904 réponses à ce sujet

[Moiaussi]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Do you understand the kind of costs that were incurred stopping the rachni and the krogan? You should think twice about putting the galaxy through that. Even if victory is assured a second time that doesn't mean the war won't be destructive to the galaxy. This is not something we want to repeat.

They pale in comparason to the cost to the Rachni. Why would they want to repeat?

[tjzsf]

Saphra Deden wrote...
Only if the rachni believe you about the Reapers. If they don't they may become hostile before any show up. If you release the queen she sould easily have had her offspring overrun Noveria. Noveria I remind you is a valuable research world for many corporations. It's also unlikely that the rachni can build up a sizable fleet in time to be useful in a galactic war and if they can then that's all the more reason to be fearful of them. They might have self preservation, but they are also extremely aggressive and territorial. They might decide they can beat the Reapers WIHOUT YOU.

Noveria is also outside Council jurisdiction, so I have no responsibility towards them. Those corporations specifically use that loophole to run experiments that would be illegal in Council space. If the rachni cannot build up a sizeable fleet in time, then there's no point killing them, the Reapers will do the job. If they can, that makes the the fight against the Reapers easier. Even if you have to fight them later, that's good because it means you survived the Reaper attack. In addition, the queen you talked to is evidence that they're not necessarily inherently aggressive and territorial; her behavior is at odds with the history books' definitions of "attack on sight", necessitating suspicion on the part of the history books and suggesting that they can be reasoned with. Finally, even if they think they can beat the Reapers without you, it stands to reason that they can beat the Reapers easier with you.

Do you understand the kind of costs that were incurred stopping the rachni and the krogan? You should think twice about putting the galaxy through that. Even if victory is assured a second time that doesn't mean the war won't be destructive to the galaxy. This is not something we want to repeat.

Yes. I also do not think the costs would be nearly that high, seeing as the rachni are reduced to only 1 queen. Having more bug-swarm bodies to throw against the reapers is worth the controllable risk.

All of which is subordinate to the original point: If I do not let myself become subject to the dogma of "ALL RISK MUST BE ELIMINATED", paragon response makes more sense. Which brings it back to the point before that: I don't have to metagame to arrive at the conclusion that paragon choice > renegade choice.

Dean_the_Young wrote...
I'd say there are a few unwaranted
assumptions in there... like that the Rachni have that sort of survival
instinct. Indoctrinated organics being an excellent case-in-point as to
why organic =/= opposed to Reaper, and the Rachni Queen has already made
an implicit claim to such a defense. Moreover, there can also be
political factors being freely ignorred: simply because the Terminus and
Council could both be better if they cooperated doesn't mean they can
or will, any more than the mutual gains of a Batarian/Human
reconciliation have inevitably led to that detente.

It also
assumes that the Rachni have the same viewpoint as you, and that you
understand their interests: the Rachni could see both the Reapers
AND Shepard/the Council as critical threats. The enemy of my enemy,
after all, is simply my enemy's enemy. Game theory recognizes its own
greatest limitation in that it often breaks down if both sides aren't
following it in similar ways. The quickest route to destabilizing any
equilibrium, after all, is deception of means and ends... or just
irrationality.

There's also the matter of costs associated with
control: Turians + Humans + Shepard > Rachni, but then Turians
+ Humans + Shepard - Significant Hostile Rachni >> Turians
+ Humans + Shepard - No Rachni.

Now, whether Turians + Humans
+ Shepard - No Rachni > Reapers is already the greatest matter of
concern... but we can already be pretty sure that any victory would
already be narrow enough at the best of alliances. Any action B that
could significantly alter an alliance so that Alliance A (default)
>> Alliance B should be, for very obvious reasons, be looked at
with much suspicion for other benefits.

Thank you for actually thinking through this stuff instead of relying on stereotypical paragon/renegade dogma.
I think it's a fair assumption that the rachni would hold similar viewpoints, as the queen demonstrates sentience, and assuming the case of it thinks both Reapers and Council as critical threats, it also makes no sense to waste resources on the weaker threat with a common enemy instead of pooling resources to fight the common enemy first. Organic would be helping Reapers only if they're being indoctrinated, and the rachni queen does not show signs of such (of course, it is doubtful that Shep would recognize them, but it's also not something he'd know at the time, so as far as in-story decision making, rachni queen is treated as non-indoctrinated). As for political factors...the queen on Noveria was the only queen. Politics is a lot simpler when you only have one individual to deal with. Terminus/Council or Human/Batarian conflict is less analogous, as those are very much cases where war benefits certain individuals more than peace. WRT rachni, the fact that they have to rebuild from only 1 queen after taking whatever losses the Reaper invasion will incur on them makes the potential cost rather small by my estimation.

On a side note, this talk of ME3 consequences has me wanting to play a new round of ME1 and 2, using Kharn Shepard, the unflinching killer who seeks only additional notches on his gun(s). Rachni, Council, Heretics, nameless Eclipse merc who stands too close to the edge of a skyscraper for his own good, by my bloody hand they shall not live another day!

[Mippoose]

I think a lot of harsh punishments and rewards are generally avoided, not saying there are no reactions. Imagine the quick saving and loading and redoing that would occur because certain decisions have massive punishments on the player.

There are a lot of perfectionists, and others, who would be traumatized by the idea of a super arbitrary game that throws space nukes at you for refusing to rescue an alien cat from a tree - yet gives only dialogue consequence to other actions closing of the same caliber.

I agree that certain greater feelings of punishment and reward would make the game feel deeper and more real, but I think it's avoided to keep the gamer more interested in playing the game rather than min-maxing their moral compass to make the game enjoyable and rewarding in any degree.

[Dean_the_Young]

tjzsf wrote...

Thank you for actually thinking through this stuff instead of relying on stereotypical paragon/renegade dogma.
I think it's a fair assumption that the rachni would hold similar viewpoints, as the queen demonstrates sentience,  and assuming the case of it thinks both Reapers and Council as critical threats, it also makes no sense to waste resources on the weaker threat with a common enemy instead of pooling resources to fight the common enemy first.

If that were true, human history would be far different, and wo would the Mass Effect universe (remember Retribution?). Humans/the Council/whoever may be a weaker threat for the Rachni, but they can also be an immediate threat, and may also be uninclined towards cooperation. This is the same Council, after all, that refuses to even entertain cooperation with Cerberus, which is a far lesser threat than the Rachni ever could be. Why should the Rachni Queen bother to make common cause with an ensemble of species that don't even recognize the common cause to be had, let alone have a history of trusting and making common cause with such historic dangers?

Mind you, we also have to argue as to why we should believe the Rachni Queen believes in the Reapers, rather than simply, well, lying to Shepard.

Organic would be helping Reapers only if they're being indoctrinated,

See, here's a thing that's well disputed by history and that game theory can never ignore: people will side with a greater threat to their own ultimate destruction. Why? Lots of reasons: they hate the other person more, they think they can handle the other threat regardless, they think they can strike a bargain, they don't recognize the threat, etc.

These are all historic, validated actions by people and civilizations. Did they eventually pay? Sure. Do people still make the same decisions? Absolutely: Saren was working with the Reapers even before he was ultimately indoctrinated.

and the rachni queen does not show signs of such (of course, it is doubtful that Shep would recognize them, but it's also not something he'd know at the time, so as far as in-story decision making, rachni queen is treated as non-indoctrinated).

Shepard can more or less believe in indoctrination at that point if Shepard wants to: there's no evidence of it until Virmire, and Benezia and Shiala's accounts can be dismissed as self-serving defenses by criminals, but there's no set mission order either.

As for political factors...the queen on Noveria was the only queen. Politics is a lot simpler when you only have one individual to deal with. Terminus/Council or Human/Batarian conflict is less analogous, as those are very much cases where war benefits certain individuals more than peace. WRT rachni, the fact that they have to rebuild from only 1 queen after taking whatever losses the Reaper invasion will incur on them makes the potential cost rather small by my estimation.

How long is she going to be the only queen for? Rachni can set up colonies in a matter of weeks: if one queen can produce that many drones that quickly, why on earth shouldn't she/they produce more queens for more exponential growth?

That's a very unsound game theory assumption, because it relies on the Queen not pursuing a dominant strategy.

On a side note, this talk of ME3 consequences has me wanting to play a new round of ME1 and 2, using Kharn Shepard, the unflinching killer who seeks only additional notches on his gun(s). Rachni, Council, Heretics, nameless Eclipse merc who stands too close to the edge of a skyscraper for his own good, by my bloody hand they shall not live another day!

Ironically enough, my next playthrough shall be Volus Shepard: the Volus-in-human-avatar who only walks, gets behind cover, and uses omnitool abilities while his allies do all the fighting.

No shooting, running, or biotics allowed.