148 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Hey, at least that theory makes sense.

[von uber]

I see the dreams as foreshadowing making the wrong choice in accepting the catalyst's offer.

[AlanC9]

How do the dreams foreshadow Refuse?

More seriously, even if you believe that Bio added IT after the outline, the dreams are already in the outline. What were they foreshadowing before Bio decided to change the ending to IT?

Modifié par AlanC9, 22 février 2014 - 04:16 .

[69_Gio_69]

What does it matter? Your whole argument is based on a script that is in many ways different from the final product.

If you believe in face value, you should also believe that they changed synthesis from 'becoming one with the reapers' into 'organics with green eyes and synthetic parts'. Why did they change that concept?

[AlanC9]

The pont is that the dreams weren't written to foreshadow IT because IT didn't exist yet. When the dreams were written Control really was Control.

(Not that IT ever existed except in the minds of some fans, but I'll grant its later addition for the sake of the discussion.)

[69_Gio_69]

We already discussed this. The child was also not in the script, so the script isn't relevant. It is clear that things have changed, since the leaked script so you can't base conclusion on something like that. If you still want to, instead of just looking at the game itself, be my guest. But I don't think any IT'er will change their opinion based on something like this.

[Gervaise]

It all really comes down to the meaning of the child. In response to original OP, if making the image more defined should reveal something significant, please let us know.

69_Gio_69: I spent my first play through wondering constantly about the kid and the dreams. I speculated that it might signify the Reapers attempting indoctrination. Since the Reapers are so aware of Shepard and he has been in close proximity to their technology on more than one occasion, plus EDI actually has bits of Sovereign in her build, there was sufficient hardware to provide a sort of antennae for the Reaper signal. It made sense to me that they would try to indoctrinate Shepard as we had been told that is the way they broke the resistance on previous cycles, undermining it by indoctrinating important people.

So when the Catalyst appeared in the guise of the child, my reaction initially was that the Reapers must have been behind the dreams. At the very least it would seem to indicate that they were in Shepard's sub-conscious or why choose the image of that particular child? (Leviathan appeared to confirm this when they chose to address Shepard in the form of the Ann Bryson and he conducted the conversation on dry land, even though we(he) knew he was at the bottom of the ocean).

Despite all this, I was befuddled into choosing Synthesis but my immediate reaction on seeing what happened to Joker's eyes was that I had been tricked (by the writers) into doing what the Intelligence wanted - effectively Shepard (me) had been indoctrinated. Naturally the Intelligence viewed Synthesis as the perfect solution but I was horrified I had been beguiled into taking it. Of course at this point I did not know that I had only been offered it because I had achieved the "perfect" game and therefore perhaps the writers also viewed it as the perfect solution. Subsequently, after seeing Leviathan, I also felt that the bit from the elevator onwards was playing out in Shepard's head and that is why he only had to choose for the Crucible to work. The actions were simply symbolic, which is why in Control and Destroy, Shepard is seen doing exactly the same actions as Anderson and TIM. In the original version no matter which ending I chose, Shepard died.

The EC does contradict some of the above, particularly as now when I choose Destroy, I get the breath scene. However, I'd still like to know why, if it was not meant to be symbolic of indoctrination, the Catalyst took the form of the child? Also in the Refuse ending, it reverts to Harbinger's voice, again suggesting this is a deliberate projection by the Reapers. Of course the Intelligence is angry if Shepard refuses to choose because it has already admitted that its solution is no longer viable and an alternative needs to be put in place. The only thing I do not understand is why, if Shepard refuses, it does not simply try using someone else to activate the Crucible.

So, to sum up, to view the child as some form of symbolic indoctrination attempt seems a perfectly valid interpretation but obviously not the only one.

[SwobyJ]

You sure it is Harbinger's voice?

[Gervaise]

Okay, deep, booming, Reaper-like voice. Main point being that that would appear to be its true voice and it was adopting the voice of the child, just as it adopted its appearance.

I suppose an alternative interpretation of the child is that the Intelligence could "see" into Shepard's sub-conscious and that he/she had been having guilt ridden dreams which featured the child he/she had seen killed. Since the child in this version symbolises all the people who are dying during the harvest, the Intelligence adopts this image in order to remind them of what the stakes are in the decision.

[SwobyJ]

I wonder what EDI's 'true voice' is?

[ImaginaryMatter]

69_Gio_69 wrote...

We already discussed this. The child was also not in the script, so the script isn't relevant. It is clear that things have changed, since the leaked script so you can't base conclusion on something like that. If you still want to, instead of just looking at the game itself, be my guest. But I don't think any IT'er will change their opinion based on something like this.

What about Vendetta not identifying Shepard as Indoctrinated?

[TurianRebel212]

SwobyJ wrote...

I wonder what EDI's 'true voice' is?

I don't know, gee maybe go back at chat up Squid Face 1 on Virmire. 

Probably something like that methinks. 

[AlanC9]

69_Gio_69 wrote...
We already discussed this. The child was also not in the script, so the script isn't relevant. It is clear that things have changed, since the leaked script so you can't base conclusion on something like that. If you still want to, instead of just looking at the game itself, be my guest. But I don't think any IT'er will change their opinion based on something like this.

The script is relevant because the dreams were in the script; that's where the kid comes from.They haven't changed, and they weren't written to foreshadow IT. If you want to believe that the dreams were somehow transubstantiated into foreshadowing a concept that didn't exist yet when they were written, feel free.

And no, I don't think any ITer is going to change his mind based on this argument, or any other argument. 

[SwobyJ]

TurianRebel212 wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

I wonder what EDI's 'true voice' is?

I don't know, gee maybe go back at chat up Squid Face 1 on Virmire. 

Probably something like that methinks. 

That's CRAZY TALK.

My EDIpoo has the most lovely voice.

Nothing like a Reaper. Nothing!

Huh, Reaper code? Bah!

[TurianRebel212]

SwobyJ wrote...

TurianRebel212 wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

I wonder what EDI's 'true voice' is?

I don't know, gee maybe go back at chat up Squid Face 1 on Virmire. 

Probably something like that methinks. 

That's CRAZY TALK.

My EDIpoo has the most lovely voice.

Nothing like a Reaper. Nothing!

Huh, Reaper code? Bah!

Yes, established lore in ME1 and ME2 is all "bah" by the time ME3 rolls around. 

BAH!!! to it all I say. Just give me more cool explosions and aliens to play in MP and I'll be happy!!!! Take my money EA!!! Take it all!!







Nope. 


EDI calls the "beam" the conduit..... lolololololololol. 

Hillarious. It's quite ammusing how much face slapping TrollWare was doing to the player in ME3. Literally, like in every mission there's something that's "off" or odd. But.... ignorance is bliss. 

[IoCaster]

69_Gio_69 wrote...

So because it is not mentioned in a leaked script, it can't be true? Riiight..
It is obvious:
a. The child is first seen in a ventilation shaft and suddenly disappears with a reaper growl.
b. Then the child pops up in all your dreams.

What do the writers want to tell us with this? THE CHILD IS NOT REAL. As I said before, if you cannot comprehend this you don't understand storytelling.

What? I thought that it had been established right after the game was released that the child was in fact real.

[shodiswe]

The kid on earth is real. He signifies all the innocents lost in the Reaper invasion.

The idea that the kid isn't real is Indonctrination Theory coffestain reading and crystal ball scrying.

Since that kid gave face to the tragedy he keeps reappearing in Shepards dreams. And when Shepard sees a holographic projection of the Catalyst that's fussy Shepards mind might possibly give it form. ( Rorschach test )

I don't see why everything has to be a conspiracy to some people, in that case then the Quarian presense on on dissapearing Human colonies and the fact that Quarians suddenly gained a technology that helepd them fight the Geth for the first time in 300 years happend at the same time. The Collectors have been known to pay mercenaries and government in technology for services rendered. And the True Geth certainly wern't friends of the Reapers or Collectors, so they actualy won another ally by providing that tech aswell as some help in shutting down the colonys security mechs and defences.
The security mech didn't come online until Shepard landed, they were completely useless and shutdown while the Collectors were there.
Hard evidence is lacking though.

Same goes for the IT, there is no hard evidence, just a bunch of crazy interpretations and no proof what so ever.

The Vorcha Bloodpack on Omega were given a plague by the Collectors to help them take over Omega in exchange for services rendered.

This game is full of what could be conspiracies, but they never go anywhere. Unless of course that's something we will be exploring in the next game. But that's up to the Devs.
Personaly I don't want to revisit the Reaper war. If so it would be an introduction to the protagonist, earlier in their life, before the real story.

An angry orphan searching for answers and other stuff...

[von uber]

I meant that the dream means you should not trust the catalysts offers of control etc. Showing you siding with the catalyst (i.e. choosing it's best offer of synthesis) by sitting with the child and then demonstrating this being the wrong choice by bursting into flames.
Just my take and nothing to do with IT.

[shodiswe]

von uber wrote...

I meant that the dream means you should not trust the catalysts offers of control etc. Showing you siding with the catalyst (i.e. choosing it's best offer of synthesis) by sitting with the child and then demonstrating this being the wrong choice by bursting into flames.
Just my take and nothing to do with IT.

I think the part with the child bursting into flames, Shepard bursting into flames and Squadmates talking about dying and people dying is more about Shepard being on edge about loosing people all the time.

I think the dreams are more about the writers atempt to display how close Shepard is to breaking down completely... Like that PTSD Asari commando on the Citadel that wanted a gun to shoot herself.

It feels fairly farfetched to think Shepard is prophetic and can see into the future. A PTSD reaction and nightmares seems far more belivable than belivign somethign that isn't otherwise supported by anything said in-game or presented in the EC.

Least that's my take on it.

I've never been a fan of the dream sequences myself.

After one of those dreams Shepard can also talk to Liara about his worries about loosing friends, and the people he has already lost like the VS who didn't make it from Virmire.
Which is actualy Shepards interpretation of the dream. A nightmare about loosing friends and other people. Nightmares about failing. Shepard feels s/he failed the kid, and any other Squadmates that dies, aswell as other people who are dying in the Reaper invasion.

Modifié par shodiswe, 23 février 2014 - 12:29 .

[von uber]

Oh I agree with that summary, I was looking at it from a potential broader theme from the writers. It's a stretch I know (and probably another feeble attempt to reconcile starkid in my head!).

[Gervaise]

The kid in the vent was real. I don't subscribe to Shepard being indoctrinated that far back. The kid in the dreams could be attempted indoctrination but just as easily personification of guilt/stress. Either way something is being forced onto Shepard's subconscious by the writers which the player may not actually feel.

The significance is in the appearance of the Catalyst. Why would Shepard look at a fuzzy image and immediately project the image of the kid onto it? The Catalyst looks like the kid because that is how it chose to look. So symbolic of the Reapers gaining at least some control over Shepard's subconscious. If not indoctrination then at least gaining an insight as to where his/her potential area of weakness might lie and play on that. It could also be symbolic of the childlike simplicity of the Catalyst's logic - one problem, one solution, never question that there might be an alternative until Shepard appears in its inner sanctum (I presume the inaccessible inner core of the Citadel referred to in ME1). Then absolute insistence that a new solution is needed and Shepard must chose which. If Shepard refuses to choose, it throws its toys out of the pram (metaphorically) and continues the harvest despite having insisted that it is no longer a solution.

Modifié par Gervaise, 23 février 2014 - 03:07 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

IoCaster wrote...

What? I thought that it had been established right after the game was released that the child was in fact real.

Clearly the memorial wall is Indoctrination too.

[SwobyJ]

Cerberus Scientist: That thing that just… gray thing! It disappeared when I looked straight at it. Came out of the damn wall! Where we took off that panel.



Right.

Modifié par SwobyJ, 23 février 2014 - 07:36 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

SwobyJ wrote...

Cerberus Scientist: That thing that just… gray thing! It disappeared when I looked straight at it. Came out of the damn wall! Where we took off that panel.



Right.

Ya, it always seemed like the hallucinations were fleeting glimpses more akin to schizophrenia rather than full-blown Hollywood type hallucinations.

[SwobyJ]

Sure.