Re: Shepards Indoctrination (Major Spoilers!)

I search on the forums and found nothing of it, so here we go. Everyone who hated the Mass Effect 3 ending should watch this video I'm about to post. In my opinion, this makes the current ending of the game VERY awesome, and actually cuts out a lot (All) of the loop holes left by the first impresion of the endings. Hopefully this is what Bioware had in mind the whole time, and add to this instead of making a brand new ending. It just doesn't make sense to the that Bioware, people who's made awesome game after awesome games, ESPECIALLY the Mass Effect games, would make the only bad thing about all three of the games. And it's not just bad, but horrible! And very unlike what we've gotten in the past.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ythY_GkEBck&feature=share

When fans have to explain away the FACT of the ME3 endings, you know that Bioware is in trouble.

If Shepard was indoctrinated..... then why is the audience viewing the whole galaxy doing stuff? You know, like the Normandy outrunning a wave blast and crash landing on some lush planet?

Is all of this an illusion?  Are we indoctrinated?

The ending just plain sucks.

Well the Normandy running away (That's just plain stupid, Joker would never fly away into a Mass Rely while a fight to save Earth is happening.) is all Shepards illusion. Everything after you get shot by the Reaper is all Shepards mind. Even the galaxy being saved part. The next thing Shepard does after the beam hit him is wake up (IE, breating scene) Everything in between doesn't actually happen.

I am in the process of viewing this video.  I will only accept indoctrination as the ending because the current ending is plain awful.

Three words:

Prince of Persia.

.

It has an expanding ending as DLC that was later considered the "real" ending.

.

While I'm not saying the ending killed my experience with the Franchise I do agree with everyone who's saying the dropped the ball. This may seem like grasping at straws to the jaded, but that's a lot of straws to grasp. When I started ME3 and saw the Cerberus versions of Husks I kind of agreed with Ash-Lenko (whoever you had with you - didn't matter) in that even I couldn't trust the Shepard I was playing was still the Shepard who died at the start of Mass Effect 2.

That video was very informative. Brought attention to a lot of little things I didn't notice like the trees around the Conduit and Shepard bleeding from the spot where Anderson was shot.

-

If the DLC ending is after the events in Shepard's mind, it would be interesting. Maybe we would play as a squadmate and have to kill Shepard. Or maybe if yo picked the Destroy ending you could keep playing as yourself. I don't know. Too many variables, too many variables.

implantedwall14:

That video was very informative. Brought attention to a lot of little things I didn't notice like the trees around the Conduit and Shepard bleeding from the spot where Anderson was shot.

-

If the DLC ending is after the events in Shepard's mind, it would be interesting. Maybe we would play as a squadmate and have to kill Shepard. Or maybe if yo picked the Destroy ending you could keep playing as yourself. I don't know. Too many variables, too many variables.

That's the whole problem and I've made a few posts regarding it... I watched the video and it does seem like adding up all the little details make the ending point towards indoctrination. That being said, the video also keeps reinforcing itself by repeating little things mentioned by harbinger, or even Sovereign 2 games ago. All these tiny little details that would require me to have an almost photographic memory to put it all together is just poor implementation.   I just don't think it should take a video capture device, a complete playthrough of all the cutscenes from all 3 games, a re-rendering of the final 20 min of ME 3 with a voice over from all 3 games just to explain WTH is going on.

JMPO, but if the whole indoctrination theory ends up being the actual ending that they were portraying, then (although I agree it makes sense of most of it) I'm no more a fan of it now than when I didn't understand it.  I actually don't like it even more... Hundreds of hours of game play and played all 6 classes in ME 2 and the final conflict is within Shepard's own mind... and at that, it's almost all cutscene with very little choice of what happens. That's just depressing.  Maybe I won't bother finishing my femshep playthrough... Not like I'll get a different ending.

I agree, it still is not a good ending, but it is still better than what we have now. I'm not going to let the end ruin this trilogy for me though. I still love the games. It is just the last two minutes or so that I am not on board with.

implantedwall14:

I agree, it still is not a good ending, but it is still better than what we have now. I'm not going to let the end ruin this trilogy for me though. I still love the games. It is just the last two minutes or so that I am not on board with.

True enough that it doesn't ruin the rest of the trilogy.  Problem is that the part that gets so screwed up is the biggest, most important part... the one we've been waiting years for. What it ruins, for me, is my want to play more. Of the many video games I've played, the ones I consider to be the best are the ones where the ending leaves me wanting to keep playing... the endings that make me say nooo! it can't be over yet, I want more! They left me with an uplifted feeling of accomplishment, and that there was hope for future happenings.  ME 3 left me with only confusion... and the more clear things become (IF the indoctrination ending is legit) the more I feel like I accomplished nothing.

Of course, part of that may be because I didn't get the 'Takes a breath afterward' ending, but even if I had... to what end? The devs said they were making the ending bittersweet.  To me, it seemed much more bitter than sweet. There was just too much finality to it. Even if I could imagine there being more, it didn't make me want more.

The indoctrination theory has plot holes as well. For example why is Shepard just accepting everything the ghostly image tells him, the series is about choices but Shep just stand like a statue and agrees with and does everything the boy tells him?  Makes no sense. Also where does the Mass relays exploding factor into the indoctrination theory?

The ending is all part of a plan by EA/Bioware, they purposefully did this to charge for an alternate ending DLC.

Jago 85:

The indoctrination theory has plot holes as well. For example why is Shepard just accepting everything the ghostly image tells him, the series is about choices but Shep just stand like a statue and agrees with and does everything the boy tells him?  Makes no sense. Also where does the Mass relays exploding factor into the indoctrination theory?

The ending is all part of a plan by EA/Bioware, they purposefully did this to charge for an alternate ending DLC.

Because its all a hallucination.  None of it is real. 

-

Id also like to link another Indoctrination theory vid made by the guy who made the "ten things that make ME3 ending bad" video that has been making its rounds.  After watching it, I hope that the Indoctrination theory is true and makes me actually like the ending.

BEASTmmb:

Jago 85:

The indoctrination theory has plot holes as well. For example why is Shepard just accepting everything the ghostly image tells him, the series is about choices but Shep just stand like a statue and agrees with and does everything the boy tells him?  Makes no sense. Also where does the Mass relays exploding factor into the indoctrination theory?

The ending is all part of a plan by EA/Bioware, they purposefully did this to charge for an alternate ending DLC.

Because its all a hallucination.  None of it is real. 

-

Id also like to link another Indoctrination theory vid made by the guy who made the "ten things that make ME3 ending bad" video that has been making its rounds.  After watching it, I hope that the Indoctrination theory is true and makes me actually like the ending.

That is not the point.  The narrative of the cut scenes are from OUR point of view, not Shepard's.

So unless we are indoctrinated, I fail to see how Mass Relays blowing up is all happening in Shepard's mind.

That's ridiculous.  The whole point of fiction like this is to immerse the viewer/reader/player into the POV of the character.  Any high school English student knows that.  The reason why the ending works is because it's open to interpretation.  If I choose to SPECULATE that Shep is indoctrinated, then there can be all kinds of reasons why I'm seeing this through his eyes.  At the moment of his death, perhaps he weighs the consequences of what he's done, or just sees his own perfect visions for what became of his friends.  We don't know either way, but that's what makes it so brilliant.  In many ways, if they offer a taut explanation of this, it will only cheapen it.

^^ @Back Lot Basher, agreed!

As an English teacher with a graduate degree in the subject I disagree.

.

The characteristics of a 3rd person narrative is significantly different than that of a work written in the 1st person.

If you like it, then that is fine.

.

The issues of the ending have been well articulated. All art is open to interpretation.  The problems with ME3's ending deal with structure, inconsistency, and overall narrative weakness.

That is my opinion.

If you like the ending, then kudos for you :)

Best regards,

Nugolis:

Well the Normandy running away (That's just plain stupid, Joker would never fly away into a Mass Rely while a fight to save Earth is happening.) is all Shepards illusion. Everything after you get shot by the Reaper is all Shepards mind. Even the galaxy being saved part. The next thing Shepard does after the beam hit him is wake up (IE, breating scene) Everything in between doesn't actually happen.

Joker didn't use a Relay........its called FTL. and he wasn't running from the battle obviously (stop watching retarded youtube vids).

Shepard indoctrinated....I don't buy it.  

RyoTakahashi:

BEASTmmb:

Jago 85:

The indoctrination theory has plot holes as well. For example why is Shepard just accepting everything the ghostly image tells him, the series is about choices but Shep just stand like a statue and agrees with and does everything the boy tells him?  Makes no sense. Also where does the Mass relays exploding factor into the indoctrination theory?

The ending is all part of a plan by EA/Bioware, they purposefully did this to charge for an alternate ending DLC.

Because its all a hallucination.  None of it is real. 

-

Id also like to link another Indoctrination theory vid made by the guy who made the "ten things that make ME3 ending bad" video that has been making its rounds.  After watching it, I hope that the Indoctrination theory is true and makes me actually like the ending.

That is not the point.  The narrative of the cut scenes are from OUR point of view, not Shepard's.

So unless we are indoctrinated, I fail to see how Mass Relays blowing up is all happening in Shepard's mind.

How do you know its from OUR point of view?  It very well could be Shepard's subconscious or Harbinger trying to convince him that he has done the right thing.  We don't know.  Its fun to speculate though.  

I have yet to finish ME 3 but it sounds to me like the ending resembles the final scene of The Sopranos lol.

BEASTmmb:

RyoTakahashi:

BEASTmmb:

Jago 85:

The indoctrination theory has plot holes as well. For example why is Shepard just accepting everything the ghostly image tells him, the series is about choices but Shep just stand like a statue and agrees with and does everything the boy tells him?  Makes no sense. Also where does the Mass relays exploding factor into the indoctrination theory?

The ending is all part of a plan by EA/Bioware, they purposefully did this to charge for an alternate ending DLC.

Because its all a hallucination.  None of it is real. 

-

Id also like to link another Indoctrination theory vid made by the guy who made the "ten things that make ME3 ending bad" video that has been making its rounds.  After watching it, I hope that the Indoctrination theory is true and makes me actually like the ending.

That is not the point.  The narrative of the cut scenes are from OUR point of view, not Shepard's.

So unless we are indoctrinated, I fail to see how Mass Relays blowing up is all happening in Shepard's mind.

How do you know its from OUR point of view?  It very well could be Shepard's subconscious or Harbinger trying to convince him that he has done the right thing.  We don't know.  Its fun to speculate though.  

LOL, this is why Microsoft says that they do not comment of rumors and speculation ;)

Interpretation is a good thing in art.  But I think that Bioware needed to frame that ending a little.

But you are 100% right speculation is indeed fun.

Have a great weekend :)

BEASTmmb:

Jago 85:

The indoctrination theory has plot holes as well. For example why is Shepard just accepting everything the ghostly image tells him, the series is about choices but Shep just stand like a statue and agrees with and does everything the boy tells him?  Makes no sense. Also where does the Mass relays exploding factor into the indoctrination theory?

The ending is all part of a plan by EA/Bioware, they purposefully did this to charge for an alternate ending DLC.

Because its all a hallucination.  None of it is real. 

-

Id also like to link another Indoctrination theory vid made by the guy who made the "ten things that make ME3 ending bad" video that has been making its rounds.  After watching it, I hope that the Indoctrination theory is true and makes me actually like the ending.

Of course, this brings us right back to a conclusion (for me at least) that the ending couldn't possibly be worse. Give this some thought. IF the indoctrination 'ending' is all a hallucination... if, in fact, none of it is real, then drawing that to it's natural conclusion, Shepard truly has IMO accomplished absolutely nothing! Why? because none of it actually happened!  Well, if none of it actually happened, then in reality, Shepard is still lying either dead, or best case scenario, nearly dead in a pile of rubble on earth, while the 'final battle' rages on without him. No matter what decision he made, it only happened within the confines of his own mind, not in reality... therefore, Shepard is either dead or mortally wounded without ever seeing and / or finishing the end of this battle.

Which is why we will be getting DLC to finish the fight Im willing to bet.  I don't like ending a game with DLC, but in this instance I think it is a more impactful way to do it.

Think of it this way:

1) You accept the idea this isn't the "real ending" and wait to see what develops.

or

2) You accept the idea this is the "real ending" and just move on to the final sage of grief or a new game.

BEASTmmb:

Which is why we will be getting DLC to finish the fight Im willing to bet.  I don't like ending a game with DLC, but in this instance I think it is a more impactful way to do it.

In my case, it might just end up being a completely NON impactful way to do it.  I'm pretty heavily considering just following bardnoir's suggestion and starting to play something else.  And if they actually think I'm going to pay for DLC to end a game that I already paid for it will be very non impactful, especially on my wallet.

BEASTmmb:

Jago 85:

The indoctrination theory has plot holes as well. For example why is Shepard just accepting everything the ghostly image tells him, the series is about choices but Shep just stand like a statue and agrees with and does everything the boy tells him?  Makes no sense. Also where does the Mass relays exploding factor into the indoctrination theory?

The ending is all part of a plan by EA/Bioware, they purposefully did this to charge for an alternate ending DLC.

Because its all a hallucination.  None of it is real. 

-

Id also like to link another Indoctrination theory vid made by the guy who made the "ten things that make ME3 ending bad" video that has been making its rounds.  After watching it, I hope that the Indoctrination theory is true and makes me actually like the ending.

 

 

Ha ha, Angry Joe. That's where I first found out about the theory to begin with.

vader da slayer:

Nugolis:

Well the Normandy running away (That's just plain stupid, Joker would never fly away into a Mass Rely while a fight to save Earth is happening.) is all Shepards illusion. Everything after you get shot by the Reaper is all Shepards mind. Even the galaxy being saved part. The next thing Shepard does after the beam hit him is wake up (IE, breating scene) Everything in between doesn't actually happen.

Joker didn't use a Relay........its called FTL. and he wasn't running from the battle obviously (stop watching retarded youtube vids).

I guess I'm failing to see where him using FTL would make any more sense.  He was already at the battle, why and to where would he need to use FTL?  And if he was only using FTL that would mean he was still in the Sol System.   If he's still in the Sol System then what the hell planet did he crash on?

I have to say I am very onboard with the indocrination theory.  When I was playing through and got hit by the beam as soon as sheaperd stood up my first thought was "oh hey dream sequence" then a husk killed me and proved me wrong... even now when I up that save it still has all the filters (sound/visual) that your dreams had throughout the game.

This theory actually makes the ending decent. If this is not what bioware intended to go with the story line, they should watch and capitalize off this.

Heard they aren't gonna change it, but just add more to it. which is fine with me. I just would like to know more about the story of my squadmates after my decision.

Nugolis:

I search on the forums and found nothing of it, so here we go. Everyone who hated the Mass Effect 3 ending should watch this video I'm about to post. In my opinion, this makes the current ending of the game VERY awesome, and actually cuts out a lot (All) of the loop holes left by the first impresion of the endings. Hopefully this is what Bioware had in mind the whole time, and add to this instead of making a brand new ending. It just doesn't make sense to the that Bioware, people who's made awesome game after awesome games, ESPECIALLY the Mass Effect games, would make the only bad thing about all three of the games. And it's not just bad, but horrible! And very unlike what we've gotten in the past.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ythY_GkEBck&feature=share

If indeed that was the possible true ending, then BW/EA still screwed up. There should have been a "To be continued" in there too stave of the disinterest/outcry over the ending. If this true then I may be willing to start playing again just to get the Paragon ending that I want. But if this is just a ploy by BW/EA to trick people into continuing to playing even though the ending doesn't change then I for one will never buy another BW/EA game ever again. Because this will mean that their only interest will be to sell games even if the games are not worth the money that we spend on them.

RyoTakahashi:

As an English teacher with a graduate degree in the subject I disagree.

The characteristics of a 3rd person narrative is significantly different than that of a work written in the 1st person.

Me too!  We should have a degree-measuring contest :)

Seriously though, you have to admit that when principles of "point of view" are applied to videogames, they become a lot more fluid than those of fiction.  Are we, as players, occupying the 1st person role, or are we simply observing the main character's actions in the 3rd person.  I'd argue that, because it's actually both, then most of the rules go out the window. 

Don't get me wrong...although I love the artistic merit of having a cryptic, open ending finale that invites speculation, I'm just as much a sucker for happy endings as everyone else.  Sure, I'd love to have a scene with Shepard, Garrus and Liara all getting hammered in Purgatory decades in the future, reminiscing over how they kicked the Reapers' a**.  But the ending as it exists now appeals to my love for deep, philosophical sci-fi that concerns itself more with questions than it does answers.

CosmoRBGSpacely:

This theory actually makes the ending decent. If this is not what bioware intended to go with the story line, they should watch and capitalize off this.

Heard they aren't gonna change it, but just add more to it. which is fine with me. I just would like to know more about the story of my squadmates after my decision.

I can't see how it actually makes the ending decent.  I think a lot of people aren't taking into consideration the fact that the indoctrination theory means that Shepard is lying on the ground, dead... or best case scenario, almost dead without finishing the fight, or even knowing how it ended.

Think about it. If the indoctrination theory holds true, then Shepard is unconscious after being hit while running towards the beam of light. That means that the only ending in which he actually regains consciousness would be the 'best' ending because everything that happens after that point is only happening within his mind. Draw that to it's natural conclusion. He never actually made it onto the citadel, never actually had the confrontation with TIM, Anderson and Star-boy... none of that happened in reality. And BTW, those confusing video clips about what happens to different squad mates... all in Shepard's mind too. IF you get the 'takes a breath ending' it happens after the clips of what supposedly happens to your squad mates.

So according to the indoctrination theory, Shepard gets killed (or best case, mortally wounded) in the final hour of the conflict that this whole series has been leading up to, without ever seeing IF it ends or how.  Unless somebody is going to start saying something like; Oh yeah, BTW everything that happens in Shepard's indoctrinated mind while he's unconscious actually happens in reality too. I'm not buying that for a minute.

MPO, we could just call it ME 3 indoctrination theory: Don't Finish The Fight.

There are as many things that don't make sense about the indoctrination theory as there are that do, IMO.

But, to me, the biggest example is this.  No one seems to point out that this theory only makes sense if you have high enough war assets to get the option of all three endings.  In fact, if your war assets are extremely low you don't even get an option.  Your only choice is to destroy the Reapers,  The very ending they are supposed to not want you to choose.  So, if you suck at bringing the galaxy together the Reapers give up and let you destroy them?   But, if you don't they decided to make it hard on you and try and 'trick' you into saving them?

Makes about as much sense as the actual ending to me.

OR, more like the "default" ending is Shepard picks "destroy" because that's the only way to really beat the reapers. If, even at your worst, you got the "destroy Reaper" ending then it means you weren't indoctrinated, the Reapers didn't win and we have aftermath with what happened next. If you end up picking the others then the Reapers win and you'd almost have a 'Mission Fail' much like when you don't choose the Renegade option of Shooting the Illusive Man... The whole "you become what you fear" sort of thing.

Also, of note, is how being Renegade seems to be the "right choice" a lot. Renegade was never "Evil" as per the Fable series but more the "Selfish" route. You can tell people "I'm fine. Don't worry about me. I just need to focus on the war." and get Paragon points or tell them "I'm having a bad day but I don't want to talk about it. Can we just move on?" and get Renegade points. In that example, being honest is the Renegade option.

.

I also agree with something Back Lot Basher pointed out. I loved Inception, and the ending leaves all kind of room for deconstruction, speculation and theory. ME3 is no Inception and the ending isn't perfect, but it's what I expected and I like that it's being analyzed. I mean, if we'd already gotten the closure most people are asking for right now wouldn't we all have just moved on to Max Payne 3 by now?

Why would the "default" ending be the ending in which you "win"?  You did the worst, why would you still win?

I agree about the Renegade stuff and do believe it's the best ending.  I just don't see how it fits with the theory.  The whole point of it is moot if the consequence for preparing poorly is just getting to pointed to the only option they don't want you to pick.

I'm on another run through of the game and I just noticed something new. When you're on Eden Prime trying to gain the Prothean squad member and you come across the data that only Shepard can see (everyone else just sees static) they explain it away as Shepard must be able to understand it because (s)he came in contact with the beacon. But, When Shepard is viewing the video, his/her eyes change to a bright glowing blue. Is this an indication of indoctrination???

:)

I did not mean to sound arrogant.

You would probably measure up better than me in any contest :)

I can see how the views can shift in the medium.  I find myself on the fence with the ending after watching it a couple of times again.  I still think that the center does not hold in the ending.  Mind you, I thought Galactica's finale was well done, and LOST was mediocre.

Best regards,

Insomniac- It is not because of the beacon, but because of the cipher you gained on Feros. His eyes glowing blue are probably just some way to show that he is using the cipher.

So, according to this THEORY, no matter what we do or what CHOICES we made in the 3 games, we get the same generic, linear ending as everyone else? Oh, okay then, good -- I was worried Bioware lied to me for 5 years about my choices meaning something...

Forgive me if someone already asked (or answered) this, but don't you have to be in constant proximity to a Reaper to be indoctrinated? Saren lived on Sovereign, Dr. Kenson was on a station w/ a reaper artifact, TIM was on a station w/ reaper tech...

True but we don't know the origin of the synthetic components used to rebuild Shepard and EDI also had Reaper tech.