202 réponses à ce sujet

[PMC65]

Dave666 wrote...

Jzadek72 wrote...

Well, at least it isn't as bad as "Goodbye, little wing... I shall see you again with the dawn..."
Gah.

Odd, I just assumed that thats what 'Liara' means in Asari 'Little Wing'.  Sort of the way many names have another or original meaning.  

How dare Matriarch Benezia say goodbye to her daughter, she should be all apathetic and unfeeling, 'cause its not like a mother might care about her last moments on this mortal coil. /sarcasm

Liara delivered a line that I thought was wrong ... If she is with you in Chora's Den she says something like "We Asaris are more comfortable with our bodies then other species, so places like this exploit it." What? If you aren't ashamed of your bodies, see sensuality as natural then why would you feel exploited? I just figure my Shep's translator went on the blink and she really said "We Asaris are more comfortable with our bodies then other species, but I just never wanted to work in places like this."

[seirhart]

I wanted to give the base to the council but no of course not; either had to destroy it or give it to a bunch of terrosits

[Seboist]

laecraft wrote...

Sounds a bit selfish, doesn't it? Billions of dead in the galaxy are not going to care about who you were, Shepard. And putting who you are above everything else - it's a little odd. Too much is at stake. Do what you must to save what you can. If it means sacrificing your self, so be it.

Shepard should be slapped upside the head when he says stupid **** like that.

[xlI ReFLeX lIx]

Zall wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Paragons are silly like that.

Yep. Being a pure Paragon, I actually liked that line.

Yeppp same here

[Mr0TYuH]

That line is cringe worthy. Worse than that, as I have posted elsewhere, I feel this is the point where where the paragon/renegade system completely imploded. Also, all but one of my characters destroyed the base, and fear was the primary motivation. They all feared the cost/benefit ratio.

[Markinator_123]

Mr0TYuH wrote...

That line is cringe worthy. Worse than that, as I have posted elsewhere, I feel this is the point where where the paragon/renegade system completely imploded. Also, all but one of my characters destroyed the base, and fear was the primary motivation. They all feared the cost/benefit ratio.

Isn't that ironic lol

[Kreid]

I really love how people still think that keeping the base is a good idea, when in every.piece.of.media shown of the Mass Effect universe depicts Reaper technology backfiring and causing MUCH more trouble that it is worth, not to mention giving it to he xenophobic lead of a shady organization bent on human domination over the galaxy.

Have you ever stopped for a moment and think what would happen if TIM was indoctrinated? with his resources he would tear the galaxy apart from inside in the middle of war, and given the trend that's a very likely occurring scenario.
About the line itself, well it might have been worse, I agree it's little bit idealistic and self righteous but time is at stake and there's certain logic behing it.

Modifié par Creid-X, 28 avril 2011 - 11:23 .

[Tazzmission]

Markinator_123 wrote...

This is the line that needs to be brought to attention. Was anybody else upset that Shepard doesn't give practical reasons for destroying the base? I know that the majority of the people on this forum have their own practical reasons for destroying the base that has little to do with morality. The collector base has no ethical value. Why is that the focus of destroying the base? I am not trying to play as a "good guy" and it hurts the character I'm trying to play as when I sometimes make this decision (it should focus more on the ramifications of giving it to Cerberus or reaper tech not because the base is "tainted").

.............. not trying to be a douche but you really missed the point of that line.

[Markinator_123]

Tazzmission wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...

This is the line that needs to be brought to attention. Was anybody else upset that Shepard doesn't give practical reasons for destroying the base? I know that the majority of the people on this forum have their own practical reasons for destroying the base that has little to do with morality. The collector base has no ethical value. Why is that the focus of destroying the base? I am not trying to play as a "good guy" and it hurts the character I'm trying to play as when I sometimes make this decision (it should focus more on the ramifications of giving it to Cerberus or reaper tech not because the base is "tainted").

.............. not trying to be a douche but you really missed the point of that line.

ok? Care to elaborate?

[Bluko]

Markinator_123 wrote...

This is the line that needs to be brought to attention. Was anybody else upset that Shepard doesn't give practical reasons for destroying the base? I know that the majority of the people on this forum have their own practical reasons for destroying the base that has little to do with morality. The collector base has no ethical value. Why is that the focus of destroying the base? I am not trying to play as a "good guy" and it hurts the character I'm trying to play as when I sometimes make this decision (it should focus more on the ramifications of giving it to Cerberus or reaper tech not because the base is "tainted").

Uhh...





Look I know Shepard doesn't always say the best/smartest things, but honestly I thoght that was one of the better lines in-game. My Shepard isn't going to fall prey to the idea that we need the Reaper's tech to beat them. Wouldn't the Reapers want us to keep the Collector base and use their own technology? See they know how their own technology works. Makes it easier for them to counter anything we do. Point is there are many reasons to keep the base (and frankly I've only kept the base in my pure Renegade playthru) there's no way Shepard could voice all the reasons. I mean may I ask what you would have had Shepard say instead?

Pretty much any reason he could have given would be selfish.

Also no ethical value?

Eh you do realize thousands of human died in that place to make some of the Collector's creations. Yeah that's kind of a big deal. I mean there was plenty of debacle over whether or not to use data **** scientists had gathered from brutally experimenting on people in the internment camps. I don't think you can claim ethical values aren't a factor in such decisions.

Modifié par Bluko, 28 avril 2011 - 11:43 .

[Markinator_123]

Bluko wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...

This is the line that needs to be brought to attention. Was anybody else upset that Shepard doesn't give practical reasons for destroying the base? I know that the majority of the people on this forum have their own practical reasons for destroying the base that has little to do with morality. The collector base has no ethical value. Why is that the focus of destroying the base? I am not trying to play as a "good guy" and it hurts the character I'm trying to play as when I sometimes make this decision (it should focus more on the ramifications of giving it to Cerberus or reaper tech not because the base is "tainted").

Uhh...





Look I know Shepard doesn't always say the best/smartest things, but honestly I thoght that was one of the better lines in-game. My Shepard isn't going to fall prey to the idea that we need the Reaper's tech to beat them. Wouldn't the Reapers want us to keep the Collector and use their own technology? See they know how their own technology works. Point is there are many reasons to keep the base (and frankly I've only kept the base in my pure Renegade playthru) there's no way Shepard could voice all the reasons. I mean may I ask what you would have had Shepard say instead?

Pretty much any reason he could have given would be selfish.

Also no ethical value?

Eh you do realize thousands of human died in that place to make some of the Collector's creations. Yeah that's kind of a big deal. I mean there was plenty of debacle over whether or not to use data **** scientists had gathered from brutally experimenting on people in the internment camps. I don't think you can claim ethical values aren't a factor in such decisions.

Read some of the pages bro and there are some alternatives that have already been given. By the way, things don't have ethical value (meaning objects). You can't help the dead. What you should consider is make their sacrifices mean something and to not make sure that the lives lost were not in vain.

Modifié par Markinator_123, 28 avril 2011 - 11:49 .

[Wulfram]

AlexXIV wrote...

Paragon = idealistic Shep, Renegade = practical Shep

If you want to be practical, keep the base.

Nah, Neutral = practical Shep.

Renegade Shep spends too much time pointlessly pissing people off and being a jerk.  Plus his commitment to vigilante justice is if anything as idealistic as paragon shep's mercy

[Markinator_123]

Wulfram wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Paragon = idealistic Shep, Renegade = practical Shep

If you want to be practical, keep the base.

Nah, Neutral = practical Shep.

Renegade Shep spends too much time pointlessly pissing people off and being a jerk.  Plus his commitment to vigilante justice is if anything as idealistic as paragon shep's mercy

Yup. Pure Paragons and Pure Renegades are both idiots

[AdmiralCheez]

Markinator_123 wrote...

Yup. Pure Paragons and Pure Renegades are both idiots

BUT THE POINTS!  I NEED THE POINTS, MAN!

[Malanek]

It was a good line, just unfortunately used to try and justify a pretty stupid choice.

[Konfined]

Malanek999 wrote...

It was a good line, just unfortunately used to try and justify a pretty stupid choice.

Destroying an enemy construct full of untested, inherently dangerous, alien technology; rather than giving it to an individual who's motives are questionable at best, who has done absolutely little to warrant trust or loyalty, and who is the head of a dangerously unethical criminal organization, hated by the known galaxy and of which Shepard has actually engaged in combat on numerous occasions.  Totally a stupid, idealistic decision.  Yeah, sure.

Modifié par Konfined, 29 avril 2011 - 12:28 .

[Malanek]

Konfined wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

It was a good line, just unfortunately used to try and justify a pretty stupid choice.

Destroying an enemy construct full of untested, inherently dangerous, alien technology; rather than giving it to an individual who's motives are questionable at best, who has done absolutely little to warrant trust or loyalty, and who is the head of a dangerously unethical criminal organization, hated by the known galaxy and of which Shepard has actually engaged in combat on numerous occasions.  Totally a stupid, idealistic decision.  Yeah, sure.

Sigh. Yes it was an unjustified decision. When you are facing a technologicially superior enemy, upon capturing some of that technology, destroying it is inept. I don't feel like getting into this argument again but I will say this would never happen in reallity.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

I took the "I won't let fear compromise who I am" line to be Shepard telling TIM he couldn't use fear to change her mind. She had already made her decision based on whatever criteria she decided was valid, and TIM saying "but we're going to die if you don't" was just him trying to use fear to manipulate her. And that dog won't hunt.

"I won't be swayed by your manipulative fear-mongering" might have been more specific, but it doesn't sound as good.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 29 avril 2011 - 12:37 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Konfined wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

It was a good line, just unfortunately used to try and justify a pretty stupid choice.

Destroying an enemy construct full of untested, inherently dangerous, alien technology; rather than giving it to an individual who's motives are questionable at best, who has done absolutely little to warrant trust or loyalty, and who is the head of a dangerously unethical criminal organization, hated by the known galaxy and of which Shepard has actually engaged in combat on numerous occasions.  Totally a stupid, idealistic decision.  Yeah, sure.

The funny thing is, this gets more accurate if you cut about a third of it out.

[AdmiralCheez]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

I took the "I won't let fear compromise who I am" line to be Shepard telling TIM he couldn't use fear to change her mind. She had already made her decision based on whatever criteria she decided was valid, and TIM saying "but we're going to die if you don't" was just him trying to use fear to manipulate her. And that dog won't hunt.

Hm.  Good way to look at it.

Dunno, just played that part, and in context, it didn't seem too horribly derpy.

[Konfined]

Malanek999 wrote...

Konfined wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

It was a good line, just unfortunately used to try and justify a pretty stupid choice.

Destroying an enemy construct full of untested, inherently dangerous, alien technology; rather than giving it to an individual who's motives are questionable at best, who has done absolutely little to warrant trust or loyalty, and who is the head of a dangerously unethical criminal organization, hated by the known galaxy and of which Shepard has actually engaged in combat on numerous occasions.  Totally a stupid, idealistic decision.  Yeah, sure.

Sigh. Yes it was an unjustified decision. When you are facing a technologicially superior enemy, upon capturing some of that technology, destroying it is inept. I don't feel like getting into this argument again but I will say this would never happen in reallity.

Sigh.  Yes, it was totally unjustified to destroy technology that has been shown, on nearly every occasion, to corrupt the minds of the people who attempt to even so much as study it.  Totally stupid decision.  And no, we more than likely will never have an instant where a single individual must decide what to do with an alien foward operating base.

Modifié par Konfined, 29 avril 2011 - 12:43 .

[Malanek]

The collector base was building a reaper. The knowledge of how that process works would be invaluable. You can study it, look for weaknesses. Aid your understanding of what the reapers really are. Yes, there are risks but there are more risks in not keeping it. I'm just wondering how selective you are going to be with this. Do you some reaper technology and not other technology? How do you make that judgment?

[Konfined]

Malanek999 wrote...

The collector base was building a reaper. The knowledge of how that process works would be invaluable. You can study it, look for weaknesses. Aid your understanding of what the reapers really are. Yes, there are risks but there are more risks in not keeping it. I'm just wondering how selective you are going to be with this. Do you some reaper technology and not other technology? How do you make that judgment?

It's not at all about that.  And before you even start, Reaper tech has obviously had it's uses, EDI, the IFF despite the loss of life, the Arrival artifact even.  With all that said, Reaper tech corrupts the user- it's in game, it's canon, it's lore, it's an undeniable fact. 

Whether it's right or not to use Reaper tech is not the question at all, however.  The question is whether or not Shepard should hand a Reaper construct over to a criminal mastermind, whose motives, goals, and plans are justifiably questionable, and whose track record of success with extremely dangerous experiments is nearly zero; or to destroy it and take their chances without it.  The results of the decision won't truly be felt until ME3, but it's hardly a stupid decision if one should elect to destroy it, rather than hand it over to a potentially power hungry mad man.

Modifié par Konfined, 29 avril 2011 - 01:30 .