(XL) Was the Ending a Hallucination? - Indoctrination Theory Mark IV!

Well it could just be multiplayer maintenance. Though it would be good if it's something to allow the world state to be exported to an external server, like Dragon Age Keep. That would suggest some continuity in the storyline rather than a clean slate.

ElSuperGecko wrote:

Terramine wrote:Ok to put it bluntly, it's almost like diss to us ITers. Because we're the only ones who'd play now after so long just to see what the fuss is about...

Eh, no.  ME3 still has a pretty thriving online multiplayer community, and most of them couldn't care less about IT.

Uh... waht... didn't multiplayer end?

No, it didn't. Still a decent number of people playing it.

Multiplayer is still thriving, it's just not supported like it used to be, no new content or balance changes etc.

I've been playing some games recently and ME 3 dropped to like £2 on the Origin store the other day so that'll probably bring new players in.

Man feels like ages since i last posted on here. My personal insight is that at this point ME3 shall be as it is. Bioware has made it clear they have forgotten about ME3's end and want to start fresh. All this may change depending on the success of ME4 which will STILL have high sales. So overall Shepard shall be screwed over, the galaxy in utter ruins, and no IT what so ever.

However aside from that it may be possible in the remastered version they COULD add IT content but it is HIGHLY unlikely. And let's not start up old flame wars. We already know their answers and they know ours. It's futile to change their minds as it has been 3 years. Though granted the new ME players sway more towards the other side and sometimes ours there is no benefit other than just being as it is. If you want to debate with them then do so but don't use memes and direct attacks about them being stupid. Find weakness in their statements and bring them up. if they refuse to acknowledge your claims and can't back it up then you have further won.

Nevertheless if those who want to further the ideal of IT to other players then do so nicely and answer all their questions the best you can, even though they may not show kindness towards us.

Depends on what YOU think is right. If you think the reapers are right then they are right. If you think the Reapers are wrong then you are right. Social view wise the Reapers are seen as monsters that harvest advance organic life depending on the genetic material and the population the organic specie has. Intellectual wise the Reaper are just doing their job in an immoral fashion but it is still considered a inorganic crime against eons of harvests. Debate wise it is whether or not the Reapers are right about their justifications.



Personally i don't think they have any arguments.

1. If synthetics rebel against their organic creators all the time no matter what then how is it evident when Reapers express their freedom at any given time to rebel against their creator they do not? A Reaper like Harbinger, and Sovereign would NEVER let an A.I construct lead them, nor take orders from the A.I overlord. The seek different goals than what we see at the end of ME3 from their leader yet not ONCE does the leader go in depth of considering the fact that its Reapers have awareness of free will to disobey their leaders orders.



1.1 Going further into this the Protheans were NOT preserved in a Reaper, they were turned into HUSK like creatures, indoctrinated and cleansed of their genetic material. Harbinger stated in ME2 that all the other races did NOT meet the requirements in BECOMING a Reaper. Could mean capital ship class but can be highly unlikely. It is made evident that the Reapers supported the synthetics in a war against the organics in the Prothean cycle despite how the Reaper A.I overlord stands AGAINST the continuation of synthetics/organic war. Furthermore the Protheans turned into the collectors/indoctrinated fathomed the idea of controlling the reapers WHEN the crucible WAS discovered. That seems like a HUGE red flag.



2. Indoctrination is a method of SUBDUING anyone/thing to AGREE and abide to the Reapers OWN way of viewing things. Controlling the Reapers seems to plant FALSE hope in the enemies against the Reapers and cause them to sway sides and destroy alliances. T.I.M was a sleeping agent for the Reapers, able to act on his own yet still be a pawn in the end. Him finding a way to control the Reapers does not seem healthy at all, nor would the Reapers let T.I.M control them regardless if he was not indoctrinated.



2.1 Moreover the Prothean V.I Shepard meets later on has been hacked into and there is reasonable evidence to believe it was corrupted. The time frame it would have taken to find the Cerberus base, to gather the information, to prepare the alliance fleet and the few hours we are given before the assault on the Cerberus base. Gives T.I.M more time to crack the V.I and alter it for T.I.M was LONG gone before the alliance showed up and how T.I.M KNEW exactly WHERE Shepard would BE at the end of the game. It is clearly evident that the Reapers had been pulling the string on T.I.M all along like they did with Saren, and the other characters Shepard encounters.



3. Therefore the Reapers automatically have a solution of SYNTHESIS that would bring balance to the galaxy YET they need SHEPARD to decide for them. The catalyst it seems is SHEPARD since HE/SHE makes the choice rather than the "CATALYST". The leader of the Reapers explains in depth of how this new option gives them a chance to win and the war to be over DESPITE the REACTIONS/BACKLASH the Reapers would get still. However in the end everyone lives in peace which is incorrect.



3.1 Peace doesn't just happen with ALTERING DNA. FORGIVENESS doesn't just happen after the losses the galaxy had taken. Javik is out of character as are many characters. For the Reapers to be RIGHT about synthesis is up surd for there is NO absolute outcome REGARDLESS of ALL choices but evidently in destroy ONLY on the main THREE options is going to REPEAT the cycle DESPITE the reconstruction and promising future shown.



4.The Reapers own logic about the destroy ending clearly is basing it on a common assumption that in MANY cases would be said yet despite the other TWO choices they CLEARLY know what would HAPPEN and the OUTCOME. Thus highlights how the Reapers own logic out ways ours despite how their logic has still gotten nowhere for they NEVER gave the galaxy a chance to CORRECT itself by having the organics and synthetics CHOOSE for themselves.



4.1 You can say the Reapers did BUT hardly the case when the crucible WAS intended to KILL the Reapers YET somehow the Reaper leader managed to gather much information from the crucible's design specs on THINGS we NEVER HAD BUILT IT FOR. Controlling the Reapers and synthesis are REAPER ideals. As explained why the Reapers would want control there it is to conquer your enemies by having them think they are in control but they are not for now you control them.



Overall the Reapers have outlived their expiration date and their ideals are based on assumption as is everything and NOT all correct upon other peoples views unless you agree with them. Tis true organics and synthetics will always fight because of their differences BUT that doesn't mean solutions can't be solved and EVEN if the peace is for a bit there was a victory in that moment.

my post on the BSN.

It's definitely not the best choice for Bioware. To give an ambiguous ending which can only be explained by the fan IT. While Bioware sticks with the whole "take it at face value" approach. I'm sad that they are moving away from Shepard and his team. I have a lot of love for those characters. As most do. Still I can't help but feel excited to see more of the mass effect universe and excitement for the next game. I still believe that Bioware will pull a Halo, and make some spin off type games and roll Shepard out after time has pass, maybe in 10 years where the gaming tech maybe a lot more advanced. As I've said before, they rushed the reaper war, and they will not be replaced in terms of horrifying villains. If the new game does take place in another galaxy and happends along side Mass Effect 3 or the whole trilogy like the popular fan theory suggests then there's still hope for IT to come into play, even if it's a long wait.

I'm sorry, did something change in the last few months? Or year? No? The story for ME4 is still secret? Then there's no reason to complain about anything other than the wait, is there?

ZerebusPrime wrote:I'm sorry, did something change in the last few months?  Or year?  No?  The story for ME4 is still secret?  Then there's no reason to complain about anything other than the wait, is there?

That is the thing. I doubt it shall be ME3 related. Chances are they are going to just recycle the ME material and just forget Shepard ever happened. In all honest their sales on ME4 are going to be high so therefore ME3 would become a distant memory UNLESS ME4 screws up which all depends on the writing at this point. You can have good game mechanics but when the writing which ME is known for its selective choices then you are screwed Bioware for ME and have to go back and do IT or something with the endings in ME3

Way I see it, the ME:Next design documents were penned in the same timeframe as ME3's DLC. Every DLC had IT elements. The Citadel DLC outright acknowledges us while making it clear that everything within is off, wrong, and not as things appear on the surface. We haven't heard a peep out of BioWare about ME's story since the curtain fell on ME3's final DLC, so there's no reason to believe that their direction has changed outside of Hudson's leaving videogames for a real Comp Sci Virtual Reality job.

Very good point Zerberus..it would've had to go on Pre-Pro around the time they were making DLC. I think we'll find out more when E3 rolls around. I doubt we'll know if IT is confirmed or not drying that time. I think they'd use it as a twist ending. If they did it in ME: Next...though I still think it's what they are saying...a spinn off. Who knows how much they mention up to this point is going to actually be true. Development does change and evolve, and like we've seen at the end, they can throw out whole gameplay elements between now and then. And they'll most likely delay it after the announce the first date anyways so that's more time things can change. So we won't know anything till it's in our hands and we can dissect it.

DoomsdayDevice wrote:No, it didn't. Still a decent number of people playing it.

People made it sound different when they claimed the arena in the Citadel DLC was to make up for something with mutliplayer ending. In terms of content, there's no reason why Bioware would feel the need to make up for the fact that they would stop delivering new content for multiplayer because they already released a shit ton of FREE content for it. if anything that arena was to prolong the playability of ME, so you could play without starting a new game all over again IMO

Armax Arena was just so you could fight alongside all your old ME2 team members in ME3. Has nothing to do with multiplayer.

Plus it lead to a nice bonding moment with Jack..in a very Jack way.

DoomsdayDevice wrote:Armax Arena was just so you could fight alongside all your old ME2 team members in ME3. Has nothing to do with multiplayer.

People outside on the strip are commenting on multiplayer though.

I don't see the point.

ViolentSound wrote:Plus it lead to a nice bonding moment with Jack..in a very Jack way.

Also this lovely tribute:

AAA Information Technology Dept. wrote: Commander Shepard,

Here in the arena IT department...

Every Bioware writer and their dog knew what the initials IT related to. They stuck it in anyway.

IT is gonna bail Shepard out lol

There's an analyst suggesting that ME 4 and Mirror's Edge 2 will be out before March next year. That would be before the end of EA's Fiscal year..here's the link. I think it's pretty solid though they may delay. http://www.vg247.com/2015/04/09/mass-effect-4-and-mirrors-edge-2-to-release-before-the-end-of-march-2016-says-pachter/

If anything's pushing back an ME release, it'll be BioWare's Star Wars property in lieu of the next Star Wars film.

Well there's Battlefront..which I hope is gonna be good. I think Star Wars The Old Republic..it was just a dumb choice to make that an MMO IMHO. Are they still putting more content In TOR?