1700 réponses à ce sujet

[Jebel Krong]

Xeranx wrote...

That's a flawed argument considering the stated fact that ME2 is about the characters and Mass Effect (ME1) wasn't stated to be character driven.  If I'm going to get a story that's supposed to be about the characters and is supposed to be character driven then the characters should have more say in anything that happens.  

it's not - because the characters do. what they don't do is make odd comments in a few places when you're walking around - the important things are done interacting in conversations.

[glacier1701]

Il Divo wrote...

 snip...

2) There ultimately is no evidence of Reapers. Yes, the Council claims to have believed Shepard at the closing of ME1. But what new evidence came forth? They conceded Saren was a danger, that he was leading the Geth/using the Reapers to manipulate them, and that it was a priority to beat him to the Conduit. They also already possessed prior knowledge of Sovereign, which they mentioned before sending Shepard off to chase Saren. This was all at the start of your quest. So excluding the Prothean visions, conversation with Sovereign, and Vigil's beacon, which no one else has access to, what new evidence can you point to? There must be something if we can make the claim that the Council is acting stupid/out of character.

 Actually there is:

 (1) In ME2 we come across a number of worlds which have had civilisations on them that pre-date the Protheans yet show signs of having being bombarded from orbit. This is NOT clear evidence of Reapers as it could be said that what it shows is that 2 species went to war and one lost BUT isn't that basically what happens when the Reapers come? It is something that from remarks made by Liara in ME1 could easily fall into a pattern that we believe occurs with Reaper occurences. Note that while we see this information as we move across the Galaxy in ME2 the data presented shows that this was not something Shepard found but had already been discovered PRIOR to ME1 in all cases. Its just the interpretation put upon the evidence that is in question.

(2) The Keepers. Chorban (if you did the quest in ME1) comes up with evidence that shows that the Keepers have been around for MILLIONS of years and that the technology involved with them MATCHES that which shows up in Sovereign. Chorban contacts Shepard and makes the statement that no-one on the Citadel listens. The timing of that message is such that it seems clear that he has been trying to get people to look at his results for a good part of the time that Shepard was 'dead'. In other words there is clear cut evidence that Sovereign is NOT Geth since in no way can a few hundred years can be equated to a few million years.

(3) Dragon's Teeth. Even in ME1 we KNOW that these things that make husks are OLDER than the Geth. We run into a colony that discovered these things buried and of a date that suggests hundreds of thousands of years. Yet they are automatically thought of as being Geth even though once again the dates do not match up. I do not recall anyone trying to analyse these things but considering how many were on Eden Prime (for example) and left behind it should be clear enough that there would be similarities between Sovereign and the Teeth and once again BECAUSE of dating makes it clear that Sovereign is NOT Geth and that Shepard has a very valid point.


 So quite frankly there is enough evidence out their that fits into their actually being Reapers. It is clearly being ignored as no-one wants to go looking to see if it actually is what Shepard says it is. What we get is a clear denial of evidence found by people OTHER than Shepard that fits the Reaper theory. I would say that that is shows the Council is idiotic.

[Slayer299]

Jebel Krong wrote...
It's not - because the characters do. what they don't do is make odd comments in a few places when you're walking around - the important things are done interacting in conversations.

I disagree with you there. Just interacting with the char's when you speak with them isn't the only important things, they are supposed to be individuals, not just silent automatons. Look at DAO, those 'odd comments' actually added a sense that they were alive and reacting to things/people, not just standing/following you around.

Granted, it woud get annoying if it happened constantly, but for a 'charachter driven story', the non-interaction is just resoundingly loud. For two examples though; look at Jacob's resentment of Thane or even the more, better known Miranda/Jack. Don't you think either one would have something to say on the others LM??

[lazuli]

Slayer299 wrote...

Granted, it woud get annoying if it happened constantly, but for a 'charachter driven story', the non-interaction is just resoundingly loud. For two examples though; look at Jacob's resentment of Thane or even the more, better known Miranda/Jack. Don't you think either one would have something to say on the others LM??

I agree that more character interaction would be nice.  Jack does have a special comment on Miranda's loyalty mission though.  She likes Enyala.

[SimonTheFrog]

glacier1701 wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

 snip...

  snip...

I would say that that is shows the Council is idiotic.

I would say their ignorance is a plot-device :innocent:

[Il Divo]

glacier1701 wrote...

 (1) In ME2 we come across a number of worlds which have had civilisations on them that pre-date the Protheans yet show signs of having being bombarded from orbit. This is NOT clear evidence of Reapers as it could be said that what it shows is that 2 species went to war and one lost BUT isn't that basically what happens when the Reapers come? It is something that from remarks made by Liara in ME1 could easily fall into a pattern that we believe occurs with Reaper occurences. Note that while we see this information as we move across the Galaxy in ME2 the data presented shows that this was not something Shepard found but had already been discovered PRIOR to ME1 in all cases. Its just the interpretation put upon the evidence that is in question.

True, but how does this even prove Reapers exist? You're providing circumstantial evidence. Yes, Reapers could exist...or two civilizations (both now extinct) could have fought with one emerging the victor.

(2) The Keepers. Chorban (if you did the quest in ME1) comes up with evidence that shows that the Keepers have been around for MILLIONS of years and that the technology involved with them MATCHES that which shows up in Sovereign. Chorban contacts Shepard and makes the statement that no-one on the Citadel listens. The timing of that message is such that it seems clear that he has been trying to get people to look at his results for a good part of the time that Shepard was 'dead'. In other words there is clear cut evidence that Sovereign is NOT Geth since in no way can a few hundred years can be equated to a few million years.

The key words being the underlined. As you also point out, Shepard (the leading proponent of the Reaper theory) is dead. The Council thinks this is over with. Scientist or not, if I came up to you and said that I'd done research and had scientific evidence that vampires are real and coming to destroy us, would you (as a head of government) be inclined to spend your time considering my theories, especially when my own scientific experts could not identify the same?
 
I would also like to point out that while this is an interesting point, it's also not valid in any playthroughs where the quest is ignored or Chorban is killed, meaning there is less evidence to consider depending on the playthrough.

(3) Dragon's Teeth. Even in ME1 we KNOW that these things that make husks are OLDER than the Geth. We run into a colony that discovered these things buried and of a date that suggests hundreds of thousands of years. Yet they are automatically thought of as being Geth even though once again the dates do not match up. I do not recall anyone trying to analyse these things but considering how many were on Eden Prime (for example) and left behind it should be clear enough that there would be similarities between Sovereign and the Teeth and once again BECAUSE of dating makes it clear that Sovereign is NOT Geth and that Shepard has a very valid point.

Yet, if I recall correctly, as per the Salarian Councilor's words, not enough of Sovereign was obtained to identify it as being anything beyond a potential geth construction. This is also bearing in mind that the Geth have not been seen beyond the veil in over 300 years. Therefore, we are not fully aware what technological advances they could have attained.



Keep in mind this same argument can be applied at the start of Mass Effect 1. No one chooses to analyze the husks to see if they are centuries old. And (unlike Sovereign) the Dragon's teeth are not substantially damaged in any way, so there is even less of an excuse not to have analyzed the Dragon's teeth. So if anything, your argument is simultaneously criticizing Mass Effect as well.

 So quite frankly there is enough evidence out their that fits into their actually being Reapers. It is clearly being ignored as no-one wants to go looking to see if it actually is what Shepard says it is. What we get is a clear denial of evidence found by people OTHER than Shepard that fits the Reaper theory. I would say that that is shows the Council is idiotic.

I wouldn't want to go looking either. Tenacity is not uncommon in human beings. We like to cling strongly to certain everyday beliefs and avoid others, especially those which can potentially upset our every day habits. If the vast majority of the galaxy believes there are no Reapers, for their sakes as well as my own I wouldn't want to consider the idea that they are real. I wouldn't want to go looking for evidence that they are real.

If I accept the existence of Reapers, that means my existence is entirely a lie, a fabrication created by my rulers. It also means that my existence as well as every other organic being's is currently being threatened. It's the equivalent of someone telling you that you're plugged into the Matrix. If that were true, would you want to know? Do you think your mind could fathom the full extent of that belief? I can't guarantee that my own mind would come out whole. And so, I can't say I'd want to see any evidence, large or small, of that belief.

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 novembre 2010 - 04:57 .

[Lord Nicholai]

I agree with IL Divo. There isn't any solid proof that Reapers exist. Just because something is a little (okay in some cases more than a little ) out of the ordinary, it's not that sensible to just jump to the conculsion that its all the result of an ancient race of super machines hell-bent on wiping out the galaxy. Give me a few weeks and I could provide proof that aliens exist and are coming to Earth to suck out our brains by the year 2015. If I were a war hero would you believe me, or just think I'm a nutter?

[Nightwriter]

iakus wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Ha. Last post in on the "ME2 sucked as a middle chapter" thread. Always satisfying.

iakus, have you considered we may have been expecting too much, or that we had incorrect expectations? What if we did? Maybe I was just wrong and I'm not seeing it in the right way.

Perish the thought we get more than one thread pointing out the weaknesses of the game

Anyway, that was actually my first thought after I finished ME 2 for the first time.  "Maybe it was rose colored glasses"  Or perhaps I was missing something.  That's why I started a fresh game and ran through ME 1 followed by ME 2.  Nope.  The difference is striking.

For one thing, I may never forgive Bioware for the personal terminal and its neverending supply of email.

As to it being a poor sequel, I certainly stand by it.  It should have been possible to create a sequel that didn't require a) Shepard to die  The Council to turn into a bunch of idiots and c) Shepard's old allies to turn unexpectedly cold and hostile.  I ended up feeling like the writers had the story they wanted but had to bang the puzzle pieces with a hammer to make them fit into the story they arleady told.  It simply didn't flow naturally.

Now as to the story itself:

I admit that creating a "character-centric" story would not have been my first choice as a sequel.  But I've seen it done well before.  I could deal with that part. 

The problem here is that character development takes place almost entirely within the loyalty missions.  Now the loyalty missions are mostly done well (Grunt's is kinda lame.  Jacob's had continuity problems)  Bioware has a long history of creating "personal missions" in their games, from Dragon Age to Baldur's Gate.  And it's a good thing.  It lets us see what made these characters into the people they are.  We get to step into their world and maybe make better (or worse).  Mass Effect 2 is no different.

That's the problem.

These Loyalty Missions are really no different thatn the "personal mission" sidequests from previous games.  Notice the emphasis.  However nice they are, however they get classified in the journal, they're still sidequests.  By themselves, they cannot carry a game.  Personal missions show something of what the character was.  Interaction and banter show us how the character is now.   Yet this "character-centric" game is expected to get by with that one mission and little else.  Even games from a decade ago like Baldur's Gate had interaction.  In ME 2, most of the character's personality is what kind of ammo powers they have.

If the game was like Jade Empire and only allowed one companion, it might not have been so obvious.  Or if it had a stronger plot which focused our attention on the Collectors, we might have forgiven the lack of characterization.  But no, they focused the spotlight on the characters, and gave us a bunch of colorful, yet isolated squadmates.  Like a box of crayons, each in their own little holder.

As usual, I agree with you.

If you are going to make a character focused game, I do not think you should make the whole game about sidequests. Rather, you should weave each character's story into the main storyline.

[Nightwriter]

Lumikki wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

iakus wrote...

Yeah, if the game's about the charaacters, make the game about the characters.

I mean, how cool would it have been if, every once in a while, when you go into Zaed's compartment, you find Grunt sitting there too, listening to Zaed's war stories?

If Jack's loyalty mission was changed into a more "My Fair Lady" type story where she's trying to fit into society.  Maybe have  a scene where Shepard's escorting her through the Normandy and she's trying to actually talk to the crew, keeping her profanities to a minimum (With Engineer Donnelly so flabbergasted he blurts out something inappropriate, hunches his shoulders and mutters "pleasedontkillme")

If Samara and Garrus in in the squad together, they talk about past activities, with Samara clearly trying to decide if this turian vigilante needs killing

Jacob trying to get under Thane's skin.  Thane praying for patience

Miranda with Jack or Tali trading insuilts (particularly of one is the LI)

Morinth hitting on...everyone (possibly including Legion, much to his bemusement)

The possibilites go on and on.  Ah, wasted potential. 

x 2.

There really is no price on character interaction. None. If they had set up interesting inter-character stories and relationships I wouldn't have even cared about the story. The game would've been carried by the characters and their interactions alone.

Interesting.

This is not what I would ever want, because it's phony, like over emotional behaviors. In reality people are not that emotional or interesting. I want more real life like people, not this over emotional acting to increase players interest. Meaning there is different between increase game enviroment feel more alive and over do it with unrealistic stuff.

It's little like DA2 is doing the graphics, the "cool" affect are over done there, the problem is that it doesn't feel anymore right. It's over done, exaggerated. The Normandy crew and squad members are not like family where everyone is close to each others, they just do they jobs.

My point is, I don't want, what you two seem to want, because it makes my gameplay experience worst. I do agree little bit more would be nice, more like they work related talk, but not like suggested here, it's just over done. Normal people don't behave that way, mostly people are very booring. Having so many not normal people in same place, makes hole situation unrealistic, extreme, phony.

Lumikki, trust me, by now we know you do not want what we want, lol.

If you don't want a game where characters acknowledge each other, it's fine. I know different people have different tastes. Myself, I like good character interaction.

[AdmiralCheez]

Nightwriter wrote...

Lumikki, trust me, by now we know you do not want what we want, lol.

If you don't want a game where characters acknowledge each other, it's fine. I know different people have different tastes. Myself, I like good character interaction.

Agreed.  Or maybe just more character REACTION.  I don't know how many times I walked past a couple krogans talking about killing turians and salarians while I had both Mordin and Garrus in my squad.  I was expecting at least one of them to drop a short quip, but nope, nothing.

[QwertyQwerty]

My only complaint was that the story line was to fixated on helping your squad mates with their personal matters...

Modifié par QwertyQwerty, 08 novembre 2010 - 08:56 .

[Nightwriter]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Lumikki, trust me, by now we know you do not want what we want, lol.

If you don't want a game where characters acknowledge each other, it's fine. I know different people have different tastes. Myself, I like good character interaction.

Agreed.  Or maybe just more character REACTION.  I don't know how many times I walked past a couple krogans talking about killing turians and salarians while I had both Mordin and Garrus in my squad.  I was expecting at least one of them to drop a short quip, but nope, nothing.

I know.

[Iakus]

Lumikki wrote...
Interesting.

This is not what I would ever want, because it's phony, like over emotional behaviors. In reality people are not that emotional or interesting. I want more real life like people, not this over emotional acting to increase players interest. Meaning there is different between increase game enviroment feel more alive and over do it with unrealistic stuff.

It's little like DA2 is doing the graphics, the "cool" affect are over done there, the problem is that it doesn't feel anymore right. It's over done, exaggerated. The Normandy crew and squad members are not like family where everyone is close to each others, they just do they jobs.

How would character interaction be "phony"?  I'm not saying the characters should all grow to like each other.  That would be phony.  Some I think would get along.  Others not so much.  But they should all learn to at least get along.  Good teams don't just magically meld together by proximity.  They work together, train together, get to know each other to the point where they can anticipate each others reactions.  The point of the objective isn't to bring a group of lone gunmen on this mission.  It's to bring a well-prepared team.

My point is, I don't want, what you two seem to want, because it makes my gameplay experience worst. I do agree little bit more would be nice, more like they work related talk, but not like suggested here, it's just over done. Normal people don't behave that way, mostly people are very booring. Having so many not normal people in same place, makes hole situation unrealistic, extreme, phony.

And here I thought the characters were already overdone, and I was trying to bring them back to more "human" levels

[Nightwriter]

I think Lumikki may be envisioning some emo soap opera in space. That's definitely not what we're asking for, Lumikki.

[Slayer299]

lazuli wrote...

Slayer299 wrote...

Granted, it woud get annoying if it happened constantly, but for a 'charachter driven story', the non-interaction is just resoundingly loud. For two examples though; look at Jacob's resentment of Thane or even the more, better known Miranda/Jack. Don't you think either one would have something to say on the others LM??

I agree that more character interaction would be nice.  Jack does have a special comment on Miranda's loyalty mission though.  She likes Enyala.

Does she? I must have missed that. Cool, now I have to go check an old save and try it to see, thanks!

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...
1) Your judgment has no standing in any renegade scenario. Udina was the only one to make any positive claim regarding the Reapers. However, Udina's word is not law, he is not the human council. It's also completely within his character to stab you in the back, as he's done before, showing that he's not above lying to get what he wants. Any claims you can make regarding how the previous Council believed Shepard/understood his theory on the Reapers died with them.

But there were other witnesses.  Heck, if Udina believes, who wouldn't at this point?     Udina may stab Shep in the back for personal gain, but would he let the galaxy die for petty ambition?   I mean, Commander Shepard, in the course of his adventures, demonstrated that:

1)  The Council's top Spectre was a traitor
2)  That the rachni were less extinct than the Council thought (and the situation may have been rectified)
3)  There's a huge intrelligent plant-creature that could take control of people, predates the Protheans, and oh yeah, now I understand Prothean
4)  Has found the Mu Relay, thought lost for millenia
5) Found what is likely the largest Prothean cache ever uncovered, complete with a functional Conduit, which the Council had "dismissed those claims" for most of the game

If in addition Shep predicts an impending invasion of sentient intelligent starships, I'd pay attention.

2) There ultimately is no evidence of Reapers. Yes, the Council claims to have believed Shepard at the closing of ME1. But what new evidence came forth? They conceded Saren was a danger, that he was leading the Geth/using the Reapers to manipulate them, and that it was a priority to beat him to the Conduit. They also already possessed prior knowledge of Sovereign, which they mentioned before sending Shepard off to chase Saren. This was all at the start of your quest. So excluding the Prothean visions, conversation with Sovereign, and Vigil's beacon, which no one else has access to, what new evidence can you point to? There must be something if we can make the claim that the Council is acting stupid/out of character.

Besides the fact that a Reaper actually attacked the Citadel?  That enough hardware survived to learn how to make thanix cannons and EDI, yet not enough to confirm that it wasn't geth? (they couldn't compare what they found with the geth ships that were destroyed?)  I can hear the puzzle piece getting banged into place here.

They didn't bother to actually, you know examine a Keeper or two?  A salarian with a medical scanner found information that corroborates Shepard's claims.

Or the console Saren was playing with in the Council chambers?

Or Ilos, a research base that was actually in operation at the time of the last culling.  Might be something to find there that backs the claims of Reapers besides VIgil.

Sworn testimony from the surviving Normandy crew?  Garrus?  Tali?  Liara?  Hardsuit recordings?

Whether there's information to find or not, the Council did not appear to even try to verify anything Shepard claimed.  Despite the fact that everything Shepard claimed in ME 1 came true.

And yet, as Liara herself concedes, among the Asari she has obtained little respect due to both her theories and her age. And they don't need to interview her regarding Vigil's warnings as Shepard possesses all the same knowledge.
What ultimately could Liara provide as evidence? The best she could probably do is provide her own theories that there were advanced civilizations before the Protheans, but nothing to identify the Reapers as responsible.

Given that her theories fit neatly into Shepard's story of the Reapers (which he originally posited before he even knew Liara, let alone her theories, existed) a few questions may not have been out of order.

Then I wish Shepard luck in convincing these groups to stop killing each other. Whether or not it would be great to unite all these forces does not say whether it would be possible. It's true that groups tend to unite to face a common foe, but there's not even enough evidence to convince the Council, we can barely get the Citadel races to get along with each other, and now we're going to try convincing the anarchy that is the Terminus Systems? Obviously, once the Reapers arrive, I could see this as a possibility, but not any time before.

Ya know what would have made for a good background for a "dark second act"?  The Council trying without success to unite all these disparate forces.

But what kind of power supply? Do they possess the technology to do so? We know the Council couldn't get it active, but that's really it. This was in the past two years since Shepard's been gone. 

Good questions.  Too bad they didn't answer them.  Just a "Vigil's not working.  So you're delusional.  Despite the fact that it's in a base that's been sealed for 50,000 years whcih we didn't believe you about, nor the relay lhought lost for millenia, but you found   Along with the Conduit that we didn't believe you about either.  Nope, we might have believed you after the attack.  But what have you proved lately?"

If the Council even believes in the Reapers, then they will declare war against them. Why shouldn't they deny what they no longer believe? As I said, war with the Geth makes sense. Preparing for war with the Geth also makes sense. Your position relies entirely on the grounds that the Council believes in the Reapers, which also requires some basis for saying that they are idiots for still not believing in the Reapers.

I'm starting to get the feeling we're no longer debating "They want to ignore the problem cause it'll cause a panic if they face it" but we're back to "we have dismissed those claims"

Assuming they can get it active. It wasn't made entirely clear what was on Vigil's data disc beyond it being able to keep control away from Sovereign.

Good point, another piece of evidence for Shepard's story, VIgil data disc.

Modifié par iakus, 08 novembre 2010 - 10:27 .

[Iakus]

Lord Nicholai wrote...

I agree with IL Divo. There isn't any solid proof that Reapers exist. Just because something is a little (okay in some cases more than a little ) out of the ordinary, it's not that sensible to just jump to the conculsion that its all the result of an ancient race of super machines hell-bent on wiping out the galaxy. Give me a few weeks and I could provide proof that aliens exist and are coming to Earth to suck out our brains by the year 2015. If I were a war hero would you believe me, or just think I'm a nutter?

If you almost single-handedly fought off one invasion, I'd say it's worth looking into

[Iakus]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

That's a flawed argument considering the stated fact that ME2 is about the characters and Mass Effect (ME1) wasn't stated to be character driven.  If I'm going to get a story that's supposed to be about the characters and is supposed to be character driven then the characters should have more say in anything that happens.  

it's not - because the characters do. what they don't do is make odd comments in a few places when you're walking around - the important things are done interacting in conversations.

Which squadmates think Garrus should kill Sidonis?
Which squadmates favor rewriting the heretic geth?  Which favor killing them?
Which characters want to expose Rael'Zorah's activities, which favor letting Tali take the fall?
Which squadmates favor arresting Jacob's father?  Killing him?  Leaving him?
Which characters favor destroying the genophage data?

Does having their loyalty alter any of these statements?

Why does Jacob distrust merceneries (and assassins)?  At what point doe he come to accept Thane as part of the team?

What's Mordin's thoughts on a certain tank-bred krogan?  Or Miranda's genetic engineering?  Or Shepard's ressurection?

Which renegade options does Samara remark to?  Which paragon choices?

Do Jacob Taylor and Ashley Williams know each other?

What observations does Zaed have about the Warden of Purgatory?

At what point does Samara show approval/disapproval of the following squadmates:  Jack, Zaed, Garrus, Kasumi?.

And finally:

How is this a character-centric story?

[freestylez]

iakus with the goods, again.

The problem is Il Divo actually presents better rationale than BW did on why the Reapers' existance would be denied. Although I don't agree, I would've felt a lot better about the storyline if they had given me something. Instead, all we're given is a two-year time-lapse and a lot of handwaving.

This is bascally what I hear when I play ME2:

Shepard: What about the Reapers?
Council: They were a myth.
Shepard: WTF? I spent the whole of ME1 convincing you they were real!
Council: Yeah, but two years have passed Shepard. Things changed.
Shepard: Like?
Council: You would have known,..if you hadn't died.

Modifié par freestylez, 08 novembre 2010 - 11:32 .

[Il Divo]

[quote]iakus wrote...
But there were other witnesses.  Heck, if Udina believes, who wouldn't at this point?     Udina may stab Shep in the back for personal gain, but would he let the galaxy die for petty ambition?   I mean, Commander Shepard, in the course of his adventures, demonstrated that: [/quote]

Petty ambition vs. political suicide? Udina's character would clearly take ambition. In any renegade ending, there is no surviving council. The aliens whom Shepard presented all those little reports to are dead. Udina saying 'We'll stop the reapers' is fine if the Alliance decides so. However, the new Council said no. So Udina (who is your typical politician) changes his stance.Humanity's concern is singular: take control. Control takes time. Does this new human-led council wants to hear stories of sentient space ships when they're trying to fill a power vacuum? Everything listed below is ultimately irrelevant to a Council that never dealt with the gritty aspects of the Saren threat or interacted with Shepard.  

[quote]
1)  The Council's top Spectre was a traitor
2)  That the rachni were less extinct than the Council thought (and the situation may have been rectified)
3)  There's a huge intrelligent plant-creature that could take control of people, predates the Protheans, and oh yeah, now I understand Prothean
4)  Has found the Mu Relay, thought lost for millenia
5) Found what is likely the largest Prothean cache ever uncovered, complete with a functional Conduit, which the Council had "dismissed those claims" for most of the game [/quote]

By this logic, the Council should never have impounded the Normandy. The first four items on your list can all be taken into account prior to the Normandy's lockdown, in which case Shepard should have been able to convince the Council to send a fleet to Ilos.

[quote]
If in addition Shep predicts an impending invasion of sentient intelligent starships, I'd pay attention. [/quote]

See above. If Shepard says 'meteors will rain on the Citadel tomorrow', do we prepare for a meteor shower or quietly ignore him?

[quote]
Besides the fact that a Reaper actually attacked the Citadel?  That enough hardware survived to learn how to make thanix cannons and EDI, yet not enough to confirm that it wasn't geth? (they couldn't compare what they found with the geth ships that were destroyed?)  I can hear the puzzle piece getting banged into place here. [/quote]

What Reaper? I saw a giant ship...leading a fleet of Geth. Reapers are sentient. What organics did Sovereign converse with during the attack? None that I know of.

We do also know that various parts of Sovereign were stripped prior to the Council getting their hands on it.

[quote]
They didn't bother to actually, you know examine a Keeper or two?  A salarian with a medical scanner found information that corroborates Shepard's claims. [/quote]

Information which was validated only after Shepard was dead.

[quote]
Or the console Saren was playing with in the Council chambers? [/quote]

Hmm, what precisely about it?

[quote]
Or Ilos, a research base that was actually in operation at the time of the last culling.  Might be something to find there that backs the claims of Reapers besides VIgil.  [/quote]

'Might' being the key phrase. Vigil is inactive. Potential for evidence ultimately cannot not equal evidence of a claim. As the person claiming the Reapers are real, you have to use positive evidence to demonstrate their existence.

[quote]
Sworn testimony from the surviving Normandy crew?  Garrus?  Tali?  Liara?  Hardsuit recordings? [/quote]

All of which are questionable and can be equally directed at Mass Effect during the Normandy lockdown sequence. Hardsuit recordings (which according to the codex we have) should have been able to prove the existence of Sovereign/corroborate the events on Virmire, but we often overlook such details in exchange for entertainment.  

[quote]
Whether there's information to find or not, the Council did not appear to even try to verify anything Shepard claimed.  Despite the fact that everything Shepard claimed in ME 1 came true. [/quote]

They tried to verify Vigil's existence on Ilos, which turned up nothing. They tried to analyze Sovereign's remnants, which again turned up nothing. I'd say that fits the definition of verification. Now, they may have refused to see every potential source of evidence Shepard put forth before them. But how long can you expect them to continue for?

[quote]
Given that her theories fit neatly into Shepard's story of the Reapers (which he originally posited before he even knew Liara, let alone her theories, existed) a few questions may not have been out of order. [/quote]

But what will they get out of it? We know (for starters) that Liara is not held to be the most respected Prothean researcher due to her age, despite her own research. If you're suggesting that they should have mind melded with her/Shepard, then you are correct this is a plot hole, but still one that can be applied to Mass Effect.

[quote]
Ya know what would have made for a good background for a "dark second act"?  The Council trying without success to unite all these disparate forces. [/quote]

It might be the notion of uniting these disparate forces that puts them off ever further on believing the Reaper menace.

[quote]
Good questions.  Too bad they didn't answer them.  Just a "Vigil's not working.  So you're delusional.  Despite the fact that it's in a base that's been sealed for 50,000 years whcih we didn't believe you about, nor the relay lhought lost for millenia, but you found   Along with the Conduit that we didn't believe you about either.  Nope, we might have believed you after the attack.  But what have you proved lately?" [/quote]

Actually, they believed in the Conduit; they authorized Shepard to search for it. Following Virmire, they tried putting him on a leash. But here you haven't provided a substitute argument for why Reapers exist. Your argument equates to 'Shepard's been right about alot of stuff, so he's right about this' which is not valid in argumentation. Every point must be demonstrated through reasoning. Try this:

Alternate Theory: Saren wishes to rule the galaxy, so he uses the Reapers to manipulate the Geth into obeying his commands. Researching the Protheans and discovering the Conduit, Mu Relay, and Ilos through the beacon Saren enacts a plan intended to grant him a back door through the Citadel to surprise attack the Council and decapitate the head of government.

Based on all the evidence we have, this is equally valid as a theory and there is no mention of Reapers, leaving them a potential figment of Shepard's imagination.

[quote]
Why I'm starting to get the feeling we're no longer debating "They want to ignore the problem cause it'll cause a panic if they face it" but we're back to "we have dismissed those claims" [/quote]

Perhaps, but I do feel that these criticisms come from a perspective which does not fully appreciate the point of view of the Council. 'Sure, we'll launch a fleet to fight the Reapers! No problem!' sounds all fine and dandy for a video game.  We don't think about it too much because we're curious about the action and to see events play out. Again, try telling someone that everything they've ever believed about their existence is a lie. It's the equivalent of convincing someone who believes the world is round that in reality it is flat. That's the scale of this revelation, even for just the Council members. Acceptance of such a revelation also entails an incredible amount of effort in dealing with a threat on a level we have never encountered.

Expecting someone to seek out evidence of such a belief is itself ludicrous. That's why examples like 'Well, if they would just talk to Liara' or 'they should spend more time reactivating Vigil!' are themselves difficult. They don't want to talk to them because they don't want to risk being wrong. I'm not even saying that all the evidence works perfectly in their favor, but who would want to believe that millenia old space ships are coming to murder us? And that they've done this successfully every time, bar none? It's something out of Lovecraftian horror. 

[quote]
Good point, another piece of evidence for Shepard's story, VIgil data disc. [/quote]

What was on the data disc being a key point. Remember, we're trying to prove to a galactic government why they should declare war against what they believe to be an imaginary enemy. The disc would have to have something more than Citadel controls to fill that role. 

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 novembre 2010 - 11:49 .

[Il Divo]

freestylez wrote...
The problem is Il Divo actually presents better rationale than BW did on why the Reapers' existance would be denied. Although I don't agree, I would've felt a lot better about the storyline if they had given me something. Instead, all we're given is a two-year time-lapse and a lot of handwaving.

I think it works within the confines of the story, but I also definitely think it could have been better implemented. Renegade ending definitely works better in this regard since there is no council, only Udina, to consider.
 
For paragons, I think (as Shepard) we should have been able to call the Council out on their change of position (even if they chose to keep denying the Reapers) instead of only hearing about it second hand through Anderson, Illusive Man, and Gabby/Ken.

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 novembre 2010 - 11:45 .

[Moiaussi]

Il Divo wrote...

See above. If Shepard says 'meteors will rain on the Citadel tomorrow', do we prepare for a meteor shower or quietly ignore him?

After Ilos and the Citadel war, despite their appearant improbability, I'd quietly prepare and take him to task if this time he was wrong.

What Reaper? I saw a giant ship...leading a fleet of Geth. Reapers are sentient. What organics did Sovereign converse with during the attack? None that I know of.

We do also know that various parts of Sovereign were stripped prior to the Council getting their hands on it.
Information which was validated only after Shepard was dead.

'Might' being the key phrase. Vigil is inactive. Potential for evidence ultimately cannot not equal evidence of a claim. As the person claiming the Reapers are real, you have to use positive evidence to demonstrate their existence.

All of which are questionable and can be equally directed at Mass Effect during the Normandy lockdown sequence. Hardsuit recordings (which according to the codex we have) should have been able to prove the existence of Sovereign/corroborate the events on Virmire, but we often overlook such details in exchange for entertainment. 

So you are saying that despite being right about everything else and saving the Council (if he did), Shepard is not a credible witness? That there are no archaeologists in existance besides Liara? That the Geth would build one essentially indesructable dreadnaught, and use it to do nothing but dock with the citadel rather than simply destroy the citadel fleet, which is was very likely to have been able to do given it seemed to be able to ignore everything other than feedback from a dying mecha-saren?

The fact that Shepard can speak Prothean and could create a rosetta stone for archaeologists?

But what will they get out of it? We know (for starters) that Liara is not held to be the most respected Prothean researcher due to her age, despite her own research. If you're suggesting that they should have mind melded with her/Shepard, then you are correct this is a plot hole, but still one that can be applied to Mass Effect.

That could still have happened after the end of ME1, after they had more reason to trust him.

It might be the notion of uniting these disparate forces that puts them off ever further on believing the Reaper menace.

No... its the notion that recruitment missions that are self contained short stories are easier to write than a coherrent whole. It might also be that they appearantly did the unifying factions thing in DA, so they decided not to repeat themselves here regardless of the effect on the ME story....

Actually, they believed in the Conduit; they authorized Shepard to search for it. Following Virmire, they tried putting him on a leash. But here you haven't provided a substitute argument for why Reapers exist. Your argument equates to 'Shepard's been right about alot of stuff, so he's right about this' which is not valid in argumentation. Every point must be demonstrated through reasoning. Try this:

Alternate Theory: Saren wishes to rule the galaxy, so he uses the Reapers to manipulate the Geth into obeying his commands. Researching the Protheans and discovering the Conduit, Mu Relay, and Ilos through the beacon Saren enacts a plan intended to grant him a back door through the Citadel to surprise attack the Council and decapitate the head of government.

Based on all the evidence we have, this is equally valid as a theory and there is no mention of Reapers, leaving them a potential figment of Shepard's imagination.

None of which precludes the possibility of reapers. I agree that Shepard running about telling everyone 'OMG, REAPERS!' was both nuts and bad writing, but to insist that the possibility not be investigated? Shep even finds an intact beacon in ME2, but isn't given the option to deliver it to the Council.

Perhaps, but I do feel that these criticisms come from a perspective which does not fully appreciate the point of view of the Council. 'Sure, we'll launch a fleet to fight the Reapers! No problem!' sounds all fine and dandy for a video game.  We don't think about it too much because we're curious about the action and to see events play out. Again, try telling someone that everything they've ever believed about their existence is a lie. It's the equivalent of convincing someone who believes the world is round that in reality it is flat. That's the scale of this revelation, even for just the Council members. Acceptance of such a revelation also entails an incredible amount of effort in dealing with a threat on a level we have never encountered.

Expecting someone to seek out evidence of such a belief is itself ludicrous. That's why examples like 'Well, if they would just talk to Liara' or 'they should spend more time reactivating Vigil!' are themselves difficult. They don't want to talk to them because they don't want to risk being wrong. I'm not even saying that all the evidence works perfectly in their favor, but who would want to believe that millenia old space ships are coming to murder us? And that they've done this successfully every time, bar none? It's something out of Lovecraftian horror. 

You are still looking at this as binary. Doubting the reapers does not preclude investigation or acknowledging their possibility. They already have reason to rebuild as fast as possible. They were paniced about war with the Terminus systems before, and now their fleets are decimated. And despite the "OMG, You'll start a war!" from ME1, they now insist that Shepard spend 100% of his time in the very region they were panicing to keep him out of previously. Pardon?

What was on the data disc being a key point. Remember, we're trying to prove to a galactic government why they should declare war against what they believe to be an imaginary enemy. The disc would have to have something more than Citadel controls to fill that role. 

You can't 'start a war' against a foe that isn't there yet. They are being asked to prepare for war, which they should already be doing rebuilding as fast as they can. Before the Rachni, noone said 'hey, lets explore cautiously.' Noone expected to be overrun so easily. Likewise to a lesser degree with the Krogan. They weren't ready for the Morning War, and they weren't ready for the Citadel war, despite warnings in the last case.

One would think they would learn something over the millenia...

[Iakus]

[quote]Il Divo wrote...

Petty ambition vs. political suicide? Udina's character would clearly take ambition. In any renegade ending, there is no surviving council. The aliens whom Shepard presented all those little reports to are dead. Udina saying 'We'll stop the reapers' is fine if the Alliance decides so. However, the new Council said no. So Udina (who is your typical politician) changes his stance.Humanity's concern is singular: take control. Control takes time. Does this new human-led council wants to hear stories of sentient space ships when they're trying to fill a power vacuum? Everything listed below is ultimately irrelevant to a Council that never dealt with the gritty aspects of the Saren threat or interacted with Shepard.  [/quote]

In a renegade ending, a new Council is picked.  These Council members presumably become privy to the papers and reports of the old Council

"Hmm, this Shepard guy seemed to have warned them about Saren and his plans.  They didn't listen and it got them killed"

"He have anything else to say?"

"Yeah, that their flagship, Sovereign was a sentient  being called a Reaper.  Says there's a lot more out in dark space and that the Citadel is actually a relay that connects out there.  Sovereign was trying to open it"

"Bring him in for a debrief.  I don't intend to end up like our predecessors"

[quote]
By this logic, the Council should never have impounded the Normandy. The first four items on your list can all be taken into account prior to the Normandy's lockdown, in which case Shepard should have been able to convince the Council to send a fleet to Ilos. [/quote]

Indeed.  They finally took decisive action, and it was the wrong move.  I can kinda understand the action they took, though.  Sovereign had yet to reveal his full power and no one really knew what the Conduit was yet.  Basically, they were guilty of jumping the gun and not letting Shepard complete the investigation. By the same token, I'd rather see the Council (either of them) take the wrong action rather than no action regarding the Reapers.

[quote]
See above. If Shepard says 'meteors will rain on the Citadel tomorrow', do we prepare for a meteor shower or quietly ignore him?[/quote]

Post Citadel batle?  I'd starrt doing some sensor sweeps and have the station's point defense on standbye.

[quote]
What Reaper? I saw a giant ship...leading a fleet of Geth. Reapers are sentient. What organics did Sovereign converse with during the attack? None that I know of.[/quote]

I am Sovereign.  And this station is mine!  Said to at least three people.

Likely three more people than the geth spoke to.  Are we sure those were geth ships?

[quote]
We do also know that various parts of Sovereign were stripped prior to the Council getting their hands on it. [/quote]

Parts.  But enough was recovered to reverse engineer at least one of his guns and create a really high-end AI.  That implies internal components, not jusdt outer hull or armor plating.

[quote]
They didn't bother to actually, you know examine a Keeper or two?  A salarian with a medical scanner found information that corroborates Shepard's claims. [/quote]

Information which was validated only after Shepard was dead.[/quote]

Yeah.  Imagine if the Council ordered a scan after the battle.

[quote]
Or the console Saren was playing with in the Council chambers? [/quote]

Hmm, what precisely about it?[/quote]

Oh, nothing.  Except that there's a port there where you can gain control of the whole Citadel.

[quote]
Or Ilos, a research base that was actually in operation at the time of the last culling.  Might be something to find there that backs the claims of Reapers besides VIgil.  [/quote]

'Might' being the key phrase. Vigil is inactive. Potential for evidence ultimately cannot not equal evidence of a claim. As the person claiming the Reapers are real, you have to use positive evidence to demonstrate their existence. [/quote]



[quote]
Sworn testimony from the surviving Normandy crew?  Garrus?  Tali?  Liara?  Hardsuit recordings? [/quote]

All of which are questionable and can be equally directed at Mass Effect during the Normandy lockdown sequence. Hardsuit recordings (which according to the codex we have) should have been able to prove the existence of Sovereign/corroborate the events on Virmire, but we often overlook such details in exchange for entertainment.  [/quote]

The Normandy lockdown was a bit different.  The Council was taking action, albiet the wrong action.  What we have here is the Council (potentially) having evidence that confirms the existence of the Reapers, and outright ignoring it.  Misinterpreting the data is one thing.  Believing the data had been somehow falsified could also work (though I'd like to see evidence that the Council belived this)  Outright denying the evidence is foolish in teh extreme

[quote]
They tried to verify Vigil's existence on Ilos, which turned up nothing. They tried to analyze Sovereign's remnants, which again turned up nothing. I'd say that fits the definition of verification. Now, they may have refused to see every potential source of evidence Shepard put forth before them. But how long can you expect them to continue for? [/quote]

The fact that Vigil even exists should say something.  The examined Sovereigns remains and came up with a lot more than nothing.  They're just under the insane assumption that it's geth.  Even if there's little direct evidence crying "Reaper" there's a whole heap of circumstantial evidence saying there's something Reaper-like out there

[quote]
But what will they get out of it? We know (for starters) that Liara is not held to be the most respected Prothean researcher due to her age, despite her own research. If you're suggesting that they should have mind melded with her/Shepard, then you are correct this is a plot hole, but still one that can be applied to Mass Effect. [/quote]

...or a post-battle debrief.

[quote]
Actually, they believed in the Conduit; they authorized Shepard to search for it. Following Virmire, they tried putting him on a leash. But here you haven't provided a substitute argument for why Reapers exist. Your argument equates to 'Shepard's been right about alot of stuff, so he's right about this' which is not valid in argumentation. Every point must be demonstrated through reasoning. Try this:[/quote]

Nope.  Shep's first asignment was specifically to go into the Traverse and apprehend Saren "by any means necessary"

My arguement has been ( I think) that everything Shepard has told the Council has panned out.  Yet the Council is taking no more than token attempts to verify the existence of the Reapers, despite Shepard's warnings.  Evidence that does exist is conveniently overlooked, either by the Council itself  or the writers

[quote]
Alternate Theory: Saren wishes to rule the galaxy, so he uses the Reapers to manipulate the Geth into obeying his commands. Researching the Protheans and discovering the Conduit, Mu Relay, and Ilos through the beacon Saren enacts a plan intended to grant him a back door through the Citadel to surprise attack the Council and decapitate the head of government.[/quote]

Saren, an organic lifeform, managing to manipulate however many thousands of geth, that attacked Eden Prime, Feros, Noveria, Virmire, the Citadel and so on, is easier to believe than Reapers?  Even true geth want nothing to do with organics.  And they're the friendly ones.

Plus: Where would Sovereign fit in?  Is it a geth dreadnaught, or Saren's Reaper-puppet?

[quote]
Perhaps, but I do feel that these criticisms come from a perspective which does not fully appreciate the point of view of the Council. 'Sure, we'll launch a fleet to fight the Reapers! No problem!' sounds all fine and dandy for a video game.  We don't think about it too much because we're curious about the action and to see events play out. Again, try telling someone that everything they've ever believed about their existence is a lie. It's the equivalent of convincing someone who believes the world is round that in reality it is flat. That's the scale of this revelation, even for just the Council members. Acceptance of such a revelation also entails an incredible amount of effort in dealing with a threat on a level we have never encountered. [/quote]

But we're not talking about building an invasion fleet, we're talking about an impending invasion.  One which the Citadel Council has already had a taste of.  There are 3 or 4 different ways the Council could have put Shepard off about it in ME 2 that would have made far more sense than the route they went down.

[quote]
Expecting someone to seek out evidence of such a belief is itself ludicrous. That's why examples like 'Well, if they would just talk to Liara' or 'they should spend more time reactivating Vigil!' are themselves difficult. They don't want to talk to them because they don't want to risk being wrong. I'm not even saying that all the evidence works perfectly in their favor, but who would want to believe that millenia old space ships are coming to murder us? And that they've done this successfully every time, bar none? It's something out of Lovecraftian horror. [/quote]

Risk being wrong?

The Citadel, the seat of galactic government was attacked!  The Council came within a hair of/was wiped out!  It took two fleets to stop the attack, and their flagship held its own against several cruisers after docking with the Citadel itself for some strange reason!.  The Spectre who managed to put an end to the attack warns that this isn't over.  If your wrong, the Spectre looks like an idiot, the Council looks prudent, if a little credulous.  If they're right, to quote from Ghostbusters: "You will have saved the lives of millions of registered voters"

There are far worse things than being wrong.

[quote]
What was on the data disc being a key point. Remember, we're trying to prove to a galactic government why they should declare war against what they believe to be an imaginary enemy. The disc would have to have something more than Citadel controls to fill that role. [/quote]

Given the Citadel is still not completely understood ("Whoah, this is a dark space relay?") I'd say Citadel controls would indeed fill the role

[Jebel Krong]

Nightwriter wrote...

If you are going to make a character focused game, I do not think you should make the whole game about sidequests. Rather, you should weave each character's story into the main storyline.

what? and reduce the universe by magically having everyone connected to the main story? no thanks - i'm all for meaningful character interaction (and with each other) but it has to be done properly - not me2's way and certainly not me1's way. you don't need to force links where there are none - can there be overlap? yes of course, where it makes sense; but forcing connections where there shouldn't be any is a no no.

[Jebel Krong]

iakus wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

That's a flawed argument considering the stated fact that ME2 is about the characters and Mass Effect (ME1) wasn't stated to be character driven.  If I'm going to get a story that's supposed to be about the characters and is supposed to be character driven then the characters should have more say in anything that happens.  

it's not - because the characters do. what they don't do is make odd comments in a few places when you're walking around - the important things are done interacting in conversations.

Which squadmates think Garrus should kill Sidonis?
Which squadmates favor rewriting the heretic geth?  Which favor killing them?
Which characters want to expose Rael'Zorah's activities, which favor letting Tali take the fall?
Which squadmates favor arresting Jacob's father?  Killing him?  Leaving him?
Which characters favor destroying the genophage data?

Does having their loyalty alter any of these statements?

Why does Jacob distrust merceneries (and assassins)?  At what point doe he come to accept Thane as part of the team?

What's Mordin's thoughts on a certain tank-bred krogan?  Or Miranda's genetic engineering?  Or Shepard's ressurection?

Which renegade options does Samara remark to?  Which paragon choices?

Do Jacob Taylor and Ashley Williams know each other?

What observations does Zaed have about the Warden of Purgatory?

At what point does Samara show approval/disapproval of the following squadmates:  Jack, Zaed, Garrus, Kasumi?.

And finally:

How is this a character-centric story?

yeah and we'd all like an unlimited budget, unlimited time-frame to spit out the perfect game - ME2 already has, what, twice the dialogue of me1(?) and is a much longer game. i, too would love a 100+ hour game that you're suggesting, but we all know game development is not that, and compromises have to be made - pie in the sky fantasies are great but not realistic, and it's not like any precedent was set in the first game, lest you forget. a lot of those things are touched on - jacob in the initial conversation on the normandy after recruiting thane - you get the snapshots of the world, but it can't be all spoon-fed/explained to you.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 09 novembre 2010 - 09:16 .