94 réponses à ce sujet

[fhs33721]

Disagree so completely!

IT is a thing that real fans actually came up with because they needed to figure out the endings and the meanings. Subtle variation here.

 

You mean the super-secret meaning that only destroy is the "correct" option because in all others you are being indoctrinated^TM . Yeah thats why Bioware released a free DLC with Epilogue slides for all the endings, which show little to nothing that proves this concept.

 

You don't give BW enough credit with their writing... subtlety is everywhere in the entire ME trilogy.

 

Name one example of subtlety in the Main storyline of Mass Effect. One that isn't somehow linked to the Indoctrination theory.

[rossler]

I don't think that kid was real to begin with.

[voteDC]

so you took no notice of the fact shepard was basically unable to do anything during the confrontation with TIM and Anderson?  The only thing he managed to do was shoot TIM even though he had no control of his major motor functions at all. You took no notice of the oily shadows everywhere on screen?  The reaper noises in the background.  The indoctrination nibbling at his mind all the time judging by his reactions - it deffo looked as if something was messing with his mind.

 

It's just so obvious.  

 

Replay the section in surround and really listen to the individual channels.  It's a dead giveaway.

It amazes me how the goal posts of indoctrination theory move from person to person.

Okay. I'm open to accepting what you propose but what about all the other supporters of indoctrination theory who say that Shepard is clearly indoctrinated directly after being hit by Harbinger's beam. How it is completely obvious because of the spooky trees and slow-mo. How about those that believe that Vent Boy is the Reapers trying to affect Shepard, that the dreams with him in are Shepard fighting off indoctrination.

 

Indoctrination theory falls apart the more you look into it because the pieces, much like the Citadel at the end, have to keep shifting in order to make them fit.

[Scourge king]

Pretty much everyone has. It's one of the points of 'proof' that people who believe in Indoctrination theory cite, that Shepard starts bleeding from the same place they shot Anderson.

I guess the massive injuries that Shepard has suffered and the physical stress of fighting Illusive Man's control could in no way have torn open a wound.

wellt he thing is he got blown up by harbingers laser he didnt get any puncture wounds from harbingers laser, (being blown up causes damage to organs) and it does not cause bleeding except from nose and ears unless while shepard got blown up with metal or glass or something of that nature accelerated and penetrated shepards body

(otherwise i dont see any other reason he should be bleeding unless anderson was his subconscience or something really important hinting at IT theory)

[voteDC]

wellt he thing is he got blown up by harbingers laser he didnt get any puncture wounds from harbingers laser, (being blown up causes damage to organs) and it does not cause bleeding except from nose and ears unless while shepard got blown up with metal or glass or something of that nature accelerated and penetrated shepards body

(otherwise i dont see any other reason he should be bleeding unless anderson was his subconscience or something really important hinting at IT theory)

You don't see how Harbinger's weapon could have thrown massive amounts of debris and shrapnel at Shepard?

[Scourge king]

You don't see how Harbinger's weapon could have thrown massive amounts of debris and shrapnel at Shepard?

i just rewatched shepard getting blown up by harbinger again about 5 times before i realised harbinger was doing his powerful laser but as i watched though shepard got thrown back before the laser hit him and i did not see that large of debris it mostly looked like chips of concrete/dirt. and i noticed that the laser wasnt going directly towards shepard it rather veered to the left (shepards left)

[voteDC]

So you in no way believe that the chips of concrete could cause Shepard's wound? One that could tear open when under stress?

Shepard's armour has clearly been damaged by heat and debris, but in no way could that cause Shepard to bleed? It absolutely has to be because Shepard is indoctrinated?

[Dantriges]

So you two are now analyzing the injuries from Harbinger´s laser beam of reclothing which blew away Shepard´s armor and reclothed him/her in his/her other dress*, blew away the grenades, if there were any, instead of vaporising Shepard which was the only possible outcome when hit this close by a stream of capship ripping molten metal?

 

*because it would be too silly to let Shep go into the last chapter in briefs or boxers and some undershirt or whatever you wear below this armor. A snugly fitting onesie perhaps?

[voteDC]

So you two are now analyzing the injuries from Harbinger´s laser beam of reclothing which blew away Shepard´s armor and reclothed him/her in his/her other dress*, blew away the grenades, if there were any, instead of vaporising Shepard which was the only possible outcome when hit this close by a stream of capship ripping molten metal?

 

*because it would be too silly to let Shep go into the last chapter in briefs or boxers and some undershirt or whatever you wear below this armor. A snugly fitting onesie perhaps?

Yes, pretty much. I just find it odd that Scourge can see no other way that the wound may have been caused other than it being part of indoctrination.

[Dantriges]

Shep bled because it was dramatically approriate to do so, as much as it was appropriate to clothe in something with a bit more dignity than a slip.

[Scourge king]

Yes, pretty much. I just find it odd that Scourge can see no other way that the wound may have been caused other than it being part of indoctrination.

well no i just have a hard time imagine concrete flying fast enough to penetrate someones skin.

and why in the gut of all places?

are the body/cybernetic upgrades in mass effect 2 affect gameplay only or do they affect lore and background/story?

(i know i'm looking to far into something)

(i also think the bleeding is open to interpretation unless bioware says something officially about it otherwise it can be from shepard shooting anderson or him getting blown up by harbingers laser)

what about the reflections of trees in the decision chamber?

(i think IT will be around until bioware says no its not true says it is true then it wasnt a theory or until ME4 comes out, IMO i think destruction is the perfect ending otherwise if you merged all organics with synthetics wouldnt that technically make all organics immortal/ live forever until killed)

[Dantriges]

Well, we can headcanon up what we want, the canon inquisition won´t bash in your door, but yeah I doubt that it was intended to portray the whole sequence as some kind of indoctrinated dream. Would result in reducing all decisions to one or none, because well what´s making destroy the real one? How do we know that there was a destroy option all along? So "hi we are Bioware, we promised you lots of endings and meaningful decisions but in the end, you only had one and we were just messing with you? Oh but we never tell you and even make a Ending DLC where we reinforce that the whole stuff is true?" I think the inconsistencies are just inconsistencies, the stuff is coming from the same company who let Shep smash into a planet, after dieing in vacuum, reentering atmosphere and then rise and shine because of resources and TIM´s inspiring word "make it so."  Oh and stuff like the Normandy arriving for evac 5 seconds after being called and Harbinger patiently waiting for his great entrance of handing Shep new clothes. Any evidence for inconsistencies are pretty sketchy and unreliable at best, if they handle their stuff inconsistent in general.

 

But yeah they are there, you can cook up some nifty IT theory, if you want to.

[corkyspetals]

It amazes me how the goal posts of indoctrination theory move from person to person.
 

 

I think it's because the Indoctrination Theory was developed by many different people, it's not some cohesive idea formed by consensus.  I'm intrigued by the idea of indoctrination in the ME story, but I definitely fall on the light, small "i" end of the scale as opposed to the heavy "IT" side.  Since the whole Shep shoots Anderson scene was a leftover from the abandoned TIM mind control plot, are their other things that suggest it?  The dreams of spooky trees and oily shadows suggest it.  But they can also suggest that Vent Boy is a burning  reminder (that's a joke, get it?) and motivator for Shep to continue the fight.  See, I can argue both sides.  And then, if the Shep shoots Anderson and with vertigo and whispery voices was part of a deleted plot line why did BW leave it in?

 

 

Right now I'm inclined to think that BW writers wanted us to at least wonder if there was some attempt to indoctrinate Shep, that Shep fought it off  but never succumbed to it.

 

Don't know what I'll think tomorrow.

[voteDC]

well no i just have a hard time imagine concrete flying fast enough to penetrate someones skin.

My last post on this since we've been going more off-topic than we should.

Concrete when thrown by an explosion makes a very effective shrapnel. It doesn't just all instantly turn to dust but pieces large and small can cause serious damage to a person.

 

Shep bled because it was dramatically approriate to do so, as much as it was appropriate to clothe in something with a bit more dignity than a slip.

I think this is the best explanation I've read.

[corkyspetals]

Concrete when thrown by an explosion makes a very effective shrapnel. It doesn't just all instantly turn to dust but pieces large and small can cause serious damage to a person.

 

I think this is the best explanation I've read.

 

Yes.

 

And when I had to break up the concrete sidewalk to get to my sewer line, I sure didn't want to drop the pieces on my foot, much less have them thrown at me.

[introverted_assassin]

Show signs of indoctrination.

you reaching.

[themikefest]

The problem I have with Shepard being shot by Harbinger is that there was no reason for it too happen. Its interesting his/her armor is blown off his/her body, but yet the others in the same area still have their armor on their bodies completely intact. I guess the reason for Shepard being injured was to show how tough and committed to completing the mission he/she is.  Why not just have Shepard go up the beam without any injury? Losing his/her shields could be explained by the beam causing them to be disabled.

 

When Shepard gets up, after being shot by Harbinger, there is blood seen on the left arm. Its possible a piece of shrapnel did lodge in Shepard's torso. It had to be a very small piece otherwise she/he may of passed out long before encountering TIM and Anderson.

 

Anderson getting shot was overkill. TIM already had both under control. Shooting Anderson was just lame way to have him die. The scene didnt't require Anderson. Just have TIM carrying a pistol with him instead of pulling one out of Anderson's backside.

 

Anyways. During the conversation, Shepard is seen placing her left hand to her head when TIM uses more control then puts the arm back down. Anderson puts up his right arm when saying we destroy them or they destroy us. Then he puts his left arm to his gut after being shot. I guess TIM didn't have complete control

 

If Shepard  did suffer the same wound as Anderson, she/he would've bled to death just like Anderson from his wound. What is interesting is Miranda and Ashley/Kaidan die within a few seconds of being shot in the same area, but Anderson is able to stand there and finish talking, then, if TIM is shot or shoots himself, is able to crawl over to the middle to have that dialogue with Shepard. Whatever

[corkyspetals]

 

Anderson getting shot was overkill. TIM already had both under control. Shooting Anderson was just lame way to have him die. The scene didnt't require Anderson. Just have TIM carrying a pistol with him instead of pulling one out of Anderson's backside.

 

 

 

To quote Dantriges, because it was dramatically appropriate.

 

No armor, friends dying left and right, Shepard alone must choose the fate of the galaxy.  TIM is there to be evil (and have a dramatic death), Anderson is there to remind up of the "good" choice, Starbrat to be dispassionate and maybe offer a dispassionate third option.  In the end, Shepard is alone.

[themikefest]

To quote Dantriges, because it was dramatically appropriate.

No it wasn't. It was a poor way to kill off a character.
 

No armor, friends dying left and right,

What friends are you talking about?
 

TIM is there to be evil (and have a dramatic death),

Was TIM evil? His death I wouldn't call dramatic. I just call it a death.
 

Anderson is there to remind up of the "good" choice,

Since my Shepard wanted the things destroyed, Anderson wasn't needed
 

[Dantriges]

No it wasn't. It was a poor way to kill off a character.

 

To calrify, I never said that I was fond of the "for drama" style.

[Rusted Cage]

Indoctrination Theory does have some compelling arguements but I was never convinced by it beyond mild interested. Before the release of the EC dlc there was a message at the end of the game along the lines of "Shepard has become a legend by stopping the Reapers, add to that legend by buying our DLC" which at the time indicated to me that the real ending was yet to be revealed. The conspiracy theorist in me loved the idea that there was something else going on but it was all for nothing after the EC was released.

 

Since Mr BTongue freed me from the ending I tend to take a more open minded approach to all the different theories floating about. It all reminds me of the endings to KotOR and KotOR II and the fate of Revan. At the time of Sith Lords Revan's fate was a mystery and a source of some minor controversy/discussion. Did he/she turn to the darkside to stop a greater threat? Was Revan male or female and how would that ever be resolved to fit within the SW canon? At the time it was a burning question, a mystery which needed answers. We finally got the answers long after the hints in those games were any longer relevant. Revan's gender became an actual canonical thing and by then few cared. Revan's motives were revealed but by then new mysteries were far more important.

 

We may yet get a true sequel set in The Milky Way but, like Star Wars TOR and its Revan revelations, it will be long after Shepard has any contemporary relevance. Once we've all played Andromeda and are discussing that game's ending and the mysteries it brings to the MEniverse, maybe a few years after that we'll all look back on ME3's ending and receive the news that Shepard's final choice has been defined in canon and we'll say to ourselves "huh, I remember when I had my head up my ass about that."

 

Maybe that's wishful thinking but until then rejecting reality and substituting one's own is about as good a source of closure as any other. So yeah, IT is definitely still a thing, just not to me. Hell, I'd say that the refusal ending is about as good an ending as anything else - the writer's are not boxed into such a corner with that one. Maybe we'll get Mass Effect Fallout and adventure within the Galactic Wasteland ;p

[AzWarp]

you reaching.

All right... maybe a little

 

Still, that's a good example of how different people can see different things in the story depending on how you look at it.

[Abedsbrother]

Here's my idea: the entire sequence with the Catalyst happens in Shepard's head, much like his conversation with Leviathan (who, when speaking with Shepard, visually used constructs from Shepard's mind). Not saying this makes what he says possess any more sense.

 

I fired up an old save the other day and played through Surkesh. Got through the second dream sequence. After it is over, the cinematic visual cut is not to Shepard snapping suddenly awake (like with the third dream). It is to Shepard turning off a device - not his omni-tool, maybe a tablet - when Liara knocks at his cabin door. Not sure what all that means; I just thought it was strange.

[AlanC9]

Here's my idea: the entire sequence with the Catalyst happens in Shepard's head, much like his conversation with Leviathan (who, when speaking with Shepard, visually used constructs from Shepard's mind). Not saying this makes what he says possess any more sense.

This idea's been kicking around for a long time. It clears up some stuff, particularly the absurd activation procedure for Destroy.

[dorktainian]

It amazes me how the goal posts of indoctrination theory move from person to person.

Okay. I'm open to accepting what you propose but what about all the other supporters of indoctrination theory who say that Shepard is clearly indoctrinated directly after being hit by Harbinger's beam. How it is completely obvious because of the spooky trees and slow-mo. How about those that believe that Vent Boy is the Reapers trying to affect Shepard, that the dreams with him in are Shepard fighting off indoctrination.

 

Indoctrination theory falls apart the more you look into it because the pieces, much like the Citadel at the end, have to keep shifting in order to make them fit.

 

Do your research....

 

 

actually if you took time to have a look at some of my older posts, you would have understood that my position in this is and has always been that IT is correct, but is just a part of something on a much grander scale so to speak. You say it falls apart but does it?  Does it really?  were you paying any attention after the beam run?  you could go further back than that and look at Cronos Station, once again something about which I have posted in the past.

 

In fact go back to the beginning of the game.  Yes right at the beginning of Mass Effect 3.

 

In order to aid you, I'll include this.

 

 

I'd say the only thing that makes any sense of the ending as it stands at the moment is IT, or shockingly bad writing.