328 réponses à ce sujet

[darknoon5]

...interesting suggestions. I'll keep that in mind next time a thread like this appears.

[JRCHOharry]

Phaedon wrote...

I have an avatar depicting Garrus as Sherlock Holmes . Your argument is invalid.

I might not be Garrus' biggest fan... But this guy is right.

[Phaedon]

Mesina2 wrote...
How is that possible with water?

Massive drowning.

[cachx]

Phaedon wrote...

darknoon5 wrote...
This thread should be killed. With fire.

And water.

Couldn't resist.

[habitat 67]

A person in love with a character who doinks varren dislikes Garrus and we care?

[adneate]

Phaedon wrote...
He has killed half of the gangs in Omega so he is a pretty good candidate for Shepard's squad?

So what? He can kill a few mercenaries how does that make him any different from Zaeed, in fact just put Zaeed directly into the Archangel mission and there would be no difference what so ever. His inclusion in ME2 is pointless for the character.

Phaedon wrote...
Recruitment and Loyalty mission.

Maybe you don't really understand what character development is, there is none in the recruitment mission he acts exactly the same way at the end as he does at the beginning, except now he has a bandage on half is face. His loyalty mission also develops the character from ME1 in exactly no way whatsoever, if anything it's a repetition of the exact same development we went through with ME1 except now he acts even more like a child if you don't let him gun down a man in the middle of a space station because he suspects he's the person who betrayed him. It's the Dr. Heart encounter all over again and we "develop" him in exactly the same way, either pushing him to be ruthless or more reasoned.

All the more proof that Garrus has no real in-game reason to be in the ME2 squad.

[xlavaina]

OP you are one of about .001% of the entire population of the universe that hates Garrus.

[CroGamer002]

xlavaina wrote...

OP you are one of about .001% of the entire population of the universe that hates Garrus.

That's still a lot people you know?

[Phaedon]

adneate wrote...
So what? He can kill a few mercenaries how does that make him any different from Zaeed, in fact just put Zaeed directly into the Archangel mission and there would be no difference what so ever. His inclusion in ME2 is pointless for the character.

Zaeed is a mercenary. Garrus is a skilled sniper, with leadership abilities, has been trained, made it to Spectre Bootcamp, is loyal to Shepard and is a guddamn detective. He has as many reasons, or more, to be in ME2 as any other squaddie.

adneate wrote...
Maybe you don't really understand what character development is, there is none in the recruitment mission he acts exactly the same way at the end as he does at the beginning, except now he has a bandage on half is face.

Incorrect.
1) He has become a lot more renegade, he is a vigilante now.
2) He has just lost all of his team, psychological scars and all that.

His loyalty mission also develops the character from ME1 in exactly no way whatsoever, if anything it's a repetition of the exact same development we went through with ME1 except now he acts even more like a child if you don't let him gun down a man in the middle of a space station because he suspects he's the person who betrayed him. It's the Dr. Heart encounter all over again and we "develop" him in exactly the same way, either pushing him to be ruthless or more reasoned.

Uh yeah, because hunting down a criminal that hardly knows you is the same as the traitor who you trusted for months, and ended up killing all of your friends and almost yourself too. Apart from the referene to Exodus that is quite dominant in the whole mission (Eye for an eye), Garrus can (possibly) understand that there is not only black and white in the galaxy. Big deal, huh? Most people don't fully understand that until late in their life.

All the more proof that Garrus has no real in-game reason to be in the ME2 squad.

Modifié par Phaedon, 31 janvier 2011 - 09:37 .

[ObserverStatus]

Gemaphrodite wrote...

Lol, the op is just expressing an opinion.

Gosh people are sensitive.

It's worse than that.  The op didn't just express an opinion, he spoke blasphemy.

[-Skorpious-]

I don't know if the op is afraid of the bogeyman, but they should probably check their closet tonight for Garrus Vakarian before going to sleep.

[STG]

I don't like Garrus.

Modifié par STG, 31 janvier 2011 - 09:47 .

[adneate]

Phaedon wrote...
Zaeed a mercenary. Garrus is a skilled sniper, with leadership abilities, has been trained, made it to Spectre Bootcamp, is loyal to Shepard and is a guddamn detective. He has as many reasons, or more, to be in ME2 as any other squaddie

You're essentially just splitting hairs on two characters with exactly the same abilites, Zaeed can use Sniper Rifles and Assault Rifles too. Zaeed is also a battle hardened mercenary and founder of one the largest private mercenary armies in the galaxy. He specifically says he lead the men into battle while Vido did the book keeping. Besides if Garrus is apparently so loyal why would he even have a loyalty mission doesn't that imply you have to win his loyalty?

Phaedon wrote...
Incorrect.
1) He has become a lot more renegade, he is a vigilante now.
2) He has just lost all of his team, psychological scars and all that.

Well the first one is just an obvious retcon of Garrus's ME1 character, they made the choice to push him one way or the other entirely meaningless in ME2 so they could have him in the same circumstances. The end result of multiple conversations and a loyalty mission is a slight change in his story after ME1 before he becomes the card board one size fits all character he is in ME2. As for the second one this is only told and never explored or developed in any way by the writers, all it triggers is a self-indulgent revenge fantasy. No survivor's guilt no PTSD no doubts about his leadership abilities, nope everything will be solved by murdering someone in a mall with a high powered rifle.

Phaedon wrote...
Uh yeah, because hunting down a criminal that hardly knows you is the same as the traitor who you trusted for months, and ended up killing all of your friends and almost yourself too. Apart from the referene to Exodus that is quite dominant in the whole mission (Eye for an eye), Garrus can (possibly) understand that there is no black and white in the galaxy. Big deal, huh? Most people don't fully understand that until late in their life.

The context is different but that's entirely superficial the development is the same he doesn't learn anything about the galaxy and his character doesn't grow in any measurable or meaningful way. You either indulge his revenge fantasy for no consequence or don't for no consequence, get a few generic remarks at the end and then it's either romance him from stuff totally unrelated to that LM or don't for no further input or dialogue from the character.

If these themes you claim are present, which is doubtful, they are so poorly done and so casually brushed aside for the sake of gameplay that it hardly makes a convinving argument for his inclusion in ME2's squad roaster. If anything he belonged in Bailey's postion where you could see the real results of how you pushed his character in ME1, as be became either a model C-Sec Officer with a reasoned approach to his Ward or an unhappy hot-head bending and breaking the rules to get the job done.

Instead we get an obvious bit of fanservice that does harm to the character from ME1 and shoves him into a plot and mission that both disrespects the player's choices and leaves the character spinning in place.

Modifié par adneate, 31 janvier 2011 - 09:52 .

[Joram Talid]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
His loyalty mission is also a selfish, pointless waste of time but he wants you to do it...

And constantly gripes about how he doesn't need you to approve and that he's going to do it "his way".  Perfect way to treat your commanding officer who is only doing this as a personal favor to you.

If there was an option to turn around and leave Garrus alone in the warehouses I would have taken it.

garrus has gone to hell and back with shepard, a human, well before turian/human relations were that good. he asks shepard for a favor, like EVERYBODY ELSE(whom he hasn't gone to hell and back with), and shepard questions him. 

yeah, what a friend shepard is.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

habitat 67 wrote...

A person in love with a character who doinks varren dislikes Garrus and we care?

A Garrus fan is trying to "defend Garrus" by baselessly and childishly insulting other characters and acting like their opposition is the one who's trolling?

[darknoon5]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

habitat 67 wrote...

A person in love with a character who doinks varren dislikes Garrus and we care?

A Garrus fan is trying to "defend Garrus" by baselessly and childishly insulting other characters and acting like their opposition is the one who's trolling?

I actually agree. Defending one character does not entail bashing another character.

Also, I was only joking earlier. I don't really see how people could dislike Garrus, but everybody's entitled to their own opinion.

The loyalty mission complaints are stupid though. Pretty much every character has "selfish" loyalty missions, and often complains about Shepard's actions (eg. Thane's, Zaeed's, Jack's). Garrus' was one of the more personal ones, and he was obviously emotional due to the loss of his friends, which was why he was questioning Shepard. He's obviously very thankful for Shepard's help as well.

But whatever.

Modifié par darknoon5, 31 janvier 2011 - 09:59 .

[Rogue Unit]

Really, Garrus and his actions don't need to be justified or defended. His fan count speaks for itself.

Modifié par Rogue Unit, 31 janvier 2011 - 09:59 .

[darknoon5]

adneate wrote...
Well the first one is just an obvious retcon of Garrus's ME1 character

It's called character development.

If I got a penny everytime somebody incorrectly used the term retcon on these forums, I'd be a rich man by now.

[habitat 67]

darknoon5 wrote...

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

habitat 67 wrote...

A person in love with a character who doinks varren dislikes Garrus and we care?

A Garrus fan is trying to "defend Garrus" by baselessly and childishly insulting other characters and acting like their opposition is the one who's trolling?

I actually agree. Defending one character does not entail bashing another character.

Also, I was only joking earlier. I don't really see how people could dislike Garrus, but everybody's entitled to their own opinion.

So, er I was joking too and you guys are so pent up over this it's rediculous.  Must be a symptom of the scale itch.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Mesina2 wrote...
[Points]
1) If he did that then he would lost 11 men there, not 10 much later do to Sidonis's betrayal.
He already was deep in that "space cowboy" or whatever you want to put it and he couldn't visit his family.
And he sending money is not appreciating his family?

2)Then he shouldn't like Wrex either.

3) WTF that has to do with Garrus's leadership?!
Only thing Garrus is for blame that he trusted Sidonis!

4) He isn't responsible for their deaths!

Counter Points:
1) From the sounds of it, Garrus's mom has been sick for a long time and Garrus has not come to visit in a long time.  He could have gone to see her before going to Omega, but apparently he just says "Nah, I'll send some money; I gotta kill some people on Omega."

2) If that single character trait was the only reason why he didn't like Garrus then you might have a point in not liking Wrex.  But it isn't.

3) Erm, Garrus led a team of 12 people against an entire space station full of criminals.  That's ridiculously reckless, which is not a very good trait for a leader.  It's compounded by the fact that Garrus is the aggressor there; he chose to throw a rocks at a 12-foot wasp nest.  Yeah, big surprise when you get stung, eh?

4) Maybe not directly, but he's still responsible for leading the team there and giving the orders.  They were successful for a little while then it went to hell, just as any good leader would have known it would.

[STG]

adneate wrote...
If these themes you claim are present, which is doubtful, they are so poorly done and so casually brushed aside for the sake of gameplay that it hardly makes a convinving argument for his inclusion in ME2's squad roaster. If anything he belonged in Bailey's postion where you could see the real results of how you pushed his character in ME1, as be became either a model C-Sec Officer with a reasoned approach to his Ward or an unhappy hot-head bending and breaking the rules to get the job done.

Instead we get an obvious bit of fanservice that does harm to the character from ME1 and shoves him into a plot and mission that both disrespects the player's choices and leaves the character spinning in place.

That would honestly make MUCH more sense than what we got instead. I guess fanservice > story and character progression.

[adneate]

darknoon5 wrote...
If I got a penny everytime somebody incorrectly used the term character development on these forums, I'd be a rich man by now.

I fixed it, you can thank me later.

[JamieCOTC]

I like Garrus and if the OP hadn't stuck this in the GD No Spoiler Board I would tell him why. But, oh well ...

[habitat 67]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...


3) Erm, Garrus led a team of 12 people against an entire space station full of criminals.  That's ridiculously reckless, which is not a very good trait for a leader.  It's compounded by the fact that Garrus is the aggressor there; he chose to throw a rocks at a 12-foot wasp nest.  Yeah, big surprise when you get stung, eh?

Durr, all the characters have moments of recklessness. Really, you try too hard.