372 réponses à ce sujet

[Yezdigerd]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

What on Earth (besides being on Earth) gives you the impression that criminals have a right to a trial on the Citadel? The Magna Carta has not been prevailed upon the other species.

Besides which, it's quite clear the Council is quite happy to tolerate such things in the interests of the greater galactic good. Cold blooded executions doesn't phase them... and neither do war crimes, working for criminal cabals, or acceptable terrorism.

Well surely there must be some system to sort killings on the citadel? Can any random Salarian gun down people and get away with it saying he just killed some criminals?
Also Wrex were apprehended by C-sec for his threats to kill Fist, so it matters when it's convinient for the plot.

Only when it's against the interests of the state. When it's in support of the ruling party, or against the ruling regime's opponents, it's quite often encouraged (except when politically expedient to punish particular offenses). (See: China, Libya, Russia, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Iran, half the middle east.)

Hence the word unsanctioned. And council space strike me as losely ruled rather then totalitarian.

Modifié par Yezdigerd, 31 août 2011 - 12:52 .

[Undertone]

Yezdigerd wrote...

Undertone wrote...

A Spectre can deal with a situation however she/he feels fit. This is the whole point of becoming one. Play ME1 again maybe?

You missed the part were Shepard isn't a spectre when he kills Fist. Maybe you should take your own advice and play ME1 again.

He doesn't need to be - he is given clearance on both political and military level by the Alliance to find evidence of Saren's involvement in Eden Prime's attack in any possible way. Fist is working for Saren, what more do you want? His direct actions result in said promotion into Spectre among other things. Maybe you lack comprehension or I dunno.

Don't assume your morals, values or protocol work everywhere in the world kid, let alone are applicable to ME universe.

Modifié par Undertone, 31 août 2011 - 01:01 .

[Medhia Nox]

Funny thing about the superiority of morals (be they high brow or base) - Bioware, the authority on the morality of the ME universe, declares both options work just fine.

Until an option is "punished" - arguing how "justified" you are is pointless.

[Undertone]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Funny thing about the superiority of morals (be they high brow or base) - Bioware, the authority on the morality of the ME universe, declares both options work just fine.

Until an option is "punished" - arguing how "justified" you are is pointless.

I have no problem with that if that was the case.

Unfortunately paragon decisions work out 100% of the time with no backlash or detriment in any shape or form, allow the player to get the full cake and eat it while keeping their morals.

Renegade results in being hated regardless of reasons that was considered when making the decision (and no renegade does not equate psychopatic ****) and universal lack of content in any shape or form. Add to that the sacrifice of morals in order to achieve the goal.

And I will give you examples:

Paragons manage to save the Council and stop Sovereing ending being loved by everyone. Renegades end up being hated by everyone. Paragons manage to save the workers and gain Zaeed loyalty. Renegades only manage the latter. Renegade have no cameos - and always you have an idiot on the forum that will point out the very very illusive argument that "oh my god dead people can't have cameos!!?!?!??" as if those people were not related to any other people at all and you could not tie let's say Fist brother looking for revenge for killing him, this coming on the top of my head.

Modifié par Undertone, 31 août 2011 - 01:28 .

[Seboist]

Yeah, aliens hate Shepard for sacrificing the council but if she sacrifices human warships to save them then there aren't any Alliance admirals or people back home giving her grief about it.

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

[TheZyzyva]

Undertone wrote...

Unfortunately paragon decisions work out 100% of the time with no backlash or detriment in any shape or form, allow the player to get the full cake and eat it while keeping their morals.

Renegade results in being hated regardless of reasons that was considered when making the decision (and no renegade does not equate psychopatic ****) and universal lack of content in any shape or form. Add to that the sacrifice of morals in order to achieve the goal.

And I will give you examples:

Paragons manage to save the Council and stop Sovereing ending being loved by everyone. Renegades end up being hated by everyone. Paragons manage to save the workers and gain Zaeed loyalty. Renegades only manage the latter. Renegade have no cameos - and always you have an idiot on the forum that will point out the very very illusive argument that "oh my god dead people can't have cameos!!?!?!??" as if those people were not related to any other people at all and you could not tie let's say Fist brother looking for revenge for killing him, this coming on the top of my head.

First, sacrificing the council leads to a humanity led galaxy, something most renegades seem to want, so I don't see that as being a bad thing for renegade players. Considering most renegade options tend to make Shep look like a total *** why shouldn't you be hated for taking that path? As for Zaeeds mission, going into it Shep is only told that you need to rescue a refinery, it's after the start that Shep finds out (even though we as the player already know) that Zaeed has a stake in it. So if you go back on the original mission that's your own fault. You can still be a renegade, save the people, and get Zaeeds loyalty too. If you chose to help Zaeed from the start just because that was the red option, how is that any better than a paragon only choosing blue options without any thought, something we are often accused of? And there are renegade options to let people live too, like Helena. Just because [shoot] is one of the first options doesn't mean it's the only renegade rout.

As far as paragons working out 100%, well I hate to break it to you, but that's not much more the case than with 'gades, at least from the "being liked" perspective. You let the rachni live, people question the decision. You rewrite the Geth, people question you. It's not that only paragons get their cake and eat it too, we just get a different cake than renegades. Besides, the story is still ongoing. We don't know how our decisions play out. I hope Balak comes back to bite me because I let him go, and I hope on the flip side 'gades have to go take care of something because those three people aren't alive to do it, or something along those lines. I'm sorry if you feel discriminated against because you play renegade, but it's a little early to be calling foul.

And besides, it's a game that's meant to be enjoyed, if you don't like full 'gade, there are other options that should suit you just fine.

[TheZyzyva]

Seboist wrote...

Yeah, aliens hate Shepard for sacrificing the council but if she sacrifices human warships to save them then there aren't any Alliance admirals or people back home giving her grief about it.

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

Aliens hate Shep and humanity for sac'ing the council, but it puts humanity in a spot of power. That seems like a fair trade for a renegade decision, doesn't it? Saving them prevents hate, and prevents a human superiority, that's a fair trade for paragons. That decision to me feels like it has an equal balance.

Have never given Veetor to Cerb, so I don't know the results of that, but it's not like letting the Quarians have him is a huge difference on the game. All it does is let you acquit Tali without having to give a 'gon or 'gade speech at the trial if you also saved Kal, if memory serves.

Again, still working on a mostly renegade playthrough, so I don't know the results of most of the more d***-ish renegade options, but most I can think of don't really seem like they would have terribly bad outcomes. Some more examples would help push your point.

[Dave of Canada]

TheZyzyva wrote...

Have never given Veetor to Cerb, so I don't know the results of that, but it's not like letting the Quarians have him is a huge difference on the game. All it does is let you acquit Tali without having to give a 'gon or 'gade speech at the trial if you also saved Kal, if memory serves.

Veetor is mentally broken, Tali is (brielfy) pissed off at you, you've gotten the exact same intel either way, Veetor won't testify to defend Tali. Talking to the Quarian taking care of him suggests that Cerberus wasn't the ones who caused the mental breakdown.

Some more examples would help push your point.

Without going into any specific, I'll just mention the general idea that frequently happens.
You're (often) presented with two choices:
Abandon the mission to serve your morality.
Complete the mission by abandoning your morality.

End results often yield that regardless of choice, abandoning the mission doesn't punish those who've done it and morality remains intact. In these cases, one who's done the Renegade choice might feel a little iffed at the end result being the same but worse.

This creates scenarios where metagame is often used, people always want the best results and if they know they can save everybody by picking the Paragon choice, they'll rarely never pick it. The worst part is, killing the people is never mentioned either. All choices you've done which results in claiming other people's lives exist in a bubble.

You've saved Jim's life? He'll greet you and highfive you, mentioning that time you saved him and completed the mission and everything went well.
You killed Jim? Well, nothing. Nobody mentions it, it's like if Jim never existed at all.

Introducing cameos to the Renegade choice will result in a more reactive universe for those who've decided to play that way, it doesn't have to be anything really big. Some mourning mother asking why you killed her son? Makes it feel like you've done something and allows you to further expand your Renegade Shepard (you can show remorse or be dismissive for example). Similar to how Paragons can threaten people they've saved, be nice to them or whatever (which creates a deeper Shep).

In addition to this:
Introducing consequences to the Paragon choice (for example, not being able to claim Zaeed's loyalty by pointing a gun in his face) could lead to nobody being capable of saying to themselves "This is the right decision, the other one is for the experimental playthrough".

[Golden Owl]

Seboist wrote...

Yeah, aliens hate Shepard for sacrificing the council but if she sacrifices human warships to save them then there aren't any Alliance admirals or people back home giving her grief about it.

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

I understand your first point Seboist...there should have been at least a little recognition and burn for paragon Sheps choice in regards to sacrifice for the DA...I wouldn't expect every human to be angry, but at least a number should be.

As for your second point, you have lost me on that one...Paragon Sheps trust in Tali to forward him the info should pay off...she is no stranger to him and there already is a closeness and level of trust between them....that one makes perfect sense to me.

[Seboist]

Golden Owl wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Yeah, aliens hate Shepard for sacrificing the council but if she sacrifices human warships to save them then there aren't any Alliance admirals or people back home giving her grief about it.

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

I understand your first point Seboist...there should have been at least a little recognition and burn for paragon Sheps choice in regards to sacrifice for the DA...I wouldn't expect every human to be angry, but at least a number should be.

As for your second point, you have lost me on that one...Paragon Sheps trust in Tali to forward him the info should pay off...she is no stranger to him and there already is a closeness and level of trust between them....that one makes perfect sense to me.

The point I was trying to make with the Renegade Veetor decision is that there's no pay off in the form of any kind of extra information or anything vs the alternative. It just ends up existing for the lulz and nothing else.

It's not as bad as the renegade Feros path being made into a joke but still....

[wizardryforever]

laecraft wrote...

Goneaviking wrote...

The reason that Anderson didn't pass the test is because hundreds of civilians died on his recruitment mission, apparently it's important that potential spectres possess some semblance of moderation in their "whatever it takes" worldview.

By "the test" I'm referring to the test Saren put Anderson through. Saren managed to screw up Anderson, but couldn't screw up Shepard. Shepard exposed and disgraced Saren - something that Anderson failed to do. He got the best of Saren. It was a real world test.

When you listen to Anderson speak of the event, it's clear that he's still horrified by what Saren did. But Saren's behavior was not very unusual for a Spectre. In fact, it was mild enough, since he didn't use a nuke. Anderson either didn't see it coming or was too slow to react. Or, more likely, he was mentally unprepared to the methods of a Spectre.

What's a couple of hundred of civilians to the Council? The only thing they care about is a mission accomplished. Listen them chastise Shepard for being distracted with the rescue of the colonists. Listen to Shepard replying "I did not jeopardize the mission." And they, apparently placated, stress the point that the mission always comes first.

And does Anderson truly believe that the Council wouldn't even listen to him? Does that mean he didn't even speak? He didn't try to take revenge? Shepard would be pissed! Come on, a real Spectre fights back!

I think the real reason why Anderson didn't pass the test was because the Council didn't want a Spectre who could be bested, tricked, and set up.

Have you read Revelation?  All of this is explained clearly in there (I just reread it recently).  Basically, Saren was a douche and deliberately sabotaged Anderson's plan to get the target and get out by just killing everyone inside.  Then he lied to the Council about what happened and pinned it on Anderson.  Politics plays into the decision in a big way, and Anderson had had enough of politics.  He hadn't ever really wanted to be a Spectre anyway.  It was more or less forced on him.

[Golden Owl]

Seboist wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Yeah, aliens hate Shepard for sacrificing the council but if she sacrifices human warships to save them then there aren't any Alliance admirals or people back home giving her grief about it.

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

I understand your first point Seboist...there should have been at least a little recognition and burn for paragon Sheps choice in regards to sacrifice for the DA...I wouldn't expect every human to be angry, but at least a number should be.

As for your second point, you have lost me on that one...Paragon Sheps trust in Tali to forward him the info should pay off...she is no stranger to him and there already is a closeness and level of trust between them....that one makes perfect sense to me.

The point I was trying to make with the Renegade Veetor decision is that there's no pay off in the form of any kind of extra information or anything vs the alternative. It just ends up existing for the lulz and nothing else.

It's not as bad as the renegade Feros path being made into a joke but still....

Fair enough...as a perfect paragon......I have not experienced the renegade out come there...so it's pretty much just p*ssing people off huh....nothing else.

The Feros one is a hard one...though I think Saphra Deden has come up with a pretty fair reason there a number of times...not risking Shep and squad on a guesstamation about the gas grenandes, etc...

[Golden Owl]

laecraft wrote...

Seboist wrote...

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

Yeah, the paragon choice is "the right" choice, without any drawbacks. As for the renegade choice, it has no benefits whatsoever. Even TIM is pleasantly surprised with the quarians offering an olive branch. I think it's the only thing he's really excited about in that mission. Everything else is old news to him.

I cannot begin to tell you how much it surprised me on the first playthrough.

I remember other such unpleasant shocks, one from Zaeed's loyalty mission, Paragon path (struck down by divine beam! give me back my suspension of disbelief), Horizon (for obvious reasons), Udina and the Council freaking out when I enter the room (I don't irradiate evil, people, and Cerberus allegiance isn't contagious), Tali's loyalty mission, where she presses you into false testimony, and then you remain on friendly terms (I wanted to tell her, fine, I'll do it for you, but then I never want to see you again - and then my Shepard is all...affectionate to her), and my teammates reactions to keeping the base.

Oh, and when my fish died for the first time. I mean, come on! The situation's grim enough. Do we really need to drive home the point how I bring death to all around me?

As a Paragon player, the ease in which I could persuede Zaeed to drop it stunned me also...that reeked of a meta gaming gloss over by BW...My Shep should not have been able to persuede Zaeed so easily...in all reality, my Shep really should have made an enemy of Zaeed at that point and probably having to end up killing him.

[Seboist]

TheZyzyva wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Yeah, aliens hate Shepard for sacrificing the council but if she sacrifices human warships to save them then there aren't any Alliance admirals or people back home giving her grief about it.

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

Aliens hate Shep and humanity for sac'ing the council, but it puts humanity in a spot of power. That seems like a fair trade for a renegade decision, doesn't it? Saving them prevents hate, and prevents a human superiority, that's a fair trade for paragons. That decision to me feels like it has an equal balance.

Have never given Veetor to Cerb, so I don't know the results of that, but it's not like letting the Quarians have him is a huge difference on the game. All it does is let you acquit Tali without having to give a 'gon or 'gade speech at the trial if you also saved Kal, if memory serves.

Again, still working on a mostly renegade playthrough, so I don't know the results of most of the more d***-ish renegade options, but most I can think of don't really seem like they would have terribly bad outcomes. Some more examples would help push your point.

The outcome of the sacrifice the council decision results in a hollow victory with needless sacrifice with little noticable difference. There's a human led council (or so the game tells me) but they're nowhere to be found, there's little indicator that humanity is militarily stronger and it doesn't help that the alternative results in destroying Sovereign with minimal losses, an appearence by the council and nothing but praise.

Dave already covered the Veetor example so i'll cover another one, Feros. Theoretically the renegade path should be the easier one but it's made into a mockery by the fact that the colonists are feeble enemies and it's easier to take them out with the gas grenades and if that wasn't enough it also insta-kills the creepers. Once again the renegade path results in a hollow victory with needless sacrifice.

[Seboist]

Golden Owl wrote...

laecraft wrote...

Seboist wrote...

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

Yeah, the paragon choice is "the right" choice, without any drawbacks. As for the renegade choice, it has no benefits whatsoever. Even TIM is pleasantly surprised with the quarians offering an olive branch. I think it's the only thing he's really excited about in that mission. Everything else is old news to him.

I cannot begin to tell you how much it surprised me on the first playthrough.

I remember other such unpleasant shocks, one from Zaeed's loyalty mission, Paragon path (struck down by divine beam! give me back my suspension of disbelief), Horizon (for obvious reasons), Udina and the Council freaking out when I enter the room (I don't irradiate evil, people, and Cerberus allegiance isn't contagious), Tali's loyalty mission, where she presses you into false testimony, and then you remain on friendly terms (I wanted to tell her, fine, I'll do it for you, but then I never want to see you again - and then my Shepard is all...affectionate to her), and my teammates reactions to keeping the base.

Oh, and when my fish died for the first time. I mean, come on! The situation's grim enough. Do we really need to drive home the point how I bring death to all around me?

As a Paragon player, the ease in which I could persuede Zaeed to drop it stunned me also...that reeked of a meta gaming gloss over by BW...My Shep should not have been able to persuede Zaeed so easily...in all reality, my Shep really should have made an enemy of Zaeed at that point and probably having to end up killing him.

Seeing my favorite squadmate Zaeed getting the "Helena Blake" treatment was tough to watch. There's nothing sadder than to see a ruthless merc who's known nothing but violence for most of his life and who's been obsessing over revenge for 20 years being robbed of his manhood by being talk-jutsu-ed into submission in less than a minute after having a gun shoved in his face.

It's very odd Zaeed doesn't hold any animosity for Shepard having him relive that traumatic experience Vido gave him back in the day.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Seboist wrote...

It's very odd Zaeed doesn't hold any animosity for Shepard having him relive that traumatic experience Vido gave him back in the day.

When I saw that I thought I was going to have to fight him,like a mini-boss fight.

Or maybe he just pulls a Cal Nordo and owns your ass...

[kumquats]

Giving Balak, Elnora and Santiago the Fist treatment will really ****** me of.
I mean I really like my Renegade, but at this point, which means Mass Effect 2, it's not as satisfying as playing Kotor on the DS.
It just makes me sad how many criminals the Paragon lets walk free and will not get any real punishment for that.
I don't kid myself, my Paragon will not get punished for letting them live, I'm certain of that.

[Seboist]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Seboist wrote...

It's very odd Zaeed doesn't hold any animosity for Shepard having him relive that traumatic experience Vido gave him back in the day.

When I saw that I thought I was going to have to fight him,like a mini-boss fight.

Or maybe he just pulls a Cal Nordo and owns your ass...

It would have been nice for Zaeed to be a Paragon enemy in ME3 with Samara being the renegade one.

[Golden Owl]

Seboist wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

laecraft wrote...

Seboist wrote...

The Veetor decision in Freedom's Progress is another good example of a Paragon "have your cake and eat it" outcome. The alternative is rendered pointless in true renegade fashion.

Yeah, the paragon choice is "the right" choice, without any drawbacks. As for the renegade choice, it has no benefits whatsoever. Even TIM is pleasantly surprised with the quarians offering an olive branch. I think it's the only thing he's really excited about in that mission. Everything else is old news to him.

I cannot begin to tell you how much it surprised me on the first playthrough.

I remember other such unpleasant shocks, one from Zaeed's loyalty mission, Paragon path (struck down by divine beam! give me back my suspension of disbelief), Horizon (for obvious reasons), Udina and the Council freaking out when I enter the room (I don't irradiate evil, people, and Cerberus allegiance isn't contagious), Tali's loyalty mission, where she presses you into false testimony, and then you remain on friendly terms (I wanted to tell her, fine, I'll do it for you, but then I never want to see you again - and then my Shepard is all...affectionate to her), and my teammates reactions to keeping the base.

Oh, and when my fish died for the first time. I mean, come on! The situation's grim enough. Do we really need to drive home the point how I bring death to all around me?

As a Paragon player, the ease in which I could persuede Zaeed to drop it stunned me also...that reeked of a meta gaming gloss over by BW...My Shep should not have been able to persuede Zaeed so easily...in all reality, my Shep really should have made an enemy of Zaeed at that point and probably having to end up killing him.

Seeing my favorite squadmate Zaeed getting the "Helena Blake" treatment was tough to watch. There's nothing sadder than to see a ruthless merc who's known nothing but violence for most of his life and who's been obsessing over revenge for 20 years being robbed of his manhood by being talk-jutsu-ed into submission in less than a minute after having a gun shoved in his face.

It's very odd Zaeed doesn't hold any animosity for Shepard having him relive that traumatic experience Vido gave him back in the day.

You noticed the connection too huh...Shep knew a soft spot and put the boot in with copying the gun in Zaeeds face....Zaeed makes comments later on about realizing what Shep and Co are doing is bigger than anything Zaeeds done before...but that still doesn't negate the fact that yes, paragon Shep did essentially neuter Zaeed on his LM and Zaeed should not have conceded with a moments back hand treatment from Shep...It sucks all the toughness and mans man feel about Zaeed straight out of the character....That was badly played out....I like Zaeed, but feel like his character was fed to the wolves there.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Seboist wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Seboist wrote...

It's very odd Zaeed doesn't hold any animosity for Shepard having him relive that traumatic experience Vido gave him back in the day.

When I saw that I thought I was going to have to fight him,like a mini-boss fight.

Or maybe he just pulls a Cal Nordo and owns your ass...

It would have been nice for Zaeed to be a Paragon enemy in ME3 with Samara being the renegade one.

That would be bad-ass,if Zaeed wasn't DLC they could have done that,I guess they could anyway...would'nt be as epic though..fighting Samara would be ALOT harder then fighting Zaeed,even though he would be the only one to barely make it out alive...jk

[Golden Owl]

kumquats wrote...

Giving Balak, Elnora and Santiago the Fist treatment will really ****** me of.
I mean I really like my Renegade, but at this point, which means Mass Effect 2, it's not as satisfying as playing Kotor on the DS.
It just makes me sad how many criminals the Paragon lets walk free and will not get any real punishment for that.
I don't kid myself, my Paragon will not get punished for letting them live, I'm certain of that.

Balak and Sanitago...yes...I would be p*ssed...Elnora not so much (she isn't tough)....I was not happy about Helena Blake, I would have thought her a tougher nut than that, Fist not so much though, he never really struck me as more than just a glorified petty criminal.

[Golden Owl]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Seboist wrote...

It's very odd Zaeed doesn't hold any animosity for Shepard having him relive that traumatic experience Vido gave him back in the day.

When I saw that I thought I was going to have to fight him,like a mini-boss fight.

Or maybe he just pulls a Cal Nordo and owns your ass...

It would have been nice for Zaeed to be a Paragon enemy in ME3 with Samara being the renegade one.

That would be bad-ass,if Zaeed wasn't DLC they could have done that,I guess they could anyway...would'nt be as epic though..fighting Samara would be ALOT harder then fighting Zaeed,even though he would be the only one to barely make it out alive...jk

It would be pretty awesome...I like the idea...though I wouldn't judge Zaeed so quickly Typhoon.......Zaeed isn't stupid, he wouldn't try to tackle Shep one on one, his a smart man, he would have a clever plan and a professional mercs squad.

[Seboist]

Golden Owl wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Seboist wrote...

It's very odd Zaeed doesn't hold any animosity for Shepard having him relive that traumatic experience Vido gave him back in the day.

When I saw that I thought I was going to have to fight him,like a mini-boss fight.

Or maybe he just pulls a Cal Nordo and owns your ass...

It would have been nice for Zaeed to be a Paragon enemy in ME3 with Samara being the renegade one.

That would be bad-ass,if Zaeed wasn't DLC they could have done that,I guess they could anyway...would'nt be as epic though..fighting Samara would be ALOT harder then fighting Zaeed,even though he would be the only one to barely make it out alive...jk

It would be pretty awesome...I like the idea...though I wouldn't judge Zaeed so quickly Typhoon.......Zaeed isn't stupid, he wouldn't try to tackle Shep one on one, his a smart man, he would have a clever plan and a professional mercs squad.

Like Saphra has said Zaeed could sign up with Cerberus (again) so he could have a chance at revenge against Shep.