User blog comment:Suparockr/List of Plotholes throughout the series/@comment-166.82.245.89-20120719070005/@comment-6810992-20130228235824

why are you so against it?

its the only plausible ending to the game/story.

if it isn't indoc (which obviously it may not be), then the rest of the game, especially me3 makes no sense. the endings make no sense. and it becomes i scripted failure of a game.

and to be honest, i was just giving a "theory" to the main posters question regarding the significance of the boy. again, my theory, is the only one which makes a bit of sense. it is just "hog-wash" otherwise.

its actually funny to see such negative responses against the indoc theories, when in actual reality, if it was made more apparent for the people with such closed minds or lack of intelligence... then the ending (if fleshed out a little - its still not great), would have been held a marvel, masterpiece in story telling and for fooling you for majority of the game.

such things used in films, misdirection etc, are what people give the films high rating for. evoking a reaction, or for fooling you into believing something or not seeing something.

i guarantee, the "we hate mass effect trilogies ending!" club, would not have been nearly as high/big as it is now, if the "indoc" theory was publicly announced as correct at the get go and if it was made more apparent for the people who clearly dont get it.

"just sayin..."

again, just my opinion of course - it could be that the endings are that rubbish and the whole game is pretty poor if it ISNT indoc, that my mind refuses to believe anything else, because its a damn site better then. "shepard wakes up / takes a breath in random rubble on earth... oh btw he fell from space and didnt die like he did in me2"

as you clearly well know, there are many more reasons it "needs" to be indoc otherwise its plot hole fun time!