50 réponses à ce sujet

[Kjata1013]

I know. It's been rehashed, every clue uncovered, every theory posited. I don't know where else to post this but are there any more people like me who are now consumed with this universe and need to talk about it? I am desperate.

 

*SPOILERS* 

 

My first play through, I took everything at face value. I knew enough that the ending was going to be an issue and I braced myself for it. And, like others, it left me wanting and disappointed. None of the choices made sense. I chose synthesis because, as I said, I believed everything I saw and synthesis made the most sense. Shepard (in my games maxed out paragon. HATED playing renegade in ME1) Shepard always tried to solve things without taking a life. She campaigned that any sentient being deserved life and rights to make their own future. She only killed to prevent others from dying (contradictory, I know). I believed the god-child when they said that destroy would kill all synthetics. EDI, the geth, everything. It made no sense after how much Shepard fought to end the geth / Quarian war, help EDI and Joker, etc. Synthesis seemed to be the choice that ended the cycle of synthetics vs organics and ends the war. 

 

After completing the series I went back to get the achievements and DLC. I also went through my pages I had booked-marked to read long ago when three came out (Yup, I bought these games on release day but only played them now. I hate me too.) and starting reading about the indoctrination theory. It made complete sense to me. All the loose ends wrapped up. Destroy makes sense because that is the only option to have Shepard survive. Neat, I thought, this makes so much more sense. It wasn't the Return of the Jedi happy ending, it was a realistic ending that had enormous sacrifices, consequence, but still had hope. As an aside, just because Shepard breathes, doesn't mean they're OK. I can only imagine the physical and mental torment that she has gone through, she'll never be the same. 

 

Anyway. Pleased with the IT, I continued to research and that has lead me to make this post. There are people vehement that the IT is not canon, Bioware has "denied" it, and everything that happened was real. 

 

Is there anyone who can tell me why people think it's not true? I've tried to find statements from Bioware but the best I can find in an old Kotaku article that says they refused to comment. 

 

If there is anyone new who isn't sick of talking about it or anyone who is a veteran and isn't sick of talking about it, please, what are your thoughts? What have you found? Thank you.

[fraggle]

If I remember it right, one of the main points of IT is that Shepard is still in London by the end/breath scene.

However it was tweeted by one of the devs that Shepard is on the Citadel. Plus there's the slides in EC, which pretty much states everything that happened was real. You directly see what you did by choosing any ending, you see the future you've created with it.

[KevTheGamer]

I'm in the minority but I actually liked the final choices in Mass Effect 3. The original ending was lazy but the extended cut gave me everything I needed personally. 

 

Destroy - simple straight forward I came here to do a job and I am going to do it. This is what I came here to do. Its what I know will work for the immediate threat. 

Control- Its a chance. A huge chance but TIM proved that it is possible to control the Reapers provided that they are not controlling you already. 

Synthesis- Another gamble but its the best of both worlds. Nobody has to die and we can all work together. 

Rejection- Screw you I will do it my way. You die but you die knowing you did what you thought was right. 

 

I don't think there was ever meant to be a good choice. Its one of those choices like Ashley or Kaiden (depending on how you look at it anyway. I personally disliked Kaiden) You'd rather not have to make the choice but this is what you have to work with and basically this entire time your assumptions about the Reapers were slightly off in a lot of ways. So to me it makes a lot of sense. Its simply just not the ending the fans wanted. Its a shame that almost 4 years later that people are still talking about the ending though. That speaks volumes to how great the trilogy was. 

[Kjata1013]

 @fraggle I see. So, if the Citadel scenes were just a manifest of indoctrination, then how did Shepard affect the outcome of the war. Is that right? Ugh, so we're trading one gigantic plot hole for another. 

 

Thank you for replying. More to think about...

[Kjata1013]

 people are still talking about the ending though. That speaks volumes to how great the trilogy was. 

 

Absolutely. I was just thinking that. The fact that people have such strong emotions about it one way or another is very indicative that this is a great series. 

[holdenagincourt]

Well historically IT emerged from the numerous holes in the information presented by the original ending of ME3. The Extended Cut cleared up a number of inconsistencies and missing bits, thereby weakening the case.

 

The thing you're forgetting is that as originally proposed, IT placed a good amount of faith in BioWare, arguing that the writers had created a challenging and bombastic ending that few people understood as presented and which they would eventually reveal with great fanfare. The "true ending" would fulfill the high expectations fans had for the culmination of Shepard's story, reward the Destroy people who saw through the charade all along, and smite the Control and Synthesis nonbelievers who had fallen prey to Reaper suggestion.

 

This obviously never happened, and with the EC endings it is basically guaranteed that BioWare wants the Catalyst to be a reliable source of information and the endings to be taken at face value. In none of them is a massive Reaper conspiracy made apparent to the galaxy; in fact, outside of the disturbing violations of sentient rights every ending requires Shepard to perpetrate, the denouement of the trilogy is basically positive in all cases.

[fraggle]

 @fraggle I see. So, if the Citadel scenes were just a manifest of indoctrination, then how did Shepard affect the outcome of the war. Is that right? Ugh, so we're trading one gigantic plot hole for another. 

 

Thank you for replying. More to think about...

 

Not sure which plot holes you mean, you mean when taking IT as real?

[Kjata1013]

Not sure which plot holes you mean, you mean when taking IT as real?

 

I guess I'm thinking too much in binary, that either IT is right or not. Maybe plot hole was not a good choice of words.

[Kjata1013]

 The Extended Cut cleared up a number of inconsistencies and missing bits, thereby weakening the case.

There is an issue I take with this particular statement although, please understand, I am not dismissing your argument. It's giving me a lot more to think about.

 

I never played ME3 without the extended cut. Some of the videos I've watched, I didn't realize they were about the original ending at first blush. A lot of questions I had were brought up in these videos. My first play through left me with a feeling of "this isn't right". How did Anderson get there ahead of Shepard? Why was Shepard shot in the same place as Anderson? Those are the ones off the top of my head right now. 

[Tim van Beek]

How did Anderson get there ahead of Shepard? Why was Shepard shot in the same place as Anderson? Those are the ones off the top of my head right now. 

You should easily find videos from back then which have about, I don't know, 50 or so observations that break realism after Harbinger's beam hits Shepard. Beginning with the fact that the beam does not kill Shepard outright (while it does on Tuchanka and on Rannoch and on Earth, where standing still in front of a Reaper and its beam for a couple of seconds instantly results in a critical mission failure), but redresses her into her casual outfit, to the fact that what the Catalyst says about synthethis does not make any sense in the ME universe and that the way Shepard dies does not make any sense, up to the breath scene which is impossible if the citadel blows up as it is shown.

 

The extended cut basically throws more text and pictures at all this in the effort to "make sense" if it all, so IT is clearly not what the writers intended.

 

Before the EC, the best point IMHO against IT would have been that the whole story of IT would need Shepard to have some kind of inner life and personality, that begins to shift in the course of the game. Shep doesn't have that. There are a lot of movies out there that show how this can be done, even subtly, and none of the necessary concepts are present in ME:3. 

 

You can't have a "The Sixth Sense" like twist ending, if you don't prepare it somehow and for example start the movie with the first conversation between Bruce Willis' character and the kid, i.e Bruce is never shot. 

[themikefest]

How did Anderson get there ahead of Shepard?

He didn't go up the beam the same time Shepard did and it dropped him off at another location. He also wasn't badly wounded. So him getting to the console first isn't too hard to believe.

What bothers me is he says I followed you up the beam. Obviously he saw Shepard go up the beam, but if Shepard turns around before going up the beam, no one is seen. Why couldn't he help Shepard deal with the husks and Mirauder? After Shepard is shot by Harbinger, Harbinger is seen flying away, but yet Coates and another Marine are saying fallback, regroup. Why? Didn't Anderson say we move forward at all cost? Or why didn't he get on the comms and tell everyone to disregard retreating and run to the beam after Harbinger flew away?
 

Why was Shepard shot in the same place as Anderson?

Its possible a piece of shrapnel caused the wound

[Fawna]

I know. It's been rehashed, every clue uncovered, every theory posited. I don't know where else to post this but are there any more people like me who are now consumed with this universe and need to talk about it? I am desperate.

*SPOILERS*

My first play through, I took everything at face value. I knew enough that the ending was going to be an issue and I braced myself for it. And, like others, it left me wanting and disappointed. None of the choices made sense. I chose synthesis because, as I said, I believed everything I saw and synthesis made the most sense. Shepard (in my games maxed out paragon. HATED playing renegade in ME1) Shepard always tried to solve things without taking a life. She campaigned that any sentient being deserved life and rights to make their own future. She only killed to prevent others from dying (contradictory, I know). I believed the god-child when they said that destroy would kill all synthetics. EDI, the geth, everything. It made no sense after how much Shepard fought to end the geth / Quarian war, help EDI and Joker, etc. Synthesis seemed to be the choice that ended the cycle of synthetics vs organics and ends the war.

After completing the series I went back to get the achievements and DLC. I also went through my pages I had booked-marked to read long ago when three came out (Yup, I bought these games on release day but only played them now. I hate me too.) and starting reading about the indoctrination theory. It made complete sense to me. All the loose ends wrapped up. Destroy makes sense because that is the only option to have Shepard survive. Neat, I thought, this makes so much more sense. It wasn't the Return of the Jedi happy ending, it was a realistic ending that had enormous sacrifices, consequence, but still had hope. As an aside, just because Shepard breathes, doesn't mean they're OK. I can only imagine the physical and mental torment that she has gone through, she'll never be the same.

Anyway. Pleased with the IT, I continued to research and that has lead me to make this post. There are people vehement that the IT is not canon, Bioware has "denied" it, and everything that happened was real.

Is there anyone who can tell me why people think it's not true? I've tried to find statements from Bioware but the best I can find in an old Kotaku article that says they refused to comment.

If there is anyone new who isn't sick of talking about it or anyone who is a veteran and isn't sick of talking about it, please, what are your thoughts? What have you found? Thank you.

I just started in August idk. From the beginning of one it's about stopping them you even make Saeren realize there's no individual being machine an organic together because the universe is species having there own uniqueness. I'm still trying to figure it out maybe it's not meant to be but haven't been able to stop playing it. I feel like I'm missing something an it right there. The IT makes sense kinda connects the dots for me more than anything else. Because all of ME3 I feel like I'm lost.but I did just buy arrival to 2 I'm going through another run through I think this is my 6th girl Cinder. Tried to play trespassers dlc for DAI an can't get into it have to figure ME out. Hubby says I think to much but whatever. If you find something that connects it all let me know I'm doing this play through with IT theory in mind an see. Then she's on earth and my ending headcannon is this here made by the wonderful Eji I believe her


http://youtu.be/Tb44bBzUMtA

[Tim van Beek]

After Shepard is shot by Harbinger, Harbinger is seen flying away, but yet Coates and another Marine are saying fallback, regroup. Why? Didn't Anderson say we move forward at all cost? 

I think one could get away, as a writer, with some confusion on both sides on the battlefield, as most people will believe that real battles are much more chaotic than anything you ever see in fiction. For example, according to some reports, in some recent engagements more US soldiers were killed by friendly fire than by the enemey. 

 

The problem is mostly that the writers break their own rules of what is supposed to be realistic. For example, why did Anderson and only Anderson make it to the citadel, too? And this:

 

 

Or why didn't he get on the comms and tell everyone to disregard retreating and run to the beam after Harbinger flew away?

So Harby's beam did burn the armor, weapons and all active abilities, but somehow not the comm system, except that both Shepard and Anderson seem to forget that they could at least try to reach other Alliance forces with it...

 

And yes...

 

Its possible a piece of shrapnel caused the wound

It is possible to come up with explanations for most of the stuff that makes the whole sequence surreal, it's the sheer sum of those that are needed that is astonishing.

 

This has to be one of the most astonishing miscommunications in the history of fiction. (Ugh, I mean fiction that is published and distributed to an audience of millions. Presumably there is worse that never gets published  )

[Mordokai]

I am not here to debate anything. I haven't read anything past the OP and won't engage anybody in debate. I'll just post link to Deception theory in hopes that it well help OP deal with the ending as much as it did me.

 

And with that, I bid you farewell again.

[cap and gown]

The Krogan are able to build up a city over top a humongous Thresher Maw and it doesn't care, but a couple truck drive by and suddenly it decides to chase them.

The Turian fighter wing attacking the Reaper is locked on and can't break off, except right afterwards they do break off.

Geth VI is holographic reconstruction of Legion before it left Geth space, yet still has Legion's hole and a piece of N7 armor on it.

 

Over and over the writing is totally nonsensical. The writers have proven that they cannot put together a consistent, logical story. Yet somehow when we get to the ending people try to come up with some reason to justify the idea that it must all make sense.

 

IT and any other theory fails the Occam's Razor test. The most logical explanation for the ending is "Bad Writing Theory."

[themikefest]

For example, according to some reports, in some recent engagements more US soldiers were killed by friendly fire than by the enemey.

True. Though there was no friendly fire when running to the beam so I'm not sure what your comment has to do with that.
 

For example, why did Anderson and only Anderson make it to the citadel, too?

I would guess the only reason to have him on the Citadel was to have that touchy-feely scene with Shepard. Had TIM been carrying a pistol the whole time instead of pulling it out of Anderson's backside, the scene would play out the same. Anderson was not needed. It was just another way to kill off a character
 
 

[themikefest]

The Turian fighter wing attacking the Reaper is locked on and can't break off, except right afterwards they do break off.

Or why they didn't fire at the destroyer from behind instead of in front of it.

[Jeniva]

So, hang on. 

If shepard lives, you are saying they do wake up on a blown up citadel? I wasn't sure where he/she woke up. 

 

To be honest I only played EC. And when I read about IT I loved it! It did make a lot of sense and make it easier for me to accept that destroy was the only way and justify why I did it. But I don't think bioware would be clever enough to come up with the IT, so I don't believe it to be true (I wish it were). 
The whole NO ONE IS LEFT (shepard and anderson actually were), the anderson getting there first, the anderson getting shot but shepard having the wound - etc etc. IT made sense in that regard.

[AlanC9]

I guess I'm thinking too much in binary, that either IT is right or not. Maybe plot hole was not a good choice of words.

You're on to something there. I'm not sure that "right" is all that useful a concept for this topic. IT is nothing that Bio ever intended, but if IT works for you as a personal interpretation, then go ahead and use it.

[Whitering]

Play on the PC, mod the crap out of the ending, and be happy, or don't install the Extended Cut and live with the mystery.

[AlanC9]

I would guess the only reason to have him on the Citadel was to have that touchy-feely scene with Shepard. Had TIM been carrying a pistol the whole time instead of pulling it out of Anderson's backside, the scene would play out the same. Anderson was not needed. It was just another way to kill off a character

Here's some relevant stuff from that leaked outline:
 

Designer Cutscene:
Shepard comes to.
A handful of survivors from hammer, including Anderson and the henchmen, have gotten bogged down just a few dozen meters from the conduit and have dug in, but are dying quickly.
Suddenly, the Normandy streaks overhead, evading fire fromthe Reaper and blowing a hole in the Reaper enemies' lines.
Anderson shouts for Shepard to make a run for it, and orders the rest of Hammer to cover him.
Cutscene:
Shepard and Anderson approach the conduit's beam. Shepard gets in, but Anderson is grabbed by a husk. Shepard turns to help, but before he can do anything, the beam activates, whisking Shepard away to the Citadel. On the other side, Shepard tears the metal from his leg and casts it aside, and then injects himself with Medigel.
Cutscene:
Shepard comes to. Anderson is dragging him forward. A jagged, bloody piece of metal is sticking out of his thigh. The conduit anchor retracts, stranding the henchmen. Shepard tries to walk, but his leg buckles. Anderson hands Shepard his pistol, and lifts Shepard's arm around his neck, supporting his leg. The two begin to shuffle towards the conduit beam.
Designer Cutscene: Shepard limps to the conduit, and takes one final look around for other survivors. Seeing none, he enters the beam and is transported to the citadel.
CUTSCENE:
Shepard regains consciousness. He's bloody, and obviously badly injured. The Reaper is overhead, blasting away at retreating elements of Hammer. Shepard looks around: he's surrounded by burning vehicles and corpses, alone. He reaches for a syrette of medigel, but finds them broken or empty. Determined, he struggles to his feet, and starts limping towards the conduit.

(from elsewhere in the document)

CUTSCENE/CINE DESIGN:
Shepard leaps into the Conduit at the end of the Earth sequence.
Shepard slowly wakes up. He is badly injured and alone. Suddenly his radio starts to go off.
Shepard and Anderson reach the end of the tunnel in to a larger central chamber. They realize this is essentially a rendering facility. Human goo pours from their tunnel, and dozens (hundreds?) like it, into a vast holding tank under the grated floor.
As they enter the control room they can see the controls for the Citadel Arms, but before they can reach them both Shepard and Anderson begin to feel the effects similiar to those Shepard felt at MIRANDA'S MISSION. Before they can realize what's happening, Anderson and Shepard find themselves with their guns drawn and aimed at one another.
CUTSCENE:
The platform Shepard was on begins to rise up into GUARDIAN's garden where he is faced with his final decision.

Apparently there was going to be some sort of indoctrination sequence present in both the Horizon mission and in the endgame; we see traces of that in the TIM confrontation. (Bio devs have said that they playtested a sequence where Shepard was indoctrinated and out of the player's control, but it failed in testing and they cut the whole thing.) It's hard to understand the intent here because some of the alternate versions of the beam sequence imply that Anderson didn't make it up, but we only have one version of the Citadel material and Anderson is simply there.

[fraggle]

Here's some relevant stuff from that leaked outline:
 
Apparently there was going to be some sort of indoctrination sequence present in both the Horizon mission and in the endgame; we see traces of that in the TIM confrontation. (Bio devs have said that they playtested a sequence where Shepard was indoctrinated and out of the player's control, but it failed in testing and they cut the whole thing.) It's hard to understand the intent here because some of the alternate versions of the beam sequence imply that Anderson didn't make it up, but we only have one version of the Citadel material and Anderson is simply there.

 

Wow, that's really interesting! Is this a document or something? If yes, is it still online somewhere, and are there more scenes like this one? Usually I don't pay too much attention to leaked stuff as a lot of it might change anyway, but it's pretty cool to see the ideas they had and how it was done in the end.

[AlanC9]

Before the EC, the best point IMHO against IT would have been that the whole story of IT would need Shepard to have some kind of inner life and personality, that begins to shift in the course of the game. Shep doesn't have that. There are a lot of movies out there that show how this can be done, even subtly, and none of the necessary concepts are present in ME:3.

I wonder if this would have been tolerable. One of the standard knocks on ME3 if not the whole series is that Shepard's character is too predefined as it is.

[AlanC9]

Someone put it up on Reddit years ago, with a link.

[Jeniva]

I am not here to debate anything. I haven't read anything past the OP and won't engage anybody in debate. I'll just post link to Deception theory in hopes that it well help OP deal with the ending as much as it did me.

 

And with that, I bid you farewell again.

 

that link is great. I didn't read every bit of info but skimmed over it. 

The one major thing I would disagree with is the stating that the geth might not have been destroyed in the destroy ending - I think it's made fairly obvious they no longer exist as every other ending you see the geth in the slides.