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

Page 20 of 21 Previous  1 ... 11 ... 19, 20, 21  Next

Go down

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

Post by TerramineLightvoid on Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:04 pm

Rifneno wrote:What the fuck are you on about?  You say that like MEA is related to ME3 in anything other than EA trying to squeeze more money of the franchise name.  The only person we know of that was involved with the original trilogy that was involved with MEA was Mack The Hack.  Which is literally worse than no one at all.  MEA not only wasn't produced by a different team, it was produced by an entirely different fucking studio!  It's one step above fan fiction.  The American Super Mario Brothers 2 of sci fi.
Nah I'm gonna call bullshit Rif. This is the same sorry ass cop out I hear every time a series takes a turn people don't like. It's not just a thing with Mass Effect, you see this shit across the board.

Take Life is Strange for instance. People often try to use the fact that it was made by a completely separate studio from the original creators, to say it's not canon. But you'd have to be clinically retarded to not see that it clearly is exactly what the original team would have made if they had decided to make a prequel themselves. But they want to take a completely different direction, focus their time and resources on EXPANDING the Life is Strange brand. This motivation is the ONLY reason they are "against" making a prequel, in other words... they aren't actually against it at all, they just don't want to have to do the work. So if someone else comes along and asks if they can do all the work for them, of course they agree. From there it's obvious the BtS team basically is just running purely off what the original team told them.

Yet again you see the same thing with the Dragonball series. For a long time now, people have been saying that Dragonball GT is not canon. They point to how it was made by a completely different team, and wasn't officially written by Akira Toriyama himself. Despite the fact that the studio that made DBGT had claimed that Toriyama had been guiding them in the creation of a sequel to DBZ. They dismissed that fact for no reason, they just claimed that the studio paid Akira off so they could make that claim so people would be more interested to watch it. In other words, they were dismissive of it outright simply because they did not like what DBGT presented.

Low and behold some years later Akira himself comes back to write an official and 100% canon sequel to DBZ. Called Dragonball Super. Of all things that could possibly render GT completely noncanon, you'd think an official work by the original creator that takes place at the same time/overlaps when GT took place, would do it. But instead, there is unfathomable levels of twinism going on between the 2 series. Literally Dragonball Super is no more than a fresh coat of paint over the orignal GT storyline. Everything from entire characters, to plotlines, to new lore, etc. Are the same. Proving what that separate studio had claimed to be true all along. Proving all those ideas in GT were obviously Akira's ideas if he felt like keeping them around in Dragonball GT 2.0(aka DBS).

That's the fatal flaw with what you are saying. You make a sarcastic reference to the Mario Bros action live film. But the irony is that movies like that are exactly why no new live action movies differ all that relevantly from the source material. Both movie makers and video game makers have learned the hard way about ports. Be it live action ports, or studio/franchise ports. That people just wanna see the same old shit with better graphics or with real life actors. They have developed a downright, phobia, of changing ported material. Especially when we are talking about games being ported over to completely new crews. It's much worse in this regard because game makers have never even tried "spicing things up" the way Live Action films started off doing right off the bat.

Which is actually my primary complaint about Andromeda. Because in reality it feels like they just copied everything from the original trology. In the trilogy things changed over the span of games. New places, characters, and lore were revealed in each new game. Andromeda is filled with detail, for a game that is supposedly just a rushed hack job like you guys are claiming. It's just that a lot of the detail seems like "filler" most of the time. At least when it comes to anything to do with the Milky Way. The only real new stuff is the Andromeda stuff. But at the same time, this "flaw" is what helps prove my case that they aren't "headcanoning" a whole lot. Maybe Andromeda itself but even then, not as much as one may think. There's a lot going on here that intertwines with deeper facets of the original trilogy. Hints at what was meant in the original trilogy when we were told there was some sort of pattern in the galaxy that the Reapers were made aware of because they tried directing the development of life.

You see "patterns" ermerging in Andromeda, left and right. For all intents and purposes Andromeda has no connection whatsoever to Milky Way. Even the Milky Way inhabitants in Andromeda should diverge drastically from those still in the milky way, the same way Angarans have just by being secluded across planets. But in general, in every factor, Andromeda is following nearly the exact same patterns as the Milky Way. Sans the AI conflict, but really it's strongly hinted that Andromeda is the precursor to something like the Reapers. Remnant tech is near the same as Reaper tech.

Then there's the 2 incredibly suspicious galaxy map situations in the original trilogy. It's completely unexplained, but the Leviathan/Reapers are seen studying a "corrupted" galaxy map. In the same facility that they are inexplicably studying Turian physiology. There's no explanation for this AT ALL, and while there are some immediate ideas that stand out. None of them explain why the map is "corrupted". The Milky Way has already been well fleshed out by galactic civilization. We have a perfectly full map in the original trilogy, and this makes sense given the level of technology and residing inside said galaxy in the first place. So it makes no sense why Leviathans/Reapers wouldn't have a fully functional map. There is 1 explanation that explains the whole thing perfectly: The leviathans/reapers aren't observing a map of the milky way, but rather a map of Andromeda.

The other completely unexplained and previously completely nonsensical situation I mentioned. Is when Liara shows Shepard something at the end of the game. When she mind melds with Shep, and Shep and Liara are floating towards some galaxy. Before being able to see what is inside said galaxy we are blinded by it's light, and then the sequence ends. Again let me stress how random, how unexplained, how out of place, how absurd, etc this is. At the time it was sheer absurdity even though nobody called it into question. But now it makes sense if Liara knew about the Andromeda Initiative and was essentially showing Shepard. It's a bit convenient that there is a scene in ME3 that can be directly and explicitly interpreted as foreshadowing MEA. A scene that otherwise isn't all that ambiguous, a scene that could barely even be interpreted in terms of the original trilogy. Almost the only alternative is "Liara is helping the Reapers indoctrinate Shepard".

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
TerramineLightvoid
Pod Crab

Posts : 33
Join date : 2017-03-25
Age : 24
Location : Type 7, Omniverse

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Wed Jan 03, 2018 10:16 pm

Just skimmed through most of that.  Because I don't know anything about LiS or animu or any of that.  And frankly, it doesn't matter.  You can't judge Brand A, made by Company Y, by something Brand B, made by Company Z does.  That's fucking stupid.  That's what Swoby used to do.

I didn't reference the awful SMB movie.  I reference SMB2.  You don't seem to be aware of the reference, so an explanation: back in the NES days, SMB got its first of ten trillion sequels.  As was the thing at the time, it was released in Japan quite a ways ahead of American and European releases.  The thing is, SMB2 was quickly deemed "too hard" for non-Japanese audiences.  Or, you know, sane people.  It was a fucking terrible game that played like a shitty fan edit of a SMB ROM.  The graphics were exactly the same as SMB1, only the levels were different.  And again, they were terrible.  Not challenging in a good way, challenging in a "fuck you for playing" kind of way.  But they had already set release dates across the globe for SMB2.  They frantically came up with a solution: another newish game at the time, Doki Doki Panic, was rebranded as SMB2.  They stuck Mario characters in it and changed a few themes to make it fit.  It still didn't fit the Mario theme, and why would it?  It wasn't a real SMB game.  It was Doki Doki Panic with Mario characters hammered in at the last minute.  But it was the lesser evil compared to releasing the pile of shit that was the real SMB2.

And thus my comparison.  SMB2 wasn't SMB2, it was Doki Doki Panic.  ME:A isn't ME4, it's some random generic space shooter branded as ME.

But I digress.  You can complain all you want about not liking people brushing off ME:A, but they have every right to do so.  Different writers, different studio, different everything.  One notoriously bad writer is the only thing carried over from ME.  Why would the garbage game have anything significantly IT related when the writers who made it don't know anymore than we do what the original intent of the real ME team was?  Even back in ME3, the team doing multiplayer content didn't know the significance of the vent-lightning warning sign since they reused it in the Vancouver map.  You really think they had a big meeting and let the ME:A team in on the tightly kept secret despite the game having nothing to do with it?  Get real.

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2632
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 37
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by TerramineLightvoid on Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:13 am

Rifneno wrote:*snip*
But I digress. You can complain all you want about not liking people brushing off ME:A, but they have every right to do so. Different writers, different studio, different everything. One notoriously bad writer is the only thing carried over from ME. Why would the garbage game have anything significantly IT related when the writers who made it don't know anymore than we do what the original intent of the real ME team was?  Even back in ME3, the team doing multiplayer content didn't know the significance of the vent-lightning warning sign since they reused it in the Vancouver map.  You really think they had a big meeting and let the ME:A team in on the tightly kept secret despite the game having nothing to do with it? Get real.
Ah well now I get what you mean... kind of. Except Doki Doki Mario Bros 2 was loved by most fans of the series... so? Despite it seeming completely nonsensical and absurd, but it worked because Mario was already ridiculous 10 ways to sunday. But I dunno Rif, have you even played Andromeda? Because I know just how absurd that idea is. That you of all people, tried it. I own it, and I will call your bullshit out right there. It is virtually just ME3 combat on stereoids. Everything, the weapons, the cover system, the biotics. It's all there and perfectly polished, at least on console(PC has always been buggier for virtually every game ever). I don't get how you can compare MEA to Doki Mario, when it's literally the same exact gameplay mechanics. That's exactly what DM WASN'T.

As far as rationalizing how a completely different team could even know what they were doing: It's not about secrets. Not if Andromeda was the true original ending to the trilogy. It's "there" written in the details. From what I already mentioned, to the fact that the whole problem with the Crucible was that it made it seem like there was no actual way to beat the Reapers despite countless mentions of "an unconventional strategy". What exactly were the writers thinking the solution to the Reapers was gonna be? They must've had SOMETHING legit. Not even what was originally leaked actually answers this question. We just know Shepard was gonna be offered to "join the Reapers", and he was going to be able to reject. What that rejection lead to, is unknown.

But if you look at all the pieces, especially the ones towards the ending. You kinda see something. The Crucible blueprints being sourced from a species that traveled from Andromeda to the Milky Way using the Arks. Which is why the Crucible tech and the Ark tech is so similar to Remnant tech. If the Crucible is actually Reaper tech, that makes things worse. Because there is a lot of evidence to suggest "The Remnant" are the true evolutionary origins of the Reapers. I'm not trying to convince you, and I can understand people THINKING the way they do. But what I don't like is people acting so prevelantly like it's just cut and dry "this is not canon because it left the original creator's hands". It actually reminds me all too well of a similarly all-pervasive mentality we ITers have dealt with for so long. Which is the vast amount of people claiming "you're putting to much thought into it". Yet again something I hear whenever I try to "theorize" about ANY work of fiction, not just Mass Effect.

Ultimately, even if I were to agree that MEA is basically just one big shit show. I still have to hold the viewpoint that it's a shitshow that makes some more semblence of sense than people wish to believe. Because there's too much hinting at it. Maybe those colored binders weren't nothing. If they weren't, those binders were written by the original Mass Effect crew and handed over to the new one. Which actually, we have plenty of evidence for and all you have to say otherwise is just... "they lied". With no proof that they did.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
TerramineLightvoid
Pod Crab

Posts : 33
Join date : 2017-03-25
Age : 24
Location : Type 7, Omniverse

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Sat Jan 06, 2018 1:28 am

TerramineLightvoid wrote:Ah well now I get what you mean... kind of. Except Doki Doki Mario Bros 2 was loved by most fans of the series... so?

Holy shit, no. In hindsight it looks that way because gamers are some kind of hyperretarded when it comes to nostalgia. If it's old, it's great. The older it is, the greater it is. Ask any intelligent MMORPGer. I've seen people wax nostalgic about Hell Levels in EQ. This was a glitch where they accidentally added an extra digit or two to the exp requirements. Better yet, the penalty for death was losing a percentage of exp to level. So you could play for 8 hours, then die once because of someone else's mistake and lose the entire day's work. Those numbers aren't an exaggeration, one death could really set you back an entire day's work. They were called "hell levels" for a fucking reason. And retarded retards talk fondly of their memories of them. Gamers don't just have rose tinted glasses, they have an IV drip of heroin.

So yeah. The release did NOT go as well as it's portrayed in this era. It wasn't a total trainwreck like ME3 or No Man's Lie, but it was met with almost universal confused disappointment. Even the defenders of the game at the time only defended it from a stance of "it's a fun game if you don't look at it as SMB2 and just take it on its own merits." No one thought it was worthy of the name it was given.

Of course, this was before the Internet was even in its infancy so there's no 20 year old posts to dig up to prove my point. All I can say is that I don't have a reputation as a liar. If that's not enough, oh well.

But I dunno Rif, have you even played Andromeda?



No.

Because I know just how absurd that idea is. That you of all people, tried it. I own it, and I will call your bullshit out right there. It is virtually just ME3 combat on stereoids. Everything, the weapons, the cover system, the biotics. It's all there and perfectly polished, at least on console(PC has always been buggier for virtually every game ever). I don't get how you can compare MEA to Doki Mario, when it's literally the same exact gameplay mechanics. That's exactly what DM WASN'T.

Because they're different kinds of games. SMB was about gameplay. It entertained through the fun of playing it. ME could certainly be fun, but first and foremost it was about story. It entertained through a compelling tale, like a good book does. Both these examples deviated from that. DDP was a huge disappointment compared to SMB's incredibly well crafted gameplay. Andromeduh followed up the trilogy's deep and interesting story that above all made sense with a story that's literally based off nonsense. I've already written volumes on why going to Andromeda is the dumbest bullshit ever, but that's hardly all. Pretty much everything I read about MEA's lore was nonsensical gibberish. Geth are welding together mass relays to make FTL telescopes? What the fuck drivel is that?

As far as rationalizing how a completely different team could even know what they were doing: It's not about secrets. Not if Andromeda was the true original ending to the trilogy.

LOL.

It's "there" written in the details.

Just... LOL.

From what I already mentioned, to the fact that the whole problem with the Crucible was that it made it seem like there was no actual way to beat the Reapers despite countless mentions of "an unconventional strategy". What exactly were the writers thinking the solution to the Reapers was gonna be? They must've had SOMETHING legit. Not even what was originally leaked actually answers this question. We just know Shepard was gonna be offered to "join the Reapers", and he was going to be able to reject. What that rejection lead to, is unknown.

IMO, the Reapers were going to be beaten by weaponizing FTL ships. The setup was all already there. The entire Taetrus thing showed us that while it's very difficult to bypass the safeties, it IS possible. And the codex outright tells us that were the "lesser" races able to weaponize FTL, the Reapers would be all kinds of fucked. Even a simple shuttle could easily one-shot a capital ship. And the Reapers would have no way of even defending themselves because even they can't track objects moving faster than light. Taetrus was the setup. Like a few other things, they planted the seeds for a coming twist in the Cerberus Daily News.

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2632
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 37
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by dorktainian on Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:00 am

Rifneno wrote:

But I dunno Rif, have you even played Andromeda?




Brilliant.

_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3513
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

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

Post by dorktainian on Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:01 am

I thought we beat the reapers by choosing destroy? That was certainly the impression I got on first playthrough, and even more so when they rejigged the endings with the extended cut.


_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3513
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

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

Post by magnetite on Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:16 am

dorktainian wrote:I thought we beat the reapers by choosing destroy?  That was certainly the impression I got on first playthrough, and even more so when they rejigged the endings with the extended cut.

That's what the game files say.
avatar
magnetite
Brute

Posts : 723
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 34
Location : Calgary, AB, Canada

Back to top Go down

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

Post by TerramineLightvoid on Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:58 am

dorktainian wrote:I thought we beat the reapers by choosing destroy?  That was certainly the impression I got on first playthrough, and even more so when they rejigged the endings with the extended cut.
But that wasn't in the original endings, I concede that Rif's theory makes sense. But really I think evidence points that, complete retcon or not. They WERE in essence attempting to patch things up. Even if they raped the rest of the lore along the way?

Hell, Andromeda would've made infinitely more sense if it was explained by us studying Reaper corpses post ME3 Destroy ending.

Personally, I don't think the geth thing sounds absurd. It gives them a sense of having a unique dimension to provide to their allies. That they can understand tech better than we do. Because they are technology.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
TerramineLightvoid
Pod Crab

Posts : 33
Join date : 2017-03-25
Age : 24
Location : Type 7, Omniverse

Back to top Go down

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

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:35 pm

I had this conversation with someone recently who brought up Mass Effect. I was kind of reluctant to talk about the ending, fearing he would be a face value kind of guy like so many others. When he asked what my opinion was, I said I felt like I really only had one single option. To my surprise he said, "Yeah, because you end up indoctrinated in the other two." Here's the thing though, he had never heard of IT, or even considered the idea that it could be an illusion of sorts. So he did take the thing at face value, yet arrived at the same conclusion.

I thought it was really refreshing. I mean, I've said the ending is indoctrination, even at face value, but it's different coming from someone who has never even considered a mindfuck of sorts.

And before *someone* jumps at me, he didn't have any DLC, so he was talking about the original ending, which means no refuse.

_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

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

Post by magnetite on Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:28 am

When I came to making the final choice on my first ever playthrough (before hearing about IT), I thought about it logically.

-TIM tried to control the Reapers and became indoctrinated.
-Saren had himself implanted with Reaper tech and became indoctrinated.

Therefore, destroy is the only logical choice.

I then wanted to see how the control and synthesis options would play out just for fun, and went, "yep, Shepard's a husk. He's indoctrinated".
avatar
magnetite
Brute

Posts : 723
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 34
Location : Calgary, AB, Canada

Back to top Go down

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

Post by dorktainian on Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:29 am

It's not like Indoctrination isn't flagged up well before the ending of Mass Effect 3 is it?

James Vega : "Do you hear that hum? Is that just me?"

Illusive Man: "You wouldn't listen. You're still not listening. Destroying the Reapers would be the biggest mistake of our brief existence. And nothing you say will ever convince me otherwise."

and those are just in ME3. Go back to the Derelict Reaper in ME2 and it's 'Eureka'.

I think a lot of people overthink the ending when it comes to it. Basically for me it was and still is 'Do I trust the reapers?'. Everything Starjar says is from the Reapers perspective. Everything is a lie. Choosing Control results in death. Choosing Synthesis results in death. The only way to survive as well as beat the game is to choose to Destroy the Reapers.

Then look at the Major Players in the Trilogy;

Saren, a Synthesis advocate.
TIM, a Control advocate.
Shepard has to pick Destroy.

Why?

There are three avatars and he is the last one standing. Any other choice and he (and therefore you) are indoctrinated.

As for those Synthesis and Control supporters, well their logic in explaining their choice is deeply flawed and allies itself (and therefore them) to the reapers.

The reapers need to be destroyed, pure and simple. They are a threat to not only every living thing at the moment of the choice, but every other thing that will follow the choice.

Oh and Shepard wakes up in the Destroy ending. That is a Win.




_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3513
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

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

Post by magnetite on Sun Mar 18, 2018 6:02 am

I think a lot of people picked synthesis or control, because they actually believe that it destroy all synthetic life, because the so-called Starchild says it does by the mere power of his suggestion.

I've seen them say that because they *see* EDI's nameplate on the memorial board or they fact that there is no Geth being shown under the destroy ending, that they must really be dead. There is Reaper voices in that memorial scene, they just aren't audible, but they are in the game files.
avatar
magnetite
Brute

Posts : 723
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 34
Location : Calgary, AB, Canada

Back to top Go down

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

Post by felpscross on Thu Mar 22, 2018 9:21 am

magnetite wrote:There is Reaper voices in that memorial scene, they just aren't audible, but they are in the game files.

woah. what? At first glance I understand that you're saying the reaper sounds are being reproduced by the game at that exact scene, with low (inaudible) volume.

In the game files they sure are, after all they need to be, right?

I just... didn't... understand your statement. Maybe I missed some new discovery or.. dunno. Clarify me.

_________________
"Our numbers will darken the sky of every world." - Sovereing
avatar
felpscross
Drone

Posts : 5
Join date : 2015-07-01

Back to top Go down

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

Post by dorktainian on Thu Mar 22, 2018 11:37 am

felpscross wrote:
magnetite wrote:There is Reaper voices in that memorial scene, they just aren't audible, but they are in the game files.

woah. what? At first glance I understand that you're saying the reaper sounds are being reproduced by the game at that exact scene, with low (inaudible) volume.

In the game files they sure are, after all they need to be, right?

I just... didn't... understand your statement. Maybe I missed some new discovery or.. dunno. Clarify me.

The simple answer would be the sound files are there for a very good reason and that would be that everyone in that scene might be affected by the sounds?


_________________
avatar
dorktainian
Sovereign

Posts : 3513
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 49

Back to top Go down

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

Post by magnetite on Fri Mar 23, 2018 2:01 am

felpscross wrote:
magnetite wrote:There is Reaper voices in that memorial scene, they just aren't audible, but they are in the game files.

woah. what? At first glance I understand that you're saying the reaper sounds are being reproduced by the game at that exact scene, with low (inaudible) volume.

In the game files they sure are, after all they need to be, right?

I just... didn't... understand your statement. Maybe I missed some new discovery or.. dunno. Clarify me.

Hmm, on further inspection, the BioD_End002_600Epilogue seem to be tied to the TIM sequence. Which isn't anything new. Must have looked at the wrong file by mistake.
avatar
magnetite
Brute

Posts : 723
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 34
Location : Calgary, AB, Canada

Back to top Go down

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

Post by DoomsdayDevice on Wed Apr 04, 2018 4:40 pm

And so I had the sudden urge to play the ME trilogy again.

In ME1, when you have the Salarians on board after Virmire, and you speak to Captain Rentola (in the event that Kirrahe died), you can get him to say "There comes a day so many will have to be sacrificied, it will be impossible to tell who won."

Probably not intentional foreshadowing, but ironic nonetheless, what with the endless argument about the final choices.

_________________
"A good leader is someone who values the life of his men over the success of the mission, but understands that sometimes the cost of failing a mission is higher than the cost of losing those men." - Anderson
avatar
DoomsdayDevice
Being of Light

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Probing Uranus

Back to top Go down

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

Post by magnetite on Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:26 pm

I think this video is the foreshadowing of the ending debate. The literalists think we're crazy for thinking the ending was IT, but it turns out that's pretty much what it is.
avatar
magnetite
Brute

Posts : 723
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 34
Location : Calgary, AB, Canada

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Master Blaster on Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:34 pm

magnetite wrote:I think this video is the foreshadowing of the ending debate. The literalists think we're crazy for thinking the ending was IT, but it turns out that's pretty much what it is.

Pretty much

_________________
Optimus Prime: Sometimes the paths we wish we desire sometimes have to be fought by words, other than guns. However with the recent events of the Reapers arrival the time for words is over. In order to protect the humans we must stop the Reapers no matter the cost are.

Autobots transform and role out!

http://forum.bioware.com/groups/637-was-the-ending-a-hallucination-it/
avatar
Master Blaster
Geth Prime

Posts : 1643
Join date : 2013-01-08
Age : 21

Back to top Go down

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

Post by TurianRebel212 on Sat Apr 07, 2018 2:16 am

It's a bigger plot hole if Shepard ISN'T undergoing indoctrination. When you think of the shear amount of reaper tech Sheps been exposed to, it's crazy for him not to be indoctrinated. Also, as we know, Cerberus and TIM specifically, were greatly exposed and probably in a thrall BEFORE Mass Effect 2...

Its funny how in ME2 TIM is always sending Shepard into. Incredibly dangerous circumstances where Shepard could be captured or killed BEFORE the suicide mission...

"Preserve Shepard's body if possible."


_________________
We fight or we die. I choose to be free. I choose to rid the galaxy of monsters. I choose destroy.
avatar
TurianRebel212
Banshee

Posts : 1807
Join date : 2013-02-02
Location : In the dreamscape.

Back to top Go down

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

Post by CoolioThane on Sat Apr 07, 2018 3:31 am

It's true.

If Shepard is not indoctrinated despite the sheer amount of Reaper Tech, then Bioware is retarded.


_________________
avatar
CoolioThane
Space Cow

Posts : 834
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 25
Location : Falmouth, Cornwall

http://www.achievementhunter.com

Back to top Go down

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

Post by smash016 on Fri Apr 27, 2018 9:36 am

I've been wanting to do another trilogy playthrough to settle this thread once and for all, but I just can't seem to find the spare time... ;)

Haven't been into gaming at all for the past 2, 3 years? Yet ME's "real" story, or whatever I make of it, keeps haunting me from time to time. Mostly in a good way, though. I keep thinking about it.

Well, I hope you're all doing alright. Those were some good times.

... lol, just reading the text in my signature takes me way back... Club Afterlife is what Mass Effect really was all about. I will finish my ME blog one day. Bring the evidence to the table.

_________________
"Refuse to believe life ends here. Too wasteful. Have more to offer. Mistakes to fix. Cannot end here. Could do so much more."
avatar
smash016
Scion

Posts : 644
Join date : 2014-03-25
Location : Everywhere at Once

Back to top Go down

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

Post by MaximizedAction on Fri Apr 27, 2018 6:56 pm

If the news I've seen so far and journalists are representative of how the majority of people think of the sudden, what feels to be out of the blue, peace talks, smiles and literal handholding between NK and SK: 
that it's something to only be happy about, look forward to, speak high praises of Kim and at no time think "wtf" or second guess, even if it's a happy alternative to a grim reality,
then it was probably true that the majority of people chose Synthesis, peace and eternal handholding and genuinely liked it.

_________________
avatar
MaximizedAction
Space Cow

Posts : 845
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 30
Location : Munich, Germany

Back to top Go down

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

Post by TerramineLightvoid on Sat May 19, 2018 5:09 am

DoomsdayDevice wrote:I had this conversation with someone recently who brought up Mass Effect. I was kind of reluctant to talk about the ending, fearing he would be a face value kind of guy like so many others. When he asked what my opinion was, I said I felt like I really only had one single option. To my surprise he said, "Yeah, because you end up indoctrinated in the other two." Here's the thing though, he had never heard of IT, or even considered the idea that it could be an illusion of sorts. So he did take the thing at face value, yet arrived at the same conclusion.

I thought it was really refreshing. I mean, I've said the ending is indoctrination, even at face value, but it's different coming from someone who has never even considered a mindfuck of sorts.

And before *someone* jumps at me, he didn't have any DLC, so he was talking about the original ending, which means no refuse.
That's literally what I've been saying since I got here. It's especially apparent at face value if you play the entire trilogy for the first time, all at once, like I did. Because you don't have time to form a biased viewpoint based on a particular aspect of the game or story that may have been the primary focus of your attention that kept you coming back to that particular game in the trilogy for years.

This would especially be a potential issue for the first game. Because that is the beginning, and is essentially just laying the ground work for the rest of the trilogy. ME1 existed for however long before anyone could play ME2? Meaning in that time, people had lots of time to form diverse impressions. First impressions are the most important, especially if you stretch that impression on for a significant length of time.

If you play it all at once, in a continuous playthrough. Then you just look at everything in the whole trilogy, and focus much less on specific details of any given game in the trilogy. You look at the whole experience all at once, and so your perspective is of the whole picture more than anything else. With that in mind, it is just so incredibly in your face by time you reach the end. That you are undergoing an attempt by the Reapers, to get full on indoctrinated. Which is something that is evident at any point before, that the trilogy was building up to this moment.

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
TerramineLightvoid
Pod Crab

Posts : 33
Join date : 2017-03-25
Age : 24
Location : Type 7, Omniverse

Back to top Go down

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

Post by TerramineLightvoid on Sat May 19, 2018 5:45 am

dorktainian wrote:Then look at the Major Players in the Trilogy;

Saren, a Synthesis advocate.
TIM, a Control advocate.
Shepard has to pick Destroy.

Why?

There are three avatars and he is the last one standing.  Any other choice and he (and therefore you) are indoctrinated.
I think I can actually express what you are trying to say, more concisely and less circular. Less "Why? Because because."

On the first part, they aren't just "major players". Specifically Shepard is the Protag, and both Saren and TIM fall within "Big Bad" territory. Saren was the Big Bad of ME1 and despite it seeming the farthest from it on the surface TIM WAS /THE/ BIG BAD OF ME2.

Looking at it from a writing perspective, Saren was literally the guy we were chasing and trying to stop in his tracks through 99% of ME1. The Reapers themselves, and Sovereign as the direct Reaper Representative of ME1, were the "higher power" that the Big Good/Big Bad archetype has a tendency to be in touch with and being a servant of. The Final Boss was /saren/, and that only by extension meant we had destroyed Sovereign because Saren was the "Avatar" representative for the Reapers. The Big Bad is always a mortal avatar representative for a great evil force, even if it's never explicitly or directly presented that way in the story. Even if it seems like the Big Bad is doing things all by his lonesome, it just means the force that he is a puppet to is more abstract than say... Giant Cuttlefish that exist physically somewhere in space. In this case, it's not even metaphorical, it is as direct and archetypologically direct as possible.

TIM everything was a lot more indirect, he seemed like he was "on our side". But the fact of the matter is, he is a Big Entity in the ME Franchise that had motive to seek out Shepard and take control of him and use him like a pawn for his nefarious motives. Not to mention as you guys are pointing out, it is virtually certain that TIM was well indoctrinated enough that he was at that stage where you think you're doing your own motives, but really the Reapers have twisted that so you're a total hypocrite and your words really don't mean anything, by the beginning of the second game. So even if his approach seemed to be on the side of Good, he was a very subtle puppet for the Reapers. Which again in this case, he is the main direct iconic representative for the Reapers throughout this game. The final boss was finally a Reaper of a sort, but in a weird roundabout way it was really TIM because we only ended up facing the protoreaper because of his "opening pandoras box" style antics, and when all was said and done TIM wanted to /save/ the human Reaper. Claiming it was for Control motives, but makes infinitely more sense if it was a daisy chain motive on part of Harbinger to... you know... save the very thing the Reapers were trying to achieve, instead of destroying it which was basically the whole point to us going on a suicide mission even if we didn't realize it until we were there facing the proto reaper itself.

So I think, point proven. The only thing left here is to emphasize that the Protagonist role in a lot of ways is ultimately the same exact thing, functionally, as the Big Bad. Specifically the ultimate Protagonist is in fact the Big Good archetype, the ideal protagonist is someone who is a Big Good. The Big Good is essentially like "owning" the protag role, getting balls deep in it, and making it your bitch. Fighting evil and the Big Bad especially with sheer relentless and unyielding passion for doing what is right. Going to literal war, like you are the very mortal manifestation of Good unto itself. Which Good in it's truest nature, is in an eternal and infinite war with Evil. Shepard doesn't necessarily represent such an extreme manifestation, but he kind of can by the end of the trilogy /if/ you choose Destroy. Because destroy is staring the Reapers in the face, everything that they are, and telling them to shove a big fat dick up their Cthuloid anuses. You feel me? So at the end of the day, you aren't wrong... but you are more right than you know.

They aren't just "3 of the most major". They are literally defacto, the very characters that the story exclusively revolves around at it's core. It is about these 3 characters, and how Saren and TIm tell the first 2 parts/chances of a trilogy of potential Protags. Saren and TIM were protag types, but they ended up corrupted. Which is exactly what the Big Bad is, the Protag turned evil. The worst possible evil, because the prophetic hero has the greatest potential to do good... so imagine what happens when someone like that goes "Rogue"(Sound fimilar? Saren?).

Which brings me to what you were ultimately trying to say with your answer to WHY the player MUST choose destroy, but instead just ended up kinda saying "because because". The real answer is, because ultimately speaking. Why in the fuck would the "right answer", be an answer that somebody already did and failed? That's nonsense. Thematically speaking, there is kind of another side to Chekov's gun. Not only do you have to fire off the gun at some point if you show it off. But it actually is far from optimal, if you shoot the same gun off twice. In this case, it renders the first time the gun was shot completely meaningless? If the right choice was Control, then what was the whole point to TIM and the second game little alone the outcome and what was bluntly said to us right before the decision chamber in regard to TIM's fate? Literally we are told what it means... "Well, for TIM it meant that he was FUCKED, but for literally JUST BECAUSE... you doing it means complete success. Literally 100%, just because." So that whole speech where we convince TIM to shoot himself in the fucking head, because he was just plain /ALTOGETHER WRONG IDEOLOGICALLY/. Was actually false? It wasn't that Control itself is ideologically flawed? It was just cause TIM isn't the chosen one? Meanwhile if synthesis was the right choice, yet again we convinced a guy to kill himself for making peace with and merging with the Reapers. But only because he wasn't the Chosen One?

Also, nobody seems to notice that the hallmark of Conmen is that after every successful Con, they have to go to a new person and convince them all over again of the same shit they already convinced of someone else... and when people who previously got Conned start making it obvious that it is just a Con because of the inevitable results that a Con begets(Lies don't lead to legitimate results, duh.), then the Conmen has to incorporate addressing those previous cases into their Con, saying stuff like "Yeah, because that dude was an idiot. Now /you/ my friend, you definitely are not a person that could get conned. So certainly what I am selling will be 100% legit for /you/."

_________________
Life is chaos itself. Organisms appear and evolve as a mere byproduct of thermodynamics.

Welcome to a universe made up of many universes, enter prisoner 092993 of a tiny blue dot.

We are the Masters of the descended world!
avatar
TerramineLightvoid
Pod Crab

Posts : 33
Join date : 2017-03-25
Age : 24
Location : Type 7, Omniverse

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Rifneno on Sat May 19, 2018 5:55 am

TerramineLightvoid wrote:I think I can actually express what you are trying to say, more concisely and less circular.

Dork's post: 266 characters

Your post: 6,476 characters

Nailed it like the fuckin' Romans!

_________________
Remember folks.  We didn't get A, B, C endings.  We got A, A, A endings.
avatar
Rifneno
Honey Badger

Posts : 2632
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 37
Location : Razgriz Straits

Back to top Go down

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

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 20 of 21 Previous  1 ... 11 ... 19, 20, 21  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum