Why the “Indoctrination Theory” makes no sense in Mass Effect 3



I am probably not the last one in the world to argue that the so called “Indoctrination Theory” is in all aspects merely suggestive on which views and sections of the game are shown and is completely based on assumptions. Now with this post, there will be a lot of IT supports that will be sending me snide and repulsive comments and remarks, saying I am wrong and such. But here is thing: I can prove, based on both the games content, from the games themselves and added content, as well as the books. Not only with the things that I will no doubt explain in depth and hopefully prove that the “Indoctrination Theory” is merely a myth, I hope that people with finally start to open there minds and opinions that, even though Mass Effect 3 lacked many things from the get go, there are some things that have yet to be explained, and hopefully Bioware can expand on those things in the coming years.

Now, lets start with the part that started this conspiracy in the first place.

*Spoiler Warning*

#1: “The Last Breath Scene”

Since the release of Mass Effect 3, people have been so focused around this particular scene, particularly those who believe in the Indoctrination Theory. Now, we all know that if you get a certain amount of war assets you get to have certain types of endings, in regards to which of the four possible choices. In both Control and Synthesis endings, you are desinigrated into artificial code and are in all ways deceased. But with the Destroy endings, there is that one single scene, where Shepard is buried under a pile of rubble, with the chest plate exposed, and Shepard takes one single breath. And some how, this scene is supports the theory.

Now lets look at the ending one at a time here. In the control ending, it does make a lot of sense to take control of the reapers. To control your enemies power and to use that power for a better cause has been basic element in militaries and armies since the dawn of man. Capturing forts and castles, using their weapons against their own founders and creators is common. And with Shepard in control of the Reapers, it will ensure that, even though Reapers did horrible things to planets and people around the universe, those things will never happen again. And with that, worlds and societies could be rebuild and advance technologically. The same is true for Synthesis. With the knowledge of every the Reapers have done in their many cycles, civilizations can improve and transcend into states of a golden age, a renaissance of knowledge and peace. With Destroy, however, it also makes sense in regards to a few things. Shepard’s goal was to find a way to stop and destroy the Reapers. However, with choosing this, all synthetic life is destroyed. This is a reasonable sacrifice in a way, seeing how there is a chance to recreate a synthetics such as the Geth and EDI. But the ending is that, regardless of how many asset points you acquire, we don’t see Shepard either get blown up, burned to death, or even truly die. All we see is that Shepard is blown backwards.

With that in mind, how can one say, let alone prove, that Control and Synthesis supported indoctrination, and choosing Destroy breaks the Reapers control of Shepard? We don’t truly know that the Reapers and synthetics everywhere could be destroyed, or even if Shepard was truly indoctrinated in the first place. But here is the thing, if Shepard was indoctrinated, wouldn’t the Reapers control Shepard’s actions and prevent their own destruction? “Oh but Reapers wanted to control Shepard, or have Shepard synthesized. Isn’t it obvious? Destroy clearly proves Shepard is indoctrinated.”  How can it prove anything? For all we know Shepard could be on the Catalyst or the Citadel, or even somewhere half way across the galaxy for all we know, with the Reapers and Geth destroyed. If Shepard was truly indoctrinated, your choice of what your endings could be wouldn’t matter, let alone your actions in all three games. There wouldn’t be a paragon or renegade bar. There would probably be a bar that would just be black.


#2: The Prothean VI’s

I think it would be a shame for those who forgot that the two Prothean VI’s, Vigil and Vendetta, said a quite important thing here, that supports the fact that the Indoctrination Theory is merely speculation.

Vigil: “We do not sense the taint of Indoctrination in you…”

Vendetta: The VI detects an indoctrinated presence which is Kai Leng, not Shepard or the crew.

Plain and simple. How can people say that if Shepard was indoctrinated from the beginning of the game, when clearly theses two lines prove otherwise? How and where? You tell me, because until I see, with definitive proof, that Shepard was in fact indoctrinated, I will stand firm behind my evidence.


#3: Shepard’s Death in Mass Effect (First Death)

When Shepard died in the beginning of Mass Effect 2, this really left of a lot of mystery in regards to what Cerberus really did to Shepard. Now, as we know, the Illusive Man has wanted to know how to control the Reapers ever since implanting Jon Grayson with Reaper tech. But as Miranda said: “The Illusive Man wants to bring back Shepard as he/she were before his/her death. The same mind, the same morals, the same personality.” Obviously, if there was a point where Shepard could have become indoctrinated, it would be here, and considering that indoctrination takes years to develop, there is a problem in this logic. Shepard was dead for two years, meaning that there couldn’t possibly be any exposure to indoctrination at all, regardless of if the Illusive Man wanted to control the Reapers. If this had happened, the Lazarus Project would have failed. Shepard wouldn’t be who he/she was. And with the medical scans conducted to Shepard, wouldn’t there be something out of the ordinary if there was something? And yet, there is just in implants, which you can fix with the facial reconstruction.

Obviously, if the Reapers wanted to indoctrinate and control Shepard, they wouldn’t have tried and killed him/her in the first place.


#4: Leviathan Content

With the release of Leviathan, it gave a glimpse of what the Reapers origins were, as well as some information about indoctrination. Apparently the Reapers wanted to be able to figure out a way to indoctrinate the many species in the galaxy, but as it was stated, it has taken many cycles to perfect ways to indoctrinate. With this in mind, if each cycle is trying find a way to perfect a way to indoctrinate, why is Shepard the focus of it? Why Shepard? Is it possible that the Reapers actually and truly fear being exterminated by one single human? And if perchance Shepard was in fact indoctrinated, it would take years to establish the effects of it. But do we see the Reapers taking control of Shepard in the middle of a battle or in the space battle before the ending? No we don’t. If the Leviathan’s we able to control the Reapers and not be able to control Shepard, make him/her not reach where they were located, that one more reason why IT is pure myth.


#5: The rumored “Project X”

So lately I have been hearing about this so called “Project X” and how it will “Prove that the indoctrination theory is true.” Really? Just because it’s called Project X, people immediately assume it will focus on this theory? Well for starters, I doubt that it will prove that the IT is in face true. Next, I would hazard a guess that it will be based on something that either deals with biotics or something Cerberus related, or even something that is related to one of the books for game. What it will truly be, who really truly knows until it is announced.

So, until we hear more about this, speculate all you want people. Just don’t get your hopes up if your wrong.


#6: Bioware’s Response

If Shepard, as well as his/her crew, were supposed to be either indoctrinated  or not in Mass Effect 3, the true answer will have to come from Bioware and Casey Hudson. The answer from them would make this whole thing official and put an end to everything. If it was meant for Shepard to be indoctrinated, there will be red flags with this announcement because there will be things missing and plot holes to prove that it was true. I mean, where, how, and when was Shepard indoctrinated? Because if Shepard was part of the Arrival DLC and spent six months in confinement, when did all this happen? And if not part of Arrival, the same thing. What truly happened during those six months, we might never truly know.

But in hindsight, if in fact Shepard wasn’t meant to be indoctrinated, there will be those who will cry fowl and demand that IT is real. But how can such a theory truly exist if the only evidence is one scene and a few items that “support” it.


Final Words

Now I know for a fact that most, if not all, supporters of this theory will go ape shit and will want me to shut up and say I am wrong. There will be some who might go back and review this to their games. And there will be those who don’t give a damn and might be curious about this. Either way, this theory has been subjected to a unfathomable amount of comments on the Bioware Social Forums.

Now I will say that some people will interrupt their games their own way. I will say that. But since this topic is so big, and is still a big question mark on whether or not it is in fact true or not, will be speculative until we get a answer from Bioware and Casey Hudson.

But when it comes down to it, I strongly believe that the Indoctrination Theory, having been based on just one pinnacle scene and dozens of speculative context and content, is merely a fan based opinion and should be moved into the fan portion of the forums. Have the topic being spammed of merely speculative and outrageous suggestions of content to should be added, it is a becoming a topic that is beginning to get out dated. There are more things that prove that this theory is just a fan based opinion. But how people will interrupt the game is the what it comes down to it.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yea, there are some things that I did not add, such as the crews responses and such, but in my opinion, they are just minor things and can be debunked. Overall, I know some of you will either approve or dislike this post. Either way, this is just my opinion and proofs. If you want to prove me wrong, show me your own evidence. And no, I don’t want a link to the Indoctrination Theory post on Bioware Social Forum. I want YOUR own evidence. Prove me wrong if you can. If you have some actual valid points, I use your name and info in another post, probably a follow up to this. Either way, view, comment, give me feedback. And no, I don’t want any explicit negativity. If you like it, tell me what you liked and what things you liked. If you didn’t like it, then tell me why you don’t like it and give me your own reasons why I am wrong and such.