48 réponses à ce sujet

[Clonedzero]

thats the dumbest question that keeps being asked. if you dont sacrifice the squadmate the galaxy isnt saved and therefore they die anyways.

so whats the point? what a dumb question.

[Antivenger]

NG+, dude. NG+.

[Feena.c]

Honestly, I can't see this situation coming up without some serious absurdity and railroading on the part of Bioware.

"Oh noes!  Your teammate suddenly fell over onconscious and a giant beam is going to crush them if you don't save them! But if you go back you won't have enough time to run up the plateform and push the "Stop the Reapers" button! What do you do?!?!"

PUH-LEEASE!

Bottom line, yes, but I will be really annoyed if this situation even occurs.
We've already had the "You Must Choose!" situation on Virmire. <_<

[Td1984]

ladyvader wrote...

That would be hard, My favorite squadmate is my Shepard's LI and I don't know if I would sacrifice Liara without having Shepard sacrificing herself as well.

This is how I feel as well, only for me it's Miranda as opposed to Liara (and obviously not a FemShep).

[Tasha vas Nar Rayya]

Clonedzero wrote...

thats the dumbest question that keeps being asked. if you dont sacrifice the squadmate the galaxy isnt saved and therefore they die anyways.

so whats the point? what a dumb question.

Mesina doesn't mean that if you don't save your LI that you will both die anyway. That's you making an assumption.

He means that the galaxy will descend into chaos and anarchy if you pick the option not to save your LI.

[wilhelm Screamer]

Would I do it: Yes

Would I like to: No

Would I try to find a way around: Hell yes

[Ahriman]

They all signed for it, Shepard included. Yes.
I would vomit with rainbow if 'sacrifice' tell "Leave me, you must save the galaxy" though.

[Tasha vas Nar Rayya]

Wizz wrote...

They all signed for it, Shepard included. Yes.
I would vomit with rainbow if 'sacrifice' tell "Leave me, you must save the galaxy" though.

Yes. That is the line that made me kill my partner in the beginning of Fable 3

[aeetos21]

Hmm... well I didn't screw over a certain pirate I was interested in when I played DA2. I mean I said she wouldn't be getting her "treasure" because it'd screw too much up. But when the "treasure" was returned and the rightful owner demanded she be killed, that's when I told him to go to hell. So not really black and white I guess but more in the gray area.

Taking it a step further, when one of my other DA2 companions did something REALLY bad I stuck the knife in them myself.

I hope that was vague enough to avoid any spoiler issues.

Following this example... If it was the only way to save a planet or what have you and it was obvious that sacrificing Miranda (because that's my favorite) wouldn't cause a greater impact elsewhere then sure. Leave her behind to make sure the bomb goes off or whatever. But if it's just about rewarding vengeance or evil and if we have a fighting chance to prevent chaos and death then hell no. Over my dead body.

So I guess it comes back to the circumstances.

Modifié par aeetos21, 08 juin 2011 - 02:07 .

[leggywillow]

No.

::runs away squealing::

[Ryzaki]

Yeah of course I would.

[Rinji the Bearded]

No, my Shepard would only sacrifice himself willingly if it really came right down to it.

It'd only be the right thing to do.

[KawaiiKatie]

Why does this thread keep happening?

Copy-paste: I think I would save my love-interest before I saved an entire planet. Not in REAL LIFE, mind you, but in a video game, my love-interest is worth more than a thousand NPCs.

The same thing happened to me in Fable 2 and Fable 3. I chose "Love" instead of "Sacrifice" and I chose
the life of my childhood sweertheart over the lives of a dozen civilians. Not the kindest choice, but it was just a video game and my love-interest was far more interesting to talk to than the faceless NPCs.

Modifié par KawaiiKatie, 08 juin 2011 - 02:40 .

[amers1015]

Bye bye squaddies.

Even in a video game I couldn't choose one person over an entire galaxy. It wouldn't feel realistic. Totally out of character for me and for my Shep.

Besides, if someone ever killed a whole galaxy to save *my* life, I'd be furious. Imagine the friggin guilt you'd have to live with for the rest of your life. Not to mention the hatred people who lost loved ones would have for you.

[Shadow_82]

I wouldn't sacrifice my favorite.The other squadmates though,I would in a heartbeat.

[amers1015]

Feena.c wrote...

Honestly, I can't see this situation coming up without some serious absurdity and railroading on the part of Bioware.

"Oh noes!  Your teammate suddenly fell over onconscious and a giant beam is going to crush them if you don't save them! But if you go back you won't have enough time to run up the plateform and push the "Stop the Reapers" button! What do you do?!?!"

PUH-LEEASE!

Bottom line, yes, but I will be really annoyed if this situation even occurs.
We've already had the "You Must Choose!" situation on Virmire. <_<

I ROFL'd at "Stop the Reapers" button.  Good stuff there. 

[MissMaster]

lol. I'm going to sound bad when I say this but....no.

[jamesp81]

Mtw wrote...

My Shepard would probably suicide soon after if he'd have to sacrifice his LI.

Kind of my Shepard's outlook on things.  If, in the end, he has to decide between Earth and someone else's homeworld(s), he'll probably flip a coin, make the call, then shoot himself because there's no way he'd be able to live with what he'd done.

[jamesp81]

Robhuzz wrote...

If it means sacrificing the ENTIRE galaxy then... I might. If it means saving 1 or 2, perhaps 3 races (other than humanity) then no.

It goes without saying I wouldn't even sacrifice my least favorite squadmate, or even an unnamed crewmember, to save the batarian race, as far as I'm concerned, they're goners (evil laugh)

The one thing the Reapers are doing that's good, IMO

[jamesp81]

Tasha vas Nar Rayya wrote...

Anarchy is fun

Will we get to keep the Normandy loveboat?

Not to blow my own horn....aww hell, that's exactly what I'm doing.

I pitched an idea on these forums for another trilogy following ME3 that's semi-anarchy.  Actually it's more like a few, civilized areas (everyone's homeworlds and a few wealthier colonies) completely surrounded by complete anarchy due to their devastation of the war in ME3.  That amount of fun a man could have in that environment is almost limitless

[jamesp81]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

If it's just instability, not total annihilation, I wouldn't sacrifice my favorite character.

I don't see how, personally, there wouldn't be instability for several years after the war.  With most of the militaries severely weakened, the whole galaxy is going to be a gigantic wild west.  Which is a perfect setting for a new trilogy if bioware decides to do it, btw.

[jamesp81]

aeetos21 wrote...

Hmm... well I didn't screw over a certain pirate I was interested in when I played DA2. I mean I said she wouldn't be getting her "treasure" because it'd screw too much up. But when the "treasure" was returned and the rightful owner demanded she be killed, that's when I told him to go to hell. So not really black and white I guess but more in the gray area.

Taking it a step further, when one of my other DA2 companions did something REALLY bad I stuck the knife in them myself.

I hope that was vague enough to avoid any spoiler issues.

Following this example... If it was the only way to save a planet or what have you and it was obvious that sacrificing Miranda (because that's my favorite) wouldn't cause a greater impact elsewhere then sure. Leave her behind to make sure the bomb goes off or whatever. But if it's just about rewarding vengeance or evil and if we have a fighting chance to prevent chaos and death then hell no. Over my dead body.

So I guess it comes back to the circumstances.

I just had a thought, and perhaps, an insight into Bioware's problems trying to make everyone happy.

Paragons want to save the galaxy, to be that true blue hero.  Renegades want to be badasses.  Bioware has a tough challenge catering to both.

A lot of complaints come from renegades that paragons get to have their cake and eat it too.  This is not altogether wrong in many decisions you make.  The problem is that Bioware wants to create a great gaming experience for paragons, and being the hero is the experience they want.  So Bioware lets paragons play the hero.  Renegades tend to want a more emotionally depressing, grittier experience.  So Bioware sets up the renegade decisions to reflect that.

The problem is, anyone can look at the renegade choices and say that many of them don't turn out as well as paragon choices.  This should be self-evident, as plot that depressing and tragic will naturally have more bad things happen during it than a Heroic Epic's plot would.  Renegades like to complain that this is Bioware favoring paragons.  That isn't the case, however.  Bioware is giving renegades the option to experience the story how they want, they're just mad that the paragon experience seems to easy to them.

[jamesp81]

amers1015 wrote...

Feena.c wrote...

Honestly, I can't see this situation coming up without some serious absurdity and railroading on the part of Bioware.

"Oh noes!  Your teammate suddenly fell over onconscious and a giant beam is going to crush them if you don't save them! But if you go back you won't have enough time to run up the plateform and push the "Stop the Reapers" button! What do you do?!?!"

PUH-LEEASE!

Bottom line, yes, but I will be really annoyed if this situation even occurs.
We've already had the "You Must Choose!" situation on Virmire. <_<

I ROFL'd at "Stop the Reapers" button.  Good stuff there. 

Someone with photoshop skills needs to make a Staples Easy Button, except it says "Stop the Reapers".