96 réponses à ce sujet

[Cerrydd]

About Sidonis, don't forget he did not kill the 10 team members himself. He joined up with Garrus because he shared the same idea as Garrus: getting rid of some mercs. He did not join up with Garrus so he could get Garrus and the rest of his team killed off in the end. He was approached by the mercs to give information on the location of the base, and was threatened he would be killed if he didn't tell. He might even be tortured, or maybe they even threatened to hurt his family (if he had one), we don't know. Sidonis might be a coward to give in to these threats, but honestly, I think a lot of other people would do the same. If Sidonis didn't give in, the mercs would've probably approached another team member to do the same. I'm not justifying what Sidonis did, but I can't blame him either. Dying for this is too much for me.

Aside from that, Garrus' loyalty mission has nothing to do with (in)justice in my opinion. Garrus feels responsible for his dead team members. Remember the e-mail from Nalah Butler, the widow of one of his mates? She writes: "I know Garrus blames himself; he took every shot fired at his squad as a failure on his part, and it was clear when he sent me the message about my husband that he thinks it was his fault.". If every shot fired as his squad is already considered as a failure, imagine what every death in his squad meant to Garrus. In turian society, leading and protecting are very important. Garrus feels like he failed in this, because "he should have seen it coming" and "now all of them are dead, because of Sidonis". So, he thinks he failed as a leader and now someone has to pay for it. However, when you let Sidonis tell his side of the story, there is more to it than "Sidonis betrayed me and that's that". Like I said, the mercs threatened him, he can't help it that he doesn't have the balls to sacrifice himself. But he never picked up a gun and murdered the team himself.

As for Sidonis trying to make it up somehow, we'll see what happens in ME3. It'll probably be an e-mail, but I don't think of Sidonis as an evil guy. He teamed up with Garrus with the right intentions, and after letting him live, he might get out of that big depression and do something useful again.

Modifié par Cerrydd, 17 mai 2010 - 09:40 .

[Pacifien]

I never really cared if Sidonis deserved to die or live, I just knew I didn't want Garrus to be the one to shoot him.

[Flamin Jesus]

CamoBadger wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

Persephone wrote...

It isn't just about this spree. It's a principle. Sniping down a traitor/murderer is NOT due process. It is against the law and helps nobody. Garrus himself agrees that black/white is easy but he doesn't know what to do with grey. Something to ponder, no?

Due process =/= Justice. You don't need a trial to do the right thing.

Oh, really? I guess people may then take the law into their own hands and kill freely in vengeance's name? That leads only to chaos. The laws are there for a reason!

But they don't always work. There are loopholes in the system, and they make it possible for murderers to get out early, claiming insanity or some sh*t like that. The justice system is a joke.

Yes, because people who admit that they're criminally insane are just let go, that's how it works, because ever since codes of law were established in different western nations (Like... 200 years ago, or more), nobody ever noticed that this would be a rather easy get out of jail card.
You do realize that instead of being locked up in jail, you'll just end up locked up in a high security mental institution, do you? I'm not sure if the choice of whether you prefer to get shived by a white power guy for a pack of cigarettes or being strangled by Count Dracula because the elves told him so in his dreams constitutes a "loophole", but if you say so.

Sure, laws don't always work, but there's a reason the traditional lynchmob has gone out of style in developed countries. (Hint: It's because "Sam told me that that Jew/******/Arab/******/GuyWhoEarnsMoreThanSam/GirlWhoDidn'tWantToSleepWithSam did it, so we're going to have a nice impromptu hanging and BBQ." tends to give a suspiciously high amount of false positives)

Modifié par Flamin Jesus, 17 mai 2010 - 11:09 .

[Nightwriter]

Does cheating count?

I did technically "cheat" in ME2, or so others call it. I would never do that in real life, not without breaking it off first.

But it's a videogame, plus I'm lazy, I keep planning to go back and replay ME1 without romancing anybody but I've beaten the game so many times I keep putting it off like a chore.

[Collider]

Nightwriter wrote...

Does cheating count?

I did technically "cheat" in ME2, or so others call it. I would never do that in real life, not without breaking it off first.

But it's a videogame, plus I'm lazy, I keep planning to go back and replay ME1 without romancing anybody but I've beaten the game so many times I keep putting it off like a chore.

If you had Liara as the ME1 love interest, that would be cheating. Otherwise, wouldn't be.

[Cerrydd]

Collider wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Does cheating count?

I did technically "cheat" in ME2, or so others call it. I would never do that in real life, not without breaking it off first.

But it's a videogame, plus I'm lazy, I keep planning to go back and replay ME1 without romancing anybody but I've beaten the game so many times I keep putting it off like a chore.

If you had Liara as the ME1 love interest, that would be cheating. Otherwise, wouldn't be.

Uh oh, so I'm doomed?

I never saw it as cheating, actually. There's not much of a relationship when you spend two years dead.

[janeym27]

Cerrydd wrote...

Collider wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Does cheating count?

I did technically "cheat" in ME2, or so others call it. I would never do that in real life, not without breaking it off first.

But it's a videogame, plus I'm lazy, I keep planning to go back and replay ME1 without romancing anybody but I've beaten the game so many times I keep putting it off like a chore.

If you had Liara as the ME1 love interest, that would be cheating. Otherwise, wouldn't be.

Uh oh, so I'm doomed?

I never saw it as cheating, actually. There's not much of a relationship when you spend two years dead.

I know. And she isn't exactly "I have to have you back!". Plus, there is Feron to consider.

She's an asari. She should be OK with the idea of moving on.

[Barquiel]

janeym27 wrote...

She's an asari. She should be OK with the idea of moving on.

Well, obviously not.

Everyone else forgot about Shepard but "she couldn't let you go."

[Zombor]

Tali's trial: The Alarei is still there. The Admiralty Board is going to investigate and find out about the experiments. Admiral Xen does exactly that and emails you about it. All you do by handing over evidence is make a public spectacle of it and emotionally devastate Tali. I have no qualms lying to legal authorities to protect myself or my friends, but for those of you who do, neither of the blue/red text options are lying. You don't falsely claim not to have evidence. You make it pretty obvious you do have evidence, you just refuse to participate in a kangaroo court.

Cheating: Having boned someone two years ago usually doesn't mean you're in a committed relationship.

Modifié par Zombor, 18 mai 2010 - 12:06 .

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Cerrydd wrote...

Collider wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Does cheating count?

I did technically "cheat" in ME2, or so others call it. I would never do that in real life, not without breaking it off first.

But it's a videogame, plus I'm lazy, I keep planning to go back and replay ME1 without romancing anybody but I've beaten the game so many times I keep putting it off like a chore.

If you had Liara as the ME1 love interest, that would be cheating. Otherwise, wouldn't be.

Uh oh, so I'm doomed?

I never saw it as cheating, actually. There's not much of a relationship when you spend two years dead.

From Shepard's perspective, time has not passed.

Modifié par Dr. Peter Venkman, 18 mai 2010 - 12:08 .

[Jackal904]

I would let Garrus kill Sidonis if I didn't think that Sidonis will most likely help us out in ME3.



I think that prisoner getting beaten on Purgatory deserves the wooping, but I need the paragon points so I tell the guard to stop.



But even though I'm mostly paragon, I don't cure the genophage, I hang on to the data though. And I don't let Kasumi keep the graybox.

[scorptatious]

Cerrydd wrote...

About Sidonis, don't forget he did not kill the 10 team members himself. He joined up with Garrus because he shared the same idea as Garrus: getting rid of some mercs. He did not join up with Garrus so he could get Garrus and the rest of his team killed off in the end. He was approached by the mercs to give information on the location of the base, and was threatened he would be killed if he didn't tell. He might even be tortured, or maybe they even threatened to hurt his family (if he had one), we don't know. Sidonis might be a coward to give in to these threats, but honestly, I think a lot of other people would do the same. If Sidonis didn't give in, the mercs would've probably approached another team member to do the same. I'm not justifying what Sidonis did, but I can't blame him either. Dying for this is too much for me.

Aside from that, Garrus' loyalty mission has nothing to do with (in)justice in my opinion. Garrus feels responsible for his dead team members. Remember the e-mail from Nalah Butler, the widow of one of his mates? She writes: "I know Garrus blames himself; he took every shot fired at his squad as a failure on his part, and it was clear when he sent me the message about my husband that he thinks it was his fault.". If every shot fired as his squad is already considered as a failure, imagine what every death in his squad meant to Garrus. In turian society, leading and protecting are very important. Garrus feels like he failed in this, because "he should have seen it coming" and "now all of them are dead, because of Sidonis". So, he thinks he failed as a leader and now someone has to pay for it. However, when you let Sidonis tell his side of the story, there is more to it than "Sidonis betrayed me and that's that". Like I said, the mercs threatened him, he can't help it that he doesn't have the balls to sacrifice himself. But he never picked up a gun and murdered the team himself.

As for Sidonis trying to make it up somehow, we'll see what happens in ME3. It'll probably be an e-mail, but I don't think of Sidonis as an evil guy. He teamed up with Garrus with the right intentions, and after letting him live, he might get out of that big depression and do something useful again.

Hmm, that's true now that I think about it. Sidonis technically didn't kill the squad. So I guess I should retract my statement about the situation being related to capital punishment.

Modifié par scorptatious, 18 mai 2010 - 12:30 .

[GtarTravis]

For me, it was what to do with the council at the end of ME1. Personally, if someone was giving me a hard time doing my job simply because they refused to believe hard evidence I have given them, death to them would be my personal choice in real life (if and only if I can get away with some nefarious scheme like that in real life). However, it seems quite obvious that having them by your side will have a positive effect in ME3, same with sparing Krogan and saving the Rachni.

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

Cerrydd wrote...

Collider wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Does cheating count?

I did technically "cheat" in ME2, or so others call it. I would never do that in real life, not without breaking it off first.

But it's a videogame, plus I'm lazy, I keep planning to go back and replay ME1 without romancing anybody but I've beaten the game so many times I keep putting it off like a chore.

If you had Liara as the ME1 love interest, that would be cheating. Otherwise, wouldn't be.

Uh oh, so I'm doomed?

I never saw it as cheating, actually. There's not much of a relationship when you spend two years dead.

From Shepard's perspective, time has not passed.

Perhaps not, but waking up from an comma and seeing everyone has moved on and changed is rather an bucketful of water to the face. I can easily see why they let you have an LI in Me2. Everyone else has moved on with their lives thinking you were dead, you were left to catch up the slack, the relationship pretty much ended when you "died".

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

In Mass Effect 2, I went into space. In real life, I would barf.

[KOKitten]

I have no qualms lying to legal authorities to protect myself or my friends, but for those of you who do, neither of the blue/red text options are lying.

Besides the fact that I have large qualms regarding perjury, those options bother me even more.  I disagree with Rael's experiments.  He programmed those geth to sentience for the purpose of experimentation.  As a result every member of his crew died and his daughter was left to stand trial. 

I get that it's the quarian way to follow the ship captain and that it's the quarian way to strike a disgraced person's name from ship logs.  But it's human nature to recoil over covering up something which you view as a war crime.  Tali, herself, states that Rael's research violates their most sacred laws.  

So at the end, if you choose the Paragon/Renegade speeches, it all works out wonderfully.  Tali is exonerated; Rael's good name is safe; the fleet stays together (for now).  But who answers for what happened on the Alerei?  Rael paid with his life, yes.  But who provides answers to the families that have been left behind?  Where's their closure?

And what's learned?  Admiral Xen e-mails you that she's figured out what Rael's been up to.  Great.  Now she'll probably repeat the same experiments.  Maybe she'll succeed.  Or maybe she won't.  And maybe this time the incident won't just be isolated to one ship. 

The Admiralty Board and people can't handle the truth of what went on?  That's possible.  That's also metagaming.  At the time you could hope that the quarians could take this information as a wake-up call to show them just how far some were willing to go to reclaim their homeworld.  If the Admiralty Board was as silver-tongued as Shepard they could use this information to unite the quarians, calling upon them to set aside their differences.

Myself?  I'd rather not be kept in the dark as to what the Admirals are doing.  If I lost a loved one on the Alerei?  You can be sure I'd want to know the truth as to why that ship was overrun by geth and not hear some sugarcoated speech about the ship captain's daughter.  And I would want to know what sort of precautions were taken so that this could be prevented in the future.

Since it's a game I don't turn in the evidence but if this was a real-life situation, I'd turn in the evidence. 

[Beholderess]

Cerrydd wrote...

About Sidonis, don't forget he did not kill the 10 team members himself. He joined up with Garrus because he shared the same idea as Garrus: getting rid of some mercs. He did not join up with Garrus so he could get Garrus and the rest of his team killed off in the end. He was approached by the mercs to give information on the location of the base, and was threatened he would be killed if he didn't tell. He might even be tortured, or maybe they even threatened to hurt his family (if he had one), we don't know. Sidonis might be a coward to give in to these threats, but honestly, I think a lot of other people would do the same. If Sidonis didn't give in, the mercs would've probably approached another team member to do the same. I'm not justifying what Sidonis did, but I can't blame him either. Dying for this is too much for me.

Aside from that, Garrus' loyalty mission has nothing to do with (in)justice in my opinion. Garrus feels responsible for his dead team members. Remember the e-mail from Nalah Butler, the widow of one of his mates? She writes: "I know Garrus blames himself; he took every shot fired at his squad as a failure on his part, and it was clear when he sent me the message about my husband that he thinks it was his fault.". If every shot fired as his squad is already considered as a failure, imagine what every death in his squad meant to Garrus. In turian society, leading and protecting are very important. Garrus feels like he failed in this, because "he should have seen it coming" and "now all of them are dead, because of Sidonis". So, he thinks he failed as a leader and now someone has to pay for it. However, when you let Sidonis tell his side of the story, there is more to it than "Sidonis betrayed me and that's that". Like I said, the mercs threatened him, he can't help it that he doesn't have the balls to sacrifice himself. But he never picked up a gun and murdered the team himself.

As for Sidonis trying to make it up somehow, we'll see what happens in ME3. It'll probably be an e-mail, but I don't think of Sidonis as an evil guy. He teamed up with Garrus with the right intentions, and after letting him live, he might get out of that big depression and do something useful again.

Well, if Sidonis is so afraid of being killed, he shouldn't have joined Garrus's squad. After all, getting killed in a fight is always a possibility, a risk he took willingly.
If his family was threatened, then a case could be made for Sidonis. Actually, I kind of expected to learn of something like that when speaking to him the first time. It would make situation a lot less black and white. However, after speaking with Sidonis it turned out that situation is indeed black and white. He choose to pay for his life with the lives of 10 men who trusted him, and that's all.
Again, getting killed was a known risk. Don't have courage - don't join in the first place.

[Cerrydd]

Beholderess wrote...

Well, if Sidonis is so afraid of being killed, he shouldn't have joined Garrus's squad. After all, getting killed in a fight is always a possibility, a risk he took willingly.
If his family was threatened, then a case could be made for Sidonis. Actually, I kind of expected to learn of something like that when speaking to him the first time. It would make situation a lot less black and white. However, after speaking with Sidonis it turned out that situation is indeed black and white. He choose to pay for his life with the lives of 10 men who trusted him, and that's all.
Again, getting killed was a known risk. Don't have courage - don't join in the first place.

You do have a point there. But does every soldier have a death wish? You'd expect to die in battle, but most will do anything to survive. It would be very noble of Sidonis if he decided to sacrifice himself to postpone a merc attack on the base, but he chose to take the easy way. When you let Garrus take the shot as soon as possible, Sidonis will walk away. He wants to survive. When you first let him talk, he will accept his death and stand still for Garrus to take his shot.

The thing that matters to me is that Sidonis is fully aware of the consequences of him cowarding out. He knows exactly why those 10 men are dead; he chose to live, resulting in their deaths. He feels very bad because of it, he regrets what he has done, but there's nothing he can do about it now. He can either accept his death and let Garrus do his suicide for him (sometimes he wishes it's over, but again he doesn't have the balls to do it himself), or move on and do something useful. I choose to give him a second chance, because I know he's not an evil villain, simply a coward.

Things would be different if he approached the mercs himself to get rid of Garrus. But that's not the case here. If he screws up in ME3, I won't have mercy on him, but I don't expect that to happen. I just hope he'll find a job that takes less courage to do.

[Beholderess]

Cerrydd wrote...

Beholderess wrote...

Well, if Sidonis is so afraid of being killed, he shouldn't have joined Garrus's squad. After all, getting killed in a fight is always a possibility, a risk he took willingly.
If his family was threatened, then a case could be made for Sidonis. Actually, I kind of expected to learn of something like that when speaking to him the first time. It would make situation a lot less black and white. However, after speaking with Sidonis it turned out that situation is indeed black and white. He choose to pay for his life with the lives of 10 men who trusted him, and that's all.
Again, getting killed was a known risk. Don't have courage - don't join in the first place.

You do have a point there. But does every soldier have a death wish? You'd expect to die in battle, but most will do anything to survive. It would be very noble of Sidonis if he decided to sacrifice himself to postpone a merc attack on the base, but he chose to take the easy way. When you let Garrus take the shot as soon as possible, Sidonis will walk away. He wants to survive. When you first let him talk, he will accept his death and stand still for Garrus to take his shot.

The thing that matters to me is that Sidonis is fully aware of the consequences of him cowarding out. He knows exactly why those 10 men are dead; he chose to live, resulting in their deaths. He feels very bad because of it, he regrets what he has done, but there's nothing he can do about it now. He can either accept his death and let Garrus do his suicide for him (sometimes he wishes it's over, but again he doesn't have the balls to do it himself), or move on and do something useful. I choose to give him a second chance, because I know he's not an evil villain, simply a coward.

Things would be different if he approached the mercs himself to get rid of Garrus. But that's not the case here. If he screws up in ME3, I won't have mercy on him, but I don't expect that to happen. I just hope he'll find a job that takes less courage to do.

Well, there is a word for soldiers who's cowardice gets their entire company killed. I do not know much about military laws, but don't they face charges with a very serios penalties? Besides, are we speaking of drafted soldiers or volunteers? This distinction is quite important to me when speaking about morality of such actions.

Another thing - if I remember correctly, Sidonis led Garrus from the base after being threatened? So, he wasn't in an immediate danger when speaking with Garrus, and could choose to take a risk and tell him about the situation. It's one thing to give in in face of an immediate threat - survival instinct and so on, and another to go on with betrayal once he had time to think and was not in danger of being killed right now.

As for letting Sidonis go - it is a right thing to do. Killing him is a right thing to do too. The first serves mercy, the second - justice, both are right. Most of the times I prefer mercy, by the way. Just not in this particular instance.

Besides...Garrus deserves his closure. It is his duty - to look after his squad. All of them.

[Pacifien]

Zombor wrote...
Tali's trial: The Alarei is still there. The Admiralty Board is going to investigate and find out about the experiments. Admiral Xen does exactly that and emails you about it. All you do by handing over evidence is make a public spectacle of it and emotionally devastate Tali. I have no qualms lying to legal authorities to protect myself or my friends, but for those of you who do, neither of the blue/red text options are lying. You don't falsely claim not to have evidence. You make it pretty obvious you do have evidence, you just refuse to participate in a kangaroo court.

Since I'm thinking of the choices in relation to who I am in real life, while the paragon/renegade options do help Tali without ever directly addressing what happened on the Alarei, I have to admit this is something would likely not have occurred to me to try without a prompt. I usually try to keep my debates and arguments focused on the initial topic, not misdirect everyone's attentions to a different issue. Good thing I'm not a lawyer.

In any case, part of what irks me about the experiments on the Alarei and the Admiralty Board is that it's all happening behind closed doors. The isolation is what let Rael'Zorah get away with his questionable techniques in the first place. The Admiralty infighting probably needs greater exposure to the entire populace. So yes, revealing the evidence creates a huge spectacle, but a necessary one in the name of full disclosure to the populace.

Of course, there's something to be said about ignorance is bliss.

I should probably mention that I didn't actually hand over the evidence in my game, nor am I likely to in future playthroughs.

[Xeranx]

Beholderess wrote...

Cerrydd wrote...

Beholderess wrote...

Well, if Sidonis is so afraid of being killed, he shouldn't have joined Garrus's squad. After all, getting killed in a fight is always a possibility, a risk he took willingly.
If his family was threatened, then a case could be made for Sidonis. Actually, I kind of expected to learn of something like that when speaking to him the first time. It would make situation a lot less black and white. However, after speaking with Sidonis it turned out that situation is indeed black and white. He choose to pay for his life with the lives of 10 men who trusted him, and that's all.
Again, getting killed was a known risk. Don't have courage - don't join in the first place.

You do have a point there. But does every soldier have a death wish? You'd expect to die in battle, but most will do anything to survive. It would be very noble of Sidonis if he decided to sacrifice himself to postpone a merc attack on the base, but he chose to take the easy way. When you let Garrus take the shot as soon as possible, Sidonis will walk away. He wants to survive. When you first let him talk, he will accept his death and stand still for Garrus to take his shot.

The thing that matters to me is that Sidonis is fully aware of the consequences of him cowarding out. He knows exactly why those 10 men are dead; he chose to live, resulting in their deaths. He feels very bad because of it, he regrets what he has done, but there's nothing he can do about it now. He can either accept his death and let Garrus do his suicide for him (sometimes he wishes it's over, but again he doesn't have the balls to do it himself), or move on and do something useful. I choose to give him a second chance, because I know he's not an evil villain, simply a coward.

Things would be different if he approached the mercs himself to get rid of Garrus. But that's not the case here. If he screws up in ME3, I won't have mercy on him, but I don't expect that to happen. I just hope he'll find a job that takes less courage to do.

Well, there is a word for soldiers who's cowardice gets their entire company killed. I do not know much about military laws, but don't they face charges with a very serios penalties? Besides, are we speaking of drafted soldiers or volunteers? This distinction is quite important to me when speaking about morality of such actions.

Another thing - if I remember correctly, Sidonis led Garrus from the base after being threatened? So, he wasn't in an immediate danger when speaking with Garrus, and could choose to take a risk and tell him about the situation. It's one thing to give in in face of an immediate threat - survival instinct and so on, and another to go on with betrayal once he had time to think and was not in danger of being killed right now.

As for letting Sidonis go - it is a right thing to do. Killing him is a right thing to do too. The first serves mercy, the second - justice, both are right. Most of the times I prefer mercy, by the way. Just not in this particular instance.

Besides...Garrus deserves his closure. It is his duty - to look after his squad. All of them.

Funny enough, a scene similar to this played out in "Chuck".  I don't know how many people watch that show, but there was an episode where a soldier led Adam Baldwin's character away from playing cards with the rest of his squad to deal with another character in a holding cell (which the soldier killed already).  The soldier, being left alone, killed all those around the card table and left.  The reason he didn't kill Adam Baldwin's character?  He saved his life.