-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Mass Effect 3 Spoiler Thread |OT2| Taste the Rainbow
- Thread starter Patryn
- Start date
Psychoward
Banned
Okay, since it's a theory, how would one go about falsifying it?
heliosRAzi
Banned
It's a crappy ending and if it were true it would be worse than the ending we got.
Basileus777
Member
Use evidence in the game to disprove it. It exists, but most of these arguments tend become centered around authorial intention, which is arguably not even relevant.
By ignoring the hell out of it.
User: Indoctrination theory--
User2: BRRRRRRRRRROWW
User: It's totally true!
User3: BROOOOWWWWWW
User: You're don't even have evidence!
User2 and User 3 together: BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRROWWWWWW
To believe that the Indoctrination theory was actually intended by Bioware, you basically have to be willing to swallow that the entireity of the company was capable of pulling off some truther-level conspiracy shit, including letting an outside journalist into the company to do a feature on the tail end of its development that doesn't give away any hint as to what's actually going on and specifically makes mention of them cutting a part of the game that actually did make use of the theory, having one writer post to an unrelated video game forum some detailed impressions on his contributions to the plot and the behind-the-scenes story on how it was conceived, only to have those comments hastily deleted followed by silence and then some ridiculously thin PR line about how "his account was hacked" and "that stuff was posted by somebody else entirely", they would need to have intentionally left a 'fake' script for the game hidden deep inside the files of a version of the demo that was leaked by accident to a few thousand people for only a few hours, you would need to believe that they actually talked EA into letting them do this despite the ridiculous epic shitstorm it was sure to cause, and you need to believe that when disappointment with the ending reached the point where people were pledging $80,000 to a charity to convince Bioware that they were serious about being dissatisfied, and when it was mentioned everywhere from Forbes to off-hand mentions on the news, casting the game in an intensely negative light, that Bioware would still be issuing little "
" and "" updates on Twitter to 'tease' people, along with official statements about how much it hurts them to see people disappointed with their product, instead of just coming clean and immediately wiping away the bulk of the ill will by just saying "Okay, yeah, you got us, real ending coming soon".
The evidence that the theory is false isn't in the game, it's outside the game, and it's everywhere. If they decide they want to make a new ending for the game, and they do that by picking up the theory and running with it, that's one thing, but the idea that they did this intentionally is just fucking ridiculous.
" and "" updates on Twitter to 'tease' people, along with official statements about how much it hurts them to see people disappointed with their product, instead of just coming clean and immediately wiping away the bulk of the ill will by just saying "Okay, yeah, you got us, real ending coming soon".The evidence that the theory is false isn't in the game, it's outside the game, and it's everywhere. If they decide they want to make a new ending for the game, and they do that by picking up the theory and running with it, that's one thing, but the idea that they did this intentionally is just fucking ridiculous.
bigboss370
Member
this doesn't make sense (as sarcasm) because
a) Reapers are hybrids.
and
b) Reapers are the tools, the Catalyst is the user. You don't blame the gun but the wielder. In reality, we use guns to stop wars or violent conflicts all the time do we not? obtaining peace through war.
With evidence?
dilatedmuscle
Member
He said that there is no evidence that Indoctrination Theory is true... The fact that there is currently no evidence available to us is not the proof that the Indoc Theory is false. The lack of evidence at this point means nothing because it is called the Indoctrination THEORY. Its simply a Theory, not a fact but just because it is not a fact (yet?) doesn't mean that it is a false theory. It remains a theory until Bioware provides evidence that it is either false or fact.
There are actually some direct refutations to some of their points. Like one of their most popular points of "evidence" are those dark trails that converge onto the center of the screen, as clear signs of "indoctrination."
Well yeah - Illusive Man was Assuming Control™, which is when they show up, and they never show up again after he's dead.
They also specifically show up at points when Illusive Man is forcing Shepard to do something, i.e. when he shoots Anderson. They were simply meant to show that Shep was under the influence of TIM at the time.
LightofRohan
Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wisHcuBzTCM
And I havent found good proof why the indoc theory is not correct, only "bioware is dumb!".
Indoc theory would be sweet if it actually happened. But now it's just "fuck whatever". Bioware could've put some eternal darkness or some AA Scarecrow insanity-like scenes at the end. Making you play through each ending. Then snapping out of it realizing that this is bullshit, and kick the shit out of everyone.
Metroidvania
People called Romanes they go the house?
But literally any story disparity can be disproved by the IT.
It's a theory that is inarguable because it is all-encompassing.
No one will know for sure until Bioware comes out and says so, which they probably will never do.
Speculation time!
A) Vent kid is real. Why else would he be shown flying a stupid plane at the start. Why would Shep be imagining that if he's in prison.
B) The sounds around vent kid are not indoctrination sounds but sounds from the reapers outside.
C) Shep's dreams about vent kid are part of a trauma from which s/he is apparently suffering.
D) The infinite ammo thing is part of the game world.
E) Beyond the beam Anderson's waiting for you at the console. This is just a simple scene setup.
F) Indoctrination of Shepard is discarded by BW.
G) The tendrils only appear when TIM is near Shep or when he's working his mojo.
H) The meeting with the Catalyst is presented in a surreal environment, another planned scene. BW obviously didn't care that the vacuum of space has no air, or there is air provided by the Citadel/Crucible somehow, or it's a bubble.
But none of you will care about that because none of this is evidence.
A) Vent kid is real. Why else would he be shown flying a stupid plane at the start. Why would Shep be imagining that if he's in prison.
B) The sounds around vent kid are not indoctrination sounds but sounds from the reapers outside.
C) Shep's dreams about vent kid are part of a trauma from which s/he is apparently suffering.
D) The infinite ammo thing is part of the game world.
E) Beyond the beam Anderson's waiting for you at the console. This is just a simple scene setup.
F) Indoctrination of Shepard is discarded by BW.
G) The tendrils only appear when TIM is near Shep or when he's working his mojo.
H) The meeting with the Catalyst is presented in a surreal environment, another planned scene. BW obviously didn't care that the vacuum of space has no air, or there is air provided by the Citadel/Crucible somehow, or it's a bubble.
But none of you will care about that because none of this is evidence.
EmCeeGramr
Member
Mass Effect 3's ending was a hologram produced by a giant invisible galactic unicorn. I have no evidence, but it all makes sense if you think about it. Also, you can't disprove it.
LightofRohan
Member
Oh god, now I know how annoying I sound as an atheist. Haha
But I don't know, I think people are underplaying Biowares ability a little bit. They did make this ENTIRE goddam universe and no matter what you say, it's an incredible/genius feat. Also, I've met Casey a few times/talked to him and he's really a smart guy, if he had full control of the ending. I wouldn't put it past him. Again, this doesn't mean I love the ending, it makes me hate it more that they didnt finish it.
heliosRAzi
Banned
The Reapers are synthetic since the destroy ending destroys all synthetics. The Catalyst is synthetic. Therefore synthetics killing organics to prevent organics from making synthetics that will destroy organics.
I don't care if they use organics to make themselves. First off, they mush them into a paste. Second off, they have the semblance of roboticness and make the whole whirring servo noises when they move (like when babby reaper is trying to kill you in ME2)
Then really Sovereign could have just said that at the start. Then the series could have been about the right to self determination and blah blah blah.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
ED: Beaten, but whatever I still typed it.
But that ignores the issue with dream/imagination/indoctrination type theories in that they are, in a sense, unfalsifiable. It's the same issue of "How do you know we're not in the Matrix right now?". With wide-reaching theories like that, any so-called evidence to the contrary can be swept under as part of the dream/Matrix/etc.
Honestly, the biggest hit against the indoctrination theory is why it would be done at all. What purpose could indoctrinating Shepard at the climax of the final battle serve that would not be accomplished by simply incinerating him with a laser?
Reapers are hybrids only when the plot needs them to be (ME2 and ME3 endings). Everyone refers to them as machine in ME3 anway and no one bothered to explain how the hybrids work and what do they get from lifeforms DNA.
It's another poor unexplained twist they didn't bother to flesh out. "We harvest people to save their legacy"? How exactly? What does it entail?
It seems the writers focused a lot on the subplots like the genophage, the quarian/geth conflict and characters dialogue/interactions but when it was time to write the main plot they were completely lost. Oh well, guess Shepard find the blueprints for some magical weapons we never bothered to introduce in the 2 previous game and that he will meet some omniscient AI god on the Citadel that will solve everything.
It's another poor unexplained twist they didn't bother to flesh out. "We harvest people to save their legacy"? How exactly? What does it entail?
It seems the writers focused a lot on the subplots like the genophage, the quarian/geth conflict and characters dialogue/interactions but when it was time to write the main plot they were completely lost. Oh well, guess Shepard find the blueprints for some magical weapons we never bothered to introduce in the 2 previous game and that he will meet some omniscient AI god on the Citadel that will solve everything.
heliosRAzi
Banned
Another big hit to the theory is that it doesn't solve anything. According to the theory, Shep is still lying on Earth while the Reapers continue to reap. There's no conclusion.
LightofRohan
Member
No one said that it makes the ending great and it's a perfect conclusion. It actually makes it more annoying that they didn't finish it...
Also, I've seen people disprove a lot of things. But is there anything for the kid saying, "Why are you here?" unless you have 100% ems "Wake up"? Or do we just categorize that as Bioware is dumb again?
They killed him once before.
Thats because the theory assumes that Bioware will pick it up with DLC.
I just can't believe anyone is seriously on board with the Indoc theory. Its so insane...
LightofRohan
Member
What? Why didnt they just kill TIM or Saren?
How is it insane? It's more plausible that you were in a hidden part of the citadel that is in outer space, talking to a glowing boy that is the key to defeating the reaper with 3 conviently placed points that change the entire battle? How's that more plausible?
Basileus777
Member
Bioware have never really been great at crafting plots, their strengths lie in writing characters. Combine that with how ME is a trilogy not planned out in detail from the start and how it's a collaboration between many writers on a staff that had significant turnover and you see the result.
RedRedSuit
Member
Not with a giant laser.
Of course anything can be explained away, but were I the Reapers making my final assault on the galaxy and inches away from success, and I had Shepard close enough for indoctrination, I'd fucking vaporize him, after all he's done.
The biggest hit against that theory is, "c'mon, you really think that's something Bioware would think up?"
It was indirectly with a giant laser
It was indirectly with a giant laser
Added one.
They turn races into jelly and, uh, use unknowable advanced tech to build Reaper bodies out of them, which they then shove into identikit Reaper squid shells.
It's poorly explained - or actually not even really explained - but I guess they're meant to be a far advanced form of something like Legion, in that the various single members of a species become individualized A.I. programs which make up a whole. "We are each a nation" or whatever Sovereign said.
RedRedSuit
Member
Saren in order to help their plans in invading the galaxy.
TIM to sabotage any last-ditch efforts to unite and defeat the Reapers.
Indoctrinating Shepard as you're inches away from complete victory and actually, for once, have a change to really kill him doesn't really make sense.
It's not in outer space. Glass exists. If it's a dome of glass, far away, it's not that easy to see it's there at all.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
Oh come on, now you're not even trying. Do you really not see a difference between indoctrinating Saren to gain control of the Citadel to start the Reaper invasion? Or the indoctrination of the TIM to use Cerberus to stop the galaxy from uniting against the Reapers? You don't see those as quantitatively different from the scenario at the end of the game where the Reapers are waist deep in killing everyone? You really think those 3 situations are analogous?
heliosRAzi
Banned
People keep arguing like it is. They want it to be true because they can't believe Bioware would make an ending like that. Well they can and did.
It's why I nicknamed it the desperation theory. I know it rubs people the wrong way, but hoping that this ending was all a dream just so Bioware can make the true ending dlc just screams desperate to me.
LightofRohan
Member
Huh? They were interested in Shepard since the beginning, they have been talking to him directly. They even were building a reaper due to his actions in ME1. Why would they just destroy him? If you get him as an ally, you have a clear victory due to his alliances. If you destroy him, you piss them off further.
Ok, I know how you feel. But listen; nobody is saying the indoctrination theory CURES the bad ending disease. It somewhat makes it worse because they never even finished the ending. Please don't think people are believing it because they want to think the ending was good...
I call it a valid interpretation. It may never be answered.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
You keep talking about the end of the game like it's still part of ME 1 or 2. The end of ME 3 is literally, I mean literally, the last stand of all organic races to avoid being killed by the Reapers. Who cares about alliances or anything at this point? The Reapers are killing everybody, I don't think you can piss off the galaxy anymore at this point then you already have.
bigboss370
Member
well no, you can't give everything away in a series at the start. one of the main mysteries was why the Reapers were attacking. in ME1, he basically answered 'why are you doing this' with 'you would not understand/its beyond you comprehension'.
its the same thing that happens in the real world, "we will prevent war by making war", preemptive strike, etc..
and the Catalyst has been using the Reapers to do this for millions of cycles (supposedly, since Sovereign alludes to this in ME1). we also have to assume that the necessity arose only because advanced organic societies really did doom the galaxy before through their advanced tech. similar to the real world threat we have of mutually assured destruction through the tech advancement of nukes.
heliosRAzi
Banned
I have literally seen people calling Bioware geniuses if it were true. I have seen the psychological process of people being broken by the endings and then turning to the Indoc theory just to keep a little hope.
It probably will be when they "clarify" the ending
We have been through this many times before, so many times that I have lost count.
LightofRohan
Member
But it's a process that takes a long as time to complete and I'm sure they want as little resistance as possible. And we can't really know what they are thinking because Bioware did a sucky job of explaining it, maybe every reaper that dies is an extreme loss to their kind and to avoid any casualities is imperative. Who knows. But saying "they should have just killed shepard instead of indoctrinating him" is not full proof. I mean, even if it wasnt indoctrination, the reaper flew off... why not just finish him off?
That's fair. And I would consider them geniuses if this was planned and the real ending was complete waiting in the wings. But they've made it sound pretty likely they do not have the real ending planned, which makes them bigger idiots and makes me lose more faith for their company. So now I feel they just went with Indoctrination and were going to leave it at that; until the shit storm came.
Banana Kid
Member
Indoctrination is completely impossible, because EA would never allow Bioware to piss fans off on purpose like this. Not when they want those fans to keep playing the multiplayer and buying lots of $2 item packs.
It's driving people away from the game and actively costing them money. There's no way EA would allow Bioware to go into this saying "Yeah, people will hate us for a month, but then it's gonna be SO AWESOME"
It's driving people away from the game and actively costing them money. There's no way EA would allow Bioware to go into this saying "Yeah, people will hate us for a month, but then it's gonna be SO AWESOME"
EmCeeGramr
Member
Because there was supposed to be a scene of Joker and the Normandy shooting Harbinger, but they cut it out, as well as multiple scenes of Shepard getting shot with the laser, ranging from basically just scratched to the one we got where he's super wounded.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
INCEPTION
Which Harbinger basically tried to do at the end. The dude was just firing at everything. You'd have to believe that he somehow fired a less-powerful laser beam of death that would only have ensured Shepard - among all the others - was merely injured with splash damage.
I do still think that's the silliest and most contrived aspect of the ending. Harbinger single-handedly crushes the resistance in London in literally seconds but doesn't sit to guard the Conduit and ensure total Reaper victory, when the Citadel is the most important thing in the entire war, and it can only be accessed at that point via the Conduit. Did he have something better to go do?
lul
Brawndo Addict
Banned
And how would Shepard being alive stop any more Reapers from being killed? We already have every organic fleet in the galaxy fighting every Reaper at Earth. The line for avoiding casualties has long since been passed.
And the Reaper flying away makes no sense whatever the interpretation. The whole ending makes no sense. That entire portal should have been turned off by the Reapers, they should have flown the Citadel to dark space where no one can follow them, they should have had 5 giant reapers guarding the portal from the start. It's all terrible. And forget flying away, if they didn't want him dead why did they shoot him in the first place?
RedRedSuit
Member
Oh, Harbinger... how I wanted to kill that fucking guy. In person.
I definitely agree with that. They should have taken the time to write the main plot points of the three games from the start. Not every possible events or quests but simply write the whole reason behind the reapers genocide and how you would stop it in game 3. This way they could have properly hinted at this in 2 instead of making a game where the central plot is pretty much pointless in the trilogy and it would have made it much easier to take the crucible seriously. The way it is now it's quite clear they came up with this because they had no other means to solve the plot.
LightofRohan
Member
Wait what? But we hate them either way... if the indoc theory was true and they had the ending DLC waiting for free. Then it would have alleviated a lot of that hate. But it's not true. Believe the theory or not, it doesn't change the badness of the ending. And also, Bioware wouldnt have to explain the theory to them, just show them the ending. I've worked at a publisher, they don't care that much about story.