Why do you not believe the indoctrination theory? *Major Spoilers*
- Thread starter SS2Dante
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I say it was dropped, because the game itself isnt really clear cut about it, and never gives an affirmation of it. Everything about the Indoctrination theory is working on assumptions, assumptions based on logical thinking and derivative from the lore and themes of the game, but assumptions nonetheless.SS2Dante said:Why do you say it was dropped? The point of this idea is that it happened. Both the synthesis and the control endings are you being indoctrinated fully. The fight ending is you resisting, which is why you get the extra cutscene. Or have I misunderstood your meaning?boag said:If the Indoctrination theory is true, and it all points to it having been a part of the ending until it was cut out in favor of Mac Walters shitastic ending.Zhukov said:But if Shepard was hallucinating then how do you know any of that really happened? You can't have it both ways.SS2Dante said:Depends what you mean by closure. If you chose the blue or green endings you give in to the Reapers and become a husk. Pretty obvious what happens after that. Sad ending.
- side note - I love the green ending in this way. Make a new being, the pinnacle of evolution, both synthetic and organic. How did I NOT notice that this describes a Reaper?
If you chose red you get the special scene of Shepard waking up in the ruins of London. Cliffhanger ending.
And even if I accept that the child stuff was hallucination and the rest was real, that doesn't fix much. A lot of the bullshit occurs during the final ending cutscene.
Like I said.
Incompetence.
The ending was nonsensical 11th-hour bullshit on every level. Bioware dropping the ball in spectacular fashion strikes me as the more plausible explanation for this.
Then I would assume that everything after getting hit with the reaper beam is a lie, or mental fuckery of the reapers indoctrinating Shepard.
Thematically it fits, since the game is continuously hitting players over the head with Indoctrination and free will talks.
Talks with EDI about free will and the reference of the Reapers asking for Leaders to come to their superstructures.
The PSTD Commando talking about the horrors she faced with Indoctrinated humans.
The experiments the Illusive man made to power up his Cerberus army.
and so on.
All in all it was probably planned and it was dropped for X reasons.
And from all information that has been leaked there was a lot more going to be added to the ending than just the gameplay mechanic of losing control of your character.
True. Don't really know what else to say about thatboag said:I say it was dropped, because the game itself isnt really clear cut about it, and never gives an affirmation of it. Everything about the Indoctrination theory is working on assumptions, assumptions based on logical thinking and derivative from the lore and themes of the game, but assumptions nonetheless.SS2Dante said:Why do you say it was dropped? The point of this idea is that it happened. Both the synthesis and the control endings are you being indoctrinated fully. The fight ending is you resisting, which is why you get the extra cutscene. Or have I misunderstood your meaning?boag said:If the Indoctrination theory is true, and it all points to it having been a part of the ending until it was cut out in favor of Mac Walters shitastic ending.Zhukov said:But if Shepard was hallucinating then how do you know any of that really happened? You can't have it both ways.SS2Dante said:Depends what you mean by closure. If you chose the blue or green endings you give in to the Reapers and become a husk. Pretty obvious what happens after that. Sad ending.
- side note - I love the green ending in this way. Make a new being, the pinnacle of evolution, both synthetic and organic. How did I NOT notice that this describes a Reaper?
If you chose red you get the special scene of Shepard waking up in the ruins of London. Cliffhanger ending.
And even if I accept that the child stuff was hallucination and the rest was real, that doesn't fix much. A lot of the bullshit occurs during the final ending cutscene.
Like I said.
Incompetence.
The ending was nonsensical 11th-hour bullshit on every level. Bioware dropping the ball in spectacular fashion strikes me as the more plausible explanation for this.
Then I would assume that everything after getting hit with the reaper beam is a lie, or mental fuckery of the reapers indoctrinating Shepard.
Thematically it fits, since the game is continuously hitting players over the head with Indoctrination and free will talks.
Talks with EDI about free will and the reference of the Reapers asking for Leaders to come to their superstructures.
The PSTD Commando talking about the horrors she faced with Indoctrinated humans.
The experiments the Illusive man made to power up his Cerberus army.
and so on.
All in all it was probably planned and it was dropped for X reasons.
And from all information that has been leaked there was a lot more going to be added to the ending than just the gameplay mechanic of losing control of your character.
Basically my point is given two interpretations of the ending, so far one makes sense and the other does not. That why I believe this theory. I don't need dlc (would like some though
) or anything, because this interpretation makes more sense than the other.
Oh and I agree, with all intents and purposes indoctrination is my Own ending for the game, and I accept it as a true ending of sorts. I am just waiting for Biowares left hand to finally tell its right hand to disclose the information.SS2Dante said:True. Don't really know what else to say about thatboag said:I say it was dropped, because the game itself isnt really clear cut about it, and never gives an affirmation of it. Everything about the Indoctrination theory is working on assumptions, assumptions based on logical thinking and derivative from the lore and themes of the game, but assumptions nonetheless.SS2Dante said:Why do you say it was dropped? The point of this idea is that it happened. Both the synthesis and the control endings are you being indoctrinated fully. The fight ending is you resisting, which is why you get the extra cutscene. Or have I misunderstood your meaning?boag said:If the Indoctrination theory is true, and it all points to it having been a part of the ending until it was cut out in favor of Mac Walters shitastic ending.Zhukov said:But if Shepard was hallucinating then how do you know any of that really happened? You can't have it both ways.SS2Dante said:Depends what you mean by closure. If you chose the blue or green endings you give in to the Reapers and become a husk. Pretty obvious what happens after that. Sad ending.
- side note - I love the green ending in this way. Make a new being, the pinnacle of evolution, both synthetic and organic. How did I NOT notice that this describes a Reaper?
If you chose red you get the special scene of Shepard waking up in the ruins of London. Cliffhanger ending.
And even if I accept that the child stuff was hallucination and the rest was real, that doesn't fix much. A lot of the bullshit occurs during the final ending cutscene.
Like I said.
Incompetence.
The ending was nonsensical 11th-hour bullshit on every level. Bioware dropping the ball in spectacular fashion strikes me as the more plausible explanation for this.
Then I would assume that everything after getting hit with the reaper beam is a lie, or mental fuckery of the reapers indoctrinating Shepard.
Thematically it fits, since the game is continuously hitting players over the head with Indoctrination and free will talks.
Talks with EDI about free will and the reference of the Reapers asking for Leaders to come to their superstructures.
The PSTD Commando talking about the horrors she faced with Indoctrinated humans.
The experiments the Illusive man made to power up his Cerberus army.
and so on.
All in all it was probably planned and it was dropped for X reasons.
And from all information that has been leaked there was a lot more going to be added to the ending than just the gameplay mechanic of losing control of your character.
Basically my point is given two interpretations of the ending, so far one makes sense and the other does not. That why I believe this theory. I don't need dlc (would like some though
It gives me a sense of closure on the game series as a whole, but it also makes me weary of any future product Bioware might piddle out without extensive research.
This is the first time I ever risked buying a game on release date, Bioware made sure I will never repeat this action in the future.
If people are left so confused by an ending that they need to create these intricate conspiracy theories about "what really happened" THEN IT'S NOT A GOOD ENDING!
I think it's sad how people are buying into it. However, if it is true, then that's way worse than just having a regular old shitty ending! That would be a literal slap in the face with 'EAware' saying to us "HAHA, it was all just a dream. Now give us some cash and maybe we'll give you closure on a series you invested half a decade into!"
I think it's sad how people are buying into it. However, if it is true, then that's way worse than just having a regular old shitty ending! That would be a literal slap in the face with 'EAware' saying to us "HAHA, it was all just a dream. Now give us some cash and maybe we'll give you closure on a series you invested half a decade into!"
SS2Dante said:
The thing about Star Gazer is that if you choose the wrong ending, become Indoctrinated, and thus lose to the Reapers...that obviously means that the Reapers win. Soooooo that means that the Cycle was not broken, humanity and all sentient life advanced enough for reaping was harvested. As such, as I mentioned in the spoiler in the self-quote: if the Indoctrination theory is correct, then only one of the possible 3 endings should get you the Star Gazer scene at the end.In the topic I linked (don't know if you read it) I mention that both the literal interpretation and the indoctrination interpretation both have plenty of evidence to support them but leave too many holes to confirm either one, Star Gazer's appearance no matter what ending you pick is a massive hole in the Indoctrination theory.
However, as I also mentioned, I'm no longer fighting the Indoctrination theory seeing as how Bioware has declared that that is the correct interpretation, these were just a couple of the points I brought up as a former defender of the "It Really Happened" theory.
Did anyone else notice how the ending of mass effect 3 was almost the same as the episode of stargate in which they kill off all the replicators?
In stargate they find a giant ass weapon capable of destroying all life in the galaxy and SG1 uses it to send a energy pulse made up of "space magic" through the stargates to kill all the replicators.
In stargate they find a giant ass weapon capable of destroying all life in the galaxy and SG1 uses it to send a energy pulse made up of "space magic" through the stargates to kill all the replicators.
Except you have won in the Stargazer cutscene. Everyone should be dead if you lost. Why would the Reapers leave any humans alive? Also, the planet the Normandy crashes on has a similar giant planet in the sky as the space winter desktop the stargazer is standing on. Which,again, makes less even sense if it the Normandy didn't crash on it. Otherwise, its just some random colony world with humanoids on it.SS2Dante said:The point is that the ending cutscenes are in Shepards head. All your squadmates express a desire to go somewhere far away where they can relax and be happy, the final cutscenes are Shepard creating this reality. They all somehow end up far away on a beautiful paradise. That's why it's so full of obvious plotholes.
The blue and green endings simply end with you losing. The implication is the Reapers win, as you've become a husk. The RED ending gives you the extra cutscene because you've broken free, awakening from your dream in London just after Harbinger's blast. CLIFFHANGER
And, again, it plays after Shepard "wakes up" in the best destroy ending. The hallucination should be over.
It just doesn't work. The indoctrination theory skips over it because it requires too much reading in. If the theory can't make all the elements fit, it isn't a good theory.
People keep saying this, but not giving me any reason to not believe it. So far I have seen nothing but evidence to support the fact that Bioware deliberately did the indoctrination ending. Can you give me ANY reason besides *AH YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT IT SUCKS*?idarkphoenixi said:
Not trying to offend here, it's just so far no-one has taken any of the theory and actually examined it.
For me, the game ends after Anderson and Shepard have a chat, Hackett asks whats going on and Shepard collapse for final and last time.
The game ends with total absolute failure of the organic races to defeat the Reapers. Shepard fought a long hard road, but end the end - failed to fire the weapon.
You don't need closure because you then know that everybody else will have died in that battle and the rest of the galaxy for the next 200 years will slowly be wiped out.
The game ends with total absolute failure of the organic races to defeat the Reapers. Shepard fought a long hard road, but end the end - failed to fire the weapon.
You don't need closure because you then know that everybody else will have died in that battle and the rest of the galaxy for the next 200 years will slowly be wiped out.
So in your theory the remnant's of the Normandy create a new race? That seems just as unlikely to me.Xpheyel said:Except you have won in the Stargazer cutscene. Everyone should be dead if you lost. Why would the Reapers leave any humans alive? Also, the planet the Normandy crashes on has a similar giant planet in the sky as the space winter desktop the stargazer is standing on. Which,again, makes less even sense if it the Normandy didn't crash on it. Otherwise, its just some random colony world with humanoids on it.SS2Dante said:The point is that the ending cutscenes are in Shepards head. All your squadmates express a desire to go somewhere far away where they can relax and be happy, the final cutscenes are Shepard creating this reality. They all somehow end up far away on a beautiful paradise. That's why it's so full of obvious plotholes.
The blue and green endings simply end with you losing. The implication is the Reapers win, as you've become a husk. The RED ending gives you the extra cutscene because you've broken free, awakening from your dream in London just after Harbinger's blast. CLIFFHANGER
And, again, it plays after Shepard "wakes up" in the best destroy ending. The hallucination should be over.
It just doesn't work. The indoctrination theory skips over it because it requires too much reading in. If the theory can't make all the elements fit, it isn't a good theory.
We've seen that knowledge survives the cycle. Even some species can (ala the Prothean). We don't even know that these two beings are human, or how many thousands of years have passed since the ending. The two beings could be a different race, hence the title of Stargazer, instead of any actual name.
Everyone keeps assuming that these beings we see at the end are human. We have nothing but a humanish outline to suggest that. We've also seen that races can survive the cycle (the prothean). All it needed was for some data about Shepard to survive, and we have stargazer telling a child about this hero. After all, their were legends about the Reapers in ME1.RJ 17 said:SS2Dante said:
In the topic I linked (don't know if you read it) I mention that both the literal interpretation and the indoctrination interpretation both have plenty of evidence to support them but leave too many holes to confirm either one, Star Gazer's appearance no matter what ending you pick is a massive hole in the Indoctrination theory.
Also, citation needed for Bioware confirming this? I don't think they have.
I'm kind of in the middle ground here. I think everything that happens post-Harbinger beam does actually happen, but I also think that Sheppard is indoctrinated by that time. The idea that the whole thing is a hallucination is just way to elaborate for me. That's the one part that DOES seem like a desperate attempt to retcon the "Star Child". I think that all the plot holes/twists are just the result of lazy writing, but if Shepard is indoctrinated, then at least his sudden and complete reversal of moral reasoning makes some kind of sense.
You know, that bit with Joker would be really easy to explain, too. They just need one line from Hackett telling the fleets to get everyone they can and run for it if they see the Crucible preparing to fire. It would make sense: Once it goes off, it's either to destroy the Reapers or it isn't. Either way, there's no point in waiting around to find out, especially considering that whatever it does will most likely involve destruction on a massive scale. One quick cutscene of Joker picking up your squad (along with showing a few casualties based on the player's performance)as the Crucible prepares to fire and we're good to go.
You know, that bit with Joker would be really easy to explain, too. They just need one line from Hackett telling the fleets to get everyone they can and run for it if they see the Crucible preparing to fire. It would make sense: Once it goes off, it's either to destroy the Reapers or it isn't. Either way, there's no point in waiting around to find out, especially considering that whatever it does will most likely involve destruction on a massive scale. One quick cutscene of Joker picking up your squad (along with showing a few casualties based on the player's performance)as the Crucible prepares to fire and we're good to go.
Here's a quote of Boag linking me to a topic which contains the link to the proof that Indoctrination was intended but cut from the ending:SS2Dante said:
As for Star Gazer, it could be a race in the next Cycle, but still: Shepard fails if he/she picks 2 out of the 3 possible endings. Why would Star Gazer be touting the heroic failure of an ancient being who tried but ultimately never stood a chance against the Reapers? Yeah, it's a fun story to hear about how Shepard stopped Saren and the Collectors, but ultimately those are non-points considering that he/she essentially only won 2 battles but got his/her ass kicked when the real war finally arrived. Not really a legend of a grand savior that people would pass down. Beyond that: I'm pretty certain that the Star Gazer mentions something about peace being achieved thanks to Shepard no matter which ending you pick. I could be wrong on this though, don't remember every line from that scene, but yeah, Star Gazer is the big fat elephant in the room to the Indoctrination theory.boag said:
Can someone confirm the part about turning around and seeing the trees after Harbinger's blast? I'm letting a friend borrow my copy so I can't check for myself.
That part seems the most interesting to me.
Also, are we still giving Princess Zeelda the time of day? C'mon, guys. We're better than this.
That part seems the most interesting to me.
Also, are we still giving Princess Zeelda the time of day? C'mon, guys. We're better than this.
I said it in another topic but an indoctrination ending would only be good if you suddenly lost control of Shepard and watched him make the choice for you like what happenned in Bioshock when you meet your dad face to face. It would be sad ending, and frankly horrifying to watch as we see the fallen hero damning the galaxy to another cycle, but it would be a better ending than the current set.
I'm going to ask a question here and I do so as someone who has only played the original Mass Effect but knows a fair amount about ME2 from spoilers and some of ME3, but particularly having seen the endings in their entirety and reading quite a few of the theories and discussions on them. Why, if Harbinger is right there and can easily just kill Shepard (and seemingly tries to by blasting him) would he bother trying to indoctrinate him? To what end? To stop him from destroying the Reapers? Because killing him seems easier when he's right there and you just need to shoot him.SS2Dante said:
You could argue that they may try to use him to disrupt their enemies, but is there anything in the game that indicates they stand a chance without the Crucible or whatever it's called? That's the biggest problem I have with explanations of the indoctrination idea to be honest. Sure, it might make sense to try and indoctrinate Shepard when he's running around the galaxy trying to stop you, but when you're right there and can actually just blow him away, it makes more sense to just blow him away.
But honestly, I fall more in the camp that feels it's fans grasping at straws to find some more satisfying ending than they got, even though the whole thing being an indoctrination dream and not happening is worse on many levels because it had almost no meaning whatsoever, especially since you never find out for sure, and simply leaves everything except the supposed fight for Shepards soul exactly as it was before this scene. People are still dying fighting Reapers and nothing has been resolved. You could do an ending that involved indoctrination far better than this while getting the closure fans wanted. No matter which side you fall on this was still a poorly written pile of crap instead of a conclusion.
There's a lot of evidence to support the theory, especially considering this is the internet, and I very much hope there is at least some truth to it.
However, I refuse to believe it until I see it. I can handle the current endings (just about), so I'm not going to go getting my hopes up for better until I see some actual confirmation.
However, I refuse to believe it until I see it. I can handle the current endings (just about), so I'm not going to go getting my hopes up for better until I see some actual confirmation.
Only possible with the human/asari crew could, obviously. It isn't "my theory" so much as the conclusion most people have seemed to have reached about it. Sans indoctrination. My theory is that the endings are just bad.SS2Dante said:
At any rate, if what you say is true then we've lost in all the endings barring a retcon. And you have to read another cycle of extinction and a new humanoid race into it. See what I mean? To reconcile that tiny scene, you have to make up a hell of a lot. If the endings are literal and just bad, it is there to establish your ultimate victory and sell dlc. The indoctrination theory is supposed to interpret what is there to the reconcile the plot holes. It fails to account for the final-final scene of the game without creating new plot holes. It isn't discussed in the article because it blows the whole thing out of the water without a ton of spackle.