68 réponses à ce sujet

[Youknow]

Since I really like Anderson, I put Udina on the Council. If something goes wrong with humanity, the first person they'll blame is the person ON the Council, not his advisor. By putting Anderson on the Council, to me, you're basically giving him a death wish. Udina is free to manipulate Anderson-- who will probably trust Udina because of his political experience, and Udina is free to push for riskier decisions because he won't be taking the brunt of the backlash should something go wrong. Some of the reason I don't think Udina particularly has a problem with Anderson being on the Council when it's all human for instance.

As far as I'm concerned, the optimum setup would have Udina on the Council every single time. I mean, screw being a Spectre, if you are a criminal (which you technically are in ME2 because you are working with Cerberus), you can still do whatever you want anyways. And if you-- Sheperd, truly believe the reapers are coming, you cannot and should not care what other people think of you, so long as the galaxy is saved. Granted I still chose Anderson just to see what would happen, but I'd much rather have Udina, not only does he have more experience, but if something goes wrong, I'd rather be able to smugly look at Udina and laugh than see a friend go down because I wanted to be spiteful towards someone else.

Udina for me simply for how much safer the choice would be.

[Thrombin]

I'm trying to play all the variables so I have one run-through with Paragon Shepard saving the Council and picking Anderson, another saving the Council and picking Udina, a Renegade Shepard letting the Council die and picking Anderson and another Renegade letting the Council die and picking Udina.

It lets me see each variation of dialogue and will be interesting to follow through into ME3.

My 'primary' Shepard, saved the Council and picked Anderson just because it felt better. I don't like to reward the obnoxious ones any more than I have to!

Regards

Julian

Modifié par Thrombin, 01 mai 2011 - 09:09 .

[Last Darkness]

Youknow wrote...

Since I really like Anderson, I put Udina on the Council. If something goes wrong with humanity, the first person they'll blame is the person ON the Council, not his advisor. By putting Anderson on the Council, to me, you're basically giving him a death wish. Udina is free to manipulate Anderson-- who will probably trust Udina because of his political experience, and Udina is free to push for riskier decisions because he won't be taking the brunt of the backlash should something go wrong. Some of the reason I don't think Udina particularly has a problem with Anderson being on the Council when it's all human for instance.

As far as I'm concerned, the optimum setup would have Udina on the Council every single time. I mean, screw being a Spectre, if you are a criminal (which you technically are in ME2 because you are working with Cerberus), you can still do whatever you want anyways. And if you-- Sheperd, truly believe the reapers are coming, you cannot and should not care what other people think of you, so long as the galaxy is saved. Granted I still chose Anderson just to see what would happen, but I'd much rather have Udina, not only does he have more experience, but if something goes wrong, I'd rather be able to smugly look at Udina and laugh than see a friend go down because I wanted to be spiteful towards someone else.

Udina for me simply for how much safer the choice would be.

Ah the "Lightning Rod" as it were.  Thats a good point to make.
Personaly I like how Anderson dosnt like the position, is inexperinced, and of course is pretty paralysed in his actions since well you know. Being Abassador for earth makes you pretty damn busy at all times. I always viewed people who pick Anderson are really ignorant of the mistreatment they are giving him and the source of all his new problems. The choice of Ambassador is NOT a reward.

Udina fills the shoes much better and understands what the job is and is experinced at it.  Its a simple choice to make, Undina does what hes good at and Anderson is free in the military with what he likes and is good at. Win - Win.   People are not thinking this choice through beyond the imediete action, and are almost ALL basing their choice on personal prejuice only.

Thrombin wrote...

I'm trying to play all the variables so I
have one run-through with Paragon Shepard saving the Council and
picking Anderson, another saving the Council and picking Udina, a
Renegade Shepard letting the Council die and picking Anderson and
another Renegade letting the Council die and picking Udina.

It lets me see each variation of dialogue and will be interesting to follow through into ME3.

My
'primary' Shepard, saved the Council and picked Anderson just because
it felt better. I don't like to reward the obnoxious ones any more than I
have to!

Regards

Julian

Try the varibles of having a renegade Shepard saving the council, and a paragon one abandoning them.
too many people go to far too much extremes in the Paragon/Renegade thats its saturday morning cartoonish.
Make it more intresting, people are more three dimentional like that and deicisions are more complicated then "This is a paragon/renegade choice".
Several Paragon choices actualy have the worst outcome for everyone involved but you, and several Renegade choices have the best outcome. Pure Paragon/Renegade characters come off as too fake and extremly self centered to me. (Im going to choose paragon here since im a paragon instead of renegade and having a positive outcome from this situation)

I'l give a example, on the Bring Down the Sky DLC.   Heres the pure Paragon choices.   Letting a Group of Batarian murderers and slavers go, in one situation for a KEYCARD!. Then later letting another group go along with a Batarian Terrorist Kingpin/Fanatic who has shown he trying to kill as many humans as possible and has the motivation and the means to do so (Look at what hes planing to do in the first place) in order to save half a dozen people when thousands to millions are in danger from him.
To me that makes you directly responsible for everything those Batarians do after this event, and of course the fact you let slavers go is allright. Im sure they learned their lesson even though you never said anything about it. 
If you play as a colonist theres a quest where you meet a former Batarian slave who you have to prevent from killing herself...she deicided thats the bets choice for her after the batarians were done with her.

[lolwut666]

I chose Anderson only because Udina is a dick.

I think Udina is a much better choice.

Good thing ME is just a game, so it doesn't really matter what I do.

[Gabey5]

he is a dog and a good politician.. but i would not pick him during the reaper threat..if all was well then he would be good but all the denying the reapers is bad for the galaxy

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

I chose him on my human supremacist run, obviously.

The rest, not. Anderson is just too awesome.

[EightDeer]

I chose Udina for one reason and one reason only: to make the other three Councilors suffer.

[ExtremeOne]

Udina rocks he is much better than that punk anderson

[Quole]

ExtremeOne wrote...

Udina rocks he is much better than that punk anderson

please elaborate.

[lolwut666]

ExtremeOne hates the Alliance.

That's all there is to it.

[M-Sinistrari]

lolwut666 wrote...

ExtremeOne hates the Alliance.

That's all there is to it.

ExtremeOne's posts all boil down to "Cerberus Rules, Alliance Drools" and "Kill everyone Alliance they all suck for reasons I pull out of my rear".

Anyway, to topic.

I've got a couple playthroughs where I chose Udina just to see how badly he bolluxes things up in the news.

[Thrombin]

Last Darkness wrote...

Try the varibles of having a renegade Shepard saving the council, and a paragon one abandoning them.
too many people go to far too much extremes in the Paragon/Renegade thats its saturday morning cartoonish.
Make it more intresting, people are more three dimentional like that and deicisions are more complicated then "This is a paragon/renegade choice".

I wouldn't call saving the Council extreme. It's the natural Paragon choice. Anyone who thinks like a paragon would be hard pressed to rationalize letting the leaders of the Galaxy be destroyed if he had a means of preventing it. Particularly given that, as a Spectre, the council are the ones he is working for. It's natural for a Paragon to want to protect people.

I'd have considered it as a variable but I didn't really start playing the variables until ME2 and I was too busy playing ME2 to want to go back and do ME1 again. Fortunately you can change your councillor decision at the start of ME2 so I got to play with that without having to revisit ME1 at all.

As for Bring Down the Sky. There isn't a single Renegade decision in the game that I disliked more than letting the hostages die. I've played flavours of Rengade, Renegon, Paragon and Paragade but only my pure Renegade, who I hate with a vengeance, has ever sacrificed the hostages and the main reason I hate her is because of that choice!

Any police force that deliberately let hostages die to avoid letting a criminal go would be censured in a heartbeat.  The thing about that decision is you know that innocents will die if you don't save them but you don't know that more innocents will die if you let the terrorist escape. You're exchanging a certainty for a possibility so I don't buy the Renegade argument at all on that one.

Regards

Julian

[DDK]

I just realised I started this exact topic AFTER I saw this thread. So here's my thoughts:

I was a bit stunned to find that ME2 had Udina as the default choice. Every time I play through ME1, I just can't bring myself to give him the nod. Whether I'm playing renegade or paragon or any mixture of either, the guy is a complete douchebag. There's nothing about him that made me think, "Ok, this is a tough choice, both of these candidates have something in their favour..."

To me, the obvious and only choice is Anderson. He's not an idiot. So I'm wondering two things: why would Bioware make him the default choice and why would anyone in their right minds choose Udina over Anderson?

[This is the End My Friend]

Udina if Council is saved for diplomatic purposes.
Anderson if Council dead, chance for diplomacy over. I want him running the show as we head off to war.

[CeoBohga]

You know, people have made some valid points for why someone should chose Udina, but honestly, I still can't bring myself to do it, renegade or paragon. Udina comes across as a rather hateful chap I maybe I'm wrong, but I constantly get the feeling that he's only looking out for himself, not humanity. To add to his unpleasant personality, he seems to have no loyalty to Shep. Sure in the beginning before Shepard is made a SPECTRE, he backs up shep's claims and defends his actions, but once's he's a spectre, he begins to waffle and dismiss the idea of the Reapers. His support for Shepard almost completely disappears on any topic that does not directly relate to Shepard's task of arresting Saren, and then I get the feeling that he only supports that task because success improves his bargaining position.

So as Paragon, I cannot support Udina because I'm afraid his concern is first and foremost on himself and not humanity as he claims, not to mention that with all his political maneuvers seem to be as skilled and tactful as name calling and pouting.

As Renegade, I just can not trust him. Anderson, he seems to hide stuff from me, but he has a plausible excuse for what he hides, and when push comes to shove, he stepped up and put his life/career on the line for me, showing he can be a useful tool so long as I keep in his ear.

So anyways, yeah, I don't choose Udina. If I did, it would only be because it's what the systems alliance wants with him being the ambassador, but then there's the point of confusion. Why the frak does my opinion as rank commander matter over either Anderson or Udina's? Unless I planned on using my imposing reputation to establish myself as emperor of Citadel space (not a bad idea...), I really don't see why I should be anywhere near THAT decision.

[EightDeer]

Thrombin wrote...

As for Bring Down the Sky. There isn't a single Renegade decision in the game that I disliked more than letting the hostages die. I've played flavours of Rengade, Renegon, Paragon and Paragade but only my pure Renegade, who I hate with a vengeance, has ever sacrificed the hostages and the main reason I hate her is because of that choice!

Any police force that deliberately let hostages die to avoid letting a criminal go would be censured in a heartbeat.  The thing about that decision is you know that innocents will die if you don't save them but you don't know that more innocents will die if you let the terrorist escape. You're exchanging a certainty for a possibility so I don't buy the Renegade argument at all on that one.

Regards

Julian

You're the complete opposite of me: Even my hardcore Paragon Shepards refuse to let Balak escape. Ever. Even when my Shep is Paragon enough to let that corporate weasel on Feros survive, Balak still gets shot up & left for the Alliance Navy.

[aimlessgun]

EightDeer wrote...

I chose Udina for one reason and one reason only: to make the other three Councilors suffer.

This might be the best pro-Udina logic I've seen.

[Nathan Redgrave]

aimlessgun wrote...

EightDeer wrote...

I chose Udina for one reason and one reason only: to make the other three Councilors suffer.

This might be the best pro-Udina logic I've seen.

Funnily enough, it's hinted at the start of the meeting with the old council (if you saved them and selected Anderson as the Councilor) that they prefer Udina's take on things, despite his advisory position. Anderson actually has to subtly remind them that Udina is the advisor and he is the Councilor.

Seems the politicians favor the bootlicking political type. Go figure.

[eternalnightmare13]

I chose Udina once because he is a politican and knows how the Council works, and how things are done on the Citadel.