1476 réponses à ce sujet

[ChaplainTappman]

Quething wrote...

I don't think Garrus' presence means much. His devotion to Shepard is a known fact to more folks than just the Shadow Broker. Shep can convince him to abandon his principles, his driving force and his most tightly-held deeply-sworn promises to the people he was taught his entire life that he's wholly responsible for. Twice. And he doesn't even get mad for more than five minutes. This is not someone who's going to examine the idea of "sign on with the enemy" too terribly carefully, provided Shepard is sincere enough in endorsing it. Which the VS would be aware of.

That's a fair point, though throughout ME1 Garrus makes regular remarks to the effect of being a proud turian, and taking down Saren to restore the good name of turians, etc. In ME1, Garrus' philosophy on due process is malleable, but not his loyalty to his people. I have a hard time imagining Garrus being willing to buy into a philosophy that means slavery or extinction for the turian race, regardless of who's selling it. And the VS only knows Garrus in ME1; he's far more malleable and less assured in ME2. Shepard could probably persuade ME2 Garrus to buy into working full bore for Cerberus, but not the ME1 iteration.

I still think the VS jumps to the conclusion that Shepard's now effectively a Cerberus agent. To me, if I were in the VS's shoes, I'd be shocked and upset, sure. But my first reaction would be to try and understand the situation. Get the full picture. Especially if the person or people I'm encountering are people I've loved and trusted and respected. My first thought would be along the lines of "there's something going on I'm not seeing."

[Siansonea]

ChaplainTappman wrote...
*snip*I think you're kind of calling the kettle black. You're chastising people for not attempting to understand the VS's point of view. But it seems like you're dismissing Shepard's (that is, our) point/points of view. I understand the VS being hurt, being angry, being suspicious. I would be too in their situation. But Shepard, the players - we- have a right to be upset as well. The VS, especially Kaidan, says some incredibly hurtful things on Horizon, and doesn't attempt to understand the situation at hand. He/she simply gets angry, leaps to a conclusion, and leaves. A human being cannot be expected to always be okay with that, even if we understand it.

"You turned your back on everything we stood for."
"I know where my loyalty lies. I'm an Alliance soldier. Always will be."

...is "incredibly hurtful"? Truly? What sheltered lives you've all led if THIS is "incredibly hurtful". And not to mention, being "hurt" by what one character says to another character in a video game is kind of a symptom of the very thing I'm talking about—over-identification with the player character to the exclusion of the other characters.

And yes, above all else, let's not jump to conclusions. I hope you all remember this when you catch your wife in bed with another man. Now, let's not jump to conclusions! This is your wife. You trust her. You go way back. This man might have rescued her from some great harm, and she may have invited him over to thank him with a nice dinner or something. There were wine glasses in the sink, that certainly fits the scenario. Maybe her car wouldn't start, and he was forced to stay the night. That would explain why they're both still at the house. And maybe the power went out at some point, and the air conditioning wasn't working as a result. That would certainly explain why they're both naked. So yes, let's not jump to ANY conclusions here, because she might have a very good reason for being in bed with this man.

Like I said, I understand where the VS is coming from. I wish they'd listen and take the time to understand what's actually going on, but I mostly understand their reaction. I expect and require no act of contrition from Ash. But Kaidan called my integrity into question. He called me a traitor to the Alliance and to the Council. Even more frustrating is that Kaidan is neither stupid nor naive. He understands the reality of the galaxy; that things aren't always black and white. That sometimes you have to do things, deal with people you wouldn't in a perfect world. He knows that, and still he immediately questions by loyalty and my integrity. Am I supposed to be cool with that? Just let him back on my ship, back in my crew, without any issue? No. Absolutely not. He clearly doesn't trust me, and that means I can't trust him to watch my back.

Kaidan called your integrity into question. Because your integrity is now IN question. When you decided to work for Cerberus, your integrity got called into question. Stimulus, response. It's a natural order of events. If you expect your integrity to be inviolable, don't do questionable things. It seems pretty simple to me.

And Kaidan does understand that things aren't black and white. Which is why he simply left, and wished Shepard good luck. Which is why he didn't pull a Samara and go all Justicar on their asses. Kaidan expressed his extreme concern about the turn of events, warned Shepard of trusting Cerberus too much, and then left Shepard to do what she needed to do. How very unreasonable of him. And why should he trust you, darling? If you'd jump into bed with people who have killed and tortured Alliance soldiers, what's to stop you from stabbing HIM in the back if it suited your view of "the greater good". You're asking for WAY too much indulgence here if you expect someone to trust you implicitly in this situation. After two years of believing you were dead, when you're clearly not dead, and clearly never were dead (because people don't just come back to life after being dead for an extended period of time, you know). So yeah, if your integrity was so precious to you, I think you would have done or said some things differently, Shepard.

Ever notice that when people talk about Shepard, they use the first person form?

For what it's worth, I do understand Shepard's point of view. She knows things the VS doesn't. She has to do things the VS doesn't understand, because time is short and the stakes are too high. Too bad she didn't, like, explain that properly.

And then there's Anderson. Good ol' bulletproof Anderson. The man who plays his cards so close to his chest that even after he finds out that Shepard is alive, that she's working with Cerberus, and that Cerberus claims the Collectors are behind the colony abductions, he does NOT actually tell his operative any of this. His operative who is INVESTIGATING CERBERUS and the missing colonies. Instead, Anderson stonewalls them. Did Anderson just not want to spoil the surprise when Kaidan inevitably ran into Shepard? Really Anderson, what IS your agenda?

Modifié par Siansonea II, 13 août 2011 - 05:45 .

[Quething]

ChaplainTappman wrote...

That's a fair point, though throughout ME1 Garrus makes regular remarks to the effect of being a proud turian, and taking down Saren to restore the good name of turians, etc. In ME1, Garrus' philosophy on due process is malleable, but not his loyalty to his people. I have a hard time imagining Garrus being willing to buy into a philosophy that means slavery or extinction for the turian race, regardless of who's selling it. And the VS only knows Garrus in ME1; he's far more malleable and less assured in ME2. Shepard could probably persuade ME2 Garrus to buy into working full bore for Cerberus, but not the ME1 iteration.

I still think the VS jumps to the conclusion that Shepard's now effectively a Cerberus agent. To me, if I were in the VS's shoes, I'd be shocked and upset, sure. But my first reaction would be to try and understand the situation. Get the full picture. Especially if the person or people I'm encountering are people I've loved and trusted and respected. My first thought would be along the lines of "there's something going on I'm not seeing."

Well, and I think that's where the problem is. I don't think Ashley's would be; she burns hot and quick and reacts from the heart, and Shep* walking up with Cerberus logos and a smile is going to gut her. I wouldn't say that Shep means more to her than to Kaidan, but Shep is more unique in Ashley's life than in Kaidan's; she'd pretty much never had anyone outside her family have her back before. And her personal identity and sense of both self and self-worth is bound up really strongly in being part of the Alliance. So Shep's betrayal, both the (apparent) personal one and (actual) professional one, is stealing something huge from her. I can't really think of a better way to shatter her world, and I pretty much expect her to see red. She's not the kind of person who's first thought when bleeding is "what hit me and why," it's just "hit back." I can't hold Horizon against her; she's acting in-character and it's a character I happen to like.

Kaidan, on the other hand, is a much more thoughtful person, who's always trying to see both sides of things and look past his own perspective to get the whole picture. He comes from a very balanced, Zen sort of perspective to begin with, and the life lesson that's ruled him since Brain Camp is to never let his passions override his reason or stop him from thinking things through. It's very out of character for him to be satisfied with Shepard's non-answers or distracted from the weirdness of the situation by his own turmoil. It seems very much like the usual "just copypasta Ashley's lines/role/animations/armor to Kaidan, no one will notice" thing, even above and beyond the obvious attempt to push players toward Cerberus and new ME2 love interests. So, I can't really hold it against him, either, because I can't fathom that he'd actually act that way.

Of course, by the same token, my Sheps aren't incoherent, cruel imbeciles, so count me in the camp who doesn't hold anything on Horizon against anyone but the writers.

*The "treated the crew well and was a friend or lover in ME1" Shep that the game takes as a default, anyway. That the writers didn't accomodate an asstastic!Shep is, yes, a problem here, but it's a problem everywhere in ME2 and thus I can't consider it a factor in this argument in good faith.

Modifié par Quething, 13 août 2011 - 06:05 .

[ChaplainTappman]

Siansonea II wrote...

"You turned your back on everything we stood for."
"I know where my loyalty lies. I'm an Alliance soldier. Always will be."

...is "incredibly hurtful"? Truly? What sheltered lives you've all led if THIS is "incredibly hurtful". And not to mention, being "hurt" by what one character says to another character in a video game is kind of a symptom of the very thing I'm talking about—over-identification with the player character to the exclusion of the other characters.

Why wouldn't people identify with the character that, you know, we're playing? You're right, that doens't make any sense. Why would we identify with the character that was created to be us?

Is it hurtful in the real world? No, I'm not personally, as a real human being, injured in any way by that. But as Shepard? Yes. You're telling me that you'd be perfectly okay if a close friend of yours called you a traitor? Maybe it's because I've taken an oath of service that I take seriously, but I would be pissed off and, yes, hurt that someone I trusted and in turn believed trusted me would believe me capable of betraying that oath.

And yes, above all else, let's not jump to conclusions. I hope you all remember this when you catch your wife in bed with another man. Now, let's not jump to conclusions! This is your wife. You trust her. You go way back. This man might have rescued her from some great harm, and she may have invited him over to thank him with a nice dinner or something. There were wine glasses in the sink, that certainly fits the scenario. Maybe her car wouldn't start, and he was forced to stay the night. That would explain why they're both still at the house. And maybe the power went out at some point, and the air conditioning wasn't working as a result. That would certainly explain why they're both naked. So yes, let's not jump to ANY conclusions here, because she might have a very good reason for being in bed with this man.

An amusing analogy. But inaccurate. If Kaidain came across Shepard torturing people, or at a Terra Firma rally extolling the great work Cerberus is doing fighting the evil alien hordes, then your comparison would be apt. Horizon is more akin to me seeing my imaginary wife at dinner with another man. Depending on the circumstances I might be upset; but I'd ask my wife well before I assumed she was cheating on me. Because I trust her.

Kaidan called your integrity into question. Because your integrity is now IN question. When you decided to work for Cerberus, your integrity got called into question. Stimulus, response. It's a natural order of events. If you expect your integrity to be inviolable, don't do questionable things. It seems pretty simple to me.

And Kaidan does understand that things aren't black and white. Which is why he simply left, and wished Shepard good luck. Which is why he didn't pull a Samara and go all Justicar on their asses. Kaidan expressed his extreme concern about the turn of events, warned Shepard of trusting Cerberus too much, and then left Shepard to do what she needed to do. How very unreasonable of him. And why should he trust you, darling? If you'd jump into bed with people who have killed and tortured Alliance soldiers, what's to stop you from stabbing HIM in the back if it suited your view of "the greater good". You're asking for WAY too much indulgence here if you expect someone to trust you implicitly in this situation. After two years of believing you were dead, when you're clearly not dead, and clearly never were dead (because people don't just come back to life after being dead for an extended period of time, you know). So yeah, if your integrity was so precious to you, I think you would have done or said some things differently, Shepard.

Before I say this next bit, I want to make this clear: I am not saying this to leverage moral high ground, I am not saying this to impress. I am bringing this up because I have thought about this in a context not limited to a video game.

I recently enlisted as a soldier in the US Army. Less than a year from now I will be serving as an infantry soldier. I plan to join Special Forces, and later, if I'm lucky and good enough, the Tier 1 unit colloquially known as Delta Force. These units are occasionally called to act in a manner, and allign themselves with individuals, not entirely in line with the moral bearing of a soldier. But they do these things, they work with these people, for the greater good. No one would think to call them traitors, least of all fellow soldiers, and especially not their friends. So no, I'm not asking for too much indulgence; I am asking him to grant me the trust fellow soldiers should place in one another. 

Ever notice that when people talk about Shepard, they use the first person form?

Maybe that's because we ARE Shepard? Shepard is a tabula rasa for us to fill. Most of us choose to treat at least one Shepard as us.

For what it's worth, I do understand Shepard's point of view. She knows things the VS doesn't. She has to do things the VS doesn't understand, because time is short and the stakes are too high. Too bad she didn't, like, explain that properly.

Yeah, it's too bad the VS doesn't leave before asking any questions.

And then there's Anderson. Good ol' bulletproof Anderson. The man who plays his cards so close to his chest that even after he finds out that Shepard is alive, that she's working with Cerberus, and that Cerberus claims the Collectors are behind the colony abductions, he does NOT actually tell his operative any of this. His operative who is INVESTIGATING CERBERUS and the missing colonies. Instead, Anderson stonewalls them. Did Anderson just not want to spoil the surprise when Kaidan inevitably ran into Shepard? Really Anderson, what IS your agenda?

For what it's worth, I agree with you here, though I'm not sure what the point of bringing this up was. I never really understood why Anderson would stonewall the VS, either.

Modifié par ChaplainTappman, 13 août 2011 - 06:23 .

[paul165]

>>I hope you all remember this when you catch your wife in bed with another man.<<

Yes because those situations are totally identical /sarcasm
How dare Shepard wear the wrong colour uniform when saving your life - talk about complaining about rescues you don't like!

>>Which is why he didn't pull a Samara and go all Justicar on their asses. <<

Well that and being outnumbered three to one....

You realise this paragraph rather contradicts other points raised in the VS' defense right?

If the VS is aware that things are not black and white they show no indication in that conversation and also contradicts the central thrust of the argument made in this thread that from the VS' point of view Cerberus=evil no ifs, buts or maybes which is about as black and white as you can get.

If the VS believes Shepard faked their death then they also logically believe that Shepard knowing killed at least 20 of their crew in which case the VS shouldn't be talking to Shepard they should be fleeing screaming or trying to kill Shepard before they kill one more former crewmate.

The VS does neither and shows no concern over the extremely high probability that this hypothetical Cerberus!Shepard would kill them. So as I raised earlier:

>>But there is no evidence the VS ever considers they are in danger so either they accept Shepard died and they should have questions about the walking around and breathing -clone? android? plastic surgery?......Or they trust Shepard wouldn't kill them despite 'betraying everything they stood for'. Bare in mind this is Commander 'kill everything in my way' Shepard.<<

>>Too bad she didn't, like, explain that properly.<<

Too bad the VS didn't, like, ask either - no-one walks away covered in glory but some of the statements made in the VS' defense are going beyond interpreting the scene favourably into reading things that simply aren't there.

And once more I do not require trust unconditional or otherwise - I require that the VS does their job and investigate.

[ChaplainTappman]

Quething wrote...

Well, and I think that's where the problem is. I don't think Ashley's would be; she burns hot and quick and reacts from the heart, and Shep* walking up with Cerberus logos and a smile is going to gut her. I wouldn't say that Shep means more to her than to Kaidan, but Shep is more unique in Ashley's life than in Kaidan's; she'd pretty much never had anyone outside her family have her back before. And her personal identity and sense of both self and self-worth is bound up really strongly in being part of the Alliance. So Shep's betrayal, both the (apparent) personal one and (actual) professional one, is stealing something huge from her. I can't really think of a better way to shatter her world, and I pretty much expect her to see red. She's not the kind of person who's first thought when bleeding is "what hit me and why," it's just "hit back." I can't hold Horizon against her; she's acting in-character and it's a character I happen to like.

Kaidan, on the other hand, is a much more thoughtful person, who's always trying to see both sides of things and look past his own perspective to get the whole picture. He comes from a very balanced, Zen sort of perspective to begin with, and the life lesson that's ruled him since Brain Camp is to never let his passions override his reason or stop him from thinking things through. It's very out of character for him to be satisfied with Shepard's non-answers or distracted from the weirdness of the situation by his own turmoil. It seems very much like the usual "just copypasta Ashley's lines/role/animations/armor to Kaidan, no one will notice" thing, even above and beyond the obvious attempt to push players toward Cerberus and new ME2 love interests. So, I can't really hold it against him, either, because I can't fathom that he'd actually act that way.

Of course, by the same token, my Sheps aren't incoherent, cruel imbeciles, so count me in the camp who doesn't hold anything on Horizon against anyone but the writers.

*The "treated the crew well and was a friend or lover in ME1" Shep that the game takes as a default, anyway. That the writers didn't accomodate an asstastic!Shep is, yes, a problem here, but it's a problem everywhere in ME2 and thus I can't consider it a factor in this argument in good faith.

True. Like I've said, I don't hold Ash's response against her. I'd fully expect someone in that situation to be shocked and angry and upset, especially a person of Ash's temperament. But Kaidan, as you said, is different, more thoughtful. Which is why I take umbrage at his response. It's not only more forceful, angry, and pointed, but it's out of character. I'd expect him to figure out what's going on, not call me a traitor and dip out. Clearly it's at least in part an effort to give Shepard a sense of alienation and push Shep, like you said, towards interacting with and eventually romancing the ME2 LIs. But it could also be read as Kaidan letting his cover slip; he's speaking from the heart, and more honestly than we've probably ever seen. Which makes it all the more upsetting for Shepard.

[Siansonea]

[quote]ChaplainTappman wrote...

[quote]Siansonea II wrote...

"You turned your back on everything we stood for."
"I know where my loyalty lies. I'm an Alliance soldier. Always will be."

...is "incredibly hurtful"? Truly? What sheltered lives you've all led if THIS is "incredibly hurtful". And not to mention, being "hurt" by what one character says to another character in a video game is kind of a symptom of the very thing I'm talking about—over-identification with the player character to the exclusion of the other characters.[/quote]

Why wouldn't people identify with the character that, you know, we're playing? You're right, that doens't make any sense. Why would we identify with the character that was created to be us?[/quote]

Well, it’s one thing to do that while you’re playing. It’s quite another for that state to persist after you finish playing, and while discussing matters pertaining to the game from a player perspective. To be able to identify ONLY with Shepard, that just seems odd to me, and the very thing I’ve been trying to show people that they’re doing. Many of them just deny that it’s what they’re doing.

[quote]Is it hurtful in the real world? No, I'm not personally, as a real human being, injured in any way by that. But as Shepard? Yes. You're telling me that you'd be perfectly okay if a close friend of yours called you a traitor? Maybe it's because I've taken an oath of service that I take seriously, but I would be pissed off and, yes, hurt that someone I trusted and in turn believed trusted me would believe me capable of betraying that oath.[/quote]

Ha! Really? You took an oath of service—that you’re breaking by working with Cerberus, by the way—and you’re mad that someone else who took an oath of service doubts your precious honor? Give me a break. Don’t spit in my eye and tell me it’s raining.

[quote][quote]And yes, above all else, let's not jump to conclusions. I hope you all remember this when you catch your wife in bed with another man. Now, let's not jump to conclusions! This is your wife. You trust her. You go way back. This man might have rescued her from some great harm, and she may have invited him over to thank him with a nice dinner or something. There were wine glasses in the sink, that certainly fits the scenario. Maybe her car wouldn't start, and he was forced to stay the night. That would explain why they're both still at the house. And maybe the power went out at some point, and the air conditioning wasn't working as a result. That would certainly explain why they're both naked. So yes, let's not jump to ANY conclusions here, because she might have a very good reason for being in bed with this man.[/quote]
An amusing analogy. But inaccurate. If Kaidain came across Shepard torturing people, or at a Terra Firma rally extolling the great work Cerberus is doing fighting the evil alien hordes, then your comparison would be apt. Horizon is more akin to me seeing my imaginary wife at dinner with another man. Depending on the circumstances I might be upset; but I'd ask my wife well before I assumed she was cheating on me. Because I trust her.[/quote]

Now I didn’t say that you caught your wife in flagrante delicto. She’s just naked in bed with another man. I think that’s pretty parallel to Shepard being in the company of a bunch of Cerberus people.

[quote][quote]Kaidan called your integrity into question. Because your integrity is now IN question. When you decided to work for Cerberus, your integrity got called into question. Stimulus, response. It's a natural order of events. If you expect your integrity to be inviolable, don't do questionable things. It seems pretty simple to me.

And Kaidan does understand that things aren't black and white. Which is why he simply left, and wished Shepard good luck. Which is why he didn't pull a Samara and go all Justicar on their asses. Kaidan expressed his extreme concern about the turn of events, warned Shepard of trusting Cerberus too much, and then left Shepard to do what she needed to do. How very unreasonable of him. And why should he trust you, darling? If you'd jump into bed with people who have killed and tortured Alliance soldiers, what's to stop you from stabbing HIM in the back if it suited your view of "the greater good". You're asking for WAY too much indulgence here if you expect someone to trust you implicitly in this situation. After two years of believing you were dead, when you're clearly not dead, and clearly never were dead (because people don't just come back to life after being dead for an extended period of time, you know). So yeah, if your integrity was so precious to you, I think you would have done or said some things differently, Shepard.[/quote]
Before I say this next bit, I want to make this clear: I am not saying this to leverage moral high ground, I am not saying this to impress. I am bringing this up because I have thought about this in a context not limited to a video game.

I recently enlisted as a soldier in the US Army. Less than a year from now I will be serving as an infantry soldier. I plan to join Special Forces, and later, if I'm lucky and good enough, the Tier 1 unit colloquially known as Delta Force. These units are occasionally called to act in a manner, and allign themselves with individuals, not entirely in line with the moral bearing of a soldier. But they do these things, they work with these people, for the greater good. No one would think to call them traitors, least of all fellow soldiers, and especially not their friends. So no, I'm not asking for too much indulgence; I am asking him to grant me the trust fellow soldiers should place in one another. [/quote]

Well, if you go off the leash too far, expect there to be consequences. Don’t be surprised if not everyone agrees that you should just do what you will. But you seem eager to dive into the murk, so good luck with that.

[quote][quote]Ever notice that when people talk about Shepard, they use the first person form? [/quote]
Maybe that's because we ARE Shepard? Shepard is a tabula rasa for us to fill. Most of us choose to treat at least one Shepard as us.[/quote]

Well, if we could do *anything* in the game, I might identify with Shepard more. But because we are limited by the options BioWare gave us, and because the implications of those options clearly weren’t thought through properly, I find it hard to connect with Shepard as completely as others seem to. MY Shepard would have said all the right things to Kaidan. MY Shepard would have enlisted the aid of the Council and the Alliance, or at least tried to, WAY before agreeing to sign on with Cerberus in any capacity. And would have forewarned the Council and the Alliance about my working with Cerberus beforehand. I would not take all the shortcuts that even Paragon Shepard must take, because of the artificial constraints of a video game.

But no, you’re not Shepard. You should be able to take off the Shepard persona like a suit of clothes, and look at her dispassionately. If you can’t, then you’re doing exactly what I’ve been saying all along—you can’t see the forest for the trees, because you won’t or can’t do a simple thing like take a step back and enjoy a wider panorama.

[quote][quote]For what it's worth, I do understand Shepard's point of view. She knows things the VS doesn't. She has to do things the VS doesn't understand, because time is short and the stakes are too high. Too bad she didn't, like, explain that properly.[/quote]
Yeah, it's too bad the VS doesn't leave before asking any questions.[/quote]

Because the cat has got Shepard’s tongue? She can’t say “hey wait a second, let me explain”? Oh yes, Word Of God. The Game Won’t Let Me Do That, therefore it was never a good idea in the first place. How passive.

[quote][quote]And then there's Anderson. Good ol' bulletproof Anderson. The man who plays his cards so close to his chest that even after he finds out that Shepard is alive, that she's working with Cerberus, and that Cerberus claims the Collectors are behind the colony abductions, he does NOT actually tell his operative any of this. His operative who is INVESTIGATING CERBERUS and the missing colonies. Instead, Anderson stonewalls them. Did Anderson just not want to spoil the surprise when Kaidan inevitably ran into Shepard? Really Anderson, what IS your agenda?[/quote]
For what it's worth, I agree with you here, though I'm not sure what the point of bringing this up was. I never really understood why Anderson would stonewall the VS, either.
[/quote]

Well, if you’re going to hate on the VS for responding the way he/she did, how about serving up some of that self-righteous anger for the man who created the misunderstanding in the first place? Surely there's some spare bile lying around for good ol' Captain Anderson? Why hate just one NPC, when you can hate two?

[paul165]

>>Well, if you’re going to hate on the VS for responding the way he/she did, how about serving up some of that self-righteous anger for the man who created the misunderstanding in the first place? Surely there's some spare bile lying around for good ol' Captain Anderson? Why hate just one NPC, when you can hate two?<<

Possibly because we are not then expected to trust Anderson behind our back with a gun long term? Possibly because Councillor Anderson made understandable if politically motivated decisions about Cerberus? Or possibly (and this is where you accuse me of identifying too closely with Shepard) because Anderson's response to Shepard's return is to help reinstate them into the Spectres and to rationally investigate what is happening?

In contrast the VS has an emotionally fueled rant where they learn nothing, accomplish nothing and serves only to alienate Shepard.

This is not to say I don't have problems with Anderson - Retribution springs to mind but the actions Shepard is aware of during ME2 are rational enough unless you assume absolute worst case scenarios. That claim is impossible to make for the VS and this person is to be the second human Spectre and a senior officer (assumed) on the Normandy.

[Siansonea]

paul165 wrote...

>>I hope you all remember this when you catch your wife in bed with another man.<<

Yes because those situations are totally identical /sarcasm
How dare Shepard wear the wrong colour uniform when saving your life - talk about complaining about rescues you don't like!

Cerberus Isn't So Bad™ (working with Cerberus is as inconsequential as changing your armor color). We've been over this. Atrocities, yo.

>>Which is why he didn't pull a Samara and go all Justicar on their asses. <<

Well that and being outnumbered three to one....

You realise this paragraph rather contradicts other points raised in the VS' defense right?

If the VS is aware that things are not black and white they show no indication in that conversation and also contradicts the central thrust of the argument made in this thread that from the VS' point of view Cerberus=evil no ifs, buts or maybes which is about as black and white as you can get.

If the VS believes Shepard faked their death then they also logically believe that Shepard knowing killed at least 20 of their crew in which case the VS shouldn't be talking to Shepard they should be fleeing screaming or trying to kill Shepard before they kill one more former crewmate.

The VS does neither and shows no concern over the extremely high probability that this hypothetical Cerberus!Shepard would kill them. So as I raised earlier:

>>But there is no evidence the VS ever considers they are in danger so either they accept Shepard died and they should have questions about the walking around and breathing -clone? android? plastic surgery?......Or they trust Shepard wouldn't kill them despite 'betraying everything they stood for'. Bare in mind this is Commander 'kill everything in my way' Shepard.<<

Everyone acts like the VS has NO trust for Shepard. I posit that the VS' words and actions show that he/she DOES trust Shepard—just not blindly.

>>Too bad she didn't, like, explain that properly.<<

Too bad the VS didn't, like, ask either - no-one walks away covered in glory but some of the statements made in the VS' defense are going beyond interpreting the scene favourably into reading things that simply aren't there.

And once more I do not require trust unconditional or otherwise - I require that the VS does their job and investigate.

But you don't expect Shepard to do HER job, and like, explain herself. Or actually demonstrate her loyalty to the Alliance somehow. Nope, Because It's Shepard™ and nothing she does is ever wrong. The VS' crime—"not asking the right questions" is somehow judged as being far worse than Shepard's crime—working with terrorists who have tortured and killed Alliance soldiers for years. Forgive me if I tend to come down on the side of the VS in this equation. <_<

[Quething]

ChaplainTappman wrote...

True. Like I've said, I don't hold Ash's response against her. I'd fully expect someone in that situation to be shocked and angry and upset, especially a person of Ash's temperament. But Kaidan, as you said, is different, more thoughtful. Which is why I take umbrage at his response. It's not only more forceful, angry, and pointed, but it's out of character. I'd expect him to figure out what's going on, not call me a traitor and dip out. Clearly it's at least in part an effort to give Shepard a sense of alienation and push Shep, like you said, towards interacting with and eventually romancing the ME2 LIs. But it could also be read as Kaidan letting his cover slip; he's speaking from the heart, and more honestly than we've probably ever seen. Which makes it all the more upsetting for Shepard.

Fair point. I'm not much of a Kaidanmancer so I hadn't really considered it from that perspective, but I can see where that would make it worse.

As far as the original topic of the thread goes, though, I don't think that would incline me to trust him less; make it harder to work with him at first, maybe, since the hurt would still be there, but that kind of evidence of his concern for Shep would only make it easier to believe he *is* fully invested in our relationship and will look out for me in ME3.

[paul165]

Shepard tried to explain initially the information provided was brushed aside in favour of Cerberus, Cerberus, Cerberus at which it was obvious the VS was no longer listening. The only thing Shepard says the VS responds to is Cerberus not 'I was dead', not 'Reapers' nothing just Cerberus

>>Everyone acts like the VS has NO trust for Shepard. I posit that the VS' words and actions show that he/she DOES trust Shepard—just not blindly.<<

May the Asari Goddess grant that I never have anyone who trusts the way the VS does. The VS trusts Shepard about the most stupid things that they died and returned and that they are fighting the Reapers but doesn't trust enough to question whether Shepard is with Cerberus entirely by choice - that's not a certain degree of trust. That's schizophrenia!

>>Atrocities, yo.<<

Yes we have been over this at great and exceptionally tedious length. Still saved the VS from a fate worse than death though ought to be worth something.

>>But you don't expect Shepard to do HER job, and like, explain herself. Or actually demonstrate her loyalty to the Alliance somehow. Nope, Because It's Shepard™ and nothing she does is ever wrong. The VS' crime—"not asking the right questions" is somehow judged as being far worse than Shepard's crime—working with terrorists who have tortured and killed Alliance soldiers for years. Forgive me if I tend to come down on the side of the VS in this equation.<<

Shepard did their job - and a significant part of the VS' job for good measure in defending Horizon. Shepard also demonstrates loyalty to the Alliance by reporting to the Citadel, dealing with the SR1 and infiltrating Batarian space

It is not Shepard's job to investigate Cerberus, nor is it Shepard's job to demonstrate loyalty to the Alliance (and by Alliance you mean of course the VS) the assignment is to stop the Collectors a task which Shepard eventually accomplishes. The VS has a job to investigate Cerberus and fails utterly at it walking away with no more information on anything than they entered the conversation with.

You'll forgive me if I tend to view with more sympathy the person who accomplished their objective rather than the one who failed abjectly. This ultimately is why my Shepard would find it extremely difficult to trust the VS not because they said a few harsh things but because they FAILED.

They failed at Eden Prime, they failed to defend Horizon, they failed to respond rationally to Shepard returning (drawing a gun would have been fine as would a hostile interrogation) and ultimately they failed to complete the mission because they allowed personal feelings to enter the equation.

Given the stakes in ME3 would you really want someone with a record like that guarding your back or Bioware forbid issuing orders in Shepard's absence:sick:

Modifié par paul165, 13 août 2011 - 08:05 .

[rapscallioness]

@Siansonea wrote: "And personally, you can chastise me for my "tone" all you want. Being
"nice" is overrated, especially on the Internet. Being nice for the sake
of harmony just makes people ignore you and treat you like a doormat.
And it seems like THAT is the crux of the whole issue. If the VS was
"nice" to Shepard, then we wouldn't have a problem. But if I was "nice"
to all these folks after the umpteenth time they try to downplay
Cerberus, if I treated them as if their arguments were anything but
thinly veiled egocentrism, then people might think that I believe there
is a shred of validity to these convoluted pretzel logic scenarios.
Because I DO understand their point of view so well, it's obvious to me
what's really going on. And I'm not going to act like it's not
happening. So if anybody has a problem with my "tone", they can get glad
in the same pants they got mad in. Or not. But being "liked" has never
been high on my list of priorities, especially if it requires me to be
as docile as Shepard or as deferential and accommodating as Garrus and
Tali. No thank you."

It's not about being a nice girl and batting your eye lashes. It's about being civil. Having at least a shred of coutersy towards others, although they disagree w/ you. Just because you're on the internet doesn't mean you can talk to ppl any way you want. There are still human beings on the other side of that screen that you're calling stupid.

You can strongly disagree w/other ppl; make your points without being an Azzhole. The best debaters do this. You're angry w/ others because they don't seem to understand the VS' point of view, yet you're doing the exact same thing. And no one is going to think you agree. You've made your points.

If you think I just need to deal with it in regards to your tone, you need to think again because I'm not going to act like it's not happening , either. You view everything in extremes. You don't wanna be a doormat, so that must mean you have to be an azzhole? Having some respect for others, equates with being concerned if you're liked.  If ppl are ticked w/ the VS, then that means they're a Shepard rules faction? Your viewpoints have no nuance. You're either/ or, and nothing is either/or. Not even these ME games.

And I never said anything about not arguing your point, but do so without degrading others. Unless that's the only way you know how? Yes, I singled you out to chastise, although this type of thing is rampant, because presenting your arguments via personal and uncalled for insults just smacks of being ignorant. I don't believe you are ignorant. I know you're not ignorant. So, no I don't understand why you are degrading yourself and your arguments like this. Because that's what you're doing.

You've got your mad/glad pants all in a bunch because you can't take it that some ppl disagree with you. Forget a penchant for being liked. You seem to have a penchant for trying to prove to everyone that you're right. You're right and everyone else is wrong. And if they don't agree with you, then they're stupid.

You know, but *sighs*, hey, Siansonea...good luck with that.  I know you disgree, but I've said all can, or care to say about it. /chastising rant

[ChaplainTappman]

 

Siansonea II wrote...

Well, it’s one thing to do that while you’re playing. It’s quite another for that state to persist after you finish playing, and while discussing matters pertaining to the game from a player perspective. To be able to identify ONLY with Shepard, that just seems odd to me, and the very thing I’ve been trying to show people that they’re doing. Many of them just deny that it’s what they’re doing.

I don't see how that's odd. I'm not trying to say you're wrong, I just don't see anything unusual about that. It makes sense that people would find it easier to identify with the character that is us.

Now I didn’t say that you caught your wife in flagrante delicto. She’s just naked in bed with another man. I think that’s pretty parallel to Shepard being in the company of a bunch of Cerberus people.

Guilt by association? Nice. I'm standing next to them, so the only logical assumption is that I hold the same ideals, the same morals, the same goals as them? That I'm subservient to their will?

Ha! Really? You took an oath of service—that you’re breaking by working with Cerberus, by the way—and you’re mad that someone else who took an oath of service doubts your precious honor? Give me a break. Don’t spit in my eye and tell me it’s raining.

Well, if you go off the leash too far, expect there to be consequences. Don’t be surprised if not everyone agrees that you should just do what you will. But you seem eager to dive into the murk, so good luck with that.

These deserve to be responded to together. Shepard didn't go "off the leash too far." Shepard hasn't done anything outside the moral parameters of the Alliance military, or even the extraordinary loose ethical guidelines of the Spectres. And, again, soldiers understand the notion of grey space. This is especially true of special operations troops, like Shepard and the Kaidan both are. Ask a SOF trooper if the Special Forces teams that were first into Afghanistan are traitors because they worked with warlords who, before and after, were allied with the Taliban. Ask them if the Delta operators who participated in Operation Eagle Claw in 1979 broke their oaths because they were prepared to kill civilians if they had to. They'll say no. Any true soldier in Kaidan's position would give Shepard the benefit of the doubt, at least enough to not leap to judgement.

Well, if we could do *anything* in the game, I might identify with Shepard more. But because we are limited by the options BioWare gave us, and because the implications of those options clearly weren’t thought through properly, I find it hard to connect with Shepard as completely as others seem to. MY Shepard would have said all the right things to Kaidan. MY Shepard would have enlisted the aid of the Council and the Alliance, or at least tried to, WAY before agreeing to sign on with Cerberus in any capacity. And would have forewarned the Council and the Alliance about my working with Cerberus beforehand. I would not take all the shortcuts that even Paragon Shepard must take, because of the artificial constraints of a video game.

When would you have done these things? When you were in a coma? Maybe you'd sit down on Lazarus Station and refuse to move until you could call the Council? Try and shoot your way out of Minuteman Station? None of those seem like particularly viable options.

But no, you’re not Shepard. You should be able to take off the Shepard persona like a suit of clothes, and look at her dispassionately. If you can’t, then you’re doing exactly what I’ve been saying all along—you can’t see the forest for the trees, because you won’t or can’t do a simple thing like take a step back and enjoy a wider panorama.

I can look at Shepard dispassionately. I don't agree with everything Shepard - your Shepard, my Shepard, any Shepard - does and says. Disagreeing with you is not equivalent to missing the forest for the trees.

Because the cat has got Shepard’s tongue? She can’t say “hey wait a second, let me explain”? Oh yes, Word Of God. The Game Won’t Let Me Do That, therefore it was never a good idea in the first place. How passive.

Again, calling the kettle black. Because the cat has the VS's tongue? Kaidan/Ash can't say "what's going on?" The game won't let the VS do that, so automatically it's Shepard's fault? Automatically Shepard's a terrorist?

I don't understand this line of criticism. If we're using the impossible as a frame of judgement, Shepard's a real screwup. Why didn't he just fix his suit ruptures with fairy dust, and then fly away from the exploding Normandy with the power of magical farts into deep space, and destroy the Reapers by crossing his arms and blinking? Then none of this would've happened. We can only judge people, real or virtual, by what's actually possible.

Well, if you’re going to hate on the VS for responding the way he/she did, how about serving up some of that self-righteous anger for the man who created the misunderstanding in the first place? Surely there's some spare bile lying around for good ol' Captain Anderson? Why hate just one NPC, when you can hate two?

Because Anderson isn't accusing Shepard of being a traitor. That's the difference. I'd love to be able to ask Anderson why he does that, but it's not worthy of anger. And Anderson telling the VS about Shepard wouldn't have fixed anything, just made the VS not surprised to see Shepard on Horizon.

[ChaplainTappman]

Quething wrote...

Fair point. I'm not much of a Kaidanmancer so I hadn't really considered it from that perspective, but I can see where that would make it worse.

As far as the original topic of the thread goes, though, I don't think that would incline me to trust him less; make it harder to work with him at first, maybe, since the hurt would still be there, but that kind of evidence of his concern for Shep would only make it easier to believe he *is* fully invested in our relationship and will look out for me in ME3.

I romanced Kaidan once, mostly because I was curious to see it through. I probably won't carry that through to ME3, but that has more to do with my not finding him a very compelling character.

That's a reasonable way of putting it. I don't believe that I'm never going to trust Kaidan again. But at first, yeah, there will be tension there, maybe even anger. But I suspect that pretty early on, there will be a mea culpa cutscene between the VS and Shepard.

[Siansonea]

rapscallioness wrote...

@Siansonea wrote: "And personally, you can chastise me for my "tone" all you want. Being
"nice" is overrated, especially on the Internet. Being nice for the sake
of harmony just makes people ignore you and treat you like a doormat.
And it seems like THAT is the crux of the whole issue. If the VS was
"nice" to Shepard, then we wouldn't have a problem. But if I was "nice"
to all these folks after the umpteenth time they try to downplay
Cerberus, if I treated them as if their arguments were anything but
thinly veiled egocentrism, then people might think that I believe there
is a shred of validity to these convoluted pretzel logic scenarios.
Because I DO understand their point of view so well, it's obvious to me
what's really going on. And I'm not going to act like it's not
happening. So if anybody has a problem with my "tone", they can get glad
in the same pants they got mad in. Or not. But being "liked" has never
been high on my list of priorities, especially if it requires me to be
as docile as Shepard or as deferential and accommodating as Garrus and
Tali. No thank you."

It's not about being a nice girl and batting your eye lashes. It's about being civil. Having at least a shred of coutersy towards others, although they disagree w/ you. Just because you're on the internet doesn't mean you can talk to ppl any way you want. There are still human beings on the other side of that screen that you're calling stupid.

You can strongly disagree w/other ppl; make your points without being an Azzhole. The best debaters do this. You're angry w/ others because they don't seem to understand the VS' point of view, yet you're doing the exact same thing. And no one is going to think you agree. You've made your points.

If you think I just need to deal with it in regards to your tone, you need to think again because I'm not going to act like it's not happening , either. You view everything in extremes. You don't wanna be a doormat, so that must mean you have to be an azzhole? Having some respect for others, equates with being concerned if you're liked.  If ppl are ticked w/ the VS, then that means they're a Shepard rules faction? Your viewpoints have no nuance. You're either/ or, and nothing is either/or. Not even these ME games.

And I never said anything about not arguing your point, but do so without degrading others. Unless that's the only way you know how? Yes, I singled you out to chastise, although this type of thing is rampant, because presenting your arguments via personal and uncalled for insults just smacks of being ignorant. I don't believe you are ignorant. I know you're not ignorant. So, no I don't understand why you are degrading yourself and your arguments like this. Because that's what you're doing.

You've got your mad/glad pants all in a bunch because you can't take it that some ppl disagree with you. Forget a penchant for being liked. You seem to have a penchant for trying to prove to everyone that you're right. You're right and everyone else is wrong. And if they don't agree with you, then they're stupid.

You know, but *sighs*, hey, Siansonea...good luck with that.  I know you disgree, but I've said all can, or care to say about it. /chastising rant

Does this guilt trip/shame schtick work on ANYBODY? Ever?

I think you know where you can put your chastising stick, because I am not going to be cowed by your obvious guilt trip ploy. Trying to appeal to my "better nature"? Telling me that I'm degrading myself? That I'm coming across as "ignorant"? And then you call me an "azzhole"? Where's your moral high ground now, darling? Step off.

And what place does nuance have in an argument that is rather simple? People try to imbue the situation with all these spurious shades of grey. They're trying to cloud the issue, because that's the only way their pretzel logic can make any semblance of sense. But it's just rationalization. Some things pretty much ARE either/or situations. Black and white ARE shades of grey, as anyone in the graphic arts field knows. It's pretty clear what's going on, but because of the emotional connection with Shepard, people won't admit that the VS has a point. And they act like the VS has committed a grievous sin by saying two lines that are less than complimentary toward Shepard. And Shepard showing up in the company of terrorists is blameless. And I'm the one overreacting? Puh-leeze.

And it just goes to show how thin-skinned you all are. You can't take anyone even implying that you might have betrayed the Alliance by signing on with Cerberus, and you certainly can't take anyone calling you on your emotional knee-jerk reaction to same. How about coming out of your own head long enough to recognize that not everyone has to agree with you in order to be "right"? And that two people can both be right and wrong at the same time? How is THAT for nuance and shades of grey? But yeah, I'm the one who can't see things clearly. <_<

[TomY90]

too be honest i do not think we have lost trust in them we just have a bit of a sour taste to how they reacted.

I believe if they have the characters explain why they reacted like they did in a emotional way it will get many of them of the haters (me included) to have conflicting opinions on whether to be with the ME1 LI or ME2 LI (or even ME3 LI if there is one)

[Siansonea]

[quote]ChaplainTappman wrote...

 [quote]Siansonea II wrote...

Well, it’s one thing to do that while you’re playing. It’s quite another for that state to persist after you finish playing, and while discussing matters pertaining to the game from a player perspective. To be able to identify ONLY with Shepard, that just seems odd to me, and the very thing I’ve been trying to show people that they’re doing. Many of them just deny that it’s what they’re doing.[/quote]I don't see how that's odd. I'm not trying to say you're wrong, I just don't see anything unusual about that. It makes sense that people would find it easier to identify with the character that is us.[/quote]

So just because it's easy to identify with a character, it's okay to over-identify with the character? To the exclusion of consideration of other characters' points of view?  I don't think so.

[quote]
[quote]Now I didn’t say that you caught your wife in flagrante delicto. She’s just naked in bed with another man. I think that’s pretty parallel to Shepard being in the company of a bunch of Cerberus people.[/quote]Guilt by association? Nice. I'm standing next to them, so the only logical assumption is that I hold the same ideals, the same morals, the same goals as them? That I'm subservient to their will?[/quote]

Well, their morals, ideals and goals sure don't seem to bother you much. And that's a problem, since they're, you know, terrorists.

[quote]
[quote]Ha! Really? You took an oath of service—that you’re breaking by working with Cerberus, by the way—and you’re mad that someone else who took an oath of service doubts your precious honor? Give me a break. Don’t spit in my eye and tell me it’s raining.[/quote][quote]Well, if you go off the leash too far, expect there to be consequences. Don’t be surprised if not everyone agrees that you should just do what you will. But you seem eager to dive into the murk, so good luck with that.[/quote]These deserve to be responded to together. Shepard didn't go "off the leash too far." Shepard hasn't done anything outside the moral parameters of the Alliance military, or even the extraordinary loose ethical guidelines of the Spectres. And, again, soldiers understand the notion of grey space. This is especially true of special operations troops, like Shepard and the Kaidan both are. Ask a SOF trooper if the Special Forces teams that were first into Afghanistan are traitors because they worked with warlords who, before and after, were allied with the Taliban. Ask them if the Delta operators who participated in Operation Eagle Claw in 1979 broke their oaths because they were prepared to kill civilians if they had to. They'll say no. Any true soldier in Kaidan's position would give Shepard the benefit of the doubt, at least enough to not leap to judgement.[/quote]

Yeah, but these people were operatives working under the guidance and supervision of the recognized authority, not independent vigilante's doing whatever they want without having to answer to anybody. Shepard working with Cerberus with the full knowledge and support of the Alliance is NOT the same as Shepard going off and working with Cerberus on her own.

[quote]
[quote]Well, if we could do *anything* in the game, I might identify with Shepard more. But because we are limited by the options BioWare gave us, and because the implications of those options clearly weren’t thought through properly, I find it hard to connect with Shepard as completely as others seem to. MY Shepard would have said all the right things to Kaidan. MY Shepard would have enlisted the aid of the Council and the Alliance, or at least tried to, WAY before agreeing to sign on with Cerberus in any capacity. And would have forewarned the Council and the Alliance about my working with Cerberus beforehand. I would not take all the shortcuts that even Paragon Shepard must take, because of the artificial constraints of a video game.[/quote]When would you have done these things? When you were in a coma? Maybe you'd sit down on Lazarus Station and refuse to move until you could call the Council? Try and shoot your way out of Minuteman Station? None of those seem like particularly viable options.[/quote]

Gee, if you can't see the missed opportunities, you're not going to be a very good tactician.

[quote]
[quote]But no, you’re not Shepard. You should be able to take off the Shepard persona like a suit of clothes, and look at her dispassionately. If you can’t, then you’re doing exactly what I’ve been saying all along—you can’t see the forest for the trees, because you won’t or can’t do a simple thing like take a step back and enjoy a wider panorama.[/quote]I can look at Shepard dispassionately. I don't agree with everything Shepard - your Shepard, my Shepard, any Shepard - does and says. Disagreeing with you is not equivalent to missing the forest for the trees.

[quote]Because the cat has got Shepard’s tongue? She can’t say “hey wait a second, let me explain”? Oh yes, Word Of God. The Game Won’t Let Me Do That, therefore it was never a good idea in the first place. How passive.[/quote]Again, calling the kettle black. Because the cat has the VS's tongue? Kaidan/Ash can't say "what's going on?" The game won't let the VS do that, so automatically it's Shepard's fault? Automatically Shepard's a terrorist?

I don't understand this line of criticism. If we're using the impossible as a frame of judgement, Shepard's a real screwup. Why didn't he just fix his suit ruptures with fairy dust, and then fly away from the exploding Normandy with the power of magical farts into deep space, and destroy the Reapers by crossing his arms and blinking? Then none of this would've happened. We can only judge people, real or virtual, by what's actually possible.[/quote]

Fine. Do that. But judge ALL the people, not just the VS.

[quote]
[quote]Well, if you’re going to hate on the VS for responding the way he/she did, how about serving up some of that self-righteous anger for the man who created the misunderstanding in the first place? Surely there's some spare bile lying around for good ol' Captain Anderson? Why hate just one NPC, when you can hate two?[/quote]Because Anderson isn't accusing Shepard of being a traitor. That's the difference. I'd love to be able to ask Anderson why he does that, but it's not worthy of anger. And Anderson telling the VS about Shepard wouldn't have fixed anything, just made the VS not surprised to see Shepard on Horizon.
[/quote]

Meh. You people are too sensitive. There's an easy way to avoid being called a traitor. Don't show up with other people who work for a traitor organization. Yeah, guilt by association, suck it up. You don't get to avoid the bust of the meth lab just because you're not using the drug yourself, or actively engaged in cooking the meth when the cops show up. You're there at the meth lab, so off to jail you go. Get mad if you want.

[ChaplainTappman]

Siansonea II wrote...

Does this guilt trip/shame schtick work on ANYBODY? Ever?

I think you know where you can put your chastising stick, because I am not going to be cowed by your obvious guilt trip ploy. Trying to appeal to my "better nature"? Telling me that I'm degrading myself? That I'm coming across as "ignorant"? And then you call me an "azzhole"? Where's your moral high ground now, darling? Step off.

And what place does nuance have in an argument that is rather simple? People try to imbue the situation with all these spurious shades of grey. They're trying to cloud the issue, because that's the only way their pretzel logic can make any semblance of sense. But it's just rationalization. Some things pretty much ARE either/or situations. Black and white ARE shades of grey, as anyone in the graphic arts field knows. It's pretty clear what's going on, but because of the emotional connection with Shepard, people won't admit that the VS has a point. And they act like the VS has committed a grievous sin by saying two lines that are less than complimentary toward Shepard. And Shepard showing up in the company of terrorists is blameless. And I'm the one overreacting? Puh-leeze.

And it just goes to show how thin-skinned you all are. You can't take anyone even implying that you might have betrayed the Alliance by signing on with Cerberus, and you certainly can't take anyone calling you on your emotional knee-jerk reaction to same. How about coming out of your own head long enough to recognize that not everyone has to agree with you in order to be "right"? And that two people can both be right and wrong at the same time? How is THAT for nuance and shades of grey? But yeah, I'm the one who can't see things clearly. <_<

The issue isn't that someone is suggesting Shepard might be wrong, or on the wrong side of morals. I don't care, as Shepard, when Toombs, or Tela Vasir, or any number of characters in ME2 impugn Shepard's integrity for working with Cerberus. The issue is that the VS, someone who knows Shepard well and should be, as a friend, willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, isn't doing that. Is instead jumping to the worst possible conclusion, without giving Shepard the chance to explain. I don't see how it's unreasonable to find that unfair.

And nuance has a place in this discussion because the world is nuanced. The real world is nuanced, and so is the universe of Mass Effect. The realms of politics and combat are especially nuanced. That's kind of the point of the games, that morality isn't always as clear cut as video games usually make it seem.

[paul165]

>>Meh. You people are too sensitive.<<

Would you want someone who believes you to be a traitor holding a gun and watching your back in a combat situation?

>>Don't show up with other people who work for a traitor organization. <<

Love to, unfortunately the Alliance doesn't do anything about the tens of thousands of casualties and you do get authority from the Council to work with them.

>>And nuance has a place in this discussion because the world is
nuanced. The real world is nuanced, and so is the universe of Mass
Effect. The realms of politics and combat are especially nuanced.<<

Absolutely especially given the extremely complicated and dubious relationships between different power blocs seen in ME2

Modifié par paul165, 13 août 2011 - 08:56 .

[Seboist]

The whole Horizon encounter was bizarre. The VS ends up being more anti-Cerberus and angry at Shepard than the aliens from from the old crew. That they seriously think Cerberus was behind the abductions was LOL funny.


It was jarring seeing that timid loyal lapdog of femshep Kaidan who barked at her every command in the original game getting that uppity with her but that comes with the territory of him and Ashley becoming the NPC equivalent of sheploo/femshep unfortunately.

Modifié par Seboist, 13 août 2011 - 09:07 .

[ChaplainTappman]

Seboist wrote...

The whole Horizon encounter was bizarre. The VS ends up being more anti-Cerberus and angry at Shepard than the aliens from from the old crew. That they seriously think Cerberus was behind the abductions was LOL funny.

That always struck me as bizarre. Such an odd assumption to make.

[Seboist]

ChaplainTappman wrote...

Seboist wrote...

The whole Horizon encounter was bizarre. The VS ends up being more anti-Cerberus and angry at Shepard than the aliens from from the old crew. That they seriously think Cerberus was behind the abductions was LOL funny.

That always struck me as bizarre. Such an odd assumption to make.

Apparently all those Collectors were Cerberus troops in disguise and those husks were repackaged Loki mechs.

[rapscallioness]

Siansonea II wrote...

rapscallioness wrote...

@Siansonea wrote: "And personally, you can chastise me for my "tone" all you want. Being
"nice" is overrated, especially on the Internet. Being nice for the sake
of harmony just makes people ignore you and treat you like a doormat.
And it seems like THAT is the crux of the whole issue. If the VS was
"nice" to Shepard, then we wouldn't have a problem. But if I was "nice"
to all these folks after the umpteenth time they try to downplay
Cerberus, if I treated them as if their arguments were anything but
thinly veiled egocentrism, then people might think that I believe there
is a shred of validity to these convoluted pretzel logic scenarios.
Because I DO understand their point of view so well, it's obvious to me
what's really going on. And I'm not going to act like it's not
happening. So if anybody has a problem with my "tone", they can get glad
in the same pants they got mad in. Or not. But being "liked" has never
been high on my list of priorities, especially if it requires me to be
as docile as Shepard or as deferential and accommodating as Garrus and
Tali. No thank you."

It's not about being a nice girl and batting your eye lashes. It's about being civil. Having at least a shred of coutersy towards others, although they disagree w/ you. Just because you're on the internet doesn't mean you can talk to ppl any way you want. There are still human beings on the other side of that screen that you're calling stupid.

You can strongly disagree w/other ppl; make your points without being an Azzhole. The best debaters do this. You're angry w/ others because they don't seem to understand the VS' point of view, yet you're doing the exact same thing. And no one is going to think you agree. You've made your points.

If you think I just need to deal with it in regards to your tone, you need to think again because I'm not going to act like it's not happening , either. You view everything in extremes. You don't wanna be a doormat, so that must mean you have to be an azzhole? Having some respect for others, equates with being concerned if you're liked.  If ppl are ticked w/ the VS, then that means they're a Shepard rules faction? Your viewpoints have no nuance. You're either/ or, and nothing is either/or. Not even these ME games.

And I never said anything about not arguing your point, but do so without degrading others. Unless that's the only way you know how? Yes, I singled you out to chastise, although this type of thing is rampant, because presenting your arguments via personal and uncalled for insults just smacks of being ignorant. I don't believe you are ignorant. I know you're not ignorant. So, no I don't understand why you are degrading yourself and your arguments like this. Because that's what you're doing.

You've got your mad/glad pants all in a bunch because you can't take it that some ppl disagree with you. Forget a penchant for being liked. You seem to have a penchant for trying to prove to everyone that you're right. You're right and everyone else is wrong. And if they don't agree with you, then they're stupid.

You know, but *sighs*, hey, Siansonea...good luck with that.  I know you disgree, but I've said all can, or care to say about it. /chastising rant

Does this guilt trip/shame schtick work on ANYBODY? Ever?

I think you know where you can put your chastising stick, because I am not going to be cowed by your obvious guilt trip ploy. Trying to appeal to my "better nature"? Telling me that I'm degrading myself? That I'm coming across as "ignorant"? And then you call me an "azzhole"? Where's your moral high ground now, darling? Step off.

And what place does nuance have in an argument that is rather simple? People try to imbue the situation with all these spurious shades of grey. They're trying to cloud the issue, because that's the only way their pretzel logic can make any semblance of sense. But it's just rationalization. Some things pretty much ARE either/or situations. Black and white ARE shades of grey, as anyone in the graphic arts field knows. It's pretty clear what's going on, but because of the emotional connection with Shepard, people won't admit that the VS has a point. And they act like the VS has committed a grievous sin by saying two lines that are less than complimentary toward Shepard. And Shepard showing up in the company of terrorists is blameless. And I'm the one overreacting? Puh-leeze.

And it just goes to show how thin-skinned you all are. You can't take anyone even implying that you might have betrayed the Alliance by signing on with Cerberus, and you certainly can't take anyone calling you on your emotional knee-jerk reaction to same. How about coming out of your own head long enough to recognize that not everyone has to agree with you in order to be "right"? And that two people can both be right and wrong at the same time? How is THAT for nuance and shades of grey? But yeah, I'm the one who can't see things clearly. <_<

Guilt trip? If you feel guilty, that's on you. And actually I was being sincere when I said that I think this is beneath you.......(damn I was mistaken)

So okay:

No, the argument isn't simple. Your arguments are simple. Simple minded, but then that's to be expected because they're coming from you.

"How about coming out of your own head long enough to recognize that not
everyone has to agree with you in order to be "right"? And that two
people can both be right and wrong at the same time? How is THAT for
nuance and shades of grey?"

^That's exactly what you're NOT doing.

As far as what I can do w/ my chastising stick..how about I beat ur ass w/ it? You talk alot sh*t for someone cowering behind a computer. Come to my face w/ that sh*t, and I'll knock you on your azz. You arrogant lil b*tch.

You can take your opinions and your head and shove them back up your azz because it's obvious that's where they belong. F*ck you. You stupid lil piece of filth.

Is that better?  Am  I speaking your language now? ......".darling"?

[Sepewrath]

Seboist wrote...

The whole Horizon encounter was bizarre. The VS ends up being more anti-Cerberus and angry at Shepard than the aliens from from the old crew. That they seriously think Cerberus was behind the abductions was LOL funny.

Would anyone really not assume the Cerberus was behind it? It was more likely to be them than the Collectors. Also TIM fabricated intel that Cerberus was behind it and that Horizon was next to bait the VS there.

[paul165]

Sepewrath wrote...

Seboist wrote...

The whole Horizon encounter was bizarre. The VS ends up being more anti-Cerberus and angry at Shepard than the aliens from from the old crew. That they seriously think Cerberus was behind the abductions was LOL funny.

Would anyone really not assume the Cerberus was behind it? It was more likely to be them than the Collectors. Also TIM fabricated intel that Cerberus was behind it and that Horizon was next to bait the VS there.

Well except for the Collector bodies all over the place and the husks and the fact that Cerberus has never done anything that blatant and would have no reason to attack large human colonies or that a Cerberus ship just saved them....

But yes apart from that no reason at all not to suspect Cerberus:innocent: