153 réponses à ce sujet

[78stonewobble]

Considering how much I get shot and di...uhm knocked to the ground.... My shepard's armor is so good... that anything is plausible.

[Ithurael]

How dare everyone have lots of speculations!                   

 

 

 

EDIT: Seriously, not a dig.  That's the writers' intent in a nutshell: speculations.  It's in the notes!

 

 

Ya...a hack writer wants you to fill in the blanks for him and praise the narrative using your own imagination and not his writing.

 

It is up to you whether or not you buy into that crap writing and methodology.

[Valmar]

Ya...a hack writer wants you to fill in the blanks for him and praise the narrative using your own imagination and not his writing.

 

It is up to you whether or not you buy into that crap writing and methodology.

 

Beyond that though this particular subject shouldn't even be up for speculation. Like you and others have pointed out, the writer's intent was made clear and blunt: he's on the citadel. Pretending he is somewhere else other than the citadel is not speculation - its fanfiction headcanon. It isn't the real intent - we know because they clearly told us what the intent was.

[Cette]

Beyond that though this particular subject shouldn't even be up for speculation. Like you and others have pointed out, the writer's intent was made clear and blunt: he's on the citadel. Pretending he is somewhere else other than the citadel is not speculation - its fanfiction headcanon. It isn't the real intent - we know because they clearly told us what the intent was.

Not clearly stated in game.....Death of the Author........Deal with it cracka!

[WizzyWarlock]

He's in the rubble, on the Citadel... at the end of ME1. ME2 & ME3 are all in his head, the Catalyst is showing him a possible future with all its choices and repercussions, then asks at the end what he wants to do. He chooses Synthesis, Control or Destroy, then as he's dying in the dream he awakens with a jolt on the Citadel. Knowing what can be, he climbs the rubble with a smirk on his face and moves onwards into the future he already knows. ME2 & ME3 never actually happened, ME4 will be the real story.

This may or may not be true.    

[KaiserShep]

When the camera view pans to show a portion of Shepard's torso, I could swear that I saw the base of the power conduit that Shepard fires upon to destroy the Catalyst. It didn't look like London to me at all.

[Ithurael]

 

Just seems to me people can't think for themselves, if you have to rely on the developers to tell you where Shepard is. 

 

 

it also seems people like to throw out official statements because it is not what they wanted or in line with what they believe.

 

If the core of your argument is "It is impossible because X,Y,Z" you are essentially pointing out plotholes.

 

This ending was rushed and not peer reviewed. It WILL have plotholes - many of them. Even one of the writers backs this up.

 

But no...you are right...because this reason:

 

 

I'm inclined to reject Bioware's interpretation and subtitute my own.

 

This is called headcanon. It is perfectly fine to do. If you want to believe Shep is on Earth - great. Just know it is YOUR headcanon. But if you think Bioware (the developer of the game) believes that too? No.

[ZerebusPrime]

The writer in question disavowed those statements and claimed his account on relevant forum was hacked, IIRC.  Feel free to ask him about it.

 

Mr. Gamble's statements are also perfectly valid coming from the Producer of the game, but it closed few doors.  We needed IT to be shot down by Hudson, Walters, or the writing team in general; that hasn't happened.

 

Nothing is stopping BioWare from picking up the ball later.  Some would consider such a thing a retcon regardless of what is done.  If the "Indoctrination Theory" is written into canon, it becomes Ascended Fanon.  At that point it is impossible to really tell how much was BioWare's intent and how much was made up by the fans.  Note that the start of the "Sure, Why Not?" formula is speculations.  Yeah, uh, bit of a backfire there.

 

My position is pretty simple: wait and see!  Giving in to cynicism isn't healthy.

[Ithurael]

The writer in question disavowed those statements and claimed his account on relevant forum was hacked, IIRC.  Feel free to ask him about it.

 

 

Source? And I am NOT talking about Priestly - who has been known again and again to lie to fans about more than enough information.

 

Do we have a tweet? An interview? ANYTHING that proves this? From the man himself?

 

 

Mr. Gamble's statements are also perfectly valid coming from the Producer of the game, but it closed few doors.  We needed IT to be shot down by Hudson, Walters, or the writing team in general; that hasn't happened.

 

 

First it was the EC that needed to Prove and expand on IT = bust

 

Then it was Citadel = bust

 

Now it is two writers of the ending or the writing team? Well - until you give me a statement from Weekes himself disavowing the certain critical review of Bioware - we know from the writing team that an Indoctrination segment was never planned for a fake ending. Until I see that, the writing team has never mentioned leveraging indoctrination to give a 'fake' ending to a game. The only Indoctrination segment in ME3 was the TIM sequence on the Citadel. That had everything we know about indoctrination present and accounted for. AND that was mentioned by the bioware team, cited in the book, and shown in the gameplay.

 

Also mind you that Reaper Indoctrination cannot do what IT wants it to do - but that is another story completely. However, it seems Bioware Indoctrination is clearly capable of hooking fans into buying all the DLC and future games, all they need to do is lead them on.

 

 

My position is pretty simple: wait and see!  Giving in to cynicism isn't healthy.

 

 

I would rather be cynical and critical of a vendor as opposed to buying and giving money to a developer who has blatantly lied to fans, led fans on and manipulated them into believing fanfiction was developer intent in order to sell more DLC, and releases sub par products in general (seriously, just look at the game quality after DA:O or even ME2. Mechanically and story-wise it is awful and ME2 is just in there because of gameplay and replay-ability mechanics).

 

And here is the kicker. Even if we get Casey Hudson to say IT is fanfiction ITers won't believe it. They will move the goalposts - again - to say that Mac has to say it. And even then, if Mac says that same thing they won't believe it because...There is NO way the events of the ending could be real!!!

[AlanC9]

Just seems to me people can't think for themselves, if you have to rely on the developers to tell you where Shepard is.

We didn't rely on the developers to tell us that. We all figured it out for ourselves before the devs said anything.

[Ithurael]

The game ended development when Citadel was released. Hoping for more is not going to happen.

 

I know. Thus one can choose to believe the central conflict is unresolved forever (via IT) or not. Or you can create some kind of hybrid like the IT con theory - which kinda could happen I suppose.

 

However, the problem is that many an ITer does not believe the ending REALLY happened. They think the central conflict is left unresolved, that the reapers are still out there for either shepard or a new protagonist to finish off. And that this finale will occur in the next Mass Effect Game. Or in the one after that...or in the one after that. (you see where I am going with this)

 

 

As far as I'm concerned, they don't make personal DLC confirming or denying stuff for you. Like any business, they make the content they want to make, and you choose to buy it. We don't have much of a say what goes in it. Maybe a grain of salt, but not everything.

 

Well, from a story perspective it is not the best idea to leave the conclusion of a 5 year long trilogy unresolved. Certain variants of IT (like IT con) allow for the conflict to be resolved but keep to the whole 'mental battle' concept. Honestly, I would have preferred Bio to be more forward and let fans know what was developer intent and what wasn't. The closest we got was that there was no expansion of the breath scene in the EC and that the EC catered HEAVILY to the literal interpretation. In addition we get no follow-through on IT - ever. And we get a former bioware QA employee saying that IT was a fan-made theory, and we get confirmation that shep is on the citadel during the breath scene, and we get the head writer of ME3 saying that the story of shep is over and he considers shep dead.

 

But wait...bio threw in a bunch of 'things' that we can speculate on!!! Sometimes I don't think ITers know the difference between giving a nod (or throwing a bone) and intent to follow through. The EC had nods to IT, hell even Leviathan did as well. But that is where it stopped.

 

 

If you've been following the news, Casey Hudson left Bioware in mid 2014.

 

Oh I know. That is why I said ITers would move the goal posts to Mac - the hack - Walters. Because [insert speculations here]

 

In the end I have no issue with someone headcanoning IT as their ending. The problem arises when they genuinely think that more is coming or that IT was intended. That can create some issues. Mainly due to the fact that the largest argument IT has is that "There is NO way X,Y, or Z can happen or can be real!!" That is pointing out plotholes. And in a finale that was not peer reviewed...you are going to get a lot of those.

 

MrBtounge said it best (and I paraphrase) "if a segment of a story is based on or contains a contrivance it holds no narrative legitimacy. You are free to make one up in its place. And your version will be just as official as the real version if not moreso"

[Ithurael]

They went with the "there is no right or wrong answer" every ending is just as valid, and that includes IT. What you want from them is a "canon" ending. 

 

Don't you see? Having a game about player choice, and relying on developer intent, means there is only one interpretation--Bioware's. Therefore, there is no choice.

 

 

Bioware went with every ending is valid because yes every ending and every interpretation IS valid - to the fans. Also, this echos my original statement:

 

If you want to believe in IT as your ending = you are fine  (this is what bioware means by no canon ending)

If you want to believe in IT AND think that bioware intended this ending = you are not fine.  (this is NOT what bioware means by no canon ending)

 

 

They went with the answer that would please as many people as possible - keep things nebulous and you have wiggle room, it is a classic PR strategy. And they said that there is no CANON ending to ME3. This means it could be IT, it could be literal, it could be the dinosaur ending. It could be blue, red or green.

 

It seemed bio did not want to be prescriptive in how fans interpreted the ending - that is fine. But once we got the EC and closer to the final DLC bios stance changed on IT interpretation. Hell, even Merizan stated that if your interpretation of the ending of ME3 left more to be resolved than that is not the interpretation of bioware.

 

(Now I know sharing a link of JM will immediately get me backlash from die hard ITers but then again, sharing any tweet, interview, or source that hurts the IT interpretation will get that backlash. They usually try to poison the well by immediately discrediting her as a viable source. But this changes when even SHE was leading fans on saying she had an IT play-through)

 

Bioware has a clear intention and interpretation to how ME3 ended. They gave us the EC to expand on that interpretation. Some fans have an interpretation that, while bio tried to cultivate it - when not barring it from discussion or proving certain points inaccurate, ultimately bioware does not share for future development of the series.

 

If a fan expects bioware to expand on the ending of ME3 and pull out IT for ME4 or ME5 or ME6 or ME7 etc. That is totally not what is going to happen.

 

The next game is going to be a clean slate and will be the best place in the series to start

 

So - again - if you want to believe in IT that is fine. But if you think Bioware is going to deliver an IT expansion or that IT was developer intent that is not fine.

 

I know a lot of people like to think that biowares intent was to make all interpretations valid. But if I know how companies work, that is not - and never will be - the case. IT was little more than a flame shield bioware used to sell more DLC and advert more nerd rage.

 

The real question people should have asked bioware is NOT "what is the canon ending" or "do you believe in IT" but "Is IT the intended ending for ME3" And, assuming bioware ever answers us (which I doubt) we would finally get a solid tangible answer that is definite - personally I don't think it is because reaper indoctrination cannot do anything close to what IT says it can do. Maybe it is some new form of indoctrination we have never heard about...but that would be just as bad as the catalyst being real.

 

What happens if they pick an interpretation no one agrees with? Then we're right back at square one.

 

 

This is something we both can agree on. That is going to happen no matter what. Bio is most likely going to do an AU or midquel (no need for saves and great way to get new people into the series) or they genuinely will crack open the bees nest and pick a canon ending (RGB) for ME3 and expand on it.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

And a lone gunman with a single magic bullet killed JFK and Governor Connolly in 1963. Any hope of finding the truth ended when Ruby killed Oswald.

 

Bioware has to go AU and ignore the Shepard trilogy altogether, go mid-quel with this next installment, but eventually they will have to deal with RGB. The next game if a mid-quel will do enough to get enough new players hooked so that they can pick a canon in 2018 with hardly any protest because by then no one will really care about the ME3 ending.

[Reorte]

There's a big difference between "every ending is valid" and "every interpretation is valid." The former is "whatever actually happened in your game is what happened, do a different playthrough with something else and that's valid, neither of them is right or wrong." The latter is saying "meh, write your own story, we can't be bothered any more" (and doesn't work because of that; it leaves a feeling of "I don't know for sure" rather than "this happened in my game.")

[D.C.]

how exactly do you ignore the original triliogy i've got 3 games that says otherwise ..i seriously think they created this monster for whatever reason and having to deal with it and just throwing out whatever will get everyone off their backs but still backfiring.

 

example: I can tell you I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll but that don't neccessarily make it the truth but you got an answer so leave it alone lol

 

the game developers are in the position they can tell us whatever they want and we have to take it because it's their universal property and who are we to dare argue.

 

From what i have seen for answers to particular questions it seems like everyone is giving a conflicting answer to keep everyone still talking about the ending.  

[chidingewe8036]

I like WizzyWarlock's post about Shepard's breath scene actually taking place on The Citadel after Sovereign's defeat in ME1. ME2 and 3 were just dreams and ME4 will be the "real story". That would be one serious mind F from Bioware but I would go along with it. I could see this being Bioware's way of making up for a lot of stuff without making a MASS EFFECT 3 2.0. They could just say this is the same story but told a totally different way with a more simplistic ending to the whole series, maybe some way to have a conventional victory. The challenge with that would be making the so called "dream stories" of ME2 and 3 carry some type of heavy weight in the next "real Reaper story" trilogy so that fans would not have invested time and money on ME2 and 3 for nothing.

 

I say give fans what they really really really want Bioware.............A TRUE COMPLETE SIMPLE YET EPIC ENDING THAT MAKES SINCE FROM BEGINNING TO END. If they have to do this by telling the same story from another perspective or whatever, than so be it. I mean telling a whole new story that has absolutely nothing to do with Shepard's story or even his region of space and slapping the MASS EFFECT title on it is kinda Bioware's way of saying "yeah our bad, just forget those other three games". I'm telling ya'll that's not going to fly.

[Ithurael]

 

They made the ending ambiguous. Nothing wrong with that. Many movies and such have done the same thing. To quote one guy who said it better than me (his wording is a little harsh, but he gets the point across).

 

That is the "developer intent" of ME3 ending (in the link).

 

 

Lol. The link you provided is great! he has a very goldrush kind of feel to him.

 

First off, it really does amaze me that ITers - who have truly poured over the lore, the game, and the ending so many times seemed to have missed one of the biggest things about reaper indoctrination:

 

It can't create complex and detailed dreamscapes - at all.

 

Not even Leviathan enthrallment can do that.

 

Perhaps the ending could be some NEW kind of indoctrination or some NEW ability we have never seen nor heard about but that, in reality, is as big an asspull as the starbrat being on the citadel the entire time and being the collective consciousness of the reapers.

 

Iters largely assume that if a reaper is made of a leviathan than it can create a dreamscape or that since reapers perfected enthrallment to indoctrination then they can created advanced dreamscapes. But again there are two issues: The first is a fallacy called 'Affirming the consequent' the second is a huge assumption that is never replicated in the lore (until we get to that damn ending). When you base your argument on a fallacy things don't end so well.

 

Note: The leviathan 'dream' sequence were completely unrealistic and dreamy showing a lack of details. The blue background, changing character models, etc. The ending sequence is very detailed, the starkid never changes models, the setting never changes randomly, etc.

 

The best retort I can think of is that "reapers perfected enthrallment thus it CAN be more detailed". Again, this is a massive assumption. And it is never shown again in the game - at all.

 

So, lets look at the ending to Blade Runner (I haven't seen Minority Report so don't spoil it).

 

One of the big theories at the end of Blade Runner was that Deckard was a replicant. How do we think this? The story gives us and shows us how a replicant works.

 

- They look human (in the case of all shown replicants)

- Can think their human (in the case of his love interest)

 

Now, going off this and how the 'dream' sequences were in the movie (I think involving a unicorn maybe - not sure, been a while) we can conclude that yeah, it is very plausible and possible for Deckard to be a replicant. We can do this with very little speculation since we a driving from what the story and dialog have shown us. And this is repeatable and explored in the story itself

 

Now, lets look at IT and Reaper indoctrination

 

Citing the codex:

"Reaper "Indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper's resulting control over the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestions."

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

 

Now, we are shown via this codex entry what the primary goal is (control over the limbic system) what the means of this is (Physical and Psychological Conditioning) and finally what the method is (electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods)

 

So, what are the symptoms of indoctrination?

"Organics undergoing indoctrination may complain of headaches and buzzing or ringing in their ears. As time passes, they have feelings of "being watched" and hallucinations of "ghostly" presences."

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

 

Also note the rachni complained of "oily shadows". And, to the hallucinations...we see what those are during the derelict reaper mission when looking at the crew log. It was fleeting and not very long sustainable and nowhere near as detailed as a decision chamber with one, two, or three choices (two of which indoctrinate you)

LINK

Again the notable retort - "if a dead reaper can make it show something that doesn't exist for an instant an live one can do that infinitely better and with a much more complex hallucination." Again, this is an assumption the rest of the game never shows us and is not really repeatable.

 

These symptoms are shown and given to us in ONE scene during the ending - the TIM confrontation. There we see:

- Oily shadows

- Ringing sounds

- Reaper horns (subtle but there)

- Headaches

 

In the end we lose control of shepard (due to a cut scene - mechanical and TIMs domination power - story) and Shepard breaks the attempt (no matter what) and kills TIM or TIM kills himself.

 

Where - in the ending sequence with the starbrat - do we see the following:

- Oily shadows

- Ringing sounds

- Reaper horns (subtle but there)

- Headaches

- Hallucinations

 

So, to compare Blade Runner (which shows us how Deckard COULD be a Replicant and gives us the means to do it) vs The IT which the lore, codex, game, or dialog does not show us - at all - any way the reapers could create advanced dream sequences is not the best idea.

 

Thus, why I say that IT is fan headcanon. And that is ok to have. It really is. It is fine if you want IT to be your ending. Hell, it DOES explain away all the nagging problems with the ending rather easily. That is why so many people grabbed onto it in the first place. But when you look at the lore, the codex, the game, the narrative, and the dialog there is no real solid and repeatable evidence that reaper indoctrination is even capable of doing what IT wants it to be able to do.

 

But to say that IT is the developer intent - like they planned on it the entire time and are going to expand on it in the next or future titles...this is not really the best choice, and it kinda makes you look like a D.

 

Don't be a D, never assume something to be real without looking at the evidence and drawing a logical conclusion. However, if you want to fudge the variables and just headcanon that the reapers CAN make dream sequences that are as complex as the decision chamber - great. This is never shown in the lore, but hey, if you can headcanon it that is fine. It is your headcanon.

 

 

TL:DR

Believing IT or the literal ending is fine - that is the player choice and bioware truly values player choice. There is no canon ending to ME3 everything can be what the fans want it to be. You want Green, you can have green. You want Red, you can have red, You want IT, you can have IT, You want Dinosaurs, you can have dinosaurs. There are multiple endings to the game and you can choose which one you like the most. I think this is what you are trying to say and I know I am trying to say. If you want to think that the ending ends with shepard beating indoctrination - great. However, it has to end there since there will be nothing else coming.

 

However, believing that IT is how bioware wanted to end the game and was planning to end the game and everything else is just fan-fiction or fan headcanon or fan misinterpretation - this is being a bit pretentious.

 

I know - no matter what - you will reject bioware's interpretation and substitute your own. This is called headcanon. And, while it isn't what bio wrote, it is what you want. Knowing the difference is key, confusing the two is very bad and can lead to negative consequences.

 

MrBtounge said it best: "If a segment of a story is based on a contrivance than it has NO NARRATIVE LEGITIMACY you are free to substitute your own segment [IT or Shep on earth] in its place. And your substitute will be just as official as the real version [shep on the citadel] if not moreso"

- This is reinforced by Gamble saying there is no canon ending to ME3

- However, this isn't to be confused with saying IT == BIowares plan all along (as shown by the rest of the text above)

 

And while bio could at one point bring in IT for ME4 and have us finish the fight. They would need to retcon the codex a bit to allow for it or explain how the ending of ME3 was a dreamscape created by the reaper or harbinger (as depending on your playthrough either a regular sovereign class comes down or it is Harbinger)  in the next game. This echos what Zerberus stated. If you want to believe this...go for it man. But for gods sake dont just throw your money at a developer blindly because your as of yet unconfirmed and unvalidated headcanon that makes you enjoy the product more than if you didn't have it.

[Iakus]

I don't believe in IT, but I wish I did.  If Bioware ever canonized it, I'd try to roll with it.  Whatever it took so the endings aren't what they appeared to be.

[Ithurael]

I don't believe in IT, but I wish I did.  If Bioware ever canonized it, I'd try to roll with it.  Whatever it took so the endings aren't what they appeared to be.

 

Ya, if bio wants to do IT for ME4...I would be skeptical. I wouldn't pre order (as I don't do that post ME3 for any game) but I will admit, my interest would be just as percalated as if it were an AU. But again, if they do IT they would have to explain in the lore how reapers could do what they were able to do. Or they could just retcon the beam run and say shep just died lol.

 

Hell, to add to my massive post. I have my own IT headcanon and my main playthrough consists of me playing to ME2s credits and the end of Arrival DLC (my canon ending to ME2) and then just headcanoning ME3 entirely! It mostly takes this form
 

I know what I am thinking is not real or biowares intent nor what they wrote. But it makes me enjoy the series knowing that I ended it the way it was supposed to end - for me.

[Valmar]

If they went with IT for MENext then it would mean they've been lying to us about the game. Personally, I didn't appreciate being lied to with ME3 so I'm certainly won't encourage them to lie to me about MENext.

 

Anyone who goes into the next game expecting it to have X,Y,Z when Bioware have specifically said it WONT have X, Y, Z only have themselves to blame if they're disappointed it didn't.

[D.C.]

here's the problem for me:

 

developers said that it wasn't gonna have ending a,b, or c for the ending of ME3 but it did (it's a lie)

 

and then feed whatever answer they feel after that

 

I'm not walking into the the next game with any expectations because:"fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"