Yeah, right.Seboist wrote...
There could be a benefit for wiping out the colonists in the form of the council being more supportive of Shepard due to him proving he won't allow any bias for his species conflict with missions.
Dean_the_Young wrote...
Yeah, right.Seboist wrote...
There could be a benefit for wiping out the colonists in the form of the council being more supportive of Shepard due to him proving he won't allow any bias for his species conflict with missions.
"Well Shepard, normally we wouldn't believe you but because your species is masochistic enough to elevate you, we'll support you."
Dean_the_Young wrote...
Oh, the handling of ME1 choices was atrocious, no doubt about that. Worst part of the story-telling.BlueMagitek wrote...
The problem was with ME2's handling of the choices, not the choices themselves. Killing the Rachni queen should give you more support from the Council and the Krogan; this didn't happen. Feros... why would there be any benefit of exterminating the colonists? Unless the remaining Thorian spores turn out to be horrible in ME 3, but that'd be metagaming.
I don't know about killing the Rachni getting you support from the Council, but it would have made an excellent justification for in-ME2 support from Noveria. Some Noveria Exec: Hey, Shepard, thanks for saving our ass. Here's 3k of each resource to help you out.
The Feros colonist decision was badly played in general, because it's actually easier to use grenades than not... even though killing them outright was supposed to be 'our own safety first' mentality.
I think Saphra came up with a good idea that, during the finale with the Thorian itself, any colonists you 'knocked out' would come back and attack you during the boss fight. So you'd fight them and kill them any way, but the sense of the battle would be changed (did you struggle to save them, or ruthlessly put them down at your first point?).
It would have made for an easier narrative carry-over into ME2 (the only difference being whether you tried or not), and simplified design. Elizabeth should have been the cameo person as well.
Shiala would have made an ideal 'save this person for bad effects later' choice: the only real reason you have to trust her is her own word, after all.
Modifié par Amaterasuomikami, 15 novembre 2011 - 07:46 .
I'm not going to tell you any explicit spoilers, but after reading the leaks I've become rather... skeptical.Amaterasuomikami wrote...
By the way, do we actually know that the Illusive Man is running Cerberus in ME3? Is it possible that the organisation has generally been indoctrinated, but that IM was not?
Please don't refer to spoiler leaks.
Just a quick note, but iirc you can get either Paragon or Renegade points for doing the right thing (ie convincing Mr. Bahtia to allow the experiments) or the wrong thing (ie forcing the Alliance to surrender her body) in that instance.Seboist wrote...
Giving Bahtia's wife's body to the Alliance: An extra shield upgrade in ME2.
Dean_the_Young wrote...
Yeah, right.Seboist wrote...
There could be a benefit for wiping out the colonists in the form of the council being more supportive of Shepard due to him proving he won't allow any bias for his species conflict with missions.
"Well Shepard, normally we wouldn't believe you but because your species is masochistic enough to elevate you, we'll support you."
Yeah, but that Shepard did what was necessary only proves that... he does what is necessary - from his point of view. Now, his point of view may agree with Council's point of view from time to time, but that's it. It still doesn't mean that the Council should suddenly support you more in the war, as contrary to if you chose the opposite choice.Hah Yes Reapers wrote...
Dean_the_Young wrote...
Yeah, right.Seboist wrote...
There could be a benefit for wiping out the colonists in the form of the council being more supportive of Shepard due to him proving he won't allow any bias for his species conflict with missions.
"Well Shepard, normally we wouldn't believe you but because your species is masochistic enough to elevate you, we'll support you."
You're talking about on Feros?
Actually, if the colony shuts down, the turian councilor is happy you didn't jeopardize the mission.
Hah Yes Reapers wrote...
Dean_the_Young wrote...
Yeah, right.Seboist wrote...
There could be a benefit for wiping out the colonists in the form of the council being more supportive of Shepard due to him proving he won't allow any bias for his species conflict with missions.
"Well Shepard, normally we wouldn't believe you but because your species is masochistic enough to elevate you, we'll support you."
You're talking about on Feros?
Actually, if the colony shuts down, the turian councilor is happy you didn't jeopardize the mission.
General User wrote...
Just a quick note, but iirc you can get either Paragon or Renegade points for doing the right thing (ie convincing Mr. Bahtia to allow the experiments) or the wrong thing (ie forcing the Alliance to surrender her body) in that instance.Seboist wrote...
Giving Bahtia's wife's body to the Alliance: An extra shield upgrade in ME2.
And that's how it should be! Paragon and Renegade, two ways of doing things, neither inherently superior to the other.
DCWalkman wrote...
Now that it seems like The Illusive Man and Cerberus are full blown antagonist in ME3 instead of allies, can a pure renegade be a hero?
In theory, on any colony that had it's charter or colonial constitution written using non-race/non-gender specific language, aliens would be local and/or Alliance citizens by default, the same as any human would.Xilizhra wrote...
Are they actually Alliance citizens, or do they just happen to live there?The Alliance does have colonies with non-human populations. In CDN we also know that cross-species adoptions also occur.
Where's the precedence in Alliance pushing out aliens?
Modifié par General User, 15 novembre 2011 - 09:26 .
I really have no idea why or how the writers got that particular little side quest right, but flubbed up the major game decisions.Seboist wrote...
General User wrote...
Just a quick note, but iirc you can get either Paragon or Renegade points for doing the right thing (ie convincing Mr. Bahtia to allow the experiments) or the wrong thing (ie forcing the Alliance to surrender her body) in that instance.Seboist wrote...
Giving Bahtia's wife's body to the Alliance: An extra shield upgrade in ME2.
And that's how it should be! Paragon and Renegade, two ways of doing things, neither inherently superior to the other.
I wish my Shepard could give a "renegade" rationale for letting the Rachni Queen on the loose or for supporting the Krogan.
Modifié par General User, 15 novembre 2011 - 09:18 .
General User wrote...
I really have no idea why or how the writers got that particular little side quest right, but flubbed up the major game decisions.Seboist wrote...
General User wrote...
Just a quick note, but iirc you can get either Paragon or Renegade points for doing the right thing (ie convincing Mr. Bahtia to allow the experiments) or the wrong thing (ie forcing the Alliance to surrender her body) in that instance.Seboist wrote...
Giving Bahtia's wife's body to the Alliance: An extra shield upgrade in ME2.
And that's how it should be! Paragon and Renegade, two ways of doing things, neither inherently superior to the other.
I wish my Shepard could give a "renegade" rationale for letting the Rachni Queen on the loose or for supporting the Krogan.
The old adage about how "even a broke clock is right twice a day" springs to mind.
Guest_iOnlySignIn_*
Very well said. It's basically there to make the game appear much, much better to most people than it actually is.laecraft wrote...
P/R system is here to hide linearity and to stroke the Paragons' ego. It serves a double purpose - makes development easier and makes pure Paragons feel good. Thus the majority of the players defend this system, and the devs benefit from the easier development, for linearity is always easier. And the players, pure Paragons at least, are eagerly deceived into thinking that there's actually some choice here, and that the decisions they make are affecting something and making a difference, while in fact this is not the case.
You know what's the worst part of it? When people do that IRL you can simply kick their ****es (the American way). In the Mass Effect universe there is nothing you can do. It's like being challenged to an arm wrestling match, but the referee has to surgically remove your biceps first. What remarkably fair rules of competition!Ego boost at the expense of someone else. Wanting desperately someone else be bad, just so you look good in comparison, because otherwise, your character has no worth on his own. I hate it when people try it in life, and I'm not going to stand it in fiction. Especially if TIM and Renegade Shepard are the ones who are being forced into the role of designated Evil, just so all the jerks in the galaxy can look good in comparison.
Guest_iOnlySignIn_*
My FemShep was acting. She's a gifted actor - her most famous role being Lady Macbeth.Seboist wrote...
I tried to have my original femshep be a humancentric "Saren" of sorts that wants to undermine the council races by empowering the Rachni,Krogan and Geth but Instead i get railroaded into her being some blubbering do gooder touchy feely idealist. They have her saying sh!t like "will they be accepted back?" after rewriting the Heretics.
Modifié par iOnlySignIn, 15 novembre 2011 - 09:30 .
iOnlySignIn wrote...
Very well said. It's basically there to make the game appear much, much better to most people than it actually is.laecraft wrote...
P/R system is here to hide linearity and to stroke the Paragons' ego. It serves a double purpose - makes development easier and makes pure Paragons feel good. Thus the majority of the players defend this system, and the devs benefit from the easier development, for linearity is always easier. And the players, pure Paragons at least, are eagerly deceived into thinking that there's actually some choice here, and that the decisions they make are affecting something and making a difference, while in fact this is not the case.
Guest_wiggles_*
Like said before: That's just the tip of the iceberg; there's even worse in there, and a lot of it.wiggles89 wrote...
I haven't read the leaked script, but the stuff regarding Balak and being railroaded into curing the Genophage sounds like the worst **** ever. Whoever thought that those were good ideas has to be functionally retarded.
Kaiser Shepard wrote...
Like said before: That's just the tip of the iceberg; there's even worse in there, and a lot of it.wiggles89 wrote...
I haven't read the leaked script, but the stuff regarding Balak and being railroaded into curing the Genophage sounds like the worst **** ever. Whoever thought that those were good ideas has to be functionally retarded.
I honestly don't understand why you see this as a bad thing. I can't imagine you caring about any cost, except maybe Cerberus.Seboist wrote...
DCWalkman wrote...
Now that it seems like The Illusive Man and Cerberus are full blown antagonist in ME3 instead of allies, can a pure renegade be a hero?
A gimped one that succeeded at great and needless cost yeah.
DCWalkman wrote...
Now that it seems like The Illusive Man and Cerberus are full blown antagonist in ME3 instead of allies, can a pure renegade be a hero?
Bad King wrote...
DCWalkman wrote...
Now that it seems like The Illusive Man and Cerberus are full blown antagonist in ME3 instead of allies, can a pure renegade be a hero?
So there's no way of joining Cerberus near the end of the game? Btw, does TIM die in the leaked script?
Seboist wrote...
Bad King wrote...
DCWalkman wrote...
Now that it seems like The Illusive Man and Cerberus are full blown antagonist in ME3 instead of allies, can a pure renegade be a hero?
So there's no way of joining Cerberus near the end of the game? Btw, does TIM die in the leaked script?
No to joining Cerberus and the best character in the series has several ways to end up like Saren did at the end of ME1.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut