631 réponses à ce sujet

[TheOptimist]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


Newsflash. If the game doens't revolve around Shpe, why are all the ther cameos there? Why is that asari from the Thorian there?

Because my Shepard let them live?

[jtav]

No, but I'm sick of the game punishing me as a player for doing what I thought best. I'n sick of gambles paying off repeatedly against all reason. I'm sick of BW enshrining principles I think are immoral.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Newsflash. If the game doens't revolve around Shpe, why are all the ther cameos there? Why is that asari from the Thorian there? Doesn't the player understand he did something good?

Don't bring up arguments that backfire this spectacularly.
Actually, go ahead and do that. It's fun to watch you put your foot in your mouth.

It's just as fun as watching you complain about something so trivial, just because you need the game to tell you that you were a good boy for once.

Why Shiala was there? Didn't you pay attention to what she said? She had problems with the after effects of the Thorian spores.

Sorry, the universe itself isn't orbiting around Shepard, as it's quite capable of managing just fine without him/her.

I don't need the game to tell me anything. But the game should be equal to both paragons and renegades.

And no, it odens't explain anything. Why was she on Illum specificly. right in that very same building where Sheppard was? Why were all the others cameos?

Your arguments make no sense as usual...

[Ryzaki]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...


THat would occur with the paragon choices as well. Revenge for a death vs revenge for taking away someone's status. Either way one way or the other it's never going to be an equal amount of content.

As long as there's something, and the overall design is balanced to not make a 'better' or 'worse', individual choices don't need equality per choice. For example, I don't demand that there should have been an equal payout if you killed the Rachni, but that Krogan or some Noveria executive on Illium giving Shepard some credits (or even a tech upgrade) as 'thanks' would have been a much better balance: a small, plot-minor gain for Renegades in ME2 balanced by the potential great and significant free ally in ME3 for the Paragons.

(Though personally I would have made enslaving the Thorian a Renegade-choice on Feros as a means of getting the Cipher: Renegade Shep takes the Thorian's cipher and leaves it to the Alliance in exchange for its life, enslaving it and then using the Thorian's ability for the Alliance in making Feros a boom-town colony paragons would miss out on. )

I've never killed Gianni (not even sure how) so..not sure about that. I did side with lorik once (seemed the most renegade thing to do to me) but he still showed up.

You can kill Gianni if you tell her to go arrest Annoleus and also warn Annoleus that she's going to do so. They kill eachother, leaving you a garage pass to pick up off the floor.

It's not a common choice taken, and as an individual choice it doesn't grate me much, but I do have something of a soft spot for Lorik Quin.

And this Krogan magically knows that the Rachni Queen was saved? Really? 

I assume you mean killed, since the Rachni Queen being saved would be reflected by the Rachni Ambassador. And since the is both galactic acknowledgement that the Rachni were resurrected and wiped out again (galactic news) and there were witnesses/people aware (people in the Noveria labs who survived), all it would take to justify was one Krogan with an ear to the grape-vine.

Alternatively, a Noveria-exec on buisness to Illium, as I outlined above.

Shiala should've been replaced by Elizabeth true.

Agreed. Which is not to say Shiala couldn't have had a role, mind you: I think Shiala coming to Illium if she survived was good. Both share motivations for wanting to help the colonists. The way I'd have done it, Shiala would be more comfortable and composed on Illium compared to Elizabeth (who gets flustered by the anti-alien asari). Likewise, Shiala would be more mature and composed in her invitation with Shepard, while Elizabeth could have been more flustered and embarassed, as befits the younger/out-of-her-league girl.

And sometimes the alternatives will seem ridculous and won't fit properly into the story. 

Then make one that isn't ridiculous and will fit. Or, if it comes to that, revise the story. Mass Effect is supposed to be a story about reflecting choices, after all.

Not, mind you, that there are many choices where an alternative would be ridiculous.

I really could've did without that whole invitation period. Bleh. Asari and their touchiness. What I wouldn't give for a interrupt to punch everyone of them trying to touch my Shep in the face....

Though agreed for the most part. Both the renegade and paragon choices could do with better intergration in the plot. I hope ME3 does it better than the earlier games did. 

[Ryzaki]

Lotion Soronnar wrote.

I'll put things in BIG, BOLD LETTERING to EMPHASIZE things that should be EMPAHASIZED. Yet somehow it still goes over your head.

I don't acare about your paragon or renegade. For all I care you can be happy with eating dung. Plenty of others are not.

I'll complain about it if I want, and I have every right to.
Feel free to whine about it if you wish.

The irony is that I don't even care about it much, as most of my actions are paragon anyway, but those that complain do have a valid point. You don't. And therefore I will stand with them.

Alright then we'll both feel free to complain about what we wish. How utterly enlightening. And you're whining as much as I am sweet cheeks. 

[Lotion Soronarr]

TheOptimist wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


Newsflash. If the game doens't revolve around Shpe, why are all the ther cameos there? Why is that asari from the Thorian there?

Because my Shepard let them live?

Why is she THERE specificly? What are the chances she'll run into Shep again?

Why are all the other camoes of Shep paragon choices there? While, to acknowledge the choice of course.. and because the universe DOES revolve around Sheppard apparently.

So tell me.. Why isnt' there a colonist from the colony there to thank me for killing her? Why isn't there a Krogan there to thank me for killing hte Rachnii queen? Why isn't there a son/relative of Fisk there to extract vengance?
Why isnt' there ANYTHING to show the game it acknowledges that happened?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Ryzaki wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote.

I'll put things in BIG, BOLD LETTERING to EMPHASIZE things that should be EMPAHASIZED. Yet somehow it still goes over your head.

I don't acare about your paragon or renegade. For all I care you can be happy with eating dung. Plenty of others are not.

I'll complain about it if I want, and I have every right to.
Feel free to whine about it if you wish.

The irony is that I don't even care about it much, as most of my actions are paragon anyway, but those that complain do have a valid point. You don't. And therefore I will stand with them.

Alright then we'll both feel free to complain about what we wish. How utterly enlightening. And you're whining as much as I am sweet cheeks. 

Yeah, well my wining at least makes sense.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I don't need the game to tell me anything. But the game should be equal to both paragons and renegades.

And no, it odens't explain anything. Why was she on Illum specificly. right in that very same building where Sheppard was? Why were all the others cameos?

Your arguments make no sense as usual...

Your counter-arguments are weak as usual. What else is new.

Trust me. People can live without pointless cameos. Like Rana. There was really no other reason for her to be in ME2, other than to tell the player that she's alive, and might plot something against Shepard in the future. 

If you've killed her, then none are the wiser, except you, because you know that she can't torment anyone else anymore with her BS.

You don't need the equivalent of a big fat neon sign smacking you in the face with the text "GOOD JOB!" to know that you probably did something good by your own morals and standards. 

If you don't feel good about a character and you dealt with him/her, they're gone, and you know it. SImple as that.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 24 août 2011 - 07:33 .

[Dave of Canada]

Except Rana talks about the Krogan Warlord's research and how he's doing it, it's exposition you don't get unless you spared her.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 24 août 2011 - 07:33 .

[TheOptimist]

Saphra Deden wrote...


Anyone who imports gets the experience, money, and alignment points. I didn't play ME1 just for that.

 
I assume that since it wasn't guaranteed there would be a second ME you played ME1 because it was a good game.

What I was looking forward to, what was advertised, was my decisions.

What special cameos did I get? If I killed Finch I got nothing. If I killed Chorban I got nothing. If I killed Fist I got nothing. If I killed Rana I got nothing. If I killed the rachni queen I got nothing. If I killed Wrex I got nothing. If I killed the Council I got nothing. If I killed Helena Blake I got nothing. If I killed Shiala I got a nameless colonist with less dialogue.

Yep, killing all those people means they don't talk to you. What I continue to be mistified by is what you were expecting.

So I really don't know what you are trying to prove here.

That Renegades got exactly what they wanted based on the choices they made.

There is no reason what-so-ever that dead characters should result in nothing in the next game. As Dean explained in his post there are alternatives. At least try to use your imagination here. It would be helpful. I loathe people who lack creativity.

Yes there is, it's cause they're dead and they're not going to talk to you. Maybe your Shep should take up Necromancy after the Reapers get beaten.

[Someone With Mass]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Except Rana talks about the Krogan Warlord's research and how he's doing it, it's exposition you don't get unless you spared her.

So? Is that something vital which you absolutely need to accomplish your mission?

It's just something you have to DEAL WITH when you're killing characters. Like in ME3. You won't get any replacements at all if some of your squadmates are dead. That doesn't mean it's a complete fail. That means you'll simply have to do things differently.

Accept it, or play the game differently.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 24 août 2011 - 07:37 .

[Dave of Canada]

TheOptimist wrote...

I assume that since it wasn't guaranteed there would be a second ME you played ME1 because it was a good game.

Ignoring everything else you've stated, as it's been answered countless times and you don't get it: Mass Effect was advertised as a trilogy and that your choices would matter.

[Dave of Canada]

Someone With Mass wrote...

So? Is that something vital which you absolutely need to accomplish your mission?

It's still exposition, which you otherwise wouldn't get because of your actions in Mass Effect 1. There's no benefit, there's only consequence. Had there been say... a computer which you can access and get the very same exposition without Rana, it wouldn't be as bad.

Hell, I don't even know why you're heavily against Renegades getting any unique content to themselves.

Edit:

Someone With Mass wrote...

Accept it, or play the game differently.

I'll accept it when you accept that Renegades need equality.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 24 août 2011 - 07:40 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Live? Sure. And we could live if ME3 is crap. But what's life for if not criticism of the flaws of others, hm?

I can't presume to speak for too many others, but for me the ME2 Paragon/Regade carryovers were flawed in execution and design, and flawed badly. Did it make the game unplayable? No. Did it make it not fun, or ruin the carryovers that were there? No. Was is noticeably worse than it could have, and should have, been?

Yes. ME2's carryovers, for both Paragon and Renegade, were flawed, and more on the Renegade than the Paragon. Optimistically, looking at Bioware's product of DA2, I think Bioware recognizes the sort of problems that went on and will try to avoid a repeat. Call it a beginner's mistake in learning, since ME2 really is one of the first in the new genre of epic-trilogy RPGs.

But as a franchise that advertises and claims to moral equivalnce and 'no right path', ME2 did a poor job at reflecting that... just as ME1 did a poor job at setting it up (what with nearly every story decision amounting to a 'spare them/kill them' choice with carryover only if you spared them).

There's plenty of valid grounds to criticize ME2's performance and treatment of carryovers. A lack of design equality isn't something to simply gloss over.

[Ryzaki]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

So? Is that something vital which you absolutely need to accomplish your mission?

It's still exposition, which you otherwise wouldn't get because of your actions in Mass Effect 1. There's no benefit, there's only consequence. Had there been say... a computer which you can access and get the very same exposition without Rana, it wouldn't be as bad.

Hell, I don't even know why you're heavily against Renegades getting any unique content to themselves.

Edit:

Someone With Mass wrote...

Accept it, or play the game differently.

I'll accept it when you accept that Renegades need equality.

Eh...considering PS3 players and players who don't import a game get the same treatement that's not exactly unique to renegades. That information never should've been with her in the first place. 

...And I really should've gotten a second chance to kill her. <_<

Modifié par Ryzaki, 24 août 2011 - 07:42 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Since when did something have to be unique to Renegades to be a flaw Renegades have?

Heck, the only reason I'm not the first to argue that Paragons are screwed by the Collector Base decision (because nearly all the reasons for destroying it are subverted by post-ME2 plot) is because of the many other people ahead of me.

[Wulfram]

Rana isn't there for exposition - I can't think of anything of note she tells you that Okeer doesn't. She's there as one of those negative consequences for being paragon which people are always complaining don't exist.

[Ryzaki]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Since when did something have to be unique to Renegades to be a flaw Renegades have?

Heck, the only reason I'm not the first to argue that Paragons are screwed by the Collector Base decision (because nearly all the reasons for destroying it are subverted by post-ME2 plot) is because of the many other people ahead of me.

I never said it wasn't a flaw for renegades. I'm just saying they're not the only ones affected by it. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Ryzaki wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Since when did something have to be unique to Renegades to be a flaw Renegades have?

Heck, the only reason I'm not the first to argue that Paragons are screwed by the Collector Base decision (because nearly all the reasons for destroying it are subverted by post-ME2 plot) is because of the many other people ahead of me.

I never said it wasn't a flaw for renegades. I'm just saying they're not the only ones affected by it. 

I know.

[Xilizhra]

jtav wrote...

No, but I'm sick of the game punishing me as a player for doing what I thought best. I'n sick of gambles paying off repeatedly against all reason. I'm sick of BW enshrining principles I think are immoral.

And what principles would those be?

[Someone With Mass]

Dave of Canada wrote...

It's still exposition, which you otherwise wouldn't get because of your actions in Mass Effect 1. There's no benefit, there's only consequence. Had there been say... a computer which you can access and get the very same exposition without Rana, it wouldn't be as bad.

Hell, I don't even know why you're heavily against Renegades getting any unique content to themselves.

Again. That's something you have to simply accept when you're killing characters. Or, you can stop playing so blindly according to the Renegade route and actually make exceptions, like all the other players are. You know. Think of the character as a person, and not as a future reward like a greedy little ******. I doubt everyone in the galaxy will step up to Shepard and give him/her a pat on the shoulder and kiss his ass so hard for the actions against the Collectors. I don't think anyone but Shepard will mention potential dead teammates in ME3 either. And that's because the galaxy doesn't give a damn about what Shepard's doing.  Very small parts of it do.

Deal with it.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Since when did something have to be unique to Renegades to be a flaw Renegades have?

Heck, the only reason I'm not the first to argue that Paragons are screwed by the Collector Base decision (because nearly all the reasons for destroying it are subverted by post-ME2 plot) is because of the many other people ahead of me.

I never said it wasn't a flaw for renegades. I'm just saying they're not the only ones affected by it. 

I know.

Can you please elaborate on Paragons being screwed by the CB decision? (smiley as a joke)

I assume you mean that since Cerberus does what it's doing anyways, it doesn't matter?

[Someone With Mass]

Dave of Canada wrote...

I'll accept it when you accept that Renegades need equality.

Only when you start killing characters and actually think about the consequences. Or even better. Learn to accept them.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 24 août 2011 - 07:49 .

[TheOptimist]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]TheOptimist wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...


Newsflash. If the game doens't revolve around Shpe, why are all the ther cameos there? Why is that asari from the Thorian there?[/quote]

Because my Shepard let them live?[/quote]

Why is she THERE specificly? What are the chances she'll run into Shep again?

Why are all the other camoes of Shep paragon choices there? While, to acknowledge the choice of course.. and because the universe DOES revolve around Sheppard apparently.[/quote]

I'm not going to dispute that the Mass effect universe seems to have a certain shepard-centric bent, but there are only a handful of people that show up again, most just email you. 

[quote]So tell me.. Why isnt' there a colonist from the colony there to thank me for killing her?[/quote]
Because the colonists are dead too?
 
[quote]Why isn't there a Krogan there to thank me for killing hte Rachnii queen?[/quote]
For what, he'd just have done it if you didn't have the quad.  Seriously, why do you think a Krogan would care about you killing the Rachni again? They have much bigger problems and concerns, and the decision to eradicate the Rachni was the Council's, not the Krogan's.
 
[quote]Why isn't there a son/relative of Fisk there to extract vengance?[/quote]
 
Because they know you'd kill them too.

[quote]Why isnt' there ANYTHING to show the game it acknowledges that happened?[/quote]

In all seriousness, because killing people tends to leave the universe an emptier place.  Sometimes it's necessary, but it's always a solemn decision.  My Shep let Garrus kill Sidonius in this last game, and I expect my reward to be his absence from ME3.  My Shep let Wrex kill Fisk in ME1, and I expected Fisk not to bother me again.  Your reward for killing people is their absense.  You can either take solace in that or not.

[/quote]