20 réponses à ce sujet

[shadowreflexion]

We all know that death is going to be imminent. We can safely assume that when concerning our team, someone or a few will die. Take the VS. He/she escaped death because of our actions and if I assume that death is coming (ala Final Destination) then we just prolonged it. With so many situations in our control, there's bound to be things that we have no control over. But how will you make the choice? Does a person or race live because of the moral choice or does the person or race die because of the tactical choice? 

[Raiil]

Moral choice for my canon Shep, although how big the tactical difference would be, I have no idea.

But she's also selfish, and friends come first.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

I think a certain something summed it up perfectly in the first game.
"You live... because we allow it, you will die, because we demand it."


As for player choices... I would love for at least one of them to be akin to this trailer for the first game.

[nhsk]

My canon shep will base decisions on how many lives can be saved.

If I can save a relatively few civilians by sacrificing a crew mate my crew mate gets to live as it wouldn't be a good tactic to waste firepower on such scale, but lets say I can help a good 10k civilians by sacrifcing Tali I will.

Same goes for military forces if we get any influence on them, if the gain is small by their sacrifice I would rather save them for later where they might be used better.

If we get a Virmire Vega is going first, if we can. Otherwise I will sacrifice Tali if we can, then VS, then Liara, then Garrus...

Come to think of it, I can save a 100 civilians by sacrificing Tali at least she was worth something.

[Repearized Miranda]

Given your question - this intelligently masking the P/R debate - (I'm kidding, but I think it is); you could easily script-the-flip as thus:

Does a person or race live because of the tactical choice or does the person or race die because of the moral choice?

Cerberus is the perfect example! Everybody is hating on them because they're looking at it from a moral viewpoint. (ie: Cerberus has no morals) IOW, they see things tactfully. Though they screwed up many atime, it does not change this.

Then you have the Alliance/Council whom are of ridiculously high morale and because of this, they lack in tactical behavior. They've screwed up as much as Cerberus, but with their sense of morale (pride), it's not surprising they'll sit back and look stupid!

Cerberus is no better than the Council/Alliance, but depending on who's side you're on, they may actually be the lesser of two evils!

I'm not necessarily "Pro-Cerberus," but I can't help if the "tactician" in me rears itself!!

Modifié par Repearized Miranda, 25 juin 2011 - 09:57 .

[gunswordfist]

Favorites. I am throwing VS into the fire when the time comes.

[BatmanPWNS]

If so then Vega will get first class.

[Captain Crash]

No skirting round the hard decisions in ME3. I think your going to face some really difficult situations where you know sacrifice is going to happen. Just who is your choice. Virmire on a larger scale but with plenty of twists and turns.

[Ryzaki]

If Liara's killabl I'm killing her. Then maybe The VS, then Tali. After that I'm gonna be stuck.

[Raiil]

I'm wondering how much leeway we'll get in choosing. Because I have my own priority list of who I'd be willing to sacrifice- the VS at the top and Thane, Legion and Garrus at the bottom, but somehow I'm doubting we're going to have all the options.

[J. Finley]

If we're faced with a choice like this again, I don't think I can pass up choosing the VS as the sacrifice. If we deprive them of the death they want AGAIN, I don't think they'll be too happy with you.

[Repearized Miranda]

Valentia X wrote...

I'm wondering how much leeway we'll get in choosing. Because I have my own priority list of who I'd be willing to sacrifice- the VS at the top and Thane, Legion and Garrus at the bottom, but somehow I'm doubting we're going to have all the options.

Same here. (You already know which two I'm definitely saving - whether they are, remains to be seen)

I would like some leeway as well, but not too much. I would also like it to be harder to achieve such. (Do/Don't do such, character dies. ME2. SM!) However, I'm not opposed to having done everything possible (and I mean everything) and someone still dies. This is a war and it's the most realistic way to handle it - imo.

[VegasVance]

If need be and if I can choose this is how it will go.
Vega
Garrus
Ash
Tali
Joker
Anderson
Liara
Wrex
Legion

In that order, they know what is at stake. That is why I'm saving the leader of the Krogan and the only Geth we've been able to talk to for last. They are the most valuable.

[danteliveson]

Anyone from ME2 except for Garrus & Tali.

[DoNotIngest]

danteliveson wrote...

Anyone from ME2 except for Garrus & Tali.

Mordin may be an old man, but he's still pretty cool. Almost as cool, even. He sings!

[mineralica]

Tactics first, morality second.

If I would be sure Cerberus won't s***w up Collectors base, I'd keep it. I spared Rachni queen keeping in mind one day Council and Alliance may turn their backs on Shepard and he'll need a baskup ally.

My main Paragon just doesn't expose true motives to press

And for sacrifices - I'm extremely happy tactics (most used in squad) and morality (LI) chose the same person on Virmire. If Kaidan will be as useful n ME3 as Miranda was in ME2, tactics and morality will agree again. My other Shepards seems to not have such excuse... and most of them will still choose trusting to brain, no heart

[atheelogos]

shadowreflexion wrote...

We all know that death is going to be imminent. We can safely assume that when concerning our team, someone or a few will die. Take the VS. He/she escaped death because of our actions and if I assume that death is coming (ala Final Destination) then we just prolonged it. With so many situations in our control, there's bound to be things that we have no control over. But how will you make the choice? Does a person or race live because of the moral choice or does the person or race die because of the tactical choice? 

Well I tend to lean towards the tactical choice. Its just logical.

For example I let the council die because I wasn't sure I could save them and take Sovereign down with the left over ships. It made more sense to save every last ship for the real fight.

Modifié par atheelogos, 25 juin 2011 - 11:45 .

[Computer_God91]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...

I think a certain something summed it up perfectly in the first game.
"You live... because we allow it, you will die, because we demand it."


As for player choices... I would love for at least one of them to be akin to this trailer for the first game.

Oh I love that trailer so much. What happened to you Mass Effect? Where have you gone?

Seriously I want something like that to happen cause that would be seriously epic. Especially that part with the mako!!!!! I miss dropping in the mako.

Ok, enough Fanboying for now....

[TomY90]

I can imagine some situation might occur where you decide who lives and dies or even an entire race lives or dies.

they will make it that every decision has consequences.

[danteliveson]

DoNotIngest wrote...

danteliveson wrote...

Anyone from ME2 except for Garrus & Tali.

Mordin may be an old man, but he's still pretty cool. Almost as cool, even. He sings!

Damn, totally forgot about Mordin.