28 réponses à ce sujet

[Henrique]

I heard she is there but i only see an woman colonist in her place

[Repzik]

She's dead Jim.

[sterling_archer]

Repzik wrote...

She's dead Jim.

But that's impossible

[Slayer299]

Nope. She's dead along with everyone else who can die in ME.

Modifié par Slayer299, 14 juin 2011 - 03:01 .

[Sebby]

sterling_archer wrote...

Repzik wrote...

She's dead Jim.

But that's impossible

My extreme Renegon who busted two caps in her ass begs to differ.

[Unata]

If you didn't play through ME1 and kept her alive, the default is dead in ME2

[GuardianAngel470]

By far one of the worst forced-choices I've heard about in the PS3 and default new game. I've heard of hardline Renegades who felt bad killing her. Killing Shiala is like attacking mouse; completely senseless violence.

[Dean_the_Young]

Yes. Because killing someone who willingly joined a madman on a campaign that razed multiple human colonies on the defense of 'well, we hoped to make him nicer eventually,' is senseless.

[Jagri]

Evidently Shiala is considered a threat.

Appearently within the range of risk assessment and logic one doesn't factor in that Shiala was betrayed and left to be devoured by a plant. That she was able to break the effects of indoctrination and give vital intelligence to Shepard. Then after it was all said and done was willing to be excuted on the spot or offer her support in undoing the damage she did to a colony.

Hell the renegade action is just stupid at this point... The proper renegade action would have been to ship her off to a lab to be dissected to find out how she broke the effects of indoctrination along with a few creeper pods.

[Henrique]

This sucks, shame they will never port ME1 to PS3, so i'm left with no damn choice

[ThePwener]

Henrique wrote...

This sucks, shame they will never port ME1 to PS3, so i'm left with no damn choice

Pretty much, yeah. Conrad is dead/disappeared too. They should have made a full comic with every choice in ME1 and sell it for 1600 ($20).

[Rip504]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yes. Because killing someone who willingly joined a madman on a campaign that razed multiple human colonies on the defense of 'well, we hoped to make him nicer eventually,' is senseless.

I hate to admit it,but I do agree. Plus execution style kills are the best type of kill. IMO.

It didn't bother me she was not in ME2 on PS3. ME1 is one of the advantages to 360 and PC. ME1!...

Also she had no "real" problem with what she did. At that moment in time she realizes Shepard is her judge and jury.
Shiala could be lying in an attempt to warn others of Shepard's action. We do not know she is truly helping until ME2.

But my main reason for killing her(when I did,not always.) as I already stated is "execution style kills are the best type of kill. IMO..

Killing people is cool.!.

[Xeranx]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yes. Because killing someone who willingly joined a madman on a campaign that razed multiple human colonies on the defense of 'well, we hoped to make him nicer eventually,' is senseless.

Benezia offers insight as to what she was trying to do.  Matriarchs are honored for their wisdom.  Shiala is Benezia's acolyte and believes in the cause of her elder and follows her as a result.  It's the case of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons on both their parts. 

In any case, if you go through Noveria prior to going to Feros there's very little, in my mind, reason for you to execute Shiala.  And, that execution was down right evil.

[Sebby]

Xeranx wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yes. Because killing someone who willingly joined a madman on a campaign that razed multiple human colonies on the defense of 'well, we hoped to make him nicer eventually,' is senseless.

Benezia offers insight as to what she was trying to do.  Matriarchs are honored for their wisdom.  Shiala is Benezia's acolyte and believes in the cause of her elder and follows her as a result.  It's the case of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons on both their parts. 

In any case, if you go through Noveria prior to going to Feros there's very little, in my mind, reason for you to execute Shiala.  And, that execution was down right evil.

The ideal Renegade choice would have been to arrest Shiala and have her serve hard time in San Quentin but the game doesn't give us that option, so two shots to the head it is.

[Confused-Shepard]

Bioware turned all PS3 Sheps into heartless killers. No Shiala, No Gianna, No Virmire Asari scientist

[Barquiel]

Seboist wrote...

The ideal Renegade choice would have been to arrest Shiala and have her serve hard time in San Quentin but the game doesn't give us that option, so two shots to the head it is.

No court would convict her (as we see ME2).

[Dean_the_Young]

Xeranx wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yes. Because killing someone who willingly joined a madman on a campaign that razed multiple human colonies on the defense of 'well, we hoped to make him nicer eventually,' is senseless.

Benezia offers insight as to what she was trying to do.  Matriarchs are honored for their wisdom.  Shiala is Benezia's acolyte and believes in the cause of her elder and follows her as a result.  It's the case of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons on both their parts. 

Quite frankly, getting on board with a genocidal campaign 'for the right reasons' is not much of a mitigating factor. A willing criminal conspirator with good intentions is still a criminal conspirator.

In any case, if you go through Noveria prior to going to Feros there's very little, in my mind, reason for you to execute Shiala.

Why would you believe people who claim that they haven't been under their own control right up until the point you have them at gunpoint?

Even children soon learn that imaginary friends making them do something isn't a convincing excuse.


Now, after Virmire, when Indoctrination is proven, there might be a case... but then, you don't know that she isn't still Indoctrinated, because the only person saying that she isn't is, well, herself. 'I am not a liar.'

And, that execution was down right evil.

Or, alternatively, it was justice delivered to a criminal conspirator who helped a madman massacre thousands, if not millions, of innocents.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 24 juin 2011 - 02:15 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Seboist wrote...

The ideal Renegade choice would have been to arrest Shiala and have her serve hard time in San Quentin but the game doesn't give us that option, so two shots to the head it is.

Actually, I'd argue that forcing her to spend time and service in support of the colony would be another aspect of Renegade: the Human domination and utilization of an alien.

[naledgeborn]

Killing Shiala is an unnecessary waste. Shepard melded with her not two minutes prior to her execution. S/He'd have know her intentions and motivations after that experience. Since she explicitly says that she wants to rebuild Zhu's Hope, we as the players, know what those intentions are. Shepard, Renegade or Paragon, never contested with that claim, so it must be true. Killing Shiala is douchebaggery at it's lowest. Like Seboitst said the real Renegade option in that scenario would be to secure her for an Alliance Court. It would be tough to prove to judge and jury that her crimes weren't of a xenophobic nature without Shepard's testimony.

[Xeranx]

naledgeborn wrote...

Killing Shiala is an unnecessary waste. Shepard melded with her not two minutes prior to her execution. S/He'd have know her intentions and motivations after that experience. Since she explicitly says that she wants to rebuild Zhu's Hope, we as the players, know what those intentions are. Shepard, Renegade or Paragon, never contested with that claim, so it must be true. Killing Shiala is douchebaggery at it's lowest. Like Seboitst said the real Renegade option in that scenario would be to secure her for an Alliance Court. It would be tough to prove to judge and jury that her crimes weren't of a xenophobic nature without Shepard's testimony.

Is that true?  According to the wiki the transfer of memories happens during a romantic encounter.  I don't know if that's in ME1's codex or not.  If so then Shiala transferring the cipher is one way.  In fact, Liara accessed Shepard's cipher and memories of the images from the beacon and he/she didn't know what they meant until told. 

Unfortunately that means Shepard didn't know what her motivations were.  If the transfer occurred between them no matter what, then it would really make Shepard the lowest of the low.  I'm still of the opinion that the execution done is evil.  Just going through that once leaves a bad taste in my mouth and really makes me feel like less of a human being.

[Xeranx]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yes. Because killing someone who willingly joined a madman on a campaign that razed multiple human colonies on the defense of 'well, we hoped to make him nicer eventually,' is senseless.

Benezia offers insight as to what she was trying to do.  Matriarchs are honored for their wisdom.  Shiala is Benezia's acolyte and believes in the cause of her elder and follows her as a result.  It's the case of doing the wrong thing for the right reasons on both their parts. 

Quite frankly, getting on board with a genocidal campaign 'for the right reasons' is not much of a mitigating factor. A willing criminal conspirator with good intentions is still a criminal conspirator.

In any case, if you go through Noveria prior to going to Feros there's very little, in my mind, reason for you to execute Shiala.

Why would you believe people who claim that they haven't been under their own control right up until the point you have them at gunpoint?

Even children soon learn that imaginary friends making them do something isn't a convincing excuse.


Now, after Virmire, when Indoctrination is proven, there might be a case... but then, you don't know that she isn't still Indoctrinated, because the only person saying that she isn't is, well, herself. 'I am not a liar.'

And, that execution was down right evil.

Or, alternatively, it was justice delivered to a criminal conspirator who helped a madman massacre thousands, if not millions, of innocents.

To get on board the campaign is to support it from my pov.  Benezia's statements say she didn't support his views.  Whether that's true or not, only she knows and she died with that knowledge.  I'm also very sure she didn't expect Shiala to be free.  So I'm willing to believe she was telling the truth because when she's gone, and she knew she wasn't going to make it, there would be no support for Saren after her.

But you're right.  Going to Feros after Virmire would've been a better scenario as you would have had Rana's explanations about indoctrination.  Still on Feros you have two versions of Shiala to contend with before her death.  The first is a clone who's bent on killing you because the Thorian refuses to make any deals with you.  The next, as stated earlier, melds with you to give you the cipher.  Given that situation, knowing what the melding process is through Liara (if you got her first) and learning that an Asari can transfer knowledge to you as well as extract it, it makes little sense for Shepard to perform an execution of someone who could have also destroyed him from the inside seeing as he/she still is ignorant of Asari and all they can do.  Don't know if that sentence was grammatically correct, but it seems ok.  Not that I'm a stickler for grammatical correctness, but I'd rather not write something to confuse someone.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xeranx wrote...

To get on board the campaign is to support it from my pov.  Benezia's statements say she didn't support his views.  Whether that's true or not, only she knows and she died with that knowledge.  I'm also very sure she didn't expect Shiala to be free.  So I'm willing to believe she was telling the truth because when she's gone, and she knew she wasn't going to make it, there would be no support for Saren after her.

No, Benezia's defense was that she didn't share his views, but she was going to support him anyways in hopes that he might come to trust her enough to allow her to influence him. Benezia's own personal defense that, after choosing to join him, she was controlled by his choice is fundamentally indistinguishable from any self-righteous defense to salvage some part of her legacy.

But you're right.  Going to Feros after Virmire would've been a better scenario as you would have had Rana's explanations about indoctrination.  Still on Feros you have two versions of Shiala to contend with before her death.  The first is a clone who's bent on killing you because the Thorian refuses to make any deals with you.  The next, as stated earlier, melds with you to give you the cipher.  Given that situation, knowing what the melding process is through Liara (if you got her first) and learning that an Asari can transfer knowledge to you as well as extract it, it makes little sense for Shepard to perform an execution of someone who could have also destroyed him from the inside seeing as he/she still is ignorant of Asari and all they can do.  Don't know if that sentence was grammatically correct, but it seems ok.  Not that I'm a stickler for grammatical correctness, but I'd rather not write something to confuse someone.

Except there are a few certain problems with that argument: that Shepard was getting anything but the Cipher from Shiala being one of them. Asari melding has never been all-encompasing telepathy, nor has it ever been presented as preventing deception.

Nor has melding (aside from an Ardat Yakshi) ever been presented as even potentially a dangerous thing. Shiala could not 'destroy Shepard from the inside out': that's inventing capabilities that have never even been suggested in order to support. Nor would Shiala necessarily do such a thing even if that capability did exist: if Shiala is cooperating and telling a sob story in order to save her own skin, killing Shepard while giving him something that could be potentially worth his life while two heavily armed squad mates are watching would not help her survive.

There's also the fact that Thorian control does not prove control by Saren or Sovereign: though Shepard has evidence of the Thorian's ability for control, the existence of one form of control does not prove the existence or application of another. The 'Thorian controlled' and 'not Thorian controlled' categories doesn't mean that 'not Thorian controlled' persons are good.

[Xeranx]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

To get on board the campaign is to support it from my pov.  Benezia's statements say she didn't support his views.  Whether that's true or not, only she knows and she died with that knowledge.  I'm also very sure she didn't expect Shiala to be free.  So I'm willing to believe she was telling the truth because when she's gone, and she knew she wasn't going to make it, there would be no support for Saren after her.

No, Benezia's defense was that she didn't share his views, but she was going to support him anyways in hopes that he might come to trust her enough to allow her to influence him. Benezia's own personal defense that, after choosing to join him, she was controlled by his choice is fundamentally indistinguishable from any self-righteous defense to salvage some part of her legacy.

I stand corrected.  It's been a while since I've played through the first game.  Just started a new run.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

But you're right.  Going to Feros after Virmire would've been a better scenario as you would have had Rana's explanations about indoctrination.  Still on Feros you have two versions of Shiala to contend with before her death.  The first is a clone who's bent on killing you because the Thorian refuses to make any deals with you.  The next, as stated earlier, melds with you to give you the cipher.  Given that situation, knowing what the melding process is through Liara (if you got her first) and learning that an Asari can transfer knowledge to you as well as extract it, it makes little sense for Shepard to perform an execution of someone who could have also destroyed him from the inside seeing as he/she still is ignorant of Asari and all they can do.  Don't know if that sentence was grammatically correct, but it seems ok.  Not that I'm a stickler for grammatical correctness, but I'd rather not write something to confuse someone.

Except there are a few certain problems with that argument: that Shepard was getting anything but the Cipher from Shiala being one of them. Asari melding has never been all-encompasing telepathy, nor has it ever been presented as preventing deception.

Nor has melding (aside from an Ardat Yakshi) ever been presented as even potentially a dangerous thing. Shiala could not 'destroy Shepard from the inside out': that's inventing capabilities that have never even been suggested in order to support. Nor would Shiala necessarily do such a thing even if that capability did exist: if Shiala is cooperating and telling a sob story in order to save her own skin, killing Shepard while giving him something that could be potentially worth his life while two heavily armed squad mates are watching would not help her survive.

There's also the fact that Thorian control does not prove control by Saren or Sovereign: though Shepard has evidence of the Thorian's ability for control, the existence of one form of control does not prove the existence or application of another. The 'Thorian controlled' and 'not Thorian controlled' categories doesn't mean that 'not Thorian controlled' persons are good.

I'm not trying to invent anything.  I could have explained that bit better, but I put in bold your statement and the thought process Shepard could have.

And Shiala could have done anything she wanted to at that point if she intended to kill Shepard.  She was given enough time to regain her bearings.  Shepard's weapons along with companions were holstered in that scene.  Let's say they weren't.  Killing Shepard at that point would be enough of a distraction considering we don't know the capabilities of one Asari commando.  If each clone was enough of a worry for, potentially, three space marines, what would the actual article be capable of?

I'm not sure about what you're saying here.  Initially I was thinking you were saying, "Thorian control does not prove" no "control by Saren or Sovereign", but it doesn't look that way further on.  We are in agreement that 'Thorian control doesn't prove the existence or application of' control by Saren or Sovereign.  And yes, being controlled and then released from control doesn't mean that the person is good, but at the same time it doesn't mean that person is bad. 

As I said, it would be pretty senseless to let someone get close enough to do something with your mind when a few minutes earlier there were copies of her trying to kill you.  That bit doesn't make sense, but if you trusted her enough to implant something in your mind, why can you not trust her to make good on her other promises?  It's tantamount to accepting a ride home after dinner with someone who cooked for you and also happened to be someone you had a heated brawl with moments before the cooking started.  If that makes sense.

Modifié par Xeranx, 24 juin 2011 - 04:32 .

[I AM KROGAAANNN]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yes. Because killing someone who willingly joined a madman on a campaign that razed multiple human colonies on the defense of 'well, we hoped to make him nicer eventually,' is senseless.

I've long ago lost the will to correct people online. I will leave you to bask in your ignorance.