51 réponses à ce sujet

[MrFob]

Well, Retribution states that Udina is already councilor BEFORE Anderson resigns/goes rogue.

So it does promote a "cannon" at least as far as this decision is concerned.

[fongiel24]

Forcing us to accept Udina as councillor smells suspiciously like Bioware changing gears post-ME2 to fit the plot of ME3. I'm not crazy about Bioware handwaving player choices, but in the whole scheme of things, what difference did our choice of Anderson or Udina make in ME2 anyway? Shepard spent so little time in Council space or interacting with the Council that they could have written Anderson/Udina right out of ME2 and it would have made no difference in the plot. Yes, it's easier to get Spectre reinstatement with Anderson on your side (Councillor Udina + dead Council in ME1 = no Spectre status in ME2) but being a Spectre again in ME2 didn't influence much either.

As for Bioware's reasons for pushing Anderson out, maybe they're planning to take the Alliance (or at least its higher-ups) in a more sinister direction in ME3. If this was the case, Councillor Anderson would either have to be written as complicit in the Alliance's shenanigans, willfully ignorant, or stupid. Forcing Councillor Udina on us would allow them to go along with the "Alliance is plotting a coup" angle as well as freeing Anderson to take on other roles.

Modifié par fongiel24, 28 octobre 2010 - 07:39 .

[Big I]

GodWood wrote...
]There is no canon.
Thats default Shepard and those choices are picked so noob players can play the game without the game referencing too many people they don't know/choices they never made..

I disagree, canon is the elements of the story over which we have no control. For example, it's canon that Garrus became Archangel; what he did before that (going back to C-Sec or joining the Spectres) is player choice.

This is also true for the novels. No matter what choices you made (about the Collector base for instance), Cerberus will always be raided by the turians with Anderson's help. This appears to be what they're trying to do with Udina as Councilor, and it annoys the hell out of me.

If, as some say the novels indicate, Udina is always the Councilor, then they're saying that any playthrough where you chose Anderson as Councilor is bugged. It doesn't matter if you hate Udina, or think Anderson would make a better ally, or think Anderson is just the better man for the job. It doen't matter that you get e-mails from Councilor Anderson, or that Jacob and Miranda and news reports mention Anderson as Councilor, or that the Codex reflects all of this. None of that happened. All of the above is now a result of the "Anderson bug", where ME2 assumes he was Councilor when he actually wasn't.

I don't have a problem with Anderson stepping down as Councilor between ME2 and ME3; I don't have a problem with Udina being human Councilor (even though I hate him). If the Bioware writers think that's what best serves the story, fine. What I have a problem with is being told that I chose the "wrong" or imaginary choice.

This is a problem that needs to written away by Bioware. If Anderson isn't Councillor in ME3, there better be some damn option to indicate that he WAS Councilor from 2183-2185/86. Otherwise they're invalidating a sizeable chunk of people's playthroughs.

[Sailears]

Kasces wrote...

It doesn't really invalidate the choice. If Anderson as a character WANTS to resign or does stuff that gets him kicked out for whatever reason, that's stroy progression and I'm fine with that. Picking who leads the Council is a customization of the story of Shepard, not intergalactically shattering. Also for all we know, whether Anderson was your pick or Udina was yours all along can still personalize the story for you. Extra dialogue, maybe more options for whatever will happen next, etc.

I mean let's face it, Anderson HATES his job and would gladly give it to
someone more capable or be fine with it if he felt he wasn't doing
enough. He's a marine, do it right or not at all.

ArcanistLibram wrote...

It pisses me off because, well,
dealing with Udina pisses me off, but at the same time, it's not like
the entire galaxy has to revolve around whatever Shepard wants. If
Anderson wants to quit, he wants to quit.

This. The choice can customise the story for Shepard (bits of dialogue maybe), but other characters/npcs can be made to have their own choices.

[Dean_the_Young]

MrFob wrote...

Well, Retribution states that Udina is already councilor BEFORE Anderson resigns/goes rogue.
So it does promote a "cannon" at least as far as this decision is concerned.

Alas, it does not.

For those who don't want to follow the link...

///

DaBigDragon wrote...

I e-mailed Drew Karpyshyn after the ME: Retribution book came out and
asked him about the whole Udina/Anderson Councilor thing. This is what
he replied:

My e-mail to him:

"Hello,

I'm reading through your new Mass Effect book. Been
awesome so far, but how come you went with Udina being a councilor and
Anderson an advisor? What if you chose Anderson to be the councilor in
the games? Is what you wrote a retcon?"



His response:

"Sometimes for the novels, certain things have to be "taken for granted" in

order to tell a story. Anderson couldn't just leave if he was on the

Council.



But this isn't really a "ret-con", as there was no established canon in

the first place.



I realize some people get very upset when something is established that

contradicts their personal game experience, and we try to minimize the

impact. But if we want to continue expanding the Mass Effect universe,

there are times when we have to take certain decisions from the game and

go with one alternative over another so we can build on what has happened.



Hopefully the Mass Effect fans will understand our position and not get

too bent out of shape.

Drew"

[Sailears]

^ Oh, well that's nice to know.

[CroGamer002]

@Dean_the_Young



Good to know.

[Big I]

Dean_the_Young wrote...


But this isn't really a "ret-con", as there was no established canon in

the first place.

One of two things is happening here. Either Udina is being established as the canon councilor, no matter who you chose, or Retribution was written with the caveat "this is how events play out if Udina was councilor."

What we have is a conflict between two aspects of the story - the Councilor decision and Retribution. The only way for Bioware to resolve this conflict and still have a logical and coherent narative is to:

a) Ignore the player's decision and make Udina Councilor from 2183 onwards,

Ignore one element of Retribution (Udina as Councilor) but otherwise assume that all other aspects of the novel play out as written,

c) Ignore Retribution and assume that events played out completely differently  with Anderson as Councilor.


My hope is that they go with option b.

[SmokeyPSD]

There's a mass effect canon? lordey lord.



Here I was playing RPGS to you know, roleplay.

[Troodon80]

LookingGlass93 wrote...
Ignore one element of Retribution (Udina as Councilor) but otherwise assume that all other aspects of the novel play out as written,

My hope is that they go with option b.

My hope is also that they go with option "b".
Unfortunately, the writers cannot do a novel that covers each and every individual aspect of the game, where individual people make the choices. But there are certain things that remain neutral, for example:

"Shepard - with Cerberus's help - had destroyed the Collector operations."

Does this mean that Shepard did indeed destroy the Collector base or just the operation, perhaps neutralizing but not blowing up the base? It's neutral, open to interpretation. Simply that Cerberus retrieved some Reaper tech from the location is no proof either, they could have salvaged it from the wreckage/remains of the base.

Certain things, however, cannot remain neutral, no matter how much we would like it to be so, and personally I believe that if you made Anderson councilor in ME1&2 that he would remain as the councilor on an imported save and that certain details or events that happen - will happen regardless if Anderson is councilor or not. Anderson even tells us that "He's [Udina] always happy to attend all those diplomatic functions I can't be bothered with."

If this sentence rings true, then Ambassador Udina could look after things while Anderson is on his mission with Sanders. And in the long run would benefit the story from a personal perspective/playthrough, since Anderson seems to be the only person (apart from your crew) who believes you about the Reapers...

But if BioWare deems that Udina will be councilor in ME3 regardless of your decisions, then the whole point of the choice is irrelevant and completely unnecessary. But I will still play it and enjoy it for what it is.

[SmokeyPSD]

If Anderson becomes more involved miltaristically again, I'm cool with that overturning his stint as politician. He did feel like he was bashing his head against a wall the entire time.

[SonofMacPhisto]

Anderson is reminding me more and more of James Kirk from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. He's probably kicking himself in the ass for accepting promotion, when really he needs to be running around out there making things happen.



His forced retirement in ME1 was totally garbage anyway, so I'd be happy to see him get back out there and do what he loves. Without command, he's just not the same guy.

[SteelerWayne]

I still stick with Anderson as a member of the Council in the game. At least then Shepard can get his/her Spectre status reinstated.

[SmokeyPSD]

Yeah. I do enjoy the catch at the citadel after talking to the council aswell.

[Spectre_907]

LookingGlass93 wrote...

One of two things is happening here. Either Udina is being established as the canon councilor, no matter who you chose, or Retribution was written with the caveat "this is how events play out if Udina was councilor."

What we have is a conflict between two aspects of the story - the Councilor decision and Retribution. The only way for Bioware to resolve this conflict and still have a logical and coherent narative is to:

a) Ignore the player's decision and make Udina Councilor from 2183 onwards,

Ignore one element of Retribution (Udina as Councilor) but otherwise assume that all other aspects of the novel play out as written,

c) Ignore Retribution and assume that events played out completely differently  with Anderson as Councilor.


My hope is that they go with option b.

I'm going to go with option c.

[lekysma]

anderson remibds me a little of obi wan: great potential,but never achieved anything significant,just whines about how fate wronged him!

[digby69]

ReconTeam wrote...

Pinkflamingo22 wrote...
In one of the "investments" you can make, after you defeat the shadowbroker, you can choose to invest in a smear campaign against Udina, this puts Udina out of office.

My hypothesis; in ME3 niether Anderson nor Udina will be on the council, and the entire council will be replaced.

While the picture shows Udina and other councilors, I don't think that investment even specified it was a council member, it just said a politician.

And the "investement" fails

[Dave of Canada]

Default ME2 has Councilor Udina. It makes sense they continued with it.

[ResidentNoob]

On the bright side, I now hate every single member of the Council...again.



Bringing back memories of ME1, that is.

[CalJones]

I really can't see any logical reason for a player to make Udina councillor after he screwed Shepard by locking down the Normandy.

I do have him on the council in one game (a renegade who saved the Ascension) because that particularly Shepard opted not to pick a councillor himself at the end of ME1, which resulted in Udina giving the speech. I carried that over into ME2 just to see the difference, and guess what? He's even more of an ass.

I certainly wouldn't have done it if I'd sacrificed the council, because Udina won't give you your Spectre status back. Git.

[Collider]

Udina needs a "save the cat" moment

[Nozybidaj]

I don't see what the big deal is. Yeah it is basically BW saying, "we don't care what you picked, here is your councilor", but even so its not like having one or the other has any impact on anything. /shrug

[DarthCaine]

In Retribution, Anderson quits his political job

[DaBigDragon]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

MrFob wrote...

Well, Retribution states that Udina is already councilor BEFORE Anderson resigns/goes rogue.
So it does promote a "cannon" at least as far as this decision is concerned.

Alas, it does not.

For those who don't want to follow the link...

///

DaBigDragon wrote...

I e-mailed Drew Karpyshyn after the ME: Retribution book came out and
asked him about the whole Udina/Anderson Councilor thing. This is what
he replied:

My e-mail to him:

"Hello,

I'm reading through your new Mass Effect book. Been
awesome so far, but how come you went with Udina being a councilor and
Anderson an advisor? What if you chose Anderson to be the councilor in
the games? Is what you wrote a retcon?"



His response:

"Sometimes for the novels, certain things have to be "taken for granted" in

order to tell a story. Anderson couldn't just leave if he was on the

Council.



But this isn't really a "ret-con", as there was no established canon in

the first place.



I realize some people get very upset when something is established that

contradicts their personal game experience, and we try to minimize the

impact. But if we want to continue expanding the Mass Effect universe,

there are times when we have to take certain decisions from the game and

go with one alternative over another so we can build on what has happened.



Hopefully the Mass Effect fans will understand our position and not get

too bent out of shape.

Drew"

Was gonna repost this to help spread the word, thanks for doing it!

[Chaota Vos]

On the bright side, this gives Anderson a chance at being more heroically involved in ME3, Maybe captaining a Cruiser during the big final battle (if there is one!)