ME3 Indoctrination theory analysis

[kouriichi]

Ive been reading over this idea for a day or two now, and honestly, it makes the most sense to me. The ending just.... doesnt fit mass effect at all. The only way this ending is real, is if the lead writer died, rolled over in his grave, and gave production of the script to his 5 year old son.

Honestly, i didnt think it was THAT bad of an ending to begin with. But everything about it did feel off. I cant name a single thing about it that felt right. It was the fact that the crucible was the child Shepard saw in his sleep that set it over for me. If its been designed and built by aliens over hundreds of thousands of years ((maybe more)) theres no reason it would be a human child unless it was a projection of Shepard's mind. And if your hit by a Reaper Beam dead on, you have no chance of getting up and stumbling for another 100 yards plus more.

I mean, earlier in the game, just being in the same country as it insta-gibbed you for a game over. And thats if you took a glancing hit to one of the feet. Shep took a head-on blast. He'd be crispier then spawn, and thrice as dead.

And im not just thinking this cause im a bioware fanboy. Ive never held them to higher standards then any other company. They are capable of failing too. But this ending just.... Isnt Bioware in the slightest, unless it is a fake ending. At which point, it one of the best endings ive seen in a long time. It would also explain the conversation at the end about another story from "The Shepard". Why would they promise another story about Shep if its completely over?

 

[wintercoat]

The one thing I wonder about the indoctrination theory is how come, if you have a particularly low point score of War Assets, you only get the destroy ending? Unless the Reapers have porridge istead of brains, why would they only offer Shepard the ability to destroy them all? Makes no sense.

Simple. If your score is low, the Reapers don't have to really care about Shep's indoctrination because they've already won. At that point, the indoctrination is a delaying tactic to allow them to finish everyone off. If your score is high, on the other hand, the indoctrination attempt is an attempt by the Reapers to stop Shep from destroying them.

 

[Incomer]

I felt bad for killing off my allies but I was also angry enough to be unable to fight the urge to shoot something so I went for Red option as the kid was bulletproof(since synthesis wasn't presented to me - seriously F&$! multi-player, besides it's not all that much better then other endings).
Shepard can hold off Ardat-yakshi (or how do you spell that thing) close-up influence and even though you come close to Reaper tech you usually don't spend all that much time around (unlike the Cerberus dudes in the dead one).
And it would so much like a dream sequence it might make me feel even worse then Deus Ex (Machina) endings we have now.
Besides whole ME3 ignores indoctrination - they even report some sorts of detachment camps but why would they need them if they can just make people obey? And even statistics on how many people rat out their run away co-prisoners (as much as Id like to know how would anyone get reliable statistics on this matter) would have to be higher if all the reapers needed to achieve complete control was to use a little bit of their magic )

 

[wintercoat]

As much as I hope it is the indoctrination theory, I can come up with some "Bioware-Quality" answers to some of the points I believe:
-Destroy is Red, Control is Blue:
Simply put, Destroy destroys the Reapers, yes, but it also Destroys EDI and the Geth, as well as any other synthetics out there. Killing your friends and possibly allies to destroy the Reapers is what Cerberus was doing - though it was killing its people to try and control the Reapers - and thus is represented as the Red option: You destroy the Reapers and all the Biological information they hold about the earlier species, you destroy an entire species - they Geth - themselves, and you destroy your friend and, to an extent, saviour: EDI.

The destroy choice is made to look as bad as possible, while the Catalyst talks up the benefits of the other two choices. If you think of it as Shepard breaking the indoctrination by choosing the destroy option, then they would want the destroy option to look as unsavory as possible, while making the other two look as good as possible.

 

[Joccaren]

The destroy choice is made to look as bad as possible, while the Catalyst talks up the benefits of the other two choices. If you think of it as Shepard breaking the indoctrination by choosing the destroy option, then they would want the destroy option to look as unsavory as possible, while making the other two look as good as possible.

Now you are attempting to change the scene to match the theory, rather than the theory to match the scene (To an extent). Yes, the destroy ending is made to look Renegade - that's because it IS and 'Ends Justifies the Means' ending. You sacrifice friends, allies and more simply to destroy the Reapers.
Whilst the indoctrination ending does largely fit, there are other explanations for things too. I am merely providing these other explanations. Personally I hope the indoctrination ending is adopted by Bioware, but I doubt it will be, and we will be given explanations somewhat along these lines.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Red ending doesn't destroy EDI. It destroys the geth because they adopted the Reaper code. If you chose to let them adopt it. The Catalyst never says anything about EDI. It just mentions the geth. If it did involve EDI it would say so because it would be impossible to miss that one.

 

[Merrick_HLC]

Red ending doesn't destroy EDI. It destroys the geth because they adopted the Reaper code. If you chose to let them adopt it. The Catalyst never says anything about EDI. It just mentions the geth. If it did involve EDI it would say so because it would be impossible to miss that one.

Doesn't the red ending say it will destroy all synthetic life?
EDI is a synthetic.



Anyway, onto the theories themselves.

While I do think there is some potential for it to be true, the thing is it could also just be 'saving throw' thing. Leave it open to fans for what they believe.

There's also the problem that, while we often take internet access for granted, not everyone who owns a console or computer has it attached to the internet or has access to it.

If indoctrination theory is right and DLC is released...that does mean a lot of people bought a literally incomplete game that they will not be able to attain the true ending of.

I loved the game till the last few minutes, and while the indoctrination theory being shown as true would help....it'd be kind of a band-aid solution.
It doesn't change the fact the ending I got in the product I paid for was disappointing.
If it was PLANNED to be disappointing.... that's not much better to me.

 

[wintercoat]

Red ending doesn't destroy EDI. It destroys the geth because they adopted the Reaper code. If you chose to let them adopt it. The Catalyst never says anything about EDI. It just mentions the geth. If it did involve EDI it would say so because it would be impossible to miss that one.

EDI is based on Reaper tech. If you encourage her and Joker's relationship, Joker mentions it while in Purgatory.

 

[The Genius]

Can you just for a second stop whining and try to analyze the ending?

I hope the theory ends up being correct because all I see at the moment is a bunch of people brainfarming themselves into thinking their opinion is fact.

It's a theory at this time, nothing more. That it seems to fit doesn't make it the truth.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Shepard can hold off Ardat-yakshi (or how do you spell that thing) close-up influence and even though you come close to Reaper tech you usually don't spend all that much time around (unlike the Cerberus dudes in the dead one).

Remember how Cerberus implanted Shephard with cybernetics while rebuilding him/her? Now, we know that the Illusive Man always admired reaper tech and that he was ready to go to any extent to harness it (his eyes might even be an indication that he's implanted himself with reaper tech since before the start of ME2), so why not put some into Shephard when given the chance? If the Illusive Man thought it was safe for himself to do it, why not do it to Shephard to? That would explain part of the indoctrination at least, since it could have been a process going on since the start of ME2 and the recurring dreams Shephard have in ME3 are actually indoctrination taking effect.

I personally think it is a longshot that we'll see another ending to ME3, even if I would like one that actually gave some closuer to the ME-universe.

 

[putowtin]

Red ending doesn't destroy EDI. It destroys the geth because they adopted the Reaper code. If you chose to let them adopt it. The Catalyst never says anything about EDI. It just mentions the geth. If it did involve EDI it would say so because it would be impossible to miss that one.

EDI is based on Reaper tech. If you encourage her and Joker's relationship, Joker mentions it while in Purgatory.

Agreed, the god/child/thing say's that destroy option will destroy all synthetic life in the galaxy, including you (Shepard) due to the synthetics Cerberus used to bring her/him back to life.

What I don't get is, I've read to get the secret ending you have to have 5000 in EMS, I only had 4621, picked the Destroy ending but

Spoiler

Saw the scene with Shepard's torso

is there a different ending after that?

EDIT: Ignore my question, I just checked it out... no there isn't

 

[wintercoat]

Red ending doesn't destroy EDI. It destroys the geth because they adopted the Reaper code. If you chose to let them adopt it. The Catalyst never says anything about EDI. It just mentions the geth. If it did involve EDI it would say so because it would be impossible to miss that one.

EDI is based on Reaper tech. If you encourage her and Joker's relationship, Joker mentions it while in Purgatory.

Agreed, the god/child/thing say's that destroy option will destroy all synthetic life in the galaxy, including you (Shepard) due to the synthetics Cerberus used to bring her/him back to life.

What I don't get is, I've read to get the secret ending you have to have 5000 in EMS, I only had 4621, picked the Destroy ending but

Spoiler

Saw the scene with Shepard's torso

is there a different ending after that?

Spoiler

If you get TIM to shoot himself, you only need 4k EMS

 

[Indecipherable]

Red doesn't destroy EDI because she stepped off the Normandy on the jungle planet in my playthrough. She clearly survives.

 

[putowtin]

snip.

snip

Agreed, the god/child/thing say's that destroy option will destroy all synthetic life in the galaxy, including you (Shepard) due to the synthetics Cerberus used to bring her/him back to life.

What I don't get is, I've read to get the secret ending you have to have 5000 in EMS, I only had 4621, picked the Destroy ending but

Spoiler

Saw the scene with Shepard's torso

is there a different ending after that?

Spoiler

If you get TIM to shoot himself, you only need 4k EMS

Cheers! Still p1ssed off, but at least I now know why I got that ending!

 

[Incomer]

Shepard can hold off Ardat-yakshi (or how do you spell that thing) close-up influence and even though you come close to Reaper tech you usually don't spend all that much time around (unlike the Cerberus dudes in the dead one).

Remember how Cerberus implanted Shephard with cybernetics while rebuilding him/her? Now, we know that the Illusive Man always admired reaper tech and that he was ready to go to any extent to harness it (his eyes might even be an indication that he's implanted himself with reaper tech since before the start of ME2), so why not put some into Shephard when given the chance? If the Illusive Man thought it was safe for himself to do it, why not do it to Shephard to? That would explain part of the indoctrination at least, since it could have been a process going on since the start of ME2 and the recurring dreams Shephard have in ME3 are actually indoctrination taking effect.

I personally think it is a longshot that we'll see another ending to ME3, even if I would like one that actually gave some closuer to the ME-universe.

Because he wanted him to be as close to the original as possible. And Miranda would probably tell you to watch out for any signs of side effects (unless she's rly stupid hoe). So... no :]
And yes the godly kid was refering to some kind of devices inside you that are of synthetic origin but since the "renegade" ending clears the geths as well (and they are NOT reaper tech) I think it's save to assume this shouldn't be the breaking argument to support your theory

 

[mykalwane]

Will come back to talk on this once I have beaten the game. Don't want any spoilers. Might want to put up in the title possible Mass Effect 3 spoiler so people know.

 

[Darkmantle]

um...

The problem I have, is that the didn't give us an ending then. and will LITERALLY charge us to finish the game. That's what's offensive to me.

Although, I will stick to my guns. if they release a free DLC that contains the real ending, I forgive them completely.

 

[Merrick_HLC]

Red doesn't destroy EDI because she stepped off the Normandy on the jungle planet in my playthrough. She clearly survives.

Yeah in mine (choosing control) Garrus stepped off next to them.
Despite the fact he had been with me in London charging towards the teleporter when we all got blasted.

Either the indoctrination theory is true or they just randomly select whoever hops out with Joker despite it making no damn sense.

 

[Steampunk Viking]

It must be nice to be able to just turn off all critical thinking skills and just react emotionally at everything. You're like a 16 year old girl on her sweet 16 when she doesn't get the car she wanted. Can you just for a second stop whining and try to analyze the ending? Maybe you'll actually contribute something useful to one of these topics for a change.

"Analyze" the ending? No!
I am not wasting my time on such wonky ass shit. The ending is the ending. Bioware cooked up some half-baked shit and served it on a plate. and everyone proceeded to cobble it up like a bunch of pigs.

To see fans go out of their way to make it better by "analyzing" is akin to watching children run repeatedly into a wall.

By analyze you simply mean "spin this until it feels better"

The tweets also mean nothing. There shipping their overpriced DLC. that much is obvious.

Yay, Zeel is back to moan about Bioware!

 

[boag]

As much as I hope it is the indoctrination theory, I can come up with some "Bioware-Quality" answers to some of the points I believe:
-Destroy is Red, Control is Blue:
Simply put, Destroy destroys the Reapers, yes, but it also Destroys EDI and the Geth, as well as any other synthetics out there. Killing your friends and possibly allies to destroy the Reapers is what Cerberus was doing - though it was killing its people to try and control the Reapers - and thus is represented as the Red option: You destroy the Reapers and all the Biological information they hold about the earlier species, you destroy an entire species - they Geth - themselves, and you destroy your friend and, to an extent, saviour: EDI.
Control is blue as it saves everyone and everything. The Reapers still exist, but are under Shepards control. As such, they stop harvesting Organic life, start defending it, and can help rebuild the Mass Relays. In addition, the Citadel is still intact, so the seat of Galactic power still exists for people to live on, and for the Council to govern from. We can assume it is also controlled by Shepard. From there, everyone lives. The biological data of the Species from previous cycles stored within the Reapers survives, the Geth survive, EDI survives. It offers a great chance for the galaxy to rebuild, with everyone maintaining their individuality, but still surviving. In addition, it has the best watch dog fleet to stop trouble from ruining it.
-The "One more Story" line must hint towards after end DLC:
Not necessarily. After that scene, you are told that you can now continue to build on Shepard's legend by continuing to play through the game, and through DLC. What that line implies is basically that the Stargazer tells another story about one of the other missions Shepard went on, so that as you finish up anything you hadn't done before attacking Cronos Station, it is merely the Stargazer telling another story and building on the legend of 'The Shepard'.
-Can someone write a script and ruin it completely in the last 5 minutes:
Yes, if rushed. I believe there was another planned ending, something to do with Dark Matter, but for some reason that didn't go ahead and they shoved this stuff in to work with what they already had and finish the game on time. Don't know what happened there, but I will hunt down and kill whoever forced the script change.
Also note that in DA2, whilst a different group - same publisher, Leliana lived no matter whether you killed her in DA:O, and rather than admit it was a bug, they said that it was perfectly intended that way and that the player didn't necessarily know, but she survived that incident. Even though you decapitated her.
-The child seems to be merely a manifestation of Shepard's fears or W/E, and thus that whole last section is likely in his head:
Whilst the child may be purely in his head (I fully agree with this), the child being in the final section is likely either his perception of the Catalyst, or how the Catalyst chooses to present itself to him.
-The Citadel exploded and Crashed to Earth or W/E, Shepard couldn't have survived that:
An unknown device fired a beam of energy that magically disintegrated all Reapers/Synthesised all Organics with Synthetics (Control is more understandable, but why the Relays blow up in it is beyond me) - Your argument is invalid.

I tend to favor the rumor that they changed the ending in the last few months because of the leaks