937 réponses à ce sujet

[SwobyJ]

Yeah but I think it's all in a Reaper.

 

When I post that here, it's pretty much an invitation to ridicule.

 

Yet not much happens. Cool!

 

[masster blaster]

... doesn't work like that. I call it like I see it, nothing more!

 

I actually tend to like your contributions. Any posts with thoughtful analysis -- which don't reek of spin or elitism -- get my approval.

 

There are various other IT'ers on my good side as well, for one reason or another. byne, for example, always struck me as a stand-up kind of a guy when I've talked to him, not an ideologue on this topic, just that he prefers his own interpretations. Also frickin love master blaster. So for the record: my choice words for IT are not directed all of its supporters or even the concept as such, just at the "polarization" (growing extremism in belief) which has plagued both of those things ever since EC. I'm not stereotyping. I'm generalizing, exceptions are implied.

It's cool. Some of us do, and some of us don't. Same can go for any ones side towards the endings and what they think. Glad i am so loved. XD

[ElSuperGecko]

And why shouldn't people believe in the Indoctrination Theory?  It's a perfectly valid interpretation of the ending, and will remain so until Bioware come out with an actual sequel to the game.  It's infinitely more valid than, say, MEHEM as an ending, as Indoctrination Theory doesn't attempt to add anything new to the game, just interpret what's already present within it.

 

Plus of course, Bioware gave us the Leviathan DLC, which is probably as close to an outright confirmation of the Indoctrination Theory (or at least that the Catalyst encounter ain't actually physically happening) as we're ever likely to get.  The "Conspiracy Theory" DLC.  Oh, yes indeed.

[ImaginaryMatter]

And why shouldn't people believe in the Indoctrination Theory?  It's a perfectly valid interpretation of the ending, and will remain so until Bioware come out with an actual sequel to the game.  It's infinitely more valid than, say, MEHEM as an ending, as Indoctrination Theory doesn't attempt to add anything new to the game, just interpret what's already present within it.

 

Plus of course, Bioware gave us the Leviathan DLC, which is probably as close to an outright confirmation of the Indoctrination Theory (or at least that the Catalyst encounter ain't actually physically happening) as we're ever likely to get.  The "Conspiracy Theory" DLC.  Oh, yes indeed.

 

The IT is essentially just interpreting the subliminal and surreal aspects of the ending, or just the plain nonsensical parts, to the closest stated in game phenomenon: Indoctrination, while -- and here's the important part -- ignoring the things like the narrative meaning of things in the story (the EC slides, stargazer scene), statements from the developers (post Stargazer data log entry from the BioWare team), or even the lore (namely how the Indoctrination in the IT is different from the Indoctrination as shown in the Codex, Virmire facility, Derelict Reaper, etc.) that all significantly makes the IT hard to swallow.

 

What bugs people is when ITers proclaim that the IT is the only valid ending and to believe other wise is to be wholly ignorant of the story. Hopefully, non-ITers aren't bothered when people say they like the IT and that's their personal ending, like how MEHEMers have MEHEM, or in my case the small group that replaces the ending with the Marauder Shields canon.

 

Having said that the cleat intention ME3's ending is that it is to be taken at face value, the Reapers are eventually stopped, Shepard becomes a legend, and the development team leaves a message that the trilogy is over.

[MSandt]

For a year after having completed the game I avoided all IT topics because I was (dunno why exactly) under the impression that the theory had been confirmed, and I didn't want to spoil the game by having the story degenerate into a "it was all a dream" type of thing. Then I read everything I could about the IT and was very surprised at how idiotic the whole thing was: People were clinging to meaningless details and were seeing things the way they wanted to see them.

[ElSuperGecko]

The IT is essentially just interpreting the subliminal and surreal aspects of the ending, or just the plain nonsensical parts, to the closest stated in game phenomenon: Indoctrination, while -- and here's the important part -- ignoring the things like the narrative meaning of things in the story (the EC slides, stargazer scene), statements from the developers (post Stargazer data log entry from the BioWare team), or even the lore (namely how the Indoctrination in the IT is different from the Indoctrination as shown in the Codex, Virmire facility, Derelict Reaper, etc.) that all significantly makes the IT hard to swallow.

 

Respectfully disagree.  The Indoctrination Theory discussion I've seen analyses not just the "subliminal and surreal" aspects of the game (which incidentally is precisely the reason those elements are there - to provoke discussion and interpretation), but pretty much EVERYTHING within the confnes of the game.  The codex.  The dialogue.  Shepard's past experiences.  Canonical knowledge of the Reapers and their methods.  Admittedly, some of the more well-known sources of Indoctrination Theory discussion (clevernoob's videos, Choose Wisely etc) go into extreme minute detaill on elements within the game, but Mass Effect 3 is a work of fiction, not real life.  It was artificially created.  It was edited.  It was peer reviewed.  And as such, unlike real life, it can be subjected to literary analysis.  Very little happens within a work of fiction for no reason - it was put there to advance the story, to flesh out motives, hint at mysteries, or simply because someone thought it was a good idea.  Foreshadowing, metaphors, allegories... they all play a part.

 

"Things like the EC slides" aren't ignored, either.  Let's ignore the fact that the EC slides were never actually intended by the developers to be part of the story in the first place, that they were hastily assembled and thrown into the mix once the scale of the ending backlash became clear as an attempt to pacify a confused and angry fan base - the discussion regarding the Indoctrination Theory doesn't ignore them, it simply doesn't interpret them the same way as a person who watches them and takes them at face value does.  Which is entirely in keeping with the rest of the Indoctrination Theory discussion, which doesn't interpret the dreaqms, the events in London or the Catalyst conversation itself the same way as a person who views them at face value does.

 

What bugs people is when ITers proclaim that the IT is the only valid ending and to believe other wise is to be wholly ignorant of the story. Hopefully, non-ITers aren't bothered when people say they like the IT and that's their personal ending, like how MEHEMers have MEHEM, or in my case the small group that replaces the ending with the Marauder Shields canon.

 

I've rarely seen that happen to be honest.  I've seen Indoctrination Theory supporters defend their arguments,interpretations and ideas, I've also seen them question other people's arguments, interpretations and ideas, but I've never seen them say that IT is the "only valid ending".  Because it obviously isn't.  The paths are open, Shepard must choose.

 

That doesn't mean that everyone thinks every choice is right, of course - and THAT'S where the bitterness and anger sneaks in.

 

Having said that the cleat intention ME3's ending is that it is to be taken at face value, the Reapers are eventually stopped, Shepard becomes a legend, and the development team leaves a message that the trilogy is over.

 

Respectfully disagree.  The company line is "people are free to choose their story and interpret it how they want".  The intention for the end of ME3 was clearly that players think about the decision Shepard is facing, what that decision MAY mean, what effect Shepard's decision will have, and come to their own conclusion.  The Extended Cut changed the game in that regards somewhat, but as I mentioned earlier I don't see the Extended Cut as much more than a pretty hasty (if, it appears, effective) attempt at crisis management.  It doesn't entirely alter Bioware's intentions however, and it doesn't answer every question.  It just adds a bit more substance and a bit more closure for those who demanded it.  It doesn't actually refute anything.. or confirm it either, for that matter.

 

I like your username by the way.  Very fitting to the discussion in hand! 

[Hadeedak]

What usually gets under my skin is when people get all crazy up in arms.

 

That's not just indoctrination theory. I tend to get shirty when people are overly dramatic about ANYTHING. And I, personally, think it's kind of silly to put one ending or another up on a pedestal, because the one thing I absolutely love about the endings and am not ashamed to admit is that no one is the 'right one' or the 'wrong one', or even 'paragon' or 'renegade.'

 

Which I think is totally awesome. And heaven knows it's prompted enough debate. 

 

I'm not thrilled about the concept of 'pick red (or yellow) to win, and it was all a dream'.

 

That being said, I've got no beef with people who're a bit more open minded or seeing what they want to see. It's when they tell me I'm wrong that I make odd faces at my computer and go listen to a Tom Waits album all the way through while taking shots of Ballantine's.

 

The above is a hyperbole.

 

Probably.

[marcelo caldas]

It's not about believing, it's about preferring.

 

So yeah, it's better the one we had, but between IT and Marauder Shields I don't know which one I would go.

[ElSuperGecko]

It's not about believing, it's about prefering.

 

So yeah, it's better the one we had, but between IT and Marauder Shields I don't know which one I would go.

 

...and hoping, of course.  Two elements of the indoctrination theory are the presense of the N7 Breath Scene in High EMS Destroy, and Stargazr's "OK, one more story..." line (which I always actually interpreted as him shilling Bioware's DLC, but I digress)

 

If the Breath Scene is interpreted as Shepard "waking up" then the hope is that there WILL be one more story, and that the war isn't over yet.

 

Is it a vain hope?  At this stage, yeah, probably.  And it always will be, unless Bioware are hiding behind a "no more sequels" smokescreen.

[AlexMBrennan]

It's not about believing, it's about preferring.

Actually, it is - it's even in the thread title: "Do people still BELIEVE..."; if you don't believe IT but would prefer it to be true then you still don't believe IT is true.

[marcelo caldas]

Actually, it is - it's even in the thread title: "Do people still BELIEVE..."; if you don't believe IT but would prefer it to be true then you still don't believe IT is true.

 

Yeah, it's what I meant, unfortunately, I don't believe it.

[Iakus]

I agree with this, and is my main problem with this theory. All the hard work for nothing? shepard just stays there, dreaming by a possible endoctrination, while everyone in the galaxy gets their butts kicked, and all the alliances and resources gotten just for nothing?

 

I wanna know how bioware will solve the canon story for the next mass effect.

 

Mass Effect 4: The Galaxy Is Green.  Deal With It

 

Heard it here first 

[ZerebusPrime]

Mass Effect 4: The Galaxy Is Green.  Deal With It

 

Heard it here first 

Zombie Husk Emily Wong has been scooped!  Quick, someone restrain her!  Watch out for the claws!

[cyrslash1974]

Do I still believe IT ? At the beginning, I thought that IT was a phantasm of geek, but... I have changed my mind. Yes, I believe IT now and for the future.

[masster blaster]

Yeah, it's what I meant, unfortunately, I don't believe it.

That is okay. Nobody is forcing you to believe it. Each believes in his/her own thing. I believe in IT and stick with it because it helps me understand the "ending" of ME3 better than what the EC did, which was just poorly done IMO.

[masster blaster]

No, never did, thought it sounded crazy and delusional. Almost like some kind of cult.

 

 

 

@ Doomsdaydevice;  Why would it be important to test that? What's the point? Whats the importance?

I can see how it's imporant to end the killing and save people. It's Shepards job to stop the Reaper harvest and save galactic civilisation.

Is revenge or vengeance on those who had no choice but to obey really that imporant?

 

At the end of WW2 some people could have choosen a pyric victory and killed a few million extra just to make sure vengeance was delivered. Probably wouldn't have made the world a better place, I'm pretty sure of that. Same most likely applies here.

Dresden, Hiroshima and Naguesaka. We did what we must to end the war and come with a swift vengeance.though.....what we did was at a price. Destroy is the hardest choice one can make. We still hunt Nazi officers down despite all the years that have passed. The U.S hunted down Osama until he meet his end to a bullet to the head.

 

However I digress. the Reapers have killed trillions in each cycle. That has to end here. If not for vengeance, then for reason, and peace.

 

The Reapers are weapons, and should not be kept around at all. They are monsters that were created to harvest organic races because war with Synthetics was inevitable, yet the Catalyst kept prolonging the problem and resulted in an endless cycle.

 

Must the Reapers, the organic beings trapped in there must be kept around in this galaxy? I say no because they should have died long ago, they should have never been created, nor should they be kept in the monster that turned organics into their genetic material. The Geth, EDi, and all the other synthetics dying.......it is a price, a heavy one at that, but for vengeance, for peace, and for freedom the Reapers must end. Not by keeping them around, but by sending them to the after life, if not for what they did, but to free the organics trapped in the Reaper shell.

[masster blaster]

I would be lying if I said this hadn't crossed my mind. If the breath scene is just there as a "glimmer of hope," and not as the cliff-hanger it would be in a movie, then it serves no purpose at all. If it is supposed to be a definitive "Shepard lives," then why didn't they clarify that in the EC when they clarified everything else? So it's either a cliff-hanger or it is bad writing.

 

In two of the endings, the reapers are still around. Was the plot twist that the reapers are actually the good guys saving the galaxy from itself? Ha ha.

 

I've watched Leviathan on Youtube, and it's sole purpose is to foreshadow the intelligence. Yet Shepard sees the kid in the vent that Anderson doesn't see; sees the kid that no one sees.... was BW going for symbolism here where that child represented all the people on Earth who died? Or was that Harbinger's avatar? Then Shepard has dreams of Harby's avatar. Then sees Harby's avatar in the end! "You don't want to kill us. Think of the child!" 

 

But BW banned everyone who believed in IT, so there is no IT, even if it's true.

 

 The Breath scene has always been off and odd. It makes no sense, and it really makes the fans angry about it. I think of it however, aside form IT, it is a cliff hanger, yet meant to be revealed later when the new series of ME is done. Basically pull a Halo 4. Don't know how, well I can guess, but it would be up to them. They say this, and say that.....ya.....we will just have to wait and see.

 

They didn't ban those who believe IT, just the topics. One day CP just went off and ordered it all shut and closed. Much like the Council/ The Alliance does in ME2. However I believe that since ME4 is almost done, or is in the middle stages of development, Bioware will let IT come up again to help boost the talks of " ME4".

 

From what I understand , the child was never truly there. We know that on Mars when Liara was in the vents, she was making nose, yet on Earth......the boy makes no sound, and when Shepard just looks away for just a few seconds....we hear a Reaper growl that sounds like it came from WITHIN the building itself. Not saying that it came from the building, but the nearest Reapers are far away from Shepard. The Horn the Reapers use, can be heard coming from a distance, but a growl....i think not.

[masster blaster]

What's odd about calling the music "Wake Up" when it's for a scene that starts with the character waking up?

Well......

 

 

1. It could be said that it is meant to be a clue that Shepard is "waking up" to a new level of the Indoctrination attempt.

 

or

 

2. Shepard is just waking up to the child that has haunted his/her dreams, despite going full renegade Shepard, and such.

[angol fear]

Dresden, Hiroshima and Naguesaka. We did what we must to end the war and come with a swift vengeance.though.....what we did was at a price. Destroy is the hardest choice one can make. We still hunt Nazi officers down despite all the years that have passed. The U.S hunted down Osama until he meet his end to a bullet to the head.

Did you read some historians? You should read Howard Zinn : you didn't do what you had to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan was defeated and was ready to accept to surrender with conditions. America was thinking that Japan was a very good location to have for them instead of sharing it with Russia, they decided to take it with bombs (they didn't wait peace because they would share it, like Germany). Actually destroy in real life is just strategy, and without this aspect it's just the easiest solution.

[masster blaster]

Did you read some historians? You should read Howard Zinn : you didn't do what you had to do with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan was defeated and was ready to accept to surrender with conditions. America was thinking that Japan was a very good location to have for them instead of sharing it with Russia, they decided to take it with bombs (they didn't wait peace because they would share it, like Germany). Actually destroy in real life is just strategy, and without this aspect it's just the easiest solution.

True, however one can argue it is not. Times were hard back then, and although it was almost about to end, they dropped the bombs to save lives( primarily American troops), and show off their might, so that if anyone would start another World War....it would be death or surrender.

 

That being said though it is just strategy, yet with either high prices, or not so much. Destroy in ME3 is a high price to those who value the synthetics, or a easy choice because they hate the synthetics, don't care, or just know what is at stake. It all depends though. Personally i say destroy is the hardest because taking a life may be easy, but taking in the trauma from it.....you either deal with it or you break slowly or quickly. Though we kill mercs, slavers, and so many more organics and synthetics, that it does not affect our Shepard's, but Destroy on the other hand affects the player because though we may kill, we kill to save the galaxy no matter the cost. However a full paragon Shepard (from what I hear and understand)  has a weak heart to kill the synthetics along with the Reapers. To them ( yet with a few renegade rs) they feel like Destroy is a horrible ending because the synthetics die ( friends and allies at that). Though in real war........there will always be heavy casualties on either side depending on who is the victor, or who is the one who lost.

[angol fear]

True, however one can argue it is not. Times were hard back then, and although it was almost about to end, they dropped the bombs to save lives( primarily American troops), and show off their might, so that if anyone would start another World War....it would be death or surrender.

But how about killing american who were prisonners in Hiroshima, and killing innocent japanese civilians? Killing people who can't defend their life because they aren't soldiers (women and children), that how America is great?

[masster blaster]

But how about killing american who were prisonners in Hiroshima, and killing innocent japanese civilians? Killing people who can't defend their life because they aren't soldiers (women and children), that how America is great?

I didn't say that, but in war.....it changes the way people view life, and think about morals, and principles. It does not make America great, nor less. GB helped the U.S bomb Germany. Did they think about the innocent people? Did Japan think about the innocent people when they invaded China? Did Germany think of the innocent people being sent to the death camps?

 

The innocent women, children, elderly, and young men who are not fighting in the war have always been targets. Why because they help the war effort in some way. Woman produce soldiers, they help manage things back at home and keep things stable, the children grow up the the views of what they are taught, the elderly influence the young ones and teach them how they were taught or should be taught. The young men can be drafted and recruited into the army.

 

So many reasons, and so many times has this happen, and still happen. It is sad, but it is not easy trying to save everyone, nor is it pretty to end a battle, or war if civilians are in the line of fire.

[angol fear]

Yes, that's war. But the "We did what we must to end the war " is totally wrong : the japanese wanted to surrender (once again read Howard Zinn or the pentagon papers if you want real official paper to prove facts and understand USA in the XXth century), America did nothing to end the war, it wasn't to help the troops and it wasn't to be great, it was just to have more power.

[masster blaster]

Yes, that's war. But the "We did what we must to end the war " is totally wrong : the japanese wanted to surrender (once again read Howard Zinn or the pentagon papers if you want real official paper to prove facts and understand USA in the XXth century), America did nothing to end the war, it wasn't to help the troops and it wasn't to be great, it was just to have more power.

I know of it. However it was not up to me, or you. Personally i know it was to show off my own country's might, and scare Russia because the U.S did not like communism spreading here. However at this time battles were still happening, and American troops were dying. Does it make it right, no but it happened, and we know how bad the effects were, and still linger. And to say it was to have more power, yes that is true, however to say it was just power alone, that is not true. You can say it was to cover up their real intent, but we both know that it was also to save lives on the American side, even though peace talks were being made.

 

"We are now prepared to obliterate more rapidly and completely every productive enterprise the Japanese have above ground in any city. We shall destroy their docks, their factories, and their communications. Let there be no mistake; we shall completely destroy Japan's power to make war. It was to spare the Japanese people from utter destruction that the ultimatum of July 26 was issued at Potsdam. Their leaders promptly rejected that ultimatum. If they do not now accept our terms they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth .." - U.S President Truman

 

After "Fat Man" was dropped

 

"

The British, Chinese, and United States Governments have given the Japanese people adequate warning of what is in store for them. We have laid down the general terms on which they can surrender. Our warning went unheeded; our terms were rejected. Since then the Japanese have seen what our atomic bomb can do. They can foresee what it will do in the future.

The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians. But that attack is only a warning of things to come. If Japan does not surrender, bombs will have to be dropped on her war industries and, unfortunately, thousands of civilian lives will be lost. I urge Japanese civilians to leave industrial cities immediately, and save themselves from destruction.

I realize the tragic significance of the atomic bomb.

Its production and its use were not lightly undertaken by this Government. But we knew that our enemies were on the search for it. We know now how close they were to finding it. And we knew the disaster which would come to this Nation, and to all peace-loving nations, to all civilization, if they had found it first.

That is why we felt compelled to undertake the long and uncertain and costly labor of discovery and production.

We won the race of discovery against the Germans.

Having found the bomb we have used it. We have used it against those who attacking us without warning at Pearl Harbor,against those who have starved and beaten and executed American prisoners of war, against those who have abandoned all pretense of obeying International laws of warfare. We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans.

We shall continue to use it until we completely destroy Japan's power to make war. Only a Japanese surrender will stop us"

- U.S President Truman

[angol fear]

You trust official speeches?

Read this, you will not see America like you did anymore, you will no longer be a patriot trying to justify and defend what can't be justified.

 

http://www.archives....entagon-papers/