*spoilers* Revisiting the Mass Effect 3 ending.

  • 110 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#101 Posted by haggis (1677 posts) -

@mordukai said:

This is not even the case of "agree to disagree". That's how facts are. If Bioware never did the extended cut then your argument stands true but the fact Bioware addressed the rather ambiguous ending means that any further analysis of the original ending is moot.

This. Seriously. BioWare can't (for PR reasons) come right out and openly repudiate the indoctrination theory (at least until it's necessary to do so), but the extended cut is completely incompatible with the indoctrination theory. Indoctrination lost, twice. They took it out before release, and refused to go back in that direction afterward. It's time to move on.

#102 Posted by StarvingGamer (8377 posts) -

@Forum_User said:

@StarvingGamer said:

- In the ending where Shepard lives, s/he appears to be under concrete rubble. Furthermore, regardless of what the rubble looks like, the idea that Shepard could have survived the Citadel explosion is kind of crazy, even by Mass Effect logic.

That is the biggest non-argument I have ever heard.

That is the most self-descriptive sentence I have ever seen. By the way, that ending only can happen if the non-indoctrination (red) path of destroying the Reapers is chosen, despite Mister Catalyst (who is obviously telling the truth, because when would the Reapers, or something controlling them, or whatever it actually is, lie to anyone? : D) saying that it would kill Shepard. This also is confirmed as Shepard surviving by official sources like spoiler documentation with the N7 edition.

But I'm sure it's another "glancing blow," and surely isn't part of one of the biggest pieces of misdirection ever put forth in a video game story. Is it that nobody can believe that the creators of a video game (instead of a movie or book) would pull a stunt like that? I mean, I live in the world where 2001: A Space Odyssey (seems a fitting example) is a thing, right?

Yes. The Catalyst assumes that the ensuing destruction of the Citadel would kill Shepard. That makes sense. Shepard survives by another incredible stroke of luck. That also makes sense. I'm still not seeing a substantive argument here. This is basically "lalala I can't hear you" caliber discourse, especially because the EC ending directly refutes the indoctrination theory.

Look, like I said, taken out of context any one of the points you made could be right. The problem is that there is 0 hard evidence. Everything point you made was simply an interpretation, a subjective look at objective facts. I was able to instantly conjure a number of counterpoints that you have yet to prove impossible, or even less plausible. It's like believing the moon landing was faked because they could have filmed it. There could have been aliens at Area 51. There could have been aliens that helped build the Pyramids in Egypt and temples in South America. Bush and his consortium could have been responsible for 9-11. If you're going to make an argument contrary to the reality that is in front of you, you need something more solid than suppositions. You need proof, and you don't have any.

#103 Posted by DeShawn2ks (1055 posts) -

@Mike76x said:

@Forum_User: Indoctrination was supposed to take place at the end of the game.

They said the mechanics of controlling an indoctrinated Shepard and decision making didn't work so they dropped it and ended there game right there.

They also dropped the Illusive Man boss battle, because Casey Hudson thought it was too video-gamey.

"Indoctrination Theory' is merely realizing how lazy the Mass Effect team was when they ran out of time toward the end of development.

It sucks if it turns out they laid the ground work for Shepard being indoctrinated with the kid at the beginning, the hums Vega keeps hearing, the black oily shapes and hearing the dead during Shepards dreams (rachni queen mentions this in ME1). Bioware gets to the end realizes the indoctrination gameplay doesn't work and scratches it but leaves everything else in place. Just hate to think they were that sloppy. Makes me real sad to think about because I thought the whole time at the end something was off and went with the destroy ending. Oh well I guess still had a great time with this trilogy.

#104 Edited by kishinfoulux (2398 posts) -

Just watched the video in the OP. Really great stuff. I honestly don't care what Bioware says, I'm a fan of the indoctrination theory. Not because I was one of the angry people about the ending (in fact I was completely fine with it), but because it really is a fascinating theory that makes a ton of sense. There are plotholes regardless of what you believe though.

The two videos I've linked to above are a two part documentary on the Indoctrination Theory. Watching them now, and they seem to break every down piece by piece. All of this just reminds me how much I love this series. Say what you will about the ending or the third game in general, but people are still talking about it. That's a powerful effect and lasting impression.

#105 Posted by Yummylee (22056 posts) -

@DeShawn2ks said:

@Mike76x said:

@Forum_User: Indoctrination was supposed to take place at the end of the game.

They said the mechanics of controlling an indoctrinated Shepard and decision making didn't work so they dropped it and ended there game right there.

They also dropped the Illusive Man boss battle, because Casey Hudson thought it was too video-gamey.

"Indoctrination Theory' is merely realizing how lazy the Mass Effect team was when they ran out of time toward the end of development.

It sucks if it turns out they laid the ground work for Shepard being indoctrinated with the kid at the beginning, the hums Vega keeps hearing, the black oily shapes and hearing the dead during Shepards dreams (rachni queen mentions this in ME1). Bioware gets to the end realizes the indoctrination gameplay doesn't work and scratches it but leaves everything else in place. Just hate to think they were that sloppy. Makes me real sad to think about because I thought the whole time at the end something was off and went with the destroy ending. Oh well I guess still had a great time with this trilogy.

I find it rather ironic how this Illusive Man boss battle was considered too ''video-gamey'' when you consider how ME3 presented your choice of ending.

#106 Posted by Hailinel (25179 posts) -

@Yummylee: I honestly don't think Casey Hudson should have been entrusted with the direction of the third game. He even visited Giant Bomb for a special ME3 Bombcast and told the staff things about the game that, from what I recall, turned out to be hilariously inaccurate.

#107 Posted by Kadayi (185 posts) -

The main problem with the whole indoctrination theory is the simple fact that the game ends then and there. If it was supposed to be a case that Shepard's been hoodwinked then as with any other rug pull (for instance the crash in Arkham Asylum) the game should of then proceeded to the real ending. This idea that Bioware were going to sell/release the real ending as DLC down the road begs the simple question.'.why not delay the game until the entirety is ready?'

#108 Posted by Adaurin (187 posts) -

@Forum_User said:

- At the beginning, nobody else takes notice of that child, and the child takes off (is no longer there) when Anderson shows up. That event is accompanied by a Reaper growl, which people say is explained in one of the Mass Effect novels to be something that happens when someone rejects an indoctrination attempt.

Sorry to open an older thread, but I wanted to point out that the kid definitely existed, otherwise why would the Alliance soldiers have waited for him to get into the transport. They would have closed that door as soon as possible to try to get those people out of there.

#109 Posted by feliciano182 (100 posts) -

@mordukai said:

Again...Bioware discounted the indoctrination theory so this whole argument is pointless. I don't really care if you played it or not but that's how it stands. You are looking for a deeper meaning in an ending, better yet in a whole game's story line, that really has none.

Well, that's another problem with this controversy, not with the ending per se.

#110 Edited by QuistisTrepe (628 posts) -

The indoctrination theory doesn't seem to have a leg to stand on, but I do find it odd that Shepard does in fact seem dead before he can reach the console to open the Citadel arms what with that hole in his side, if the explosion from the "destroy" option didn't finish him off on top of that.

I thought it was kind of a copout to make it look like Shepard somehow survived all of that.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.