165 réponses à ce sujet

[RiouHotaru]

Manic Sheep wrote...

A person skill in whatever particular field they are in dose not necessarily mean they won’t crack under torture or certain death. Although being that you are all on a suicide mission anyway it would be a little strange if they did. But then again there is a difference between fighting for your life and knowing without a doubt you will die and then being offered a way out. Ahhh just forget that point for a sec or make it the ME1 squad or somthing.
Anyway, see how you feel about the Shep Squad? That’s probably exactly how Garrus felt about his.
Now imagine that one of your squad, and know I don’t mean your least favourite squad member. Someone who you would trust implicitly. Someone who you and everyone else relies on and who should be able to stand up in the face of death...betrays your whole squad to save their own ass. Your entire squad apart from you dies and you find that the one who betrayed you has cleared their bank and skipped town. You really would be willing to forgive them? I mean not kill them maybe but forgive them? I can't imagine doing that but maybe I'm just a horrible person. Still wouldn't make it right tho I supose.

The problem, is that the situation isn't that simple.  You can't just flip the situation around and replace every instance of Garrus and his men with Shepard and his/her men (though Nightwriter did so very amusingly).  You're dealing with two different sets of people, two different sets of motivations and trains of thought.  There's just too many things not in common.  A simple swap isn't good enough, which is why Goodwind's example feels faulty to me.

[GuardianAngel470]

Manic Sheep wrote...

A person skill in whatever particular field they are in dose not necessarily mean they won’t crack under torture or certain death. Although being that you are all on a suicide mission anyway it would be a little strange if they did. But then again there is a difference between fighting for your life and knowing without a doubt you will die and then being offered a way out. Ahhh just forget that point for a sec or make it the ME1 squad or somthing.
Anyway, see how you feel about the Shep Squad? That’s probably exactly how Garrus felt about his.
Now imagine that one of your squad, and know I don’t mean your least favourite squad member. Someone who you would trust implicitly. Someone who you and everyone else relies on and who should be able to stand up in the face of death...betrays your whole squad to save their own ass. Your entire squad apart from you dies and you find that the one who betrayed you has cleared their bank and skipped town. You really would be willing to forgive them? I mean not kill them maybe but forgive them? I can't imagine doing that but maybe I'm just a horrible person. Still wouldn't make it right tho I supose.

We've answered this question. Yes, I would forgive them. They would be punished with incarceration because they can't be trusted to watch their buddies' back, but I would forgive them.

[Collider]

The point is that the situation was setup by the writers in such a way that the paragon thing to do is to not do the mission because otherwise you kill too many to balance the life saved.

Disagreed because Shepard doesn't know what will happen beforehand.

Modifié par Collider, 29 octobre 2010 - 09:09 .

[ODST 3]

Nightwriter wrote...

I did not save Sidonis. I saved Garrus. Sidonis being alive in my playthrough is just a condition of that.

Hell yeah. Garrus shouldn't be a murderer. I will continue to train him in the light side of the force.

[GuardianAngel470]

Collider wrote...

The point is that the situation was setup by the writers in such a way that the paragon thing to do is to not do the mission because otherwise you kill too many to balance the life saved.

Disagreed because Shepard doesn't know what will happen beforehand.

He knows that Harkin is holed up in the industrial sector with the Blue Suns. I'd say that's enough.

[RiouHotaru]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

But you instigate the firefight by going there. Technically, and from a roleplaying perspective, you don't have to march headlong into the base and kill dozens of mercs in order to get to sidonis. You could just not help Garrus, or find another way.

The point is that the situation was setup by the writers in such a way that the paragon thing to do is to not do the mission because otherwise you kill too many to balance the life saved.

Finding Sidonis requires finding "Fade", which DOES require going into the merc's hideout.  It's the only lead you have.  Also, since when did Paragons become pacifists?  We're allowed to spill some blood now and again.  We'd prefer to find a more diplomatic resolution, but when it's obvious that won't do, we're not afraid to cap a few fools either.

Besides, do you think Harkin would've really cooperated any other way?

[Collider]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Collider wrote...

The point is that the situation was setup by the writers in such a way that the paragon thing to do is to not do the mission because otherwise you kill too many to balance the life saved.

Disagreed because Shepard doesn't know what will happen beforehand.

He knows that Harkin is holed up in the industrial sector with the Blue Suns. I'd say that's enough.

That's after the mission starts though, isn't it?

[GuardianAngel470]

Collider wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Collider wrote...

The point is that the situation was setup by the writers in such a way that the paragon thing to do is to not do the mission because otherwise you kill too many to balance the life saved.

Disagreed because Shepard doesn't know what will happen beforehand.

He knows that Harkin is holed up in the industrial sector with the Blue Suns. I'd say that's enough.

That's after the mission starts though, isn't it?

Nope, the Volus in the Wards tells you he's with the Blue Suns there.

[Nightwriter]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

What you are essentially saying is that because I must fight through mercs to complete this mission, I absolutely must choose the renegade outcome. And I suspect you will call this logic.

Actually no, I'm on your side. I find that for a paragon the entire quest is broken. I want to rewrite the quest so that paragons can do it and not be hypocrites.

Well it that case I sympathize with renegades on the Zaeed loyalty mission, normally you all get a "harsh with a reason" approach to things, but in this one you're just sort of ruthless bastards.

[Collider]

Even though I do the renegade route, paragon route would probably be much better for Garrus.

[GuardianAngel470]

Nightwriter wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

What you are essentially saying is that because I must fight through mercs to complete this mission, I absolutely must choose the renegade outcome. And I suspect you will call this logic.

Actually no, I'm on your side. I find that for a paragon the entire quest is broken. I want to rewrite the quest so that paragons can do it and not be hypocrites.

Well it that case I sympathize with renegades on the Zaeed loyalty mission, normally you all get a "harsh with a reason" approach to things, but in this one you're just sort of ruthless bastards.

I let the workers die in my playthroughs. In the end, I see Vido as a bigger threat to more people than just the ones in the factories. 

[Collider]

I save the refinery because:

a) That's what the mission was for in the first place

I don't think these people deserve to die just so Zaeed gets his revenge

c) The workers will stay dead, but Vido can be taken down later.

[Nightwriter]

Without this getting sidetracked into a Zaeed's mission discussion, I'll just briefly say I see true renegades as mission-at-all-costs type people, and the mission was to save the refinery and not to satisfy Zaeed's grudge. For once we see the paragon Shepard going, "You lost sight of the mission."

[marshalleck]

I love the refinery mission as well, for the parallels it draws between Shepard and Saren. I think that's something most players who don't read the codex or listen to dialogue miss.

Even though he's dead, Saren is still casting his shadow over the game in subtle ways. 

Modifié par marshalleck, 29 octobre 2010 - 09:45 .

[Nightwriter]

Again, the getting off track thing...

Collider wrote...

The point is that the situation was setup by the writers in such a way that the paragon thing to do is to not do the mission because otherwise you kill too many to balance the life saved.

Disagreed because Shepard doesn't know what will happen beforehand.

I agree with this. I also think that in real life, if mercs fired at me I'd fire back. I just find it a little ironic that I kill about a hundred people just to spare one turian.

[GuardianAngel470]

Collider wrote...

I save the refinery because:
a) That's what the mission was for in the first place
I don't think these people deserve to die just so Zaeed gets his revenge
c) The workers will stay dead, but Vido can be taken down later.

a)I think this may have been a case of Zaeed lying to you. I highly doubt he was hired to save the workers as apparently they were Vido's base of operations. In all likelihood, he told you what he thought you would believe and sympathize with. He might also have wanted to keep it secret so that you couldn't tip off Vido. I firmly believe that the mission had always been to kill vido.

b)I don't kill them so he can get revenge, I kill them because I think Vido should be taken down when the option presents itself.

c)You make a good point, but personally I feel that in the time it takes you to find and catch him again, it may no longer be convenient to do so as other things may have happened such as Reaper invasion or faction disputes. A good comparison situation would be Morinth. If you let her get away, Samara will have to track her down again, and in that time many people could be killed. The analogy fails in that the only death on the line is Morinth's, but it still displays the amount of lives that could be lost because of inaction.

That's my reasoning though, I don't actually expect you to agree with it. And to be on topic, Garrus shouldn't become a murderer because I don't need a murderer, I need a leader and a friend.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Icinix wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I did not save Sidonis. I saved Garrus. Sidonis being alive in my playthrough is just a condition of that.

+ 3.14159265

[GuardianAngel470]

marshalleck wrote...

I love the refinery mission as well, for the parallels it draws between Shepard and Saren. I think that's something most players who don't read the codex or listen to dialogue miss.

Even though he's dead, Saren is still casting his shadow over the game in subtle ways. 

Yet always with subtle differences. His shadow is cast but no matter what you do on that mission, it isn't a true parallel. Saren destroyed the refinery even though he had other options that were just as expedient for getting the job done. There was a plan in place that hadn't been compromised, yet he blew it up anyway.

With Shepard, even if you blow the refinery, you do it for a purpose, whatever your reasons. There were also only two options, because Zaeed decided that he couldn't take the mercs on the causeway and decided to start a fire.

[RiouHotaru]

Nightwriter wrote...

Again, the getting off track thing...

Collider wrote...

The point is that the situation was setup by the writers in such a way that the paragon thing to do is to not do the mission because otherwise you kill too many to balance the life saved.

Disagreed because Shepard doesn't know what will happen beforehand.

I agree with this. I also think that in real life, if mercs fired at me I'd fire back. I just find it a little ironic that I kill about a hundred people just to spare one turian.

I agree on the irony bit, but then again, this wouldn't be the first time you've gunned down ridiculous numbers of mercs for the sake of a comparatively smaller net gain.  So I figure the irony is recognized, and just moved on from.

[GuardianAngel470]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I did not save Sidonis. I saved Garrus. Sidonis being alive in my playthrough is just a condition of that.

+ 3.14159265

I don't get it, why is Pi relevant?

[doagrl]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Collider wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Collider wrote...

The point is that the situation was setup by the writers in such a way that the paragon thing to do is to not do the mission because otherwise you kill too many to balance the life saved.

Disagreed because Shepard doesn't know what will happen beforehand.

He knows that Harkin is holed up in the industrial sector with the Blue Suns. I'd say that's enough.

That's after the mission starts though, isn't it?

Nope, the Volus in the Wards tells you he's with the Blue Suns there.

When we go in to meet the Volus we are thinking we are meeting with Fade once he reveals that he's not Fade he directs you to the real Fade and tells you he's protected by the Blue Suns. So as far as I'm concerned we'd already started down the path on this mission.

But I don't understand what's so hypocritical about going after Harkin if you're a Paragon anyway. Harkin is a criminal  who is forging IDs for other criminals (and/or unsavory people) and the Blue Suns are mercenaries. Anyone who puts on a mercenary uniform and picks up a gun shouldn't be at all surprised that they don't make it home at the end of the day.

The original mission was just to get Sidonis' new name and whereabouts from Fade but once he set his gang of mercs and mechs on us then I have no qualms about killing them since paragon does not mean pacifist.

[Fiery Phoenix]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I did not save Sidonis. I saved Garrus. Sidonis being alive in my playthrough is just a condition of that.

+ 3.14159265

I don't get it, why is Pi relevant?

I honestly don't get it, either. lol!

Modifié par FieryPhoenix7, 29 octobre 2010 - 10:24 .