937 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

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 part, you can blame the BSN for the lack of clarification. Or rather, our reaction to the pre-EC EMS system. People complaining about the ambiguity were drowned out by people complaining that Shepard only lives if you played MP.

[AlanC9]

Omg a blue polygon that should've been red.
 
INDOCTRINATION!!!!!

I'm glad to see you're treating this with the seriousness it deserves.

[Iakus]

In part, you can blame the BSN for the lack of clarification. Or rather, our reaction to the pre-EC EMS system. People complaining about the ambiguity were drowned out by people complaining that Shepard only lives if you played MP.

 

I blame Bioware for being so completely thoughtless in the first pace.

[ImaginaryMatter]

I've never understood the ITer argument that the writers some how intended for IT to be the interpretation of the ending then ignore things like the datapad entry after the stargazer scene.

 

Like I know that the EC was added to add irrefutable evidence that the IT was true but that tidbit always seemed a little strange.

[Seival]

No, people still believe that IT threads in story forum should be closed or moved to fan-fiction forum.

[AlanC9]

I blame Bioware for being so completely thoughtless in the first pace.

I'll sign on for that, at least WRT the EMS requirement. I don't know how anyone thought that was a good idea.

[ImaginaryMatter]

I'll sign on for that, at least WRT the EMS requirement. I don't know how anyone thought that was a good idea.

 

I know EA gets bashed a lot, but I'm sure we can point out who indeed thought it was a good idea.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Well I think the simplest explanation is that the strength of Reaper beams vary greatly depending on the needs of the plot.

 

The Leviathan's method of control works completely differently than Indoctrination, the Leviathans use straight up mind control where as Indoctrination is more akin to psychological manipulation. I'm not exactly sure how you concluded that Reapers have an improved version of Leviathan mind control, that quote you gave just talked about the Reapers developing Indoctrination (which in most aspects pales in comparison to mind control).

 

I'm less sure where you are going with the last paragraph. Are you saying the Reapers let Shepard go on purpose? Implying that they could totally stop him at any time? That makes it seem like Shepard just wins because the Reapers are dumb. Like did the Rannoch Reaper not sweep the beam because it was throwing the fight?

 

If each Reapers possesses the ability to influence organics, and the Reapers have over the ages perfected that to indoctrination, then why should that exclude what Leviathan does? How is altering your sensory input not an ability to influence organics?

 

Harbinger was made from the essence of the Leviathans. ("From our essence, the first Reaper was created") The essence of the Leviathans is the will and the ability to dominate all.

 

As for my last paragraph, I wasn't saying the Reapers are letting Shepard go on purpose all the time, no, their efforts to kill Shep are sincere. They perceive Shepard as a threat. But like Leviathan says, they must be aware that Shepard's victories are not merely a product of chance. Shepard is a special kind of determined and strong willed, "Your confidence is singular".  But we know from ME2 that Harbinger even wanted Shepard's dead body. So I really think that they do not really care if they take Shepard alive or dead, it's just that Shepard alive is more useful to Harbinger, that's why we're being lured to the beacon. The Reapers simply create a situation where we have no other choice than to make a push for the beam. Then when Harbinger has dealt with most of the resistance, he fires a near miss at Shepard and hacks his sensory input.

 

In summary, the only moment I believe they let Shepard go on purpose is at the beam run.

 

EDIT: As for Shepard winning because the Reapers are dumb... no. If the ending is an illusion/simulation/hallucination, then Shepard didn't actually defeat the Reapers. They would succeed turning Shepard in control and synthesis, and in destroy, they'd simply kill Shepard. It's possible that that is why Shepard dies in every possible scenario except when there's an unusually high amount of war assets. (Which seems to suggest there were enough war assets to ensure Shepard survived)

[AlexMBrennan]

If each Reapers possesses the ability to influence organics, and the Reapers have over the ages perfected that to indoctrination, then why should that exclude what Leviathan does?

Because the leviathans didn't have ages to perfect their mind control? 

 

 

The essence of the Leviathans is the will and the ability to dominate all.

Nope; all that means is that the first reaper was baked from leviathan slurry

 

 

But like Leviathan says, they must be aware that Shepard's victories are not merely a product of chance. Shepard is a special kind of determined and strong willed, "Your confidence is singular"

So you are saying that elder machine gods who have repeatedly wiped out all organics civilisations are too dumb to have heard of the Texas sharpshooter fallacy? Sorry, but all that proves is that Bioware writers - being writers and not mathematicians - are ignorant of elementary statistics/logic and too ignorant to know that they should have hired consultants for these parts. 

 

Harbinger's plan is essentially equivalent to dissecting the brains of lottery winners to develop precognition. 

 

 

But we know from ME2 that Harbinger even wanted Shepard's dead body.

Clearly, Harbinger repeatedly ordering his minions to take Shepard alive means that Harbinger must secretly want Shepard dead.

 

 

Then when Harbinger has dealt with most of the resistance, he fires a near miss at Shepard and hacks his sensory input

And he didn't tell anyone else about this plan? Because the reaper ground troops are quite happy to kill Shepard dead, thus foiling all of Harbinger's plans. 

[ImaginaryMatter]

If each Reapers possesses the ability to influence organics, and the Reapers have over the ages perfected that to indoctrination, then why should that exclude what Leviathan does? How is altering your sensory input not an ability to influence organics?

 

Harbinger was made from the essence of the Leviathans. ("From our essence, the first Reaper was created") The essence of the Leviathans is the will and the ability to dominate all.

 

As for my last paragraph, I wasn't saying the Reapers are letting Shepard go on purpose all the time, no, their efforts to kill Shep are sincere. They perceive Shepard as a threat. But like Leviathan says, they must be aware that Shepard's victories are not merely a product of chance. Shepard is a special kind of determined and strong willed, "Your confidence is singular".  But we know from ME2 that Harbinger even wanted Shepard's dead body. So I really think that they do not really care if they take Shepard alive or dead, it's just that Shepard alive is more useful to Harbinger, that's why we're being lured to the beacon. The Reapers simply create a situation where we have no other choice than to make a push for the beam. Then when Harbinger has dealt with most of the resistance, he fires a near miss at Shepard and hacks his sensory input.

 

In summary, the only moment I believe they let Shepard go on purpose is at the beam run.

 

EDIT: As for Shepard winning because the Reapers are dumb... no. If the ending is an illusion/simulation/hallucination, then Shepard didn't actually defeat the Reapers. They would succeed turning Shepard in control and synthesis, and in destroy, they'd simply kill Shepard. It's possible that that is why Shepard dies in every possible scenario except when there's an unusually high amount of war assets. (Which seems to suggest there were enough war assets to ensure Shepard survived)

 

Because, "influencing Organics" is extremely vague, in context of the conversation though it is clearly refering to Indoctrination. Additionally, we have Codex entries and exposition that tell us a great deal about how Indoctrination and the Leviathan's mind control works, and they are completely different. Why doesn't Indoctrination inlcude mind control and altering sensor input? Because the game has repeatedly stated the rules, symptoms, effects of Indoctrination... and those didn't quite make the list. Now it is very well possible that the information in the game is limited, however, the only way to reach that conclusion is working backwards from the assumption that IT is true, there's nothing in game to suggest otherwise.

 

Again, essense of Leviathan's is extremely vague, what is an "essense"? What does the essense of will and ability to dominate even mean in the practical sense?

 

The problem with this whole line of arguement is that the abilities of the Reapers can suddenly change and include whatever is needed to advance IT, so they can hack Shepard but why does this hack have the most convoluted of limitations?

 

And the ending isn't an illusion. We get an in-game message from the developers that tell us the Reapers have been stopped. Is the data pad entry supposed to be some meta-trickery?

[Karlone123]

I did believe in IT for a while, mainly cause I refused to accept the original ending given how bad it was. Rumours prior to the EC dlc stirred up belief in IT even more. I was that desperate in finding something than simply accepting the fact the game ended on a cliffhanger with Shepard missing, his crew and ship stranded and all the fleets stranded in the sol system. And even the EC still did not accumulate the choices we made in the trilogy. The IT was merely a bandage.

[Excella Gionne]

There are some major loopholes within the IT theory, I found i fascinating, but I never took it to heart to actually call myself a believer. 

[ImaginaryMatter]

I like the IT, or at least I don't hate it. I use to be an ITer myself in the few weeks I had the game before the EC came out. Not that I believed it was the intention of the writers, just that it would have made a better ending.

 

It's when ITers come around insisting that IT is the truth and the truth is IT, and anything else is people deluding themselves into thinking the Reapers would hand them victory or people refusing to accept the symbolism or whatever.

[Hadeedak]

I think most everyone's given up these days. There's a few diehards who still go "Wait for ME4!"

 

That being said, both after EC and before it, when Bioware punched down the fourth wall to say 'You won!' no matter what you chose, I pretty much read that as "Shepard won. And not just by choosing destroy." It would have been an interesting twist, though I admit, I was biased against it because I loathe "It was all a dreeeeeeeeeeam" plot twists like no other.

[SwobyJ]

Well I've never been 100% ITer.

 

As in, I don't just believe in IT, and disregard other ideas, both from 'literalists' and other theories.

 

But the core proposals of IT, yes I believe in all of them. That Shepard is undergoing a form of indoctrination, etc.

 

That's what I believe. However, I consider and theorize and wonder about a whole bunch of other stuff that DoomsdayDevice, for example, hasn't even come close to believing.

 

In short, I believe in and like IT, but I don't think that IT is all that's going on. It's about 1/3 of a larger puzzle, one that the DLC continue to provide clues about. And I've become very interested in the next Mass Effect, even though they so far don't have my preorder

[N0rke]

While I think the Indoctrination Theory would have been a way cooler ending than the one we got, I always just figured it was fans grasping at straws. While Mass Effect has decent writing across the board, apart from the ending, it never really left anything to subtlety. It's not a game like Dark Souls where if you're not paying attention you can completely miss the way the dots connect in the lore to get a deeper understanding of it.

[AlanC9]

That's the thing that always puzzled me. Where did people ever get the idea that Bio does subtle?

[69_Gio_69]

Well I've never been 100% ITer.

 

As in, I don't just believe in IT, and disregard other ideas, both from 'literalists' and other theories.

 

But the core proposals of IT, yes I believe in all of them. That Shepard is undergoing a form of indoctrination, etc.

 

That's what I believe. However, I consider and theorize and wonder about a whole bunch of other stuff that DoomsdayDevice, for example, hasn't even come close to believing.

 

In short, I believe in and like IT, but I don't think that IT is all that's going on. It's about 1/3 of a larger puzzle, one that the DLC continue to provide clues about. And I've become very interested in the next Mass Effect, even though they so far don't have my preorder

Interesting! Can you name some examples of these clues and how you interpret them?

[AlexMBrennan]

If you got a few hours you can watch this "documentary" in two parts. Iirc CN have a forum just for discussing IT

[SwobyJ]

Interesting! Can you name some examples of these clues and how you interpret them?

 

Here's a quick one.

 

(Hints: logos, colors, Cat6)

 

[SwobyJ]

CleverNoob's videos are boring.

 

EDIT: And also not all of what I think.

 

EDIT: Omg his videos are painful.

 

EDIT: Some really good points in it though. Just.. still surface level interpretation. All "it's indoctrination!" without explaining what that actually could *mean*.

[Mcfly616]

Lol


I still remember when he bugged out on Bioware's Twitter after the last DLC released. He was so pissed and bitter that he was 100% wrong....

[SwobyJ]

Lol


I still remember when he bugged out on Bioware's Twitter after the last DLC released. He was so pissed and bitter that he was 100% wrong....

 

I remember being super creeped out by Citadel DLC. Everyone acting like this while the more dire storylines are taking place (Thessia, Rannoch War, Sanctuary).

 

I'll just say that it's become my favorite DLC.

[Mcfly616]

I remember being super creeped out by Citadel DLC. Everyone acting like this while the more dire storylines are taking place (Thessia, Rannoch War, Sanctuary).

I'll just say that it's become my favorite DLC.

hey, everybody needs R&R. Idc how big the war is. I found it works better if you split it up. That way it doesn't feel like one long vacation. Do the Citadel DLC 'Mission' after the Rannoch arc. Then proceed to play the game normally, whilst doing some meet ups on the Silver Sun Strip every time you stop at the Citadel. Then finally having the party right before you go past the point of no return (Cronos Station). It makes the final scene of the DLC that much more bittersweet.


I find the Citadel DLC to be the most entertaining DLC. But Leviathan is still my favorite of the trilogy, just based on lore and atmosphere.

[SwobyJ]

 

Citadel DLC isn't my favorite because of the 'R&R' or pure entertainment value. For the latter, I'd actually pick Shadow Broker.

 

However, the R&R helps (at least my Shepard) .

 

 

(the features of the Citadel DLC were very, very deliberate)