Off Topic but I just read Prof X's Sig and I feel...compelled to make an edit/addition:
"The small-minded beat against every wall they find. The wise learn to make the most of the options they have. And the Cunning use the small-minded to break the walls for them."
SPECULATIONS.!!!
I finished my fourth trilogy completion yesterday (5 times 1, 8 times me2, 4 me3) it was great fun. Anyway I found myself questioning this.I'm of the mind that attempted indoctrination occured. My conclusion following EC of course:
The endings play out as they are supposed to in reality, however; the enounter with The Illusive man and Anderson, still is deeper than it shows on the surface. Tim uses the headpains, noises, muscular spasms to get to them. He himself is indoctrinated, by Harbinger no doubt and is the only viable option to stop Anderson and Shepard, due the the arms being closed, it being blasted at.
I've no doubt that Harbinger would have assumed direct control of the body if it could have. But their efforts saved Tim ultimately from the grasp and Shepard reaches the catalyst. But I do not believe Shepard is indoctrinated.
Now, I believe the reapers constantly tried to work their influence into shepards mind throughout the Me3, abusing the emotional damage sustained throughout the earth invasion, more specifically the child. The AI hologram must be able to see this, (before omfg space magic!!, remember eezo, biotics... even reapers themselves are more fictional syfy than the rest of the games hard syfy approach) and attempts to appeal to Shepard. But overall Shepard has the reapers on the ropes, and has won by this point and finds a solution to the harvest.
I believe the dreams are an indoctrination attempt, other subtle things throughout can also be, but Shepard being remarkably strong willed overcomes this and being able to show great resolve in the Tim encounter proves this without a doubt. And I also believe this to be a viable view of how the team wrote the endings and the lead up.
So I believe they tried but ultimately failed.
The choices themselves represent the players solution to solving the problem. No to IT for me.
without any context to Shepards breath scene, (and that is the REAL wtf moment) indoctrination theory is still a decent explanation as to what the hell happened. Then again you could argue shep is still under the rubble of sovereign at the end of mass effect 1. You could argue it's a simulation. You could argue that Shepard ain't real and that He is the grey figure that's been indoctrinating everyone else, you could argue that it's fight club mass effect stylee with Joker being the one with the split personality.
There is no wrong and right answer while so much remains a mystery. Anyone slating anyone else for having an opinion on it doesn't understand that the ending was intended to be a mystery, and was intended to cause debate.
FWIW I still think IT pretty much answers it all.
http://www.forbes.co...veryones-heads/
Nope. Never did believe in it. It does have some interesting ideas.....SOME....but anyone with two brain cells can easily see how things presented to us make IT fall completely apart.
Also BioWare wouldn't have left the ending THAT ambiguous. If IT had ANY chance of being legit...we'd have had something more "in your face" to say so.
No IT is just something those that hated the endings came up with. Parts are well thought out but it completely falls apart to scrutiny. It's obvious IT was never the intended way BioWare wanted people to take the ending. Or it would have been more up-front...since the trilogy is over.
IT in a nutshell: the choice I happen to like most is also the only correct one.
^ All you need to know about IT.
Oh, and everything proves it, except the things that don't -- but those things are just illusory (*handwave*).
Guest_StreetMagic_*
If I were to entertain IT, I'd like to know when the process began. I like to think the game isn't pulling my chain when Vendetta doesn't detect an "indoctrinated" presence within us.
The story reassures us all the way up to Thessia and Chronos (or at least, Vendetta says you're "recovering him from indoctrinated forces" on Chronos... so I assume we're not indoctrinated).
If I were to entertain IT, I'd like to know when the process began. I like to think the game isn't pulling my chain when Vendetta doesn't detect an "indoctrinated" presence within us.
The story reassures us all the way up to Thessia and Chronos (or at least, Vendetta says you're "recovering him from indoctrinated forces" on Chronos... so I assume we're not indoctrinated).
Because Shepard is NOT indoctrinated. The people that still believe and support IT just won't face the obvious facts when presented...they "ignore" them or claim they're just illusions or whatever.
IT was silly. As I said it had some interesting ideas. But to still cling to it is just downright silly. Esp at this point.
Well I kinda like the idea that Shepard is indoctrinated or not, being under the process of indoctrination, or not, depending on what you want to believe more.
One of the consequences of an intentionally (oh come on, of course it was) vague ending.
I admit that I always knew indoctrination theory was wishful speculation but hands-down the most interesting time I ever had on any message board was after the game's release and prior to the extended cut. Also, as much as I love the Mass Effect trilogy- I always recommend it to everyone and consider it a masterpiece of storytelling as well as the best western RPG franchise ever- it was nothing less than ego and arrogance on the parts of Casey and Mac that they originally went with that abomination of an ending and they should be ashamed of how much they botched the finale to a great work of interactive art.
Just curious. Is it still overwhelmingly popular for everyone to associate IT with a complete hallucination ending or has that begun to run its course?
Are any strains of IT that holds interpretive credibility, for instance the 4th wall indoctrination, ever a topic here?
Well I kinda like the idea that Shepard is indoctrinated or not, being under the process of indoctrination, or not, depending on what you want to believe more.
One of the consequences of an intentionally (oh come on, of course it was) vague ending.
anyone denying this is existing in utter denial.
without any context to Shepards breath scene, (and that is the REAL wtf moment) indoctrination theory is still a decent explanation as to what the hell happened. Then again you could argue shep is still under the rubble of sovereign at the end of mass effect 1. You could argue it's a simulation. You could argue that Shepard ain't real and that He is the grey figure that's been indoctrinating everyone else, you could argue that it's fight club mass effect stylee with Joker being the one with the split personality.
There is no wrong and right answer while so much remains a mystery. Anyone slating anyone else for having an opinion on it doesn't understand that the ending was intended to be a mystery, and was intended to cause debate.
FWIW I still think IT pretty much answers it all.
Of course IT "answers everything" that's how it was conceived because it just hand waves anything not directly explainable.
What was the purpose of BioWare doing Leviathan and the EC for the endings? To better explain them. The EC and Leviathan do no such thing in regards to IT. So if IT was their intent then why did they do the EC? Or why if they would have anyway why didn't they add some scenes that show IT as being more plausible?
exactly..because IT is an untrue and unproven "theory" And frankly this far after the games ending it's kinda sad people still cling to it. It's just because they don't want to accept the crappy endings BioWare made OBVIOUS to us.
Not trying to offend, but of course IT "answers everything" because it hand waves anything questionable. So of COURSE it does.
As I said IT had some interesting ideas...some very well thought out...but it's just not true and doesn't hold any weight when put under any real scrutiny.
it's not the most bizarre thing that could have happened tho. As for clinging to it, nah I've much weirder theories than IT going through my head as to what happened in the end.
Actually Leviathan was what secured me much more right into IT, even if that's not all I wonder about.
ah yes.... don't forget harbinger tells shepard to "serve us" right before the beam hits him. It's not subliminal it's in your face. "serve us".
So if IT is not true, then what possibly can explain shepard surviving explosion of the citadel?
So if IT is not true, then what possibly can explain shepard surviving explosion of the citadel?
A miracle I guess. Its happened before.
He can be charred like hell and 99.99% close to death, I mean. Require utter reconstruction, even be basically braindead without a VI in his head telling him what to do (thank you Huarta), but still 'alive'. Enough to take a breath and hang on in rubble until allies fish him out.
There's a lot of material in the Citadel. He could have fallen into something and somethingsomething.
Or maybe Casey is a Hack.
Maybe. Whatever really.
As in topic. After the dust has settled and the last DLC is in the can, do people still believe the ending to ME3 was a hallucination cooked up by Shepard's indoctrination? Just curious.
"Believe" is the wrong word for me. I "prefer" the alternate reality. The real ending sucks.
IT is by far the most cohese interpretation of the ending. Even if we never get the dlc that gives us the "after breath scene" gameplay, the theory is still great.
Eh, I'm not an IT supporter really, but I've always pointed out that Vendetta's comment probably doesn't apply here for two reasons:If I were to entertain IT, I'd like to know when the process began. I like to think the game isn't pulling my chain when Vendetta doesn't detect an "indoctrinated" presence within us.
The story reassures us all the way up to Thessia and Chronos (or at least, Vendetta says you're "recovering him from indoctrinated forces" on Chronos... so I assume we're not indoctrinated).
Retour en haut