if it is something which cannot be forced, then why use the Crucible to do exactly that?

As for IT... I enjoy discussing the various concepts raised by the Indoctrination Theory (and no, it's not a scientific theory,there's more than one definition of the word).  I see more active and engaging discussion and interpretation of the story, the plot, the dream sequences, the dialogue, the DLC, the final missions, the lore, the game and the series as a whole amongst the IT crowd than anywhere else, and as I love the discussing the Mass Effect series as well.  Also, I think the blanket ban on IT discussion on the Bioware forums was a mistake.  Plenty of speculation for everyone, remember?

That said, I don't necessarily subscribe to the IT as a whole.  The "it's all a dream/hallucination" trope doens't entirely ring true for me - I beleive Shepard's final choice matters.  It doesn't just determine whether Shepard succumbs or resists - it determines the fate of the galaxy.  I do however believe there are intentional elements of Reaper indoctrination at play in the final sequences.  Specifically, that Bioware have deliberately introduced various red herrings and fallacies into the game's final sequences in an attempt to persuade the player to do something they would not otherwise do.  It's all but confirmed that Bioware origianlly intended indoctrination to play some role in the game's finale (see the FInal Hours app) - it's open to interpretation how much of that intent remains, and what role it plays.

[Sion1138]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Because the writers imbued Shepard with knowledge of how indoctrination works...

... that, however, puts him/her at odds with the majority of this fanbase.

*edit* -- it's kind of like Shepard never entertaining the possibility of fighting the Reapers with conventional weapons, he just knows it's not going to work, for reasons that ought to be obvious to the player (but nonetheless have eluded many people). Similarly, Shepard would know enough of indoctrination to know it's not taking place at the end of ME3. The player, though...

That's the death of role-playing right there.

[Xamufam]

Sheps indoctrination was removed from the game at the last minute, but there are strong leftovers of it

http://social.biowar.../index/17471574

This changes the entire game it makes the reapers space na zi's just as they were in me 1 & 2

Modifié par Troxa, 28 novembre 2013 - 12:36 .