6970 réponses à ce sujet

[DeathScepter]

Fan Dumb you can blame.

[Dean_the_Young]

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

^ Out of curiosity, what were you expecting of him/his role in ME3 to stay in-character? Him continuing to help with no apparent strings attached?

Blatant opportunism even as he serves as an unreliable ally.


Say that TIM  and Cerberus steals the Prothean Plot Device necessary to beat the Reapers before Shepard can get it. Possible fighting with Cerberus, even.

After the mission, TIM gives a call and offers a deal. TIM offers the Prothean Plot Device the galaxy needs to survive. In fact, TIM offers even more: Cerberus troops and ships for the war effort in the defense of Human colonies/Earth, Cerberus scientists who studied the Collector Base (remains) for the anti-Reaper tech, intelligence cooperation to ferret out indoctrinated Reaper spies.

And what's his price? SPECTRE status for himself.




SPECTRE TIM, after all, would be untouchable. Legally. And not only is a SPECTRE unaccountable to the law, but so are a SPECTRE's activities: allies, private interests... subordinates...

Giving TIM Spectre status would basically be making Cerberus a SPECTRE-class organization. Legal, unacountable, and both able and willing to abuse the **** out of it. Even as Cerberus helps the war effort for the defense and preservation of Humanity on one hand, working with the galaxy, it's also taking opportunism to new lows in this time of crisis.

SPECTRE TIM orders the assassinations/ruinations of notably anti-Human aliens. Cerberus uses SPECTRE status to requisition (steal) highly classified technology from alien species. SPECTRE Cerberus conducts assassinations, gets their arrested agents out of jail, doesn't have to bother hiding ugly experiments it doesn't want to, and more. Nothing is forbidden because, hey, SPECTRE.

Sure, after the war and the need for Cerberus the deal could be ended. SPECTRE status revoked, and all that. But by then, TIM and Cerberus have already plundered/rigged/sabotaged and otherwise blatantly pursued opportunism that can't be reversed. Cerberus, seizing the opportunity, advances itself and its vision of human interests during the crisis.





So you choose: do you convince the Council, which has finally agreed to listen to you for once because Shepard Is Always Right, to give The Illusive Man SPECTRE status? Or do you refuse, and either bet that TIM won't destroy the plot device and that you can simply take it from him/call his bluff?


If you refuse (Paragon: moral high ground, willing to risk a mission for uncompromised morality, vaguely anti-Cerberus), you either call TIM's bluff that he'd doom humanity, or you get a mission to seize the Prothean Plot Device by force. Ultimately you get the PPD, and Cerberus does not benefit. Spurned, the Illusive Man takes Cerberus and goes elsewhere to do their own thing: they don't help your war effort and they don't boost your war assets, and for most of the game they're presented as opportunistic bandits in between helping individual human colonies. They still take advantage of the chaos, still do bad things, but it's limited and opposed by the galaxy as a whole. Their support for the liberation of Earth is absent, but not critical.

Paragons are validated by getting the PPD, not strengthening Cerberus, and able to win without compromising their morals with such unpleasant allies.


If you agree (Renegade: expediency in getting the mission objective, pragmaticism in unsavory allies, pro-Human themes), you make the deal. Cerberus gives assets, hands over the Prothean Plot Device, and goes public as an official part of the galact war effort. The Illusive Man is a questionable ally at best as Cerberus acts autonomously, favoring Human interests and mitigating/subverting alien ones on a large scale. But they help build the wonder weapon, and help take back Earth, and do notable things for Humanity (defending major Human colony from Reapers) even as they strengthen themselves.

Renegades are validated by getting the PPD without risking the galaxy, strengthening Humanity in particular, and continuing the alliance with Cerberus as a (mostly) productive ally.







And that's before the end-game betrayal by Cerberus regardless. Cerberus can still want to seize control of the Reapers, after all, and still be willing to do whatever it takes.

If you made the alliance with Cerberus, then those Cerberus assets in your forces wait until after the decisive battle for Earth until they turn on Shepard's grand army and make a gambit for controlling the Reapers. Those Cerberus War Assets turn on your other allies, and throw everything in the air as they seek their end-game prize that will Secure Human Dominance ™. Because they were able to do so from a position of quasi-trust and were apart of the wonder weapon, the Cerberus machinations are stronger and more likely to succede: maybe they can actually control the Reapers, once they make further modifications, opening that up for an end-game option once Shepard regains control.


If you did NOT make an alliance with Cerberus, Cerberus shows up after the decisive battle to attack the weakened victor. Seizing the wonder weapon to make last-ditch, frantic alterations to, Cerberus's arrival turns a narrow victory into a potential disaster. Because those Cerberus scientists weren't part of the wonder weapon project from the start, however, they have less success with alterations. Maybe they can't make it control Reapers, unless you gave them the Collector Base. Shepard regains control.



Both Paragons and Renegades are once again able to claim validation. Paragons can claim that they were right not to trust Cerberus: Cerberus will betray no matter what. Renegades, however, can claim that at least they got war assets out of it, and that Cerberus did more help than bad. The effect on the ending choices (no 'Control Reaper' unless Cerberus allied OR given base) offers Choices and Consequences of an end-game level that both parties can feel better for.



Putting Cerberus in a quasi-antagonistic, optional-ally role also would strengthen the feasibility of CONSEQUENCES from the previous games, by tying into Cerberus's behavior (news reports/side quests) and being reflected in Cerberus's War Assets.

And the Final Choice.

Say that Cerberus's goal is to control the Reapers, for example. To do that they need to make modifications to the anti-Reaper weapon being developed. This can be done no matter what if they have a hand in creating the weapon from the start: TIM's offer to hand over the PPD isn't actually for the SPECTRE status, but for the chance to put his scientists to work. The SPECTRE status is just a distraction/secondary to avert suspicion.

If you don't make the alliance with Cerberus, then TIM turns to the 11th Hour strategy: let Shepard lead the liberation of Earth, then intervene, seize the wonder weapon, and make the modifications really, really quickly before the Reapers or galactic alliance can respond. In meta-terms, however, this is the Hail Mary that doesn't quite work. Only if Cerberus has the spoils of the Collector Base (say, using the Baby Reaper as a super-duper computer) can it make the changes in time. Otherwise, Cerberus can't complete the alterations by the time Shepard regains control and faces the Choice.

In other words, one of Shepard's end-trilogy decisions can be removed from play. If you did not give Cerberus the base, or ally with Cerberus in ME3, Shepard can not choose any form of 'control the Reapers' ending.

Choice and Consequences, hur hur.




Other ME2 and even ME1 choices could be reflected in War Assets that Cerberus might provide, plus news reports reflecting them.


The biggest factor, of course, would be the Collector Base. The spoiler-method of how Cerberus makes it's canonical ME3 army would be a really, really good consequence for keeping the Base only. Cerberus raises its army through trickery and even plenty of willing volunteers, turning civilians into elite commandos. Cerberus's outstanding performance even as the Alliance struggles promises to keep Cerberus as a force in the galaxy even after the war. Naturally, Cerberus war assets are in the thousands, rather than hundreds of commandoes, if you let them keep the base.  In the news, a CB-Cerberus is able to field entire armies in the defense of Human colonies, whereas a non-CB-Cerberus has to rely on logistical support and a much smaller force. 

News Ex: Legal-CB Cerberus is able to defeat a Reaper invasion of Terra Nova. Non-CB Cerberus is able to organize an evacuation of Terra Nova. The effectiveness varies by legality.




A contender for second-biggest would be Overlord, the other Cerberus Big Decision. Keeping Overlord active, for example, might allow Cerberus to control Reaper-worshipping Geth (and currently, only those Geth): ending Overlord does not. Cerberus with Overlord is Cerberus with a noticable Geth Fleet: Cerberus without Overlord is more Geth fighting for the Reapers. One gives more War Assets: the other gives more bad news in the galaxy.

News Ex: Overlord-Cerberus makes a 'miraculous' intervention for a Human colony, turning an invading Geth fleet around and taking it elsewhere. Overlordless-Cerberus is only able to evacuate a small number of people as the Geth raze the colony.




On the flip side, Tombs makes an obvious candidate for a spoiler if Shepard works with Cerberus. A Tombs quest would be framed differently between if Cerberus is an ally or not, but would pose a good chance for a Tombs-vs-Cerberus delimma. Say Toombs is in a standoff with a squad of Cerberus soldiers who want to fight the Reapers, albeit under Cerberus and not Shepard. Shepard has to side with one or the other... but Tombs will never work with Cerberus.

If you allied with Cerberus, then picking Tombs is the 'worst' choice: not only do you lose that squad's worth of assets, but Tombs goes berserk against other Cerberus assets, costing you War Assets. If you did not take the Illusive Man's deal, however, siding with Cerberus is the 'worst' choice: the Cerberus soldiers will go back to Cerberus, wheras Tombs would be a War Asset himself.




And so on. Other choices could have been factored in as well, whether as news reports or war assets.

Did Shepard NOT blow up the Cerberus genetics program? Cerberus genetic super soldiers as possible war asset boost.

Did Shepard NOT clean up the Cerberus rachni mess? Rampant Rachni harvested by Reapers, cause more problems elsewhere.

Did Shepard NOT do the Kohaku chain? Possible Alliance-Cerberus public cooperation that wouldn't exist with the truth.

Did Shepard do the 'seize Eclipse Crates for Cerberus?' How well you did determines the success of a Cerberus publicity supply drop to a Terminus colony.

Did Shepard find the Cerberus Agent data? Who you uploaded to affects relations between Alliance and Cerberus.


Etc.












Or at least, that's how I would have done it.

[Sebby]

JosephDucreux wrote...

Why can't we have the awesome TIM of ME2 back instead of this joke we're gonna get in ME3?

And it's all due to the almighty fanwanking powers that reside with the Team Dextro nuts.

After seeing the roles Team Dextro get in ME3 I'm surprised Shepard wasn't made empress of humanity.

[BlueMagitek]

Seboist wrote...

JosephDucreux wrote...

Why can't we have the awesome TIM of ME2 back instead of this joke we're gonna get in ME3?

And it's all due to the almighty fanwanking powers that reside with the Team Dextro nuts.

After seeing the roles Team Dextro get in ME3 I'm surprised Shepard wasn't made empress of humanity.

Reapers are harvesting species to fight the Tyranids; Shep becomes God Emperor in ME 4.

Edit:

Also, Dean, that would have been pretty amazing.  Like I've said before, I always expected Cerberus to be a post-Reaper problem, not a major antagonist during the invasion.  If anyone, I thought the Batarians were going to be antagonists, if not the Geth again.

Modifié par BlueMagitek, 21 janvier 2012 - 05:22 .

[Sebby]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

MizzNaaa wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Nice to see TIM reduced to the level of a Steven Seagal villain.

I doubt it's gonna be like that. Mac Walters is absolutely in love with tIM, and with right reasons. He's one of the few interesting video game villains, along with Saren and some others I can't recall right now.

At any rate, I do believe he has huge plans for him, so I woulndn't worry too much

If "huge plans" equal Resi 5 Wesker hamminess and villainy, then that is something to be worried about.

Sssssshhhhheeeeeepppppaaaaarrrrrddddd

[Kaiser Shepard]

Seboist wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

MizzNaaa wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Nice to see TIM reduced to the level of a Steven Seagal villain.

I doubt it's gonna be like that. Mac Walters is absolutely in love with tIM, and with right reasons. He's one of the few interesting video game villains, along with Saren and some others I can't recall right now.

At any rate, I do believe he has huge plans for him, so I woulndn't worry too much

If "huge plans" equal Resi 5 Wesker hamminess and villainy, then that is something to be worried about.

Sssssshhhhheeeeeepppppaaaaarrrrrddddd

                 Seven minutes. Seven Earth minutes is all the time I can spare to talk to you.

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 21 janvier 2012 - 06:36 .

[GodWood]

Xilizhra wrote...
It's the "advancement" part that bothers me, because his definition of it seems to include stepping on other people.

That "advancement" part is something that is shared by all races and all organizations within the galaxy as is the stepping on of other people.

That's how the galaxy rolls.

I could well believe he'd join the Reapers if he thought it would empower humanity, for instance if he found out that the Reapers intended to uplift humanity into a Reaper state instead of just kill them.

Why would Shepard believe such a thing? I understand why you would (you have the luxury of knowing "lol he's teh bad guy") but why would Shepard?

Among other things, the Alliance possesses accountability and a public history that doesn't consist solely of atrocities.

Now you're deflecting onto another topic.

Shepard does make an interrogative statement, along the lines of "The next thing I know, you'll be wanting to grow your own Reaper." TIM doesn't actually deny this, just repeats his thing about stopping the Reapers at any cost, something he's said before.

He's not a mind reader. If Shepard wanted this question annswered she should've asked it directly instead of saying an off-hand remark that could be interpreted as a joke.

Besides, you wouldn't stop the Reapers at any cost?

Because he set up the operation to kidnap biotic children to begin with.

We do not know of the extent of TIM's involvement in the capture of the children. From a metagame perspective it's likely he just gave a vague outline of what he wanted Teltin to be and then let the scientists figure out the rest (how to aquire the children, what to do with them etc) so he could maintain plausible deniability.

If TIM decided to join the Reapers because he'd rather humanity definitely ascended than possibly be killed. It's not so far-fetched; Saphra Deden himself advocated this.

It's also a goal that he could go for with or without CB.

Destroying it doesn't hinder this hypothetical plan that Shepard has conjured.

I'm not tossing them aside. I'd be happy to continue working with TIM afterwards (well, not happy, but tolerant) if he was willing to. Apparently not.

You should be mad they were handled so poorly then.

Anyways, unless it wasn't blatantly clear with my original response I was trying to subtley hint that the reason why you "couldn't trust TIM" is because of your metagame knowledge that TIM "is the villain".

[Armass81]

Dean_the_Young wrote...


*Snip*

Huge amounts of choices and consequences would have been great but lets be realistic here people. You didnt really expect Bioware could deliver them all, despite all the hype?

Would have been nice to get that amount of choices and consequences, bells and whistles, but it would have probably also put the game over budget and development time to the year 2013-2014. They would have had to put that amount of choices and consequences everywhere, not to mention more voice acting from star cast people that demand high pay(remember that they might have had to ditch Beattie for budget reasons alone), and it just becomes well... impossible.

Ideas like yours sound good on paper but when you start putting them into the actual game, they dont always work/you dont always have resources etc. Cuts and compromises will have to be made.

Im glad we have this much anyway should it reflect the final product. They wanted to make a war story, we have a decent and dramatic war story here, it doesnt need to be Shakespeare through and through. While it might still not be enough for some people, it is fair enough for me, tough the game still has elements that do more than raise my eyebrow *cough* EDI *cough*.

Let's just wait for the game now, shall we? Final judgements will be given after it comes. Who knows, maybe ill be there in the end bashing this game like you people here seem to do constantly, even tough you havent played it yet.

Modifié par Armass81, 21 janvier 2012 - 04:36 .

[John Renegade]

Armass81 wrote...

Huge amounts of choices and consequences would have been great but lets be realistic here people. You didnt really expect Bioware could deliver them all, despite all the hype?

Would have been nice to get that amount of choices and consequences, bells and whistles, but it would have probably also put the game over budget and development time to the year 2013-2014. They would have had to put that amount of choices and consequences everywhere, not to mention more voice acting from star cast people that demand high pay(remember that they might have had to ditch Beattie for budget reasons alone), and it just becomes well... impossible.

Ideas like yours sound good on paper but when you start putting them into the actual game, they dont always work/you dont always have resources etc. Cuts and compromises will have to be made.

Im glad we have this much anyway should it reflect the final product. They wanted to make a war story, we have a decent and dramatic war story here, it doesnt need to be Shakespeare through and through. While it might still not be enough for some people, it is fair enough for me, tough the game still has elements that do more than raise my eyebrow *cough* EDI *cough*.

Let's just wait for the game now, shall we? Final judgements will be given after it comes.

This is ridiculous. Most of what Dean says could be, in the worst case scenario, made into a few simple news reports, just enough to make it canon. The major decisions would add a few more cutscenes. If they didn't have enough money for that, they could simply cut a few sidequests - problem solved.

Besides, isn't Mass Effect supposed to be about the consequences of choices you make? Things like this should have the top priority in the game budget.

Modifié par John Renegade, 21 janvier 2012 - 01:07 .

[Xilizhra]

That "advancement" part is something that is shared by all races and all organizations within the galaxy as is the stepping on of other people.

That's how the galaxy rolls.

I'm part of the galaxy. I will roll my way.

Why would Shepard believe such a thing? I understand why you would (you have the luxury of knowing "lol he's teh bad guy") but why would Shepard?

Because he's never cared about any individual people. He's shown no sign that he values life, or even "humanity" aside from an abstract game piece that he's backing. Anything to give humanity an advantage, even if it's Reaper ascension.

He's not a mind reader. If Shepard wanted this question annswered she should've asked it directly instead of saying an off-hand remark that could be interpreted as a joke.

Besides, you wouldn't stop the Reapers at any cost?

He's extremely incautious with his words, if that's the case. And I might, but I'd ensure that I'd do everything possible to lessen the costs.

We do not know of the extent of TIM's involvement in the capture of the children. From a metagame perspective it's likely he just gave a vague outline of what he wanted Teltin to be and then let the scientists figure out the rest (how to aquire the children, what to do with them etc) so he could maintain plausible deniability.

"He's a little control-freaky. Just one man's opinion."
If TIM's plan was to be so vague, he wouldn't need to keep so few operations running. He wants to micromanage these as much as he can.

It's also a goal that he could go for with or without CB.

Destroying it doesn't hinder this hypothetical plan that Shepard has conjured.

But he wouldn't have the means to do so without the base, at least at first.

You should be mad they were handled so poorly then.

Anyways, unless it wasn't blatantly clear with my original response I was trying to subtley hint that the reason why you "couldn't trust TIM" is because of your metagame knowledge that TIM "is the villain".

I chose to destroy the base long before ME3 was announced.

[GodWood]

Xilizhra wrote...
Because he's never cared about any individual people.

You're still missing the point.

How does your Shepard 'know' this? She knows absolutely nothing of his past and little of his character. For all she knows he's got a loving wife and kids at home.

And again, why does your Shepard conjure up these negative traits for him and him alone? Why not suspect the asari councilor of being a serial rapist or the turian as a drugs dealer? You've had just as few conversations with them.

He's shown no sign that he values life, or even "humanity" aside from an abstract game piece that he's backing. Anything to give humanity an advantage, even if it's Reaper ascension.

Your second sentence contradicts the first.

If he's willing to do anything to give humanity an edge he must value humanity (the species not the concept) a great deal.

"He's a little control-freaky. Just one man's opinion."
If TIM's plan was to be so vague, he wouldn't need to keep so few operations running. He wants to micromanage these as much as he can.

Teltin was a lesson. It made him realise how important it is to have few operations so he could micromanage.

But he wouldn't have the means to do so without the base, at least at first.

And destroying it also leaves you with your own primitive technology, keeps the mysteries and weaknesses of the Reapers a secret and potentially dooms the galaxy.

That is a reality. Yours is a paranoid hypothetical your Shepard must have spontaneously thought up on the spot.

I chose to destroy the base long before ME3 was announced.

That's not what I meant.

You as the player know he's the villain. The moody lighting, the ominous music, the symbolism, these are all external things that show you the player that he is 'teh bad guy'. Compare with the council despite being fundamentally worse then TIM they are presented as 'good guys' thus (despite their actions) you (or at least the average player) will trust them.

Whether it's conscious or not you have been manipulated into seeing that he is the bad guy and that is why you destroy the base and that is why you'll assume the worst in him.

Modifié par GodWood, 21 janvier 2012 - 03:13 .

[GodWood]

Armass81 wrote...
Ideas like yours sound good on paper but when you start putting them into the actual game, they dont always work/you dont always have resources etc. Cuts and compromises will have to be made.

Exactly. Things like turning EDI into a sexbot, pulling a prothean out of thin air and 13 romance plots (3 of them new) are far more important.

[Xilizhra]

You're still missing the point.

How does your Shepard 'know' this? She knows absolutely nothing of his past and little of his character. For all she knows he's got a loving wife and kids at home.

And again, why does your Shepard conjure up these negative traits for him and him alone? Why not suspect the asari councilor of being a serial rapist or the turian as a drugs dealer? You've had just as few conversations with them.

He doesn't have a "home," he lives on that station and keeps moving it around. And I'm not saying that any of this is a certainty, which is why I'm not actively hunting him down yet. What I'm saying is that I have no real reason to trust him.
Also, there aren't any Councilors who are asking that I give the base to them and only them to secure the advancement of their race.

Your second sentence contradicts the first.

If he's willing to do anything to give humanity an edge he must value humanity (the species not the concept) a great deal.

I suppose it depends on whether you consider Reaperified humanity to still be humanity.

Teltin was a lesson. It made him realise how important it is to have few operations so he could micromanage.

Itself speculation.

And destroying it also leaves you with your own primitive technology, keeps the mysteries and weaknesses of the Reapers a secret and potentially dooms the galaxy.

That is a reality. Yours is a paranoid hypothetical your Shepard must have spontaneously thought up on the spot.

Any choice I make might doom the galaxy. And this wasn't on the spot; I'd been wondering about this for some time.

You as the player know he's the villain. The moody lighting, the ominous music, the symbolism, these are all external things that show you the player that he is 'teh bad guy'. Compare with the council despite being fundamentally worse then TIM they are presented as 'good guys' thus (despite their actions) you (or at least the average player) will trust them.

Actually, I thought he'd be a competing power with the Council that we could choose to side with if we kept the base, and fade into obscurity otherwise. I had no idea of ME3's circumstances turning out this way.

[Sebby]

GodWood wrote...

Armass81 wrote...
Ideas like yours sound good on paper but when you start putting them into the actual game, they dont always work/you dont always have resources etc. Cuts and compromises will have to be made.

Exactly. Things like turning EDI into a sexbot, pulling a prothean out of thin air and 13 romance plots (3 of them new) are far more important.

The worst part about it are the creepy pedofilic undertones. EDI couldn't even grasp the simple concept of making jokes in ME2 but now "she" is being plunged into some kind of intimate relationship with all the emotional baggage that it entails?

BW is one depraved company and this is part of a larger trend....



I echo the sentiments of this one RPG Codex poster.

I have to admit, I'm looking forward to ME3, DA3, and whatever else
Bioware has coming. I want to see how far they can take their deviant
fanfiction before the gaming mainstream catches on. So far, the Mass
Effects have been framed as cheap sci-fi action movies, which somewhat
masks the creepiness underneath, but for example DA2 barely even tries
to hide the fact that it's a dating sim with a combat minigame. I'm
curious what depths they'll sink to before crashing and burning.

Modifié par Seboist, 24 janvier 2012 - 07:49 .

[Armass81]

Are you people going to start making youtube channels and huge amounts of videos now on how every Mass Effect game except 1 sucks so badly, like a certain guy called Smudboy did? He at least seems to be obsessed about doing those things, I guess the second game really pissed him off or something...

Modifié par Armass81, 21 janvier 2012 - 06:00 .

[BlueMagitek]

Xil, I don't think you quite understand; while I could be wrong, you seem to be explaining what you're doing and what you know. Fair enough. But GodWood wants to know how your Shepard has the player information that *you* are basing your decisions on.

[Blacklash93]

Seboist wrote...
but for example DA2 barely even tries
to hide the fact that it's a dating sim with a combat minigame. I'm
curious what depths they'll sink to before crashing and burning.[/url]

Dragon Age 2 was not trying to be a dating sim. There was plenty more to it than romances and you and that poster are just grasping at straws.

Also going to RPGCodex for calm, reasonable, well-informed opinions that aren't littered with incredibly rude insults is like looking in a garbage can for gold.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 22 janvier 2012 - 01:33 .

[Blacklash93]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Smudboy's videos are well thought-out criticism. He doesn't hate the games. Such a thing is horrible to your average Biodrone.

So having a difference in opinion to some guy who sees plot holes everywhere makes one a biodrone? I'm not surprised at such logic in a thread like this.

[HiroVoid]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Smudboy's videos are well thought-out criticism. He doesn't hate the games. Such a thing is horrible to your average Biodrone.

So having a difference in opinion to some guy who sees plot holes everywhere makes one a biodrone? I'm not surprised at such logic in a thread like this.

I think he's referring more to the people that feel the need to constantly insult Smudboy with every insult in the dictionary for providing criticism rather than just going 'I disagree.'

[Blacklash93]

wiggles89 wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

Dragon Age 2 was not trying to be a dating sim. There was plenty more to it than romances and you and that poster are just grasping at straws.

This is true. It also had choices that didn't significantly impact the narrative and combat that consisted solely of killing waves of parachuting ninjas.

My point still stands. Romances were a very small part of the game.