126 réponses à ce sujet

[Raice]

Updated Notes below:

 

Alright... so... I know I'm late to this party.  I'm not wanting to start a huge debate or beat a dead horse or anything, but I need somewhere to put my thoughts down on this topic.

 

WARNING:  There are going to be serious spoilers ahead.

 

 

Apparently, this thread needs a preface, since it isn't clear enough from the very first sentence, that I just needed a place to store my thoughts:

 

All of this conjecture is for fun.  It is not to be taken seriously.  I am not writing this for your critique as I am not presenting it as an official alternate theory.  It's just something I am doing for fun.  If you cannot handle that - then you don't need to post in this thread.

 

Please, ask questions.  Point things out.  Help me make corrections.  But keep it clean and in good fun.  I don't need or want to respond to people who don't understand that this is just for fun.

 

Once again... this is just for fun.  It is not to be taken seriously.

 

 

So... okay.  I beat the game having finally taken a proper save all the way through all 3 games.  I have 3 favorite parts from the whole series:

 

1.  When you first speak with Sovereign in ME1 near the end and he starts unloading all this information on you - completely leveling your existence to a simple processing algorithm - "I am the vanguard of your destruction."  It's such a great line.  This whole scene totally blew me away the first time I played the game.  It's probably my all time favorite moment in any video game - ever.

 

2.  In ME3 near the end when you are speaking to your crew in that outpost area.  I don't know if this happened for everyone, or if it has something to do with your Paragon/Renegade meter, but when I spoke to Liara, she said something about wanting to share her dream with me.  And so then we started like... floating in space next to one another.  And this beam of light projects in front of us width-wise.  And it's like we're looking at eternity together.  And that iconic ME music that plays at the title screen - it's sad and haunting and beautiful - is playing.  And then we both face the beam of light, and she hugs my arm and then at the last moment, places her head on my shoulder.

 

This scene, man.... it was so great.  I've never in my life even remotely come close to crying because of something that happened in a video game.  But this scene really did bring a tear to my eye.  It was just so beautiful and serene.  It was when she put her head on my shoulder that really sold the shot for me.  By this time, I was totally invested in the idea that I was Shepard, and finally this game actually made me feel like it recognized me as someone important to the NPC's.

 

3.  In ME1 when you're speaking to the Prothean VI or whatever on Ilos.  This was a pretty great scene as well, for much the same reason as when you're speaking to Sovereign.  You're just being downloaded with all this great lore and narrative that totally changes your perspective of what is going on in the story.

 

 

 

Updated Examinations of the story:

 

Essentially, after reviewing the Leviathan DLC, I realized that the Leviathan's created Catalyst to solve the solution of chaos (synthetics destroying organics.)  Catalyst came up with the solution of harvesting, created Harbinger to fulfill the solution, who then took the form of Leviathan as they were the first species harvested.

 

Now, this whole thing really didn't read to me, as it just didn't make sense.  Both the Catalyst and the Leviathans told you the same story about this whole thing.  But it wasn't scanning properly, because the Catalyst is a collective intelligence, not an AI.  He is the embodiment of the collected intelligence, harvested by the Reapers.  That means that Catalyst wouldn't have even needed to exist until after intelligence had been collected.  Which means Harbinger would have had to have been created before Catalyst, as Harbinger was the harvester of intelligence.  And this made more sense to me, because the Catalyst's domain was the Citadel - which was built by the Reapers - Harbinger - which is the device that is used to create Reapers in the first place.

 

So then I started to think about that for a minute: what evidence do I have that suggests Harbinger was created first, and by whom, and why?

 

1.  Was Harbinger created before Catalyst?  I thought perhaps he was.  And my evidence for this was that the Reapers are a synthetic super AI.  AI's have a purpose, a mandate, and thus need a form to fulfill said purpose.  They can't exist without a form, unlike Catalyst who is not an AI - he is a collective intelligence.  Catalyst is basically... nothing but a really huge hard drive.  He's basically the same thing Avina is - a large encyclopedia of knowledge.  He might utilize some kind of projection of himself for the purposes of providing an interface by which he may be used, but his purpose does not require a physical form.  Catalyst is not like EDI.  She is an AI.  Her form is the Normandy.

 

Reapers are sort of like a super-mecha version of the Geth.  They are synthetics that have a civilization all to themselves, and have some kind of a purpose.  But what is interesting here is that the Geth, when created, were given form by the ones who created them: Quarians.  And that form resembles the creator: the Geth and the Quarians are very, very similar in how they appear.  Go check out their art and design.  They both have the same design motifs.  So it would stand to reason that whomever created the Reapers, would also create them in their own image:  Leviathans.

 

2.  So this was intriguing to me, because I started to wonder why Leviathans would have created the Reapers.  According to what they told us, to which Catalyst then reiterated, the Reapers were created by Catalyst as a solution to chaos.  Catalyst uses the term chaos, but Leviathan actually explains what that chaos was: the lesser species' machines would always rebel against their creators.  This is where it got interesting, because as I've already explained, this isn't making sense.

 

See, Leviathans were the apex of life.  They claimed this.  They were the first.  But more importantly... they enslaved every other species.  Let me rephrase that: every species in the galaxy was forced into slavery by Leviathans, because they demanded tribute.  What this tribute actually was, is anyone's guess, but I would say it is probably some form of intelligence or technology that the Leviathans (the master race) could use.

 

So, my current theory was that Leviathan was actually lying to Shepard about the creation of the Catalyst and the Reapers.  Why would he lie about this?

 

3.  As I've said, Leviathans were the master race - all other species were their thrall (which means slave.)  If you remember, Leviathan didn't really treat Shepard as anything more than a slave.  He immediately put him into mind control the moment he saw him - speaking to him telepathically and such "Your memories give us voice."  Even when he agree to fight the Reapers, he said that he wasn't doing it for Shepard or any other lesser species and reminded him that "We are the apex race."

 

Throughout history, they were still controlling their thrall [slaves] to hide and destroy any and all knowledge of their existence, because they were in hiding from the Reapers.  This got me to ask, "Why are they in hiding from their own creation?"  Well... the Catalyst straight up tells you that the creations will always rebel against its creators.  It happens every time without fail, and he said his job was to resolve this outcome.

 

See, Shepard was told that the Catalyst was created to find a solution to the chaos - synthetics vs organics.  His solution was the harvest.  The Reaper was the harvester.  Shepard was told that the reason the Leviathans were so concerned about this was because a dead race does not produce tribute.  This is the loop hole everyone hates: their solution to creations vs the creators is to create something to resolve the chaos.  This obviously makes no sense... unless this supposed chaos is a lie.

 

4.  The Leviathans were above the concerns of the lesser species.  He said this to Shepard.  So a thrall's issues with their machine creations wouldn't concern Leviathan, unless they did not produce tribute.  Why would a thrall not produce tribute?

 

Maybe the thralls are too busy being destroyed?  Maybe they're too busy in a war to concern themselves with research for their tribute.  Or.... maybe they were too busy rebelling against an elitist, cosmic master race that had enslaved them for longer than their history even records?

 

Now... things were starting to make sense...

 

5.  Harbinger wasn't created by Catalyst.  Catalyst was created by Harbinger.  Harbinger was created by Leviathan, and we know this because Harbinger was created in Leviathan's image.

 

Harbinger was not created to harvest organic life or to protect it against synthetic annihilation.  He was created for 2 reasons: collect tribute, and if tribute is refused out of rebellion, destroy the thrall that is rebelling, before it was able to create its own machines and synthetics strong enough to rebel against the master race: Leviathan.  Sovereign flat out tells you this in ME1:

 

"I am the vanguard of your destruction."

 

His job was to procure tribute.  The tribute is knowledge and technology.  This is what they were after the whole time.  So I ask you this:  What is the tribute?

 

The Crucible.

 

(Progress Pending...)

[JasonShepard]

Well... THAT's a new take on things. Haven't seen that combination of theories before.

 

I personally dislike IT because 'hallucinations that are trying to trick you' is entirely different to how Indoctrination has been shown to work in the past. This means that I'm inclined to take things at face value. The 'making synthetics to kill you so you don't get killed by synthetics' thing doesn't bother me, since the Catalyst makes it clear that it doesn't view harvesting and killing as the same thing. (Effectively, it's saying: "You're still alive as a Reaper, what are you complaining about?") Also, the Leviathan DLC backs up a lot of what the Catalyst tells you. Did you have the Extended Cut installed, by the way?

 

Beings of Light - that only got mentioned a couple of times in the background, but it did perk my interest. I'm still not sure what to read into the fact that the Catalyst essentially appeared in the form of a Being of Light - it wouldn't necessarily have any reason to believe Shepard would even know about the Beings of Light, if they exist.

 

Also, a major problem with all "The Catalyst is lying to you" theories is that it has no reason to even tell you about Destroy, if Destroy is the correct choice.

[SporkFu]

First off, 'Liked' for your reaction to Sovvy, and Vigil, and Liara's goodbye scene. The feels, man, the feels. I agree with you. 

 

I never saw the value of IT. If there was greater more direct evidence of it in-game then I'd buy it. But, to me, the whole reason shep has the red/green/blue choice is because she's not indoctrinated. That's why starkid tells her that if she opts for control it will work. 

 

I like your thoughts of a 'being of light' explanation. In my last playthrough I chose the destroy ending, and in the dialogue with starkid when shep asked it if there would be peace, it didn't say yes or no, it said, "the cycle will end." That's not necessarily the same thing and it was enough to make me, the player, say, "hold on a minute..."

 

Now I know someone could say, "well there's no way it could guarantee a lasting peace." ...however, it definitively denies peace if you destroy the reapers. Since you can't have it both ways. I'm gonna call BS on starkid's apparent motives for pushing one choice over another. 

 

Anyway, good post. 

[cap and gown]

Why is it that people rebel against the idea that ME's story is poorly written?

[Kenshen]

2.  In ME3 near the end when you are speaking to your crew in that outpost area.  I don't know if this happened for everyone, or if it has something to do with your Paragon/Renegade meter, but when I spoke to Liara, she said something about wanting to share her dream with me.  And so then we started like... floating in space next to one another.  And this beam of light projects in front of us width-wise.  And it's like we're looking at eternity together.  And that iconic ME music that plays at the title screen - it's sad and haunting and beautiful - is playing.  And then we both face the beam of light, and she hugs my arm and then at the last moment, places her head on my shoulder.

 

This scene, man.... it was so great.  I've never in my life even remotely come close to crying because of something that happened in a video game.  But this scene really did bring a tear to my eye.  It was just so beautiful and serene.  It was when she put her head on my shoulder that really sold the shot for me.  By this time, I was totally invested in the idea that I was Shepard, and finally this game actually made me feel like it recognized me as someone important to the NPC's.

 

 

 

 

Congrats you will soon be a proud father of a blue baby!  Well that is what I would like to think happened there but yes that was a cool part of the game.

[Kenshen]

 

Also, a major problem with all "The Catalyst is lying to you" theories is that it has no reason to even tell you about Destroy, if Destroy is the correct choice.

 

Unless it is lying about what destroy really does.  Not even sure if a machine would be able to use reverse psychology but if it could that would be the perfect time to do so since Shep is in pretty bad shape and for the last 3 years it has been about destroy the reapers.  If it turns out the brat was lying to us the whole time I will have a new found respect for it.

[SporkFu]

Why is it that people rebel against the idea that ME's story is poorly written?

It's redeemed by Virmire and Ilos, in my opinion. 

[Vazgen]

I like the theory. A few questions though

1) why do the Reapers harvest organics instead of destroying them?

2) why does the Catalyst tell you about Destroy option?

3) why even give Shepard the choices? They elevate him to the Crucible themselves

 

Also, I'm surprised you don't have a favorite moment from ME2

[Kenshen]

I like the theory. A few questions though

1) why do the Reapers harvest organics instead of destroying them?

2) why does the Catalyst tell you about Destroy option?

3) why even give Shepard the choices? They elevate him to the Crucible themselves

 

Also, I'm surprised you don't have a favorite moment from ME2

 

1. Twisted AI logic.  Maybe it is a form of machine guilt.

2.  If it wasn't lying to us about what each choice did then it is possible that it wanted to be completely open so there wouldn't be any conflict with the choice Shep makes.  I don't really know I have wondered this ever since I first saw it.

3.  My thinking is because if Shepard doesn't volunteer then the outcome would be rejected.  The catalyst does say synthesis had been considered before but it failed because organics were not ready.  Because Shepard isn't totally against it the changes would be accepted by all.  Same could apply to control I suppose but that theory doesn't work with destroy.

 

I know you were not asking me but I can't help myself sometimes when I see questions being asked.  Feel free to ignore me.

[SporkFu]

I like the theory. A few questions though

1) why do the Reapers harvest organics instead of destroying them?

2) why does the Catalyst tell you about Destroy option?

3) why even give Shepard the choices? They elevate him to the Crucible themselves

 

Also, I'm surprised you don't have a favorite moment from ME2

1. To preserve them. It says it embodies the collected knowledge of all reapers. Maybe, like the geth, its perspective improves with each harvest? 

3. Because it's still looking for a solution to the organic/synthetic problem, which is its mandate. The crucible altered the variables, created new choices, but only shep can make them happen.  

[Farangbaa]

I admit: I only glanced it. But it seems this doesn't fit with Leviathan.

[StarcloudSWG]

The volus didn't receive a vision *from* a being of light, he had a vision *of* a being of light.

 

The Catalyst was created by the Leviathan. It is not a being of light in any sense other than the literal. The same way Avina is a 'being of light'. Or the holographic greeters in the Armax Arsenal Arena.

 

You are right about the Catalyst lying. Or rather, the Catalyst using misdirection and implication in order to steer Shepard away from Destroy and towards Control and Synthesis. Remember, its entire purpose is to 'preserve life' or more accurately, preserve the Reapers. It doesn't want its work destroyed or its accomplishments eliminated. Simple as that.

 

Control is a case of "I'd let myself be overwritten since that preserves the Reapers" and Synthesis is a case of "Everything's connected to Reaper.net now! I control EVERYTHING! ULTIMATE POWER!!!!"

[Raice]

I like the theory. A few questions though

1) why do the Reapers harvest organics instead of destroying them?

2) why does the Catalyst tell you about Destroy option?

3) why even give Shepard the choices? They elevate him to the Crucible themselves

 

Also, I'm surprised you don't have a favorite moment from ME2

 

 

1.  Well... the only reason I can figure is so they can have an infinite supply of endless progressing knowledge to further their odds of always winning each cycle.  Each civilization might come to the same conclusions, but they have an infinite possibility of how they reach said conclusion.

 

All in all, I think we would have to have a more concrete definition of the word "harvest" in the context of who is saying it.  Who actually said that Reapers "harvest" the organics?  I may be wrong, but off the top of my head - the Catalyst did.  And in this theory... whatever that dude says... is a lie.

 

Moreover, I would suspect that if this theory is even remotely headed in the right direction (which it probably isn't, but it's fun to think about anyway) that answer would be given if and when we discover more about the purpose of the real Beings of Light.  Whatever their purpose is, probably has a lot to do with stopping the Reapers or at least being their anti-thesis for purpose.

 

It could be possible that organics aren't actually harvested, but are indeed destroyed.  Follow me on this:

 

All 3 options actually lead to the destruction of all organics.  Whatever knowledge a Reaper might acquire through harvesting, could just as well be attained by absorbing their left over Tech or Synthetics.  We already know that Reapers don't target Synthetics - this is why.  Those red lasers they shoot out sure don't look like they're "harvesting" anything.  They look like they're blowing the crap out of everything.

 

The difference between the three options is that "Destroying the Reapers" doesn't actually indoctrinate Shepard, while the other 2 do.  The significance of this might be that Shepard is the one chosen to help establish the next civilization.  We saw in ME3 how the Protheans helped the Asari.  Maybe this is how it's done?

 

2.  If the above theory is correct - it wouldn't matter if the Catalyst gave "Destroy the Reapers" as an option or not.  In all scenarios - everything is destroyed anyway.  But by not indoctrinating Shepard, they have the start of the next cycle - which they know is necessary.  Without Shepard as the "catalyst" for the next cycle... the next cycle will not be ready by the end of the 50,000 years.  In other words, the Reapers will not have gained anything of value from the next cycle, because it would all be starting over from square one.

 

Alternatively, look at how the Catalyst portrayed that option.  He basically more or less flat out told you that it was the absolute worst possible outcome Shepard could choose - that it would essentially be the one thing that would cause to happen, exactly what he doesn't want to happen - humanity would be lost.

 

But this Catalyst isn't really a Being of Light that is trying to help Shepard.  He is a ruse - his mission is to deceive.  And at this stage of the game - no holds are barred.  Harbringer already knows what Shepard's plan is.  The best way to confuse him, is to address it first - and that's exactly what he did.

 

And it actually worked.  My first playthrough - I totally fell for it.  None of this had even occurred to me at the time.  The whole thing was strange and weird and didn't make a whole lot of sense.  I fell upon the patterns I'd relied upon from the very beginning of the first game - there are always 3 options: Renegade, Paragon, and then really good Paragon if you completed everything prior to 100%.  Shepard's objective was to Destroy the Reapers.  That option was portrayed to me to be a Renegade option - the platform it was on was even bathed in red light.  I was playing a Paragon - I chose what was presented to me as being the Best Paragon option:  Synthesis.  Catalyst even said it was the most ideal outcome.

 

How many others played Paragon their first time?  I'd wager that most people did.  And I'd wager most people chose Synthesis - because the game had never pulled a 180 on us like that before.  Except nothing about this entire encounter was remotely like anything else in the entire game.

 

Except somehow I knew, man lol.  I don't know how I knew... I just did.  Something about the whole thing was not what it seemed to be.  Everything was way too "happily ever after" for the things that came out of left field.  The ultimate plan that had been shoved down our throats from day 1 of ME was "the worst possible option."  This is why I retconned my choice.  We've all been had

 

3.  The choices don't matter.  It's all part of the Indoctrination.  Like I said, I think some parts of the IT are actually spot on.  I do think the whole thing was Indoctrination, because like you say.... why would they even give him options?

 

It might be that they don't know that failing to Indoctrinate Shepard would have consequences.  Failing to Indoctrinate is the same thing as choosing "Destroy the Reapers."  At the end of that, we see Shepard is still alive - he takes a breath.  If this were a death scene... they wouldn't leave it on a cliffhanger.  Death scenes are used for closure.  This scene was shown as a cliffhanger.

 

Shepard lives - but the possibilities for why and to what end, given all this new stuff, could literally be anything.  We simply couldn't know until we hear something more about these Beings of Light and what they are all actually about.

 

 

ME2 had some good scenes too, but nothing off the top of my head really jumps out at me as something I probably won't ever forget.  I really enjoyed Thane in that one.  I feel like he was one of the more interesting companions and could have and should have been introduced earlier.  Miranda was pretty hot.  The new Normandy when you first looked down the main corridor looking into the cockpit was pretty righteous - it looked like a really good JJ Abrams movie... with lens flares all over.  I don't really remember particular scenes of ME2.  But I do remember ME2 having some of the better storytelling for your companions' backstories.  All of them were really well written and were interesting.  And that's all I can say about ME2 - I cared more about the people on my ship than I did about the actual plot.

[ArabianIGoggles]

Interesting take.  The Leviathan DLC negates your Being of Light portion, though. 

[Raice]

The volus didn't receive a vision *from* a being of light, he had a vision *of* a being of light.

 

The Catalyst was created by the Leviathan. It is not a being of light in any sense other than the literal. The same way Avina is a 'being of light'. Or the holographic greeters in the Armax Arsenal Arena.

 

You are right about the Catalyst lying. Or rather, the Catalyst using misdirection and implication in order to steer Shepard away from Destroy and towards Control and Synthesis. Remember, its entire purpose is to 'preserve life' or more accurately, preserve the Reapers. It doesn't want its work destroyed or its accomplishments eliminated. Simple as that.

 

Control is a case of "I'd let myself be overwritten since that preserves the Reapers" and Synthesis is a case of "Everything's connected to Reaper.net now! I control EVERYTHING! ULTIMATE POWER!!!!"

 

Well, this is going to be one of those situations where if Leviathan was so integral with the story - it shouldn't have been cut as a DLC.  It's just that simple.  Since I don't have Leviathan - I wouldn't know anything about Leviathan.  And since it's DLC - it isn't technically integral to the main story.  And the main story is all I have to go by.  This could have just been EA screwing up, though.

 

Even still... the Leviathan creating the Catalyst is still dependent upon who tells you this information.  If the Catalyst tells Shepard... then... well.... it's a lie for reasons already explored.  If you get this information through some other means, then... well... once again... it should have been part of the official game and not a DLC.  Something like that is pretty important, I'd say.

 

In either case, I can say this with 100% certainty:

 

Either the Indoctrination Theory, the Beings of Light Theory, or anything I've written here would have been a better, more compelling ending than the "face value" we're supposed to accept.

 

....

 

.... On that note... how do we know YOU aren't Indoctrinated?  Hmmmm?  

 

Plus, supposing Leviathan did create the Catalyst:  why the image of the boy?  How would the Catalyst or Leviathan even remotely know about that singular individual that was so important to Shepard?  Why is the child's voice masked with underlays of both Male and Female Shepard?  Maybe he was hallucinating?  Sure.  I'd by that.  He was bleeding out.  But why and how could he hallucinate everything the Catalyst told him?  Moreover, if he was bleeding out - how is he still alive at the end of only 1 of the outcomes?

 

These things just don't add up my friend.  And all I can tell you is that everything the Catalyst says is a lie.  All of it.  Not a single thing he says is the truth - about anything.  Either that... or the truth is that the writers really did screw up that bad.  As for myself... I'm like my Paragon brother, Shepard.  I want to have a little faith in folks.  I want to have a little faith in the guys who made this awesome series that they actually didn't just screw up the greatest story in video-games ever told.

 

Avina is not a "Being."  She is not an AI.  She is a VI.  And in either case... the Volus had a "vision."  That implies something more than "he saw a holo-projector."  Plus, this Volus isn't some pre-historic dude.  He's alive and kicking during ME3.  I'm pretty sure someone in that era would know the difference between a "vision" which is usually used to infer the supernatural, and a holographic projection of a recording from a time long past.  He was actively finding archaeological evidence of these "beings" and their culture.  If this "vision" *of* a "being of light" was really just some holo-projector recording... he would have told people that he found recordings... not "had a vision."

[Vazgen]

 

snip

I recommend you give a read to this series of articles:

Interpreting the Catalyst: part 1, part 2, part 3

It has a few ideas that may fit and improve your theory

 

I find it a hard to believe Being of Light theory after playing Leviathan but the rest of it is quite close to how I perceived the ending for the first time. 

The image of a child - for an AI that can get into a person's mind (and their creators could too) it's quite easy to get that image of a boy that Shepard saw in nightmares through the entire game. And that image is chosen to further manipulate Shepard into doing what they want.

 

The first time I got to the endings (on my "canon" Shepard) I completely disregarded Synthesis. It sounded too far-fetched and didn't draw me in the slightest. However I had a very hard time choosing between Control and Destroy. I decided to do Control, walked to the half of the path while continuing to think about it and... turned around and went for the Destroy. During the slideshow I was thinking that it was the human affinity for destruction that make me go there. I didn't have time to play Mass Effect for the next few days and spent more time on the net where I read about Tricia Helfer's outstanding performance in Synthesis ending. I loaded a save prior to the ending and went for Synthesis this time. Voice acting was indeed great, but it didn't have the same impact as Destroy and sounded like an utopia. Then I tried out Control - same feeling. I'm going for Destroy ever since

 

Your opinion on ME2 is the same as mine I have a favorite part though - Suicide Mission. It was very well executed with the feeling of actually being in command, seeing your upgrades in action, the empty eyes of the Collector General after Harbringer released direct control... And I actually got everyone out alive on my first run Garrus for fire team leader, Samara to hold the bubble, Mordin with the crew and Legion as a tech expert. Took Tali and Samara to the last fight 

[Farangbaa]

All that effort to lie...

...while it could just leave Shepard on the floor to bleed out.

I'm sure a *bleeping* AI can make the best, most rational and effective decision here, and it's not lying to Shepard

Or it might just be bored I suppose.

[Vazgen]

All that effort to lie...

...while it could just leave Shepard on the floor to bleed out.

I'm sure a *bleeping* AI can make the best, most rational and effective decision here, and it's not lying to Shepard

Or it might just be bored I suppose.

Shepard did walk around on the top floor, so he would've recovered shortly after collapsing, I think

[Farangbaa]

Shepard did walk around on the top floor, so he would've recovered shortly after collapsing, I think

And watch the Crucible do nothing?

[Vazgen]

And watch the Crucible do nothing?

Probably activate it normally via control panel instead of shooting the tube

[Obadiah]

Please allow me to introduce myself
I'm a being of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name
But what's puzzling you is the nature of my game

[Farangbaa]

Probably activate it normally via control panel instead of shooting the tube

Oh sure

[Raice]

All that effort to lie...

...while it could just leave Shepard on the floor to bleed out.

I'm sure a *bleeping* AI can make the best, most rational and effective decision here, and it's not lying to Shepard

Or it might just be bored I suppose.

 

The Reapers might not be there to destroy life.  Maybe they are just there to harvest - that's why they're called Reapers.... to reap the harvest.  It could be either way.

 

My point is, Indoctrination is the process of Harvesting.  The lie is part of the Indoctrination.  It's not lying out of fear of being destroyed.  It's lying because it's purpose is to harvest life.  If they cannot harvest you - then they didn't fulfill their purpose.  And so then you must be disposed of somehow.  Except Shepard is still alive at the end of "Destroy the Reapers."  This choice was his ability to resist Indoctrination.  If you aren't Indoctrinated... then you aren't harvested.  So what happens then?  This is the point you aren't getting.

 

Indoctrination is when you are presented with ideals that you find repulsive in a pleasant way, and things you find are pleasant are presented to you as if they were repulsive.  It requires lies.  How exactly do you think Indoctrination actually works, lol?  It doesn't work without lies.

[Ithurael]

How exactly do you think Indoctrination actually works, lol?  It doesn't work without lies.

 

From what the codex tells us...indoctrination works whether they (the Reapers) lie or not lie. It works via force, not via dialog. It, inevitably, forces the victim to think the way the reapers want them to. There is no trick, no lying, no verbal manipulation, and (via the codex and from what we have see via the lore) no long elaborate dreams.

 

You can interpret the ending as IT or indoctrination if you want, but that is just speculation.

 

The official lore on indoctrination is:

"The precise mechanics of the indoctrination effect are poorly understood. It is believed that the Reapers generate an electromagnetic field, waves of infrasound and ultrasound, or both in order to stimulate areas of a victim's brain and limbic system. The resulting effect varies depending on the intent of the Reaper: the victim may suffer headaches and hallucinations, have feelings of "being watched" or paranoia, or come to view the Reaper itself with superstitious awe. Ultimately, the Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify its signal, manifesting as voices within the victim's mind."

 

IT gets the majority of it strength via the bolded. However...Indoctrination =/= Long Elaborate Dreams. This is shown via the codex. It is a forced process. Not a Spell that can be broken.

http://masseffect.wi.../Indoctrination

 

The definition of a Hallucination is:

"an experience involving the apparent perception of something not present."

https://www.google.c...ox-a&channel=sb

 

Wheras the Definition of a Dream is:

"a series of thoughts, images, and sensations occurring in a person's mind during sleep."

https://www.google.c...ox-a&channel=sb

 

Also. Many ITers like to think Leviathan gives the perfect show of how the end could be an indoctrination attempt via how the end of the DLC works. However, Leviathan enthrallment =/= Reaper Indoctrination. It was the base for Indoctrination but it differs in many ways.

http://masseffect.wi...an_Enthrallment

 

And to your point 2:

2.  The Face Value - then there are those those basically take what is seen at face value.  Whatever is said happens... happens.  This is also the apparent official stance Bioware is taking on this issue... but frankly, I don't buy into it.  Why it's easy to assume they would say this to avoid further explanation... it is also reasonable to assume they would say this... to avoid further explanation... because it would probably ruin ME4.  Plus, regardless of what anyone says... I just refuse to believe that Bioware would give us such a weird and completely out of form narrative such as they did because they got lazy.  They wouldn't have done that.  That's just stupid to think.

 

1 - Most who loathe the ending at face value don't believe that Bioware did it because they were lazy - gods no. We don't like the ending due to perceived plot holes, failure to resolve sheps fate, or poor implementation of choices in the final act,. This is mainly due to the issue that many of that group believe that Bio was rushed in creating ME3. This is rather evident via the Vanilla ending - which...god...even the most staunch white knight of Bioware would have some trouble defending but hey some still do and that is fine.

 

2 - Bioware has stated via twitter evidence that blatantly contradicts IT. Now they could all be lying in preparation for the great and amazing reveal that will blow us all away in ME4...but I severely doubt that will happen. The content we have is the content we have - that is all.

 

3 - Whether you played it or not, Leviathan is part of the lore and is canon. It alludes to and (Leviathan itself) mentions the Catalyst as an AI (known at the time as the Intelligence). In fact...it is the only DLC I purchased and I must say from what I have played, it is quite good. I recommend it. It even adds dialog to the Catalyst scene

 

Sorry for the text but I want to get it straight for this thread how Indoctrination works first. I am glad you at least liked the game. It was fun.

 

BTW I do love your imagination!

[Ithurael]

Also OP

 

I suggest posting IT stuff here

http://indoctrinatio.../f1-mass-effect

 

There is a user on there ( and here as well sometimes) called Swobyj. I think you and he/she would have a lot in common

 

...beware the honey badger tho...