74 Antworten in diesem Thema

[corkyspetals]

I am new to the ME franchise, I just played the whole series this spring.  I played with the EC and really had no idea about the ending controversy and never heard about the Indoctrination Theory.  When I first played the ending I was a little confused (surprise!)  but thought the whole IT was just cranky fans creating a conspiracy theory to ease their minds.  I have to say I now find IT to be more compelling than I originally thought.

 

 

Question:  How important to the theory is it for Shepard to be unconscious or just lying on the ground and imagining the whole Star Child encounter?

 

 

 

 

The reason I ask this is because as I played though the ending I was wondering if something like this was going on (before I ever heard about the IT).  My interpretation was a little different.  To me, Shepard did actually go to the crucible and have a conversation with the Star Child.  A lot of what happened seemed like Shepard was under the influence, the crazy horror of the long walk, the star child, angel and devil  Anderson and TIM.  And Shepard's eyes (there seemed to be a lot of visual focus on the eyes.).  To me, Shepard was (mostly) conscious but fighting the mind control and the breath scene was on the crucible.  When I heard about Indoctrination Theory I learned there were all these rules about what happened, which blackout started the hallucination, never getting to the crucible, etc..  My first impressions didn't fit neatly into Indoctrination Theory.  I just ignored IT and tried to interpret the ending at face value.  And that was pretty unsatisfactory.  The final choices were confusing.  I totally accept that there were no easy answers, that all choices had uneasy consequences (like real life).  But to me the choices didn't align with the whole paragon/renegade thing.  Which was another layer of confusing.

 

 

 

Anyway,   In IT, does it ALL have to be hallucination?  What did I miss?  I'm approaching my second playthrough of the ending and a little curious.

 

[MrFob]

I think there are several versions of IT with slight differences but in general, yes, the IT postulated that Shep only wakes up from being shot by Harbinger in the breath scene. Everything in between is supposed to be a reaper induced hallucination and if you choose any ending but destroy, they succeed in indoctrinating you.

 

However, you have to take into account that IT originated from the original endings without the EC. After the EC was released, and if you play the game with it, in my opinion, IT doesn't make that much sense anymore. Also, since it wasn't BW's intention and since they will never follow up on it, there is also no value to it anymore IMO. Because as it is, if IT were true, we'd have a story without an ending. Shepard never defeated the reapers, so if he wakes up in the rubble in London, the war is still in full force and the situation is still dire. Since BW will never make an IT ending DLC, any IT follower will not have any ending at all.

 

I personally really liked IT when I first heard about it right after finishing the game n March 2012. I was hoping that it was BioWare's actual intention and that they already had the actual ending ready to go and would release it soon (for free). If that had happened, I'd have loved them for it. The beauty of it would have been that in a reflection of the game itself, BioWare would have succeeded in indoctrinating part of the audience. I know that it would have angered a whole lot of people (especially those who chose control or synthesis because in effect BW would have told them that they were wrong) but IMO, it would have been worth it. After all, had they done this, it would have been something completely new, something that no other piece of entertainment/literature/story telling had ever done, which is to manipulate your audience in the same way the protagonist is manipulated in the game world and have them actively working for the bad guys. This is something that also would have taken advantage of the unique interactivity that the young art form of video games offers. In other media (films, books, etc.) you can also screw with your audience's mind but ultimately, there is always this wall of non-interaction between the audience and the protagonist. Only in video games is the protagonist really the avatar of the player and only there, you can offer choices to the player directly. Choice has always been one of the major hallmarks of the ME series and having the reapers (and through them BW of course) use it in such a twisted way would not only have made sense but would have been a new and unexpected stroke of genius in a fairly new form of story telling.

 

It would take a lot of guts by the writers and devs to do such a thing because you can bet the outrage over it would have been just as loud but I believe that, despite all its down sides, this kind of devious manipulation would have been true art and it would have secured the Mass Effect trilogy a unique place in the hall of fame of new and innovative story telling for years if not decades.

 

That would have been the real strength of IT if it had been true, not that it made anyone happy or mad or whatever or that it would have been the perfect ending but that it would have been something we never experienced before.

[cap and gown]

. Because as it is, if IT were true, we'd have a story without an ending.

 

Wasn't that the point of IT? The theory seems to have been developed by people that felt we were eventually going to get the "real" ending. The EC crushed that idea.

[Remix-General Aetius]

I think there are several versions of IT with slight differences but in general, yes, the IT postulated that Shep only wakes up from being shot by Harbinger in the breath scene. Everything in between is supposed to be a reaper induced hallucination and if you choose any ending but destroy, they succeed in indoctrinating you.

 

that doesn't even make sense. I thought they said the whole choice thing was Harbinger's mind tricks and that Shepard's quest ended when he got fried by the Reaper's beam. meaning that the Crucible was never activated in the first place. because otherwise how did Shepard end up back on Earth after being UP THERE all this time? was he just magically zapped back down after he chose Destroy?

[MrFob]

@cap and gown: Yes, that was the point at the time. There are still people out there, how like the IT interpretation even now after the EC (I am not one of them). Since the OP was asking about IT in the context of the EC, that's what I was referring to there. In the beginning though (i.e. in March 2012), yes, we were hoping for a (free) IT ending DLC.

 

@B-R.S.: The idea was that Shepard's choice in the catalyst chamber represents his dedication to stick to the original goals. Control represents the way in which the reapers tried to indoctrinate TIM, Synthesis might represent the way in which they tried to indoctrinate Saren. But yes, the choice happens only in Shepard's mind and is just a representation of his/her will (and of course - as always - the player's will by proxy). This kind of representation of the mind is rather commonly used in SciFi, so wile new in the ME universe, I think one could have gotten away with it.

I do understand that this causes some highly controversial issues (as I explained in my rather extensive edit above (sorry about that) but I do still think, even with it's downsides, I would have found it super cool, even if I myself also certainly wouldn't have been happy with every aspect of it.

 

Again, sorry for the extensive edit, I think both of you might have read my post above before I updated it.

[corkyspetals]

How does the EC erase the need for IT?  I've seen videos comparing the original ending to the EC, but that just leaves me with a garbled understanding of the original ending.  Why doesn't the EC make sense if Shepard was dreaming it all?  I've seen people argue that once Shepad wakes up in London, the choice is clear.

 

 

that doesn't even make sense. I thought they said the whole choice thing was Harbinger's mind tricks and that Shepard's quest ended when he got fried by the Reaper's beam. meaning that the Crucible was never activated in the first place. because otherwise how did Shepard end up back on Earth after being UP THERE all this time? was he just magically zapped back down after he chose Destroy?

 

 

How do we know Shepard wakes up in London?

 

 

And again, my first impressions of the ending were that a conscious Shepard is fighting indoctrination,  not a complete hallucination like the IT.

 

 

Are there any flaws in that?

[Remix-General Aetius]

no need to apologize, Fobby. it's like I've always said. IT is something created by people with far too much time on their hands and in desperate need of a hobby.

[MrFob]

How does the EC erase the need for IT? I've seen videos comparing the original ending to the EC, but that just leaves me with a garbled understanding of the original ending. Why doesn't the EC make sense if Shepard was dreaming it all? I've seen people argue that once Shepad wakes up in London, the choice is clear.

Well, the problem is not really what the EC shows. Even the epilogues could be part of the dream (although I don't quite get why the reapers would show those to Shep but no matter).
The real problem is that after releasing the EC and Leviathan, BW stated that they were 100% done with the ending and would never release anything further on the issue. So today, right now, if you interpret the games final scenes in line with IT, you don't have an ending at all.
 

Are there any flaws in that?

No flaws as I can see. It's just as valid an interpretation as the others I guess.

 

@B-R.S.: What? Over-analyzing Mass Effect doesn't count as a hobby?!? I know a lot of people on these boards (me included obviously) who are so screwed right now.

[corkyspetals]

Maybe the Indoctrination Theory was only partly right.  Maybe there was indoctrination and no dream sequence.  To me, that makes the ending just as amazing, the player still has to fight the indoctrination to make the "right" choice.  At the very least, I'd say the writers wanted us players to wonder if Shepard was being influenced by indoctrination with all the nightmares, glowing eyes and surreal ending.

[corkyspetals]

p.s.

 

I've heard that Leviathan adds details that may change a player's interpretation.  I didn't have it my first playthrough, but I'll playing it the next few days.  I may come back here and add some new comments afterwards.

[fraggle]

How do we know Shepard wakes up in London?

 

Shepard wakes up on the Crucible, it has been confirmed by a dev tweet at some point.

 

Personally I've never thought the ending was anything but real. I've only read after finishing ME3 earlier this year (without EC) that IT is out there. But I still prefer it being real, and I spent a lot of time going through the Catalyst's lines to dig deeper into the ending and try to make more sense of it.

And yes, Leviathan makes that a bit easier

[cap and gown]

 I spent a lot of time going through the Catalyst's lines to dig deeper into the ending and try to make more sense of it.

And yes, Leviathan makes that a bit easier

 

Trying to make sense of the Catalyst is a hopeless task.

 

[fraggle]

Trying to make sense of the Catalyst is a hopeless task.

 

We all need a hobby

[corkyspetals]

Well, I just finished Leviathan.  It does fill in a lot of details about the story.  And it doesn't contradict my thoughts about Shepard experiencing early stages of indoctrination near the end.  My head canon stays intact.  Shepard is dazed and confused while talking to the Star Child and fights off the effects of mind control to decide which path to take.

[GalacticWolf5]

Trying to make sense of the Catalyst is a hopeless task.

 

 

It's really not.

 

Also, that picture doesn't make any sense. That's not even the purpose of the Reapers. smh

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Trying to make sense of the Catalyst is a hopeless task.

 

**snip

 

Some of us can make sense of it fine without simple denial/rejection. That there are those who do not/cannot understand it does not take away from the fact that it can indeed be made sense of.

[Reorte]

Question for the IT people? Answer is "Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

[Excella Gionne]

IT is too messy. Too many interpretations, and it falls even flatter when the Arrival DLC is excluded.

[themikefest]

If Shepard is being Indoctrinated couldn't Garrus be indoctrinated? He's the only squadmate that can be with Shepard for the whole trilogy except the beginning part of each game and the arrival dlc

[Ruadh]

It's cute people are still assuming IT is fan made. I remember thinking the dreams and the ending were some form of indoctrination, then coming here and finding many others had the same interpretation. That's wrong though, everybody knows IT is just someones fan fiction that people latched onto, because they didn't like the endings. Obviously.

 

There is something about literalists I find amusing though. The Leviathan can enter Shepards mind and manipulate his memories to make him see anything they want, while feeding him whatever information they feel like. All the while Shep is defenceless. This is fine.

 

The Reapers not only have this ability, but an extremely advanced version which they use as their greatest weapon. They use it to slowly and subtly convert organic minds to their own reasoning, with most oblivious that it's even happening.

 

But Shepard is immune to Reaper indoctrination because reasons, in true Lovecraftian style. And the self-confessed leader of the Reapers, telling you that you'll save the galaxy by killing yourself is definitely legit and all the weird things that keep happening can be ignored because LOOK A SLIDESHOW .

[corkyspetals]

@Ruadh

 

So what about a blend of indoctrination (small i) with some literalist.    Without the whole "never left London, it was all an unconscious hallucination" part.  I guess I never really saw why that needs to be part of the ending.  It seems like quite a leap to go from a badly injured Shepard (who occasionally blacks out) who is being influenced by the reaper to a total hallucination with no basis in reality.  It sounds a little like a conspiracy theory that brings up legit concerns but gets too complicated with secret shenanigans.

[DoomsdayDevice]

The breath scene doesn't need to be in London in IT, it can also be on the Citadel, depending on where you believe the illusion starts.

Some believe the illusion starts at Harbinger's blast (this is the most popular idea), but some believe Shepard actually went up to the Citadel, but the illusion starts at the decision chamber.

If the decision chamber was an illusion/dream, then the explosion we see when Shepard blows the tube didn't actually take place. The rubble we see in the breath scene could be a result of the Reapers trying to destroy Shepard once (s)he decides (s)he still wants to destroy the Reapers. Only a Shepard with lots of assets and allies is able to survive this attempt.

But to answer the OP's question:

I think only Waking Nightmare Theory (a variation of IT) postulates that it's an indoctrination attempt without being an illusion. The biggest problem with that is that Shepard would never be able to survive this humongous explosion:

[themikefest]

It's hard to believe that Shepard could survive that explosion. It's also hard to believe that people survive earthquakes being buried under a pile of rubble for a couple of days or longer

[DoomsdayDevice]

Yeah, I don't think it's as unlikely as surviving being dead center in a blast that spans a few kilometers. It would be like surviving a direct impact of a nuclear bomb that in terms of power and force is multitudes of what was dropped on Hiroshima. Shepard should be nothing but particles.