68 réponses à ce sujet

[Labrev]

Udina is really underrated. The guy is a hammer who knows how to get things done. He had a major hand in the Council's decision to make Shepard a Spectre, and otherwise seems to know who can make things happen.

I just felt like Anderson is who the Council needs. A man of action, not another politican that buries his head in the sand when having to take real action (like the other 3). As an advisor, I don't see Udina's talents going to waste, I'm sure Anderson realizes his value and listens to him (which is not the case in the opposite scenario either).

I still go with Anderson, but I always have to think a little.

[omgmahbrain]

"I'm sick of this council and its anti-human BS" isn't very diplomatic. He's described as a "diplomatic incident waiting to happen" by the Turian Hierarchy as well.

Yes, because all competent politicians remain congenial at all times.

[Barquiel]

omgmahbrain wrote...

"I'm sick of this council and its anti-human BS" isn't very diplomatic. He's described as a "diplomatic incident waiting to happen" by the Turian Hierarchy as well.

Yes, because all competent politicians remain congenial at all times.

Awkward outbursts have nothing to do with being congenial/uncongenial.

[emmanuelsieyes]

Manic Sheep wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

omgmahbrain wrote...
I mean, he is a cowardly incompetent politician, at least all of what I have seen of him points to that at least.

Would you mind providing some proof that Udina is an incompetent politician?

"I'm sick of this council and its anti-human BS" isn't very diplomatic. He's described as a "diplomatic incident waiting to happen" by the Turian Hierarchy as well.

This^
Other characters talk about him being a good politician but all you ever seem to see him do is throw hissy fits at the council.

You also only see him for about 20 minutes, tops. Let's not forget that Udina was important in getting Shepard's Spectre status - one of Udina's goals was a human Spectre. Furthermore - remember that meeting with the Council where you present the evidence against Saren? Udina got that meeting.

My problem with choosing Anderson is that he likes Shepard too much. Anderson isn't going to call out Shepard when the time is right - Udina did the wrong thing for the right reasons when he locked out the Normandy. Shepard's actions could very well have sparked an intragalactic war.

[omgmahbrain]

Awkward outbursts have nothing to do with being congenial/uncongenial.

Udina's outburst fits the definition of uncongenial.

[hc00]

Wait, people here say he is a competent politician?! How on Earth would you reach that conclusion.

He only just manages to get the council begrudgingly to listen to your testimony about Eden prime, and then immediately sticks his head up his arse and then bows down before the council when they resist granting his incredibly reasonable request.

He cant even get them to launch a proper large scale inquiry into the possibility that one of their best trained and financed operatives, with knowledge of massive amounts of sensitive information, possibly has gone Rogue. What does he manage to get them to commit to the investigation? Garrus who is as bad a policeman as they can be.

Then when you have proof that Human citizens are in incredible peril, he still cant get them to offer any security or support, and the best he can get them to do is what they were already planning to do, ie make you a spectre.

And then when they are worried about you causing a slight fuss while stopping the f*cking Mega apocalypse, he immediately bows to their whims and betrays his entire species.


How on earth do you come to the conclusion that he is a competent politician from that?!

Sorry but yeah thinking he is right for the job literally confuses me so much I cant even begin to understand how you could reach that conclusion

[wepeel_]

Never crossed my mind to choose Udina. You basically spend ME1 carrying him and the council, kicking and screaming, to salvation, whereas left to their own devices they would just have become eradicated. And then you do the same in ME2.

As for Anderson, being on the council may not be what he wants, but even if you choose Udina, Anderson ends up involved in politics anyway as Udina's advisor. If he has to be involved at all, better that he's the one with the final word. Udina is too obtuse to be allowed to control things, but his sense of political maneuvering may come in handy as an advisor.

The only reason I can think of to select Udina for the council is that he'd be another pretty good obstacle for Shepard to overcome, which is a metagaming reason. In the end, I feel the galaxy will be saved in spite of men like him rather than because of them.

Modifié par wepeel_, 24 avril 2011 - 01:22 .

[TomY90]

I did once pick Udina and I was correct that he was not right for being on the council because he puts the needs of humanity far beyond the needs of the galaxy and causes more trouble than he is worth when on the council.

I do feel as well that Udina will not help you at all in ME3 if he was a council leader he will most likely say 'I DEMAND ACTION!' and then throw you to the dogs when you have done what he needs. whereas anderson will try to help as much as he can whilst trying to help the other council races and will never take the glory which Udina would

Modifié par TomY90, 24 avril 2011 - 03:02 .

[Last Darkness]

Merchant2006 wrote...

Udina, while being a complete moron, knows what he's doing. He knows the ways in which to make humanity go further in the galaxy and knows the 'tricks of the trade' when it comes to being a politician. Anderson was a nice choice but he most likely hated every part of the job, he's the 'man of action'. Come to think of it, I don't see the danger in having Udina as councillor, sure he may be arrogant and dislike things you do (not always, he was glad you became a spectre etc) but yeah.

Anderson should always stick to his position, I mean he becomes an Admiral. Prrrrrromotion!

Sandbox47 wrote...

Udina is about as incompetent at
politics as superman is at stopping bullets. He has a good sense of
who's buttons to push. That shows very obviously after you've returned
to the Citadel after Virmire. Aside from that, Anderson didn't want to
be a politician.

caradoc2000 wrote...

I always choose Udina. He is far more capable in politics than Anderson.

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

Udina is really underrated. The
guy is a hammer who knows how to get things done. He had a major hand in
the Council's decision to make Shepard a Spectre, and otherwise seems
to know who can make things happen.

Quoted for Truth.

I really am dissappointed with the narrow views many of the poster have on this issue. Your judgeing the men not by their qualifications, experince or ability but whether or not you find them personaly appealing.
Congratulations, you all get a F.

Like him or dislike him Udina has the ability and experince to get things done, he also is pretty heavily in the humans first and whats best for all humanity field.  Anderson is not a politician and is not one who knows how to play that game so he end up being a weak leader. More a figure head who acts on his on occasion.

This is similar to the choice in Dragon Age, Harrowmont or Bhelen on the Throne? Harrowmont come soff as the good and moral choice even though it dooms his people and is a terrible outcome for the dwarves. While Bhelen is a Tyrant who get things done and his people are on the up and up and everythings looking better for all of them, even the slaves.

Too many people use the Black and White logic, and dont even consider those dont exists.  Everything is shades of grey.

Modifié par Last Darkness, 28 avril 2011 - 10:59 .

[Waltzingbear]

By trying to be objective you're creating prejudice, and presuming too much.
Udina might be a sleeky fox when it comes to politics, but whatever his interest are they aren't necessarily Shepard's, and there's no guarantee that being a good politician will serve the galaxy or humanity best in the moment of truth; and this is the moment where the ME story lands at.

The Galaxy is at war with the Reapers although some might not acknowledge it. Shepard needs to do all that's in his power to stop them and Udina cannot be fully trusted to do the right thing, that's his flaw as being a politician. Verily if I remember correctly, if not for Anderson and his mighty fist Shepard and the Normandy would have been grounded and the Citadel destroyed while Udina and the Council were joking about the alleged "Reapers" in their tea parties.
And so I ask again, can Udina be absolutely trusted? you might say yes because you know that Earth is attacked and humanity is fighting the Reapers in ME3, but it's impossible to know the consequences ahead of time, and I trust Anderson to do the right thing, although having lousy tea parties.

[wepeel_]

Last Darkness wrote...
I really am dissappointed with the narrow views many of the poster have on this issue.

I agree with Waltzingbear. Udina may be good when it comes to day-to-day politics, but much like the council, he remains unaware of the big picture. Shepard, after having received the prothean cipher and spoken to Sovereign, probably has a deeper understanding of the Reaper threat than any other living human. Whereas Anderson believes in him and has his back, Udina is a skeptic and more often than not just gets in his way.

That's not so say Udina and the council should be blamed for being careful about what they believe without having tangible evidence - but from Shepard's point of view, knowing the importance of stopping the Reapers and knowing that he's pretty much the only one who can do it - nominating the guy who trusts you to have a say in things just seems to be the better choice, across the board. Once that is over, I'm sure Anderson wouldn't mind stepping back and letting Udina do the "barter-for-human-advancement" politicking again.

[Alistair_Dunscon]

I've chosen Udina more than once and he strikes me as a triangulator who is more interested in a political victory than a policy victory.

[Last Darkness]

Waltzingbear wrote...

By trying to be objective you're creating prejudice, and presuming too much.
Udina might be a sleeky fox when it comes to politics, but whatever his interest are they aren't necessarily Shepard's, and there's no guarantee that being a good politician will serve the galaxy or humanity best in the moment of truth; and this is the moment where the ME story lands at.

The Galaxy is at war with the Reapers although some might not acknowledge it. Shepard needs to do all that's in his power to stop them and Udina cannot be fully trusted to do the right thing, that's his flaw as being a politician. Verily if I remember correctly, if not for Anderson and his mighty fist Shepard and the Normandy would have been grounded and the Citadel destroyed while Udina and the Council were joking about the alleged "Reapers" in their tea parties.
And so I ask again, can Udina be absolutely trusted? you might say yes because you know that Earth is attacked and humanity is fighting the Reapers in ME3, but it's impossible to know the consequences ahead of time, and I trust Anderson to do the right thing, although having lousy tea parties.

wepeel_ wrote...

Last Darkness wrote...
I really am dissappointed with the narrow views many of the poster have on this issue.

I
agree with Waltzingbear. Udina may be good when it comes to day-to-day
politics, but much like the council, he remains unaware of the big
picture. Shepard, after having received the prothean cipher and spoken
to Sovereign, probably has a deeper understanding of the Reaper threat
than any other living human. Whereas Anderson believes in him and has
his back, Udina is a skeptic and more often than not just gets in his
way.

That's not so say Udina and the council should be blamed for
being careful about what they believe without having tangible evidence -
but from Shepard's point of view, knowing the importance of stopping
the Reapers and knowing that he's pretty much the only one who can do it
- nominating the guy who trusts you to have a say in things just seems
to be the better choice, across the board. Once that is over, I'm sure
Anderson wouldn't mind stepping back and letting Udina do the
"barter-for-human-advancement" politicking again.

The exact same things can be said in reverse though. Also you seem to be ignoring Udinas own statements after the fact where he acknoledges what had to be done and admits his error, Udina also often had your back.

Many people are too biased and prujidiced to begin with because your basing your opinion on the point of view of Shepard, who basicaly has the script for the rest of the game while most everyone else is in the Dark. Honestly did you expect the Council to belive you about Reapers with zero proof? 
It would be like If I told you its going to rain clowns from outer space tomarrow who will take over all political offices because thats happend in a secret prophecy told only to me by a unknown source. Would you belive me? and mobilise a defense force on full standbye and drop everything your doing to prepare for the Space Clowns?

Anyways the question was who was better to advocate humanity and best represent them on the council. Please take this into perspective.

[RAF1940]

Although Udina is the better politician, I wasn't about to let that **** on the Council, so Anderson it was.

[Viperlord 21]

In my most recent playthrough, with the Council alive and Udina as the Councilor, I found it interesting that Anderson states that politically, Udina has done a fine job for the Alliance, in contrast with what he says if Udina heads a human council.

[Heather Cline]

Udina is one of those characters you love to hate. I chose Anderson in every one of my play throughs. Also you can get your spectre status back if you chose Udina but it takes a lot of ass kissing. Furthermore, yes Anderson states he doesn't like being a politician but the fact is he is at least representing humanities best interests unlike Udina if you play ME2 there are lots of news bites stating how Udina is doing tours and crap but not really helping out where it's needed.

Anderson is doing that and I think he's doing a much better job anyways.

[wepeel_]

Last Darkness wrote...

The exact same things can be said in reverse though. Also you seem to be ignoring Udinas own statements after the fact where he acknoledges what had to be done and admits his error, Udina also often had your back.

Many people are too biased and prujidiced to begin with because your basing your opinion on the point of view of Shepard, who basicaly has the script for the rest of the game while most everyone else is in the Dark. Honestly did you expect the Council to belive you about Reapers with zero proof? 
It would be like If I told you its going to rain clowns from outer space tomarrow who will take over all political offices because thats happend in a secret prophecy told only to me by a unknown source. Would you belive me? and mobilise a defense force on full standbye and drop everything your doing to prepare for the Space Clowns?

Anyways the question was who was better to advocate humanity and best represent them on the council. Please take this into perspective.

I'm not contesting that Udina has good sides too. Like I said, from Udina's and the council's point of view, being hesitant and even doubtful makes a lot of sense, in the face of lack of proof and what Shepard claims about the Reapers. From Shepard's point of view though, i.e. from the player's point of view when making the choice; stopping the Reapers overshadows everything else in the galaxy, and that's why it appears best to nominate someone you can trust - and who trusts you - to a position of great influence.

And yeah, I would indeed not believe you about your space clown threat, and that's why, if you got a chance to nominate someone to a position of great power and influence, you wouldn't nominate me even if I was the shrewdest politician; but someone who believed you and your story, who would be much more likely to provide you with the backing you needed to stop them yourself.

I also wouldn't say Udina has your back. He may in a roundabout way when he thinks you're advancing the interests of humanity on comparatively small scale, such as when you become a spectre - but like I said, within the confines of the Mass Effect games, he doesn't see the big picture. He doesn't trust you enough to believe you know what you're doing even when it seems like you aren't.
Anderson on the other hand, is a friend rather than a political ally. He believes in you so much he's ready to first give up his ship and later risk his career and even his life just to give you a shot. In my mind, with the stake being the fate of the galaxy rather than political dealing, that kind of support and trust is by far more important.

[termokanden]

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

Udina is really underrated. The guy is a hammer who knows how to get things done. He had a major hand in the Council's decision to make Shepard a Spectre, and otherwise seems to know who can make things happen.

While he does get some things done. I cannot forgive the part where Shepard is grounded. After all that has happened, of course the Council continues to ignore evidence and even punishes the very person who has been fighting their battles.

But if anything, Udina proves how much he really belongs there. He'd fit right in. That's exactly why I would never choose him.

Udina strikes me as a man who knows how the system works, but not someone I could actually trust.

[SheppardJohn]

i chose him cause: like anderson say he is an ass hehe!

[PnXMarcin1PL]

I've always chosen Anderson for councilor.
I've managed to find a femshep save on masseffectsaves.com with Udina for councillor. It'll be my first run as femshep and with Udina as councilor. My opinion about Udina: **** ! (no offense to those who like him)

[SojournerN7]

I never choose Udina, he grounded my ship. Also, this.

[CrybabyXD]

ive only chosen udina as alternative to see what happens. and did my 1st playthru in me2 and he screwed me over never again.

[Parah_Salin]

Well, mainly to set up a different "feel" for the story in one playthrough vs. another. Beyond changing the actual events of the story I think it makes the tone of the story different two. If you make Anderson the councilor you see the personal toll and futility of having a sensible minded soldier as a politician; if you go with Udina you get the futility of the unstoppable backwardness of politics. Also I feel like if you kill off the council with Udina you get this much more sinister government as the backdrop which can be fun.

[Last Darkness]

Parah_Salin wrote...

Well, mainly to set up a different "feel" for the story in one playthrough vs. another. Beyond changing the actual events of the story I think it makes the tone of the story different two. If you make Anderson the councilor you see the personal toll and futility of having a sensible minded soldier as a politician; if you go with Udina you get the futility of the unstoppable backwardness of politics. Also I feel like if you kill off the council with Udina you get this much more sinister government as the backdrop which can be fun.

My "Main" game I have.  Im actualy a Paragon Shepard and I choose abandon the council to focus on Sovereign sinc ethat is the logical and sensible choice.(Sacrifice ships and manpower to save the "Flagship" thats broken and cant contribute to the fight versus saving all your resources for the Reaper fight?)

So in my games I have my Paragon Shepard, Sacrifice the Council and put Udina in charge.
Of course in my game I make some of the hard choices, not just all paragon or all renegade. You could call my Shepard a "Magnificent Bastard" type of character. I agree it makes the ME2 game more intresting, and hopefully ME3 as well. Since I supported Cerberus, I didnt care about getting my Spectre status back and it easier to do things if everyone thinks your dead. I liked going off the reservation on that one
.

Modifié par Last Darkness, 01 mai 2011 - 02:17 .