1476 réponses à ce sujet

[whywhywhywhy]

iakus wrote...
Given that I doubt the same kinds of bonds of trust can be formed over a debate on an Internet forum as a weeks-months long misson of saving the galaxy and being under near-constant enemy fire, I'd say your analogy is a bit flawed 

But at any rate, my belief still stands.  the VS was too harsh, even if Shepard was something of a doofus.  They leaped to worst possible conclusions wihtout even trying to get all the facts.  And I think I handled the confrontational attitude rather well, if I do say so myself:whistle:

I agree with your views on the VS.  But I would even go further to say that after having examined the event from both sides the VS is completely to blame and Shepard blameless.  Regardless if that means the issue blows over or blows up the VS actions, even if you feel they were minor or justified (I don't)it should be explained in ME3.  One thing I need to emphasize is this, if it were possible that the VS was the one killed and brought back.  I would be siding with the VS however that's not what happened, so I don't support.  It's less about the character and more about what they went through.  Of course the horrible story writing of me2 is to blame but what choice do we have ?  ME3 is said to be based off choices we made in me2 so we're forced to deal with it.

My viewpoint has been the same from my first post in this thread.  It has of course evolved as I've accepted and rejected several viewpoints but isn't that the point of discussions ?  I also would like to state for the record I've never argument against a person's view because of their abrasion. 

You treat others how you want to be treated and don't play victim when you reap what you've sown or pretend it was all an act.  Own up to it.  I know some here may disagree but I stand by my position, if my giving someone who's abrasive towards several people a taste of their own medicine to get them to understand.  So be it.  If that's frowned on.  So be it.  If that makes me a hypocrite.  So be it.  If that loses me friends or support.  So be it.  One thing I can say for certain the tone has changed in the thread for the better.

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 23 août 2011 - 05:51 .

[Siansonea]

Dude, relax. You've had your mad on for 50 pages. You've accused me of being a bitter man-hater, of being mentally challenged, and all sorts of other things, and all I've ever accused YOU of is being too emotional when it comes to Shepard's confrontation with the VS. My tone was arch, but I didn't attack you the way you attacked me. And you continually complained about my tone, rather than focus on my actual arguments. That demonstrates the very thing I've been trying to say this whole time: The way something is said is more important than what is said. Because Ash and Kaidan have the nerve to wrinkle their noses and wave their hand in Shepard's face, they're the enemy. Because they accuse Shepard of "betraying everything we stood for", they are the enemy. Because the VS states that they are very certain that their loyalty is to the Alliance, and NOT Cerberus, they are the enemy. Is the VS completely blameless in this scenario? Probably not. They could have asked more questions, certainly. But in the final accounting when I compare "could have asked more questions" to "shows up working for terrorists after a two-year absence that is not adequately explained", I tend to give the person who didn't ask enough questions a pass.

[whywhywhywhy]

Future Guy wrote...
My first thoughts about this subject are that you have to let the writers off of the hook to even try to debate this, but still, it's hard for me to even join a serious discussion about this, when Shepard is killed and resurrected, possibly for game mechanics reasons.  That takes me out of any kind of serious discussion about this thread subject, and other circumstances and aspects of the game.

I absolutely feel he was killed for game mechanic reasons.

Future Guy wrote...
How can you as a role player give a damn about cheating, loyalty, or the vs emotional state during a 60 second limited-restricted conversation, when you were dead for two years, or however long it was?  When they killed and resurrected Shepard, by Cerberus no less, they trivialized these scenarios.  They don't have much meaning to me in this game, now.

Solid points.

Future Guy wrote...
ME2 has it's strong points, but I don't think the story is one of them.  Passing off game mechanics for story makes for bad role playing, I think.  With the hand that Bioware is dealing, I just don't give a damn about Ash/Kaiden's attitude when they question Shepard's "loyalties", or Liara questions Shepard's "infedelity", among a few other things in the story as well.

Perhaps someone should start a thread to try and find out what the writers were smoking.  Maybe if I could have some of that good stuff, then I might be able to take this seriously, somehow.

I agree.  ME2 is a horrible sequel to me for that reason.

[Siansonea]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Future Guy wrote...
My first thoughts about this subject are that you have to let the writers off of the hook to even try to debate this, but still, it's hard for me to even join a serious discussion about this, when Shepard is killed and resurrected, possibly for game mechanics reasons.  That takes me out of any kind of serious discussion about this thread subject, and other circumstances and aspects of the game.

I absolutely feel he was killed for game mechanic reasons.

Future Guy wrote...
How can you as a role player give a damn about cheating, loyalty, or the vs emotional state during a 60 second limited-restricted conversation, when you were dead for two years, or however long it was?  When they killed and resurrected Shepard, by Cerberus no less, they trivialized these scenarios.  They don't have much meaning to me in this game, now.

Solid points.

Future Guy wrote...
ME2 has it's strong points, but I don't think the story is one of them.  Passing off game mechanics for story makes for bad role playing, I think.  With the hand that Bioware is dealing, I just don't give a damn about Ash/Kaiden's attitude when they question Shepard's "loyalties", or Liara questions Shepard's "infedelity", among a few other things in the story as well.

Perhaps someone should start a thread to try and find out what the writers were smoking.  Maybe if I could have some of that good stuff, then I might be able to take this seriously, somehow.

I agree.  ME2 is a horrible sequel to me for that reason.

I agree too! It's a Christmas miracle! Oh wait, it's not Christmas...

My big problem with ME2 has ALWAYS been the stupid story idea of the Lazarus Project, Shepard working with Cerberus, and the final boss. There's other relatively minor writing problems too, but those are the big three for me. Three very big AYFKM moments for me in my first playthrough. And there were echoes of the resurrection stupidity every time Shepard was reunited with someone who thought she was dead for two years. A real person would grill Shepard about her whereabouts for those missing two years, and question the veracity of a "resurrection" story. But nope, everyone's like "oh you were dead, that's nice, but let me tell you about ME...":D

[whywhywhywhy]

I thought up a few scenarios that could be entertaining but more as guidelines

1. The vs begs Shepard's forgiveness and it's up to the player to forgive the VS.
2. The VS holds on to their position and emotions boil over resulting in a non-indoctrination shoot out or fight.
3. The VS gets killed before you have a chance to sort things out leaving Shepard guilt ridden.
4. The VS is put in charge of the alliance SR2/rebuilt cerb vessel and once Shepard is rescued they offer Shepard a tour of their ship.  Shepard corrects them and says you mean my Ship, this leads to a scene with them alone and the confrontation procedes along player choices.  Ranging from making up to fighting.

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Future Guy wrote...
My first thoughts about this subject are that you have to let the writers off of the hook to even try to debate this, but still, it's hard for me to even join a serious discussion about this, when Shepard is killed and resurrected, possibly for game mechanics reasons.  That takes me out of any kind of serious discussion about this thread subject, and other circumstances and aspects of the game.

I absolutely feel he was killed for game mechanic reasons.

Future Guy wrote...
How can you as a role player give a damn about cheating, loyalty, or the vs emotional state during a 60 second limited-restricted conversation, when you were dead for two years, or however long it was?  When they killed and resurrected Shepard, by Cerberus no less, they trivialized these scenarios.  They don't have much meaning to me in this game, now.

Solid points.

Future Guy wrote...
ME2 has it's strong points, but I don't think the story is one of them.  Passing off game mechanics for story makes for bad role playing, I think.  With the hand that Bioware is dealing, I just don't give a damn about Ash/Kaiden's attitude when they question Shepard's "loyalties", or Liara questions Shepard's "infedelity", among a few other things in the story as well.

Perhaps someone should start a thread to try and find out what the writers were smoking.  Maybe if I could have some of that good stuff, then I might be able to take this seriously, somehow.

I agree.  ME2 is a horrible sequel to me for that reason.

I agree too! It's a Christmas miracle! Oh wait, it's not Christmas...

Same here.  Common ground!

My big problem with ME2 has ALWAYS been the stupid story idea of the Lazarus Project, Shepard working with Cerberus, and the final boss. There's other relatively minor writing problems too, but those are the big three for me. Three very big AYFKM moments for me in my first playthrough. And there were echoes of the resurrection stupidity every time Shepard was reunited with someone who thought she was dead for two years. A real person would grill Shepard about her whereabouts for those missing two years, and question the veracity of a "resurrection" story. But nope, everyone's like "oh you were dead, that's nice, but let me tell you about ME...":D

Lazarus Project was one long wallbanging moment for me.  Ressurection is supposed to be a Big Deal.  Not a two year sabbatical.  "When the hero of the galaxy comes back from the dead, that should mean something.  To him and everyone who knew him and what he did.  Not just get discounts at stores."

Working for Cerberus was actually a decent idea.  Just executed in a way that rivals the Lazarus Project.

First time I saw the final boss, I seriously checked the box to make sure this was in fact a Bioware game I bought.

[Iakus]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

I thought up a few scenarios that could be entertaining but more as guidelines

1. The vs begs Shepard's forgiveness and it's up to the player to forgive the VS.

Possible, likely even.  But what about those who think the VS is right?

2. The VS holds on to their position and emotions boil over resulting in a non-indoctrination shoot out or fight.

I will rage if this is inevitable.

3. The VS gets killed before you have a chance to sort things out leaving Shepard guilt ridden.

I will throw all my Mass Effect  disks but ME1 in the microwave if this happens.

4. The VS is put in charge of the alliance SR2/rebuilt cerb vessel and once Shepard is rescued they offer Shepard a tour of their ship.  Shepard corrects them and says you mean my Ship, this leads to a scene with them alone and the confrontation procedes along player choices.  Ranging from making up to fighting.

We may have a winner here. 

Though I'd hope for an option to say "Our ship"  

[Siansonea]

iakus wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

I thought up a few scenarios that could be entertaining but more as guidelines

1. The vs begs Shepard's forgiveness and it's up to the player to forgive the VS.

Possible, likely even.  But what about those who think the VS is right?

I wouldn't mind a "I'm sorry I doubted you" apology from the VS, if Shepard destroys the Collector base. But I would expect a Cerberus Lovin' Shepard to still have some bad blood between herself and the VS.

2. The VS holds on to their position and emotions boil over resulting in a non-indoctrination shoot out or fight.

I will rage if this is inevitable.

I really don't see this happening. If the VS didn't draw down on Shepard in the heat of the moment on Horizon, I doubt anything could induce him/her to do so after time has passed and more information trickles down to the VS from Anderson and the extranet.

3. The VS gets killed before you have a chance to sort things out leaving Shepard guilt ridden.

I will throw all my Mass Effect  disks but ME1 in the microwave if this happens.

Again, not very likely. They wouldn't go through all the trouble of redesigning Ashley and Kaidan, as well as offer alternate appearance packs for them, if they were going to die before having a meaningful conversation with Shepard.

4. The VS is put in charge of the alliance SR2/rebuilt cerb vessel and once Shepard is rescued they offer Shepard a tour of their ship.  Shepard corrects them and says you mean my Ship, this leads to a scene with them alone and the confrontation procedes along player choices.  Ranging from making up to fighting.

We may have a winner here. 

Though I'd hope for an option to say "Our ship"  

I have some Shepards who would be perfectly fine if the VS was the CO, but I'd like the option for my Renegades to completely douche out on the VS and get territorial and whatnot. 

[whywhywhywhy]

jreezy wrote...

Commander Shepard and the VS are both Spectres but since Shepard would have seniority I think the VS would respectfully step aside and let Shepard take control of the Normandy.

I agree. I can't imagine (if given an option to) standing aside for the vs to take control of the ship. Just not going to happen, not even sharing.  Command is absolute.

[Made Nightwing]

jreezy wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Commander Shepard and the VS are both Spectres but since Shepard would have seniority I think the VS would respectfully step aside and let Shepard take control of the Normandy.

I agree. I can't imagine (if given an option to) standing aside for the vs to take control of the ship. Just not going to happen, not even sharing.  Command is absolute.

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes. The VS will do what they must."

By saying that, you ARE dealing in absolutes.

[Valdrane78]

marshalleck wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

marshalleck wrote...
The accusations weren't false. 

They were. It was the Collectors abducting humans, not Cerberus.

They were there investigating reports that Shepard was alive and working with Cerberus, and that it had something to do with the missing colonists. They never accuse Shepard of abducting anyone, but they do express grave concerns over Shepard's temporary alliance with Cerberus. Try to see it from their perspective; Shepard disappears, presumed dead. Alliance/Citadel receives reports (later revealed by TIM that he was the one who fed them) that Shepard is alive and working with Cerberus, and that Horizon might be the next colony attacked. Not wanting to believe any of this could be true, the VS goes to Horizon to wait and watch. Sure enough, colonists get attacked and then Shepard shows up with Cerberus flunkies in tow (sure they may not have actually been in your party in your playthrough, whatever, deal with it) and what is the VS supposed to think? That's confirmation of all the rumors they'd heard, and were hoping to dispel. Not find out it was all apparently true. As for whether Cerberus was behind it...well, TIM basically instigated that attack with more of his carefully planted rumors. So in a way, Cerberus was behind them. 

Shepard's the one whose loyalties are in question, not Kaidan or Ashley's. As they both said, they're still with the Alliance.

I don't know about you,  but in my playthroughs I made it abundantly clear that I didn't trust Cerberus, I still didn't like them and I wasn't working for them but using them to stop the Collectors since no one else was doing anything about it.  And at every possible turn if I had the choice I sent intel on Cerberus or the people they used back to the Alliance or Council space away from Cerberus and I destroyed any evidence of alliance wrong doing (Kasumi).  I also never fail to chew TIM out for the stupid crap he does.  So my loyalties aren't in question.

[whywhywhywhy]

Valdrane78 wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

marshalleck wrote...
The accusations weren't false. 

They were. It was the Collectors abducting humans, not Cerberus.

They were there investigating reports that Shepard was alive and working with Cerberus, and that it had something to do with the missing colonists. They never accuse Shepard of abducting anyone, but they do express grave concerns over Shepard's temporary alliance with Cerberus. Try to see it from their perspective; Shepard disappears, presumed dead. Alliance/Citadel receives reports (later revealed by TIM that he was the one who fed them) that Shepard is alive and working with Cerberus, and that Horizon might be the next colony attacked. Not wanting to believe any of this could be true, the VS goes to Horizon to wait and watch. Sure enough, colonists get attacked and then Shepard shows up with Cerberus flunkies in tow (sure they may not have actually been in your party in your playthrough, whatever, deal with it) and what is the VS supposed to think? That's confirmation of all the rumors they'd heard, and were hoping to dispel. Not find out it was all apparently true. As for whether Cerberus was behind it...well, TIM basically instigated that attack with more of his carefully planted rumors. So in a way, Cerberus was behind them. 

Shepard's the one whose loyalties are in question, not Kaidan or Ashley's. As they both said, they're still with the Alliance.

I don't know about you,  but in my playthroughs I made it abundantly clear that I didn't trust Cerberus, I still didn't like them and I wasn't working for them but using them to stop the Collectors since no one else was doing anything about it.  And at every possible turn if I had the choice I sent intel on Cerberus or the people they used back to the Alliance or Council space away from Cerberus and I destroyed any evidence of alliance wrong doing (Kasumi).  I also never fail to chew TIM out for the stupid crap he does.  So my loyalties aren't in question.

I kept both, I don't trust either

[Dariustwinblade]

Why would someone destroy the greybox?

Kasumi is still in danger regardless of it being wiped out or not. If someone wants to even see whats in the box they have to crack her head so she is still in danger.

Not Keeping the box shows how much a hippocrite Shep is.

[Dariustwinblade]

Why would someone destroy the greybox?

Kasumi is still in danger regardless of it being wiped out or not. If someone wants to even see whats in the box they have to crack her head so she is still in danger.

Not Keeping the box shows how much a hippocrite Shep is.

[Dariustwinblade]

Why would someone destroy the greybox?

Kasumi is still in danger regardless of it being wiped out or not. If someone wants to even see whats in the box they have to crack her head so she is still in danger.

Not Keeping the box shows how much a hippocrite Shep is.

[Siansonea]

Uh...wrong topic? X 3?

[whywhywhywhy]

Dariustwinblade wrote...

Why would someone destroy the greybox?

Kasumi is still in danger regardless of it being wiped out or not. If someone wants to even see whats in the box they have to crack her head so she is still in danger.

Not Keeping the box shows how much a hippocrite Shep is.

I don't know if it makes Shepard a Hypocrite to destroy the greybox but I always thought that if Kasumi erased the memories and interfaced her own she'd unlock the secrets.  So for me it was a matter of letting her grieve then if given the option find out the secret.  This to me could matter in a situation where your facing off against an alliance asset that would be better served fighting the reapers.  So new alliance crew and especially the VS could be presented the information to preserve assets under their control.  

If the VS still has a allegiance issue with the choosing the Alliance over the spectacular Commander Shepard the graybox information could be used to show the faults of that allegiance.

So it would imo be unwise to destroy the greybox.

[Obsidian Gryphon]

Scenarios running through head concerning VS + VS2, etc..... (just some idle thoughts)  Here's one.

Might or might not be the finale or it can be just at midpoint in the game, Shep is injured and this brings about the *VSs "confrontation". As in one of them has to get Shep to safety, the other to provide cover fire for their retreat. Who gets to stay behind? Definitely Shep can't make any decision since s/he is badly injured so it's up to the VSs to decide. Who stays behind? Shep's actions and words to both of them will dictate the course they will take and the result of this incident.

*Both VSs need not be in the immediate squad with Shep but somewhere nearby (split teams aka ME 1 & 2) but chain of events will see both with injured Shep.

Of course, it's not likely to happen this way, hehe, but imagine the aftermath when Shep recovered and found what had happened. Or better yet, Shep trying to make some form of protest while the two have a very quick having-it-out argument but they conked her/him out.   Too, this is a good chance to  briefly play another char other than Shep. Getting Shep and the others out!!

This one will also work for a Shep who has no LIs.

Modifié par Obsidian Gryphon, 28 août 2011 - 12:55 .

[ChaplainTappman]

Oh God, this thread is still happening? And I've been missing out on the cyclic stupidity? Also, Sian, still shaking hornets' nests?

The VS is right to be shocked and upset with Shepard, Shepard is right to be upset with the VS. Both acted like impetuous toddlers, and both is right to want a mea culpa from the other.

EDIT: Also, jreezy, command IS absolute, especially on a ship. There's a chain of command for a reason.

Modifié par ChaplainTappman, 29 août 2011 - 12:03 .

[Ryzaki]

Ah yes my Shepard's first words to the VS. "Step aside or fall in line but DON'T get in my way."