iakus wrote...
There's an old saying: "Trust everyone, but cut the cards" The VS could very well have listened to what Shepard had to say, every insane detail of it, then verify it. Maybe Shepard's telling the truth, maybe not. But at least give him a chance to defend himself before accusing him of being a traitor!
The problem though is how can you trust someone if you cannot trust yourself.
Shepards return brings up serious ramificatons, his return working with cerberus brings up even more serious ramifications, which of course lead to serious questions.
Does the fact he's alive mean he never actually died?
If he never died then why did he let me believe he was dead?
Were cereberus involved somehow?
Are they controlling him, manipulating him, duping him?
Or has he always been with them?
If he faked his death and is working with cerberus, can i trust anything he says?
Is he the man i once knew?
Did i ever really know him?
Did he ever really care?
Was i so wrong about him?
DId he fool me into believing in him, into believing in us?
Basically imo Shepards return not only forces a question of whether or not the VS. can trust Shepard but whether or not they can trust their own understanding in regards of Shepard also.
It's hard to dispel the accusations when they are accepted as fact before the rebuttal evidence is brought in.
Welcome to the weird and wacky world of human emotional interaction, fasten your seatbelt, your in for a bumpy ride.
Have you ever been involved in an argument with a significant other? be it a friend, a lover or a sibling, have you ever been accused of something you did not do or accuse someone incorrectly? ever been so sure your right that you've refused to accept your wrong?
Why does it happen when couples fight a lot of the time the outcome is one of them will end up sleeping alone on a couch or in the spare bedroom, yet the very next morning they'll make up as if nothing had happened?
Have you ever been in an argument with a friend that almost comes to blows because your both convinced its the other who's at fault, only for the very next day to act as if nothing had happened?
Sometimes in the heat of an argument emotions get so strained that one or both parties will refuse to back down or listen to evidence that proof the others pov, often they'll retreat to neutral corners, allow clearer heads to prevail and come to realise they were at fault or equally at fault in the misunderstanding.
Sometimes it may even take a different person to point out things that show this is the case.
So, what, my Sheaprd should have stopped off for a bouquet of roses on the way to Horizon? I would have thought Ash and Kaidan would at least be professional enough to listen first, then accuse.
Basically yes he should have.
The problem with Horizon is that in creating a scenario with the minimal effort we get pretty much the same scene whether we've romanced that person or not. So whearas a romanced VS has a personal reason to be annoyed by the perceived actions of Shepard this doesn't translate as well into a non romanced VS, yet the scene pretty much stays the same regardless.
Either way though, the perception of the VS remains the same, Shepard by his actions has wronged them, he has allowed them to suffer needlessly, he let them think he was dead, has allowed them to continue to believe this for 2 years without ever trying to contact them and let them know different.
He doesn't acknowledge what they've gone through, furthering the perception that he cares not a jot, so yep a bouqet of flowers would have been acceptable, an acknowledgement of what they've gone through would have been just as good.
Its hard to act professional when feelings are hurt, as much as we'd like to think we can or do act this way, the truth is your much less forgiven to someone who's hurt or angered you than you are to someone who's not.
"I'm sorry, Ash, I was clinically dead. It took two years to bring me back. So much time has passed. You've moved on. I didn't want to reopen old wounds."
Okay i would have preferred a response that said "I tried to find you but nobody would tell me how to contact you. It's almost like the universe is actively writing a script preventing us from getting together again."
The problem here though is it still boils down to the same thing, so much time has passed, you've moved on, i didn't want to reopen old wounds, not exactly a ringing endorsement of what the VS actually meant to Shepard is it.
Like i said Ash basically pours her heart out to Shepard, tells him she loved him and how much his death affected her, Shepard basically compared their previous relationship to an old wound and something that was in the past, he not only is dismissive of the relationship they had but almost of the possibility of it being rekindled imo, not something that would go down well is it?
Your response is a million times better than anything Shepard says, it shows that Shepard cares, that he acknowledges the relationship and he did everything he could to get to her (something that someone who loved someone would perhaps like to know about the person they love).
That it was 2 years ago so much time has passed line bugged me for so long and i couldn't quite figure out why, until one day watching The legend of Bagger Vance i realised what it was (and yes i know not the best movie to quote from, but i have charlize theron issues).
"But - Then - Well, tell me what to say... It was too long ago...
No it wasn't... It was just a moment ago."
That may be how it works in real life, but in a story like this, where every single former ally or companion of Shepard's treats him at least like a friendly acquaintance, it's a big middle finger to a segment of fans.
Which is actually where the biggest problem of Horizon lies imo, its not that the VS is wrong in what they say or what they do its because of how others act that it paints the VS in a different light.
To me the VS asks questions and illustrates points that others should have had an issue with, hell Shepard himself should have asked most of those questions, but because they wanted to make sure the VS. and Shepard have a rift in their relationship, its only the VS. who brings these things up, others accept Shepards word more freely and Shepard himself gives much better responses on the little questions he is faced with, that it skews the perception somewhat.
People come away from me2 with the perception that Tali or Garrus are more loyal than the VS. because those characters basically ignore the possibility that there could be something wrong with Shepard and the situation, it creates an inconsistency of character that unfortunately rather than analyze people instead portray the VS as the inconsistent one imo.
Again, middle finger to the fans. Tali's not emotionally compromised, yet she's apparantly been crushing on Shepard since ME1. Nor is Garrus, Anderson, or anyone Shepard was close to this much of a wreck.
Shepard should have offered evidence. But the VS should have asked for it, if nothing else, than by falling back on his/her training and orders and get the job done. Verify the information later if they must. Yes they do this eventually. Offscreen. But such a manner is a disservice to the characters and smacks of cut corners.
Tali and Garrus though are aliens, while they do share pretty much the emotions of humans, it could be argued that there are slight differences in how emotional they are compared to humans in the same situation, but personally i don't belive thats the reason.
Anderson is more emotionally distant from Shepard than the VS is though, he's a lifelong military leader who is much more able to out that distance between himself and Shepard, he's sent people on missions which have probably cost them their lives to do this he would have a certain amount of emotional detachedness that the VS would not.
Also he never served side by side or under the command of Shepard, he doesn't have the same emotional connection to Shepard as the people who served with him would, when you also add in that he is also aware of probaby more info than the VS then it creates a completely different scenario.
But onto why i believe the others are really different, its because imo the writers in cutting those corners regarding writing the scene from a romanced and non romance perspective fouled up, so we get pretty much the same scene regardless, which of course leads to a mish mash of reasoning why the characters are so put out by Shepards actions.
Basically in both scenes we get the lover scorned which clouds their emotions, even though in some scenes we're not actually talking to a former lover if you get me.
So while Tali and Garrus and others can act a certain way, its the fact that they weren't romances from me1 which allows them to do so, since the VS is a romance from me1 they act as lovers scorned and since the scene is done with the minimum of effort this unfortunately carries through irrespective of whether or not you had romanced them.
I actually ahve considered that. My conclusion is that both Ashley and Kaidan are both dedicated Alliance officers. Hearing Ash tear into the Terra Firma Party candidate was something to behold. If one of them Suddenly appeared two years after Virmire working with Cerbeurs, I'd like to think my Shepard would stop to ask questions. And not accuse them of betraying the Alliance until checking to see if he/she was A) Not an imposter 
acting freeely and C) had some sort of reason for doing this.
I may not agree with the reaons. I'd certainly want to verify some facts myself. This is Cerberus after all. But this is not normal behavior for them. In fact, it goes against everything they stand for. What could change someone's prioritiees so much in just two years?
Simply put Cerberus.
See they along with the 2 year gap are a large reason why things that should be universally true (shepard's character and motivations) cannot be accepted to be true.
Like i said before, if an american soldier suddenly reappeared after 2 years presumed dead, if that soldier was now working with people considered to be the enemy, then the questions of either brainwashing or finally showing their true colours come up irrespective of that soldiers previous record.
Think about how those americans who were captured working for Al qaeda in pakistan and afghanistan were treated when captured, did people go, he used to be such a nice boy you know or were they whisked to gitmo quicker than you can say bin laden.
Considering that Al qaeda as far as we know possess no super tech which allows brainwashing, could there not have been other reasons behind why these particular americans were working with them.
Now remember the examples of just exactly the type of things cerberus are capable of in me1 and me2, the tech experiments they've done, the control experiments they've done, the lengths they'll go to in order to accomplish whatever goal it is they've set out to accomplish.
So is it possible that Shepard is being controlled, manipulated or is finally showing his true colours, is it possible that he along with cerberus fabricated his death or created the situation where his death could be faked. Or is it possible that cerberus without Shepards knowledge are in league with the collectors and created the situation in order to control and manipulated but is completely unaware of that control.
Cerberus by their very nature or Ash's understanding of that nature opens up so many possibilities that its hard to dismiss them all, when added to the time gap of 2 years and a mistaken assumption that if Shepards alive then he must not have died, this opens up even more possibilities.
Modifié par alperez, 10 octobre 2011 - 04:53 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
