6970 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

If Martin Sheen sang this, regardless of his own ability to, it would be glorious.

[Ravensword]

Live and Learn?

[DeathDragon185]

People should only care if the story is good or not. not what choices they want to make in the story.

[Kaiser Shepard]

DeathDragon185 wrote...

People should only care if the story is good or not. not what choices they want to make in the story.

Sure, if we didn't have those choices or weren't promised they'd actually affect anything.

If this was Gears, I wouldn't care in the least about my "choices" affecting the story itself, thing is that we have come to expect more from Bioware. For no good reason, it seems.

[Labrev]

Still laughing at the Jacob outrage. I mean, it sucks for his fans, but I've always thought they were wrong about him. I don't even see it as being a "character-assassination" to be honest.

I never believed he was this loyal, dignified man that everyone lauded him as. I could tell from the way he'd always trash the Alliance that he was always just an entitled ****hole. "Man, they never handed me things on a silver platter! What was I supposed to do, my job??" Then he'd turn around and say the same garbage about TIM and his Cerberus co-workers, lest he forget he's one of them too.

I was surprised when I read the leak, but after thinking a bit, it's hardly out-of-character for him.

Modifié par Hah Yes Reapers, 12 novembre 2011 - 07:24 .

[Ravensword]

That's an exaggeration.

[Labrev]

No it isn't. Find me one instance where he proves himself to be dependable, and I'll show you why he isn't.

[Ravensword]

He left the Alliance b/c he felt like he wasn't making much of a difference. As far as his work for Cerberus goes, he just mentions not trusting TIM. He's even up front about it w/ TIM. I don't see how that wouldn't make him undependable. Jacob simply had the misfortune of being a human male character.

[Xilizhra]

Jacob simply had the misfortune of being a human male character.

Note how Zaeed never had this reaction. It's not just about being male and human.

[Ravensword]

Xilizhra wrote...

Jacob simply had the misfortune of being a human male character.

Note how Zaeed never had this reaction. It's not just about being male and human.

Ah, thanks for reminding me. Jacob is the only male human who doesn't seem to have any issues like the rest of the crew.

Modifié par Ravensword, 12 novembre 2011 - 07:59 .

[FJVP]

Ravensword wrote...

Ah, thanks for reminding me. Jacob is the only male human who doesn't seem to have any issues like the rest of the crew.

To be honest, from what I've seen some people also disliked him because he never opened up like the rest of the crew. That and the fact that fem!Shep seemed to get an insta-crush on him the moment they board the Normandy.

[Sebby]

The issue with Jacob is that both his personality and backstory(what little you get of it) are utterly bland and he ends up being a brooder that says absolutely nothing of interest.

If he ended up being a buddy that the player could relate to due to having a similar background like Alistair then he would have been better received.

[Labrev]

Ravensword wrote...

He left the Alliance b/c he felt like he wasn't making much of a difference. As far as his work for Cerberus goes, he just mentions not trusting TIM. He's even up front about it w/ TIM. I don't see how that wouldn't make him undependable. Jacob simply had the misfortune of being a human male character.

ROFL, response to poster w/ human male character in avatar, one without issues too.

It's one thing to simply say something like "yeah, I was with the Alliance for a while but I wasn't happy there and left" and leave it at that. He'll explain that before Freedom's Progress if asked. But he doesn't stop there though. He goes on extensively just trashing the Alliance again in a second conversation, while trashing Cerberus in the same conversation.

There's a point at which that attitude becomes childish unprofessional, that point is when he just never stops complaining about how bad they were. And he seriously just needs to complain like he needs air. "Man, they always get all up in my bizniz!" "Man, they labeled me a troublemaker!" (... what a shock). He even brings them up in conversations where you're not even talking about them just so he can trash them more.

And I don't know about you, but as his boss/commander, I despised that attitude. It makes you wonder what he'll do or say about you when he's no longer happy with what you're doing, and you shouldn't have to worry about justifying yourself to one subordinate either, especially one who has that kind of an entitlement-complex.

Besides which, we only hear his side of the story about his Alliance issues. From what I've seen of him, I think he's just an undisciplined whiner who can't do his job. And if this leak about him holds true (I doubt it happens, but still) then that proves it. Now he's just whining about femshep instead, rather than taking a look in the mirror (as usual).

[Dean_the_Young]

Fortunately, you just very succinctly established why you're no expert on what it means to be childish or unprofessional... unless you're doing a very clever contrast.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 12 novembre 2011 - 09:18 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

laecraft wrote...

BW makes universe bend to Paragons. And we do have a choice: to be Paragons or to be "failure."

Posts like this makes me sad.

Don't tell me it is this bleak in terms of P/R consequences.

[Xilizhra]

This post takes me back. "Don't bet on the losing side if you want to win," says a noble Paragon.

Speaking as someone you yourself have deemed a truly noble Paragon, idealistic Renegades are the saddest Shepards, I feel.

"You should have seen it coming," says another. "The evil smile, the red star, the teammates telling you you did the wrong thing if you kept the base. The game shows you the game-favoured path - take it, if you want to win. Don't be a fool, you don't want to feel like a failure. The game's herding you, take the blue path, take the HINT."

I was speaking based on clues that could be discerned before the final choice.

Legion's loyalty mission came very close to that. It completely erased the line between P/R options, with Paragons still zealously taking the blue one. This was also the matter with the Collector base decision. If keeping it would've been labeled as blue, Paragons would've been fervently defending keeping the base now.

As ever, the Paragon option is about preserving life.

They should've never told the player in advance which option is blue. Havoc would've ensured.

I actually agree that Mass Effect probably didn't need a karma meter.

Many hardcore Paragons out there have no concept of loyalty and don't have anything they would stand for despite the impossible odds. I wonder how far they would go to remain on the winning side. It would've been an interesting experiment, to use progressively disturbing blue options in the game, and see how many people would go through with it until they're commiting horrible atrocities to remain on the winning side, and justifying every single step.

Technically, you'll win regardless. If you're referring to whichever options result in the best outcome... perhaps. Although I have plenty of loyalty, just not to TIM or Cerberus.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 13 novembre 2011 - 02:08 .

[Kratan]

laecraft wrote...

This post takes me back. "Don't bet on the losing side if you want to win," says a noble Paragon. "You should have seen it coming," says another. "The evil smile, the red star, the teammates telling you you did the wrong thing if you kept the base. The game shows you the game-favoured path - take it, if you want to win. Don't be a fool, you don't want to feel like a failure. The game's herding you, take the blue path, take the HINT."

Here's the song to show you what I think of that kind of approach, and of Shepards whose allegiance is ruled by experience, instead of remaining true to humanity.

Yes...if Paragon Shepard bends the universe to her will, what kind of a fool would willingly surrender that power? If this is the kind of reasoning one follows in game, it would make perfect sense for one to betray and discard anyone and anything to remain Paragon.

Many hardcore Paragons out there have no concept of loyalty and don't have anything they would stand for despite the impossible odds. I wonder how far they would go to remain on the winning side. It would've been an interesting experiment, to use progressively disturbing blue options in the game, and see how many people would go through with it until they're commiting horrible atrocities to remain on the winning side, and justifying every single step.

I wager that as long as Shepard is still nice about it, and isn't rude to people, and makes a nice-sounding loftly speech, and doesn't shoot anyone in conversations as he takes decisions that leave the galaxy torn apart, in agony, and devastated, many people wouldn't even notice that something is strange with their avatar. That's how the old Council behaves, after all.

Legion's loyalty mission came very close to that. It completely erased the line between P/R options, with Paragons still zealously taking the blue one. This was also the matter with the Collector base decision. If keeping it would've been labeled as blue, Paragons would've been fervently defending keeping the base now.

They should've never told the player in advance which option is blue. Havoc would've ensured.

Don't have much to say but--wow, good points. 

You've convinced me. I was solely paragon for all my runthroughs, but now my paragon Shepard seems like kind of a psychotic dick with a friendly smile. At least Renegades don't hide behind any facades. 

But isn't that the point of Mass Effect 2? The P/R lines were blurred and had a sort of grey morality; it's the dark second act of the story. The only choices were bad ones. Paragons had to make the best out of bad situations.

Modifié par Kratan, 13 novembre 2011 - 02:26 .

[Xilizhra]

Er, psychotic dick? How so?

[Kratan]

Xilizhra wrote...

Er, psychotic dick? How so?

Strong words on my part.

Releasing the Rachni, joining and staying with Cerberus, reprogramming the geth, harboring murderers and fugitives, destroying the mass relay (bonus: killing 300,000) and going generally vigilante on the universe: Completely renegade actions.

These are all moves that were done without consulting the council or any authority on the matters (keep in mind, Shepard is only a commander. Even if s/he is the PC and possibly a SpecTRe, those decisions should not have been made by him/her). 

Laecraft is right. The game portrays them as the good options. Afterall, they have the pretty blue colorcoding, but objectively, Shepard had no right to make those calls, and in doing so, committed atrocities that should put Shepard away for a long time if not executed. Dangerous person, that Shepard is.

Modifié par Kratan, 13 novembre 2011 - 02:35 .

[Xilizhra]

These are all moves that were done without consulting the council or any authority on the matters (keep in mind, Shepard is only a commander. Even if s/he is the PC and possibly a SpecTRe, those decisions should not have been made by him/her).

You've badly misunderstood the purpose of the Spectres. They exist so that they don't have to run back to the Council to consult them on every decision. It would have been nice to do so for the rachni, but I had no option to do so. And I did have the legal power to do so, and to do everything in ME2, as I was reinstated as a Spectre and was basically given free rein so long as I didn't cause trouble for the Council in particular.

[Xilizhra]

laecraft wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

laecraft wrote...

BW makes universe bend to Paragons. And we do have a choice: to be Paragons or to be "failure."

Posts like this makes me sad.

Don't tell me it is this bleak in terms of P/R consequences.

It makes me sad, too. It's disappointing enough to turn one off the series completely, and that makes me sadder still.

If you want to help humanity so badly, don't tie your fortunes to the worst of them! 

[Kratan]

Xilizhra wrote...

These are all moves that were done without consulting the council or any authority on the matters (keep in mind, Shepard is only a commander. Even if s/he is the PC and possibly a SpecTRe, those decisions should not have been made by him/her).

You've badly misunderstood the purpose of the Spectres. They exist so that they don't have to run back to the Council to consult them on every decision. It would have been nice to do so for the rachni, but I had no option to do so. And I did have the legal power to do so, and to do everything in ME2, as I was reinstated as a Spectre and was basically given free rein so long as I didn't cause trouble for the Council in particular.

I see it as abuse of power. Shepard throws the entire universe into unbalance. The SpecTRes are there to act on behalf of the council, but Shepard takes it upon himself to make big decisions that don't preserve galactic stability. Killing the Rachni would have maintained the status quo, same for destroying the geth, but releasing and reprogramming both without knowing the consequences is just pragmatic. Calling that paragon is hypocritical. Tela Vasir made good points when paragon Shepard tried to defend his or her actions.