I'm just thinking out loud here. If the Indoctrination theory is true, would that mean the game doesn't really end, but just stops? If everything after the moment where Harbinger blasts Shepard is really in Shepard's head, isn't that where the game officially stops? This is weird.
So yeah, if the Indoctrination Theory is true the game just stops.
I'm pretty sure BW said the Indoctrination theory was not true when they released their first statement from Casey that said they stick by the ending and that it's exactly what we see. Cool theory, but no cigar.
Something that just occurred to me regarding the ending- it's basically an all-renegade ending. If you played the game as a synthetic-hating renegade, then the choices at the Citadel are all tailored to your previous decisions. And the "screw the galaxy" ending you get is what I would consider a renegade one.
So really, it just goes to show how many people played this as a paragon- for whom there are no endings. Problem is, apparently the makers of the game all played as renegades.
There's many ways that they could do it. Off the top of my head:
A. Real Time Strategy (RTS) game using a similar engine to the Star Wars Empire At War Games where the player controls both space and land forces on a galactic scale, the campaign could be built around the Geth threat, you play as the Quarians and have to stave off the Geth in the official campaign, but you could play as any race against any race. I'd love to have my hands on a game like this.
B. First Contact War. Pretty big conflict, written about in a book by Drew K. You could easily make a game out of this.
C. We did everything from the human race. There are the Turians, Asari, Geth, Quarians, Batarrians, Protheans, so on and so forth, out there. Play as one of them in a different game.
D. Prothean-based game of when the Reapers first invade Prothean space. Play as Javik in this game.
They could do things from 50,000 years ago. They built a HUGE galaxy and explained a lot of the lore which leaves significant structure for future games.
It does kind of make sense that the other two options, merging with synthetics (THEY DON'T HAVE DNA!) and controlling the Reapers all mean you've accepted machines in some way and wiped out your own existence, hence being fully indoctrinated by the Reapers. And since the god child tries to tell you that choosing destruction will kill you and destroy the mass relays, it's not that hard to believe that this is not what the kid wants you to pick. It's been shown in previous Mass Effect games that anyone can fight indoctrination if they're strong enough.
Also, the Crucible should have been a trap... Maybe it still is.
My friend's adopted son is playing ME3 and it's taking all i can do to not warn him. i'm sure he's already heard as he's 17 and all this buddies probably played it. i hope the new DLC doesn't suck. gonna be 6 months at least before it hits though.
One thing you have to give them credit for (including the ending)... It definitely leaves a lot of room for analysis, speculation and debate. Much of it quite dark and unsettling. That's what good Sci-Fi does. Maybe that's what they were shooting for... the mindf^* k ending that leaves you in an emotional and philosophical conundrum. I know that's not what many expected... or want... but if that's what BioWare set out to do then they definitely did it, probably more effectively than they hoped. lol
I don't know much about the "Indoctrination Theory" other than what was said here. I never got that impression when I played the game. When I got to the scene where I was blasted (which I assume was Harbinger because of the glowing eyes) I had heard people didn't like the ending and I thought that was it. I was like "Really? I did all that and I just get killed?!?!" That would have p*ssed people off too, but it would have been interesting, like the Reapers were so powerful nothing you could do would stop the cycle from ending.
Another complaint i had was all the other ME games they made that were only for smart phones and apple products. They seem to think we can all afford stuff like that.
Tali's getting drunk a lot lately lol. All these companies take for granted not everyone can afford these. there's a 80s transformers RPG that's ipad only too.
TIM's story (The Illusive Man) could have been done so much better as well. His weird eye implants from ME:2 always made me wonder who he is... I like to think that he is Harbinger, fully indoctrinated on the highest level, Harbinger has direct control over him and he's been slowly manipulating the galaxy through Cerberus (hence why Cerberus is against you in ME:3 and TIM comes at the end of the game for the Reapers).
It'd show some brilliant story-crafting and answer a lot of questions, the only conflict would be the attack on the Collectors base, but there you reveal that the Collectors were trying to study original Prothean DNA to try and reverse themselves, so again, perhaps the Reapers had seen that they had completed their purpose and wanted them destroyed (their cycle forever over) but the human Reaper they were building saved (hence TIM's desire to save it).
In the words of Palmer the brave,
You gotta be fu**ing kidding.....
Controversy Erupts Over Mass Effect 3 Writer's Forum Post
Wow. I think we've found the problem boys and girls.
I think they've done a hack's job on this one, pure and simple. Tonight I contented myself with a browse of cutscenes on Youtube. A lot cheaper than buying a $100 game that betrays our hopes this badly. Absolutely tons of great writing, great characters, some hilarious comic relief, great action, great gameplay - this is 90% of a superb game, from what I can see. But the endgame for a trilogy this big is make or break and in this case it's as clear a case of 'break' as can be. I mean, try to imagine the ending of 2001: A Space Odyssey grafted into the final episodes of Babylon 5. That's what we've got here. It's hopelessly inappropriate; "not what we expected" is one thing, "crapping all over the existing continuity" is another thing entirely.
Just those three alternate cutscenes the dissident writer wrote of would have done a lot to placate people, though the illogic of having the fleet stranded at Earth (and likely facing starvation - and of Joker fleeing the battle - ???!??!) - would still rankle. Why were they omitted? Just...WTF?!?!?
Won't be buying this game; may not even finish my perfect paragon playthrough of ME2. Geeze.
BioWare have some problems. DA2 made that clear, this confirms it.
Last edited by Nwerke; Mar 26, 2012 at 11:51 AM.
I think the mind set for the game's writers is just to focus on the game since that's where all the continuity really needs to take place. They probably didn't want to incorporate too many elements from the expanded universe unless it added something to the story.
I agree the expanded universe doesn't fit very well. The only expanded universe i trust was written by Drew because he was the writer of the first few novels and they matched the game perfectly cause he was writing those too so he knew what was going on. As soon as they dumped him the series went to hell.
I'd still rather see it explained in-game. I'm not going to pick up a comic book to have an in-game detail explained for me... the EU of any story isn't to explain something that happened in game, it's to create something in the world the game created that wasn't already there.
This is why I was excited to see Kai in the game, even though none of that is touched upon in the game itself.