72 réponses à ce sujet

[ODST 3]

The main difference for me was that Bring Down the Sky introduced something new to Mass Effect games (Batarians), while Arrival was completely useless and boring.

[111987]

BluSoldier wrote...

Shepard definitely had the MORAL high ground and reasons, but their ACTIONS are near identical. I d not support Shepard's breaking into the prison, however.

He broke into the prison to free Kenson, who had proof of an imminent Reaper invasion. I would have checked it out too.

[111987]

ODST 3 wrote...

The main difference for me was that Bring Down the Sky introduced something new to Mass Effect games (Batarians), while Arrival was completely useless and boring.

Yes, saving the galaxy from the Reapers was completley useless...

[littlezack]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Johnny34 wrote...

Was definitely the moral choice and right thing to do. a hundred thousand dead to save trillions more. the hundreds of thousands of batarians would have been the first to go when the reapers came anyway.

It wasn't even a 'Kill one to save many' decision, since they're dead anyway. Out of the two choices, killing them in an earth-shattering kaboom or having the Reapers reap them the explosion is more humane all around.

The one thing that annoyed me greatly about Arrival was when you're about to warn the system to evacuate and Kenson pops up, whining like a loon about how you ruined her plans. That action could've legitmately saved lives, and not only did you not enable the pop-up blocker on the communications console - you're not even allowed to try again after she shuts up!

I don't know if the Batarians would've taken the warning seriously. To them, Shepard has to be akin to a terrorist even before what he does - given the way we know the Batarian government uses crazy propoganda and manipulates their populace, and given how much they hate humans in general, Shepard is likely demonized to them. At the risk of sounding insensitive, it'd be like if Osama Bin Laden popped up and suddenly told you that he was going to give you important information that would save your life. How would you react to that?

[DaringMoosejaw]

BluSoldier wrote...

Shepard definitely had the MORAL high ground and reasons, but their ACTIONS are near identical. I d not support Shepard's breaking into the prison, however.

I guess you could argue the 'actions' were identical but only by the means, i.e. piloting an asteroid into something that would result in many losses of lives, but that doesn't mean much. Say you're in a room with two levers, one lever if pulled will result in feeding a thousand starving children while the other lever, say, floods their village. The means is the same - pulling a lever - but the results couldn't be more different.

littlezack wrote...

I don't know if the Batarians would've
taken the warning seriously. To them, Shepard has to be akin to a
terrorist even before what he does - given the way we know the Batarian
government uses crazy propoganda and manipulates their populace, and
given how much they hate humans in general, Shepard is likely demonized
to them. At the risk of sounding insensitive, it'd be like if Osama Bin
Laden popped up and suddenly told you that he was going to give you
important information that would save your life. How would you react to
that?

A chance is still a chance. If Osama Bin Laden popped up and told me my town was about to be obliterated and I should probably leave, I'd actually be more likely to believe it since he'd be the one to initiate it in the first place.

Modifié par DaringMoosejaw, 03 septembre 2011 - 06:31 .

[ODST 3]

111987 wrote...

ODST 3 wrote...

The main difference for me was that Bring Down the Sky introduced something new to Mass Effect games (Batarians), while Arrival was completely useless and boring.

Yes, saving the galaxy from the Reapers was completley useless...

How was it saving the galaxy? They come at the beginning of ME 3 anyway, you expect some grand new insight to strike Shepard in between the end of Arrival and ME 3 when he's on trial for this rubbish DLC? It actually just wasted time he could have been spending building a joint species army to fight the Reapers or whatever the hell he's going to do in Mass Effect 3. Arrival was horriblbe, there was no role-playing or choices to make, because they were all made for you.

[111987]

ODST 3 wrote...

111987 wrote...

ODST 3 wrote...

The main difference for me was that Bring Down the Sky introduced something new to Mass Effect games (Batarians), while Arrival was completely useless and boring.

Yes, saving the galaxy from the Reapers was completley useless...

How was it saving the galaxy? They come at the beginning of ME 3 anyway, you expect some grand new insight to strike Shepard in between the end of Arrival and ME 3 when he's on trial for this rubbish DLC? It actually just wasted time he could have been spending building a joint species army to fight the Reapers or whatever the hell he's going to do in Mass Effect 3. Arrival was horriblbe, there was no role-playing or choices to make, because they were all made for you.

This is what happens if you fail in Arrival.

www.youtube.com/watch

The galaxy is lost. Unless every ending in ME3 is what this video shows, then no, Arrival was not useless. It made all the difference, actually.

[ODST 3]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...
A chance is still a chance. If Osama Bin Laden popped up and told me my town was about to be obliterated and I should probably leave, I'd actually be more likely to believe it since he'd be the one to initiate it in the first place.

Not anymore.

[ODST 3]

111987 wrote...

ODST 3 wrote...

111987 wrote...

ODST 3 wrote...

The main difference for me was that Bring Down the Sky introduced something new to Mass Effect games (Batarians), while Arrival was completely useless and boring.

Yes, saving the galaxy from the Reapers was completley useless...

How was it saving the galaxy? They come at the beginning of ME 3 anyway, you expect some grand new insight to strike Shepard in between the end of Arrival and ME 3 when he's on trial for this rubbish DLC? It actually just wasted time he could have been spending building a joint species army to fight the Reapers or whatever the hell he's going to do in Mass Effect 3. Arrival was horriblbe, there was no role-playing or choices to make, because they were all made for you.

This is what happens if you fail in Arrival.

www.youtube.com/watch

The galaxy is lost. Unless every ending in ME3 is what this video shows, then no, Arrival was not useless. It made all the difference, actually.

And how does that make any sense? The game should be over as soon as the Reapers arrive to bust up your trial at the beginning of ME 3. I'm not criticizing Shepard's actions according to the poor constraints of the DLC, I'm criticizing the inconsistency of having to "save the galaxy" by delaying the Reaper invasion in Arrival when ME 3 will have you save the galaxy after they have already invaded.

1. Arrival results in Shepard being put on trial for his/her actions.
2. The Reapers finally do arrive mid-trial or therabouts.
3. Shepard still has time to go through an entire game's worth of shenanigans to defeat the Reapers. Unless of course Bioware intends to simply show that cheesy image montage (www.youtube.com/watch) as soon as they get there and cut off the rest of the game they've been talking about.

[111987]

You're forgetting the properties of the Alpha Relay. Namely, that it allows them access to 16 other primary Mass Relays, including the Citadel. By destroying the Alpha Relay, they had to go through Batarian space and then human space before they could reach the Citadel, giving the Citadel the time time it needs to close up and protect itself. Not even the Reapers can open the Citadel without destroying it, so they lose all of the enormous advantages the Citadel gives them (being the hub of the relay network, wiping out galactic leadership in a single surprise attack, being able to seal off Mass Relays thus isolating everyone).

Arrival makes a HUGE difference whether or not you liked the gameplay of it.

[Ahriman]

Moment with 'warning' is the biggest wtf for me in Arrival.
*warn the colony
Shepard: This is Commander Shepard...
*few indocrinated folks get in and get shooted by Shepard*
Shepard: Did I want to do something? Ah, nevermind, time to run.

Modifié par Wizz, 03 septembre 2011 - 06:58 .

[TuringPoint]

While I wouldn't say this was the most 'moral' choice, it was the most responsible choice. Just letting the Reapers come, and giving them that same batarian world and all those Batarian lives as shock troops, experiment fodder, etc. - worse than death perhaps - would not be an appropriate response.

I believe that Shepard was locked out of the coms system the moment the scientist lady interrupted him.  Perhaps attempting to give Shep one more reason to reconsider launching the asteroid into the relay.  Then he was knocked unconscious, had no time to send a  warning that would reach the colony in time for any sort of evacuation.  I would've still liked to have sent them... some sort of message, apologizing maybe.  (Whups!  I'ma kill all of you nau. Take my word this is the only, the best way? lolz.)  Or perhaps not.

This kind of makes Shepard a little more defined by the looming threat of the Reapers. I hope there is some way for my Shepard to express some sort of serious regret for being forced into this position. I found it frustrating that trying to send a warning to the batarian colony was for nothing.  



Anyway, interesting juxtaposition.

Modifié par Alocormin, 03 septembre 2011 - 07:09 .

[ODST 3]

111987 wrote...

You're forgetting the properties of the Alpha Relay. Namely, that it allows them access to 16 other primary Mass Relays, including the Citadel. By destroying the Alpha Relay, they had to go through Batarian space and then human space before they could reach the Citadel, giving the Citadel the time time it needs to close up and protect itself. Not even the Reapers can open the Citadel without destroying it, so they lose all of the enormous advantages the Citadel gives them (being the hub of the relay network, wiping out galactic leadership in a single surprise attack, being able to seal off Mass Relays thus isolating everyone).

Arrival makes a HUGE difference whether or not you liked the gameplay of it.

That still makes no sense. Shepard's going to have to destroy a lot more relays than that if he wants to slow them down. In Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2, the Normandy is able to easily and rapidly zip all over the galaxy using a network of relays in every system. We know that the Local Cluster or earth solar system has at least one Mass relay orbiting Pluto, so as soon as the Reapers reach this system, they should be able to get pretty much anywhere, just like Shepard. Why would they have to chug through batarian and human space before being able to fly everywhere? The first relay they hit will link them in. No one's going to be sealing the Citadel because no one believes in the Reapers.

[TuringPoint]

ODST: Basically it slowed the Reapers down, made their threat a little less imminent.  Instead of momentary invasion, destroying the relay gives the galaxy days, weeks, months or years before the invasion begins.  It gives the Reapers one less avenue for attack, and the Batarians on that world would die anyway, debatably in a much more horrible way.

If this weren't done, they'd have come through and destroyed/enslaved the batarian colony world, implanted sleeper agents, basically started the invasion sooner and the batarians wouldn't survive anyway.

Modifié par Alocormin, 03 septembre 2011 - 07:15 .

[111987]

ODST 3 wrote...

111987 wrote...

You're forgetting the properties of the Alpha Relay. Namely, that it allows them access to 16 other primary Mass Relays, including the Citadel. By destroying the Alpha Relay, they had to go through Batarian space and then human space before they could reach the Citadel, giving the Citadel the time time it needs to close up and protect itself. Not even the Reapers can open the Citadel without destroying it, so they lose all of the enormous advantages the Citadel gives them (being the hub of the relay network, wiping out galactic leadership in a single surprise attack, being able to seal off Mass Relays thus isolating everyone).

Arrival makes a HUGE difference whether or not you liked the gameplay of it.

That still makes no sense. Shepard's going to have to destroy a lot more relays than that if he wants to slow them down. In Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2, the Normandy is able to easily and rapidly zip all over the galaxy using a network of relays in every system. We know that the Local Cluster or earth solar system has at least one Mass relay orbiting Pluto, so as soon as the Reapers reach this system, they should be able to get pretty much anywhere, just like Shepard. Why would they have to chug through batarian and human space before being able to fly everywhere? The first relay they hit will link them in. No one's going to be sealing the Citadel because no one believes in the Reapers.

They have to travel from relay to relay until they find one that links to the Citadel. By that time, the Reapers will have been identified and the Citadel sealed.

If you can't understand how preventing the Reapers from having instant access to the Citadel is helpful, then there's really nothing more for me to say. Hate on Arrival's gameplay, but don't pointlessly criticize its plot.

[Big stupid jellyfish]

Yes, I have noticed the similarities, and I enjoyed them in a way. There is something oddly ironic and cruel in it; also, makes me think about Thane's 'The measure of an individual can be difficult to discern by actions alone' quote.

I also believe that Shepards that took the incident as a chance to get their revenge are much closer to Balak and the likes of him than they would like to think. Which is ironic, too.

Also,

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

The one thing that annoyed me greatly about Arrival was when you're about to warn the system to evacuate and Kenson pops up, whining like a loon about how you ruined her plans. That action could've legitmately saved lives, and not only did you not enable the pop-up blocker on the communications console - you're not even allowed to try again after she shuts up!

This. To clarify, I am ok with two choices leading to the same outcome in the DLC. Sometimes it's necessary to show a player that you get the same result no matter what you do/don't do because the circumstances are stronger than you, and I accept that. But, well, they could have shown how shuttles are trying to escape from the planet and are incinerated by the blow, or how someone receives Shepard's transmission but discards it. Mission outcome? Still the same. Point? You really feel that you/Shepard at least tried and your choices affect the game somehow -- beyond one or two extra lines.

[Juniper Mucius]

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".

[Inutaisho7996]

111987 wrote...

They have to travel from relay to relay until they find one that links to the Citadel. By that time, the Reapers will have been identified and the Citadel sealed.

If you can't understand how preventing the Reapers from having instant access to the Citadel is helpful, then there's really nothing more for me to say. Hate on Arrival's gameplay, but don't pointlessly criticize its plot.

The one problem with that is the Reapers are able to travel faster than light, and no one can detectect a ship traveling FTL. Why not travel between relays at FTL speeds and remain undetected all way to the Citadel?

The only explaination I can think of is, maybe, traveling through dark space using conventional FTL drives used up most of their fuel, so they can't do that. They may have had to stop in batarian space for fuel ruining their suprise attack. But why not just fuel up, and then travel through the galaxy FTL?

[111987]

Inutaisho7996 wrote...

111987 wrote...

They have to travel from relay to relay until they find one that links to the Citadel. By that time, the Reapers will have been identified and the Citadel sealed.

If you can't understand how preventing the Reapers from having instant access to the Citadel is helpful, then there's really nothing more for me to say. Hate on Arrival's gameplay, but don't pointlessly criticize its plot.

The one problem with that is the Reapers are able to travel faster than light, and no one can detectect a ship traveling FTL. Why not travel between relays at FTL speeds and remain undetected all way to the Citadel?

The only explaination I can think of is, maybe, traveling through dark space using conventional FTL drives used up most of their fuel, so they can't do that. They may have had to stop in batarian space for fuel ruining their suprise attack. But why not just fuel up, and then travel through the galaxy FTL?

I suppose they could do that, but that would delay them years, because they would have to travel almost half the length of the galaxy to do that. Therefore the Reapers would lose their advantage of surprise and give the galaxy at considerable amount of time to prepare.

Plus as soon as the Reapers show up, the Citadel can just close itself. The only reason that didn't work against Sovereign is because Saren was on the inside.

[Saberchic]

I think the comparison of Balak and Shepard are skin deep at best.

Balak's goal was to destroy the humans. He set out to kill thousands of people. He meant to annihilate a large colony. He apparently had a track record of doing such acts before.

Shepard was trying to save lives. Millions of lives, by the way, from the Reapers.

That Kenson witch left Shep no choice. And honestly, looking back on it, it was the only way to stop the Reaper invasion from happening right then. At least Shep (or most of my Sheps) tried to warn others. There was no intent to take out all the Batarians. That wasn't Shep's "master plan."

And if you really want to look deeper...why isn't the Alliance being called terrorists? It was their plan originally, or at least Kenson was working for them. I'm still not sure how much Hackett really knows.

[Arppis]

You do have to realize that Shepard tries to warn the Batarians (or atleast if you choose so). So, he is not really trying to sacrifice these people, he just can't save them.

Good theory however.

Modifié par Arppis, 03 septembre 2011 - 07:51 .

[TexasToast712]

 Pfft....emotional is one way to put it. I was jumping for joy that I got to kill a bunch of batarians. I hate Batarians.

[HighMoon]

I prefer Arrival.

However, if given the choice between Ms. Bowman and Dr. Kenson, I would go with the former. She was just more pleasant.

[JBONE27]

littlezack wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Johnny34 wrote...

Was definitely the moral choice and right thing to do. a hundred thousand dead to save trillions more. the hundreds of thousands of batarians would have been the first to go when the reapers came anyway.

It wasn't even a 'Kill one to save many' decision, since they're dead anyway. Out of the two choices, killing them in an earth-shattering kaboom or having the Reapers reap them the explosion is more humane all around.

The one thing that annoyed me greatly about Arrival was when you're about to warn the system to evacuate and Kenson pops up, whining like a loon about how you ruined her plans. That action could've legitmately saved lives, and not only did you not enable the pop-up blocker on the communications console - you're not even allowed to try again after she shuts up!

I don't know if the Batarians would've taken the warning seriously. To them, Shepard has to be akin to a terrorist even before what he does - given the way we know the Batarian government uses crazy propoganda and manipulates their populace, and given how much they hate humans in general, Shepard is likely demonized to them. At the risk of sounding insensitive, it'd be like if Osama Bin Laden popped up and suddenly told you that he was going to give you important information that would save your life. How would you react to that?

 Probably by saying... OMFG a zombie RUN AHHHHH Where's my shotgun.