The Indoctrination Theory and Refuse

One quote I know of, that in my opinion supports refuse, is this one:

EDI: Shepard, do you believe your crew members should be allowed to disobey an order on moral grounds?
Shepard (Paragon): Absolutely. I have no use for team members who can't think for themselves.

Then again, if you don't think that refuse is disobeying orders / abandoning mission, then you won't agree with this.

IronicParticle wrote:

DoomsdayDevice wrote:A lot of those destroy quotes are about being prepared to make sacrifices though.

And I'm pretty sure it means the heroic kinds of sacrifices you have the right to make in the first place. Like what is seen in Refuse, not Destroy. Destroy is Saren type sacrifice.

Sacrificing the entire galaxy is a heroic sacrifice now?

DoomsdayDevice wrote:

IronicParticle wrote:

DoomsdayDevice wrote:A lot of those destroy quotes are about being prepared to make sacrifices though.

And I'm pretty sure it means the heroic kinds of sacrifices you have the right to make in the first place. Like what is seen in Refuse, not Destroy. Destroy is Saren type sacrifice.

Sacrificing the entire galaxy is a heroic sacrifice now?

The only sacrifice you have the right to make, is to sacrifice yourself. In Refuse, your resolve involves the will to sacrifice your life to destroy the reapers if need be. Now, as I said before hiding is a legit scenario.... if anybody cared about their lives so much that they'd back-stab the Geth, they just would've ran away and hid under a rock instead in the first place. This is proven beyond possible thanks to the Leviathans hiding from the Reapers since their Cycle began. That's how easy it is, that you can hide FOREVER if you want.

However everyone there has the resolve of Refuse, it's the resolve to fight to death trying to destroy the Reapers, TOGETHER. In Destroy, it's literally like the bad guy invited Shepard into the back VIP room to discuss selling out the Geth's chance at a future in exchange for everyone Else's future. This is the kind of resolve that can be twisted, because as soon as you sign that deal you are willing to do anything to destroy the Reapers. Heck the will to do anything to destroy the Reapers makes no sense, it's irrational and illogical because if I told you to make a list of things... and to just keep making the list. Eventually and inevitably, you will have written down 1 or more things that will OUTWEIGH destroying the Reapers. This is inevitable, because there is things imaginably worst than the Reapers.

The hiding argument is not really that good.
In theory, yes you are able to hide, especially races with a long life span (Asari, Krogan, EDI, Geth...). Liara herself states that twice (at the beginning/mid of ME3 and later when she is in your bedroom before going to Cronos Station [which is actually a good trigger for the Jungle Planet, as a place "where a single ship could be lost in the stars"]).

However, this does not apply to all those who have not enough resources, no ship or are already trapped on a planet that is under Reaper occupation.
And we only have a single example for this kind of strategy that works for more than one cycle. Think about the Ilos scientists, on the other hand. They survived, but were not able to sustain a population.

And in the end, running away and hiding does not solve the problem. Even if some Asari would be able to slip through the Reaper's grid (a likely scenarion given their long lifespan and ability to procreate with nearly everything) and were able to maintain their civilization and technoloy, this new civilization would soon be observed by the Vanguard Reaper and cause another invasion, if necessary.

Restrider wrote:The hiding argument is not really that good.
In theory, yes you are able to hide, especially races with a long life span (Asari, Krogan, EDI, Geth...). Liara herself states that twice (at the beginning/mid of ME3 and later when she is in your bedroom before going to Cronos Station [which is actually a good trigger for the Jungle Planet, as a place "where a single ship could be lost in the stars"]).

However, this does not apply to all those who have not enough resources, no ship or are already trapped on a planet that is under Reaper occupation.
And we only have a single example for this kind of strategy that works for more than one cycle. Think about the Ilos scientists, on the other hand. They survived, but were not able to sustain a population.

And in the end, running away and hiding does not solve the problem. Even if some Asari would be able to slip through the Reaper's grid (a likely scenarion given their long lifespan and ability to procreate with nearly everything) and were able to maintain their civilization and technoloy, this new civilization would soon be observed by the Vanguard Reaper and cause another invasion, if necessary.

Yeah but at the same time, morally and ethically speaking, it'd be better than back-stabbing the Geth. I mean it's not like anyone is currently being selfish, everyone is fighting for selfless reasons under the Refuse resolve, and so the galaxy wouldn't want to sell the Geth out. This was my point, everyone who dies in Refuse would rather die themselves protecting the Geth than they would want to sell them out.

This argument is my attempt to address the notion that Shepard lets the galaxy die/sacrifices the galaxy. It's a false assertion because everyone dies of their own accord. Also Shepard is not letting the Reapers win, failure to stop something=/=Letting it happen.

Random example, but imagine God came down. Turns out it's evil and wants to destroy us all. Now in this what if scenario, this is the real God/s, meaning there is literally 0% chance of winning. Essentially our doom is inevitable even if we don't know it. Then say I oppose it, or you do, or whoever.... someone opposes God. The person to oppose it dies, does this mean they let God destroy the world? No, it doesn't. You only have so much power to let, or prevent, just because something stops you either way doesn't mean you let it happen. Even if it did, under this context it's not the same immoral kind of letting the galaxy fall, as say helping the Reapers. It's the kind of letting the galaxy fall that is not your fault because you tried to not let it happen.

If we put ourselves in Shepard's shoes and don't know the outcome of each choice, nobody would choose it. It's either Destroy, which sacrifice the synthetic life, who are willing to die, in order to defeat the Reapers once and for all, or sacrifice all life in a foolhardy chance to defeat them conventionally, which was pounbded into us as being impossible.

Selim Bradley wrote: If we put ourselves in Shepard's shoes and don't know the outcome of each choice, nobody would choose it. It's either Destroy, which sacrifice the synthetic life, who are willing to die, in order to defeat the Reapers once and for all, or sacrifice all life in a foolhardy chance to defeat them conventionally, which was pounbded into us as being impossible.

Exactly.

IronicParticle wrote:The only sacrifice you have the right to make, is to sacrifice yourself.

That's not at all how being in the military works. Your superiors can sacrifice you for anything they deem necessary, you agree to this possibility by signing up. The Geth, EDI, and everyone else knew what they were getting into, and all were willing to die to kill the Reapers. Just the fact that they are fighting is them giving permission to be sacrificed if need be.

BleedingUranium wrote:

IronicParticle wrote:The only sacrifice you have the right to make, is to sacrifice yourself.

That's not at all how being in the military works. Your superiors can sacrifice you for anything they deem necessary, you agree to this possibility by signing up. The Geth, EDI, and everyone else knew what they were getting into, and all were willing to die to kill the Reapers. Just the fact that they are fighting is them giving permission to be sacrificed if need be.

Reminds me of a quote from Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood:
"Whenever a soldier dawns their uniform, they accept the reality that they might be buried in it." -Wrath

@Selim: Wrong, as I said before I would've picked Refuse from the beginning if the option was there.

Funny thing is, is that Refuse is more justified than Destroy, it's more consensual. The same logic that the Geth are ready to die, applies to Refuse and the whole galaxy. Everyone there is ready to die, the difference between Destroy and Refuse is that nobody is ready for Destroy to happen.... they didn't sign up for Destroy, they didn't sign up to betray the Geth, etc. Like I said before, Destroy completely lacks consent on everyone's behalf. Meanwhile Refuse is the one where it is 100% consensual.

@DD: "Exactly." Nope.

"That's not at all how being in the military works. Your superiors can sacrifice you for anything they deem necessary, you agree to this possibility by signing up. The Geth, EDI, and everyone else knew what they were getting into, and all were willing to die to kill the Reapers. Just the fact that they are fighting is them giving permission to be sacrificed if need be."

Shepard is not a politician who does hard calculus, not unless it's 100% necessary like Arrival. To the contrary it seems that if there is any chance, Shepard will do the opposite. Not to mention not everybody there is a soldier, many civilians have shown up. Everyone there, soldiers included, are not there to be pawns, their there to fight TOGETHER for everybody's future.

A good leader only makes justified sacrifices. Simply telling me that the military is corrupt and immoral does not help your case... so "That's not at all how being in the military works" your point is? The way it normally works, is wrong, the way it's supposed to work is supposed to be logical, rational, reasonable, empathetic, ethical, moral, etc. That's how all Humans are meant to work, it's what our hardware is equipped to do... anything else breaks our "hardware" and only creates suffering.

You have the ability to sacrifice the Geth, but not the right. You also leave out the organic's consent when making a sacrifice on their behalf. You cannot logically argue that the whole galaxy consented to back-stabbing the Geth, in reality they would've wanted the opposite. So like I said, it's 100% non-consensual. Which I want to stress the fact, that even if you had the right to sacrifice the Geth, you don't have the right to forfeit their chance for a future... you only have the right to make a sacrifice IN ORDER TO SAVE THEIR FUTURE.

IronicParticle wrote:@Selim: Wrong, as I said before I would've picked Refuse from the beginning if the option was there.

Funny thing is, is that Refuse is more justified than Destroy, it's more consensual. The same logic that the Geth are ready to die, applies to Refuse and the whole galaxy. Everyone there is ready to die, the difference between Destroy and Refuse is that nobody is ready for Destroy to happen.... they didn't sign up for Destroy, they didn't sign up to betray the Geth, etc. Like I said before, Destroy completely lacks consent on everyone's behalf. Meanwhile Refuse is the one where it is 100% consensual.

What do you mean they didn't sign up for Destroy. How else would they beat the Reapers? Everyone has accepted the use of the Crucible, so consensensually they are more open for Control and Synthesis than Refuse since at least those endings still stop the Repers. As for synthetics, Destroy takes the Reapers with them while in Refuse, the Reapers will defeat us and the cycle will continue. As beings who operate on logic, synthetics would much rather die for an absolute chance to defeat the Reapers than fighting a winless battle through conventional means.

IronicParticle wrote:@Selim: Wrong, as I said before I would've picked Refuse from the beginning if the option was there.

IronicParticle wrote:Remember, I'm a Destroyer too because everything I am saying is speculation. Without any real evidence I have no reason to think it's definitely the case.

Tell me, which one is true.

Any non indoctrinated people who put their luck in the crucible, is really putting it into Shepard who in turn greatly holds the damn thing, and it being the only way, to a big ole grain of salt. Which they only trust Shepard because they expect him to do the right thing, not the cold calculus thing.

We already know the crucible isn't even a way to destroy the Reapers in the first place. Now you can try and say that Shepard thinks it will, but you can't say he thinks it is the only way. Not only does he believe there is always another way, but unless bioware plans to make the Reapers winning as canon, we WILL destroy the Reapers without using the crucible... at least, not without reverse-enginnering it. Which means, it's already undeniable that there is another way.

"As beings who operate on logic" EDI operates on the Human resolve. The Geth also have been idealistic a lot of the time in their consensus. The problem with your claim, is that Morality, Ethics, Empathy... are all logical. The notion that they are irrational is incorrect, they appear to be inevitable byproducts of an intelligence that grows properly. It's a pattern of evolution, it is inevitable as long as an intelligence isn't neglected.

"Tell me, which one is true."

Maybe Restrider deleted the post where I had said it, or maybe it's still there, but I said that the only real reason I probably support Destroy is because of reading all the Indoctrination Theory stuff which is biased towards Destroy, plus Destroy Pre-EC was the lesser of 3 evils. ultimately, there are good lore arguments for Destroy, but the EC rendered most moral based arguments invalid, and of the lore arguments a lot of them easily support Refuse. I am stuck in the middle. Though when I said the Refuse thing, you have to remember that I was saying that under the context of "what if refuse was there from the start"... meaning before I knew about IT, etc.

"Not if we lose our humanity in the process! I'm out there fighting to stop crap like this!" - Commander Shepard

This quote is in direct response to the accusation from Clerk Bosker that Shepard would be willing to sacrifice his/her humanity. Shepard is undeniably saying as bluntly as possible, that in fact he/she is fighting to stop the sacrifice of humanity even!

I also recall that Shepard has this sort of attitude when talking with TIM on the citadel at the end. TIM has sacrificed his Humanity, to save humanity, if you catch my drift and it's exactly what he has done wrong.

IronicParticle wrote:Any non indoctrinated people who put their luck in the crucible, is really putting it into Shepard who in turn greatly holds the damn thing, and it being the only way, to a big ole grain of salt. Which they only trust Shepard because they expect him to do the right thing, not the cold calculus thing.

We already know the crucible isn't even a way to destroy the Reapers in the first place. Now you can try and say that Shepard thinks it will, but you can't say he thinks it is the only way. Not only does he believe there is always another way, but unless bioware plans to make the Reapers winning as canon, we WILL destroy the Reapers without using the crucible... at least, not without reverse-enginnering it. Which means, it's already undeniable that there is another way.

No Shepard doesn't. If Shepard had any doubts on the Crucible not being the solution, they wouldn't have dedicated the entire game to building an army to guard it. Also, we do not know that the Crucible doesn't actually destroy the Reapers. It could be anything from a Reaper trap or a superweapon built to destroy the Reapers and everything in between. And even if we, the players, did Shepard does not. Shepard is in the mindset that the Crucible will defeat the Reapers once and for all, and is the only way to do it.

Selim Bradley wrote:

IronicParticle wrote:Any non indoctrinated people who put their luck in the crucible, is really putting it into Shepard who in turn greatly holds the damn thing, and it being the only way, to a big ole grain of salt. Which they only trust Shepard because they expect him to do the right thing, not the cold calculus thing.

We already know the crucible isn't even a way to destroy the Reapers in the first place. Now you can try and say that Shepard thinks it will, but you can't say he thinks it is the only way. Not only does he believe there is always another way, but unless bioware plans to make the Reapers winning as canon, we WILL destroy the Reapers without using the crucible... at least, not without reverse-enginnering it. Which means, it's already undeniable that there is another way.

No Shepard doesn't. If Shepard had any doubts on the Crucible not being the solution, they wouldn't have dedicated the entire game to building an army to guard it. Also, we do not know that the Crucible doesn't actually destroy the Reapers. It could be anything from a Reaper trap or a superweapon built to destroy the Reapers and everything in between. And even if we, the players, did Shepard does not. Shepard is in the mindset that the Crucible will defeat the Reapers once and for all, and is the only way to do it.

Wrong, when Liara asks if it's worth a shot Shepard shows great doubt, so you are wrong. Also no, there is no chance the crucible is legit because the Reapers would've destroyed it in a millisecond the moment it was even a mile away from earth. Then the beam run to it is obviously set up, no sane person would try that and Harbinger is avoiding killing Shepard, he is even behind the beam meaning he is leading you to it, not defending it. I can keep going, but in the end it's inevitable. The reapers set the stage to get their avatar for their Reaper, that's why they whispered in the back of Shepard's mind telling him/her to come home, in the boy's voice.

IronicParticle wrote:Wrong, when Liara asks if it's worth a shot Shepard shows great doubt, so you are wrong. Also no, there is no chance the crucible is legit because the Reapers would've destroyed it in a millisecond the moment it was even a mile away from earth. Then the beam run to it is obviously set up, no sane person would try that and Harbinger is avoiding killing Shepard, he is even behind the beam meaning he is leading you to it, not defending it. I can keep going, but in the end it's inevitable. The reapers set the stage to get their avatar for their Reaper, that's why they whispered in the back of Shepard's mind telling him/her to come home, in the boy's voice.

Shepard shows great doubt that even with the Crucible, they may not win this. As for the Reapers destroying it, that's why Shield Fleet exists: to shield the Crucible so it can dock with the Citadel. They are using the beam to ferry humans, alive and dead, to the Citadel for unknown reasons though presumed for a second attempt at constructing the Human Reaper. As for no sane person running towards it, Shepard and Hammer have no choice in the manner but to do it. When the only option is insane, you still take it because there is no other options. Shepard has done the same things many times throughout the trilogy. As for Shepard being the "avatar for their Reaper", where's your proof this is what they do? I want to see it since it is not in the games/books.

IronicParticle wrote:"Not if we lose our humanity in the process! I'm out there fighting to stop crap like this!" - Commander Shepard

This quote is in direct response to the accusation from Clerk Bosker that Shepard would be willing to sacrifice his/her humanity. Shepard is undeniably saying as bluntly as possible, that in fact he/she is fighting to stop the sacrifice of humanity even!

I also recall that Shepard has this sort of attitude when talking with TIM on the citadel at the end. TIM has sacrificed his Humanity, to save humanity, if you catch my drift and it's exactly what he has done wrong.

You could also add the Paragon dialogue at the end of ME2, if you destroyed the base.

Selim Bradley wrote: Shepard shows great doubt that even with the Crucible, they may not win this. As for the Reapers destroying it, that's why Shield Fleet exists: to shield the Crucible so it can dock with the Citadel. They are using the beam to ferry humans, alive and dead, to the Citadel for unknown reasons though presumed for a second attempt at constructing the Human Reaper. As for no sane person running towards it, Shepard and Hammer have no choice in the manner but to do it. When the only option is insane, you still take it because there is no other options. Shepard has done the same things many times throughout the trilogy. As for Shepard being the "avatar for their Reaper", where's your proof this is what they do? I want to see it since it is not in the games/books.

Shepard at the beginning of ME3 seems to have doubts if the Crucible is the best way to defeat the Reapers, but Liara convinces him to at least "give it a try". After that, at a several opportunities people voice their concern whether the Crucible will work or how it works, but not Shepard. Shepard seems to focus entirely on the success of the Crucible mission, ignoring the suspicious things about it that are lingering in the game.

And I am not even talking about the marvelous technology that is easy to use, yet incomprehensible, and built by an ancient, now extinct, organic race. The fact that Leviathan seems to know something it does not want to reveal (same technique was used in LotSB to show that there was something off about Tela Vasir, even when we met her in Liara's appartment), the fact that the Reapers hold their troops back during F:E, the fact that the Reapers could have easily shut down the beam to prevent their destruction, the fact that the Guardian states that they were unaware of the existence of the Crucible plans, although they were obviously used one cycle ago and Cerberus knows about them as well.

A lot points at the Crucible being a dud or a trap. The observant player knows that, yet Shepard does not voice their concern (if they have any; let's be honest here, Shepard is sometimes slow in comprehending). An interesting concept was that the player is Shepard's subconscience or whatever part of the mind is necessary for decision making. Maybe subconsciously Shepard knows through the player that something is off?

Selim Bradley wrote:

IronicParticle wrote:*snip*

Shepard shows great doubt that even with the Crucible, they may not win this. As for the Reapers destroying it, that's why Shield Fleet exists: to shield the Crucible so it can dock with the Citadel. They are using the beam to ferry humans, alive and dead, to the Citadel for unknown reasons though presumed for a second attempt at constructing the Human Reaper. As for no sane person running towards it, Shepard and Hammer have no choice in the manner but to do it. When the only option is insane, you still take it because there is no other options. Shepard has done the same things many times throughout the trilogy. As for Shepard being the "avatar for their Reaper", where's your proof this is what they do? I want to see it since it is not in the games/books.

It may be Anderson who said there is always another way, but Shepard works as if that's also what he/she thinks, for example when talking with Harbinger in ME2 Shepard says that they will find a way because that's what humans do. What does that mean? Oh yeah, there is always another way to find, and we humans are good at finding it.

But also, Shepard will NOT use the crucible if it means sacrificing our Humanity:

"Not if we lose our humanity in the process! I'm out there fighting to stop crap like this!" - Commander Shepard

"I don't think so. I'm gonna stop the Reapers, but I won't sacrifice the soul of our species to do it." - Commander Shepard

To be specific, at best Shepard plans to use the crucible without sacrificing our Humanity. You guys talk about how Shepard expected Destroy? No he didn't, he expected to destroy the Reapers without losing his Humanity.

Speaking of Cerberus knowing about the Crucible, don't we KNOW the Reapers know about the Crucible? The Prothean VI said that's exactly why they began to move it there in the first place didn't it? Because TIM alerted them? So the guardian HAD to know, and the Reapers even moved it there BECAUSE we were doing it.

Allegedly it was to protect the Citadel from being used.

Which in response to Selim: "that's why Shield Fleet exists: to shield the Crucible so it can dock with the Citadel."

Are you fucking kidding me, there is 200 reapers around earth. They ripped through our defenses and pwned us in seconds. They could prepare like 50 reapers for the crucible and like I said, destroy it in a millisecond, at most a second, literally. Reapers have gone through multiple singularities, their processing power and speed is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction times billions of a second. They have beams that can destroy dreadnaughts. Somehow a few weakling ships and pointless armor can at least delay it for more than 2 seconds against 20, little alone 50 Reapers? Get real.

Everything we do, they are so powerful they are actually orchestrating it, We'd be done for already if they didn't WANT us to get to the beam. In reality, we are probably going to beat them because of an unknown weakness discovered on the Citadel... I'm betting on the hidden archives.

IronicParticle wrote:

Which in response to Selim: "that's why Shield Fleet exists: to shield the Crucible so it can dock with the Citadel."

Are you fucking kidding me, there is 200 reapers around earth. They ripped through our defenses and pwned us in seconds. They could prepare like 50 reapers for the crucible and like I said, destroy it in a millisecond, at most a second, literally. Reapers have gone through multiple singularities, their processing power and speed is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction times billions of a second. They have beams that can destroy dreadnaughts. Somehow a few weakling ships and pointless armor can at least delay it for more than 2 seconds against 20, little alone 50 Reapers? Get real.

Everything we do, they are so powerful they are actually orchestrating it, We'd be done for already if they didn't WANT us to get to the beam. In reality, we are probably going to beat them because of an unknown weakness discovered on the Citadel... I'm betting on the hidden archives.

So let me get this straight: Shield Fleet can't defend the Crucible, but we can defeat the Reapers with conventional means? The Reapers would never keep such a weakness on the citadel, even if they assumked nobody wiould find it. Know why? The Reapers operate solely on logic, and leaving data of your weakness ANYWHERE is illogical.

Also, please don't resort to saying things like swear words.

Selim Bradley wrote:

IronicParticle wrote:

Which in response to Selim: "that's why Shield Fleet exists: to shield the Crucible so it can dock with the Citadel."

Are you fucking kidding me, there is 200 reapers around earth. They ripped through our defenses and pwned us in seconds. They could prepare like 50 reapers for the crucible and like I said, destroy it in a millisecond, at most a second, literally. Reapers have gone through multiple singularities, their processing power and speed is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction times billions of a second. They have beams that can destroy dreadnaughts. Somehow a few weakling ships and pointless armor can at least delay it for more than 2 seconds against 20, little alone 50 Reapers? Get real.

Everything we do, they are so powerful they are actually orchestrating it, We'd be done for already if they didn't WANT us to get to the beam. In reality, we are probably going to beat them because of an unknown weakness discovered on the Citadel... I'm betting on the hidden archives.

So let me get this straight: Shield Fleet can't defend the Crucible, but we can defeat the Reapers with conventional means? The Reapers would never keep such a weakness on the citadel, even if they assumked nobody wiould find it. Know why? The Reapers operate solely on logic, and leaving data of your weakness ANYWHERE is illogical.

Also, please don't resort to saying things like swear words.

Excuse my language. Anyways, not using the crucible, is not inherently conventional. Conventional means you shoot them to death with regular weapons/methods. Also you didn't refute my point about how you can't fight off 200 Reapers. Us getting to earth was all part of their plan, or are you not an ITer? Because any ITer knows that they brought Shepard there to indoctrinate him/her.

Even EDI says they technically should wipe us out then and there, and Shepard brushes it off in a stupid way by claiming they underestimate us. Considering the Reapers are so intelligent that they are beyond our comprehension, underestimating their enemies does not seem possible. In reality Shepard underestimates the Reapers, which is unbelievable... you'd almost have to be blind to do that >.>

Edit: Actually, your biggest threat is the person who knows you the most. Even the smallest information about you, could be a weakness. They might hide information about their past or something, and such personal information could be all we need. Essentially, they could've stored information they deemed harmless and too secure to be found anyways, and we can use it to our advantage in a way they couldn't have guessed.

Restrider wrote:

Selim Bradley wrote: Shepard shows great doubt that even with the Crucible, they may not win this. As for the Reapers destroying it, that's why Shield Fleet exists: to shield the Crucible so it can dock with the Citadel. They are using the beam to ferry humans, alive and dead, to the Citadel for unknown reasons though presumed for a second attempt at constructing the Human Reaper. As for no sane person running towards it, Shepard and Hammer have no choice in the manner but to do it. When the only option is insane, you still take it because there is no other options. Shepard has done the same things many times throughout the trilogy. As for Shepard being the "avatar for their Reaper", where's your proof this is what they do? I want to see it since it is not in the games/books.

Shepard at the beginning of ME3 seems to have doubts if the Crucible is the best way to defeat the Reapers, but Liara convinces him to at least "give it a try". After that, at a several opportunities people voice their concern whether the Crucible will work or how it works, but not Shepard. Shepard seems to focus entirely on the success of the Crucible mission, ignoring the suspicious things about it that are lingering in the game.

And I am not even talking about the marvelous technology that is easy to use, yet incomprehensible, and built by an ancient, now extinct, organic race. The fact that Leviathan seems to know something it does not want to reveal (same technique was used in LotSB to show that there was something off about Tela Vasir, even when we met her in Liara's appartment), the fact that the Reapers hold their troops back during F:E, the fact that the Reapers could have easily shut down the beam to prevent their destruction, the fact that the Guardian states that they were unaware of the existence of the Crucible plans, although they were obviously used one cycle ago and Cerberus knows about them as well.

A lot points at the Crucible being a dud or a trap. The observant player knows that, yet Shepard does not voice their concern (if they have any; let's be honest here, Shepard is sometimes slow in comprehending). An interesting concept was that the player is Shepard's subconscience or whatever part of the mind is necessary for decision making. Maybe subconsciously Shepard knows through the player that something is off?

Beautiful.

Especially the last part. Most people can't control their dreams, right? It needs training. Usually, the subconsciousness is the one controlling what you do in your dreams.
Which is, what we're doing in the ME3 dreams.

Re: Shepard having doubts, that only goes for paragon Shepard.

Paragon Shepard has doubts about everything, doesn't think we can win, worries about who we'll lose, etcetera. It gets worse progressively towards the end.

On my first playthrough, I thought my Shepard was being more and more out of character as I progressed. It all started in Arrival, where Shep tells Harbinger "Well, maybe we can't win...", etcetera.

Then on a subsequent playthrough I noticed that renegade Shepard doesn't suffer from this at all. Never doubts that we'll kick the Reapers ass.

Also, in the decision chamber, paragon Shepard seems completely indoctrinated to me, as opposed to renegade.

DoomsdayDevice wrote:Re: Shepard having doubts, that only goes for paragon Shepard.

Paragon Shepard has doubts about everything, doesn't think we can win, worries about who we'll lose, etcetera. It gets worse progressively towards the end.

On my first playthrough, I thought my Shepard was being more and more out of character as I progressed. It all started in Arrival, where Shep tells Harbinger "Well, maybe we can't win...", etcetera.

Then on a subsequent playthrough I noticed that renegade Shepard doesn't suffer from this at all. Never doubts that we'll kick the Reapers ass.

Also, in the decision chamber, paragon Shepard seems completely indoctrinated to me, as opposed to renegade.

I agree, though no Shepard ever questions the legitimacy of the Crucible despite some glaring holes in its story of existence.

To the bolded part: I also agree. Paragon dialogue choices such as "So... the Illusive Man was right after all?" or "I think I understand [Synthesis]..." are really hinting at something being wrong. In the end, I ended up 100% renegade in the Decision Chamber. It ends with Refuse...