74 réponses à ce sujet

[Seboist]

Garrus was never a significant character apart from being one of Shepard's crew. He could be skipped altogether in ME1 and in ME2 he's just as disposable as the rest.

He's more like the "Wedge Antilles" than Luke or Han.

[Leonia]

@Admiral: Did you not do his loyalty mission in ME2? He changed a LOT between ME1 and ME2, there was lots of character development going on. If you find him so boring and static, why on earth are you using a Garrus avatar?

The dossier doesn't say that Garrus feels he is being held back, it is written from the Shadow-broker's point of view. Maybe he thought he could have been a useful asset if he was left on his own and a renegade.

If Liara (the freaking Shadow-broker) can still remain as a squad-mate to Shepard with such a big role, then surely it's not a huge stretch for Garrus to also do the same (and also fill a large role off the squad, potentially).

[Admiral Awsome]

Seboist wrote...

Garrus was never a significant character apart from being one of Shepard's crew. He could be skipped altogether in ME1 and in ME2 he's just as disposable as the rest.

He's more like the "Wedge Antilles" than Luke or Han.

Pretty much.

[ExtremeOne]

Garrus is a bad ass

[Admiral Awsome]

leonia42 wrote...

@Admiral: Did you not do his loyalty mission in ME2? He changed a LOT between ME1 and ME2, there was lots of character development going on. If you find him so boring and static, why on earth are you using a Garrus avatar?

The dossier doesn't say that Garrus feels he is being held back, it is written from the Shadow-broker's point of view. Maybe he thought he could have been a useful asset if he was left on his own and a renegade.

If Liara (the freaking Shadow-broker) can still remain as a squad-mate to Shepard with such a big role, then surely it's not a huge stretch for Garrus to also do the same (and also fill a large role off the squad, potentially).

In ME2 he's boring and static. ME1 had him and Shephard in sort of a student/teacher relationship. There was no character development between games. Garrus was always a renegade who prefered the Spectre way of doing business. You here it in his story of Dr. Saleon. You see him act it out as Arcangel. Whatever you said to him after the Saleon mission has no effect so we can just disregard it. His loyalty mission is about getting revenge on a traitor. Wanting revenge is not character development when the character is already shown as a renegade vigilante who wants to be able to do anything to get the job, serve justice, etc.

[Admiral Awsome]

Significant characters aren't the only ones who are allowed to be interesting. Just look at most of the ME2 crew.

Modifié par Admiral Awsome, 25 avril 2011 - 10:27 .

[Leonia]

I think.. you missed a lot, honestly. If anything, he was more static in ME1 (providing a bit of information on his past but otherwise just along for the ride). The whole walking down the road of revenge isn't something that one does just for the lulz. Even Harkin points it out.. he changed immensely in those two years from someone who used to get upset when Wrex would kill someone in cold blood to a guy who would happily murder someone if he felt he deserved it. I just.. I can't believe you missed all those extra layers of development. It's not like the romance added that much more.. well, maybe it does when you realise how bad he is hurting after his Omega experience because he doesn't talk as openly about it as just friends. But really? Boring and static as synonyms for Garrus?

Wait, wait.

Admiral Awsome wrote...

Significant characters aren't the only ones who are allowed to be interesting. Just look at most of the ME2 crew.

You think characters we just met in ME2 who were there ONLY to help with the SM and weren't Shepard's buddies had more development? Samara, Thane, Grunt, Zaeed, Kasumi.. while all fun to have around had like ZERO development and very little influence on Shepard as a character. 

Dude, I don't get it.

Modifié par leonia42, 25 avril 2011 - 10:29 .

[Admiral Awsome]

leonia42 wrote...

I think.. you missed a lot, honestly. If anything, he was more static in ME1 (providing a bit of information on his past but otherwise just along for the ride).

As opposed to ME2? How was he not along for the ride then?

[Admiral Awsome]

leonia42 wrote...

You think characters we just met in ME2 who were there ONLY to help with the SM 

They were. That was why we gathered them. To go on suicide mission and not have a drink at the Normandy's bar.

Modifié par Admiral Awsome, 25 avril 2011 - 10:43 .

[Leonia]

So basically none of the characters are important to your Shepard. Got it.

[ExtremeOne]

leonia42 wrote...

So basically none of the characters are important to your Shepard. Got it.

   


The alliance squad mates will rot on the Ship as far My Shepard is concerned  

If Bioware forces them on My Shepard in certain parts of the game well I will have no problem killing them 

[Eradyn]

I'm ecstatic BW is ignoring the haters and "fans"-in-sheep's-clothing and has put Garrus in as a squaddie.

Hey, if you don't like him/are tired of him, ME2 is your ticket out of having to deal with him. As with all the rest of the characters, he will continue to develop and, eventually, will run out of dialogue as you speak with him. That's not a failure on the character's part; that's Bioware and it's the exact same thing every other character suffers from. BW cannot provide infinite lines.

[AdmiralCheez]

Arcian wrote...

Sidelining Garrus is like punching the sun.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I do not want Wrex as a squad member. Because he's become too awesome and badass to be back under Shepard's wing. I wouldn't mind one mission with him as a companion however, just like the old days. But other than that, I want him to lead his people like he's supposed to.

Garrus, I am conflicted. On one hand, he's too awesome not to be a squad member. On the otherhand, what the Shadow Broker wrote was probably right. He will not be able to develop his tactical genius to its fullest potential while being overshadowed by Shepard.

[Big stupid jellyfish]

I see there orange shades are kinda contagious.

*fights the urge to put them on her Shep*

In any case, Wrex would make a great temporary squaddie, but permanent? Nah, don't make a king serve another king (or queen).

As for Grunt, he's my baby and I want him back.

[CroGamer002]

Big stupid jellyfish wrote...

I see there orange shades are kinda contagious.

[Big stupid jellyfish]

Mesina2 wrote...

Big stupid jellyfish wrote...

I see there orange shades are kinda contagious.

I see.



Damn, that's addictive.

[Lvl20DM]

Just to clarify, I don't believe Garrus has been confirmed as a full squadmate. The GI article says he will be playable to some extent. He could be a temporary squadmate, as well.

It sounds like the ME2 squad has fallen apart by the time ME3 begins. Perhaps Garrus went back to Palaven to be with his sick mother (or to bury her). We know that we are going to Palaven at some point, and that would be a great place to reintroduce Garrus.

[Parkerpen]

I feel sorry for Wrex. There's all this hype over the original squad (Kaidan/Ash, Garrus, Liara and Tali) but not for wrex despite the fact he's a total bad ass. I think Garrus is a confirmed squad mate not sure if temp or perm and I don't care about Grunt.

[Seboist]

Screw Wrex, I want Wreav as a squadmate.

[Akizora]

I think its very unlikely for Wrex to be a permanent companion, since he can die in the first that leaves him gone for a huge portion of the players. And if I remember correctly, he dies for a lot of players.

[TexasToast712]

Garrus is confirmed, Wrex is confirmed to at least be a temporary while Grunt is unknown but Iam calling here and now. Grunt will be the traditional meatshield Krogan companion for ME3. He has no reason to leave Shepard as Shepard is his Battlemaster.

[night_raven26]

That's sad. I liked Wrex more.