159 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

ReggarBlane wrote...

Canon fights are for Star Wars because Lucas claims that [his] canon is the end-all/beat-all most important thing in Star Wars.

Greedo shot first.

[camcon2100]

i honestly take it as though Anderson is going to do alot more than he could on the council. Honestly do any of you actually want him in the position with those council idiots. The choice to put him on the council was a mistake on shepards part because he cant do anything from there. I respect there decision about this! Makes a better plot for ME3!!!!!!!!

[Mars Nova]

I just read the part where it describes Anderson as Councilor Udina's adviser, and I am very disappointed and upset with Bioware right now. Until this time, the books had done a great job of not mentioning events where a player's choice impacted the outcome, or at least keeping the mentions vague.



But referring to Anderson as Councilor Udina's advisor is inexcusable. It shows blatant disregard for the choices of the player, making them feel like their decisions don't really matter. And it won't be simply fixed by saying in ME3 that Anderson stepped down or was ousted shortly before the events of the book. That would be taking the easy way out, and I expect more from Bioware.



I suppose I should have seen the red flags as soon as the prologue, when the book made several references that seemed to be leaning towards certain decisions: the line about the Alliance groveling at their alien masters, salvage from the Collector base, the restructuring of the Council.



I am shocked and saddened that Drew, who otherwise has done such an excellent job writing the books, has done this, especially given he was the lead writer for both ME1 and ME2. I'm going to continue to read the book and support Mass Effect, but I'm not forgetting about this. I want some answers.

[dreman9999]

Mars Nova wrote...

I just read the part where it describes Anderson as Councilor Udina's adviser, and I am very disappointed and upset with Bioware right now. Until this time, the books had done a great job of not mentioning events where a player's choice impacted the outcome, or at least keeping the mentions vague.

But referring to Anderson as Councilor Udina's advisor is inexcusable. It shows blatant disregard for the choices of the player, making them feel like their decisions don't really matter. And it won't be simply fixed by saying in ME3 that Anderson stepped down or was ousted shortly before the events of the book. That would be taking the easy way out, and I expect more from Bioware.

I suppose I should have seen the red flags as soon as the prologue, when the book made several references that seemed to be leaning towards certain decisions: the line about the Alliance groveling at their alien masters, salvage from the Collector base, the restructuring of the Council.

I am shocked and saddened that Drew, who otherwise has done such an excellent job writing the books, has done this, especially given he was the lead writer for both ME1 and ME2. I'm going to continue to read the book and support Mass Effect, but I'm not forgetting about this. I want some answers.

..........If you keep read you'll understand that it doesn't matter.

[Asheer_Khan]

Mars Nova wrote...

I just read the part where it describes Anderson as Councilor Udina's adviser, and I am very disappointed and upset with Bioware right now. Until this time, the books had done a great job of not mentioning events where a player's choice impacted the outcome, or at least keeping the mentions vague.

But referring to Anderson as Councilor Udina's advisor is inexcusable. It shows blatant disregard for the choices of the player, making them feel like their decisions don't really matter. And it won't be simply fixed by saying in ME3 that Anderson stepped down or was ousted shortly before the events of the book. That would be taking the easy way out, and I expect more from Bioware.

I suppose I should have seen the red flags as soon as the prologue, when the book made several references that seemed to be leaning towards certain decisions: the line about the Alliance groveling at their alien masters, salvage from the Collector base, the restructuring of the Council.

I am shocked and saddened that Drew, who otherwise has done such an excellent job writing the books, has done this, especially given he was the lead writer for both ME1 and ME2. I'm going to continue to read the book and support Mass Effect, but I'm not forgetting about this. I want some answers.

I think since Drew K. was removed as lead writer he was free to pursit his own "line of events" in ME universe and books are more or less Alternative Universe to games than canon for them since Drew from the very beginning shows cerberus in very bad light ... 

Similar to post RoTJ books which were official deny by Lucas ("AH YES Star Wars books showing how Luke's life could go after Battle on Endor.... i have rejected that claim" ) as official continuation of the story.

Same case is when comes to ME books and ME games .
Of course devs can use some book events in game but it's sure that those books are not essential for over all gameplay.

[KainrycKarr]

Asheer_Khan wrote...

Mars Nova wrote...

I just read the part where it describes Anderson as Councilor Udina's adviser, and I am very disappointed and upset with Bioware right now. Until this time, the books had done a great job of not mentioning events where a player's choice impacted the outcome, or at least keeping the mentions vague.

But referring to Anderson as Councilor Udina's advisor is inexcusable. It shows blatant disregard for the choices of the player, making them feel like their decisions don't really matter. And it won't be simply fixed by saying in ME3 that Anderson stepped down or was ousted shortly before the events of the book. That would be taking the easy way out, and I expect more from Bioware.

I suppose I should have seen the red flags as soon as the prologue, when the book made several references that seemed to be leaning towards certain decisions: the line about the Alliance groveling at their alien masters, salvage from the Collector base, the restructuring of the Council.

I am shocked and saddened that Drew, who otherwise has done such an excellent job writing the books, has done this, especially given he was the lead writer for both ME1 and ME2. I'm going to continue to read the book and support Mass Effect, but I'm not forgetting about this. I want some answers.

I think since Drew K. was removed as lead writer he was free to pursit his own "line of events" in ME universe and books are more or less Alternative Universe to games than canon for them since Drew from the very beginning shows cerberus in very bad light ... 

Similar to post RoTJ books which were official deny by Lucas ("AH YES Star Wars books showing how Luke's life could go after Battle on Endor.... i have rejected that claim" ) as official continuation of the story.

Same case is when comes to ME books and ME games .
Of course devs can use some book events in game but it's sure that those books are not essential for over all gameplay.

Off topic, but that is 100% false.

[Ulicus]

didymos1120 wrote...

Here's my guess on the Anderson situation:

As we saw, he wasn't the most effective Councilor.  He just hates playing the political game too much, and he keeps insisting that the Reapers are coming, which nobody in the political hierarchy, human or alien, is interested in hearing about.  He's also a bit of a loose cannon: not informing anyone in the Alliance about inviting Shepard by for a private meeting with the Council, defying Udina in ME1 and aiding what effectively was a mutiny, etc.   These things may have been allowed to slide for various reasons, but they couldn't have possibly met with universal acclaim from Alliance officials, and you can bet a lot of aliens didn't like them either, even if on average they were grateful for Saren's defeat.   We also have to keep in mind that a Councilor is the representative for their species, even if officially they're supposed to be impartial and above-it-all.  He's humanity's representative:  i.e.  he doesn't really "belong" to himself, and he can't just ignore public or Alliance opinion.

So, I'm thinking that for a Shep who selected Anderson as Councilor, the story come ME3 will be that Udina and other like minded individuals in both the Alliance and the Citadel politically outmaneuvered Anderson and made it so he just plain couldn't function as a Councilor. It's not like the position makes one King/Queen of humanity, and people aren't just going to obey your every whim and cooperate with whatever agenda you may have.  So, if it got into a situation where the top Alliance officials, military and civilian,  just plain lacked confidence in Anderson-as-Councilor and were engaging in obstructionism and the like, and the nature of the situation became clear to the other Councilors, Anderson would pretty much have to step down. 

Now, they of course wouldn't want to disgrace him.  He's still one of humanity's heroes and respected for his military service and role in Saren's defeat, however unorthodox the latter was.  So, instead, they promote him to Admiral and simultaneously demote him to Citadel diplomat and advisor to the newly-installed Councilor Udina.  It's still a prestigious position and saves some face for all involved, and neatly gets him out the way and into a position where he's got much less freedom and (theoretically) less ability to cause problems.

Of course, that can't go into the novel.  To explain it in that fashion would irrevocably canonize the "Councilor Anderson" choice.  But, as the novel stands, they actually can accomodate either choice:  either Anderson always was subordinate to Udina, or he was ousted shortly after the events of ME2 and replaced by Udina.  For the latter case, all that needs be done is to add some expository dialogue to that effect in ME3 if you chose Anderson.

This. I've really admired Drew's ability to make sure each novel works with everyone's game, regardless of their choices, so I would hope we get some sort of expository dialogue in ME3 explaining why the situation is as it is in Retribution.

Taranatar9 wrote...

If they wanted to enforce an Udina as councillor outcome, they already passed on a perfectly good and logical way to do it.

"We
appreciate your recommendation, Shepard, but the voters of the Alliance
decided otherwise. Like it or not, that's how the system works,
right?".

This would, of course, been 1000X better... though I bet half the fanbase would have ****ed about it. <_<

Modifié par Ulicus, 31 juillet 2010 - 02:43 .

[AresXX7]

Mars Nova wrote...

I just read the part where it describes Anderson as Councilor Udina's adviser, and I am very disappointed and upset with Bioware right now. Until this time, the books had done a great job of not mentioning events where a player's choice impacted the outcome, or at least keeping the mentions vague.

But referring to Anderson as Councilor Udina's advisor is inexcusable. It shows blatant disregard for the choices of the player, making them feel like their decisions don't really matter. And it won't be simply fixed by saying in ME3 that Anderson stepped down or was ousted shortly before the events of the book. That would be taking the easy way out, and I expect more from Bioware.

I suppose I should have seen the red flags as soon as the prologue, when the book made several references that seemed to be leaning towards certain decisions: the line about the Alliance groveling at their alien masters, salvage from the Collector base, the restructuring of the Council.

I am shocked and saddened that Drew, who otherwise has done such an excellent job writing the books, has done this, especially given he was the lead writer for both ME1 and ME2. I'm going to continue to read the book and support Mass Effect, but I'm not forgetting about this. I want some answers.

there is one sidenote to consider in this, it would be a lot easier for Anderson to quit & get involved if he were only an advisor, rather than an actual council member

and, as far as salvaging from the collector base, what makes sense for me is, when you salvage something in the game for credits, someone had to pay you for it, so why wouldn't they get the salvaged items as well

in other words, it is never mentioned whether or not the base was intact following the events of ME2

Modifié par AriesXX7, 31 juillet 2010 - 02:55 .

[Mars Nova]

I'm not arguing about the Collector base, I never had a problem with the reference to salvage. TBH, a lot of that post was a knee jerk reaction. I was very upset, but I've gotten over it now and I'm willing to chalk it up to human error on Drew's part rather than a deliberate attempt to enforce a canon when it comes to in-game choices.



Having finished the book, I'm glad to see that it looks like Anderson will be more of a force in ME3, and I can appreciate the book for being what it is: a fantastic look into not only the ME universe, but also an insight into Reaper indoctrination, and a kick-ass lead-in to ME3. Speaking of ME3, I've got a feeling we'll be seeing Kai Leng as a squadmate.

[javierabegazo]

http://social.biowar...5/index/3263041

Lets try and move into one thread now shall we?