165 réponses à ce sujet

[TheBlackBaron]

GodWood wrote...
You kill all these people to get to him then tell Garrus that killing is wrong and he can't kill the man who killed his team.

You spend half the game mowing down people that haven't really done anything to Shepard. But then, what measure is a mook?

Although apparantly all somebody needs is five seconds of dialogue and a name to convince some people they should be left alive.

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 29 octobre 2010 - 07:14 .

[Nightwriter]

Shandepared wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

The Paragon is always inconsistent, so sparing Sidonis is quite consistent with the general paragon inconsistency. Dialectics.

This example is particularly bad though. "I'm going to kill dozens of mercs to teach Garrus that it is not okay to kill people."

Rofl. We can't control the waves of mercs sent at us. Why don't you ask us about choices we can actually control.

[Fiery Phoenix]

LOL

[RiouHotaru]

Nightwriter wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

The Paragon is always inconsistent, so sparing Sidonis is quite consistent with the general paragon inconsistency. Dialectics.

This example is particularly bad though. "I'm going to kill dozens of mercs to teach Garrus that it is not okay to kill people."

Rofl. We can't control the waves of mercs sent at us. Why don't you ask us about choices we can actually control.

Because, Wise Nightwriter, if it were choices we could control, then Paragons would be consistent, and Renegades can't have us making logical sense now can they?

[RiouHotaru]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Rofl. We can't control the waves of mercs sent at us. Why don't you ask us about choices we can actually control.

Why did you understake the mission in the first place?

Because Garrus asked Shepard for help in locating Sidonis.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Rofl. We can't control the waves of mercs sent at us. Why don't you ask us about choices we can actually control.

Why did you understake the mission in the first place?

Who said that waves of mercs are definite when doing a mission? GArrus's missions could have been just like Samara's or Thane's. Collecting information for a discrete assassination, no combat required. 

[abnocte]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

The thing about this is you spend at least 30 minutes touring the Citadel, persuading people, and then fighting mercs and mechs before you can make this decision. If Sidonis is let alive, then you've practically wasted your time and all the trouble you've just gone through. As in, if Shepard knows and intends for it to end this way, why doesn't she make it clear for Garrus that she won't help him murder a helpless soul just because of "personal matters"?

Granted, Garrus may have been rather skeptical about Shepard's intended plan on handling the situation, but part of him seemed to believe that she was in fact going to proceed with the plan, in which case it makes sparing Sidonis seem a bit out of place.

In any event, I generally do save Sidonis myself, but I killed him on a few Renegade playthroughs. That's just my honest opinion on the matter regardless of how I handle it in my game.

From my point of view, my paragon Shepard tags along simply because she considers Garrus a friend.

She doesn't agree with killing Sidonis from the very beginning, but she knows Garrus isn't going to let it go. So if she can't change his mind before going after Sidonis, at least she will be there for him, trying to avoid Garrus crossing the line....and as soon as she saw that killing Sidonis wasn't necessary she took her chances.

And I agree that Garrus is a grown man and can take his own decisions, but that doesn't mind that as a friend you just shut your mouth. For me a real friend says things to your face when he thinks you are doing something wrong, their words changing your mind is another matter, but I like to hear their opinions about it...

[Gibb_Shepard]

Shandepared wrote...

No, but Garrus specifically told you he wanted to find Sidonis and kill him. Did you plan all along to find Sidonis and then betray Garrus by standing in front of the scope?

That wasn't what you were refering to. You were saying "why undertake the mission if you didn't want to kill mercs?". I was simply saying that the mercs were an unexpected obstacle, that weren't necessarily outlined as a prerequisite of undertaking the mission.

I do agree that saving Sidonis is a bit inconsistent though, i always let Garrus kill him, but only after Sidonis has given me the reasoning behind his betrayal. 

[RiouHotaru]

Shandepared wrote...

No, but Garrus specifically told you he wanted to find Sidonis and kill him. Did you plan all along to find Sidonis and then betray Garrus by standing in front of the scope?

Well, you only knew that Sidonis "betrayed" Garrus.  Garrus assumes the betrayal was a willing, malicious act, painting Sidonis as a nasty, ill-minded individual.  What you actually find is a shell-shocked man who was coerced into unwillingly giving up his allies, and lives with the guilt and horror of what he's done.  Killing Sidonis after learning this has no meaning.  You're just killing another man.

Funny how the intervention is called "betrayal" as well.

[GuardianAngel470]

GodWood wrote...

I'll never understand paragons.
You kill all these people to get to him then tell Garrus that killing is wrong and he can't kill the man who killed his team.

As Nightwriter said, we can't control the gameplay, but we can control the dialog. If there had been an option to stealth through like in Deus Ex, I'd have done that as I'm an infiltrator. We can't control the gameplay.

And for the record, I killed him the first several times simply because I thought I would lose Garrus' loyalty. Then I took a chance and listened to what Sidonis had to say, and after that I didn't let Garrus kill him anymore, for reasons I've already made clear.

Also, blood trails are good.

Modifié par GuardianAngel470, 29 octobre 2010 - 07:45 .

[Nightwriter]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Rofl. We can't control the waves of mercs sent at us. Why don't you ask us about choices we can actually control.

Why did you understake the mission in the first place?

ROFL x 2.

"What did you want Garrus's loyalty for, Nightwriter?"

I mean why would I want to unlock the ONLY other dialogue content I get with Garrus besides CALIBRATIONS CALIBRATIONS CALIBRATIONS CALIBRATIONS.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 29 octobre 2010 - 07:45 .

[TheBlackBaron]

RiouHotaru wrote...
Well, you only knew that Sidonis "betrayed" Garrus.  Garrus assumes the betrayal was a willing, malicious act, painting Sidonis as a nasty, ill-minded individual.  What you actually find is a shell-shocked man who was coerced into unwillingly giving up his allies, and lives with the guilt and horror of what he's done.  Killing Sidonis after learning this has no meaning.  You're just killing another man.

Funny how the intervention is called "betrayal" as well.

What difference does that make? It's still a betrayel of Garrus. Hell, in Garrus' mind that's even worse, since it also shows Sidonis to be a coward.

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 29 octobre 2010 - 07:48 .

[GodWood]

Soo paragons would be forgiving if one of Shepard's team killed the rest of the squad?

[RiouHotaru]

Nightwriter wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Rofl. We can't control the waves of mercs sent at us. Why don't you ask us about choices we can actually control.

Why did you understake the mission in the first place?

ROFL x 2.

"What did you want Garrus's loyalty for, Nightwriter?"

I mean why would I want to unlock the ONLY other dialogue content I get with Garrus besides CALIBRATIONS CALIBRATIONS CALIBRATIONS CALIBRATIONS.

Or, for those of us with FemSheps, the chance to make our ME1 fantasies a reality~

[RiouHotaru]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...
Well, you only knew that Sidonis "betrayed" Garrus.  Garrus assumes the betrayal was a willing, malicious act, painting Sidonis as a nasty, ill-minded individual.  What you actually find is a shell-shocked man who was coerced into unwillingly giving up his allies, and lives with the guilt and horror of what he's done.  Killing Sidonis after learning this has no meaning.  You're just killing another man.

Funny how the intervention is called "betrayal" as well.

What difference does that make? It's still a betrayel of Garrus. Hell, in Garrus' mind that's even worse, since it also shows Sidonis to be a coward.

...Wow, you do realize that how heartless that sounds?  Does anyone remember what Zaeed said, which fits into this perfectly: "Doesn't matter who you are, you got a gun in your face chances are good you'll do what the other man says. Only two types don't buckle at that point: trained killers, and psychopaths. Lot of people can't tell the difference."

So you think it's unforgiveable that Sidonis isn't an implacable badass like Shepard?

GodWood wrote...

Soo paragons would be forgiving if one of Shepard's team killed the rest of the squad?

Ask yourself whether or not Shepard's Squad, at their peak, could be taken by a joint operation between 3 merc groups in the same manner as Garrus' squad....

Yeah, I didn't think so either.

I also just LOVE a false dicotomy.

Modifié par RiouHotaru, 29 octobre 2010 - 07:58 .

[GuardianAngel470]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...
Well, you only knew that Sidonis "betrayed" Garrus.  Garrus assumes the betrayal was a willing, malicious act, painting Sidonis as a nasty, ill-minded individual.  What you actually find is a shell-shocked man who was coerced into unwillingly giving up his allies, and lives with the guilt and horror of what he's done.  Killing Sidonis after learning this has no meaning.  You're just killing another man.

Funny how the intervention is called "betrayal" as well.

What difference does that make? It's still a betrayel of Garrus. Hell, in Garrus' mind that's even worse, since it also shows Sidonis to be a coward.

What difference? Did you just... Really? I'm at a loss.... 

It's the difference between life and death to me. Sidonis acted selfishly and chose his own life over his team's. It's a part of the survival instinct, obviously he had more loyalty to himself than his comrades, but at the same time he didn't actively seek out a way to kill them.

He wasn't approached with an offer of money if he turned them over to the mercs, he didn't seek out the mercs to betray them, which is the type of act that Garrus was convinced he did.

Barbarians kill people because of cowardice. Garrus is above that. To kill a man for an instinctual reaction to danger would create a society that ate itself into oblivion. It would turn inward and destroy itself.

[TheBlackBaron]

RiouHotaru wrote...
...Wow, you do realize that how heartless that sounds?  Does anyone remember what Zaeed said, which fits into this perfectly: "Doesn't matter who you are, you got a gun in your face chances are good you'll do what the other man says. Only two types don't buckle at that point: trained killers, and psychopaths. Lot of people can't tell the difference."

So you think it's unforgiveable that Sidonis isn't an implacable badass like Shepard?

Do you deny that it's a betrayel of Garrus? 

Ask yourself whether or not Shepard's Squad, at their peak, could be taken by a joint operation between 3 merc groups in the same manner as Garrus' squad....

Yeah, I didn't think so either.

Way to dodge the question there, chief.

EDIT: On a lighter note, this is gonna start looking really schizophrenic - three Garrus avatars arguing.

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 29 octobre 2010 - 07:56 .

[GuardianAngel470]

GodWood wrote...

Soo paragons would be forgiving if one of Shepard's team killed the rest of the squad?

Killed? No, if say Miranda or Jack led a group of reapers into shepard's team on purpose, with the intent to have them killed, then no I wouldn't forgive them (I use those two because they have the weakest loyalty).

However, if Jack was captured and possibly tortured into revealing the location of my team, then yes I would. Imprison her sure, but I would forgive her.

The latter is the only scenario relevant.

[GodWood]

RiouHotaru wrote...

GodWood wrote...
Soo paragons would be forgiving if one of Shepard's team killed the rest of the squad?

Ask yourself whether or not Shepard's Squad, at their peak, could be taken by a joint operation between 3 merc groups in the same manner as Garrus' squad....

Yeah, I didn't think so either.

How is that even relevent?
My point is would you forgive one of Shepard's squad if they killed the rest of the team?

[GuardianAngel470]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...
...Wow, you do realize that how heartless that sounds?  Does anyone remember what Zaeed said, which fits into this perfectly: "Doesn't matter who you are, you got a gun in your face chances are good you'll do what the other man says. Only two types don't buckle at that point: trained killers, and psychopaths. Lot of people can't tell the difference."

So you think it's unforgiveable that Sidonis isn't an implacable badass like Shepard?

Do you deny that it's a betrayel of Garrus? 

Ask yourself whether or not Shepard's Squad, at their peak, could be taken by a joint operation between 3 merc groups in the same manner as Garrus' squad....

Yeah, I didn't think so either.

Way to dodge the question there, chief.

EDIT: On a lighter note, this is gonna start looking really schizophrenic - three Garrus avatars arguing.

Yes, it is a betrayal, but it isn't the one Garrus told us it was.

And yes, schizophrenia is a side effect of awesome.

[RiouHotaru]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

Do you deny that it's a betrayel of Garrus? 

Yes, yes I do.  I don't consider it a betrayal when done at the muzzle of a gun.  It's completely understandable.

Way to dodge the question there, chief. 

Not really, he's offering us a rather odd scenario with two mutually exclusive options.  Do you really think any individual member of Shepard's team doesn't possess the skills to get themselves OUT of such a situation?  I'm not undervaluing Garrus' Squad, but you have to admit, they're not Shepard's Dirty Dozen.

EDIT: On a lighter note, this is gonna start looking really schizophrenic - three Garrus avatars arguing.

Hahaha, awesome.

[TheBlackBaron]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Yes, it is a betrayal, but it isn't the one Garrus told us it was.

Indeed, and in fact I actually do sympathize with Sidonis slightly more knowing that he was acting out of survival instinct and not pure greed.

But I also value loyalty to your friends and comrades, and the fact that Sidonis also turns towards the Citadel's criminal underground to escape any retribution also rankles me.

Finally, as I pointed out on the first page, he wants to die. That's why I usually drag it out to that point. It's as much a mercy for him as it is for Garrus.

"No more sleepless nights."
"For either of us."
*pow*