526 réponses à ce sujet

[R4ZOR GHO5T]

Oh god we're not still talking about THAT theory are we?

[Farangbaa]

R4ZOR GHO5T wrote...

Oh god we're not still talking about THAT theory are we?

Yes, they are.

[AlanC9]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

This is an argument about what you want to be true. You want an ending where the facts of the MEU are consistent with what you perceive the themes to be, so you edit the facts to fit the themes.

No... I have always interpreted the ending this way ever since I first played it. I literally couldn't interpret it any other way because I automatically assumed it was consistent with the themes. So when the Reaper overlord confronted me with information that seemed to contradict what we've learned before, I automatically distrusted it. Not in the last place because the Reapers are mind-controlling, brainwashing superbeings who let people believe in fantastic things. I literally had to laugh out loud when it told me I could control the Reapers. after every backfiring control attempt that happened in the games, that idea was just laughable to me.

OK. Then it was an unconscious process. So it's not an argument about what you want to be true, it's an argument about whether your unconscious biases distorted your interpretation of the game to the point where you're believing nonsense, but you have come by that nonsense honestly.

I stand corrected.

Modifié par AlanC9, 06 février 2014 - 10:08 .

[wright1978]

MrFob wrote...

Ok, I told myself a long time ago that I was done discussing the ending but now I kinda got scooped up here and I want to answer this post.
Because if it were just the case that I could find one ending better than the rest, I'd actually be fine with them. But that's not the case.
Control and Synthesis are out immediately because I'd never trust the catalyst (and even if I would, I find the consequences as described in the EC non-sensical and rather revoting but that's just me). That leaves destroy as you say. Now if the only issue of destroy were killing all Synthetics, I could probably even live with that. Granted it's a sad thing but I never expected this to end clean and pretty, so be it.
No, the real problem I have with destroy is that it doesn't make sense. Why in the world would the catalyst offer me that option? It goes against everything that motivates him so why does he even let me choose it? Because the crucible "changed the variables"? A few sentences earlier he says it's basically just a big battery, developed by organic who never got beyond reaper level of tech, so it can't really be new to him (besides, he already knew about it before). So that doesn't make sense.
Maybe he can't control the crucible and has no choice but to offer all three options. But wait: Refuse proves that he can just shut it down if he wants and that his reapers can destroy it instantly so that's out.
What does that leave? As you said, it leave the Indoctrination Theory. The problem with that is, all you get from the IT at this point is NO ending instead of a bad ending. That's not really an improvement in my book.

That plus all the little annoying logical fallacies, the abrupt change in tone and in Shep's character as well as the narrative fallacy of providing a giant info dump in the last 5 minutes, those are the reasons why I never could make my piece with the endings. But as I said, that's just me.

This excellent post sums up one of the main reasons i'll never play the unmodded game again.

[AlanC9]

Psychevore wrote...

R4ZOR GHO5T wrote...

Oh god we're not still talking about THAT theory are we?

Yes, they are.

It's just something you have to put up with on the BSN.

[dreamgazer]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Why did Bioware a year and a half later regret not giving the player a more personally satisfying end to the game? The flat out said they "Learned some lessons". And that is not an opinion, that is a fact.

You're twisting that quote all out of context.

[DoomsdayDevice]

AlanC9 wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

This is an argument about what you want to be true. You want an ending where the facts of the MEU are consistent with what you perceive the themes to be, so you edit the facts to fit the themes.

No... I have always interpreted the ending this way ever since I first played it. I literally couldn't interpret it any other way because I automatically assumed it was consistent with the themes. So when the Reaper overlord confronted me with information that seemed to contradict what we've learned before, I automatically distrusted it. Not in the last place because the Reapers are mind-controlling, brainwashing superbeings who let people believe in fantastic things. I literally had to laugh out loud when it told me I could control the Reapers. after every backfiring control attempt that happened in the games, that idea was just laughable to me.

IOW, you indoctrinated yourself.

No, I paid attention to the themes and patterns. You see, wanting to control the Reapers, or synthesizing with them, that's what those indoctrinated fellows want to do. Last I checked, indoctrinated individuals didn't want to destroy the Reapers. On the contrary; they oppose those who would want to destroy them.

I mean, if you want to ignore that the games keep beating you over the head by showing that certain practices consistently lead to disastrous outcomes, just because the Reaper Overlord tells you that your Shepard is special, go right ahead. *shrug*

But I personally wouldn't bet humanity's existence on it.

[AlanC9]

You keep talking about themes like they're real. They're not real for Shepard.

But if we want to bring in metagame stuff like this, go ahead. It's clear from the design history of the game that Bio always intended a morally-conflicted and ironic ending.

Modifié par AlanC9, 06 février 2014 - 10:34 .

[DoomsdayDevice]

Well, we got that, no matter which way you look at it.

[Invisible Man]

my main issue with discussing IT with IT supporters... is the fact that there are inconstancies with indoctrination theory, and it's supporters simply claim that the inconstancies are there to fool us, and they don't really matter as non of this is actually happening. I also can't accept that bioware would sell us a game without an actual ending in it. and I wouldn't actually want to play such a game if they did actually do that. or, even worse... selling a full price game then telling me to actually finish the game i need to by this dlc here. if this ever occurred I'd stop buying computer/video games & go back to pen & paper rpgs... forever.

[AlanC9]

Don't worry about that. IT's unpopular enough that nobody's ever going to try anything like that, with ME or any other franchise.

Modifié par AlanC9, 06 février 2014 - 10:59 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Well, we got that, no matter which way you look at it.

How is the ending morally grey if IT is supposed to be true?

[DoomsdayDevice]

Yeah, remember when Chris Priestly polled about a thousand respondents on holdtheline, and a whopping 80% believed in IT?

@Invisible Man: I understand that IT-ers can be annoying, by coming off as belittling other people's interpretations. I -try- to avoid that. I don't mind people having different interpretations. It's just that, here on BSN, if you partake in any ending discussion, it's hard to partake in the debates if your interpretation is IT. Just the mention of it will make people jump all over you. It works both ways really.

As for inconsistencies, AFAIK the IT actually explains most of them. It's just that IT-ers don't always agree on some of the details, so YMMV depending on who you ask what. It's a theory, after all.

[DoomsdayDevice]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Well, we got that, no matter which way you look at it.

How is the ending morally grey if IT is supposed to be true?

Because you still make the decision in a state of mind that things are to be taken at face value. The breath scene comes after you've already made the choice.

Same goes for Shepard. Just like the player, Shepard has no idea that the situation could be an illusionary construct. Still need to make the decision weighing the pros and cons that we're being told.

Even if you go for destroy, you still need to make the decision to sacrifice the Geth. The possibility that this doesn't even actually happen is irrelevant for the decision. You have to make the decision knowing that the possible consequences of your choice could come true. IOW, you need to be prepared to pay the price.

[CronoDragoon]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Yeah, remember when Chris Priestly polled about a thousand respondents on holdtheline, and a whopping 80% believed in IT?

Pre or post EC? Link? Not that I don't believe you but I don't in fact remember this.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Even if you go for destroy, you still need to make the decision to sacrifice the Geth. The possibility that this doesn't even actually happen is irrelevant for the decision. You have to make the decision knowing that the possible consequences of your choice could come true. IOW, you need to be prepared to pay the price.

So you're weighing sacrificing the Geth vs. letting everybody be murdered? How is that morally grey?

IT interepretation doesn't allow for morally grey, since it requires one clear superior option (anything but Destroy screws over the galaxy). It's like pointing to the suicide mission decisions and calling them morally grey when they're strictly about the competence of the player character.

[Mcfly616]

CronoDragoon wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Yeah, remember when Chris Priestly polled about a thousand respondents on holdtheline, and a whopping 80% believed in IT?

Pre or post EC? Link? Not that I don't believe you but I don't in fact remember this.

he's telling the truth. But that 80% was definitely skewed by the fact that it was 2 weeks prior to EC and at that time many people just wanted IT to be true because it meant they would get a completely new ending. I don't have the link, but I did vote on it. It was literally on the homepage of the Retake site or Hold the Line site. The question was pretty much "Do you believe in the Indoctrination Theory, Yes or No?" (he left it at that. Specified beforehand that he didn't want any drawn out explanations as to why or why not. Just yes or no.) 


Anyways, I have a theory that BW actually had an "Extended" Breathe Scene (where Shepard stands up out of the rubble) prepared for EC. But they decided to cut it because this poll was so overwhelmingly in favor of IT, and adding an extension of the breathe scene would literally destroy IT along with the interpretations of a good chunk of their fanbase. And they were obviously trying to avoid any more backlash than they had already received by that point.(ofcourse I have no proof for this theory. I just couldn't understand any other logical reason why Priestly would be doing a poll asking this specific question on the Retake site 2 weeks before EC released)

Modifié par Mcfly616, 06 février 2014 - 11:56 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Because you still make the decision in a state of mind that things are to be taken at face value. The breath scene comes after you've already made the choice.

Same goes for Shepard. Just like the player, Shepard has no idea that the situation could be an illusionary construct. Still need to make the decision weighing the pros and cons that we're being told.

Even if you go for destroy, you still need to make the decision to sacrifice the Geth. The possibility that this doesn't even actually happen is irrelevant for the decision. You have to make the decision knowing that the possible consequences of your choice could come true. IOW, you need to be prepared to pay the price.

Except IT completely falls apart if the ending is taken at face value. At face value the IT reasons for not choosing Control and Synthesis (and Refuse?) go away.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

As for inconsistencies, AFAIK the IT actually explains most of them.

"That part isn't real" is not an explanation. It's handwaving, in the same vein as calling them "bad writing."

[wright1978]

Mcfly616 wrote...
He's telling the truth. But that 80% was definitely skewed by the fact that it was 2 weeks prior to EC and at that time many people just wanted IT to be true because it meant they would get a completely new ending. I don't have the link, but I did vote on it. It was literally on the homepage of the Retake site or Hold the Line site. The question was pretty much "Do you believe in the Indoctrination Theory, Yes or No?" (he left it at that. Specified beforehand that he didn't want any drawn out explanations as to why or why not. Just yes or no.) 

Anyways, I have a theory that BW actually had an "Extended" Breathe Scene (where Shepard stands up out of the rubble) prepared for EC. But they decided to cut it because this poll was so overwhelmingly in favor of IT, and adding an extension of the breathe scene would literally destroy IT along with the interpretations of a good chunk of their fanbase. And they were obviously trying to avoid any more backlash than they had already received by that point.(ofcourse I have no proof for this theory. I just couldn't understand any other logical reason why Priestly would be doing a poll asking this specific question on the Retake site 2 weeks before EC released)

I didn't frequent HTL much so must have missed that. Don't get why they would just poll there anyway.
as for if there's some scene on the cutting room floor well I doubt it but it would be ironic as that scene would have gone A long way to placating my vitriol. As it is their disrespect for live Shep's fuels it.

[AlanC9]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Anyways, I have a theory that BW actually had an "Extended" Breathe Scene (where Shepard stands up out of the rubble) prepared for EC. But they decided to cut it because this poll was so overwhelmingly in favor of IT, and adding an extension of the breathe scene would literally destroy IT along with the interpretations of a good chunk of their fanbase. And they were obviously trying to avoid any more backlash than they had already received by that point.(ofcourse I have no proof for this theory. I just couldn't understand any other logical reason why Priestly would be doing a poll asking this specific question on the Retake site 2 weeks before EC released)

It's an interesting thing to speculate about. If such a thing exists you'd think that it would leak someday, though.

Modifié par AlanC9, 07 février 2014 - 12:09 .

[George Costanza]

You know, back before Daft Punk released the album Human After All, it leaked to the Internet and was passed around file sharing sites and the like. People downloaded it, and a lot of people weren't happy with it. It was boring. It wasn't the Daft Punk they wanted. Then someone proposed that Daft Punk had purposely leaked a terrible album to discourage file sharing of their new record, and when the real album hit it would be "all that" as the kids on the street say. It was a ridiculous idea, but it spread like wildfire and a lot of people believed it. And of course when the album arrived, it was exactly the same as the one that leaked.

For some people it's easier to delude themselves with outlandish theories and keep up false hope than it is to just face the harsh truth; sometimes, things just suck.

Modifié par George Costanza, 07 février 2014 - 12:19 .

[Mcfly616]

It might've ceased to be the Breathe Scene altogether. It would've just been a scene concretely showing our Shepard alive amongst the Citadel wreckage. Maybe he got rescued. Either way, I'm still unclear as to why he ever did that poll. You don't just go to the homepage of the group who has brought world wide negative press to your game and ask them what they believe in....for no reason at all.


They clearly didn't add anything supporting IT due to the poll results. Yet, they also didn't put an end to it either. I can only theorize that they left something out due to it.

Modifié par Mcfly616, 07 février 2014 - 12:25 .

[Invisible Man]

most of the big issues I have with IT itself (pre ec): is that there is evidence that could support it (though there are other possible explanations for those same proofs too), and there is just as much evidence to suggest that IT isn't at work here. for the most part the proofs that seem to support IT only suggest it, where the proofs that seem to disprove it, seem to do more than simply suggest it. and the fact that the larger disproving bits of evidence are only dealt with by saying oh, it's a dream so non of this is actually happening, the catalyst is just adding this in to make it convincing, etc. it just doesn't hold water to me. now, post ec, there seems to be more proofs that are also more compelling that disprove (or suggest) that IT is not at work, as opposed to it being more likely.
now, I'm not trying to rag on anyone, nor force my opinions on anyone... I'm simply trying to share what I see. I'm not stating solid fact, just my opinion.

[Mathias]

dreamgazer wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Why did Bioware a year and a half later regret not giving the player a more personally satisfying end to the game? The flat out said they "Learned some lessons". And that is not an opinion, that is a fact.

You're twisting that quote all out of context.

http://www.totalxbox...r-future-games/

"The primary take-away was never to underestimated the passion of your core fan-base. We learned that since fans had spent three games with most of these characters, their feelings about letting them go were just as strong as ours."


Sounds like a lesson learned to me.

Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 07 février 2014 - 12:36 .