197 réponses à ce sujet

[Pacifien]

Edit: Okay, retry here.

I agree that revealing the evidence should have been on the paragon side. It would certainly make people pause before making a decision, as I get the impression some people base their decisions solely based on if the choice was in the paragon or renegade slots rather than what the action actually is.

Modifié par Pacifien, 03 novembre 2010 - 04:54 .

[jlb524]

JaerWolfe wrote...


They deserve the right to know why their loved ones died. If they want to blame Rael or the Admirals or whoever, I could not care less, but they deserve the right to make that choice for themselves rather than have it be hidden with back door politics.

I reveal the information every time. I find it difficult to accept Tali putting more meaning into her dead father's pride than the grief of the families of those who died.

I also believe that events can change people. Who's to say Jona, learning the truth of his mother's death didn't seek peace with the Geth? Or didn't become the driving force for finding a planet the Fleet could call their own? Or maybe, driven by revenge, he created a weapon that wiped the Geth out once and for all. Any of it could have been directly influenced by knowing how and why his mother died.

Hmmm...good points.  Handing over the evidence could show quarians that their kind isn't as innocent in the Geth/Quarian conflict as they want to think.

I always hide the evidence, as I figure since Rael'Zorah is dead, there's no point in punishing him further, and more can be gained by hiding it, but....now I have something else to think about

[Zall]

Shandepared wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

The whole 'revealing the data being Renegade' thing never made sense to me. The coverup, while sympathetic, was distinctly more 'against the rules', which seems distinctly Renegade to me.

The truth is, Bioware looks at decisions like this:

Does it have a good outcome or a bad outcome? Are you liked or hated?

If the outcome is bad or you are hated then it is renegade.

If the outcome is good and you are liked then it is paragon.

The actual ethics and reasoning behind the choice are meaningless.

Or, you know, they might have had a different opinion than you. Perhaps they did not think it was the ethical choice.

Anyway, majority of the mission endings are held in greyish tones. No pure black and white. The developers most likely are patting themselves on the shoulder, that there are so many heated discussions over what is the right thing to do.

[Pacifien]

mrsph wrote...
I think it is renegade because you are handing over dangerous knowledge to at least one person who seems to want to abuse it for her own ends.

Yeah, but turns out she can't use it if you turn in the evidence. Whereas if you withhold it, she gains access to it in secret and goes "Mwuahahaha!"

[Moiaussi]

Shandepared wrote...

The truth is, Bioware looks at decisions like this:

Does it have a good outcome or a bad outcome? Are you liked or hated?

If the outcome is bad or you are hated then it is renegade.

If the outcome is good and you are liked then it is paragon.

The actual ethics and reasoning behind the choice are meaningless.

Sadly I don't think it is even that consistant. They seem confused which model they are following. My sense of it is that it was worse in ME2 than in ME1, but wouldn't swear to that.

[jbblue05]

Splitting up the Quarins is what's best for the Quarians

The Flotilla has been the Quarians biggest strength and major weakness.

The Quarians have spent the past 300 years being stalemated in politics not making any major progress

With the war branch they would have Dano Xen, she would be able to focus on her experiments possibly taking back the homeworld without losing one quarian or ship.  If they take back the homeworld they .can invite the peace branch.

If the war branch fails the peace branch can focus on colonizing and finding a planet worthy of colonization if they succeed they can invite the war branch.

The Quarians can accomplish so much more if they go their separate ways

[Nightwriter]

Pacifien wrote...

Edit: Okay, retry here.

I agree that revealing the evidence should have been on the paragon side. It would certainly make people pause before making a decision, as I get the impression some people base their decisions solely based on if the choice was in the paragon or renegade slots rather than what the action actually is.

I don't agree that it should be paragon.

Paragons aren't senseless idiots. How is it paragon to throw the entire quarian nation into utter chaos on the brink of a Reaper war? If morality was defined by telling the truth vs not telling the truth you'd be right, but I don't think that's all morality is defined by.

[Collider]

Letting the quarians know about technology that could compel them to go to war again (and fail) = dangerous and short sighted. Legion said himself that everytime the quarians believed that they had a chance against the geth, the quarians attacked (and lost). It's like giving a "kill all your enemies" button to a dictator. You're just asking for trouble.

Also, I'd rather give the quarian government the right to decide what to do with what is on the Alarei. Shepard is a guest - he doesn't have the right to make such a serious decision as if he's part of the quarian government.

That said? It's a morally ambiguous decision. Mass Effect 2 definitely stepped up and improved the moral decisions because they're less black and white this time around. Mass Effect 1's main decisions were literally "kill innocent people or leave them to die" or "don't kill or leave innocent people."

Mass Effect 2 is a lot better than that. I'm glad that Tali's end mission decision was morally ambiguous and not black and white. That's something I would have if I was a writer - my own character's mission would end with a choice that made people think.

Modifié par Collider, 03 novembre 2010 - 05:20 .

[Kronner]

"Spiting on a corpse", what is done is done? Really?

He was reckless and incompetent - got himself and his whole team killed.

He did nasty experiments on POWs (geth). Just beacuse he is dead does not mean he can't, or shouldn't, be punished for it. His team died, despite the fact that they did not want to risk, Rael made the decision for everyone.
Fact that he was Tali's father does not change anything.

But I suppose any war crimes should be overlooked, because what's done is done, right?

Modifié par Kronner, 03 novembre 2010 - 05:22 .

[Nightwriter]

So you'll doom the entire quarian people and throw away an important ally in the Reaper war - all just to punish Rael?

[Kronner]

Nightwriter wrote...

So you'll doom the entire quarian people and throw away an important ally in the Reaper war - all just to punish Rael?

No. Even when you give them the evidence, you can encourage them to not to go to war with geth.
And franky, 17 million quarians (and how many can actually fight?), with plenty of old ships are not gonna make any difference anyways. Geth are far superior and much more important ally against the Reapers. Quarians can either stop playing games and make peace with the geth or they can doom themselves. If they are so stupid to do the latter, the evidence has no influence on that.

Modifié par Kronner, 03 novembre 2010 - 05:28 .

[Collider]

Rael is already dead. He can't be punished. He can be punished in "spirit," but honestly, that doesn't mean anything.

The only people who can be punished are the ones still living - that includes Tali and the Quarian people. As it turns out, they do suffer if the evidence is made public.

[Nightwriter]

Kronner wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

So you'll doom the entire quarian people and throw away an important ally in the Reaper war - all just to punish Rael?

No. Even when you give them the evidence, you can encourage them to not to go to war with geth.
And franky, 17 million quarians (and how many can actually fight?), with plenty of old ships are not gonna make any difference anyways. Geth are far superior and much more important ally against the Reapers. Quarians can either stop playing games and make peace with the geth or they can doom themselves. If they are so stupid to do the latter, the evidence has no influence on that.

The biggest fleet in the galaxy will be of no use whatsoever? I guess we have different viewpoints here.

Also, having the quarians as an ally does not preclude having the geth as an ally. Having both is the ideal. Which is why peace is so important.

Handing the quarians a doomsday weapon is counterproductive to peace.

[Dave of Canada]

Nightwriter wrote...

Paragons aren't senseless idiots. How is it paragon to throw the entire quarian nation into utter chaos on the brink of a Reaper war? If morality was defined by telling the truth vs not telling the truth you'd be right, but I don't think that's all morality is defined by.

How would you know it could put all the Quarians into chaos? All the information you've recieved up to that point is that Rael's name would be removed from the records and he's going to be viewed upon as a monster. I never saw the whole "evidence = fragmented quarians" thing coming.

Hell, how does it fit renegade?

[Kronner]

Nightwriter wrote...

The biggest fleet in the galaxy will be of no use whatsoever? I guess we have different viewpoints here.

Also, having the quarians as an ally does not preclude having the geth as an ally. Having both is the ideal. Which is why peace is so important.

Handing the quarians a doomsday weapon is counterproductive to peace.

Numbers are meaningless if most of their ships are old and hold together by honest word. If they were so strong, how come geth beat their asses every single time?

Yes, and revealing the evidence may be the first step in understanding that what they did to geth was wrong and peace is the best solution for them. Otherwise they will either be wiped out by the geth or die slowly on their old ships.

And you do not give them anything but information, they are the ones resposible for its use. If the admirals are so pround and stupid to see that geth are far stronger faction, then go ahead and kill yoursel, fools. Otherwise, get your act together, admit you made mistake, go back to your homeworld, which is in a good shape thanks to the geth, and then help against the Reapers. Easy. Rael Zorah or Tali are irrelevant.

Modifié par Kronner, 03 novembre 2010 - 05:43 .

[Nightwriter]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Paragons aren't senseless idiots. How is it paragon to throw the entire quarian nation into utter chaos on the brink of a Reaper war? If morality was defined by telling the truth vs not telling the truth you'd be right, but I don't think that's all morality is defined by.

How would you know it could put all the Quarians into chaos? All the information you've recieved up to that point is that Rael's name would be removed from the records and he's going to be viewed upon as a monster. I never saw the whole "evidence = fragmented quarians" thing coming.

Hell, how does it fit renegade?

Well, it's safe to say you knew it would create a big sensation. You knew it would be explosive news.

When they got this news, I expected two reactions:

1. "Rael was a monster!"
2. "Holy sh*t, look at this, he was onto something here."

[Fiery Phoenix]

Collider wrote...

Rael is already dead. He can't be punished. He can be punished in "spirit," but honestly, that doesn't mean anything.
The only people who can be punished are the ones still living - that includes Tali and the Quarian people. As it turns out, they do suffer if the evidence is made public.

This would be my justification as well.

Honestly, though, if there was an option to reveal the evidence and NOT get Tali exiled, I might have considered going for it on one of my playthroughs. But obviously there is no such option, which makes sense regardless.

[Dave of Canada]

Nightwriter wrote...

Well, it's safe to say you knew it would create a big sensation. You knew it would be explosive news.

While that's true, it never suggested the fate of all the infighting.

[JaerWolfe]

Dave of Canada wrote...
How would you know it could put all the Quarians into chaos? All the information you've recieved up to that point is that Rael's name would be removed from the records and he's going to be viewed upon as a monster. I never saw the whole "evidence = fragmented quarians" thing coming.

Hell, how does it fit renegade?

I never understood how revealing the information equated destroying the Quarians. I never saw them as being that fragile. This is a people that survived the decimation of their population, the exile from their homeworld, the dependency of their bodies on an enclosed biosystem...they survived all of this and the truth is going to wipe them out?
I always saw that statement from an emotional reaction in a time of grief and not something to be taken literally.

Modifié par JaerWolfe, 03 novembre 2010 - 05:42 .

[Collider]

Like I said - Shepard would be giving technology that has the potential to destroy the geth to the quarians. That's enough to raise alarm and suspect that revealing the evidence would harm the quarians. Going to war against the Geth again isn't going to help the quarians, it's going to harm them.

[Nightwriter]

Kronner wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

The biggest fleet in the galaxy will be of no use whatsoever? I guess we have different viewpoints here.

Also, having the quarians as an ally does not preclude having the geth as an ally. Having both is the ideal. Which is why peace is so important.

Handing the quarians a doomsday weapon is counterproductive to peace.

Numbers are meaningless if most of their ships are old and hold together by honest word. If they were so strong, how come geth beat their asses every single time?

Yes, and revealing the evidence may be the first step in understanding that what they did to geth was wrong and peace is the best solution for them. Otherwise they will either be wiped out by the geth or die slowly on their old ships.

And you do not give them anything but information, they are the ones resposible for its use.

It doesn't matter, you need all the ships you can get, and they have a lot. More than anyone.

Revealing the information will show them Rael made a mistake but was onto something huge.

Whether you like it or not, you are responsible for the consequences of giving them that information.

[ashwind]

Pacifien wrote...
I agree that revealing the evidence should have been on the paragon side. It would certainly make people pause before making a decision, as I get the impression some people base their decisions solely based on if the choice was in the paragon or renegade slots rather than what the action actually is.

But Tali would be soooo sad if you gave them the evidence. She asked so cutely... who cares about the consequences, Shep has taken out one Reaper and beaten another numerous time - the only thing Shep cannot handle is a pouting, weeping, sulking girl. Who cares about Renegade/Paragon/Justice/Injustice, tis what Tali wants that matters.

Pacifien wrote...
Yeah, but turns out she can't use it if you turn in the evidence. Whereas if you withhold it, she gains access to it in secret and goes "Mwuahahaha!"

Well, Tali will be very upset if she found out that because of her own selfishness, the Quarians may get into trouble - more hug time 

Sides, tis only one crazy admiral, nothing a healthy amount of bullets wont fix. :innocent:

Modifié par ashwind, 03 novembre 2010 - 05:47 .