328 réponses à ce sujet

[Jack Package]

Jarek_Cousland wrote...

@OP:Lol I love the sniper hate.


One thing you gotta love is some Shotgun berserker getting picked off by a skilled sniper.


Dont hate the skillz son.

Well said. I approve.

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

Ok ok ok. So let me get this straight. Someone makes a baseless claim in an original post as to how they don't like a character. Fans of said character declare troll and scramble to make baseless counter arguments while insulting other characters. Then to satisfy their false intellect people come in and spout nonsense that is only sort of related to the first post. All the while people are ignoring good posts and replying to the posts they wish to point out flaws in.
Does this forum follow a formula or something? Honestly this is like every character dislike thread I have ever seen.

You must be new to the internet. Welcome.

[cachx]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...
Someone makes a baseless claim in an original post as to how they don't like a character. Fans of said character declare troll and scramble to make baseless counter arguments while insulting other characters. Then to satisfy their false intellect people come in and spout nonsense that is only sort of related to the first post. All the while people are ignoring good posts and replying to the posts they wish to point out flaws in.

You just described the internet.

Funny how some of my reasons to like Garrus are the same reasons other people use to dislike him. The discussion could go forever... If I cared.

[Sparda Stonerule]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

Ok ok ok. So let me get this straight. Someone makes a baseless claim in an original post as to how they don't like a character. Fans of said character declare troll and scramble to make baseless counter arguments while insulting other characters. Then to satisfy their false intellect people come in and spout nonsense that is only sort of related to the first post. All the while people are ignoring good posts and replying to the posts they wish to point out flaws in.
Does this forum follow a formula or something? Honestly this is like every character dislike thread I have ever seen.

You must be new to the internet. Welcome.

I was going for irony, not a lack of familiarity with the internet. Oh well, my point got across I guess.

[Rogue Unit]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...
I'm sure he saved more than one life by taking Omega's top three gangs. But if you feel that murders shouldn't be held accountable and should be able to continue killing as they please, by all means..
You have to remeber, Omega has no prison system, no legal system. The only way to deal with the murders were to take them out.
If an officer has to kill three terrorist to save one hostage, I feel it was justified. Their lives aren't worth less, but they need to be stopped.
The same thing could be said for Samara. She'll kill you just for being a corrupt politician.

To reiterate: the issue here is that Garrus is recklessly endangering lives and causing countless deaths for the sake of a mission that has no chance of success.

The people that joined Garrus' team did it of their own free will. They knew what the risks were.

And I don't think he recklessly endangered their lives. He didn't throw a 12-man team against armies of mercs.

"They'd come charging into our well-prepared killzone. Crossfire and snipers."

They used strategy and logic. And Garrus never said his mission was to rid Omega of all crimes. His job, more or less, was to protect the innocent to the thugs kicking them.

I'd say that mission was robably successful considering the mercs lost so many men and money that they all teamed up against him and ended up dead in the end. Though he need Shepard's help to do that I doubt he would have had his team not been betrayed.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Rogue Unit wrote...
The people that joined Garrus' team did it of their own free will. They knew what the risks were.
And I don't think he recklessly endangered their lives. He didn't throw a 12-man team against armies of mercs.
"They'd come charging into our well-prepared killzone. Crossfire and snipers."
They used strategy and logic. And Garrus never said his mission was to rid Omega of all crimes. His job, more or less, was to protect the innocent to the thugs kicking them.
I'd say that mission was robably successful considering the mercs lost so many men and money that they all teamed up against him and ended up dead in the end. Though he need Shepard's help to do that I doubt he would have had his team not been betrayed.

I wasn't talking specifically about his team members, though I do think he risked their lives quite a bit (and, yes, they risked their own lives willingly).

He risked a lot of people's lives, and I put more blame on him because he orchestrated it all.  Yes, he had some successes for a while, but I wouldn't say his mission was anywhere close to successful.  Omega doesn't change when those merc groups are gone, as evidenced by that quote you brought up yourself about the death count.

Again, Garrus's abilities would have been better spent elsewhere, and likely a lot less people would have died than in Omega, AKA Garrus's pursuit of glory.

[Jack Package]

Rogue Unit wrote...

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...
I'm sure he saved more than one life by taking Omega's top three gangs. But if you feel that murders shouldn't be held accountable and should be able to continue killing as they please, by all means..
You have to remeber, Omega has no prison system, no legal system. The only way to deal with the murders were to take them out.
If an officer has to kill three terrorist to save one hostage, I feel it was justified. Their lives aren't worth less, but they need to be stopped.
The same thing could be said for Samara. She'll kill you just for being a corrupt politician.

To reiterate: the issue here is that Garrus is recklessly endangering lives and causing countless deaths for the sake of a mission that has no chance of success.

The people that joined Garrus' team did it of their own free will. They knew what the risks were.

And I don't think he recklessly endangered their lives. He didn't throw a 12-man team against armies of mercs.

"They'd come charging into our well-prepared killzone. Crossfire and snipers."

They used strategy and logic. And Garrus never said his mission was to rid Omega of all crimes. His job, more or less, was to protect the innocent to the thugs kicking them.

I'd say that mission was robably successful considering the mercs lost so many men and money that they all teamed up against him and ended up dead in the end. Though he need Shepard's help to do that I doubt he would have had his team not been betrayed.

Good point. I as well think that people who claim Garrus is a bad leader are just wrong. He is perfectly capable of commanding a team in a strategically clever and efficient way. If he would not, then he hadn't manage to carry out his strikes against the mercs with only 12 men.
People tend to mix his commanding skills and his character together. Garrus character, if he is reckless for example and so on can be dabated but I will not contribute to that part of the discussion.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Jack Package wrote...
Good point. I as well think that people who claim Garrus is a bad leader are just wrong. He is perfectly capable of commanding a team in a strategically clever and efficient way. If he would not, then he hadn't manage to carry out his strikes against the mercs with only 12 men.
People tend to mix his commanding skills and his character together. Garrus character, if he is reckless for example and so on can be dabated but I will not contribute to that part of the discussion.

A good leader also has to decide which battles to fight, not just how to fight them.  Garrus may be a good tactician, but a good leader requires much, much more than setting up efficient killzones.

[-Skorpious-]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Are we allowed to compare that one life to all the lives he himself took?  Are those lives worth so much less?  All of them?  Really?

And Shepard's killing of mercs is any better? Or Wrex's? Or how about Samara, who admits to killing an innocent if they violate her code. Garrus would never do such a thing.

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...


I never said Garrus shouldn't have protected himself... Garrus never should have caused that whole situation.
What he shouldn't have done was get so cocky and reckless about everything.  He shouldn't have called everyone he killed a reckless idiot (a point BioWare was obviously trying to make by throwing that kid in the fray in the first place).

I don't agree with your comments that he was tired and not thinking straight.  The other things he says in the game when he's well-rested coincide with that attitude.  Especially with Harkin and everyone else on his personal mission.  I understand that he was angry and wanted REVENGE!!! and all but that doesn't make his attitude acceptable to me.  His one saving grace is that he can be talked out of pulling the trigger, but even then he cops an attitude about it and says he isn't going to talk about it.

Have you considered that Garrus' betrayal had anything to do with his current situation? Have you considered that after Garrus' face, family markings, identity, hideouts, ect were released to the the mercs (the top three merc gangs in the galaxy mind you) that locating him would prove little challenge? Or that his only mistake was getting cornered in unfamiliar territory? 

You may consider Garrus reckless, but he has made a positive difference in the lives of Omega's citizens (the e-mail from the widow of one of Garrus' teammates cements this "fact"). How many people can claim that they have saved somebodies life; especially when you consider how dangerous a place such as Omega can be. 

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

A good leader also has to decide which battles to fight, not just how to fight them.  Garrus may be a good tactician, but a good leader requires much, much more than setting up efficient killzones.

He did pretty damn well before he was betrayed. Plus, he never lost a man to these conflicts until Sidonis' deception.

Modifié par -Skorpious-, 31 janvier 2011 - 11:33 .

[Xilizhra]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Rogue Unit wrote...
The people that joined Garrus' team did it of their own free will. They knew what the risks were.
And I don't think he recklessly endangered their lives. He didn't throw a 12-man team against armies of mercs.
"They'd come charging into our well-prepared killzone. Crossfire and snipers."
They used strategy and logic. And Garrus never said his mission was to rid Omega of all crimes. His job, more or less, was to protect the innocent to the thugs kicking them.
I'd say that mission was robably successful considering the mercs lost so many men and money that they all teamed up against him and ended up dead in the end. Though he need Shepard's help to do that I doubt he would have had his team not been betrayed.

I wasn't talking specifically about his team members, though I do think he risked their lives quite a bit (and, yes, they risked their own lives willingly).

He risked a lot of people's lives, and I put more blame on him because he orchestrated it all.  Yes, he had some successes for a while, but I wouldn't say his mission was anywhere close to successful.  Omega doesn't change when those merc groups are gone, as evidenced by that quote you brought up yourself about the death count.

Again, Garrus's abilities would have been better spent elsewhere, and likely a lot less people would have died than in Omega, AKA Garrus's pursuit of glory.

"Glory," I feel, is unfair. Garrus was impulsive but not selfish; he wanted to do something, anything, as long as it could genuinely help people. He was in way over his head, but he wasn't just out for his own glory (how could he have been when he was anonymous?).

[Jack Package]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Jack Package wrote...
Good point. I as well think that people who claim Garrus is a bad leader are just wrong. He is perfectly capable of commanding a team in a strategically clever and efficient way. If he would not, then he hadn't manage to carry out his strikes against the mercs with only 12 men.
People tend to mix his commanding skills and his character together. Garrus character, if he is reckless for example and so on can be dabated but I will not contribute to that part of the discussion.

A good leader also has to decide which battles to fight, not just how to fight them.  Garrus may be a good tactician, but a good leader requires much, much more than setting up efficient killzones.

Hm true Mys. *thinking smilie*
Maybe the term "leader" was wrong in the context I used. But then, he was not selected by TIM to be a leader. He is well suited for the job of being in a small strike team of Shepard and also well suited for the job of leading (as in commanding and giving tactic orders) a group of fighters through the Collector base.

[AdmiralCheez]

The best part about this thread is that people are talking about Garrus as if he were a real person.



Bioware has succeeded.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

-Skorpious- wrote...
1) And Shepard's killing of mercs is any better? Or Wrex's? Or how about Samara, who admits to killing an innocent if they violate her code. Garrus would never do such a thing.

2) Have you considered that Garrus' betrayal had anything to do with his current situation? Have you considered that after Garrus' face, family markings, identity, hideouts, ect was released to the the mercs (the top three merc gangs in the galaxy mind you) that locating him would prove little challenge? Or that his only mistake was getting cornered in unfamiliar territory? 

3) You may consider Garrus reckless, but he has made a positive difference in the lives of Omega's citizens (the e-mail from the widow of one of Garrus' teammates cements this "fact"). How may people can claim that they have saved somebodies life; especially when you consider how dangerous a place such as Omega can be. 

4) He did pretty damn well before he was betrayed. Plus, he never lost a man to these conflicts until Sidonis' deception.

1) Shepard's mission is to save humanity from the Collectors.  Garrus's mission is... to kill mercs, apparently.  Some of whom are smugglers, some of whom are killers, some of whom are simple soldiers for hire.

2) If you've read my posts then you would know that I have considered the betrayal.  He was bound to screw up sooner or later.  He was fighting an entire space station.  So Sidonis brought the roof down on him.  If not him then it would have been something else.  Garrus was not going to kill every merc in that station.  There was no chance of that.

3) I do consider Garrus reckless, and for every "life he made better" on Omega he got countless other people killed.  And in the end his team died, he was evacuated and lawlessness still ruled Omega.  Good going, I guess?

4) He did well, again, as a tactician, for a little while.  He hadn't lost a man yet, but he would have.  And, the most important thing, he did.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Xilizhra wrote...
"Glory," I feel, is unfair. Garrus was impulsive but not selfish; he wanted to do something, anything, as long as it could genuinely help people. He was in way over his head, but he wasn't just out for his own glory (how could he have been when he was anonymous?).

I think he was in it for glory.  Maybe not fame, but definitely glory.  There's a reason why he packed up and moved to Omega instead of trying to make a difference on the Citadel.
That reason being that he was tired of taking orders and wanted to do things that he personally thought was right.  Nevermind that my Shepard tried to teach him in ME1 that those rules are there for a good reason; he was just tired of not being able to do things his way.  That is not a good trait imo, and I would call that overtly selfish and even arrogant.

[Xilizhra]

I think his reason would be that C-SEC would quickly get wind of a turian supervigilante on the Citadel and arrest him, and his conscience clearly wouldn't let him kill cops, so his attempt would be ended very swiftly.

I also think that Garrus mentally regressed some after Shepard died, and him seeing everything she tried to accomplish within the rules simply unravel.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Xilizhra wrote...
I think his reason would be that C-SEC would quickly get wind of a turian supervigilante on the Citadel and arrest him, and his conscience clearly wouldn't let him kill cops, so his attempt would be ended very swiftly.
I also think that Garrus mentally regressed some after Shepard died, and him seeing everything she tried to accomplish within the rules simply unravel.

His state of mind after Shepard's death is supposition; not admissable as evidence.

And, yes, C-Sec wouldn't let him be a vigilante, so he went off to a lawless place where the local law enforcement wouldn't interfere with his space cowboy playtime.

Modifié par Mystranna Kelteel, 31 janvier 2011 - 11:44 .

[Xilizhra]

I still think that's unfair. He may have been stupid, but his desire to help people was genuine. And probably successful, given that he got the nickname "Archangel."

[volus4life]

OP is bitter that garrus is taking all the human women away from him.

[-Skorpious-]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

1) Shepard's mission is to save humanity from the Collectors.  Garrus's mission is... to kill mercs, apparently.  Some of whom are smugglers, some of whom are killers, some of whom are simple soldiers for hire.

Garrus knew about the coming invasion (i.e the reapers) but was frustrated by his inability to prevent it. Garrus isn't a high-ranking soldier, scientist, or intelligence officer - what could he do to change the minds of anybody significant, and even more difficult, find proof to back his claims? Garrus simply wanted to make the galaxy a better place before he died.

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...


2) If you've read my posts then you would know that I have considered the betrayal.  He was bound to screw up sooner or later.  He was fighting an entire space station.  So Sidonis brought the roof down on him.  If not him then it would have been something else.  Garrus was not going to kill every merc in that station.  There was no chance of that.

He was bound to screw up eventually so he should quit? Shepard, who is fighting against odds 1000x greater than Garrus' should quit because failure is a possibility? Please. 

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

3) I do consider Garrus reckless, and for every "life he made better" on Omega he got countless other people killed.  And in the end his team died, he was evacuated and lawlessness still ruled Omega.  Good going, I guess?

He accomplished a hell of a lot more than anybody else could have. He choose to aid Omega because nobody else would. Plus, is the live of a merc (in the Eclipse's case a guaranteed murderer) better than the life of a possible civilian who happened to walk down the wrong alley one night?

Mystranna Kelteel wrote.

4) He did well, again, as a tactician, for a little while.  He hadn't lost a man yet, but he would have.  And, the most important thing, he did.

Again, he should quit because he and his crew could possibly die? Is Shepard a bad leader if Jack turned him in to the Blue Suns?

Modifié par -Skorpious-, 31 janvier 2011 - 11:49 .

[AdmiralCheez]

You gotta admit, Xilizhra: Garrus does love to play the hero. He's got a massive ego and is way too reckless for his own good. But like I said a few pages back, part of his appeal is that he's a massive jackass from time to time. It makes him "human."

[Xilizhra]

Plus, is the live of a merc (in the Eclipse's case a guaranteed murderer) better than the life of a possible civilian who happened to walk down the wrong alley one night?

Nitpick. The murder-to-enter requirement was for the Eclipse Sisters, a Nos Astra subset of the larger mercenary company. I don't think that it could exist as the most respected of the big three if they required every single member to commit a murder before entering.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Xilizhra wrote...
I still think that's unfair. He may have been stupid, but his desire to help people was genuine. And probably successful, given that he got the nickname "Archangel."

I'm not saying he is purely selfish, only that the events that brought him to Omega were due in no small way to his impatience with C-Sec and dissatisfaction with having to follow orders.

Whether or not he did any good is not in question.  If that small amount of good was worth the risk and loss of life when the mission was doomed to fail from the start is the real issue, and why I don't like Garrus.

[-Skorpious-]

Xilizhra wrote...

Plus, is the live of a merc (in the Eclipse's case a guaranteed murderer) better than the life of a possible civilian who happened to walk down the wrong alley one night?

Nitpick. The murder-to-enter requirement was for the Eclipse Sisters, a Nos Astra subset of the larger mercenary company. I don't think that it could exist as the most respected of the big three if they required every single member to commit a murder before entering.

Ok, but signing up as a "merc" usually means (at least in ME lore) that you would be expected to commit illegal crimes. We have seen evidence of both the Blue Suns and Eclipse murdering civilians, and the Blood Pack openly kills for no reason at all at times. 

Modifié par -Skorpious-, 31 janvier 2011 - 11:53 .

[Xilizhra]

It's too bad we can't track the number of lives saved compared to the number of lives lost due to the actions of Garrus' team.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

-Skorpious- wrote...
1) Garrus knew about the coming invasion (i.e the reapers) but was frustrated by his inability to prevent it. Garrus isn't a high-ranking soldier, scientist, or intelligence officer - what could he do to change the minds of anybody significant, and even more difficult, find proof to back his claims? Garrus simply wanted to make the galaxy a better place before he died.

2) He was bound to screw up eventually so he should quit? Shepard, who is fighting against odds 1000x greater than Garrus' should quit because failure is a possibility? Please.

3) He accomplished a hell of a lot more than anybody else could have. He choose to aid Omega because nobody else would. Plus, is the live of a merc (in the Eclipse's case a guaranteed murderer) better than the life of a possible civilian who happened to walk down the wrong alley one night?

4) Again, he should quit because he and his crew could possibly die? Is Shepard a bad leader if Jack turned him in to the Blue Suns?

1) And he could have done exactly that in a million ways that are by far less reckless and with far fewer casualties.

2) I've already explained this quite a few times.  He never should have started an impossible mission in the first place.  And that is quite simply true because he's not fighting a specific battle.  Shepard is fighting a specific battle to save the galaxy.  Garrus just arbitrarily selected a place with criminal activity and said, "Okay, let's shoot that place up."  The difference is pretty obvious...

3) What he did accomplish is not measurable, and seemingly pointless based on the fact that we see no change at all in Omega.  What do you think happened when Garrus's team died and he left with Shep?  Do you think the remaining mercs didn't swoop right back in, possibly even worse than before to make up for all they lost?
And a life is a life.  Not all those mercs deserved to die.

4) See 2.

Modifié par Mystranna Kelteel, 31 janvier 2011 - 11:57 .