120 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

Phaedon wrote...

Some people would disagree on that
statement, but I won't. I am assuming most professional soldiers don't
just do it for the money.

The more professional the soldier is, the more he is in it for the (potential) kicks of killing people.

BlueDemonX wrote...

But personally, I think that if you are in the Military and have to protect lives, you really can´t be too renegade. You´ve become a soldier for a reason (And yes, I know about corruption etc., but I´m talking about "normal" soldiers - or how they should be )

The function on the military is not to protect lives. It is to take them away from the enemies.

It is the function of the politicians to utilize the military in the way they deem necessary and justify it with "protecting the lives" on the TV.

Speaking of Hackett, a "soldier" in a position this high up has to be a bit of a politician himself. And that's all there is to his appreciation of the paragon scenarios: they sound good on the news.

[Reever]

Yeah, you´re right, the army - till now - was there to fight and conquer. I´d hope there´s a change of mind in the modern era (and in the future )

And well, that´s a way you can see it as well. But having the news as your only reason for him to be praised is a bit week, seeing that unwanted details can easily be covered if there´s something that happens on planets where the Alliance arrives first, anyway!

And lastly, I like to believe that people are inclined to do good things, even if they are egoistical most of the time.
So that´s why I think that Adm. Hackett is as good a person as he can be in his position! Of course, I may be wrong, but hey, it´s still only a game ;-)

[Phaedon]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
The more professional the soldier is, the more he is in it for the (potential) kicks of killing people.

Uhhh, sure.

[aimlessgun]

Phaedon wrote...
Although there are a lot of ambiguous characters, I don't personally see Hackett as one.

Ah, but even if you don't see him as one, the divided views show that on the whole, to the playerbase, Hackett is an ambiguous character.

[Zulu_DFA]

Phaedon wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
The more professional the soldier is, the more he is in it for the (potential) kicks of killing people.

Uhhh, sure.

Just like Garrus, you know... "Scoped and dropped, yay!!!"

Actually, no, bad example. A professional soldier kills people designated by his superiors, but Garrus just went psycho...

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 23 mars 2011 - 07:51 .

[ThrakF]

Now this is an interesting topic. Hackett and TIM. A moral conflict in ME3 would be very interesting, though since something like that would be a very large choice, and most likely severely affect everything after it, it would have to be fairly late in the game I think.

I see the whole equal and opposite thing, they're both top figures in the 2 extremes, both command figures, they are both brilliant at their respective commands, they are both incredible at strategizing, and they are both done by extremely good voice actors, and we've had ME1 with the alliance, ME2 with cerberus, so it may be possible that we get some sort of choice in ME3.

As for me, I'd take hackett over TIM any day, though TIM does get a fair few points for being one of the few people in the galaxy who takes the reapers seriously and actually bothers to get off his ass and do something about it. Ok, well actually he mostly sits down and does everything through screens and communication, so bad example, but you get my point. Whether hackett believed shep after the destruction of the normandy SR1 I do not know, this may well have been answered somewhere already, if he did, then there wasn't exactly anything he could do to help shep without losing his command, and having someone who believes him in that position could be very handy. If he didn't believe shep, then although I'd be very annoyed with him, that still wouldn't mean i'd pick TIM over him.

I do wish sometimes the alliance could take a page out of cerberus book on 2 things, and only 2 things. 1) believing in the reapers 2) what was it that jacob said? Ummm, oh yeah: "When colonies go missing, we don't commision a team to write a report to figure out what the hell to do about it. We just go and find out."

Though the IM might have the potential to be a small antagonist in ME3, I seriously doubt he'd be anything more than a small annoyance compared to the reapers, even if he sides with them, which is not completely out of the question . There could be a possible moment to choose one or the other, after which the one you don't choose becomes your enemy.

By this I mean the sort of thing where you choose one to fight the reapers with, and after the reapers are done and dusted, if you've sided with the alliance, you build a perfect galaxy, if you side with cerberus, TIM takes over the galaxy, with shep in a position of power, something like that. I know it's not very likely, but if this did happen, could be something like that

[Phaedon]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
Just like Garrus, you know... "Scoped and dropped, yay!!!"

Actually, no, bad example. A professional soldier kills people designated by his superiors, but Garrus just went psycho...

Am I supposed to be raging? 
And for your information, 'being in for the kicks of killing people' is a psychological disorder.

ThrakF wrote...

Now this is an interesting topic. Hackett and TIM. A moral conflict in ME3 would be very interesting, though since something like that would be a very large choice, and most likely severely affect everything after it, it would have to be fairly late in the game I think.

I see the whole equal and opposite thing, they're both top figures in the 2 extremes, both command figures, they are both brilliant at their respective commands, they are both incredible at strategizing, and they are both done by extremely good voice actors, and we've had ME1 with the alliance, ME2 with cerberus, so it may be possible that we get some sort of choice in ME3.

As for me, I'd take hackett over TIM any day, though TIM does get a fair few points for being one of the few people in the galaxy who takes the reapers seriously and actually bothers to get off his ass and do something about it. Ok, well actually he mostly sits down and does everything through screens and communication, so bad example, but you get my point. Whether hackett believed shep after the destruction of the normandy SR1 I do not know, this may well have been answered somewhere already, if he did, then there wasn't exactly anything he could do to help shep without losing his command, and having someone who believes him in that position could be very handy. If he didn't believe shep, then although I'd be very annoyed with him, that still wouldn't mean i'd pick TIM over him.

I do wish sometimes the alliance could take a page out of cerberus book on 2 things, and only 2 things. 1) believing in the reapers 2) what was it that jacob said? Ummm, oh yeah: "When colonies go missing, we don't commision a team to write a report to figure out what the hell to do about it. We just go and find out."

Though the IM might have the potential to be a small antagonist in ME3, I seriously doubt he'd be anything more than a small annoyance compared to the reapers, even if he sides with them, which is not completely out of the question . There could be a possible moment to choose one or the other, after which the one you don't choose becomes your enemy.

By this I mean the sort of thing where you choose one to fight the reapers with, and after the reapers are done and dusted, if you've sided with the alliance, you build a perfect galaxy, if you side with cerberus, TIM takes over the galaxy, with shep in a position of power, something like that. I know it's not very likely, but if this did happen, could be something like that

I agree in most of the things you mentioned. 

TIM takes over the galaxy, with shep in a position of power, something like that. I know it's not very likely, but if this did happen, could be something like that

This is basically the most worrying thing about Cerberus. And giving more power to them.

Modifié par Phaedon, 23 mars 2011 - 08:46 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Phaedon wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
Just like Garrus, you know... "Scoped and dropped, yay!!!"

Actually, no, bad example. A professional soldier kills people designated by his superiors, but Garrus just went psycho...

Am I supposed to be raging? [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]

Save your rage for Admiral Hackett. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Phaedon wrote...

And for your information, 'being in for the kicks of killing people' is a psychological disorder.

No, it's just the "killer instinct". It is present in most people in a latent form, but the game developers have already made billions on it, by making shooters, like ME2, and better.

A psychological disorder is the inability to control it.

[ThrakF]

Phaedon wrote...

TIM takes over the galaxy, with shep in a position of power, something like that. I know it's not very likely, but if this did happen, could be something like that

This is basically the most worrying thing about Cerberus. And giving more power to them.

Indeed, the idea of cerberus gaining a lot of power is very very worrying.

[Knottedredloc]

Anderson and TIM definitely not Hackett and TIM.   Anderson damn near took down TIM and  destroyed a huge portion of the Cerberus network and it's assets.   

Modifié par Knottedredloc, 24 mars 2011 - 01:17 .

[Phaedon]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
No, it's just the "killer instinct". It is present in most people in a latent form, but the game developers have already made billions on it, by making shooters, like ME2, and better.

A psychological disorder is the inability to control it.

Okay, 1)Survival instinct, 2)desensitization to violence and 3)Liking murder are three very different things.

Knottedredloc wrote...

Anderson and TIM definitely not Hackett and TIM.   Anderson damn near took down TIM and  destroyed a huge portion of the Cerberus network and it's assets.   

But that wouldn't happen without Grayson's data. And Hackett ordered raids against Cerberus bases as well.

Modifié par Phaedon, 24 mars 2011 - 08:18 .

[habitat 67]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
The more professional the soldier is, the more he is in it for the (potential) kicks of killing people.

Uhhh, sure.

Just like Garrus, you know... "Scoped and dropped, yay!!!"

Actually, no, bad example. A professional soldier kills people designated by his superiors, but Garrus just went psycho...

I'm going to go ahead and say that Garrus is the least psycho person on the Normandy.

[Phaedon]

habitat 67 wrote...
I'm going to go ahead and say that Garrus is the least psycho person on the Normandy. 

It was not used as an argument, he thought he'd ****** me off. 

Modifié par Phaedon, 25 mars 2011 - 07:12 .

[Uszi]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Look, Hitler loved children. And dogs. Did it make him a paragon?

Godwin's law.
/thread

Modifié par Uszi, 25 mars 2011 - 07:48 .

[Uszi]

So, Zulu, are you still supporting your:  "Shepard will be arrested by the Alliance, therefore new ship/stat reset/crew" theory?

That's a bit of a tangental discussion here, but it's also an important motivation considering your the most coherent and adament "Hacket is a renegade" person in the thread.  Would you say that this would affect your theory quite a bit?

As far as the OP:

I think it's an interesting theory.  Since Shepard will technically still be an outlaw aligned with Terrorists at the end of ME2/Beginning of ME3, and since para-Shep will not be able to count on TIM for continued support, it seems to follow that Shep will need some sort of new sugar daddy who will be sympathetic to the destruction of the collector base and anti-Cerberous.

Maybe that's Hackett.  Other people have pointed out that it would more likely be Anderson.  That seems to make more sense to me, especially considering that he's more of a "polar opposite" than Hackett, if that dichotomy seems important to you.

i.e.
Anderson works within the system (as a counselor potentially), whereas TIM works outside the system.

Anderson supports destroying the reapers philosophically, whereas TIM seeks to understand/use the reapers.

Anderson, as you said, is more of a pascifist, whereas TIM clearly has no problems or qualms with sending teams of hundreds to die uselessly (i.e. on the derelect reaper).

And so on.

I also agree with the sentiment expressed by others that Hackett is more Paragade than pure Paragon.  The assassination of the drug lord in UNC: Negotiations is not the paragon choice.  But it does make the most sense militarily.  Considering that the Paragon often makes decisions over the course of ME1 and ME2 of low strategic value, pure paragons don't strike me as good military men.

Therefore, to me, you might have a scale wherein the pure Renegade is TIM, the pure Paragon is Anderson, and the middle line is Hackett.

And Anderson seems like the more likely candidate to support you in the face of you making enemies with Cerberous, even though you may be wanted by the Counsel and the Alliance.

Modifié par Uszi, 25 mars 2011 - 08:06 .

[Phaedon]

 Maybe, I am just thinking, with Anderson and Hackett combined, easily 'outcooling' TIM, there's no reason left for Cerberus to stay around is there? 

[Dominus]

Interviewer: Cerberus is over - what are you going to do now?

Cerberus Guard: I'm going to disney world! illium!

Modifié par DominusVita, 27 mars 2011 - 02:25 .

[lovgreno]

Uszi wrote...

Therefore, to me, you might have a scale wherein the pure Renegade is TIM, the pure Paragon is Anderson, and the middle line is Hackett.

A simplification perhaps, but still a interesting idea. It could become the basis of some good stories.

[Phaedon]

So, thoughts after playing Arrival?

[maxulic]

Dionkey wrote...

I totally agree. Hackett is the only human that has any bearing in the ME Universe at this point considering the councilor is only a piece in a set of 4 while Hackett is the leader of the muscle, he has the final word. The point of ME3 is the struggle for Earth, whether it be the reapers or beyond. TIM's methods will certainly be put to question by the Alliance and you will have to choose eventually, at least thats my thoughts.

I have no doubt that Hackett and Arcturus Station will shine in ME3. This station is protecting the mass relay leading to Earth, I would be surprised if that's not the location of an important battle to come.

[Ghost Warrior]

I think it's actually Anderson vs. TIM. Hackett is mix of those two,although obviously more Paragon than Renegade,but still Paragade.That's why I like the old bastard.That and possibly the coolest voice in the series.

Obviously all of them will have big roles in ME3,yeah!!!

I used to hope we will be able to choose between those two,but it seems we won't have that option.

Modifié par Ghost Warrior, 22 avril 2011 - 07:08 .