3618 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

ThePwener wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

1. TIM still gains knowledge from the base- making my decision pointless.

2. Anderson steps down- again, making my decision pointless.

I consider Retribution and ME2 in the same "area".

Those are NOT retcons.   No: not even if they said that what you chose never happened.  Why? Because there's no established canon for those events.  If they do say "This is how it really happened for choice X" then all they've done is to define canon for that choice. You're free to dislike the hell out of that, but a retcon it is not. No, a retcon is when something that was already canon is later said to have happened differently or even that it never happened at all. Retroactive continuity.

Feign ignorance is a serious issue didy, just look at what happened to Star Wars.

What Star wars did was complety alter events. The first time we saw the first Starwars, Han Solo shot first. Years later Lucas said it never happened and had Greddo do it. In the return of the Jedi, we had jedi ghoust anikin look on way, years later Lucas said he never looked that way and changed his look......That's a retcon.

In ME, Anderson becomes conciler....he then later stepsdown..... It was explain why it happened, had a derection on why it happened, and it never denied that he was a concilor....That is not a retcon.

[dreman9999]

ThePwener wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

You say Retcon..
I say pay attenion.

You say pay attention
I say BW could have done better

I'm sorry. Bioware explain everything in detail from books, fact from ME1 tech and events in ME1. If you don't like the results, that's fine.....But it doesn't mean it's a retcon, especialy if there is an explination.

[didymos1120]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Serious question here. So if they introduce a way to defeat the reaper it is not in-fact a retcon.

As long as that way doesn't retroactively alter something that's been firmly established as fact, no, not a retcon.  Though you can get into murky areas where we learn that something previously believed was mistaken.  That may or may not be a retcon, even if it looks exactly like it.  For instance, this new fact may have been intended all along, but the writers just failed to give it a proper set-up by dropping hints in the form of foreshadowing, etc.  Or they were misleading people on purpose so it would be a surprise. 

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

The explicit reason that we are losing the "war" on drugs (which is as much a philosophical war as a physical war) is because of addiction.

No, it is not a philosophical war. It is a very phyiscal war and we're losing because of a lack of support in other countries (namely South America), the inability of our police forces to take the necessary aggressive action, as well as a dirth of home-grown drugs.

It's just not worth fighting. It was a bad idea to ban them in the first place.

If made legal the drugs would be profitable and safer too.

It's a VERY philosophical war.

Why are drugs illegal in the first place?  Because everyone thinks that they are bad.  That term is completely subjective.  Especially when you consider that there are other things that are "bad" for us (junk food), but they have not made them illegal substances.

It is a war based upon ideaology.

Just because there are PHYSICAL reasons for other people to oppose us (making money), that doesn't mean that there are no philosophical reasons for it.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

didymos1120 wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Serious question here. So if they introduce a way to defeat the reaper it is not in-fact a retcon.

As long as that way doesn't retroactively alter something that's been firmly established as fact, no, not a retcon.  Though you can get into murky areas where we learn that something previously believed was mistaken.  That may or may not be a retcon, even if it looks exactly like it.  For instance, this new fact may have been intended all along, but the writers just failed to give it a proper set-up by dropping hints in the form of foreshadowing, etc.  Or they were misleading people on purpose so it would be a surprise. 

So if it happens that dark matter plays a part,its more a chekhovs gun then a retcon,same with the theory on Protheans being in stasis on mars.

[ThePwener]

I sometimes get the feeling BW is making this up as they go along. The books/comics ****** a lot of people off.... always.

[Sisterofshane]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

@Humaniod_Typhoon

Meh, they claimed that the technical advances occurred in between ME1 and ME2. That disqualifies it from retcon status, and I just consider it a game mechanic though (like the biotic 'bolts' that act like physical objects), and largely ignore it for lore purposes, similar to ignoring space-ships making noise in sci-fi movies.

Seems like a stupid idea but my point still stands. How can you trust a guy with tech like what was at the Collector's Base if he does crap like that to you? In the military, you basically have no choice... in ME2, Shep was basically like a badass mercenary/James Bond that could make his own decisions.

You don't need to trust him in any general sense. All you need to do is have faith in TIM's desire to save his own butt.

i don't think it's that simple.  What if TIM's self survival technique is to become the very thing we are trying to fight?

It's more reasonable to assume that we would find evidence on building Reapers at the CB then evidence on how to destroy one.

*TIM turns himself into a reaper*

THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11!1!!!!!!111!!

See?!?!  Exactly my point! (LOL)

We know for a fact that TIM doesn't want the base solely to fight the Reapers.
He also wants to use it to secure Humanity's future dominance, dominance led by Ceberus.

[Gregolian]

...... I feel like this has devolved into a canon discussion the likes of which could rival Star Wars and Halo discussion boards.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Gregolian wrote...

...... I feel like this has devolved into a canon discussion the likes of which could rival Star Wars and Halo discussion boards.

Ugh,I was on the bungie forums for months before Reach came out..canon wars were in pretty much every thread.

[Gregolian]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Gregolian wrote...

...... I feel like this has devolved into a canon discussion the likes of which could rival Star Wars and Halo discussion boards.

Ugh,I was on the bungie forums for months before Reach came out..canon wars were in pretty much every thread.

With the Halo 4 release the Ghost of Onyx book is being torn to shreds.  I sense the closer to release this gets the worst this canon thing will get too.

[Kaiser Shepard]

ThePwener wrote...

I sometimes get the feeling BW is making this up as they go along. The books/comics ****** a lot of people off.... always.

The 'filler' nature of ME2's main plot, namely the Collector arc, makes me feel the same way. The way I see it, at the end of ME1 they probably only had just that, Revelation and the obvious endgame scenario that is the Reaper War to work towards.

[Shimmer_Gloom]

Sisterofshane wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

The explicit reason that we are losing the "war" on drugs (which is as much a philosophical war as a physical war) is because of addiction.

No, it is not a philosophical war. It is a very phyiscal war and we're losing because of a lack of support in other countries (namely South America), the inability of our police forces to take the necessary aggressive action, as well as a dirth of home-grown drugs.

It's just not worth fighting. It was a bad idea to ban them in the first place.

If made legal the drugs would be profitable and safer too.

It's a VERY philosophical war.

Why are drugs illegal in the first place?  Because everyone thinks that they are bad.  That term is completely subjective.  Especially when you consider that there are other things that are "bad" for us (junk food), but they have not made them illegal substances.

It is a war based upon ideaology.

Just because there are PHYSICAL reasons for other people to oppose us (making money), that doesn't mean that there are no philosophical reasons for it.

Absolutely.  I agree completely.

BUT.  And this is a big fat BUT.

The philosophical problem of controlled substances has CREATED a physical problem of corrupt power structures that support the physical product.

Therefore, destroying the philosophical basis for illeagal drugs (by making them legal) does NOT get rid of the 'monsters' the drugs created.  Nor does it get rid of their supporters, the addicts...Its kind of like pointing out that a person has a problem with their brakes as they are speeding down hill.  Sure we know what caused it but fixing the brakes won't fix the problem.

The War on Drugs is a crappy situation.  And I don't see any easy solution (especially when we do the cartel's recruiting for them and put people in jail for drug charges).  It sucks.

But that doesn't mean that Herroin isn't dangerous.  Or that Meth isn't one of the most destructive substances to a person's behavior I can think of.  Sure alchohol is bad.  Sure junk food is bad.  But Meth is on a whole other scale of bad. Ug.  Gross.

Talking about drugs is like talking about American Politics... no good can come of it.

[ThePwener]

Sisterofshane wrote...

He also wants to use it to secure Humanity's future dominance, dominance led by Ceberus.

That's not so bad.... if you're human. The base will is never going to be used anyway. When we reach TIM in ME3 he'll say he hasn't been able to use it yet and then you kill him and take over Cerberus/destroy Cerberus.

Either way, you get the base.

[Sisterofshane]

ThePwener wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

He also wants to use it to secure Humanity's future dominance, dominance led by Ceberus.

That's not so bad.... if you're human. The base will is never going to be used anyway. When we reach TIM in ME3 he'll say he hasn't been able to use it yet and then you kill him and take over Cerberus/destroy Cerberus.

Either way, you get the base.

I don't know, they've done some pretty awful things to our own, all for the sake of "human advancement".  They're not really the kind of people that I would put in charge of everything.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

I don't know, they've done some pretty awful things to our own, all for the sake of "human advancement".  They're not really the kind of people that I would put in charge of everything.

Why such a huge lack of faith?

You'd think they never brought you back from death, gave you a crew, a ship, money, and objectives.

If you don't trust them so much why help them fight the Collectors in the first place?

Well,there is the whole issue of Shepard you know,being anti-colonist abduction and anti-reaper.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

I don't know, they've done some pretty awful things to our own, all for the sake of "human advancement".  They're not really the kind of people that I would put in charge of everything.

Why such a huge lack of faith?

You'd think they never brought you back from death, gave you a crew, a ship, money, and objectives.

If you don't trust them so much why help them fight the Collectors in the first place?

Yeah. they do all that with GIANT strings attached.  As soon as you consider the favor repayed, TIM pretty much turns on you.

The reason I fight for him is because there is no other way.  People are disapearing, and I have the ability to help.  I'm not one to look a gift horse in the mouth.

TIM is a fair weather friend.  As long as you do exactly what he says, he's your best bud.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Yeah. they do all that with GIANT strings attached.  As soon as you consider the favor repayed, TIM pretty much turns on you.

When has he ever turned on you?

I haven't confirmed it with every possible ending, but basically  you can get to an option where you tell TIM that you're not going to play by his rules anymore.  He suddenly goes from being all friendly to adopting a very hostile stance and tone with Shepard.

He goes from being your friend, to not.  He's just not inclined to help you if you don't play "the game" by his rules.

If you kept the Collector Base, and choose the renegade dialogue path in the final ending, this doesn't happen.  Presumably because you are doing exactly what he wants you to do.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Yeah. they do all that with GIANT strings attached.  As soon as you consider the favor repayed, TIM pretty much turns on you.

When has he ever turned on you?

"He wasn't exactly forthcoming regarding the 'abandoned' Collector Vessel."

"That was necessary to guarantee mission success."

"No, it wasn't."

"Yes, it was."

[Sisterofshane]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Yeah. they do all that with GIANT strings attached.  As soon as you consider the favor repayed, TIM pretty much turns on you.

When has he ever turned on you?

"He wasn't exactly forthcoming regarding the 'abandoned' Collector Vessel."

"That was necessary to guarantee mission success."

"No, it wasn't."

"Yes, it was."

I don't know what point you're trying to prove, but I think that Saphra had a fair question.  So I answered it.

[Ieldra]

Sisterofshane wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...
Yeah. they do all that with GIANT strings attached.  As soon as you consider the favor repayed, TIM pretty much turns on you.

When has he ever turned on you?

I haven't confirmed it with every possible ending, but basically  you can get to an option where you tell TIM that you're not going to play by his rules anymore.  He suddenly goes from being all friendly to adopting a very hostile stance and tone with Shepard.

He goes from being your friend, to not.  He's just not inclined to help you if you don't play "the game" by his rules.

If you kept the Collector Base, and choose the renegade dialogue path in the final ending, this doesn't happen.  Presumably because you are doing exactly what he wants you to do.

If you keep the base and tell him to use it against the Reapers, he answers with something like "It's not that simple", and you can then answer either with that dreadful "soul of the species" line or close the connection. He's still friendly in that exchange.

I can't remember what you get when you destroy the base. I did that only once.

As for the Collector ship, I'm inclined to take him at face value because I cannot see what he would have to gain by a betrayal at this polnt.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 03 août 2011 - 07:45 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

Sisterofshane wrote...

I don't know what point you're trying to prove, but I think that Saphra had a fair question.  So I answered it.

Just playing out what probably would've become of that question, as it usually goes regarding trusting TIM.

[Ieldra]

Shimmer_Gloom wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

What if those Drug Dealers represented a significant force that could be used against an alien invasion on Earth?

I agree that they are despicable people, but to allow more people to die b/c I was unwilling to work with someone is not moral, it is the abdication of reason and logic for dogma.

That is a perfectly reasonable argument.  And this is why Shepard worked for Cerberus in ME2.  But WORKING and TRUSTING are two different things.  Did I work with Cerberus?  Yes.  Do I trust Cerberus?  Hells No.

Do I trust them to use the CB responsibly?  No.  Do I trust them to share information with me?  No.  Do I trust they can hold the CB against the Reapers?  Do I trust they are even competent to work with Reaper tech and not get indoctrinated.... eh.  This is a bit debateable.  I'm gunna go with no.

I see the question of who has the base as a secondary concern. As long as it is in the hands of a faction I can reasonably expect to fight the Reapers I'm ok with it - for now. At the point where we have to make the decision, destroying the base is, above all else, premature. Once destroyed, you cannot undestroy it while the option to destroy it remains open for later if you keep it. It is essentially the same as with the genophage data: better have it (intact somewhere) and not need it.

Of course you cannot trust TIM to do what you want. But then, neither can you  trust the Council to do what you want. The games are ample proof of that. You can, however, trust all of the factions in the galaxy with this: they want to survive, and if they consist of technologically advanced intelligent organic lifeforms, then they won't if the Reapers win. Everyone has an interest in survival. That's why I trust TIM to not willingly do anything that will help the Reapers.

Do I see the risk of another major f*uckup? Of course I do. But then, what can Cerberus do even if they become indoctrinated? It's still small fry compared to even one Reaper. Any advanced technology from the base can only be reproduced and deployed on a large scale with the resources of a few planets behind the faction who does it.

Do I think Cerberus can hold it against the Reapers? Of course not. But neither can we. For the Reapers it remains a neglible resource anyway. Production of a new Reaper is a long-term project and won't help in the war, and everything else on the base is nothing they don't already have.

For now, the option that serves the primary objective - to defeat the Reapers - best is to ensure that the information contained in the base remains intact. That it's Cerberus who's got it is unfortunate, but in the end who's got it is a secondary concern. If they won't share the knowledge willingly, then it can be taken from them (I suspect we'll be called on to do exactly that in ME3). Much easier than to take it from a Reaper.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 03 août 2011 - 08:20 .