587 réponses à ce sujet

[GuardianAngel470]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Actually, I had the same reaction to what the quarians did and I played ME1 first.  It seemed so simple to me that the quarians were in the wrong initially.  I guess others weren't as objective as I was.

Which isn't objective, that's ignoring the Quarian point of view altogether.

Oh no it isn't, I acknowledge their point of view.  I knew that they felt that the Geth would rebel and I knew that they were trying to avoid getting attacked.  I just thought that because they were A) projecting a reaction that they had no hard evidence to suggest would occur and Decided that even after they found out that the geth were sentient they thought it was a good idea to kill a race of sentient constructs.  I felt that they were wrong because their reactions were based on conjecture made from the standpoint of organics who feel emotions as well as organics who are individuals.  They were way too different from the geth to ever think that they could accurately judge how they would react to being servants.

Add to that Tali tells you that the Quarians never tried to make peace or set the geth free, they just attacked.  The quarians were wrong in my opinion to attack the geth who had displayed no aggressive actions or who never gave any indication that a rebelion was inevitable.  The quarians acted on flimsy conjecture and attacked a sentient species.  That makes them in the wrong.

[Collider]

I don't think there really is any blame to be had. The Quarians thought there were shutting down faulty hardware. The Geth likely had survival programming that reasoned that killing everyone would be the way to survive. A race's government does not impart blame upon the entire race, either, nor should we concern ourselves with the sins of our ancestors as if we are personally to blame.

[CmdrFenix83]

Nightwriter wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Okay, okay, I'll admit, my first notion of "factions" did not come from Legion at all.

It actually came from the ME2 trailers pre game release. I knew it before I'd started the game. Casey Hudson and some of the writers got on for a few videos to say we'd learn there were actually different factions within the geth. I remember it very clearly.

Is that cheating? I suppose it might be. Still, it's those writers and what they said that sticks with me right now. I can't unhear it.

The difference is I don't metagame decisions.  I knew Legion was a squaddie.  I knew Grunt was a squaddie.  Grunt stayed in his tube on the basis that he's a Krogan and therefor likely to be dangerous.  Same deal with Legion... I just won't do anything in favor of Cerberus.  I probably would have left him on the derelict if given the opportunity.  Hell, I would have rather given him to the Migrant Fleet to study.

Does your metagaming mean you disregard something you know to be the truth? Like the writers telling us there are now different geth factions, and that Legion belongs to one?

Regardless, I did as much as possible to make sure I did nothing in favor of Cerberus in game 2. I spent the whole game in shock I was actually working with them, that the card in my game box said Cerberus Network and I was getting e-mails from Cerberus command like I was one of them, giving me missions like Admiral Hackett.

But keeping Legion had nothing to do with Cerberus. I kept him for myself, not for TIM.

Not metagaming means I use absolutely no knowledge that Shepard himself wouldn't know.  Nothing that hasn't been said in-game, and in front of Shepard.  Metagaming is using knowledge Shepard couldn't know.  I've done a lot of roleplaying all the way back to D&D, so it's just common practice now.

[CmdrFenix83]

Xaijin wrote...

Considering he changed opinion based on forum responses, metagaming is the least of possible skewing.

My opinion != Shepard's.  Does the concept of roleplaying illude you?

[Nightwriter]

Collider wrote...

I don't think there really is any blame to be had. The Quarians thought there were shutting down faulty hardware. The Geth likely had survival programming that reasoned that killing everyone would be the way to survive. A race's government does not impart blame upon the entire race, either, nor should we concern ourselves with the sins of our ancestors as if we are personally to blame.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I know for a certainty from what I am told that I wiped out all the buffalo.

[Collider]

You monster.

[Nightwriter]

I threw smallpox blankets on poor Pocahontas too, I hear.

[RyrineaNara]

Nightwriter I lol'd so hard

[CmdrFenix83]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Actually, I had the same reaction to what the quarians did and I played ME1 first.  It seemed so simple to me that the quarians were in the wrong initially.  I guess others weren't as objective as I was.

Which isn't objective, that's ignoring the Quarian point of view altogether.

Oh no it isn't, I acknowledge their point of view.  I knew that they felt that the Geth would rebel and I knew that they were trying to avoid getting attacked.  I just thought that because they were A) projecting a reaction that they had no hard evidence to suggest would occur and Decided that even after they found out that the geth were sentient they thought it was a good idea to kill a race of sentient constructs.  I felt that they were wrong because their reactions were based on conjecture made from the standpoint of organics who feel emotions as well as organics who are individuals.  They were way too different from the geth to ever think that they could accurately judge how they would react to being servants.

Add to that Tali tells you that the Quarians never tried to make peace or set the geth free, they just attacked.  The quarians were wrong in my opinion to attack the geth who had displayed no aggressive actions or who never gave any indication that a rebelion was inevitable.  The quarians acted on flimsy conjecture and attacked a sentient species.  That makes them in the wrong.

They believed that the Geth weren't all sentient yet, but would become so soon, and moved to act before that happened.  That's the difference.  They didn't believe they were sutting down sentient beings.  They thought they could stop it before it happened.  They underestimated the Geth's neural network, and the Geth turned to *be* sentient.  In hind-sight, yes, they trying to wipe our a race of sentient machines.  They didn't know most, or even many were sentient yet.  Only a handful of cases doesn't mean it's widespread.  They were recalling faulty products, nothing more.

[Nightwriter]

RyrineaNara wrote...

Nightwriter I lol'd so hard

[Collider]

The Quarians did not attack. They tried to shut them down from control hubs and the Geth resisted. It's like shutting down an appliance or a system of computers that has gotten a virus. If artificial intelligence was illegal at that time (it currently is in the ME universe), then the Quarians were also avoiding political fallout and probably being exiled from the council by trying to shut down these AIs.

[RyrineaNara]

Nightwriter wrote...

RyrineaNara wrote...

Nightwriter I lol'd so hard

I love using History too our advantage.

[Xaijin]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

Considering he changed opinion based on forum responses, metagaming is the least of possible skewing.

My opinion != Shepard's.  Does the concept of roleplaying illude you?

You're not roleplaying anymore and have long since departed that venue.

By your own volition and admission you let fourth estate actions and content change YOUR primary observation and color the subsequent responses in game. The only way you could get farther is to have someone tell you hoe to play and then take the controller when you did something unsatisfactory.

[Nightwriter]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Does your metagaming mean you disregard something you know to be the truth? Like the writers telling us there are now different geth factions, and that Legion belongs to one?

Not metagaming means I use absolutely no knowledge that Shepard himself wouldn't know. 

So... yes, then, is the answer to that question.

Nothing that hasn't been said in-game, and in front of Shepard.  Metagaming is using knowledge Shepard couldn't know.  I've done a lot of roleplaying all the way back to D&D, so it's just common practice now.

That's fine. We all have our own styles, ways we like to play. I just wanted to understand clearly.

[Xaijin]

Nightwriter wrote...

I threw smallpox blankets on poor Pocahontas too, I hear.

Funny how everyone remembers that and forgets about the Commanche and Apache killing off entire tribes and taking slaves well before any boat folks showed up.

[CmdrFenix83]

Xaijin wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

Considering he changed opinion based on forum responses, metagaming is the least of possible skewing.

My opinion != Shepard's.  Does the concept of roleplaying illude you?

You're not roleplaying anymore and have long since departed that venue.

By your own volition and admission you let fourth estate actions and content change YOUR primary observation and color the subsequent responses in game. The only way you could get farther is to have someone tell you hoe to play and then take the controller when you did something unsatisfactory.

I'm still arguing from decisions made by my first Shepard, I don't see your point.  What I may or may not feel about a character has zero relevance to how I've played through the game in any manner.  I hate Miranda too, yet I have a character that romanced her and loves her. 

[Collider]

Xaijin wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...
I threw smallpox blankets on poor Pocahontas too, I hear.

Funny how everyone remembers that and forgets about the Commanche and Apache killing off entire tribes and taking slaves well before any boat folks showed up.

Good point. But as a whole the Europeans were more powerful. The most influential of cultures also tend to be the most well known.

[Xaijin]

Aye.

[RyrineaNara]

Xaijin some tend to forget that the Commanche and Apache were war tribes not peaceful tribes. Most indins were peaceful other than the Commanche, and Apache. Please learn your history a little bit better. Not all the indins were waring tribes. <_<

Modifié par RyrineaNara, 03 avril 2010 - 02:30 .

[Xaijin]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

Considering he changed opinion based on forum responses, metagaming is the least of possible skewing.

My opinion != Shepard's.  Does the concept of roleplaying illude you?

You're not roleplaying anymore and have long since departed that venue.

By your own volition and admission you let fourth estate actions and content change YOUR primary observation and color the subsequent responses in game. The only way you could get farther is to have someone tell you hoe to play and then take the controller when you did something unsatisfactory.

I'm still arguing from decisions made by my first Shepard, I don't see your point.  What I may or may not feel about a character has zero relevance to how I've played through the game in any manner.  I hate Miranda too, yet I have a character that romanced her and loves her. 

No, you're not. I'm super empathic but If I can see it over an internet forum... seriously. You're abstracting beyond the fourth wall and then applying it as an internal rationale.

[Xaijin]

RyrineaNara wrote...

Xaijin some tend to forget that the Commanche and Apache were war tribes not peaceful tribes.

Yeah, but that could also be applied ot the external folks, ne?

Actions become successful actions traditions becomes ways of life.

Modifié par Xaijin, 03 avril 2010 - 02:31 .

[Nightwriter]

Xaijin wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I threw smallpox blankets on poor Pocahontas too, I hear.

Funny how everyone remembers that and forgets about the Commanche and Apache killing off entire tribes and taking slaves well before any boat folks showed up.

La la la la la la la!!! No, no, I cannot hear such things! La la la la la!!! They were helpless victims, cute little kittens in wheelchairs who just wanted to plant trees and worship mother earth! History tells me so! I am the evil white invader who came and slaughtered them with my evil white sledgehammer of inhumanity!

I am evil! EEEVIIIILL!!!

Modifié par Nightwriter, 03 avril 2010 - 02:33 .

[RyrineaNara]

Xaijin wrote...

RyrineaNara wrote...

Xaijin some tend to forget that the Commanche and Apache were war tribes not peaceful tribes.

Yeha, but that could also be applied ot the external folks, ne?

I agree, However not all the Native Americans were war tribes. In which we shouldn't have tried to whipe them out like that.

[Xaijin]

RyrineaNara wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

RyrineaNara wrote...

Xaijin some tend to forget that the Commanche and Apache were war tribes not peaceful tribes.

Yeha, but that could also be applied ot the external folks, ne?

I agree, However not all the Native Americans were war tribes. In which we shouldn't have tried to whipe them out like that.

Settled tribes took slaves as well.

Of course, NONE it was justifiable. Power makes justification. Something the Quarians have come to experience from both ends. Understanding seems to be a bit further away.

[Collider]

I don't think the Quarians were on the level as the acts we are talking about between humans. The Quarian actions acted badly for them but I do not think they were morally wrong. Shortsighted at most.