92 réponses à ce sujet

[Fiery Phoenix]

I'm not saying that fixes it; just a cheap way of thinking of it in a way so it makes sense.

[Ieldra]

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...
Miranda 

Destroy - 1
Keep - 5

This one irritated me probably the most. She completely defends Cerberus the entire game (aside from the paragon end scene, which I thought was crazy). She should be furious that Shepard destroyed the base.

Very much this. Miranda is completely out of character at the end of the suicide mission. All through the game, she stays pragmatic, recommending not going after the crew if a loyalty mission is unfinished, recommending not sending anyone back with the crew, and here she makes an impulsive emotion-based turn-about in the single decision where thinking about it and making a pragmatic decision would be most appropriate for her. It's extremely annoying.

[magelet]

My main problem was how no one really agrees with you about keeping it. It makes it seem like you did the wrong thing, which I don't think the game should do.

Also some characters (Miranda and Mordin specifically) just seem really out of character by disagreeing with you.

[kraidy1117]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...
Miranda 

Destroy - 1
Keep - 5

This one irritated me probably the most. She completely defends Cerberus the entire game (aside from the paragon end scene, which I thought was crazy). She should be furious that Shepard destroyed the base.

Very much this. Miranda is completely out of character at the end of the suicide mission. All through the game, she stays pragmatic, recommending not going after the crew if a loyalty mission is unfinished, recommending not sending anyone back with the crew, and here she makes an impulsive emotion-based turn-about in the single decision where thinking about it and making a pragmatic decision would be most appropriate for her. It's extremely annoying.

Actualy as I have said, this whole part should have been done better, there should have two opinion for both choices. If you where anti Cerberus, did her LM and tlaked to Miri about Cerberus faults then there should have been an argument with her and TIM which ultimly she quits(better writen) where if you where pro Cerberus she would argue with you if you decided to destory the base, and it would be oposite if you kept the base. That's what should have happen, however we have Miri not likeing Cerberus in genral at the end with nothing leading too it.

Messy writing or OOC(which ever you want to use), it's crap and should have been done better.

Modifié par kraidy1117, 20 novembre 2010 - 07:26 .

[Caihn]

Miranda's reaction is logical considering her character development and completely IC. And I really hope Bioware will continue to develop her character the same way in ME3. Miranda is a dynamic character, and that's one of the main reason why I like her.

[kraidy1117]

Yannkee wrote...

Miranda's reaction is logical considering her character development and completely IC. And I really hope Bioware will continue to develop her character the same way in ME3. Miranda is a dynamic character, and that's one of the main reason why I like her.

I think there should have been a bunch of choices, because to some this can be very jarring, to other it makes sense, and to some like me it just feels rush. Perosnaly I don't mind her quiting since it's great character dev, I just wished it was done better.

Modifié par kraidy1117, 20 novembre 2010 - 07:43 .

[LorDC]

Yannkee wrote...

Miranda's reaction is logical considering her character development and completely IC. And I really hope Bioware will continue to develop her character the same way in ME3. Miranda is a dynamic character, and that's one of the main reason why I like her.

Emm... where is her character development? She surely becomes more open to Shepard but nothing in game ever indicates that she started to doubt Cerberus ideas or became less pragmatic. Ieldra posted two good examples about it.

Modifié par LorDC, 20 novembre 2010 - 07:55 .

[Lleuen]

Markinator_123 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Serious-mode, I don't like the epilogue dialogue lines. It feels forced on the player to make them feel bad if they kept the base and pat the ones who blew it up on the back. For a game that goes out to try and show choice, they certainly like to cater to the paragon choices.

This. I bet the only reason many people blew it up is because the narrative wanted them to. Sometimes, I just say "fine, Bioware, I will blow up the base since this is the choice you want me to make." However, personally speaking for a game known for moral ambiguity, this is just boring anf phony. What is the point in even making the renegade decision if Bioware is going to claim that it is the wrong choice to make.

I agree that the paragon ending is a sentiment that the 'powers that be' probably wanted the players to have -  egged on by the epilogue dialogue and whatnot. Honestly, I blew it up because keeping the base doesn't mean Shepard and the team have it to use... it's the Illusive Man who is the sole proprietor. It just seems like a riskier choice to give this one guy the reins to possibly the most advanced technology in the galaxy, to use for his own goals - which he obviously does have an underlying agenda apart from just stopping the Reapers. If it were so that idk, the council? or just Shepard? had the base all to themselves, I probably would've kept it.

On a side-note, Legion was definitely too wishy-washy. I thought he would support destroying it due to the whole "self-determination" ideal. He ended up supporting to keep it, but if you do blow it up, he makes a positive comparison between Shepard and the Geth... I mean, come on... 

Garrus neither condemned or condoned Shepard's decision, post-suicide mission, and rarely second-guessed Shepard's choices anyway, so I was happy with his reaction after all was said and done.

Modifié par Lleuen, 20 novembre 2010 - 08:05 .

[Manic Sheep]

NVM

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 20 novembre 2010 - 08:47 .

[Ryzaki]

I just take it as everyone having second thoughts because they realized the only person with complete access to the base was...TIM who had already lied and betrayed them.

[Caihn]

I'm glad you're not a Bioware writter, because if you need to announce and justify every major twists many times before it happens, I imagine how boring your stories would be.



But if you absolutely need to justify Miranda's behavior :

Miranda is a loyalist, she believes in what Cerberus stands for (what it stands for, not what it really is). Miranda knows most of the other cells of Cerberus because of what TIM wanted to tell her. When she discovers the real Cerberus and the real TIM's motivations during ME2 story (pragia, overlord, IFF mission ...), she's surely disappointed. But she's not showing it, and I wouldn't expect more from her. She stays loyal until she can't stand it anymore. Her Cerberus support speech after her loyalty mission seems more like a speech to convince herself, than something to convince Shepard.



Then, about the reasons why she supports the CB destruction :

Nobody could guess how people would react during such a moment. Miranda's emotional reaction is not something which surprised me, quite the contrary. And taking pragmatic decisions doesn't mean you have to be pragmatic every time. It doesn't bother me to let the council die at the end of ME1, but I destroyed the collector base even with my most renegade Shepards.

Also, it's obvious that Miranda knows that TIM's motivations about the collector base don't fit with what she believe in.



Miranda still defending Cerberus during this scene would have been the most disappointing thing I would have seen. And the fact that she takes this decision regardless her loyalty, proves that she's enough intelligent and independent to make her own opinion about this without being influenced by Shepard.

[Gokuthegrate]

The squad trust Shep to use the CB responsibly they dont trust TIM.

If BW gave players the option to keep the base but prevent TIM from getting near it then more of the charecters in game would of approved.

[Lord Nicholai]

GodWood wrote...


Miranda: I'm not so sure. Seeing it first hand--using anything from this base seems like a betrayal.

People complain that its out of character for Miranda to turn against Cerberus, but just read what she said. A lot of people can change their opinions if they see something shocking enough. A lot of vegetarians stop eating meat because they see the conditions animals are kept in; perhaps they would still be meat eaters if they hadn't seen it?

[GodWood]

Gokuthegrate wrote...
The squad trust Shep to use the CB responsibly they dont trust TIM.
If BW gave players the option to keep the base but prevent TIM from getting near it then more of the charecters in game would of approved.

But the thing is half of them did approve but once they got back to the Normandy they all say you should of blew it up.

Its stupid.

[jolly_rog]

People change their minds all the time in real life, so why not in a video game? The squaddies that advocated keeping the base during the mission might have changed their opinion after returning to the Normandy and realizing that maybe handing the base over to the Illusive Man is A Bad Idea.

Same with certain characters perceived as being OOC, that happens all the time in real life too. A rational person is capable of being irrational, and a pragmatist surely has his non-pragmatic moments.

Modifié par jolly_rog, 20 novembre 2010 - 11:39 .

[Inverness Moon]

Some may think handing over the base to TIM is a bad idea, but they should be smart enough to realize that destroying what could be your salvation is a worse idea.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Entire team approves of destroying the base? Could it be--gasp!--foreshadowing?! Because obviously flashing warning signs in your face and reminding you that paragons are superior takes priority over staying in character.

Bioware, I am disappoint.

Indeed, I think the writing that went into this decision and the teammates' responses to it was terrible.

Xilizhra wrote...

The Teltin facility may be the only actual rogue operation in Cerberus history.

Quite frankly, I don't believe this either. TIM doesn't seem like the kind of person who'd trust evidence reports alone, judging by his bugging the entire Normandy.

The Normandy is very much a different environment, because not everyone on the ship is a member of Cerberus. Also, the Normandy itself, EDI, and Shepard are all significant Cerberus investments, far more than any other operation I'm sure. Additionally, their mission is vital to the survival of humanity, unlike any of Cerberus's other projects beyond the Lazarus Project.

Considering all that it is not at all surprising that the Normandy is heavily monitored while other facilities might not be. The Normandy also has the benefit of being able to communicate with the Illusive Man no matter where they are in the normal universe, so he doesn't have to rely on someone else to relay information to him.

kraidy1117 wrote...

Well true for maybe Mordin, the same could not be said for Legion

Legion says keep the base, then all of a sudden it says it was better to destory it. It's like Legion, are you broken?

Legion's stance if you talk to him on the Normandy after keeping the base is illogical. Nobody has any idea when the reapers will arrive, so nobody can afford placing all their hopes on creating new technology that has yet to be conceived in order to defeat the reapers.

I really hated how the dialog from the Normandy afterwards was so different from that during the mission. As far as I'm concerned, what they say if they're with you when you're making the decision is their actual feeling on the matter.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 20 novembre 2010 - 12:04 .

[Count Viceroy]

jolly_rog wrote...


Same with certain characters perceived as being OOC, that happens all the time in real life too. A rational person is capable of being irrational, and a pragmatist surely has his non-pragmatic moments.

It's just opinion as well. I can rationalize her decision just as much as someone who believes otherwise can claim it's ridiculous. At the end of the day, it's the writer that decides what is 'in character' or not. Not people on the forums.

Modifié par Count Viceroy, 20 novembre 2010 - 12:05 .

[Dean_the_Young]

As far as I'm concerned, they couldn't solve their own family/revenge/guilt trip issues without turning to Shepard, so the only ones I'll give any weight to are those who didn't let me decide things for them.



Grunt, Jacob, and possibly Garrus if I didn't insist on trying to re-paragonize him.

[Arijharn]

Count Viceroy wrote...

jolly_rog wrote...


Same with certain characters perceived as being OOC, that happens all the time in real life too. A rational person is capable of being irrational, and a pragmatist surely has his non-pragmatic moments.

It's just opinion as well. I can rationalize her decision just as much as someone who believes otherwise can claim it's ridiculous. At the end of the day, it's the writer that decides what is 'in character' or not. Not people on the forums.

I think that's nonsense. As consumers we are drawn into the world and experience it. We get an understanding of how the character (and events) works and we can form our opinions based on what is presented to us. As intelligent people we can digest and critique what the writers give us and how we perceive things should be of some degree of importance to those writers so they can work out what 'works' and what doesn't.

If I perceived some moments in game that Cerberus activities rocked Miranda's foundations, then perhaps her remarks on the collector base would ring true, as is they don't. Miranda dismisses every concern that Shephard can bring up in the game about it's past escapades, so her sudden about-turn, especially since it wasn't Cerberus themselves doing the experiments sounds utterly contrived in an attempt to guilt trip the player to make a certain decision.

Her decision to suddenly spite Cerberus (and in the manner she does) seems to me as being so incredibly <insert inflammatory word here> stupid that it's completely unlike her. Did she suddenly forget that Cerberus brought her in from the cold when she ran in the first place? Did she suddenly forget that Cerberus is the only real thing protecting her sister from their father? Did she suddenly forget that Cerberus is the only organisation that is actively supporting them in their preparations for war with the Reapers? Did she suddenly forget that as her past and basic designation of being a 'terrorist' she isn't really going to have an easy time (or quick) getting some sort of plea bargain with the Systems Alliance?

[LorDC]

Yannkee wrote...

I'm glad you're not a Bioware writter, because if you need to announce and justify every major twists many times before it happens, I imagine how boring your stories would be.

But if you absolutely need to justify Miranda's behavior :
Miranda is a loyalist, she believes in what Cerberus stands for (what it stands for, not what it really is). Miranda knows most of the other cells of Cerberus because of what TIM wanted to tell her. When she discovers the real Cerberus and the real TIM's motivations during ME2 story (pragia, overlord, IFF mission ...), she's surely disappointed. But she's not showing it, and I wouldn't expect more from her. She stays loyal until she can't stand it anymore. Her Cerberus support speech after her loyalty mission seems more like a speech to convince herself, than something to convince Shepard.

Then, about the reasons why she supports the CB destruction :
Nobody could guess how people would react during such a moment. Miranda's emotional reaction is not something which surprised me, quite the contrary. And taking pragmatic decisions doesn't mean you have to be pragmatic every time. It doesn't bother me to let the council die at the end of ME1, but I destroyed the collector base even with my most renegade Shepards.
Also, it's obvious that Miranda knows that TIM's motivations about the collector base don't fit with what she believe in.

Miranda still defending Cerberus during this scene would have been the most disappointing thing I would have seen. And the fact that she takes this decision regardless her loyalty, proves that she's enough intelligent and independent to make her own opinion about this without being influenced by Shepard.

You basically claim that there is some "true Miranda" lurking deep inside her. And she shows up because of the "emotional shock". I would have agreed with this explanation but there are two problems:
1) "true hidden identities" and "emotional shock" can explain just about any change in behavior. Why didn't she turn into sociopathic killer for example?
2) It wouldn't be a problem if there were at least some hints showing change in her. Instead she actively defends Cerberus in any conversation that involves her. She is obviously not very concerned with Cerberus methods too. Ieldra made two good examples: after crew abduction she suggests to stick with building crew and during SM itself suggests not to escort them back to Normandy.

Want to comment on this in paricular:

Yannkee wrote...

I'm glad you're not a Bioware writter, because if you need to announce and justify every major twists many times before it happens, I imagine how boring your stories would be.

Major twist is one thing but when one of main characters you constantly interact with suddenly shows behavior opposite of earlier it is called "deus ex machina". Ans seeing how many people find her behavior strange I dare to say that it was bad writing. Either her change was unnecessary or her transformation throughout game was bad written.

Modifié par LorDC, 20 novembre 2010 - 02:17 .

[Caihn]

LorDC wrote...

You basically claim that there is some "true Miranda" lurking deep inside her. And she shows up because of the "emotional shock". I would have agreed with this explanation but there are two problems:
1) "true hidden identities" and "emotional shock" can explain just about any change in behavior. Why didn't she turn into sociopathic killer for example?
2) It wouldn't be a problem if there were at least some hints showing change in her. Instead she actively defends Cerberus in any conversation that involves her. She is obviously not very concerned with Cerberus methods too. Ieldra made two good examples: after crew abduction she suggests to stick with building crew and during SM itself suggests not to escort them back to Normandy.

I never claimed that.
The Miranda who wants to destroy the base is the same that the one who doesn't want to send someone to escort the crew.
Like I already said : taking pragmatic decisions doesn't mean you have to be always pragmatic (even if I think that keeping the base seems more a stupid decision than a pragmatic one). With my first Shepard I let the council die, I didn't rewrite the geths and I didn't save the crew, but I destroyed the collector base (basically for the same reasons than Miranda).
The fact that she approves the destruction didn't change her to an emotional idealist paragon, she could take some of her previous pragmatic decisions again.

In real life, I don't pretend to know how people will react because I've seen some of their reactions before. I don't think someone can do it with fictional characters, except the writer(s).

Major twist is one thing but when one of main characters you constantly interact with suddenly shows behavior opposite of earlier it is called "deus ex machina". Ans seeing how many people find her behavior strange I dare to say that it was bad writing. Either her change was unnecessary or her transformation throughout game was bad written.

You have the right to like static characters, personally I don't.
And I know many people who consider her resignation and the fact that she approves the CB destruction, completely IC.
And to me Miranda is one of the best written character of the whole Mass Effect series. Her resignation is also one of my favorite moment in ME2.

But maybe, the real problem is that people are upset because she (like most of the crew) doesn't approve their decision.

[LorDC]

Yannkee wrote...
I never claimed that.
The Miranda who wants to destroy the base is the same that the one who doesn't want to send someone to escort the crew.
Like I already said : taking pragmatic decisions doesn't mean you have to be always pragmatic (even if I think that keeping the base seems more a stupid decision than a pragmatic one). With my first Shepard I let the council die, I didn't rewrite the geths and I didn't save the crew, but I destroyed the collector base (basically for the same reasons than Miranda).
The fact that she approves the destruction didn't change her to an emotional idealist paragon, she could take some of her previous pragmatic decisions again.

You either don't understand or do not want to understand what I(and other people) have written. I am not arguing that Miranda could not or should not change her opinion. I am arguing that there is not enough preparation for this throughout the story. You can bring up any number of plausible excuses for her behavior but it will not make her SUDDEN change less immersion breaking.

Yannkee wrote...
In real life, I don't pretend to know how people will react because I've seen some of their reactions before. I don't think someone can do it with fictional characters, except the writer(s).

It is not real life. It is story. And Miranda's change is storytelling issue.

Yannkee wrote...
You have the right to like static characters, personally I don't.

One sudden change change in personality doesn't make "static" character any more "dynamic" only more inconsistent. "Deus ex machina" is worse than static characters. The only way for you to prove your point is to show actual development of her character with examples of quotes or actions she takes. Without this all your explanations are just excuses for bad writing.

[keekee53]

magelet wrote...

My main problem was how no one really agrees with you about keeping it. It makes it seem like you did the wrong thing, which I don't think the game should do.
Also some characters (Miranda and Mordin specifically) just seem really out of character by disagreeing with you.

I totally agree and I was totally surprised by their reactions.

[pacer90]

I wouldn't mind all of the characters supporting or hating your decision either way, as long as they had the same frame of mind when you were actually MAKING THE DECISION.



Ex: My first shep was pure renegade. Took Garrus and Mordin with me, cause they were my boys. Both agreed that base should be kept.



Come back on the ship and they're all paragons now. Very annoying.