82210 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

Not Miranda's style. She'd use a single bullet.

[broj1]

Hello everyone. Here's an interesting question about Miranda:
When she quits Cerberus she asks TIM: “Or what? You'll replace me next?” Did she mean anything specific by that (something that happened in “Mass Effect Galaxy”, or in the comic “Redemption”), or was she just confirming that Cerberus has a habit of “replacing” the operatives which have outlived their usefulness?

[Caihn]

MisterJB wrote...

What Miranda would actually want is what she actually said in the game.

This.

I consider everything Miranda says as part of her character.
And I want this Miranda back in ME3. I like the character from the moment she shoots Wilson until she resigns and supports the destruction of the CB, and I don't want that one of the aspects of her character and her character development disapear in ME3.

[Ieldra]

broj1 wrote...
Hello everyone. Here's an interesting question about Miranda:
When she quits Cerberus she asks TIM: “Or what? You'll replace me next?” Did she mean anything specific by that (something that happened in “Mass Effect Galaxy”, or in the comic “Redemption”), or was she just confirming that Cerberus has a habit of “replacing” the operatives which have outlived their usefulness?

Shepard was about to be replaced, having outlived his usefulness. I read it as "So if I won't replace him for you, you'll replace me?"

I am unaware of anything specific she could have meant apart from that.

In general I think people make too much of her resignation, esepcially in the light of the ME3 info. We'll see her again in ME3, and she won't be part of Cerberus then, no matter what, except if blackmailed by TIM into cooperation (which I hope we won't see). And just so that nobody misreads me: I'm glad that apparently she won't be part of Cerberus in ME3 even if you keep the Collector base. I never liked that those decisions were linked.

And I want Miranda to admit that her recommendation to destroy the CB was ill-considered, a result of being mentally overwhelmed by the events, even should it turn out for the best in the end (which I also hope it doesn't)

Modifié par Ieldra2, 23 juin 2011 - 08:55 .

[broj1]

Ieldra2 wrote...

broj1 wrote...
Hello everyone. Here's an interesting question about Miranda:
When she quits Cerberus she asks TIM: “Or what? You'll replace me next?” Did she mean anything specific by that (something that happened in “Mass Effect Galaxy”, or in the comic “Redemption”), or was she just confirming that Cerberus has a habit of “replacing” the operatives which have outlived their usefulness?

Shepard was about to be replaced, having outlived his usefulness. I read it as "So if I won't replace him for you, you'll replace me?"

I am unaware of anything specific she could have meant apart from that.

In general I think people make too much of her resignation, esepcially in the light of the ME3 info. We'll see her again in ME3, and she won't be part of Cerberus then, no matter what, except if blackmailed by TIM into cooperation (which I hope we won't see). And just so that nobody misreads me: I'm glad that apparently she won't be part of Cerberus in ME3 even if you keep the Collector base. I never liked that those decisions were linked.

And I want Miranda to admit that her recommendation to destroy the CB was ill-considered, a result of being mentally overwhelmed by the events, even should it turn out for the best in the end (which I also hope it doesn't)

Thanks, I just thought there might be more to that comment, since Bioware loves to intertwine their games, and I have no idea what takes place in "Mass Effect Galaxy". Also, I agree that some paragon choices should backfire.

[Jebel Krong]

Ieldra2 wrote...

alperez wrote...
There is no right or wrong choice or way to play there is only your version, no one else's counts.

As long as Bioware acknowledges both - in general and with regard to Miranda - I'm OK with it. But with their annoying Paragon favoritism I'm not confident of that outcome. That's why I won't cease commenting. 

see i don't really see this, other than the forced morality of the base choice, and then that's only a morality rather than in-game consequence one (so far). i play renegade and i haven't noticed any real downsides apart from a few inconsequential people not appearing because i killed their annoying selves already, which was much more satisfying.

[Jebel Krong]

Ieldra2 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...
What Miranda would actually want is what she actually said in the game.

I contest that. I dismiss everything the team members say after the SM about the CB, and the other thing Miranda never says in my games. Let's leave it at that.

whilst everything said post-game is somewhat abbreviated, how can you dismiss that and not the silly post LoSB dossiers? 

[Bottomroach]

broj1 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

broj1 wrote...
Hello everyone. Here's an interesting question about Miranda:
When she quits Cerberus she asks TIM: “Or what? You'll replace me next?” Did she mean anything specific by that (something that happened in “Mass Effect Galaxy”, or in the comic “Redemption”), or was she just confirming that Cerberus has a habit of “replacing” the operatives which have outlived their usefulness?

Shepard was about to be replaced, having outlived his usefulness. I read it as "So if I won't replace him for you, you'll replace me?"

I am unaware of anything specific she could have meant apart from that.

In general I think people make too much of her resignation, esepcially in the light of the ME3 info. We'll see her again in ME3, and she won't be part of Cerberus then, no matter what, except if blackmailed by TIM into cooperation (which I hope we won't see). And just so that nobody misreads me: I'm glad that apparently she won't be part of Cerberus in ME3 even if you keep the Collector base. I never liked that those decisions were linked.

And I want Miranda to admit that her recommendation to destroy the CB was ill-considered, a result of being mentally overwhelmed by the events, even should it turn out for the best in the end (which I also hope it doesn't)

Thanks, I just thought there might be more to that comment, since Bioware loves to intertwine their games, and I have no idea what takes place in "Mass Effect Galaxy". Also, I agree that some paragon choices should backfire.

I think her resignation was to showcase her loyalty to Shepard rather than TIM and his "the ends justify the means" philosophy.

I also agree the paragon route shouldn't only be rewarded, I'm starting to feel like Renegade is leading up to a "you're screwed" ending in ME3.

Although they did show that Paragon might not always be the best choice with Rana Thanoptis, the Asari from Virmire (experimented on salarians) who claimed she was forced into experimenting and the Paragon option is to let her go, and yet she appears again on Korlus experimenting on Krogan. Another instance is the Eclipse sister during Samara's mission who claimed she was only pretending to shoot and never hurt anyone and Paragon option is letting her go, but later on you found she killed the volus trader in cold blood with enthusiasm.

So I'm hoping for something like that but on a bigger scale in ME3 - maybe with the heretic geth base, make it so destroying it was the right choice and they turn back to the Reapers if not destroyed. I wouldn't make either option with the CB as the "right" one, rather have the game play out differently without penalizing. How about keeping the base means Cerberus gets the Reaper tech so they are more powerful but let you acquire it for yourself, and destroying the base means Cerberus is less powerful but you don't get the tech either?

Modifié par Bottomroach, 23 juin 2011 - 09:35 .

[AresXX7]

broj1 wrote...

Hello everyone. Here's an interesting question about Miranda:
When she quits Cerberus she asks TIM: “Or what? You'll replace me next?” Did she mean anything specific by that (something that happened in “Mass Effect Galaxy”, or in the comic “Redemption”), or was she just confirming that Cerberus has a habit of “replacing” the operatives which have outlived their usefulness?

In my opinion, I'd say the latter.

[Ieldra]

Bottomroach wrote...
So I'm hoping for something like that but on a bigger scale in ME3 - maybe with the heretic geth base, make it so destroying it was the right choice and they turn back to the Reapers if not destroyed. I wouldn't make either option with the CB as the "right" one, rather have the game play out differently without penalizing. How about keeping the base means Cerberus gets the Reaper tech so they are more powerful but let you acquire it for yourself, and destroying the base means Cerberus is less powerful but you don't get the tech either?

That's kind of what I'm hoping for. And that possibility - namely getting the technology - is what Miranda, as the competent operative she is, should have acknowledged. 

[PMC65]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Bottomroach wrote...
So I'm hoping for something like that but on a bigger scale in ME3 - maybe with the heretic geth base, make it so destroying it was the right choice and they turn back to the Reapers if not destroyed. I wouldn't make either option with the CB as the "right" one, rather have the game play out differently without penalizing. How about keeping the base means Cerberus gets the Reaper tech so they are more powerful but let you acquire it for yourself, and destroying the base means Cerberus is less powerful but you don't get the tech either?

That's kind of what I'm hoping for. And that possibility - namely getting the technology - is what Miranda, as the competent operative she is, should have acknowledged. 

To be honest, I never saw what was so "dangerous" about keeping the CB. After all, Cerberus has a derelict REAPER and god only knows what else. 

The CB can show him how to make a reaper which even if he goes over to the reaper side, they already know how to make ... it's their recipe. Now what you may hope is that there is some data that will shed further light on the how & why the reapers do this cycle as well as maybe another vigil hidden in the data. After all, Benezia with her final hoo-ra put important data on a disc. A prothean at the early stages may have done the same.

But, since it is a game, probably not. Just looking at the could-a's ... Will keeping or destroying the CB make a difference in ME3? Since Bioware keeps saying that they don't want to "punish" players for their choices, well .. probably not. Just maybe a little road bump. 

In only one of my games did I take Miranda with Shepard to the showdown, I've avoided that since. So in three games she didn't quit ... I wonder if the game will have her "quitting" no matter if you took her or not.  

[evescerater]

First of all the character is awesomely portrayed and written by Bioware....but the fact that its ****ing Yvonne Strahovski voicing her from my favorite television show Chuck means she is an uber character for me. Now I love Liara but Miranda is......perfect

[Td1984]

@PMC65

Cerberus doesn't have the derelict Reaper anymore. After you take out the mass effect core, it crashes into the planet below. I know they sent a team in earlier, but they didn't escape and were turned into husks. I'm not sure how much data they were able to transmit to TIM (if any).

[Melra]

Yeah, I always destroy the base and I never thought there was any good reason to keep it. Only thing, that I can think of, that hasn't somehow backfired is the new cannon on Normandy and it might be just matter of time. I thought Miranda thought the same.

I won't take anything Reaperish on my ME runs, if possible. Shepard's ''new'' body... well, I hope it doesn't turn out too badly.

Modifié par Melrache, 23 juin 2011 - 03:38 .

[MASSEFFECTfanforlife101]

Yeah that base had to be destroyed. I'm not sorry it's gone.

If Cerberus kept it, it would have made things even worse in ME3.

[Vertigo_1]

It would have been nice to have party banter between Shepard and Miranda during the biotic bubble stage where she opens up a little and says things like: "When we first started this I was sure, now I'm not so sure" etc etc

Modifié par Vertigo_1, 23 juin 2011 - 03:48 .

[Ieldra]

PMC65 wrote...
But, since it is a game, probably not. Just looking at the could-a's ... Will keeping or destroying the CB make a difference in ME3? Since Bioware keeps saying that they don't want to "punish" players for their choices, well .. probably not. Just maybe a little road bump.

They can't have it both ways. Either there are meaningful consequences, then the decisions are sometimes better for one side that the other, and there is some "punishment", or there is none, but then there also won't be meaningful consequences. I guess they'll try to make the down- and upsides balances, but since they are often a matter of opinion that won't work for all players.

In only one of my games did I take Miranda with Shepard to the showdown, I've avoided that since. So in three games she didn't quit ... I wonder if the game will have her "quitting" no matter if you took her or not.

I can't imagine she'll be with Cerberus, hunting Shepard. So yes, I expect her not to be with Cerberus except for a possible blackmail scenario. Or, if they want to get fancy, if you haven't earned her loyalty in ME2 she'll be an antagonist in ME3. But even that won't happen IMO. Too many possible inconsistencies with the CB decision. If you leave her on the SR2 she won't resign,if you bring you with her she will, then add loyalty combinations and the CB decision itself. No, I think she won't be with Cerberus no matter what, blackmail the possible exception.

[PMC65]

Td1984 wrote...

@PMC65

Cerberus doesn't have the derelict Reaper anymore. After you take out the mass effect core, it crashes into the planet below. I know they sent a team in earlier, but they didn't escape and were turned into husks. I'm not sure how much data they were able to transmit to TIM (if any).

I would think that they uploaded data ... I just really thought the "to keep or not to keep" fell flat for me overall. I've kept the base on two Shepards and destroyed it on two. It will be interesting to see if it even really matters in ME3.

[jtav]

If this were real I'd call the Council once back on the Normandy and tell them there's something they might want to see. As is, I know what kind of story I'm in. I still like my base keeping Shepards better. The romance Shepard is a base keeper.

[Vertigo_1]

jtav wrote...

If this were real I'd call the Council once back on the Normandy and tell them there's something they might want to see. As is, I know what kind of story I'm in. I still like my base keeping Shepards better. The romance Shepard is a base keeper.

I wonder how they would handle that...they seem reluctant to enter the terminus systems since it would lead to war;
Although it didn't stop them from going to Ilos..

[Ieldra]

@Melrache:
As for Reaper technology, EDI has Reaper technology parts. They were the parts that interfaced with the Reaper IFF and as such, crucial to the mission. Without EDI, the whole mission would have been impossible.
So here it is: Reaper technology saved your ass, and the lives of countless humans along with it.

Thus it has been proven that Reaper technology can indeed be useful in the war, and the reasoning to keep the Collector base intact for that reason is valid.

[PMC65]

Ieldra2 wrote...

PMC65 wrote...
But, since it is a game, probably not. Just looking at the could-a's ... Will keeping or destroying the CB make a difference in ME3? Since Bioware keeps saying that they don't want to "punish" players for their choices, well .. probably not. Just maybe a little road bump.

They can't have it both ways. Either there are meaningful consequences, then the decisions are sometimes better for one side that the other, and there is some "punishment", or there is none, but then there also won't be meaningful consequences. I guess they'll try to make the down- and upsides balances, but since they are often a matter of opinion that won't work for all players.

In only one of my games did I take Miranda with Shepard to the showdown, I've avoided that since. So in three games she didn't quit ... I wonder if the game will have her "quitting" no matter if you took her or not.

I can't imagine she'll be with Cerberus, hunting Shepard. So yes, I expect her not to be with Cerberus except for a possible blackmail scenario. Or, if they want to get fancy, if you haven't earned her loyalty in ME2 she'll be an antagonist in ME3. But even that won't happen IMO. Too many possible inconsistencies with the CB decision. If you leave her on the SR2 she won't resign,if you bring you with her she will, then add loyalty combinations and the CB decision itself. No, I think she won't be with Cerberus no matter what, blackmail the possible exception.

I am looking forward to what the squaddies will be up to as my Shepard starts roaming the galaxy. I was pleased to find Wrex leading the krogan, Ash/Kaidan still with the Alliance (although that meet-up sucked), Liara not stripping or in a merc band, Tali teamleading and using some of Shepards examples .... we won't talk about Garrus .

Now in ME3 it will be the same ... where is Waldo. I both want and don't want to know what each will be doing before I play the game.  

[Bottomroach]

PMC65 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Bottomroach wrote...
So I'm hoping for something like that but on a bigger scale in ME3 - maybe with the heretic geth base, make it so destroying it was the right choice and they turn back to the Reapers if not destroyed. I wouldn't make either option with the CB as the "right" one, rather have the game play out differently without penalizing. How about keeping the base means Cerberus gets the Reaper tech so they are more powerful but let you acquire it for yourself, and destroying the base means Cerberus is less powerful but you don't get the tech either?

That's kind of what I'm hoping for. And that possibility - namely getting the technology - is what Miranda, as the competent operative she is, should have acknowledged. 

To be honest, I never saw what was so "dangerous" about keeping the CB. After all, Cerberus has a derelict REAPER and god only knows what else. 

The CB can show him how to make a reaper which even if he goes over to the reaper side, they already know how to make ... it's their recipe. Now what you may hope is that there is some data that will shed further light on the how & why the reapers do this cycle as well as maybe another vigil hidden in the data. After all, Benezia with her final hoo-ra put important data on a disc. A prothean at the early stages may have done the same.

But, since it is a game, probably not. Just looking at the could-a's ... Will keeping or destroying the CB make a difference in ME3? Since Bioware keeps saying that they don't want to "punish" players for their choices, well .. probably not. Just maybe a little road bump. 

In only one of my games did I take Miranda with Shepard to the showdown, I've avoided that since. So in three games she didn't quit ... I wonder if the game will have her "quitting" no matter if you took her or not.  

Bioware said that ME1 and ME2 choices will greatly affect ME3, and since they said there won't be penalizing, I'm seeing potential for missions being vastly different based on previous decisions rather than the only difference being conversation options. So on certain missions you would have a different path or even a different objective based on your decision about the Rachni queen/heretic Geth ship/Quarian-Geth conflict/CB or any other major decision.

This is something I noticed in Zaeed's loyalty mission when you have to decide to save the rafinery workers or pursue Vido, not just the ending but also the part right after your decision where you take a different path based on Paragon/Renegade choice.

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...
If this were real I'd call the Council once back on the Normandy and tell them there's something they might want to see. As is, I know what kind of story I'm in. I still like my base keeping Shepards better. The romance Shepard is a base keeper.

This. So very much. Given the situation, I can't see any reason why Shepard, keeping the base, is forced to leave it to one of the most questionable groups in the galaxy. I found that very annoying.