The Indoctrination Theory and Refuse

SwobyJ wrote:God, this is going around in circles. Tuesday, and maybe we'll see.

I truly don't get how you think that choosing to Destroy the Reapers at the (at least potential) cost of those who signed up for risk of direct death is sacrificing the soul of humanity.


EDIT: "We did everything we could. We built the Crucible, but it didn't work. We fought as a united galaxy, but it wasn't enough. I only hope the information in this capsule (LIKE CRUCIBLE BLUEPRINTS) is enough to help you before its too late." -Liara


"Didn't work" = Didn't use it..

Of course that discussion is circular, because there are two opinions/interpretations flying around and no concluding evidence to settle this.

We have: Destroy at all costs vs. Destroy, only if it is morally excusable
I think there is no concrete answer to this question and I would really like to steer away the discussion from this topic, since it usually boils down to Shepard's resolve and people either creating concepts that show Shepard's resolve is Destroy/Refuse or people throwing around quotes, while the interesting questions are being mostly ignored.

That is:

Why was the Destroy dialogue changed in the EC making it less negatively presented by the Guardian (in the OC it was a blunt threat) and why -- for the love of god -- is the Guardian so negative about Refuse?

Look at the dialogue after choosing the Renegade response for Destroy. People here have claimed that quotes support a certain ending that were less obvious.
To stress it once more:

S: "I don't believe you."

SwobyJ wrote:Holy crap, he treats Refuse as worse because Shepard is useless to him.

I didn't say Destroy was ideal, to be clear.

What I AM saying is that Destroy has the chance to continue the story. It keeps Shepard as Shepard (DON'T TOUCH THIS, stop), but has his mind still open to possible future manipulation (another "Struggle if you wish, your mind will be mine").

As far as I'm concerned (SO FAR), Refuse is Shepard bleeding out in London rubble. No breath to keep fighting, but a resignation that he did all he could, and now he can't do anything anymore.

That's a possibility I will not deny.
Personally I think that in Refuse Shepard resists the indoctrination more than in Destroy, period.
Seeing that his manipulations will not work on Shepard, the Guardian is not amused, because this leaves it only with the possibility with killing Shepard (like frying his brain or something like that).
Destroy Shepard resists, but there is still a possibility to indoctrinate him later.

In the end, it has the same result as the so popular "mind broken/giving up" interpretation, but for different reasons.

"Personally I think that in Refuse Shepard resists the indoctrination more than in Destroy, period."

I do too.

I only think it's at the price of losing his fighting spirit, that made Shepard, THE Shepard, in some ways.

Like a part of him woke up from the nightmare, but not in the way he probably should have. Too jarring. I'd almost think of a Refuse Shepard as a suicidal Shep, defiantly putting the gun to his head instead of towards the Reapers.

(yes I know you're actually pointing to toward the kid vision, so again, we're reaching no conclusions here)

Only a few days left to wait.

Restrider wrote:Only a few days left to wait.

True enough.

However: "Holy crap, he treats Refuse as worse because Shepard is useless to him."

There is strong evidence against this, namely the Rannoch Reaper trying to kill Shepard. He has talked to Harbinger, I'm sure even being independent he acknowledges his "lesser" position as a Reaper compared to Harbinger so I doubt he'd touch Shepard knowing harbinger would be pissed about it.

I mean heck, in reality the Reapers don't care that much about Shepard. He's interesting, possibly a delicious prize for Harbinger, but if he fails that all becomes invalid anyways. It makes more sense they are actively trying to stop him and if he fails he is not good enough so they move on, or if he succeeds then he is worthy and they get him in perfect condition. He's useless to them if he's so unworthy that he needs them to MAKE him succeed -_-

Good points all around, by everybody.

RR, that was an interesting examination of the endings. For the record, I have seen the entire dialogue version of refuse, several times, I was simply having trouble finding that specific moment on youtube.

Your questions are legitimate, and I don't have any answers.

Some of the changes in the EC really make you wonder.

Like I've said before, my hypothesis is that you don't wake up in refuse, because Shepard knows he doomed this cycle. He believes he died. In destroy, you believe you did everything you can to stop the Reapers, so he has more hope, and that is why he wakes up.

I think that only changes on the run up to the beam.

I know it's more of a guess :P

But I think the indoctrination aspect does something to the subject. Saren thought of himself as the one to 'force an alliance' with the Reapers. Kenson wanted the 'blessings of the Reapers', etc.

So yeah, it could be in the end that Harbinger couldn't care less if Shepard dies or not, just that he prefers Shep lives so he can be more easily tinkered with.

SwobyJ wrote:I think that only changes on the run up to the beam.

I know it's more of a guess :P

But I think the indoctrination aspect does something to the subject. Saren thought of himself as the one to 'force an alliance' with the Reapers. Kenson wanted the 'blessings of the Reapers', etc.

So yeah, it could be in the end that Harbinger couldn't care less if Shepard dies or not, just that he prefers Shep lives so he can be more easily tinkered with.

Well of course he'd prefer it, but I feel it's in the same way you might want a rival sports team to win a specific match of theirs so they can go to the Superbowl and face your team. If they lose, oh well, you don't sabotage the opposing team just so they make it... because if they were going to lose, they weren't worthy of facing you.

If Shepard was to pick Destroy and it was his resolve, the Reapers are dead. I don't believe there will be another chance to indoctrinate Shepard, nor do I expect Harbinger to think there is another chance. Nobody has ever broken free before, technically you will forever be immune because if they try it again you'll instantly recognize it.

DoomsdayDevice wrote:Good points all around, by everybody.

RR, that was an interesting examination of the endings. For the record, I have seen the entire dialogue version of refuse, several times, I was simply having trouble finding that specific moment on youtube.

Your questions are legitimate, and I don't have any answers.

Some of the changes in the EC really make you wonder.

Like I've said before, my hypothesis is that you don't wake up in refuse, because Shepard knows he doomed this cycle. He believes he died. In destroy, you believe you did everything you can to stop the Reapers, so he has more hope, and that is why he wakes up.

Yeah, it's strange... even if Destroy is the way not many people will have the right to be angry they were wrong because it wasn't easy finding out. If there is some beyond convincing evidence either way, we haven't found it, we have good points but we also have good counter arguments, etc. In the end whatever choice you made was a guess. So you can't be angry, and you can't judge others for getting it wrong no matter what. Though you can still laugh at literalists, because even without a reveal IT has very compelling evidence.

Edit: I would like to add, I think the reason Harbinger isn't trying to kill Shepard at the end is because this is when the test is being finalized. Harbinger lures him near the end to start it, but Shepard can still fail because everything before was like studying for this moment, this is where he gives his answer and gets graded. If he passes, the Reapers obtain him in full condition. If he fails, then he is unworthy and thus loses his value entirely.

IronicParticle wrote:Yeah, it's strange... even if Destroy is the way not many people will have the right to be angry they were wrong because it wasn't easy finding out. If there is some beyond convincing evidence either way, we haven't found it, we have good points but we also have good counter arguments, etc. In the end whatever choice you made was a guess. So you can't be angry, and you can't judge others for getting it wrong no matter what. Though you can still laugh at literalists, because even without a reveal IT has very compelling evidence.

Edit: I would like to add, I think the reason Harbinger isn't trying to kill Shepard at the end is because this is when the test is being finalized. Harbinger lures him near the end to start it, but Shepard can still fail because everything before was like studying for this moment, this is where he gives his answer and gets graded. If he passes, the Reapers obtain him in full condition. If he fails, then he is unworthy and thus loses his value entirely.

Agreed. During your first playthrough people choose the whole spectrum of choices for various reasons.
Only a selected few chose Destroy because they knew it was indoctrination. Others out of a gut feeling (in retrospect, I thought agreeing to one of the choices would autolock it, so I kept refusing them and after having heard all three choices and the extended dialogue, I was convinced that pissing off the Guardian was a good thing... heyho Refuse :D ).

What is inexcusable is having heard the evidence hinting at IT and still deny the possibility of it. That's just stupidity.

Restrider wrote:

IronicParticle wrote:*snip*

Agreed. During your first playthrough people choose the whole spectrum of choices for various reasons.
Only a selected few chose Destroy because they knew it was indoctrination. Others out of a gut feeling (in retrospect, I thought agreeing to one of the choices would autolock it, so I kept refusing them and after having heard all three choices and the extended dialogue, I was convinced that pissing off the Guardian was a good thing... heyho Refuse :D ).

What is inexcusable is having heard the evidence hinting at IT and still deny the possibility of it. That's just stupidity.

I can excuse anyone who just isn't into the series and so they never looked into it, or people who just weren't aware at all. But the majority online, in fact are aware of all the evidence and yet trying to get them to admit to even the slightest possibility causes head-keyboard smashing to ensue almost inevitably. That level of ignorance is definitely inexcusable.

At least we can say everyone here acknowledges the legitimacy of the IT regardless of the diversity in speculations. MUCH better than what I've seen of the BSN or my YouTube and Wiki encounters. That's nightmare stuff :l

DoomsdayDevice wrote:
...Like I've said before, my hypothesis is that you don't wake up in refuse, because Shepard knows he doomed this cycle. He believes he died. In destroy, you believe you did everything you can to stop the Reapers, so he has more hope, and that is why he wakes up.

OR in refuse Shep goes on, because he knows that now the really hard work begins; Whereas in destroy he believes he's done - he's won - the reapers are gone and he blew up along with the tube - there's no longer any need to keep cramping his wounds shut - there could even be a temptation of not having to be around to answer for oneself.

So many different ways to see things. :7

I'm still not ruling out the possibility that any IT reveal will fork off before Priority: Earth, leaving all the original four as fail states.

The hustler game in the Citadel DLC, is obviously rigged. There is 3 options, and none of them are right. Now logically, the only real way to win, is to not play. You get ripped off IF you play. Here's an interesting note, one of the hustlers will say "You lose, too bad, hahahaha!" or something to that effect if you go away and avoid playing.

This is the same attitude people feel is given from the endings, because Bioware is all like "Oh, Refuse kills everyone!"... however these are Hustlers, so inherently the attitude is depicted as reverse psychology in this situation. The Hustler wants you to play obviously, so he acts like you suffer the most if you don't play.

Now here's the thing, from an in-game perspective. Who is really flipping you off in Refuse? Most people thought it was a flip off from Bioware? My question is, why? In-game, you are talking to a Reaper, not Bioware. As well, one must ask why it's painted so negatively. That's Reaper manipulations obviously, it's not real, just like the Synthesis scenes. Also, why the hell would a game company flip people off? THAT NEVER HAPPENS! So that's not what was going on here.

It just feels to me, that this Hustler's game is greatly foreshadowing the ending...