User blog comment:Kaloneous/Mass Effect 3 Ending DLC Denied and PAX/@comment-4937645-20120407161512

I've been thinking about the videos and transcripts I've seen of the ME3 panel at PAX, in light of the indoctrination theory, and for what it's worth, I'm not sure PAX actually did anything to disprove the IT.

First let me say, I've always been hesitant to believe in IT, not because it seems to lack in-game evidence - the changed eyes in Synthesis/Control and the fact that Shepard can only survive in the Destroy ending are evidence enough, in my mind, let alone all the other, smaller clues - but because, given the backlash, you'd think BioWare would have owned up to IT by now and been like, "Calm down, people! It all makes sense!  See!!"

So, I'm still hesitant to believe wholeheartedly in IT - But I also don't think the PAX panel did anything to disprove it. Here's why:

- The answer re: IT at PAX was pretty vague. It was like, "Uh, we don't want to comment, we want you to interpret, wait for the DLC." That's so vague, it makes a lot of politicians look downright direct.

- The remark about survivors on the citadel - as far as I could tell, the commentator said "IF the Citadel blew up..." (emphasis mine). Why throw the "if" in there if everything we see in the current ending is rock-solid truth?

- The confirmation of the Multiplayer DLC, which lines up with the details leaked by the same dude who leaked "The Truth." Which lends the whole "Truth" thing a bit more credence (this in spite of the tweet saying "The Truth is a lie," which is so clever I wonder if it was a quasi-denial rather than an actual denial). IF (big if) BioWare has always planned to go with IT and a "sike!!" moment down the road, it's entirely possible they intended to release it much later, possibly after dropping hints in other single-player DLC. Which leads to...

- The repeated use of the phrase "re-prioritizing" in regards to DLC. Now, there's a decent-to-very-high probability that's just PR doublespeak, but...on the other hand...maybe this extended cut has been planned from the beginning. Maybe BioWare deserves *SOME* credit in the writing department regarding IT and the ending, but simply whiffed the business side. Maybe they thought they could release other Single Player DLC first, then the real ending. But now, with the backlash, they have to "re-prioritize" in order to address unforseen fan outcry?

Just some thoughts.