140 réponses à ce sujet

[Asheer_Khan]

"AH Yes... ME 1" Mac Walters and EA have dismiss his existence...

[james1976]

Babli wrote...

Mass Effect 2 is not sequel, its reboot. That explains it.

I don't see how you can say it's a reboot.

[gogman25]

I can understand why they won't believe it, but regardless it is fairly overdone, it feels like they are even more against the idea..

[Nightwriter]

TS2Aggie wrote...

In the council's defense, I expect that they *do* know the truth, but are trying to cover it up to prevent mass hysteria. Think about it: if you knew that there was an immortal race of sentient machines lying in wait to pop up and kill everyone deader than dead and that there was little to no hope of stopping them, would you bother continuing to live your life normally? Go to work? Pay your bills? Generally be an integral part of society? Probably not.

I expect the council is trying (in their own 'special' way) to maintain galactic stability. I sincerely doubt that they (or even the Alliance, for that matter) has been doing absolutely nothing. I expect it's more likely that Shepard is deliberately being kept out of the loop for the plans to deal with the Reapers...for whatever reason.

My criticism still stands. I have heard the "they really do know but are lying to you" theory before. People hoping for a bombshell to get dropped on us in ME3 when we find out that the Council knew all along.

I'm not confident that this is likely, but even if it did happen, my sentiment is "too little, too late". It wouldn't heal the damage. If the Council was keeping it under wraps to prevent panic, say so. Don't let the player think the writing is becoming inept, that's silly. Of course BioWare couldn't have the Council say so, because then they would secretly encourage your mission and Cerberus would no longer be necessary, in which case this all looks like a cheap plot device to get us to work with Cerberus, which is also bad.

[Googlesaurus]

I like how the Council dismisses Shepard as delusional, but their rebuttals are so childish and ignorant they would get people in lower political positions fired.

"Look at Sovereign, it's not geth technology!"
"But it could be geth technology...right?"

Modifié par Googlesaurus, 17 janvier 2011 - 09:06 .

[Big stupid jellyfish]

In ME1 it was ok. Actually, I thought that even Tali's evidence won't be enough 'cos hey, audio files provided may have been counterfeited by either Shepard, Tali or even geth before Tali got them. Not to mention that there were just a couple of lines taken out of context. So I was surprised when our favourite Turian Councilor was like 'Yes! I see now! Saren is a traitor!'

As for ME2, yes, it was overused.

Modifié par Big stupid jellyfish, 17 janvier 2011 - 09:15 .

[Iakus]

Aigyl wrote...

This, pretty much.

At the end of ME1 the Council believe in the Reapers and tells the public that Shepard is off cleaning up Geth to avoid inciting panic, not searching for a way to stop an army of Space Cthulus from killing and mind-controlling all life in the galaxy. The public would not react very well to that.

When Shepard comes back in ME2, s/he's with Cerberus and god-knows-what rumours TIM's been spreading around. The STG have been studying Reaper Indoctrination (mentioned somewhere in Mordin's loyalty). They don't know if they can trust Shepard yet, so they go back to good ol' stonewalling.

I imagine the actual reason for this was the same why all the choices in ME1 are played down in ME2, to make sure the narrative is nice and tight so everything is binded together for ME3 and nothing has de-railed too far.

Still doesn't explain why they don't admit to the existence of Reapers to Shepard (who not only knows about the Reapers, but was the very person who spent all of ME 1 trying to convince the Council of them) In the human councillor's own office at that.  "You don't need to know" "We can't trust you with that information" "It's being handled" would all be appropriate responses. "you're delusional" is not.

That being said, the Council lying to Shepard is now the only explanation that makes any kind of sense at this point.  Even as a poor explanation, it beats complete denial of ME 1.

[RVallant]

iakus wrote...

Aigyl wrote...

This, pretty much.

At the end of ME1 the Council believe in the Reapers and tells the public that Shepard is off cleaning up Geth to avoid inciting panic, not searching for a way to stop an army of Space Cthulus from killing and mind-controlling all life in the galaxy. The public would not react very well to that.

When Shepard comes back in ME2, s/he's with Cerberus and god-knows-what rumours TIM's been spreading around. The STG have been studying Reaper Indoctrination (mentioned somewhere in Mordin's loyalty). They don't know if they can trust Shepard yet, so they go back to good ol' stonewalling.

I imagine the actual reason for this was the same why all the choices in ME1 are played down in ME2, to make sure the narrative is nice and tight so everything is binded together for ME3 and nothing has de-railed too far.

Still doesn't explain why they don't admit to the existence of Reapers to Shepard (who not only knows about the Reapers, but was the very person who spent all of ME 1 trying to convince the Council of them) In the human councillor's own office at that.  "You don't need to know" "We can't trust you with that information" "It's being handled" would all be appropriate responses. "you're delusional" is not.

That being said, the Council lying to Shepard is now the only explanation that makes any kind of sense at this point.  Even as a poor explanation, it beats complete denial of ME 1.

Aye, having seen the council's reaction for myself I'm happy to "dismiss" the more delusional "they're doing stuff about it but not telling you" crowd until a more solid line of evidence comes up.

But to answer the question;

ME1: no, there wasn't that much evidence in any case.

ME2: Yes. Way too much so. Still they 'support' him with SPECTRE reinstation if you play it right so it's not all lost.

[Nightwriter]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

In ME1, certainly not (Shepard had no evidence when he needed it).

In ME2, unsightly when it is raised, but still no: the primary actors who don't believe you (the Council) may be a bit unpleasant to look at, if they aren't lying, but many other informed people do know and believe you.

Come on, Dean, man. The scarce few who do believe you do nothing to heal the sting and injustice of all those who don't believe you.

[Dean_the_Young]

Vaenier wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Stupidus wrote...

I don't know either it's stupid. The council was in the Destiny Ascension and probably saw Sovereign, and even at the end if you save the council even the god damn Turian one aknowledges the word 'Reaper' at the end. Yet in ME2 we get "Ah yes, Reapers...". Even more disappointed by Kaidan/Ashley not believing you.

The question has never been if Sovereign, the ship, existed. Even it having an AI isn't necessarily in dispute.

The matter of debate is if Sovereign, the ship, is necessarily a Reaper, an immortal race of sentient space ships that kill everything for no apparent reason and then leave without leaving any real proof each time.

Everyone knows the Geth built Sovereign, then Saren took Sovereign and tricked the Geth into believing it was really an ancient god and not something they built themselves. He is just that charismatic...

I think this sums it up well enough.

[Theoristitis]

Nightwriter wrote...

This is not asking if it is plausible or believable that the Council still refuses to believe Shepard about the Reapers.

This is asking, from a writing perspective: have they overused this plot device?

Actually, to me, asking "if it's overused" seems very much in the same vein as "if it's plausible". If it's plausible (and not only plausible but, in fact, likely), then I don't see how it could "overused" as much as it "holds continuity" from the first game. We can call it overused in stories in general, I suppose, but it's hard to blame Bioware for that given that the ideas for ME1's plot probably germinated 6+ years ago, and it wasn't quite as overdone then.

For all the talk that the Council has clear evidence...they really don't. Nothing but the word of a new Spectre who a) is a reckless human; accused their top Spectre of betrayal (no matter the accuracy); and c) is working based on 'visions' and other tenuous evidence that he conveniently destroys. Eden Prime beacon? Virmire beacon? Vigil? Benezia? The Thorian? Saren? Sovereign?

Advanced technology does not a Reaper make. Humanity jumped centuries technologically in 30 years. What's to say the geth, an evolving collective-consciousness AI created by the tech wizards of the galaxy, didn't do the same in 200 years?

If you're tired of it, consider it a good thing - it means you've successfully put yourself in Shepard's shoes. 

[NanQuan]

To answer your question, as I understood it, from a writing perspective: yes, it was nessecary/a proper stylistic choice to hammer home the idea that no one trusts you. As OP stated, I am not going to address whether the denial of the council is reasonable. I also am not addressing whether as a player it upset me.

What I am saying, is that from a writing perspective it was perfectly reasonable for Bioware to repeat the "we don't believe you" trope. Why? Because, as the second chapter of the triology the storyline deals heavily with loss.  The job of the second installment is to build up to the final installment - to create anticipation and motivation for the final battle. It is also supposed to establish an uphill battle to the end.  An overwhelming sense of loss is a means to achieve this end. In ME2 Shep loses his/her life, his/her status as an Alliance soldier, maybe Spectre status, his/her friends (Ash/Kaidan) as well as their trust, and the trust of the council.  In ME3 Shep will be fighting to regain some of these things and fighting despite the odds against him/her.

So, yes, it may seem overbearing at times, but Bioware is conciously trying to fill the player with a sense of loss. I don't think it's overdone and can certainly see why they did it.

[Chuvvy]

hawat333 wrote...

In ME1: No.
In ME2: Yes. They've had clear evidence by then, and not some visions from a guy/girl who was knocked out cold by an alien device.

This, I didn't even fully believe me during ME1 until I saw it with my own eyes. I wish there was a "I'm going after saren." dialog option. Not just "HURR DURR RAEPARS!". You have no real proof during the begining of ME1.

[Nightwriter]

Theoristitis wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

This is not asking if it is plausible or believable that the Council still refuses to believe Shepard about the Reapers.

This is asking, from a writing perspective: have they overused this plot device?

Actually, to me, asking "if it's overused" seems very much in the same vein as "if it's plausible". If it's plausible (and not only plausible but, in fact, likely), then I don't see how it could "overused" as much as it "holds continuity" from the first game. We can call it overused in stories in general, I suppose, but it's hard to blame Bioware for that given that the ideas for ME1's plot probably germinated 6+ years ago, and it wasn't quite as overdone then.

For all the talk that the Council has clear evidence...they really don't. Nothing but the word of a new Spectre who a) is a reckless human; accused their top Spectre of betrayal (no matter the accuracy); and c) is working based on 'visions' and other tenuous evidence that he conveniently destroys. Eden Prime beacon? Virmire beacon? Vigil? Benezia? The Thorian? Saren? Sovereign?

Advanced technology does not a Reaper make. Humanity jumped centuries technologically in 30 years. What's to say the geth, an evolving collective-consciousness AI created by the tech wizards of the galaxy, didn't do the same in 200 years?

If you're tired of it, consider it a good thing - it means you've successfully put yourself in Shepard's shoes. 

Yeah but to make that work, you'd need dialogue specifically addressing it, like this:

Shepard: "I can't believe this! A Reaper drops down on their heads in the center of galactic space, and they still shut their eyes. You know, I'm starting to wonder if the galaxy is even worth saving."

Oh,  and here's the difference: if it's plausible enough, you stop caring that it's overused. If it isn't plausible enough, it feels overused to the point of distraction and hurts the story.

In this case, you put so much effort into proving your claim in ME1 that it's definitely a taboo to sweep that all aside in ME2. Not just because it frustrates the player beyond all decency, but because it stagnates the story.

[Kenshen]

It makes sense too me. What would happen on Earth if one day our government came out and said there were thousands of killer machines coming toward us and there isn't much we can do to stop them. It would be total chaos instantly and that is what the council is protecting from. And I do agree with them that there isn't that much to go on so to sound the alarm and then be wrong would be really bad. Of course there isn't much reason to treat Shep like they do. Now why is it that Shep never learns and at least starts taping everything he/she does.

[Il Divo]

aryon69 wrote...

It makes sense too me. What would happen on Earth if one day our government came out and said there were thousands of killer machines coming toward us and there isn't much we can do to stop them. It would be total chaos instantly and that is what the council is protecting from. And I do agree with them that there isn't that much to go on so to sound the alarm and then be wrong would be really bad. Of course there isn't much reason to treat Shep like they do. Now why is it that Shep never learns and at least starts taping everything he/she does.

I think this is a very good point and something people are forgetting. If your average human being were exposed to the 'truth' of the Reapers, they would not quite take it in stride as Shepard does. They would not resolve themselves by saying "I'm going to find some way to stop you". No marine, however tough, would take such a revelation in stride.
 
In this sense, I think the Council's reaction is very sensible, even with whatever little evidence there is about Reapers. Most people would not be able to accept such a revelation if it were presented to them.

[wulf3n]

james1976 wrote...

Babli wrote...
Mass Effect 2 is not sequel, its reboot. That explains it.

I don't see how you can say it's a reboot.

ME1:
Start - Council don't believe in reapers, won't help you
Middle - you learn about the reaper plans
End - you foil reaper plans, council acknowledges reaper existence

ME2:
Start - Council don't believe in reapers, won't help you
Middle - you learn about the reaper involvement in the collector plans
End - you foil reaper plans, and have evidence to show the council to prove reapers existence.

.... sounds a lot like a reboot to me.

[Vaenier]

Il Divo wrote...

aryon69 wrote...

It makes sense too me. What would happen on Earth if one day our government came out and said there were thousands of killer machines coming toward us and there isn't much we can do to stop them. It would be total chaos instantly and that is what the council is protecting from. And I do agree with them that there isn't that much to go on so to sound the alarm and then be wrong would be really bad. Of course there isn't much reason to treat Shep like they do. Now why is it that Shep never learns and at least starts taping everything he/she does.

I think this is a very good point and something people are forgetting. If your average human being were exposed to the 'truth' of the Reapers, they would not quite take it in stride as Shepard does. They would not resolve themselves by saying "I'm going to find some way to stop you". No marine, however tough, would take such a revelation in stride.
 
In this sense, I think the Council's reaction is very sensible, even with whatever little evidence there is about Reapers. Most people would not be able to accept such a revelation if it were presented to them.

So? Who cares about informing the other people, thats just dumb. But that doesnt mean you should ignore the problem. You should have all your resources devoted to stopping them, be building war ships and researching new technology. It can all be under the guise of a continueing war against the Geth. Did they just all forget about the 90% of Geth still existing in their home turf that would probably be building even larger armies and ****? They never even bother to scout their own enemy. [based on their own knowlegde] The Idiot Ball has been abused to death here and beyond.

[Theoristitis]

Nightwriter wrote...
Yeah but to make that work, you'd need dialogue specifically addressing it, like this:

Shepard: "I can't believe this! A Reaper drops down on their heads in the center of galactic space, and they still shut their eyes. You know, I'm starting to wonder if the galaxy is even worth saving."

Oh,  and here's the difference: if it's plausible enough, you stop caring that it's overused. If it isn't plausible enough, it feels overused to the point of distraction and hurts the story.

In this case, you put so much effort into proving your claim in ME1 that it's definitely a taboo to sweep that all aside in ME2. Not just because it frustrates the player beyond all decency, but because it stagnates the story.

You didn't put effort into proving your claim that the Reapers existed, you put effort into stopping Saren and Sovereign. You only proved it to yourself and your squad. It would be taboo to sweep it all aside if you had in fact proved your story, but as far as the Council's aware there's nothing to sweep aside. The only evidence that exists is circumstantial - your visions, your correct guesses about the Protheans.

It's frustrating to the player, but it's supposed to be: it's an RPG and you're playing Shepard. Speaking for myself, I'd be more frustrated as a player (not as Shepard, of course) if the Council believed me, because it goes against everything built up thus far. Aliens hate humans. Humans are reckless attention-seekers. Shepard destroys everything he touches. If it means the No One Believes You trope is overused, I'd rather that then wonder why the Council suddenly believes a human Spectre without any change in the objective evidence.

Not to mention there's always the possibility that the Council is being subtly indoctrinated by the residual effects and code of the Sovereign pieces that mysteriously disappeared due to the keeper cleanup. Just as a side note.

Now, I guess if we're talking about the story stagnating, there's definitely a point there...but what it comes down to, as it always does, is this: what would you have done instead? They couldn't do an ME1 repeat - the same "explore the open galaxy" and "search for the truth while hunting a Spectre" couldn't be done twice. The first game almost necessitated the style of ME2 because it was so complete. I have ideas about things they could have done instead, but these ideas aren't yet formed enough to compose a full game, let alone two.

[ZLurps]

aryon69 wrote...

It makes sense too me. What would happen on Earth if one day our government came out and said there were thousands of killer machines coming toward us and there isn't much we can do to stop them. It would be total chaos instantly and that is what the council is protecting from. And I do agree with them that there isn't that much to go on so to sound the alarm and then be wrong would be really bad. Of course there isn't much reason to treat Shep like they do. Now why is it that Shep never learns and at least starts taping everything he/she does.

Pretty much this.

I wouldn't be surprised if we learned in DLC or in ME3 that Council was investigating the Reaper threat all the time after Citadel attack. Also Human / Turian joint project for developing Thanix cannon and that humans are increasing their fleet strength may indicate that there is something going on behind the scenes.

Plain Ignorance is also possible explanation. There are examples in world history of that. Stalin didn't believed his military advisors that Germany would attack. He was presented evidence but he just went all "Ah yes, Germans..." I think everybody knows how well that ended.

Modifié par ZLurps, 17 janvier 2011 - 11:05 .

[wulf3n]

Theoristitis wrote...
The first game almost necessitated the style of ME2 because it was so complete. I have ideas about things they could have done instead, but these ideas aren't yet formed enough to compose a full game, let alone two.

Nothing "necessitated" the style of ME2. There's a lot bioware could have done, without resorting to "resetting" everything you'd accomplished, you just have to pick any random "story" thread in this forum to see numerous ideas that are better than what was done in ME2.

Why they didn't who knows, time, money.

[Il Divo]

Vaenier wrote...

So? Who cares about informing the other people, thats just dumb. But that doesnt mean you should ignore the problem. You should have all your resources devoted to stopping them, be building war ships and researching new technology. It can all be under the guise of a continueing war against the Geth. Did they just all forget about the 90% of Geth still existing in their home turf that would probably be building even larger armies and ****? They never even bother to scout their own enemy. [based on their own knowlegde] The Idiot Ball has been abused to death here and beyond.

Believing in Reapers is dumb to the galaxy. If someone ever wants to convince me to believe in some superstitious force, whether I'm a head of government or a shoemaker, I'm going to want to see some direct proof. The little tidbits like Liara's data, Sovereign being incredibly advanced, etc, do not fulfill that burden.

Sovereign is supposed to be a Reaper, a million year old ship which has been responsible for systematically purging the galaxy of all life. But what evidence is there that proved "Sovereign was definitely this"? Before the attack, the Council believes Sovereign is a Geth ship. In the immediate aftermath, they believe he is a Reaper. What changed to make this so? That's where my objection comes in.

My argument is not "The Council doesn't believe in Reapers because no one would believe them." My argument is instead "The Council doesn't believe in Reapers because an extreme lack of evidence and the difficulty that such a belief would bring".

Modifié par Il Divo, 17 janvier 2011 - 11:17 .

[james1976]

wulf3n wrote...

james1976 wrote...

Babli wrote...
Mass Effect 2 is not sequel, its reboot. That explains it.

I don't see how you can say it's a reboot.

ME1:
Start - Council don't believe in reapers, won't help you
Middle - you learn about the reaper plans
End - you foil reaper plans, council acknowledges reaper existence

ME2:
Start - Council don't believe in reapers, won't help you
Middle - you learn about the reaper involvement in the collector plans
End - you foil reaper plans, and have evidence to show the council to prove reapers existence.

.... sounds a lot like a reboot to me.

Just because they choose not to believe you in ME2 doesn't mean it's a reboot.  Because Cerebus brought you back they don't trust you.  But they don't stop you either, which means they might be secretly preparing something and since they can't trust you they aren't sharing yet.  We won't know until ME3.

[Vaenier]

Il Divo wrote...

Believing in Reapers is dumb to the galaxy. If someone ever wants to convince me to believe in some superstitious force, whether I'm a head of government or a shoemaker, I'm going to want to see some direct proof. The little tidbits like Liara's data, Sovereign being incredibly advanced, etc, do not fulfill that burden.

Sovereign is supposed to be a Reaper, a million year old ship which has been responsible for systematically purging the galaxy of all life. But what evidence is there that proved "Sovereign was definitely this"? Before the attack, the Council believes Sovereign is a Geth ship. In the immediate aftermath, they believe he is a Reaper. What changed to make this so? That's where my objection comes in.

My argument is not "The Council doesn't believe in Reapers because no one would believe them." My argument is instead "The Council doesn't believe in Reapers because an extreme lack of evidence and the difficulty that such a belief would bring".

You are right, this plot is just too railroaded. I want the option to open the Citadel relay and say frak you to the galaxy. I am tired of debate. Have a nice day.

[wulf3n]

Il Divo wrote...Believing in Reapers is dumb to the galaxy. If someone ever wants to convince me to believe in some superstitious force, whether I'm a head of government or a shoemaker, I'm going to want to see some direct proof. The little tidbits like Liara's data, Sovereign being incredibly advanced, etc, do not fulfill that burden.  

Superstitious force? no ones trying to make the reapers out to be gods. and everything they ARE is what exists within the galaxy already.

Sentient AI  - Already exists with the Geth
Ancient Superior Technology - do i even have to explain.

The idea of reapers is so NOT far fetched and exactly what the council fears the most, that there's no reason for them not to believe it.