Sorry but anyone who think synthesis is what Saren is talking about has either never played ME1 or has never seen the synthesis ending. And no amount of memes will change what is clearly depicted and narrated (and confirmed by bioware) in the actual ending.
BTW if Saren is machine and flesh intertwined it disproves your assertion he was talking about synthesis, he was simply an organic with reaper implants.
Could have*
Would have*
For crying out loud.
Whether you want it to or not, I think it's fairly obvious the writers intended for each ending to be taken literally and seriously. Even though there is a mountain of reasons to suspect it might all be a dream, the fact of the matter is that what happens on the Citadel was not happening in Shepard's head. It happened. For real.
Personally, I liked the idea that all of Shepard's dreams throughout the game might of been Indoctrination induced, and that it was all leading up to something, but... no. It really was just all about that one kid who died. There isn't any deeper meaning because the writers didn't give it any deeper meaning, or if they were trying to, they flubbed it completely.
And it's just something people need to accept. I mean if they were really going to make Indoctrination Theory a thing, they probably would of acknowledged it in the EC. And they didn't.
Take it at face value. You'll live a healthier life that way.
This I agree with completely.
Sorry but anyone who think synthesis is what Saren is talking about has either never played ME1 or has never seen the synthesis ending. And no amount of memes will change what is clearly depicted and narrated (and confirmed by bioware) in the actual ending.
BTW if Saren is machine and flesh intertwined it disproves your assertion he was talking about synthesis, he was simply an organic with reaper implants.
I did both those things and... yeah, no, I'm pretty sure the Reapers are not only all about Synthesis, they are the product of it. The actual Synthesis ending just appears to be a more refined form of it.
You can stick your fingers in your ears and go "Lalalalala" all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the Reapers are synthetics composed of organic parts, their MO has always been inter-meshing organics with cybernetics (look at any husk or the Collectors), their leader's idea of a wet dream is turning the whole galaxy glowey matrix green, and Saren was ultimately down with the idea of all this, even if what he went through wasn't as refined as what the Crucible does.
Also, saying that Synthesis isn't just filling everyone in the galaxy with Reaper implants is... well... you just can't say that. It very well could be. It isn't stated one way or the other, but... who knows? The implants might all be based on Reaper nanites.
Aaaaand that's all the thought I'm giving that for the day.
I would actually call disregarding the moving pictures on your tv screen generated by the game itself "sticking your fingers in your ears and saying lalalala". But it's whatever everyone has their own take on the endings.
I don't understand what it is you think I'm ignoring, precisely.
I'm not trying to argue, I genuinely don't understand.
Hey,
believe it as in actually believing it to be true (contrary to "artistic vision/integrity"-devs) probably not
wishing that it were true? - Yeah, I do wish that (not that it will ever happen with rEApers in charge of EAware)
greetings LAX
Even though The Illusive Man and Saren were both advocating Synthesis and Control and both showed pretty blatant symptoms of indoctrination by the end?
I'm not an IT believer but I still think Control and Synthesis might prove to be the 'you fool!' options.
Yeah, this might have held some water before Leviation, EC and all that jazz, when you could reasonably question whether the information presented to you by the Starchild, Illusive Man, et al regarding the Reapers, their motives, and these ending choices was accurate/factual or whether it was deceptive, but all that dlc essentially independently confirmed that what they're telling you is factual. Synthesis/control are not "a trap" in any meaningful sense of the word, they are more or less just what they appear to be- that isn't to say some people might not find them morally questionable or incongruent with the Shepard they're roleplaying, but the dlc took basically all the wind out of the sails of this sort of theory.
You know how sometimes auto dialogue happens, and other times you can control what shepherd says?
Maybe that is him going in and out of indoctrination!
It should have died with the EC.
It should have died with the Leviathan DLC.
It should have died when ME4 was announced.
But somehow it still persists. Hell ME4 can begin with Shepard directly addressing the screen saying "The ending of ME3 really happened, I was not Indoctrinated" and people would still believe it.
I have always thought IT made for an interesting twist and I can see how people came to that conclusion but it has never had any affect on me making any of the choices. It does make me wonder though if Shep is indeed indoctrinated then why would he/she ever pick destroy? Would it be the final test to see if Shepherd can be controlled? I just to see a motive to be given that option. One thing IT can do is give us another game that follows right behind 3 on the timeline, that if BW had the quad to do something like that which I don't think they do.
It should have died with the EC.
It should have died with the Leviathan DLC.
It should have died when ME4 was announced.
I think it did die. It has just made a few subsequent appearances, as a zombie.
I think it did die. It has just made a few subsequent appearances, as a zombie.
but it is very true. And it is supported by EC, Omega, Leviathan, Citadel and ME4. Don't deny it and yes there is an indoctrination device under your desk and in your computer.
Even though The Illusive Man and Saren were both advocating Synthesis and Control and both showed pretty blatant symptoms of indoctrination by the end?
I'm not an IT believer but I still think Control and Synthesis might prove to be the 'you fool!' options.
To be clear, the difference was that TIM wanted Control to ensure domination of humanity, which we find with BW's EC that Shepalyst does not want this, even when Renegade. And Saren wanted Synthesis in the basic sense, the intertwining of organics and synthetics, but wanted it as a subject of the Reapers, and we find that Shepard never, ever wanted this. And with EC, we didn't get this.
~~~
Yet to put my position out there again... Yes, I think Shepard is being indoctrinated. Yes, I think Destroy is the way to wake up, whatever that actually means. But no, I don't think its as simple as this. And no, I don't think that Control and Synthesis are utterly losing endings. They would, imo, continue the story just as well as Destroy may.
Saren never advocated synthesis. He advocated serving the reapers and surrendering free will, essentially he wanted everyone to become husks.
Synthesis serves the Reapers' collective intelligence's goal. It surrendered the free will of those who otherwise may not have chosen to be synthesized. There are clear similarities.
But agreed - it is not actually *the same* as being a servant of the Reapers, and surrendering all/most free will. And the result isn't really 'husks', but a whole other understanding of life.
Synthesis plugs everyone into Reapernet. The Catalyst/Intelligence is still in charge.
I remember seeing this commercial on TV once (it may have been SuperBowl Sunday, in fact) for some job-finder website. In it, you see this one (human) man working alongside a bunch of chimpanzees in an office, and the chimps are just doing everything the wrong way...
In the final scene of the ad, the one guy walks into a board meeting where the monkey head-honchos are celebrating, with a stand at the end of the table holding a graph of the company's sales with an arrow shooting sharply upwards. A little peeved, guy tells them to stop celebrating and turns the graph right-side-up to reveal that the company's sales haven't improved but that they're actually going down big time. The chimps all fall silent for a while, until the one nearest to the graph turns it upside-down again and they resume celebrating...
... That's IT, reveling in an imagined victory, won by taking all information that contradicts them and turning it upside down. Every Mass Effect publication since ME3 offers it no further legitimacy and even at times straight-up contradicts it (Leviathan DLC, for example), and yet its proponents take this non-evidence and flip it upside-down to maintain the self-induced hypnosis (the irony of which is off-the-charts).
The ending is reviled for having flaws, but IT offers no improvement, being as the player needs to reductio ad absurdem massive amounts of established canon in order for it to fit (at which point, it lies firmly in the realm of headcanon).
Well, I do say that one of the things I like least of IT is that it goes 'Red Ending Win', with no other viewpoint. And I don't even find Bioware to be *so* simple with its colored choices. Actually, I don't remember a colored choice not resulting in something the player would find successful. Blue and Green may not be a clear victory in the war (assuming indoctrination), but I don't think its as basic as 'Shepard lost, died in rubble, nothing else happens other than everyone dies'. I still don't see Bioware going that route, if they're going to do anything.
Synthesis plugs everyone into Reapernet. The Catalyst/Intelligence is still in charge.
(Seriously) agreed with the first. Not with the second.
Yeah, this might have held some water before Leviation, EC and all that jazz, when you could reasonably question whether the information presented to you by the Starchild, Illusive Man, et al regarding the Reapers, their motives, and these ending choices was accurate/factual or whether it was deceptive, but all that dlc essentially independently confirmed that what they're telling you is factual. Synthesis/control are not "a trap" in any meaningful sense of the word, they are more or less just what they appear to be- that isn't to say some people might not find them morally questionable or incongruent with the Shepard they're roleplaying, but the dlc took basically all the wind out of the sails of this sort of theory.
Wonderful creativity by Bioware then..
I have always thought IT made for an interesting twist and I can see how people came to that conclusion but it has never had any affect on me making any of the choices. It does make me wonder though if Shep is indeed indoctrinated then why would he/she ever pick destroy? Would it be the final test to see if Shepherd can be controlled? I just to see a motive to be given that option. One thing IT can do is give us another game that follows right behind 3 on the timeline, that if BW had the quad to do something like that which I don't think they do.
The Reapers are not aiming to control Shepard. He impresses them, even as he concerns them.
He is being primed for Ascension.
This line may have been cut because it was too telling:
Harbinger: "WE RETURN, AND YOU WILL RISE."
Catalyst: "Our future depends on you."
Though I'm not into the IT, there are still some some unanswered mysteries that puzzle me. I don't know if it was just bad writing (to make the conversations flow easier) or something hidden. Perhaps some of you can shed some light on it:
TIM: (best seats in the house) I need you to believe me.
Why? Since when does TIM give a hoot about anybody's opinion but his own? Numerous times he's said (more or less) "I don't expect you believe. I'm not seeking your approval. You're just a disposable tool", etc
TIM: I have dedicated my entire life to understanding the reapers.
If the reapers were discovered only 3 years prior -- and perhaps a few years before by Bryson, then how could TIM make this statement?
Thoughts?
Though I'm not into the IT, there are still some some unanswered mysteries that puzzle me. I don't know if it was just bad writing (to make the conversations flow easier) or something hidden. Perhaps some of you can shed some light on it:
TIM: (best seats in the house) I need you to believe me.
Why? Since when does TIM give a hoot about anybody's opinion but his own? Numerous times he's said (more or less) "I don't expect you believe. I'm not seeking your approval. You're just a disposable tool", etc
TIM: I have dedicated my entire life to understanding the reapers.
If the reapers were discovered only 3 years prior -- and perhaps a few years before by Bryson, then how could TIM make this statement?
Thoughts?
1. TIM is indoctrinated. It's not him who wants the Shepard to understand, it's the Reapers (star child).
2. TIM got in contact with the Reapers during the First Contact War, according to Mass Effect: Evolution
Never believed in it.
In order for the Indoctrination Theory to be the correct interpretation of ME3, it would have be something the devs intended and wrote into the story of ME3. Two years later and long after the last DLC for ME3 released, that quite obviously isn't the case. The endings are what they are. The IT was always a combination of one part denial and one part wishful thinking by some fans who were clinging to any hope (no matter how far-fetched) that the original endings weren't the actual endings to the game.
1. TIM is indoctrinated. It's not him who wants the Shepard to understand, it's the Reapers (star child).
2. TIM got in contact with the Reapers during the First Contact War, according to Mass Effect: Evolution
Thank you!
.
2. TIM got in contact with the Reapers during the First Contact War, according to Mass Effect: Evolution
That's one bit I could never quite understand. The revelation that TIM might have been indoctrinated as far back as the FCW then raises the question of why TIM was allowed to actively oppose the Reapers in Mass Effect 2. The Lazarus Project is allowed to be followed through to completion, Shepard partially foils the abduction of Horizon's colonists thanks to Cerberus intel, TIM reveals the location of the Derelict Reaper and the IFF to Shepard, and then after retrieving the IFF Shepard jumps through the Omega IV relay and potentially blows the Collector base to smithereens. It just seems that for a thrall TIM had an awfully free hand to undermine various Reaper plots.
That's one bit I could never quite understand. The revelation that TIM might have been indoctrinated as far back as the FCW then raises the question of why TIM was allowed to actively oppose the Reapers in Mass Effect 2. The Lazarus Project is allowed to be followed through to completion, Shepard partially foils the abduction of Horizon's colonists thanks to Cerberus intel, TIM reveals the location of the Derelict Reaper and the IFF to Shepard, and then after retrieving the IFF Shepard jumps through the Omega IV relay and potentially blows the Collector base to smithereens. It just seems that for a thrall TIM had an awfully free hand to undermine various Reaper plots.
It is not stated that TIM is indoctrinated starting from First Contact War
SPOILERS FOR MASS EFFECT: EVOLUTION
He gets in touch with Reaper artifact during the war and started to feel it. The artifact turned his friend into a husk-like creature and he tried to pull him away but gets hit indirectly, through his friend. He starts to understand Reaper symbols too. That does not yet count for complete indoctrination, it's just the first step. The artifact in question was destroyed too, making him lose the link with the Reapers.
END of SPOILERS
When they come back, the link is reestablished and the process is completed.
Retour en haut