531 réponses à ce sujet

[GodWood]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

GodWood wrote...
The guy who wrote Ash (Chris L' I believe) actually said on the old forums that Ash isn't a racist.

Just putting that out there.

I don't want to sound trite, but Chris L' isn't canon. If everything the dev's said outside of the various mediums was canon, then Legion would be an enemy that stalks Shepard throughout ME2, choices would actually matter when you carried them over from game to game, and a whole host of other promises.
I'm trying to work within the material given to me, and she sounds like a racist to me.

So the guy who wrote the character is wrong?

[Collider]

If Ashley isn't racist, they did a poor job of conveying that.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Collider wrote...

If Ashley isn't racist, they did a poor job of conveying that.

I thought they did just fine with Ash.  She seemed less racist and more just cynical.  In fact, she and Miranda were two characters that I thought I'd dislike and ended up really liking.

Mass Effect was probably the first BioWare game in which I didn't really dislike anyone.  Udina, obviously, but you're supposed to hate him.  In prior games, there was usually someone I really hated (Aribeth, Aerie, Carth, etc.)  I thought Kaidan was pretty bleh and couldn't get over the repeat use of the same VA in more or less the same role (space soldier female love interest woobie) even though the personality was different.  And I was disappointed with Thane--I thought his potential for badassery and snark got totally hosed by all the IMO completely unnecessary Woobie angst that seemed to be there more or less as estrogen bait.  Bleaaaaaargh.  Other than that, I liked just about everyone.  I even felt bad for offing Kaidan and Thane 

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 26 octobre 2010 - 06:54 .

[ADLegend21]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

ADLegend21 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

ADLegend21 wrote...

Like Sagequeen I like em all....except Zaeed. I made the mistake of (in the first playthrough after downloading him because I did my first SM without him and also played me2 first before going back and playing me1 to get better me2 scenarios) doing his LM first and I couldn't get his loyalty without killing those poor innocent workers and hearing them burn to death all so he could be happy. when I found out I could leave him on that planet it brought joy to my face to hear him go "SHEPAAAARD!" then blow up. and him trying to intimidate someone who came back from the dead really mad me go "who the hell do you think you are?! I've killed a reaper so I can damn sure kill you if you don't chill out!" and other than that he was like the fifth concussive shot user on the ship (on my soldier playthrough) and I'mg glad every time I see his squad selection picture colored in red.

You don't like killing a few workers in order to kill a man that really deserves it but you take pleasure in the sight of proof that you let Zaeed die on Zorya? I'm guessing you saved the Council? Even if you didn't, the point is still valid.

Interesting, to say the least.

Zaeed turns his mission to save those workers into a mission to kill one person. andyeah I saved the counil it was better than default Udina ruling the damn galaxy needs of the many and all that jazz.

I think Zaeed probably lied to you about being hired to rescue the workers. The fact that the planet description describes the factories as major blue suns bases doesn't seem like a rescue mission.

And honestly, needs of the many would have you kill Vido and send the suns into turmoil. Vido, from Zaeed's descriptions as well as his dialog, is a sadistic b*stard. Any chance to destabilize his operations could allow Shepard to eliminate them as a threat.

It's a gamble, but no less so than devoting reinforcments to saving the council. In fact, I would argue that saving the council is the greatest gamble.

I sent the suns into turmoil by taking out their bases and wiping out their various operations and hell even now as the shadow broker I can bust up one of their operations, before I downloaded Zaeed's DLC. once I figured out I didn't ahve to kill vido to do it, I had problem not letting Zaeed have his revenge and killing one man while killing several innocents.

[EbonyKnight]

Collider wrote...

If Ashley isn't racist, they did a poor job of conveying that.

How do you define 'racism'?

[Christmas Ape]

GodWood wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

GodWood wrote...
The guy who wrote Ash (Chris L' I believe) actually said on the old forums that Ash isn't a racist.

Just putting that out there.

I don't want to sound trite, but Chris L' isn't canon. If everything the dev's said outside of the various mediums was canon, then Legion would be an enemy that stalks Shepard throughout ME2, choices would actually matter when you carried them over from game to game, and a whole host of other promises.
I'm trying to work within the material given to me, and she sounds like a racist to me.

So the guy who wrote the character is wrong?

Authorial intent is a small piece of the puzzle if that intent is completely butchered in execution.

[GodWood]

Yet it wasn't butchered.

[Elyvern]

Why when such threads come up, most people invariably discount the ability of characters to develop and change? Ashley began ME1 hostile to aliens but as the game progresses along, her attitude does change. Same with Jack and Miranda. It's really a damn pity that when faced with a character that elicits a kee-jerk effect right at the start, the tendency is to dismiss them and never give them a chance to prove themselves. I love the idea of character progression for all 3 characters. On the contrary, Garrus was the one who pissed me off. After making attempts to change his attitude in ME1, it's like he threw all of that out of the window and decided to go back to his old path again. If that's the case, why even bother?

[Christmas Ape]

There seems to some contention about that, though. You know, the frequent alien/animal comparisons and the like.

I don't agree, personally - realistically cynical but not a racist - but evidently others see her as a speciesist (which would be more technically accurate).

[V-rex]

[quote]GuardianAngel470 wrote...

[quote]Sable Phoenix wrote...

[quote]easygame88 wrote...

[quote]Getorex wrote...

Ash. Found her very physically appealing (reminds me of someone but can't put a real face to her) but her religion and racist leanings were annoying. Lose the religion and the alien hate and you would be quite hot Ash. I found her very effective as a teammate because she had THE highest combat scoring addition to your capabilities. Problematic that she lacked any and all tech OR biotic capabilities. EVERYONE should at least have some tech ability if they aren't a biotic. Tech is off-the-shelf!

[/quote]

Wait, being religious is a bad thing?

[/quote]

Ash isn't religious, she's spiritual.  Big difference.  The people who deride her for it (a fictional character, yet!) are revealing more about themselves than her.

Ash isn't racist, she's humanist.  Big difference.  In a dangerous situation you'll save a member of your own familly before a member of someone else's, and she recognizes this as a universal constant.  There are lingering bad feelings over the First Contact War and her grandfather's unjust censure, but she's not alone in that.  Pressley starts out as far more virulently xenophobic than she does, and nobody gets on his case.

The bad rap Ash gets is totally unjustified.

[/quote]

[quote]Ash gets the religious flak because of how she presents the fact that she's spiritual. That particular conversation was either poorly written or just plain bad. Shepard is forced into judging her spirituality, and most people don't like doing that. She, either as a result of bad writing or bad concept design, pushes the issue on you. That I believe is where that flak comes from and I agree with it. It just isn't cool to do that to anyone.[/quote]

I have to disagree here, very strongly. Ashley does not simply shout:
"I AM RELIGIOUS, EITHER LIKE IT OR LUMP IT!"
Instead after talking about her father, poetry and how she reads poetry to her father's grave and believes that he's still watching from the afterlife, that's when the conversation goes into the topic of her believing in god. After which she simply asks Shepard's opinion on this fact, she isn't forcing him to judge her, hell she can even be romanced if Shepard demonstrates signs of aethism.

It gets brought up in conversation because the conversation goes that way, and after the issue is raised, the conversation about it ends and isn't brought up again. She certainly wasn't putting Shepard in the awkward position of 'having to judge her beliefs' mostly because simply believing in god should not be something that needs to be judged. IT SHOULDN"T MATTER.

All she says is she believes in god, it hurts no one and she has the right to believe it. It's possible that she was just asking because she and Shepard were getting to know each other more and wanted to get that out in the clear. I'm sorry but I really don't see how it's fair to make harsh judgements about a person's religious beliefs just because they 'forced you to judge it' after it came up in conversation.

Look, I see people who declare her as a 'fanatical religious zealot' who 'kills in the name of her god' and 'believes humanity is the divine savior of the universe' and all that other kind of bull. And all I'm thinking is how bloody unfair that really is, how on Earth can so many people justify the label of 'religious god nut zealot wacko' when all she does is say she happens to have religious beliefs?

Hell she herself mentions that one reason she's so awkward about her faith is because people get wierded out by it, so in my eyes that might mean that she brought it up in the first place. A lot of religious people in the world get bullied these days simply because so many people out there label them as 'religious bible bashers' just because they happen to be Christian.
So again, screaming 'religious fanatic' and declaring it as an inherently negative trait doesn't paint one in the best light. Especially not when you spend so much time labelling the character in question as a 'bigot'

Bottom line, you weren't being 'forced' to accept her religious beliefs. In fact you weren't 'forced' to do anything, the character merely mentions that she happens to believe in god. She doesn't force it in your face, she doesn't display signs of fanaticism and her religion does not transcend into any form of bigotry.
So if you for some reason had a problem with this, then it says more bad things about YOU then it does about HER.

I'm sorry, but I've seen too many friends bullied for their religious beliefs out in the real world in this exact same manner, so this is quite a sensitive issue for me. I am so sick of people acting like blatant acts of religious persecution is suddenly 'okay', even in a fictional context.

[quote]As for the racist part, she is. "I don't feel comfortable having them around the normandy's systems. I disagree with them being given free roam" is basically what she says. That doesn't sound like what you described.[/quote]

The reason Sable Phoenix described is her reason for distrusting the Council and alien governments in general.

Her reason for distrusting aliens aboard the Normandy is actually pretty simple.
They are non-alliance individuals with no true loyalty ties walking around in an otherwise human run ship. She therefore is concerned about letting them near the vital systems of the ship, perhaps in case they aren't who they say they are or because they might leak data or information back to someone else.

Think about it, would you feel comfortable knowing that there were members of a foreign power without any loyalty ties to your country's government freely walking around a top secret military base?

The thing is, Ashley has never worked with aliens before, thus the idea of aliens walking around freely on an Alliance vessel is a new concept for her. So fo course, with the history of the First Contact War, she's not going to be trusting right away.

Remember, the Normandy is not a leisure cruise, it is not a theme park, it is not a suburban neighbourhood and it is not an office job. It is a military grade ship and the most advanced warship humanity has at it's disposal, with that in mind one would be concerned about ANY new arrivals, especially ones without direct loyalty to the Alliance.
I don't think Ashley has any ideas of 'racial purity' or anything like that, she just has a few concerns as security chief aboard the Normandy.

That said, she still concedes that Shepard is in command and if she is ordered to work with aliens, she will abide. Plus, over the course of the story she becomes more agreeable about working with them.

[quote]Consequently, it is the same thing Pressley says.[/quote]

Not quite, Pressly flat out announces that he doesn't like Turians 'in general'. Ashley never announces that she doesn't like aliens, only that she doesn't trust them. Similarly, Pressly doesn't seem keen on the idea of humanity and aliens working together in 'humanities war' whereas Ashley says that she doesn't think humanity should turn down allies, just should bet everything on them staying allies.

It's subtle but there are differences, namely Pressley's beliefs are much more 'solid' then Ashley's are, as she still has quite a few mixed views on the matter.

[GuardianAngel470]

V-rex wrote...

Snip

Alright, it's clear you didn't get my message about her religious beliefs so I'll try and restate them.

The PLAYER is forced to choose a dialog option that judges her beliefs. Either they say "I do too, "Doesn't matter to me," or "I'll have no religion on my boat!" Because of the arbitrary game mechanic, the player IS forced to judge her beliefs as either valid, in line with their own, or wrong.

That is where the flak comes from, because most people don't like being put in that situation and it gets put on the character because technically, she instigated it. Do I think it is a real problem? Not particularly. I find her poetry reading more abrasive but that's because I hate literature as I see it as elitism that is forced on everyone.

But that's a discussion for another time.

As for her racism/speciesism, she tells you that she doesn't trust aliens and for no other reason than they're different. She says that it is because they aren't human that she believes they won't look out for human interests and she uses that as justification for restricting them on the Normandy. I'm sorry, but that does not translate well into logic. Because they won't put humanity first, they should be restricted to their quarters while on the ship? That sounds like the sort of feeble justification that people use to support their unfounded prejudices. Unfounded prejudice that I can't actually do anything about. Unfounded prejudice that won't go away is called racism.

Despite other's claims, she doesn't change. Her dialog simply goes in a different direction, she never expresses a change in opinion. In that I believe she differs from Miranda and Jack who, even if you didn't romance them, change.

Modifié par GuardianAngel470, 26 octobre 2010 - 09:30 .

[GuardianAngel470]

Elyvern wrote...

Why when such threads come up, most people invariably discount the ability of characters to develop and change? Ashley began ME1 hostile to aliens but as the game progresses along, her attitude does change. Same with Jack and Miranda. It's really a damn pity that when faced with a character that elicits a kee-jerk effect right at the start, the tendency is to dismiss them and never give them a chance to prove themselves. I love the idea of character progression for all 3 characters. On the contrary, Garrus was the one who pissed me off. After making attempts to change his attitude in ME1, it's like he threw all of that out of the window and decided to go back to his old path again. If that's the case, why even bother?

Miranda and Jack change, Ashley never expresses any change of opinion. We don't gain any insight to that end either like we did with Pressley. I've romanced ashley and all I could tell from her dialog was that she diverted from her racism (IMO) to her family life. She never expresses any actual change of heart, at least not that I remember.

[GodWood]

You can paragon persuade her to be less cynical in her beliefs of aliens.

She ends up being the most paragon companion.

[Christmas Ape]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
Alright, it's clear you didn't get my message about her religious beliefs so I'll try and restate them.
The PLAYER is forced to choose a dialog option that judges her beliefs. Either they say "I do too, "Doesn't matter to me," or "I'll have no religion on my boat!" Because of the arbitrary game mechanic, the player IS forced to judge her beliefs as either valid, in line with their own, or wrong.
That is where the flak comes from, because most people don't like being put in that situation and it gets put on the character because technically, she instigated it. Do I think it is a real problem? Not particularly. I find her poetry reading more abrasive but that's because I hate literature as I see it as elitism that is forced on everyone.
But that's a discussion for another time.

Nothing in here stands up to logic, incidentally.

As for her racism/speciesism, she tells you that she doesn't trust aliens and for no other reason than they're different. She says that it is because they aren't human that she believes they won't look out for human interests and she uses that as justification for restricting them on the Normandy. I'm sorry, but that does not translate well into logic.

She essentially thinks that aliens think the same way she does; species first, which is rather simple evolutionary psychology.

Because they won't put humanity first, they should be restricted to their quarters while on the ship?

It's a state of the art human warship. They're essentially foreign nationals.

That sounds like the sort of feeble justification that people use to support their unfounded prejudices. Unfounded prejudice that I can't actually do anything about. Unfounded prejudice that won't go away is called racism.

That sounds like military protocol. Would you expect to be permitted to freely wander a Russian warship if you were involved in a joint operation, or would you likely be expected to keep out of the crew's way and not go poking around the ship's systems?

[Elyvern]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Elyvern wrote...

Why when such threads come up, most people invariably discount the ability of characters to develop and change? Ashley began ME1 hostile to aliens but as the game progresses along, her attitude does change. Same with Jack and Miranda. It's really a damn pity that when faced with a character that elicits a kee-jerk effect right at the start, the tendency is to dismiss them and never give them a chance to prove themselves. I love the idea of character progression for all 3 characters. On the contrary, Garrus was the one who pissed me off. After making attempts to change his attitude in ME1, it's like he threw all of that out of the window and decided to go back to his old path again. If that's the case, why even bother?

Miranda and Jack change, Ashley never expresses any change of opinion. We don't gain any insight to that end either like we did with Pressley. I've romanced ashley and all I could tell from her dialog was that she diverted from her racism (IMO) to her family life. She never expresses any actual change of heart, at least not that I remember.

Have you forgotten the most obvious example when you leave her to die holding the line with Kirrahe on Virmire?  News reports in ME2 also quotes her follow-up on the "I can't seperate the aliens from animals" line. It may be a pity that she has to die to validate herself as having moved on from her original anti-alien biases, but the fact is she has the capacity to do that is the important thing.

[V-rex]

[quote]GuardianAngel470 wrote...

[quote]V-rex wrote...

Snip[/quote]


[quote]Alright, it's clear you didn't get my message about her religious beliefs so I'll try and restate them.

The PLAYER is forced to choose a dialog option that judges her beliefs. Either they say "I do too, "Doesn't matter to me," or "I'll have no religion on my boat!" Because of the arbitrary game mechanic, the player IS forced to judge her beliefs as either valid, in line with their own, or wrong.[/quote]

And the option to say:
"You have the right to believe whatever you want."
Meaning that you don't have to agree or disagree with her beliefs, nor give off any indication of what your own beliefs are. Just that you are open minded enough to accept her views.

Seriously, that's the main paragon choice in dialogue that you can pick. The others are 'I believe as well' and 'are you are fanatic?'

You most certainly are not made to JUDGE her at all, you can just say 'you have the right to believe what you want to believe'.

I'm sorry but, your argument is invalid.

[quote]That is where the flak comes from, because most people don't like being put in that situation and it gets put on the character because technically, she instigated it. Do I think it is a real problem? Not particularly. I find her poetry reading more abrasive but that's because I hate literature as I see it as elitism that is forced on everyone.

But that's a discussion for another time.[/quote]

Okay I understand where you are coming from but, seriously, the degree of people shouting 'Religious fanaticzor!!!!!!!!!!!!!h1h1h11hg1g1g1g1' on the web in regard to her beliefs, is rather concerning.
Also I don't think there's anything particularly elitist about liking classical literature, if it's something that helps you remember the relationship you had with your late father.
But again, different topic for a different time.

[quote]As for her racism/speciesism, she tells you that she doesn't trust aliens and for no other reason than they're different. [/quote]

Not really, she has a reason to distrust aliens far greater than just 'they are different'.
Namely, her grandfather was General Williams. Famously the first human ever to surrender to an alien race during the First Contact War, as a result of this happening her family name was made to shame and with a blacklisted name that has haunted her career and the career of everyone in her family, Ashley has developed a grudge against alien foreign powers.
She explains this all AT GREAT LENGTH in one of the conversations. You get a very deep and proper insight into why she feels the way she does.

Interestingly enough, later on you can actually PURSUADE her to accept and come to terms with the fact that it was the Alliance who she needs to blame for all this, not the Council or the Turians. As a result, she becomes more open minded about working with aliens.
It's right here:


You've had this shown to you twice, I am quite sick of seeing you ignore it.

Also for the record, it must be said that while Ashley does show aggression from time to time, she still shows compassion and respect to the Quarians in an elevator conversation with Tali, as well as happily volunteering to assist the Salarian team on Virmire and openly opposing the ideals of Terra Firma.
That does a lot to seperate the idea that them merely being 'different' is the reason for her prejudice.

[quote]She says that it is because they aren't human that she believes they won't look out for human interests and she uses that as justification for restricting them on the Normandy.[/quote]

Er, no.
She's saying that the Council will always look after their own first if they are forced to, she even says that if the Council were to do that it wouldn't be 'racism' as much as it would be just looking out for their own. And that therefore humanity shouldn't be waiting around hoping the Council will save them, instead they should be capable to save themselves.
And remember, from their response to Eden Prime to their disregard of everything Shepard says and a fair bit of unfair double standards coming their way, it's kind of hard to argue with the idea that you might not be able to rely on them.

As for the Normandy, Ashley simply doesn't think that non-Alliance soldiers should be free to access vital systems and data aboard the ship that should really be considered classified. When you consider that one of the team involved is the Daughter of one of the main villians, one should be able to see where she is coming from.

[quote]I'm sorry, but that does not translate well into logic. Because they won't put humanity first, they should be restricted to their quarters while on the ship?[/quote]

Also, while I'm here she never says to leave them locked up in their quarters, just that she doesn't think it's wise to let them near the vital systems. I'm sure they're welcome in the Mess Hall, or medical bay, or armory or observation deck. The places that Ashley would be concerned about is likely the Weapons systems, the bridge, the control panels and the engine rooms.



[quote]That sounds like the sort of feeble justification that people use to support their unfounded prejudices.[/quote][/quote]

Or maybe it's horrifically distorted variants on what characters actually said being used as an argument against said character that's a feeble justification to support unfounded prejudices?
I'm sorry, that was kind of mean. But my point is, you got the points mixed up, her reasons for distrusting the Council and not wanting aliens touching the vital systems of the Normandy are two different things.

[quote]Unfounded prejudice that I can't actually do anything about. Unfounded prejudice that won't go away is called racism.[/quote]

Except for that it has a foundation, namely bad history and lack of personal experience, and you can do something about it, talk her down a peg, and in turn it does go away.
Your argument is invalid.

[quote]Despite other's claims, she doesn't change. Her dialog simply goes in a different direction, she never expresses a change in opinion.[/quote]Just because she doesn't announce a change in opinion doesn't mean a change in opinion didn't happen. Remember at the end of the argument in 'the big conversation' she concedes and admits that she has to blame the Alliance and not the Council for her family name being blacklisted.
Similarly her defensive aggressive stance about alien foreign powers also cuts down if Shepard says that she should be taking this time with aliens as an oppurtunity to learn, after which she says that she 'never thought of it that way, all big picture and all'.

I.E meaning that you've convinced her to see things in a different light and to be more open minded about trusting aliens. And as for the idea that she 'never changes'....

Here is the default dialogue in the romance scene with Ashley:



And here is that exact same scene, if the character has been 'paragoned':

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPtpniEVkqE

Notice anything? You should, namely that in the first one Ashley declares rebelling against the Council to be a sign that they are 'humanities best and brightest', I.E that going against the Council is the right thing to do. And that again, her feelings reaffirmed, has little respect for the Council.

In the second variant however, she says "I couldn't blame the Council for calling us reckless and aggressive."
This implies a level of respect and implied understanding of the Council's positon on things, which in turn implies that she is more trusting. That her view on things has become different over the course of the story. This is what we call a 'change in opinion', also known as 'character development'.

There is a similar one that I can't find on youtube, in which she comes and gives Shepard a 'pep talk' (if romanced).

In the default one when Shepard expresses disbelief that the Council wouldn't listen, Ashley has a sort of 'I told you so' kind of attitude and retains her cynical negative view on them. Encouraging him to do this for himself, not rely on others to do it.

But in a paragoned version of this same scene, Ashley actually calls Shepard 'Mr. Negativity' and reminds him that it was him who taught her to trust the Council in the first place and that he can't just back out now. So in a sense she encourages him by reminding him of what he taught her, to give the Council a chance.

If that isn't a 'change in opinon' I don't know what is. The character has been directly influenced by Shepard's intervention and now is seeing things in a different light and expressing beliefs and viewpoints that are the polar opposite of what they were before. In fact, in the latter this means that the roles are reversed and the disillusioned Shepard is now being encouraged to once again have faith in the Council by Ashley Williams, who started out in the game by saying that she didn't trust them.
Seriously, that's got to be the most blatant, in your face example of change in opinion I've ever seen in an RPG.

It is a real thing, it really happens and is considered an intrigal part of Ashley's character by most of the people who like her.
Part of what makes it great is that the character only changes her opinion if YOU get involved in it, if you actively try with the dialogue to make it happen. This isn't like with Jack where her change is part of the romance, if you want Ashley to change you have to talk to her yourself.
This adds a nice level of interactivity to the whole experience that I find rather cathartic. Ashley has strong wills and views and you have to work to make her change them, but she can change them.

[quote]In that I believe she differs from Miranda and Jack who, even if you didn't romance them, change.[/quote]

I have yet to romance Jack and so far the only change she goes under is from outright aggression to 'whatever' as an attitude, if you don't romance her of course.
Also the main change Miranda typically seems to have is suddenly deciding that she hates Cerberus in the final mission and announcing her resignation, I'm sorry but for a character who is endetted to an organization and has been defending its interests for a number of years now, to suddenly just decide:
"Welp, I'm done here. Shepard's awesome."
Is kind of silly.

I admit it makes more sense if she was romanced because at least then there's an emotional connection established but otherwise I have to say that moment is kind of random.

Modifié par V-rex, 02 novembre 2010 - 09:59 .

[GuardianAngel470]

Christmas Ape wrote...

Nothing in here stands up to logic, incidentally.

First of all, prove it. Don't just state I'm wrong so flippantly, it detracts from whatever point you're trying to make. I state clearly that I believe that the cause of people's dislike of Ashley's religious angle is because the player is forced to choose a dialog option that judges that in some way. Most people don't like being forced to judge other's beliefs, especially not their religious beliefs.

She essentially thinks that aliens think the same way she does; species first, which is rather simple evolutionary psychology........It's a state of the art human warship. They're essentially foreign nationals...........That sounds like military protocol. Would you expect to be permitted to freely wander a Russian warship if you were involved in a joint operation, or would you likely be expected to keep out of the crew's way and not go poking around the ship's systems?

You are comparing the situation to a joint russian/us mission correct? Yes, I do believe they should be, and I'll give an example.

The International Space Station. That project was co-developed by the US and Russia and both sides had access to the station itself. Joint op, full disclosure. This was done to help rebuild relations after the Cold War, much like the Normandy was built to build relations with the Turians.

Now, I recruited a quarian engineer and a turian navyman for my crew, I would think it would be logical to utilize their expertise. Ashley disagrees, and believes that the simple fact that they are aliens aboard the ship they shouldn't be allowed to roam around.

One thing to keep in mind, the Normandy isn't designed for secrecy. Any US naval vessel today has a secluded bridge with subdivided stations to maintain the concept that only those with clearance can see what's on the screens and what technologies are being used. Were the Normandy designed to support this type of secrecy, then Ashley's opinion would be more valid as the higher ups would have ensured that their technology was well protected.

She's a gunnery chief, her opinion is moot to the higher ups, military protocol. And my statement that she doesn't change is still valid, because if she is alive long enough to grow, she doesn't.

[V-rex]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...


First of all, prove it. Don't just state I'm wrong so flippantly, it detracts from whatever point you're trying to make. I state clearly that I believe that the cause of people's dislike of Ashley's religious angle is because the player is forced to choose a dialog option that judges that in some way. Most people don't like being forced to judge other's beliefs, especially not their religious beliefs.

Of yes, because obviously the people on the internet who shout:
"WHAT A CRAZY RELIGIOUS B*TCH!!"
and:
"SHE'S AN INSANE BIBLE BASHING CHRISTIAN!!"
and:
"LOL I KILLED HER BECAUSE SHE"S A CRAZY ZEALOT!"
and:
"SHE'S A RELIGIOUSLY FUNDEMENTALIST GOD NUT!!"

.... are obviously just soooooo concerned about being forced to judge people's beliefs. Yep, those poor people, how sad it must be to be pushed down a life of broken heart and despair to be forced to make such harsh accusations about a character who only ever said she believes in God. Yep, it's so sad when you think about it. Those poor souls.
<_<

Seriously though, you don't have to say anything other than just 'You have the right to believe whatever you want.' That doesn't mean forcing to agree or disagree or even having that much of an opinion on the matter.
So in other words, these people had a chance to not make a big deal about a video game character being religious, instead they chose to get angry and extremely pissy about it. Labeling the character as a 'fanatic' and revealing a rather ugly truth about their own personality in the process.
I have no sympathy.

Modifié par V-rex, 26 octobre 2010 - 10:32 .

[Christmas Ape]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
First of all, prove it. Don't just state I'm wrong so flippantly, it detracts from whatever point you're trying to make. I state clearly that I believe that the cause of people's dislike of Ashley's religious angle is because the player is forced to choose a dialog option that judges that in some way. Most people don't like being forced to judge other's beliefs, especially not their religious beliefs.

So people are judging her beliefs because they don't like being forced to judge her beliefs. I mean, that really takes more explanation to be obviously ridiculous?

The International Space Station. That project was co-developed by the US and Russia and both sides had access to the station itself. Joint op, full disclosure. This was done to help rebuild relations after the Cold War, much like the Normandy was built to build relations with the Turians.

Utterly irrelevant. The ISS is not a military project. And it's not the Interspecies Vessel Normandy. It's an Alliance warship built with certain turian technologies and designs, as much to spy on their ship-building techniques as anything.

Now, I recruited a quarian engineer and a turian navyman for my crew, I would think it would be logical to utilize their expertise. Ashley disagrees, and believes that the simple fact that they are aliens aboard the ship they shouldn't be allowed to roam around.

Well, I don't think Ash ever tells you not to take Garrus or Tali on a mission, and thereby utilize their expertise. Just that they shouldn't have free reign to potentially acquire Alliance encryption codes, fleet deployments, and other sensitive military data found in a warship's systems that one would also attempt to restrict Alliance civilians from. Security is security.
EDIT: Also, what? Garrus is a cop who went to boot camp first.

One thing to keep in mind, the Normandy isn't designed for secrecy.

...it's a stealth ship.

Any US naval vessel today has a secluded bridge with subdivided stations to maintain the concept that only those with clearance can see what's on the screens and what technologies are being used. Were the Normandy designed to support this type of secrecy, then Ashley's opinion would be more valid as the higher ups would have ensured that their technology was well protected.

Did you find the crew interfaces that easy to read on the SR-1? They looked like indistinct orange holograms to me; given you can put a screen on a laptop that makes it unreadable from angles other than dead on, an extension of this system is entirely plausible. They're projected directly towards the crew member.

She's a gunnery chief, her opinion is moot to the higher ups, military protocol.

Which doesn't mean she doesn't know it, just that the military chain of command is quite strict on contributions from the lower ranks.

Modifié par Christmas Ape, 26 octobre 2010 - 10:46 .

[V-rex]

Shavon wrote...

How does a belief in God make someone 'religious?' Did Ashley say she went to Space Church every Sunday? Did Shepard ever stumble upon Ashley praying, or meditating, as Shepard does with Thane? No.

Ashley does not have a religious angle. She has an open belief in God. Two very, very different things.

Exactly, she doesn't even give any specific religion or any tenets of belief structure, only that she believes that there IS a god. This really, shouldn't be an issue in any sense of the word. I'm surprised that people percieve it as such.
I mean I actually remember one person claim that she 'kills in the name of her god' and that she dislikes aliens because she thinks humans are the 'divine race of the galaxy'.

It really blows my mind how much people can read into the line 'I believe in God'. I mean they make such a big deal about it and it's like, barely even part of her character. It certainly wasn't presented as a hug aspect of her personality, it was basically just one part that made up her character.
It shouldn't have offended anyone.

Modifié par V-rex, 26 octobre 2010 - 10:44 .

[GuardianAngel470]

V-rex wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...


First of all, prove it. Don't just state I'm wrong so flippantly, it detracts from whatever point you're trying to make. I state clearly that I believe that the cause of people's dislike of Ashley's religious angle is because the player is forced to choose a dialog option that judges that in some way. Most people don't like being forced to judge other's beliefs, especially not their religious beliefs.

Of yes, because obviously the people on the internet who shout:
"WHAT A CRAZY RELIGIOUS B*TCH!!"
and:
"SHE'S AN INSANE BIBLE BASHING CHRISTIAN!!"
and:
"LOL I KILLED HER BECAUSE SHE"S A CRAZY ZEALOT!"
and:
"SHE'S A RELIGIOUSLY FUNDEMENTALIST GOD NUT!!"

.... are obviously just soooooo concerned about being forced to judge people's beliefs. Yep, those poor people, how sad it must be to be pushed down a life of broken heart and despair to be forced to make such harsh accusations about a character who only ever said she believes in God. Yep, it's so sad when you think about it. Those poor souls.
<_<

Seriously though, you don't have to say anything other than just 'You have the right to believe whatever you want.' That doesn't mean forcing to agree or disagree or even having that much of an opinion on the matter.
So in other words, these people had a chance to not make a big deal about a video game character being religious, instead they chose to get angry and extremely pissy about it. Labeling the character as a 'fanatic' and revealing a rather ugly truth about their own personality in the process.
I have no sympathy.

I believe that for the same reason I believe the Mako is underrated. People, all people, are prone to making snap decisions or simply feeling a certain way and not analyzing why. I'm not arguing that those people aren't immature, but you don't understand how people can say these things and I gave you an explanation.

It may seem strange, but think about all the things you have ever felt that you don't know why.  You rightly pointed out, both of you, that Ashley doesn't actually do anything that could create those sorts of feelings in people yet there they are, spouting that nonsense.

From a psychological standpoint, this makes sense. The arbitrary game mechanic of judging her by choosing a dialog option would create this sort of emotion and the fact that most people wouldn't dig deep enough to come to the conclusion that it was the choice and not the dialog that made them feel that way is what gives you these types of ignorant responses.

But I think I've probably overstepped the bounds of the topic, so to be on topic, THE TURIAN COUNCILOR SUCKS!!!!??!!!??!!??

[Sable Phoenix]

Shavon wrote...

So, anyway, the Turian counselor is a douche.  Unnecessarily rude, difficult to work with, and a classic politician. Lol

I always cut him off after Feros.

"Shepard would go to any lengths to protect a human colony."
"Goodbye, Councilor."