153 réponses à ce sujet

[crimzontearz]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

the GI article pretty much confirmed THAT is gonna blow up in our faces

If I remember correctly we've been told the "decision could haunt you", not which side of the decision could haunt you

they also said they saw some "huskified rachni looking things"

Right, but your allies will obviously take losses during the war. Which the enemy than uses to make husks. That doesn't mean the addition of another fleet won't be a good thing overall.

or the reapers are just going to indoctrinate them again and the choice to keep them alive blows up in your face

[Someone With Mass]

I've seen a picture of something that resembles the rachni quite well, with the exception that the description of it is two cannons instead of arms, and dispersal pods all over the body.

I'd say that sufficient to say that the rachni choice will bite you in the ass to a certain extent.

[WizenSlinky0]

crimzontearz wrote...


or the reapers are just going to indoctrinate them again and the choice to keep them alive blows up in your face

Not saying it's not a distinct possibility. But just saying don't get so doom and gloom about it. There's nothing that particularly hints at the Paragon decision neccasarily being bad just yet. And indoctrination takes time and they never mentioned if it's effects are sped up for races already caught in it once.

Someone With Mass wrote...

I've seen a picture of
something that resembles the rachni quite well, with the exception that
the description of it is two cannons instead of arms, and dispersal pods
all over the body.

I'd say that sufficient to say that the rachni choice will bite you in the ass to a certain extent.

To an extent maybe, but only to the extent of additional ground troops. The reapers are the main enemy and overcoming their fleet will be the primary challenge. So I'd venture to guess a few rachni husks are well worth the addition of a rachni fleet on your side.

Modifié par WizenSlinky0, 04 mai 2011 - 01:38 .

[crimzontearz]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...


or the reapers are just going to indoctrinate them again and the choice to keep them alive blows up in your face

Not saying it's not a distinct possibility. But just saying don't get so doom and gloom about it. There's nothing that particularly hints at the Paragon decision neccasarily being bad just yet. And indoctrination takes time and they never mentioned if it's effects are sped up for races already caught in it once.

Someone With Mass wrote...

I've seen a picture of
something that resembles the rachni quite well, with the exception that
the description of it is two cannons instead of arms, and dispersal pods
all over the body.

I'd say that sufficient to say that the rachni choice will bite you in the ass to a certain extent.

To an extent maybe, but only to the extent of additional ground troops. The reapers are the main enemy and overcoming their fleet will be the primary challenge. So I'd venture to guess a few rachni husks are well worth the addition of a rachni fleet on your side.

doom and gloom? moi?


definitely not good sir, I'll take whatever comes my way

[WizenSlinky0]

crimzontearz wrote...

definitely not good sir, I'll take whatever comes my way

*throws a hairless weasel*

All yours!

[crimzontearz]

I am pet lover what can I say -calls the hairless weasel mister wigglesworth-

[JustHonest]

Undertone wrote...

Okay I've been out of the forums for some time now and this thread might be repeating other threads but somebody bloody explain me what was the whole point of ME2...

Now, now I know what you are thinking "What the hell is Undertone talking about? Have you not played the game?".

Well explain to me a logical reason why we are going to fight Cerberus in ME3 again... As if there weren't countless reasons why there's practically almost no plot progression in ME2 and now we get the same enemies. That pretty much counters the entire view, opinion of TIM. Why did he waste time and effort in ME2 so he fights Shepard a few months later again.

With risk of this thread going along the lines "Afraid for the plot aka Dragon Age2" - This makes no sense...

Why create a cool intelligent anti-hero/uncertain villain to make it another typical ****** mini-evil before beating the bigger evil. How cliche.

Oh and thanks again for giving another slap to the renegades. As if that's not proof enough that Bioware always will support their foster kids the paragons. So basically keeping the Base again turns out to be a bad decision just like every other practical (but supposedly evil) decision that **** up in the face of renegades because the good guys have to get it right all the time. Thanks for the rail-road. Yeah if paragons want to break of Cerberus let them do it and suffer repercussions for turning away good resources. Being a renegade however and practically handling superior tech, is there any solid logical argument for Cerberus to become enemies again? 

its ok we understand beating a dead horse is fun and all but that'll do pig...that'll do

[OmegaXI]

You denied the Reapers resources and a base of operations. You saved human lives and gathered much needed intel on the Reapers.

[Sandbox47]

Aside from that ^ I can say that this is how the story unfolds in BioWare's mind. This is how they want it to be. For instance what was the point of Elendil in Lord of the Rings or what was the point of making the Cullens vampires if it's all about sex anyway? This is the writer's story. Don't complain.

[Seboist]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Undertone wrote...

You are probably correct that I should wait for more info. And yes ME2 is fun, but story and dialogue have always been the most important aspects for me when it comes to movies, games, whatever. Currently you can play ME1, skip ME2 entirely and still be up with what's going on with very few exceptions (the only one that I can maybe think of is "Oh the geth are good guys now").

Even if I could, I wouldn't.  Too much fun, too many juice variables to import, and I love my squad to death.

And really, with the Reapers hoofing it to the Milky Way after the Citadel plan tanked, we didn't really have anything to do but kill time anyway.

Imagine if ME2 had started with the arrival of the Reapers.  Everyone would be going, "Hey, wait a minute!  How come they just showed up like that?!  Why didn't anyone do anything to prepare?  What the hell was Bioware thinking, putting that giant, stupid timeskip in there?!  What, was Shepard getting drunk somewhere or something?!"

Plus, I'd rather play the stuff that happened in ME2 than read or be told about it.

I just hope the reason or plot twist is good. Because TIM is really nice and interesting character and so far ME3 contradicts everything about him that was in ME2 (work with Shepard despite methods, greater threat etc.). He is reduced to a cliche, stupid, normal mini-villain.

Like you didn't see it coming?

Renegade Ending 
Paragon Ending
Shepard Dies

I don't see how any of the endings implies that TIM is going to scheme against Shepard in the future. One thing that's real telling is that in the bad ending where the CB is destroyed and Shepard dies TIM is not angry like he is in the "ultimate paragon ending",which to me says his anger was over his disapointment in Shepard than the fate of the CB.

[Dave666]

Sandbox47 wrote...







Aside from that ^ I can say that this is how the story unfolds in BioWare's mind. This is how they want it to be. For instance what was the point of Elendil in Lord of the Rings or what was the point of making the Cullens vampires if it's all about sex anyway? This is the writer's story. Don't complain.

But...but...but...I'm English! We're supposed to complain!

[Phaedon]

Uh, what.

ACT 1 establishes the universe (Protheans, Citadel, races etc) and introduces the threat (Reapers) with the first conflict in it's end (Battle of the Citadel)

ACT 2 introduces themes that will be dominant in the third act (genophage, geth-quarian conflict, TIM etc), maintains and further explores the overreaching plot (Reapers actually carry genetic goo, and they try to retake the Citadel by creating a new vanguard, Geth are split into factions) and collects the resources (Normandy SR2, squadmates, knowledge) that will be used in the third act.

ACT 3 The experiences and resources of the first two acts are used, and the whole act is paced towards an epic lysis, giving a clear answer to the overreaching plot.

Modifié par Phaedon, 04 mai 2011 - 11:08 .

[OmegaXI]

Phaedon wrote...

Uh, what.

ACT 1 establishes the universe (Protheans, Citadel, races etc) and introduces the threat (Reapers) with the first conflict in it's end (Battle of the Citadel)

ACT 2 introduces themes that will be dominant in the third act (genophage, geth-quarian conflict, TIM etc), maintains and further explores the overreaching plot (Reapers actually carry genetic goo, and they try to retake the Citadel by creating a new vanguard, Geth are split into factions) and collects the resources (Normandy SR2, squadmates, knowledge) that will be used in the third act.

ACT 3 The experiences and resources of the first two acts are used, and the whole act is paced towards an epic lysis, giving a clear answer to the overreaching plot.

this

[evmiller]

crimzontearz wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Okay I've been out of the forums for some time now and this thread might be repeating other threads but somebody bloody explain me what was the whole point of ME2...

Now, now I know what you are thinking "What the hell is Undertone talking about? Have you not played the game?".

Well explain to me a logical reason why we are going to fight Cerberus in ME3 again... As if there weren't countless reasons why there's practically almost no plot progression in ME2 and now we get the same enemies. That pretty much counters the entire view, opinion of TIM. Why did he waste time and effort in ME2 so he fights Shepard a few months later again.

With risk of this thread going along the lines "Afraid for the plot aka Dragon Age2" - This makes no sense...

Why create a cool intelligent anti-hero/uncertain villain to make it another typical ****** mini-evil before beating the bigger evil. How cliche.

Oh and thanks again for giving another slap to the renegades. As if that's not proof enough that Bioware always will support their foster kids the paragons. So basically keeping the Base again turns out to be a bad decision just like every other practical (but supposedly evil) decision that **** up in the face of renegades because the good guys have to get it right all the time. Thanks for the rail-road. Yeah if paragons want to break of Cerberus let them do it and suffer repercussions for turning away good resources. Being a renegade however and practically handling superior tech, is there any solid logical argument for Cerberus to become enemies again? 

dude..you are giving the collector base to the splinter group that is reponsible for

1: the existence of Jack
2: Akuze
3: Cloning uncontrollable Rachni soldiers + Thorian Creepers + Husks and failing at controlling them
4: PROJECT OVERLORD

seriously? You'd give THEM the collector base?

not only this, but everyone who is ever been in contact with reaper tech for any period of time has gotten their asses indoctrindated or turned to husks. Cerberus has to big of a track record of failures, and rouge cells to trust a collector ship to.

[Thrombin]

I don't get this idea that Renegade or Paragon choices are going to backfire. The only reason for different choices is to reflect the style of gameplay the player enjoys. I personally don't believe that any choice will be a bad choice it will just result in a different scenario.

Ultimately I want to experience the result of all choices but the only time I would expect a choice to be one that I would regret would be a choice to go neutral or not be able to use a Charm/Intimidate. Any pure Paragon or pure Renegade choice should not be penalized in ME3 and I don't believe it will be.

Regards

Julian

[Someone With Mass]

Phaedon wrote...

Uh, what.

ACT 1 establishes the universe (Protheans, Citadel, races etc) and introduces the threat (Reapers) with the first conflict in it's end (Battle of the Citadel)

ACT 2 introduces themes that will be dominant in the third act (genophage, geth-quarian conflict, TIM etc), maintains and further explores the overreaching plot (Reapers actually carry genetic goo, and they try to retake the Citadel by creating a new vanguard, Geth are split into factions) and collects the resources (Normandy SR2, squadmates, knowledge) that will be used in the third act.

ACT 3 The experiences and resources of the first two acts are used, and the whole act is paced towards an epic lysis, giving a clear answer to the overreaching plot.

Sounds basic enough to work.

[Sandbox47]

@Dave:
It's cool then. Go ahead and complain. The British Isles in general get privilliges. The rest will need Aperture certified passes to complain. And we are out of Aperture certified passes at the moment.

[RunicDragons]

Phaedon wrote...

Uh, what.

ACT 1 establishes the universe (Protheans, Citadel, races etc) and introduces the threat (Reapers) with the first conflict in it's end (Battle of the Citadel)

ACT 2 introduces themes that will be dominant in the third act (genophage, geth-quarian conflict, TIM etc), maintains and further explores the overreaching plot (Reapers actually carry genetic goo, and they try to retake the Citadel by creating a new vanguard, Geth are split into factions) and collects the resources (Normandy SR2, squadmates, knowledge) that will be used in the third act.

ACT 3 The experiences and resources of the first two acts are used, and the whole act is paced towards an epic lysis, giving a clear answer to the overreaching plot.

Exactly what i thought too! 

[Tripedius]

To me ME1 is setting the scene. Big threat is established, namely the reapers. Stopping Saren/Sovreign is the main point, but it also hints at a bigger threat. ME2 is deeping the scene. ME2 is much more about fleshing out the ME-galaxy than the actual reaper threat. It is therefore not suprising the link with the reapers is weak. However it also more insight into why and what the reapers do with their harvesting. The collectors, in my opinion, aren't looking for a way to bring the reapers to us faster, but they are actually doing the harvesting with the purpose of expanding the reaper species. The reapers are, in my view, the culmination of the advanced species of that time. ME 3 is the culmination of the threat, the end scene.

So in short: ME1 intro, ME2 motivation/character building, ME3 end

[Thrombin]

As far as Cerberus being Evil is concerned, I don't understand the problem. They were set up as Evil from the start. The epitome of "the end justifies the means no matter how abhorrent".

It was clear that TIM was just using Shepard as a tool to suit his own ends during ME2 and it was clear that Shepard knew this but was happy to go with it as long as both of their goals were aligned. The fact that Renegade Shepard was happy to stick with Cerberus for longer than Paragon Shepard doesn't mean Renegade Shepard fully trusts TIM and it certainly doesn't mean that TIM showing his true colours some time down the line isn't fully expected by any sensible Shepard, Paragon or not.

I suppose there are some people who want their Shepard to be as Evil as Cerberus but I've never seen renegade Shepard as being Evil. All Shepards, Renegade or not, are supposed to be humanity's champion. A hero destined to save the day. I don't think Bioware wanted Renegade to represent Evil so sticking with Cerberus once the truth came out was never going to be an option, in my opinion.

Regards

Julian

[Seboist]

Thrombin wrote...

As far as Cerberus being Evil is concerned, I don't understand the problem. They were set up as Evil from the start. The epitome of "the end justifies the means no matter how abhorrent".

It was clear that TIM was just using Shepard as a tool to suit his own ends during ME2 and it was clear that Shepard knew this but was happy to go with it as long as both of their goals were aligned. The fact that Renegade Shepard was happy to stick with Cerberus for longer than Paragon Shepard doesn't mean Renegade Shepard fully trusts TIM and it certainly doesn't mean that TIM showing his true colours some time down the line isn't fully expected by any sensible Shepard, Paragon or not.

I suppose there are some people who want their Shepard to be as Evil as Cerberus but I've never seen renegade Shepard as being Evil. All Shepards, Renegade or not, are supposed to be humanity's champion. A hero destined to save the day. I don't think Bioware wanted Renegade to represent Evil so sticking with Cerberus once the truth came out was never going to be an option, in my opinion.

Regards

Julian

So it's okay to work with genocidal robots, warmongering man-turtles,violent insects that breed fast, an alien council that sterilized a species and sociopathic criminals but when it comes to allying with Cerberus the moral high ground must be taken?

[Fixers0]

Phaedon wrote...

ACT 2 introduces themes that will be dominant in the third act (genophage, geth-quarian conflict, TIM etc), maintains and further explores the overreaching plot (Reapers actually carry genetic goo, and they try to retake the Citadel by creating a new vanguard, Geth are split into factions) and collects the resources (Normandy SR2, squadmates, knowledge) that will be used in the third act.

That's not what the Narative told us.

[Undertone]

TIM&Cerberus attacking Shepard in ME3 contradicts their entire agenda in ME2. What was the point of resurrecting him/her then? The Collectors were just the beginning of the larger threat. ME2 presents TIM as the only sensible and smart guy in the galaxy who would do something despite his agendas, methods and ally himself with possibly uncooperative Shepard (paragon) in order to stop a greater threat in order to ensure survival. This will derail the threat completely but it's like Russia and US stopping the Cold War and becoming allies because aliens are invading. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. It's the most logical thing. ME3 disregards this completely and now we have TIM doing exactly the opposite of what he stated the entire time in ME2.

And please cut with anti-Cerberus **** This thread isn't about how good or bad Cerberus is. And if it was it's funny how we may completely trust some random giant insects that almost destroyed the galaxy (indoctrination or not), or the "aristocratic" rasist council seeking to preserve the status quo, or raging krogans, or salarians/turians that committed genocide themselves or the quarian who had they control over the geth would have waged war against others but suddenly when it comes to Cerberus we go with the higher moral norm. Laughable.

EDIT: Seboist read my thoughts precisely. Sometimes I find it so amusing how people would give up on their kind in favor of others because they don't want to see their kind "get stronger".

And those with the smart-ass pictures. If you feel you have nothing new to contribute why don't you just refrain from posting and let the thread die on it's own? 

Modifié par Undertone, 04 mai 2011 - 01:00 .

[Icinix]

ME2's point was to introduce a range of conflicts, characters and factions. It was one of the Reapers many plans that was foiled.

There are no right or wrong decisions - just different ways to play. Being a renegade isn't going to lead you to a 'bad' ending. Just a different one more in line with your choices.

As for Cerberus - Anyway you look at it, Shep is a rogue agent not 100% loyal to cerberus (at least form the gameplay choices side of things). TIM doesn't look anyone not 100% loyal, and even if they are, they're still expendable tools for him.

My theory with the whole turning against Shep though is probably more along the lines of A) Indocrination or more likely TIM wants the Reapers to wipe out other races first and / or has a way to contain / control a reaper / the reapers and wants to exploit that. Shep (the game character, renegade or paragon) would never allow that, so thus must be taken out of the equation.

[Thrombin]

Seboist wrote...
So it's okay to work with genocidal robots, warmongering man-turtles,violent insects that breed fast, an alien council that sterilized a species and sociopathic criminals but when it comes to allying with Cerberus the moral high ground must be taken?

The Geth aren't genocidal. They defended themselves from the genocidal Quarians. Some of them got mind-controlled by the Reapers but the rest seem to be quite happy to live in peace if allowed to.

The Quarians aren't really genocidal though as, at the time, they thought they were just shutting down non-sentient machines before they could achieve true sentience.

Given that Shepard is an alliance soldier he spends all his time working with human warmongers. I'm not sure why Krogan war-mongers would be an issue.

The genophage was the idea of individuals not an entire race. Judging an entire race by the decisions of its leaders is unreasonable. Even the scientist who helped create the thing became remorseful of the unforeseen repercussions. In any case, the genophage didn't directly kill or harm anyone, but it saved a lot of lives.

If the insects you are referring to are the Rachni, they aren't violent unless they're being mind-controlled by the Reapers.

There's always a line. You can turn a blind eye up to a point if the stakes are high enough but trying to defend an organization driven by hatred for other species and a blatant disregard for life, human or otherwise, is just not possible. There is no defense for liking Cerberus. Sorry, you may as well be defending N*zi's  There's no defense, in my mind. None at all.

Regards

Julian

Modifié par Thrombin, 04 mai 2011 - 01:02 .