Most people won't agree but yeah IT was really well thought and i'm sure it was meant to be canon before people started crying all over the place. All proofs lead to IT anyway.
This. Was probably intended on release, but then the outrage came and Bioware may have backed down and will probably never touch the endings topic again. You can thank the "Blue Babies and Cupcakes Squad" for that. Too bad, because it could have been something truly clever and in theme with the series.
This. Was probably intended on release, but then the outrage came and Bioware may have backed down and will probably never touch the endings topic again. You can thank the "Blue Babies and Cupcakes Squad" for that. Too bad, because it could have been something truly clever and in theme with the series.
IT is just another flavor for a downer "fu** you" ending, which we got anyway. (at least before EC, but the EC after the fact, felt like a bandage on a missing limb) The only difference is that certain people feel that this is "their" ending because they figured it out themselves.
Bioware seemed quite surprised with the rise of IT during the ending debacle. But of course nothing came out of it, because this was not what they actually intended, and didn't really know what to do with it.
Surprise surprise: the writers didn't really think the implications for certain parts in the story all the way through. (business as usual...)
"Blue Babies and Cupcakes Squad": Let's stop right here before the discussion devolves into the frustrations of talimancers with the taste of tali's sweat...
Everyone knows how to throw cheap insults.
Bioware seemed quite surprised with the rise of IT during the ending debacle. But of course nothing came out of it, because this was not what they actually intended, and didn't really know what to do with it.
Surprise surprise: the writers didn't really think the implications for certain parts in the story all the way through. (business as usual...)
I don't know man. Those dark oily shadows and whispers dreams seem like indoctrination symptoms to me. I mean they used that before in the lore for this exact purpose, they can't be that ignorant. And the cliffhanger breath scene that appears to be in London but at the same time is short and vague enough to make you wonder.
Ah, sod it. No use arguing about it now.
It wasn't the lack of choice that made some people dislike IT. It's the fact that some of the choices could be wrong ones and that would mean their Shepard screwed up and they themselves got duped by the reapers.
That's the opposite of arguing against player choice though. That's arguing that the player, and by extension, Shepard, should have knowledge of what the Reapers are doing when you shouldn't know. I think you can argue pretty easily that both Control and Synthesis are valid endings. As a human being in 21st century, I think some form of synthesis or control probably is the pinnacle of human evolution, and we already kind of know what it looks like. We aren't all that far away from nanobots killing cancer cells or clearing arteries. We're also not that far from nanobot "maintenance" (if you will) being performed on human bodies, drastically increasing lifespan. That's player choice.
But if the argument against IT is, "I got duped by the Reapers if I didn't pick Destroy" well, so what? If you, the player, make the Control or Synthesis choices and have valid reasons for doing so, why would you argue against yourself, merely because the character you were controlling didn't know everything and by extension, you, the player, didn't know everything? Do the Control and Synthesis endings not help humanity? I could pretty easily argue that the "heroic" Destroy ending is actually the worst option for the advancement of civilization and I haven't even played it. Player choice is exactly what A, B, and C were.
You can also argue that you didn't get Indoctrinated, you were merely convinced. 
Bioware seemed quite surprised with the rise of IT during the ending debacle. But of course nothing came out of it, because this was not what they actually intended, and didn't really know what to do with it.
Just because not to feed oil to flames, not because "it wasn't intended".
Can you imagine how much damage "Blue baby squadron" can cause to internet if that was canon?(Replace it with Tali's sweat or Garrus' little Turian babies, it doesn't really matter. I have nothing against any kind of relationships Shephard built, it is all fine. But blue baby stuff probably most told complaint ever 
)
People are/were too naive to expect a "good ending" in that dire times of ME galaxy.
Surprise surprise: the writers didn't really think the implications for certain parts in the story all the way through. (business as usual...)
The problem is BW had fans followed them since ME 1, jumped in to train at ME 2, had no idea about series but got ME 3 for MP and gave SP a chance.
Too many variables about players here. So with all these kinds of people of course they couldn't maintain "All your choices should make an impact/sense" part.
Or you'd see people crying "Why Shephard did this? I don't understand" and responses were "Go play previous game. Go read this book" etc. which would mean game wasn't complete at stand alone point and heavily dependant on other or previous stuff. Both are bad for business.
So while i don't agree i don't disagree aswell. It is a "complication" of telling story of the same guy/gal in so near time line.
People are/were too naive to expect a "good ending" in that dire times of ME galaxy.
I agree with this. As Garus said "Humans want to save everyone, but in this war that's not going to happen."
eThat's the opposite of arguing against player choice though. That's arguing that the player, and by extension, Shepard, should have knowledge of what the Reapers are doing when you shouldn't know. I think you can argue pretty easily that both Control and Synthesis are valid endings. As a human being in 21st century, I think some form of synthesis or control probably is the pinnacle of human evolution, and we already kind of know what it looks like. We aren't all that far away from nanobots killing cancer cells or clearing arteries. We're also not that far from nanobot "maintenance" (if you will) being performed on human bodies, drastically increasing lifespan. That's player choice.
But if the argument against IT is, "I got duped by the Reapers if I didn't pick Destroy" well, so what? If you, the player, make the Control or Synthesis choices and have valid reasons for doing so, why would you argue against yourself, merely because the character you were controlling didn't know everything and by extension, you, the player, didn't know everything? Do the Control and Synthesis endings not help humanity? I could pretty easily argue that the "heroic" Destroy ending is actually the worst option for the advancement of civilization and I haven't even played it. Player choice is exactly what A, B, and C were.
You can also argue that you didn't get Indoctrinated, you were merely convinced.
Got your point, control and synthesis are already being chosen by humanity, there is no real good or bad decisions in the game, you just need to deal with them.
My opinion is that the choice made in ME3 will affect Shepard only, not the entire galaxy, it would be too difficult to join all the three endings in one storyline when ME3 sequel come up. I say "when" because Shepard is just a too good copyright to be thrown away, but I also believe this sequel will only happen in a distant future, not in this new game they are developing, the scars are still open.
My real problem with the ending is not by having Shepard dead, it was just that deja-vu feeling from Deus Ex, I thought: "again I have to chose between these three options". There is nothing better that can be done with MEU? If IT is real, or just some points of it, only BW will answer in the future. Fact is: ME3 final didn't honor the series until now.
That's the opposite of arguing against player choice though. That's arguing that the player, and by extension, Shepard, should have knowledge of what the Reapers are doing when you shouldn't know. I think you can argue pretty easily that both Control and Synthesis are valid endings. As a human being in 21st century, I think some form of synthesis or control probably is the pinnacle of human evolution, and we already kind of know what it looks like. We aren't all that far away from nanobots killing cancer cells or clearing arteries. We're also not that far from nanobot "maintenance" (if you will) being performed on human bodies, drastically increasing lifespan. That's player choice.
But if the argument against IT is, "I got duped by the Reapers if I didn't pick Destroy" well, so what? If you, the player, make the Control or Synthesis choices and have valid reasons for doing so, why would you argue against yourself, merely because the character you were controlling didn't know everything and by extension, you, the player, didn't know everything? Do the Control and Synthesis endings not help humanity? I could pretty easily argue that the "heroic" Destroy ending is actually the worst option for the advancement of civilization and I haven't even played it. Player choice is exactly what A, B, and C were.
You can also argue that you didn't get Indoctrinated, you were merely convinced.
As an ITer, that's exactly my take. Helps me that I'm an 'ITer + More', as in I don't think its necessarily evil (or good) if you take any particular choice here.
I'll definitely have alts which chose Synthesis and Control, and it fits. And for these, I can only have hope and faith that something good, even great could come out of it, even if the ending of ME3 is a 'dream' (of sorts).
The Reapers suck. From most objective human morality, they're evil. They're failed. Etc.
But that doesn't mean they're absolute evils, that that suck at everything, that they fail in all things, etc.
I think the narrative is supposed to teach us this. That resistance, vs a submission, is exactly what's needed here - but maybe not necessarily a total resistance in all ways at all points, depending on perspective. Shepard wants to just 'stop' the Reapers, especially if Paragon. Even if 'Paragon lost' (AHEM), that doesn't mean no good can come out of the experience. Maybe one can disagree with this, but I still wonder.
Got your point, control and synthesis are already being chosen by humanity, there is no real good or bad decisions in the game, you just need to deal with them.
My opinion is that the choice made in ME3 will affect Shepard only, not the entire galaxy, it would be too difficult to join all the three endings in one storyline when ME3 sequel come up. I say "when" because Shepard is just a too good copyright to be thrown away, but I also believe this sequel will only happen in a distant future, not in this new game they are developing, the scars are still open.
My real problem with the ending is not by having Shepard dead, it was just that deja-vu feeling from Deus Ex, I thought: "again I have to chose between these three options". There is nothing better that can be done with MEU? If IT is real, or just some points of it, only BW will answer in the future. Fact is: ME3 final didn't honor the series until now.
I'm of two minds, depending on what I focus on theorizing.
'affect Shepard only' - Yep, quite possible imo. Color wave isn't exactly real, or timeline/place is so different that it won't matter, etc. I'm looking forward to my ME3 conclusion actions being narratively minimized in SOME way.
"only your actions will be remembered" (Samara) - Hmm, could this mean something? Could everything/almost everything 'matter', but in a different context?
Or maybe nothing matters and we get a 100% clean slate. Maybe we'll learn at E3. *shrug*
It is a known fact that Casey Hudson had played Deus Ex: Human Revolution just prior to when they wrote the ending to the game.
Their way out of the endings is the final part voiced by Buzz Aldrin. - it was just a story told. And now we have a fresh start and can leave that disastrous ending behind.
*snip* "Blue baby squadron" *snip*
"only your actions will be remembered" (Samara) - Hmm, could this mean something? Could everything/almost everything 'matter', but in a different context?
Or maybe nothing matters and we get a 100% clean slate. Maybe we'll learn at E3. *shrug*
OH IT......
I still have my hopes up for the next game to be the reveal. Just to see the pro-enders loose their heads.
Well, to be fair, IT is a bit more than "a dream sequence." It's a battle happening in Shepard's mind, he just doesn't know it. He can still make the decisions though. It's not like Shepard woke up just before the the Normandy was heading through the relay to Eden Prime rendering all three games moot. See, that would be frustrating.
Speaking of IT, does anyone know what happened to CleverNoob's YouTube videos? Their channel is gone.
Julian (CleverNoob) said on a forum that he wants to move on and not do any more online stuff. He closed his website and YouTube channel.
I liked his IT videos, agreed with some of his points disagreed with some others but I still think the original "Shepard's Indoctrination" by Acavyos is one of the best IT videos around. It's short and covers all the essentials.
.. I still think the original "Shepard's Indoctrination" by Acavyos is one of the best IT videos around. It's short and covers all the essentials.
Too bad the videos aren't still up. I've seen the one by Acavyos, and yes, it's good. Thank you!
IT or not, there was always something about the ending and Catalyst conversation that I found to be freakin' brilliant. There is a moment in Mass Effect Retribution were the reapers use Paul Grayson as an avatar and talk to Kahlee Sanders. She seems to be in awe and says the reapers words reached her on a subconscious level and she started to nod in agreement. Pretty much what happens with the player (and Shepard) in the decision chamber, some even starting to support control or synthesis with a passion or arguing that destroy is the worse option and basically a crime.
This is the passage from the book:
The reapers are master manipulators and their arguments were always meant to be convincing regardless of the various interpretations of the endings.
Bad writing huh?
IT or not, there was always something about the ending and Catalyst conversation that I found to be freakin' brilliant. There is a moment in Mass Effect Retribution were the reapers use Paul Grayson as an avatar and talk to Kahlee Sanders. She seems to be in awe and says the reapers words reached her on a subconscious level and she started to nod in agreement. Pretty much what happens with the player (and Shepard) in the decision chamber, some even starting to support control or synthesis with a passion or arguing that destroy is the worse option and basically a crime.
That is the most laughable thing I have ever heard.
In any event, bringing about "ascension" through Armageddon, empties the Reaper words from meaning.
The cruelty, stupidity, and sheer waste caused by a galactic extinction-level war, could have been avoided through diplomacy.
No one would *really* reject in the end the promises of immortality and Ascension if they didn't come with side dishes of needless horror,
and the cheesy idea of rendering organics into goo in order to do it...
The Reapers do not merely offer "Ascension", their offer is a poison that will make you into an obedient space monster with no will of your own.
How do I know? Because of the fact that there are no Reaper "heretics", despite the deep hatred that each race harbored for the Reapers before their extinction, and despite the fact that supposedly a Reaper is made in the image of a specific race, which in turn would mean that different Reapers think differently.
Well that's the whole problem of the Reapers, isn't it? That they don't want to work on an equal level. You evolve to them or die. Such behavior can alternately be seen as the Reapers actually being an inferior 'devolution' of organics in many ways. The Reapers never valued free will (even in themselves) so they never account for it or value it in the future. No free will --> no free will allowed in harvested/preserved societies in Reaper form --> no free will ever --> etc etc. Unless we fight them. Just what other characters (typically antagonist ones) argue is that the 'Reapers are just trying to control us', aka outside of their disgusting lack of respect for free will (which they have because they don't think free will is real), their other elements of working (mechanics, intelligence, etc) and their actual goal (making relationship between organics and synthetics) are not bad, or at least necessarily bad in themselves. Depending on your views of trans/post humanism and such.
The problem is - how do you control/work with/subvert/etc... or even just FIGHT... something that can and will ...worm its way inside your mind? Apparently you fight (however way you can) or you die, but you cannot ever submit.
That is the most laughable thing I have ever heard.
Well, there were a lot of claims like that back in 2012 about the Destroy choice - "primitive", "barbaric", "genocide". Don't look at me, it wasn't my idea. I could find some quotes but I rather not sift through all the old legacy BSN crap. Funny, there's a topic right next door where someone calls destroy - genocide. LOL.
Well, there were a lot of claims like that back in 2012 about the Destroy choice - "primitive", "barbaric", "genocide". Don't look at me, it wasn't my idea. I could find some quotes but I rather not sift through all the old legacy BSN crap. Funny, there's a topic right next door where someone calls destroy - genocide. LOL.
Yep.
I don't think most players will have that explicit of an opinion (especially since polls seem to consistently show Destroy to have AT the VERY least 40-50% support), but I know many who picked the other two paths because they saw Destroy as, well, too destructive, too low for what they tried to play the game for, and they couldn't stomach destroying all of the Geth (that they considered alive) and even had a degree of discomfort with destroying every single Reaper (because while they didn't *exactly* buy into TIM's opinion, they *did* buy into the story they're told about the options and they trust at least stuff like the Blue colored option to be more-or-less 'good').
Yep.
...they *did* buy into the story they're told about the options and they trust at least stuff like the Blue colored option to be more-or-less 'good').
It's also funny how the Destroy-Control color schemes are actually swapped but people don't seem to catch on these days (or back in the days for that matter).
Destroying the collector base was the Blue (Paragon) choice. It's an abomination and it needs to go.
Keeping (controlling) the base was the Red (Renegade) choice. It's high tech, lets keep it and use it and deal with the consequences later.
Destroying the reapers is a paragon action. It's what all "paragon" NPC's support throughout the game, hell it even shows Anderson in the vision. The reapers have killed trillions, they are abominations and they need to go.
Controlling the reapers is a renegade action. As Shepard himself/herself says just 5 min earlier "You're playing with powers you don't understand". It even shows the Illusive Man plain as day as representative for this choice. Control the reapers, take the power and damn the consequences - renegade.
I don't think its as cut and dry as that.
Now don't get me wrong - I mostly agree. And I sorta completely agree in the context of the trilogy and of ME3. But I wonder about something else happening as well.
And this may be a tricky matter to discuss, but even losing a war ('Paragon Lost') does not mean a worse situation in the longer term. I'll leave it at that.
Still chose Destroy though. Its my story and I believe in this path, and I do tend to believe that something mental is happening - easily attributed to the label of 'indoctrination'.
Personally, I don't think the Indoctrination Theory went far enough.
I just write the whole plot of ME1-3 off as Shepard's mind being wrecked by the Prothean Beacon, trying to put itself back together and deal with everything the Beacon rammed into his head.
Lets me sidestep every plot hole in the trilogy.
I like the use of imagination IT encouraged..... that is the magic of Mass Effect, it has the power to inspire on so many levels.
E3 ME4 news is going to be amazing!!
Volver arriba
