ME3. Indoctrination Theory, Spoilers abound. You have been warned.

[Sivin]

Old thread is over (or soon to be) 400 posts, let's get this started.

On the subject of a Mass Effect film:

http://www.ingame.ms...ct-games-120565

Actually, all signs appear relatively positive... I like the idea of Legendary producing (please kidnap Chris Nolan's family, please kidnap Chris Nolan's family!), and I like the idea of it not being set in the Reaper conflict. Myself, I'd have not had Shepard in it at all, but whatever.

It'll probably never get off the ground, and it'll probably suck if it does. But if there's any series/studio combination that can pull off a good videogame-to-movie, it'd definitely be BioWare. Expectations aren't exceedingly high, though.

[Fez]

I'll expect it to come out around around the same time as the Halo movie. Still, if actually done, and done well, it could be amazing.

As for the Indoctrination theory, if it is true (and i'm convinced that it is), what does it mean? Has Bioware decided to just end its trilogy on a huge twist? Is there DLC about to come out (or something hidden on the disc)? Will it be free or is this the start of a very worrying trend? And most of all, why would they go about it like this if there is more to come as opposed to just having the game continue as is with this hypothetical extra content immediately? (All I can think of is they want to go all meta on the players, but it seems incredibly risky for a company to do. Maybe they think the resulting press coverage would be worth it?)

ETA: Well here's the proof that there's officially something up; or Bioware is run by true trolls.

[Sivin]

I'll expect it to come out around around the same time as the Halo movie. Still, if actually done, and done well, it could be amazing.

ETA: Well here's the proof that there's officially something up; or Bioware is run by true trolls.

The Halo movie, hmmph! I remember being quite excited for that when Peter Jackson was aboard, but it did give us 'District 9', so all ended well.

Yeah, that link has me fully convinced. There's some shifty shit going on here. Has anyone beaten the game, then gone back through with the same character? And if this isn't what BioWare had planned, at least they're smart enough to run with the greatest option. Better than giving Mark Sanchez a $40 million raise because, it's what we decided on... wait, wrong thread! ;)

"Expectations aren't exceedingly high, though."

What the hell is up with me recently? In the last two days I've been making a shitload of grammatical and fact mistakes (I called Pat Bowlen the owner of the Miami Dolphins in the NFL thread, that might have been dissmissed because I was talking about the Broncos as well, but this is unacceptable). Kinda has me worried. Not to mention that I've been using stockier sentences far more frequently...

[Weak With The Dawn]

The Mass Effect movie is kind of old news, they announced it a year ago. Casey Hudson is going to be on as an executive producer and considering Mass Effect is his brain child I have higher hopes for it then I would other video game related films.

As far as indoctrination theory. I've pretty much jumped on board. I just started a third run and watched as the child from the intro runs into a building (the one where you have to melee the Husks in the first level) and I noticed the little vent he's hiding in is directly in the path of the reaper laser that blows the building to shreds.

There's no way that kid is alive. So looks like the hallucinations starts from the beginning.

Cut to the end, if you listen to the God Childs voice, it's actually three voices. A Child, Fem Shep and Male Shep, all on one track. Why would the catalyst sound like Shepard? Possibly because he's talking to himself.

That along with more cryptic messages from bioware and the 230+ page thread on the bioware forums leaves me with little else to believe. At the very least anything they announce in the coming weeks/months will be interesting.

[Liffguard]

There's too many little hints and incongruities for me not to be on board with indoctrination theory. The clincher was that picture on the last thread, showing if you turn and look behind you whilst heading to the beam you see one of the ghostly trees from your dreams that wasn't there before.

[denstorebog]

Ok, so let's accept that there's something going on there. Now what are they planning to do with it?

The obvious answer is that some DLC will follow up on it. That just seems like a weird choice from a developer's point of view. You have a massive blockbuster hit trilogy and it's about to end with a huge third instalment ... so you end that instalment with a weird-as-hell cop-out just so you can *really* end it in a 4-hour expansion that a bunch of people will never even play?

On top of that, this is going to be convoluted as hell. The complicated scheme of ME3's multiple endings is already impossible to figure out without Googling some table of variables. Now, on top of that, they're going to add a real ending to those endings? Or multiple real endings? My head spins already.

Then there's the narrative side of things. Sheperd being indoctrinated certainly seems to be true from a bunch of indicators in the last 10 minutes, but there's also a lot of stuff that seems weirdly out of place if it's true. The whole God Child representation of some supernatural force, which defines the whole flavor of the (somewhat unpopular) ending is going to be something as trivial as "Reapers disguising inside Sheperd's mind and spouting a whole lot of metaphysical nonsense". I can accept that they would disguise as a kid that Sheperd has an emotional connection to, but what the hell is up with the whole "you have three choices" thing? Isn't the point of indoctrination that the Reapers make the choice for the victim? It seems like the ending was supposed to both satisfy people who couldn't be expected to play whatever DLC is coming up - by presenting the expected multiple choice ending to the series - and to those who want more - probably by retconning those options to be "Sheperd's mind struggling against itself" or some shit like that.

Also, why the whole Illusive Man dialogue near the end? What purpose does that serve as part of a Reaper indoctrination? Again, smells like Bioware trying to have it both ways, making sure that the Illusive Man storyline is wrapped up for those who won't play an upcoming DLC.

[Werthead]

If it's true it will be interesting. But I think BioWare could only get away with it by providing the 'full' ending as a free DLC. Asking people to pay for the 'real' ending would be absolutely fricking mental.

As for why, I can think of one: EA wanting additional entries to the franchise. One way of doing this is giving ME3 players the 'real' ending and having it spin off into potential further adventures. Not involving Shepard, but perhaps creating a scenario where the main Reapers are destroyed but lots of small groups of survivors are left and a permanant, MP-based war game is then released which has players teaming up to mop up the Reaper survivors. The DLC would serve as a bridge between the ME trilogy and this new style of game (or not even a new game, but a new, more elaborate MP mode for ME3 itself to be added later).

What would be interesting is if BioWare didn't plan for any of this but decided to make use of it anyway.

[Fez]

If it's true it will be interesting. But I think BioWare could only get away with it by providing the 'full' ending as a free DLC. Asking people to pay for the 'real' ending would be absolutely fricking mental.

As for why, I can think of one: EA wanting additional entries to the franchise. One way of doing this is giving ME3 players the 'real' ending and having it spin off into potential further adventures. Not involving Shepard, but perhaps creating a scenario where the main Reapers are destroyed but lots of small groups of survivors are left and a permanant, MP-based war game is then released which has players teaming up to mop up the Reaper survivors. The DLC would serve as a bridge between the ME trilogy and this new style of game (or not even a new game, but a new, more elaborate MP mode for ME3 itself to be added later).

What would be interesting is if BioWare didn't plan for any of this but decided to make use of it anyway.

Possibly, but I really hope not. EA definitely wants more games, but I'm sure they don't care exactly what they are so long as they're profitable. And I think Bioware would be more interested in expanding other areas of the lore than just doing some sort of MP-game. Especially while the combat is definitely good, as is the MP, it doesn't really stand up to truly combat-only games in the genre, like Gears of War.

I can actually think of another reason too, though its a little far fetched, which is that they just didn't want the ending spoiled for anyone. Bioware has always had problems with leaks, an entire early draft of the script for ME3 has released for sake. So it could be a situation where most of the company and the playtesters and everyone else thinks that the end we got is the end, but they also built another "real ending" that only the lead writers, the necessary voice actors, and a select group of graphics designers, etc. were involved with. Sort of like how the line "No, I am your father!" was hidden from almost everyone who worked on Empire Strikes Back. This would require the project leads to be incredibly passionate about this IP, but every indication is that they are.

[Merentha]

It took people several years to get on board with the "Squall is hallucinating all of disk 2" theory, it took Mass Effect fans all of 3 days. I don't buy it. Nothing in there convinces me that this is anything other than a team colossally messing up and dealing with memory limitations and plot holes. In Mass Effect 2, the Normandy drops off the anti-Grunt fanclub after his loyalty mission, but nobody decided that meant Joker was subtly trying to kill you. It was a repurposed cutscene. And having a similar tree in a dreamscape as in a scene that you're pretty undoubtedly concussed...well.

I can actually think of another reason too, though its a little far fetched, which is that they just didn't want the ending spoiled for anyone. Bioware has always had problems with leaks, an entire early draft of the script for ME3 has released for sake. So it could be a situation where most of the company and the playtesters and everyone else thinks that the end we got is the end, but they also built another "real ending" that only the lead writers, the necessary voice actors, and a select group of graphics designers, etc. were involved with.

the poster In It For the Tank on Somethingawful was giving away absolutely everything several weeks before release. He implied he worked for Bioware and was right about absolutely everything he ever said, up to and including the last choice you had to make. The writer for Mordin claimed he had nothing to do with the ending in a way that implied he was trying to distance himself from it. I don't buy a subtle and intricate work from the people who took forever to figure out a morality system that wasn't "I kick puppies for fun" and "I hug everyone I meet". And Mass Effect was pretty close to that at times too.

On top of that, this is going to be convoluted as hell. The complicated scheme of ME3's multiple endings is already impossible to figure out without Googling some table of variables. Now, on top of that, they're going to add a real ending to those endings? Or multiple real endings? My head spins already.

It is? Its pretty simple, and would be even more understandable if they didn't use the completely counterintuitive

more assets = more choices of buttons to press

Minimum= forced choice of destroy/control based on collector base decision

Next limit gives you access to a choice between them.

After that gives you synthesis

After that gives you a destroy option that doesn't blow up Big Ben.

After that destroy is implied to not kill Shepard.

edit: Another point to "plotholes"

EDI can walk out of the Normandy if you picked the Destroy ending. The one that will blow up all synthetic life, including the Geth. EDI is an AI made by jamming the rogue Luna VI with ReaperTech. If she isn't in line for exploding I don't know what is

[Kalbear]

My bet is that they had planned something with the indoctrination ending but had to cut it. So the stuff is there - but they didn't have time for it or it just didnn't work. So they gave an ending that could largely have the same three videos, assets and other stuff and didn't require a lot of other scripting without it being blatant what was supposed to have just happened.

[Fez]

Look I'm not saying with 100% Moses coming down from the mountain that this is true; but the amount of evidence, combined with how coy numerous Bioware employee twitter feeds have been when asked about this, strongly suggest that it is; or that its a huge coincidence doubling as a lucky break for Bioware in order to deal with the current backlash.

Just look at the very first post in this (currently) 300 page thread that summarizes a lot the different pieces of evidence. Some stuff is clearly reaching, and all of it on its own can be easily explained away, but added all together and its very hard to ignore.

ETA: Here's another thing from later in that thread:

The codex entry for indoctrination also contains "through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise..." and one of things James Vega randomly says when you try to start a conversation on the Normandy and he doesn't have anything new to say is "Do you hear that humming noise? Or is that just me?".

So yeah, Cerberus could've snuck an indoctrination device onto the Normandy (or it could even be the Reaper IFF, or maybe the engine that everyone keeps raving about is Reaper tech that has a side effect) and all implements Shepard has could be amplifying it.

Just another potential piece of evidence.

[Weak With The Dawn]

It took people several years to get on board with the "Squall is hallucinating all of disk 2" theory, it took Mass Effect fans all of 3 days. I don't buy it. Nothing in there convinces me that this is anything other than a team colossally messing up and dealing with memory limitations and plot holes. In Mass Effect 2, the Normandy drops off the anti-Grunt fanclub after his loyalty mission, but nobody decided that meant Joker was subtly trying to kill you. It was a repurposed cutscene. And having a similar tree in a dreamscape as in a scene that you're pretty undoubtedly concussed...well.

Well, they used a smaller blue painted Normandy for that scene, it's not even the same ship you use. I'm not saying it isn't cheap, but it's clearly not the same Normandy you landed on either. Hence no Joker conspiracy theorists.

As far as the tree is concerned. From both personal experience and second hand, being concussed does not cause you to see things that aren't there. So I don't know what you're getting at.

I don't buy a subtle and intricate work from the people who took forever to figure out a morality system that wasn't "I kick puppies for fun" and "I hug everyone I meet". And Mass Effect was pretty close to that at times too.

So because they decided to revamp a game mechanic you don't believe that they have higher cognitive ability to write anything intricate? It's not hard to write something subtle or intricate, just because developers wanted a black and white morality system in the first game doesn't mean they don't understand how to write a good story.

edit: Another point to "plotholes"

EDI can walk out of the Normandy if you picked the Destroy ending. The one that will blow up all synthetic life, including the Geth. EDI is an AI made by jamming the rogue Luna VI with ReaperTech. If she isn't in line for exploding I don't know what is

EDI leaving the Normandy could be a plot hole. It could also prove that the whole damn thing is a Shepard hallucination. If your EMS is low enough you see your squad mates on the ground in a pool of blood, yet they can also step from the Normandy in the final scene. I'm sorry, you may have not faith in BioWare, but that seems like a huge over sight.

You were bashing on the game mechanics before it even came out, so I don't know how much of this you'll even bother to consider, but the writers and developers have also been tossing out cryptic messages for the past few days.

"Are my squad mates dead at the end?"

"I don't believe we've revealed that yet."

Sure maybe it's standard PR response, but if there was nothing more to the ending, why would they have to reveal more info on it after the game releases?

[Merentha]

You were bashing on the game mechanics before it even came out, so I don't know how much of this you'll even bother to consider, but the writers and developers have also been tossing out cryptic messages for the past few days.

And, I also felt like there were many times when I didn't have dialogue options that in previous games I would have, so I would go so far as to say I was right. The fact that the writing of their other characters and the tone of the game was able to overcome that minor irritation is a pleasant and unexpected change. It wasn't as bad as I'd feared, but I definitely saw moments where I would very much have been able to comment in the previous two games.

As far as the tree is concerned. From both personal experience and second hand, being concussed does not cause you to see things that aren't there. So I don't know what you're getting at.

And nobody who's been indoctrinated claims anything about visual hallucinations, only auditory.

Nothing they have written has been subtle. At all.

Everything in Mass Effect smacks you in the face and that's okay. It just means that even if they had Shep get indoctrinated, it still would be from a game with a totally different tone. Shepard gets attacked by a

goddamn anime tech ninja, for fuck's sake. One who is played up by someone as so dangerous that the man who is on a planet being Reaped says he's worse that the Reapers.

To assume that they played a long, intricate game with audio cues that still removes all of your agency, leading to the same complaints with the ending anyway, is a little odd.

Besides, if the game ends with Shepard being indoctrinated, what? Lol, you lose regardless of everything else you did? Pick your color of hallucination? Kalbear's seems like the best explanation for all of that, much like all of their foreshadowing dark energy was also cut content. And the only ending that has you "breaking the compulsion" (destroy) a) genocides the Geth for some reason and b ) is being used as an example for the hallucination in the first place. Making me play a hallucination works in a Call of Cthulhu game, barely. And this isn't anywhere close to that.

You were bashing on the game mechanics before it even came out, so I don't know how much of this you'll even bother to consider, but the writers and developers have also been tossing out cryptic messages for the past few days.

Casey Hudson was also saying on twitter that the endings would be personalized for each Shepard. Yeah, that worked out. I hope you dated one of the ME1 love interests, or you don't get to see their face in the "friends flashing before your eyes" sequence.

edit: Can we get an ME3 spoiler tag on this whole thread? It seems stupid to be debating with everything being spoilered.

[Fez]

And nobody who's been indoctrinated claims anything about visual hallucinations, only auditory.

here's the full codex entry on indoctrination:

Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds,"reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods. The Reaper's resulting control over the limbic system leaves the victim highly susceptible to its suggestions.

Organics undergoing indoctrination may complain of headaches and buzzing or ringing in their ears. As time passes, they have feelings of "being watched" and hallucinations of "ghostly" presences. Ultimately, the Reaper gains the ability to use the victim's body to amplify its signals, manifesting as "alien" voices in the mind.

Indoctrination can create perfect deep cover agents. A Reaper's "suggestions" can manipulate victims into betraying friends, trusting enemies, or viewing the Reaper itself with superstitious awe. Should a Reaper subvert a well-placed political or military leader, the resulting chaos can bring down nations.

Long-term physical effects of the manipulation are unsustainable, Higher mental functioning decays, ultimately leaving the victim a gibbering animal. Rapid indoctrination is possible, but causes this decay in days or weeks. Slow, patient indoctrination allows the thrall to last for months or years.

All these things can be described as happening to Shepard.

Besides, if the game ends with Shepard being indoctrinated, what? Lol, you lose regardless of everything else you did? Pick your color of hallucination? Kalbear's seems like the best explanation for all of that, much like all of their foreshadowing dark energy was also cut content. And the only ending that has you "breaking the compulsion" (destroy) a) genocides the Geth for some reason and b ) is being used as an example for the hallucination in the first place. Making me play a hallucination works in a Call of Cthulhu game, barely. And this isn't anywhere close to that.

The idea is that if you pick 'Destroy' you are breaking the Indoctrination. Its the only choice where you can get the 'Shepard lives' scene, its the only choice that the Catalyst strongly discourages, and its the only choice that if you pick then the Catalyst disappears instead of hanging around to watch you. And so the ending, as it stands now, is that if you pick Destroy that the fight will continue.

[Merentha]

The idea is that if you pick 'Destroy' you are breaking the Indoctrination. Its the only choice where you can get the 'Shepard lives' scene, its the only choice that the Catalyst strongly discourages, and its the only choice that if you pick then the Catalyst disappears instead of hanging around to watch you. And so the ending, as it stands now, is that if you pick Destroy that the fight will continue.

And then what? I still am left with no information on the war, no information on my squadmates, no information on anything that I cared about over 3 games. That's still an unbelievably shitty ending. Because if it is true, then you never find out what the Crucible does, never find TIM, and never end up on the Catalyst in the first place. All you're left with, then, is "Shepard got lazed by Harbinger, now here's Buzz Aldrin telling a children's story on a different planet that implies we don't have space travel."

[Fez]

And then what? I still am left with no information on the war, no information on my squadmates, no information on anything that I cared about over 3 games. That's still an unbelievably shitty ending. Because if it is true, then you never find out what the Crucible does, never find TIM, and never end up on the Catalyst in the first place. All you're left with, then, is "Shepard got lazed by Harbinger, now here's Buzz Aldrin telling a children's story on a different planet that implies we don't have space travel."

Well either:

1) There is an ending to come that will either be free (meaning its either some sort of PR stunt or trying to protect the ending) or cost money (meaning its the worst money grab ever for a video game and may start a terrible trend)

or

2) Bioware wanted to end the series on a "the fight goes on" note, but you don't get to see it see. Lots of movies do that, and sometimes also have a post-credits scene showing the outcome like (spoiler for a movie that came out this January)

The Grey

So its definitely a common enough storytelling technique.

As for the underlying motivation; I dunno, maybe they just wanted to mindfuck everyone.

I just think there are far too many coincidences and barely hidden clues for there to be any other explanation; except possibly Kalbear's where this is what they meant to do but they cut it without actually cutting most of it. But even if that was the case I think the resulting backlash is going to make them go for it anyway.

Honestly I'm starting to feel the same way I did back in 2001 when I first got in to the R+L=J debate on a earlier version of this board. There's still no direct evidence of that either, but the clues are just overwhelming.

[Weak With The Dawn]

And then what? I still am left with no information on the war, no information on my squadmates, no information on anything that I cared about over 3 games. That's still an unbelievably shitty ending. Because if it is true, then you never find out what the Crucible does, never find TIM, and never end up on the Catalyst in the first place. All you're left with, then, is "Shepard got lazed by Harbinger, now here's Buzz Aldrin telling a children's story on a different planet that implies we don't have space travel."

Which is exactly why the hints that they have not released all info on the ending are spurring the theorycrafters on.

Like I said earlier, I didn't dislike these endings, so if it all ends up being just some theory. Fine. I'll deal.

However the evidence is accumulating and the devs and community managers are leaving cryptic messages implying that it's not over yet.

There's no way of knowing, but it's not going to stop me from looking for more clues that bolster the theory.

Honestly I'm starting to feel the same way I did back in 2001 when I first got in to the R+L=J debate on a earlier version of this board. There's still no direct evidence of that either, but the clues are just overwhelming.

That's a pretty accurate comparison.

[denstorebog]

Going back to the implications for the narrative level, another huge problem is that we've now seen a dream version of a lot of the payoffs that we fought for. We've seen a dream version of the Crucible going off, of Illusive Man dying, and an explanation for the Catalyst.

That's problematic for a DLC that goes with the indoctrination premise. Presumably, that DLC will have to somehow explain that "no, the Crucible actually doesn't do that, it does this, and TIM doesn't die like that, in fact he isn't dead, but now he dies this way instead, and the Catalyst isn't that at all, it's this."

If that's what the DLC does (and I don't see any other purpose for a DLC that builds on the indoctrination premise), then we're going to go back in time, undoing not only the relevance of the last 10 minutes of exposition in ME3, but also in a sense having to see the Crucible going off again, in a different manner, see TIL get resolved again, in a different manner, and get a new, different explanation for the Catalyst. It's like redoing the payoffs, and there's no way that's going to resonate very well - not only because we need to erase our previous understanding of how things are connected, but also because we'll be playing it at least 6 months down the line, at a point where we probably don't care as much as when shit was about to go down in ME3.

I don't see any secret plans from Bioware turning out better than just letting the ME3 ending be the ending.

EDIT: A thought - a lot of work seems to have gone into that Galaxy At War shit. Could that have an effect on the 'real' ME3 ending that would be presented in a DLC?

[Werthead]

Oh FFS. I managed to full foul of a bug that prevents me from completing Aria's mission on the Citadel. After talking to Bailey, his assistant and the nutjob Asarian, I convinced her second-in-command (a Salarian) to step up and become the new head honcho. Which was fine, except I then saved and quite out afterwards before I left the area. Apparently to complete the mission you're supposed to walk out of the docks and Bailey contacts you to tell you mission accomplished. By saving between those two points and reloading, I erased the mission completion trigger. This means it is now impossible to complete the mission.

I've been quite paranoid about having multiple saves (after hearing it's possible to 'lose' missions if you don't accomplish them in a set amount of time), so I can return to a point before the situation arose...but it means losing the 4-5 hours of stuff I've done since then, which I really don't want to do. There's a save game editor that can apparently work, but it can also totally fuck your game up if you're unlucky. Otherwise there's no official fix, and failing to do this mission means you fail the whole 3-pronged Aria questline (though you still get war assets from completing the other two sub-quests). Grr.

A large part of the problem is down to the fact that the journal system in the game is screwed to hell and back. It's really, really vague on what you have to do next and the game's dialogue and writing often leave it unclear about what to do next as well. Easily the worst journal system of the three games.

[Crazydog7]

Considering how much the games have made I don't think we have seen the last of the Mass Effect universe. I don't think the movie route is the way to go through.