112 réponses à ce sujet

[Odoyle]

He's not a big fan of Ruthless Shepard.

If Shepard is Ruthless, he personally orders no arrests be made against those who tried to extinguish the Shepard Memorial Flame on Torfan.

Regardless of what Hackett says at the beginning of ME1, it's Anderson's recommendation that get's you evaluated for the Specter program. Hackett is no better than Udina; he's just not shy about asking for favors.

I got ten bucks that says he throws you under the bus at your trial.

Modifié par Odoyle, 30 mai 2011 - 04:29 .

[SalsaDMA]

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

If you played a Renegade it isn't the first time Hackett used you for under-the-table dealings. He's not as nice a guy as most people would like to believe.

Indeed.

Hackett is a manipulative SOB. He just is better at hiding it normally. I consider the only reasonable excuse for Arrival as being Hackett setting Shep up for some reason.

People are deluding themselves if they think Hackett never tried manipulating Shepard or is beyond backstabbing.

He's an Admiral, backstabbing-prowess is prerequisite for that job. Also, the only reasonable excuse for Arrival was to make a point the Reapers won't need decades of lonely spacetrael to reach the Galaxy canon and to get a few more bucks.

Saying Hackett did set Shepard up is as much credible as saying the earth is flat. And I mean every implication that goes around what I just said. And yes, I know the Flat-Earth-Society.

Hackett is an Admiral, a high profile military that is not beyond using chesspieces to their strategies good. Shepard may be a valuable piece, but a piece nontheless in the eyes of a strategist.
And he has shown more than enough trust on Shepard and his actions that we can trust that even though he is obliged to treat Shepard as what law dictates him to do, he (and every decent military) is not going to sacrifice such a valuable chesspiece unless it is absolutely imperative.

I say let's end this speculation and uncalled for character interpretations without foundation and resume to tasks at hand.

I underlined the part I'm responding to: Had you considered that Hackett might consider Shepard a liability at this point? Alliance has no real control of Shepard, only being able to basicly beg him/her and pull the 'old favours' card all the time. At some point that card becomes useless. Hackett knows this, as well as the fact that Shepard has intimate knowledge of several highly restricted security level black ops the alliance is in no rush to let the masses know about.

Having a solid chesspiece is fine and good, but only as long as you control the piece. When you no longer are in control of the piece, it's not your chess-piece anymore. Add the fact that Shepard answers to a higher authority that could actively judge and condem the alliance for some of the stuff they did, and you start seeing a problem. If anything, I see Hackett working full hard on discrediting Shepard as being more likely than anything else.

[Odoyle]

Me2 is pretty much like the Empire Strikes Back. Despite all you've down, it ends on a really down note.

[Dean_the_Young]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

This presumes there is a universal canon, which has never been implied or suggested.

It does presume there is a universal canon, but only because I find it hard to believe Retribution ISN'T canon, especially considering ALL of the other novels and comics are, in fact, canon. Why should Retribution be any different?

Because Retribution is the first time they did something post-ME1 requiring some acknowledgement of Shepard's choices?

Different franchises treat the concept of a 'canon' in different ways, and it's not always in the sense of 'there is one true path.' Since the books are, at their heart, ways to expand the universe, as opposed to determining it, a 'literary canon' separated from the games (where there is distinctly no canon' is a logical progression.

Not disputing the possibility entirely; just saying it is highly unlikely that Retribution will only apply to certain playthrough's and not others. (Also don't forget Kai Leng has been confirmed to make an appearance in ME3, if that says something.)

'Retribution' as a general sequence of events can still occur without requiring Anderson to not be Councilor in much the same way that Retribution can work as either a consequence of Shepard blowing up the base (forcing Cerberus to work from scraps) or Shepard keeping the base. It can't be written as both at the same time, unlike the Collector Base decision or even the question of whether it's a Paragon or Renegade Council, because Anderson was too desirable a character to pass up and yet can't be fudged over by not mentioning anything.


On the presumption that Retribution happens regardless but Anderson is Councilor, here's an alternative scenario that remains almost entirely the same: 

Instead of going behind always-Councilor Udina's back, Anderson (as Councilor) directly authorizes the Turian raid. Raid goes off, Anderson and Kahlee go to investigate, Aria's people raid the station and take Anderson and Kahlee prisoner. Anderson is a potential hostage/valuable tool, Kahlee is used as bait for Grayson, Kai Leng rescues/kidnaps them after the failed ambush and and takes them in pursuit of Greyson. Events on the station occur, and by the time Anderson is free long enough to assert his authority after being kidnapped by Terminus gangs/Cerberus terrorists, Kai Leng has already made his mistake. Anderson faces criticism for his actions (and being taken hostage), but survives due to his Principaled Stand earning some Turian respect. With no one else high enough and enclined to fire him, Anderson doesn't step down.

Tada. Nearly the exact same events of Retribution, but with a Councilor Anderson. Equally few lines changed in terms of ME3 references. No need for a retcon of player choices. Since Anderson himself only got involved directly on the ground because of Aria's intervention, there's no real reason Councilor Anderson couldn't have also played most of the same role in Retribution.

I've read Drew's letter, and while it was perfectly understandable that he had to do it for the sake of writing Retribution's story, it doesn't change the fact that they can still fix it upon ME3. Of course, fixing it won't involve reinstating Anderson as Councilor again, since Udina's Councilor status has been canonized per Drew's input on the matter. Rather, it can be fixed by dialogue--nothing more, nothing less.

Udina isn't canon Councilor in any sense except literature. Drew specifically refuted it being a retcon, or a canon decision for the games.

[Dean_the_Young]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

This presumes there is a universal canon, which has never been implied or suggested.

There is. That canon is events that happen outside of the games. Like the novels and comics.

Not necessarily: plenty of franchises go with an approch of 'non-canonical' expanded universes of various sorts. Parallel canons (exploring how things would have gone if something different happened), pseudo-canon (to be believed unless/until some later 'core' canon is produced and contradictss), even literature-only canon (for various franchises that have crossed mediums). Some franchises even go by a 'canonical heirarchy': for the Gundam anime franchise, the abundance of contradicting sources has led to a more or less acknowledged 'anime series/movies/primary manga/secondary manga/games/encylopedia-codexs/magazine articles.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I like your scenario, Dean. Sounds like something that would fit just fine. However, if that were the case and it did get handled that way, don't you think people who made Anderson Councilor would rage and ask why THAT version of Retribution never saw the light?

I'm not sure that's something BioWare is going or willing to do. Not when they've said time and time again that whatever happens in other Mass Effect media does not in any way or shape or form violate what the player might have done on their playthrough's in the games. I'd honestly be cool if your idea was their plan as to how to deal with the issue, but I'm just one among God knows how many who have Anderson as Councilor.

Modifié par Fiery Phoenix, 30 mai 2011 - 06:03 .

[Sarcastic Tasha]

Hackett is an arse, I miss Kahoku

[Dean_the_Young]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

I like your scenario, Dean. Sounds like something that would fit just fine. However, if that were the case and it did get handled that way, don't you think people who made Anderson Councilor would rage and ask why THAT version of Retribution never saw the light?

Not many, and certainly not as many as would complain for such a retcon of a nominal 'big decision' based on a book that, from the start, was never technically applicable to them anyway. Since the alternate scenario could nicely be summarized by Anderson (or the summary-purchase in some in-game store) in about, oh, a paragraph, most of the differences would be pretty negligable.

As Drew said, the books exist to expand the universe, and sometimes to do that they're going to have to work with some assumptions, no matter how much they try to avoid it. Since the entire Retribution could be almost entirely the same minus about, oh, some changed dialogue (Councilor Anderson instead of General Anderson having lunch with an Elcor, official secret Alliance approval instead of lack of it, etc.), while 95+% of it would be the same, those complaints would lack more than a little content.

I'm not sure that's something BioWare is going or willing to do. Not when they've said time and time again that whatever happens in other Mass Effect media does not in any way or shape or form violate what the player might have done on their playthrough's in the games. I'd honestly be cool if your idea was their plan as to how to deal with the issue, but I'm just one among God knows how many who have Anderson as Councilor.

Of course. And, frankly, I won't be surprised if the 'retcon' route is what they do with.

What does annoy me, however, is how many people have such conviction about something that in no sense is required to occur like that. It isn't even the prospect of a lazy retcon: its that everyone is convinced that it's the only path and no one else bothers to think up what took me less than thirty seconds to write out off the cuff.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

(...)

What does annoy me, however, is how many people have such conviction about something that in no sense is required to occur like that. It isn't even the prospect of a lazy retcon: its that everyone is convinced that it's the only path and no one else bothers to think up what took me less than thirty seconds to write out off the cuff.

I'm not entirely certain what you're getting at here. Are you implying that whoever made Anderson Councilor should go back and rectify the decision so that it is seamless with Retribution rather than complaining about it? Because if so, I fear it isn't a fair solution at all. Not to mention it completely undermines the concept of player choice, which is a defining feature of Mass Effect.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

(...)

What does annoy me, however, is how many people have such conviction about something that in no sense is required to occur like that. It isn't even the prospect of a lazy retcon: its that everyone is convinced that it's the only path and no one else bothers to think up what took me less than thirty seconds to write out off the cuff.

I'm not entirely certain what you're getting at here. Are you implying that whoever made Anderson Councilor should go back and rectify the decision so that it is seamless with Retribution rather than complaining about it? Because if so, I fear it isn't a fair solution at all. Not to mention it completely undermines the concept of player choice, which is a defining feature of Mass Effect.

That and considering it is classed as one of the main choices (as proven by the fact it's in the comic) which Bioware even went to the lengths of giving PC players option of re-confirming due to the save issue. It definitly would seem a bit silly if there isn't some form of acknowledgment of it in ME3 even if Udina has now become the Councilor no matter which choice you made.

I highly doubt Bioware is going to retcon or brush the choice under the rug.

As for Hackett... similar to what Salsa said, I think despite what he can say to Shep during the debrief I think he is beginning to have doubts about Shep, the way he queried whether Shepard was sure about the Reaper threat, had me thinking he was beginning to believe that it was all just in Shepard's head. As for his dossier, IIRC wasn't that request from the other Alliance member before Shep left the SR1?

Regarding Hackett, Anderson and Udina talking at the start of ME, don't forget, whether you got most of your squad killed on Torfan, was the only survivor out of your squad on Akuze or almost single handedly repelled an attack by batarian slavers on Elysium, Shepard is the ONLY kind of person who can protect the Galaxy... well apart from the other two types who are also the kind of person who can do just that

[Dean_the_Young]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

(...)

What does annoy me, however, is how many people have such conviction about something that in no sense is required to occur like that. It isn't even the prospect of a lazy retcon: its that everyone is convinced that it's the only path and no one else bothers to think up what took me less than thirty seconds to write out off the cuff.

I'm not entirely certain what you're getting at here. Are you implying that whoever made Anderson Councilor should go back and rectify the decision so that it is seamless with Retribution rather than complaining about it? Because if so, I fear it isn't a fair solution at all. Not to mention it completely undermines the concept of player choice, which is a defining feature of Mass Effect.

Not quite. I was complaining/ranting/criticizing/demeaning fans who are convinced that There Is No Other Explanation Than RETCON to Anderson having ever been Councilor when I was able to make one up in half a minute.

The people who haven't even thought about how Anderson could still be Councilor, forgetting what we know of the books and fixating on them being literal canon.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Does he say the "ready to take the hit" line if you haven't volunteered to go to trial yourself? Because it seems perfectly natural if you have.

[008Zulu]

DPSSOC wrote...
No Paragons get to charm TIM into opening a puppy shelter and using is vast riches to put under privledged youths through college in order to build a better tomorrow full of sunshine and rainbows.

That's what Paragons get, the satisfaction of breaking a human soul with nothing more than charisma and good cheer.

Just because Paragons do things that generally save more lives, doesn't mean that we are all sunshine and lolipops. After all...

Mercy is the mark of a great man.
<shoots TIM in the knee>
Guess I'm just a good man.
<shoots TIM in the arm>
Well, I'm all right.

[Dean_the_Young]

Bloody sadist-revenge fetishists...

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 31 mai 2011 - 01:40 .

[DPSSOC]

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

Does he say the "ready to take the hit" line if you haven't volunteered to go to trial yourself? Because it seems perfectly natural if you have.

I'm pretty sure you get that line regardless of whether you've volunteered to come in quietly.

008Zulu wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...
No Paragons get to charm TIM into opening a puppy shelter and using is vast riches to put under privledged youths through college in order to build a better tomorrow full of sunshine and rainbows.

That's what Paragons get, the satisfaction of breaking a human soul with nothing more than charisma and good cheer.

Just because Paragons do things that generally save more lives, doesn't mean that we are all sunshine and lolipops. After all...

Mercy is the mark of a great man.
<shoots TIM in the knee>
Guess I'm just a good man.
<shoots TIM in the arm>
Well, I'm all right.

This totally needs to be a Paragon option (or a Renegade option in the grander Paragon scheme).

I must however question you equating "breaking a human soul" with "sunshine and lolipops."  Paragon's are far more evil than Renegades could ever hope to be; we just kill people, you destroy them.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

//punches Admiral Hackett

Shepard: "You didn't even tell the old Council to eject!? Bad Admiral....bad bad Admiral"

[008Zulu]

DPSSOC wrote...
This totally needs to be a Paragon option (or a Renegade option in the grander Paragon scheme).

I must however question you equating "breaking a human soul" with "sunshine and lolipops."  Paragon's are far more evil than Renegades could ever hope to be; we just kill people, you destroy them.

All I meant was we're not the knights in gleaming shiny armour that people imagine us to be. No one is perfect. No one.

[008Zulu]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Bloody sadist-revenge fetishists...

Considering some of the pro-Cerb "revenge against the Alliance" rhetoric being spouted on the forums, this statement is particularly amusing. Especially since its you.

Hypocrisy is a tasty dish.

[CroGamer002]

Shepard punches Admiral Hackett

Shepard: Oh shi-
Hackett: WHAT THE HELL COMMANDER?!
Shepard: I just saw Renegade interrupt.
Hackett: WHY DID YOU PRESS IT!
Shepard: It's an awesome button.
Hackett: Well you're right, it is. Now I have a lot of awesome buttons.
Shepard: What are yo... *Hackett starts to massacre Shepard*

*Zaeed shows up*

Zaeed: Can I join in cousin?
Hackett: Yes.

[Dean_the_Young]

008Zulu wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Bloody sadist-revenge fetishists...

Considering some of the pro-Cerb "revenge against the Alliance" rhetoric being spouted on the forums, this statement is particularly amusing. Especially since its you.

Hypocrisy is a tasty dish.

Find a single post in which I indulge or advocate 'revenge against the Alliance', and your charge may have some basis. Otherwise, not only are you still indulging in revenge fetish fantasies, but you (still) can't even distinguish the views of others who disagree with you.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 31 mai 2011 - 11:44 .

[Dean_the_Young]

DPSSOC wrote...

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

Does he say the "ready to take the hit" line if you haven't volunteered to go to trial yourself? Because it seems perfectly natural if you have.

I'm pretty sure you get that line regardless of whether you've volunteered to come in quietly.

008Zulu wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...
No Paragons get to charm TIM into opening a puppy shelter and using is vast riches to put under privledged youths through college in order to build a better tomorrow full of sunshine and rainbows.

That's what Paragons get, the satisfaction of breaking a human soul with nothing more than charisma and good cheer.

Just because Paragons do things that generally save more lives, doesn't mean that we are all sunshine and lolipops. After all...

Mercy is the mark of a great man.
<shoots TIM in the knee>
Guess I'm just a good man.
<shoots TIM in the arm>
Well, I'm all right.

This totally needs to be a Paragon option (or a Renegade option in the grander Paragon scheme).

I must however question you equating "breaking a human soul" with "sunshine and lolipops."  Paragon's are far more evil than Renegades could ever hope to be; we just kill people, you destroy them.

And gamble with galactic existence by encouraging risks.