6970 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

Council, Councilor (though not renegade), Rachni Queen and more.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 11 novembre 2011 - 04:01 .

[Xilizhra]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Council, Councilor (though not renegade), Rachni Queen and more.

The Council is only a very mild nuisance and the queen... well, if I responded, it would involve spoilers.

[Xilizhra]

Saphra Deden wrote...

A mild nuisance to you, but a big one to me and many others.

What would you want to see from that scene?

[Dave of Canada]

Talking about ME3, the scene is different if you killed the original Council. It punishes you if you killed the original Council, though you get to meet the new (alien) Councilors.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 11 novembre 2011 - 04:08 .

[Xilizhra]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

What would you want to see from that scene?

I'd like to talk with them and have them blow me off. Or they can shower me with gifts. I don't ****ing care. I just want ot interact with the Council I CREATED!!

Would the Council be so eager to talk to the person who killed their predecessors? If I was a politician, I'd probably want to stay away.

Talking about ME3, the scene is different if you killed the original Council. It punishes you if you killed the original Council.

PM me how?

[Xilizhra]

laecraft wrote...

Isn't it more fulfilling to make Paragon choices because you feel like being Paragon, and not because you know for the fact that this is the only choice that would be rewarded? Wouldn't Paragons feel even better and morally superior if they did the right thing without being rewarded for it, every once in a while? And wouldn't it be more fun to make a choice without knowing in advance if it's the right one or not? The game isn't half as fun if you cheat and know you can't lose.

This linearity isn't just hurting renegades. It is robbing paragons of choices and of creating their own unique personal experience during the game, it's robbing them of tension and suspense, and paragons don't even notice.

I take action to bring about the best possible outcome. I will do what I deem will be successful... and no, I didn't metagame that much my first time though.

[Xilizhra]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Would the Council be so eager to talk to the person who killed their predecessors?

He put them in power, he was an important person, he disappeared for two years, and he showed up suddenly desiring to talk. They should at least want to hear for himselves where he's been for two years.

You keep sucking that developer dick though, you're good at it.

I just enjoy the game more when I have reasons for why things happen. I hate leaving things in a limbo of perceived writer fiat.

[Xilizhra]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I just enjoy the game more when I have reasons for why things happen. I hate leaving things in a limbo of perceived writer fiat.

You are so full of crap. This game, no series is nothing but writer fiat!

There are in-universe reasons for everything. My enjoyment comes largely from finding them if they aren't immediately apparent.

[Labrev]

rofl @ making decisions to be paragon or renegade, as opposed to trying to actually make the right or wrong decision.

[Sebby]

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

rofl @ making decisions to be paragon or renegade, as opposed to trying to actually make the right or wrong decision.

Even my most Renegade Shepard is one third Paragon but that's besides the point. The point is that there's clear Paragon bias that makes everything Renegade pointless.

If you haven't already check out the leaked files.

[Xilizhra]

laecraft wrote...

They should've never presented this game as one with choices. Of course, creating actual choices is hard, and it's much easier to offer a second "failure" option, but it's not choice, it's an illusion. Don't perpetuate that illusion. Those who dare to take the second option are going to discover the truth anyway.

Avarice defeats art once again. Don't enable this situation to repeat in the future by inventing the reasons why this makes sense in the game. Such explanations are going to be nothing but cosmetic. The skeleton itself is wrong, decorating it is pointless.

Relatively, very few people will fail to see how this makes sense.

[Labrev]

@Sebo - from hearing this argument in the past and the reasons given for it, I'm inclined to think its the usual response: overreaction.


But I'm not through the script just yet.

edit: 4-star alert.

Modifié par Hah Yes Reapers, 11 novembre 2011 - 05:58 .

[Sebby]

Trust me, it isn't an overreaction. The Rachni Queen,Genophage and Udina sub-plots(among others) perfectly illustrate how pointless the renegade path is.

For a good LOL read up on EDI....

[Bad King]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Talking about ME3, the scene is different if you killed the original Council. It punishes you if you killed the original Council, though you get to meet the new (alien) Councilors.

Blargh, so the all human one never happened? Oh well, that's unfortunate but not surprising and not entirely unreasonable either, frankly. Though I hope they are at least distinctly different from the old one.

An all-human one would have been so much more interesting though.

Yeah, it's unsurprising- most (if not all) of the evidence in ME2 pointed towards there being a mixed council if you let the original one die. I'm kind of glad of this because the all human council wouldn't make sense- Udina's main justification for maintaining it was that the other races would allow humanity to take full control due to their fear and uncertainty regarding the reapers, they'd essentially fall in line behind humanity. However, the writers' decision to make the council deny the reaper threat and convince the population that they weren't real pretty much drove a stake through the possibility of an all-human council (how would humanity maintain their position as the sole race to control the council if they don't take advantage of the aliens' fear regarding the reapers?).

[GHNR]

Saphra Deden wrote...

The thing with Udina irks me the most. I guess they can justify it though with that comic they wrote. However that comic was a bad idea in the first place. Christ, why did they have to make Udina evil? Just because he was an ass? Everything he did in ME1 and ME2 was totally reasonable and I felt, preferable to anything Anderson did.

So many players as well have no idea how much Udina actually helped them in the first game too.

Yes....preventing the Normandy from going to Ilos was so helpful.

[Kaiser Shepard]

GHNR wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

The thing with Udina irks me the most. I guess they can justify it though with that comic they wrote. However that comic was a bad idea in the first place. Christ, why did they have to make Udina evil? Just because he was an ass? Everything he did in ME1 and ME2 was totally reasonable and I felt, preferable to anything Anderson did.

So many players as well have no idea how much Udina actually helped them in the first game too.

Yes....preventing the Normandy from going to Ilos was so helpful.

'Twas justified from his and the Council's in-universe perspective, and he was also responsible for allowing you to become a Spectre. Still, even that mistake of his doesn't justify being turned into a comic book style villain.

What is this, Resident Evil?