1127 réponses à ce sujet

[Killjoy Cutter]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Probable outcomes. If the base was necessary and Cerberus ws necessary, then you DID doom the galaxy.
You are willing to risk to satisfy your petty ego. I'm not.

You are proving to be irrational.

I'm irrational when you're the one who discounts all risks and dangers as irrelevent?   LoL.

I'm not discoutning them.

You're infalting them to proprtions that make the universe look small, all the while dismissing the reapers as a real threat.

When have I dismissed the reapers as a real threat?

I just don't see the risk of leaving the base sitting there when a Reaper or more Collectors or some other threat or something hidden in the base itself could make the whole op go pear shaped at any moment as rational.  I don't see the risk of handing it over to a bumbling, confused organization like Cerberus as rational.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Then please go assasinate the Council. Because they are DOMINATING the galaxy.

And you know jack s**** of what TIM's dominance would mean, you assume.

Really?  Look at how he opperates -- everyone and everything is disposable in TIM's mind, as long as TIM achieves TIM's goal.  He'll betray anyone and risk everything at the drop of a hat, and treats even his biggest investments as pawns.  He doesn't care what his underlings do as long as they get the results he was looking for. 

As for the Council, it's in dire need of reform, but assassinating them won't accomplish anything.
 

How does anything you say discount your assertion of dominance? It doesn't. You're just trying to throw a smokescreen now that the game is up.

Governments regulary treat soldeirs and underlings as disposable - becasue they generally ARE.
The Council is no better than TIM when it comes to "caring" about the people.

And thus they're in dire need of reform, as I said. 

But replacing a group of petty, myopic, bureaucratic oligarchs with a self-righteous megalomaniacal ****** (TIM) is at best a step sideways. 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 22 décembre 2011 - 07:06 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

IF they'd actually decided that the base needed to be kept and that all the indicators screaming DON'T DO IT were a smokescreen, I guess I'd deal with it and go do some new playthroughs.

[Seboist]

Luc0s wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

IF they'd actually decided that the base needed to be kept and that all the indicators screaming DON'T DO IT were a smokescreen, I guess I'd deal with it and go do some new playthroughs.

And IF they actually decided that the base = instant game over in ME3, I'd simply reload my ME2 save-file and make the decision to blow up the base.


Really, no biggie. But I hope both choices result in something epic. I want my choices to MEAN something. If my choices actually mean something in ME3, I'm the happiest person on the planet, even if it turns out my choices weren't the best choices after all.


WHAT I DON'T WANT:

- ME3 if you kept the base: "Good Shepard, you kept the Collector base! Thanks to you we have salvaged the base, which gave us new tech!"

- ME3 if you destroyed the base: "Good Shepard, you destroyed the Collector base! After you blew it up, we were able to salvage the remains, which gave us new tech!"

What you don't want is exactly what you're going to get in ME3 unfortunately.

Once again this illustration perfectly describes ME3 and the entire series.

[AlexXIV]

Seboist wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

IF they'd actually decided that the base needed to be kept and that all the indicators screaming DON'T DO IT were a smokescreen, I guess I'd deal with it and go do some new playthroughs.

And IF they actually decided that the base = instant game over in ME3, I'd simply reload my ME2 save-file and make the decision to blow up the base.


Really, no biggie. But I hope both choices result in something epic. I want my choices to MEAN something. If my choices actually mean something in ME3, I'm the happiest person on the planet, even if it turns out my choices weren't the best choices after all.


WHAT I DON'T WANT:

- ME3 if you kept the base: "Good Shepard, you kept the Collector base! Thanks to you we have salvaged the base, which gave us new tech!"

- ME3 if you destroyed the base: "Good Shepard, you destroyed the Collector base! After you blew it up, we were able to salvage the remains, which gave us new tech!"

What you don't want is exactly what you're going to get in ME3 unfortunately.

Once again this illustration perfectly describes ME3 and the entire series.

No what we get is that Shepard gets rewarded for destroying the base and punished for giving it to Cerberus. How hard the punishment or how good the reward I cannot say ofc.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 22 décembre 2011 - 07:42 .

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

No what we get is that Shepard gets rewarded for destroying the base and punished for giving it to Cerberus. How hard the punishment or how good the reward I cannot say ofc.

Keep up the wishful thinking bro. Nobody has been rewarded or punished for any choices in the entire ME series so far and judged on the leaked script I think BioWare is going to keep up this trent.

Paragon and Renegade are just 2 different paths leading to exactly the same results and exactly the same rewards, with the only difference that Renegade gets a little less content because they tent to blow everything up (with the Collector base being the only exception).

The consequences have been delayed until ME3. That's why we have not seen them yet. ME2 is the middle game of a trilogy. I wouldn't know why Bioware would do their worst in ME3. And if you expect that then I don't know why you are still here.

[Gemini1179]

GodWood wrote...

Unfortunately however, after reading the spoilers it's clear that's not the case. Instead the ME3 plot feels like it has been written by some trolly paragon with a clear anti-renegade/Cerberus agenda.

It's seriously quite amazing how ridiculous it is.

If there is one thing I've learned through reading some Mass Effect fanfiction it is this: the nature of the game and the 'game elements' seems to completely hamper plausable and creative writing for the series. For example in ME2, the opening 'tutorial' level is an incredibly poorly conceived plot- but somewhat necessary for introducing the gameplay elements. The game designers can then use something like the Shadow Broker dossiers to 'hand wave' the sillyness of it in terms of story.

Like what was once said by Mr.... whatever is name is that does those Star Wars prequel reviews, you shouldn't have to read novels and tie-ins for a (movie) game plot to make sense. Having to shoe-horn in explainations for plot and character motivations usually just indicates that at the time, the thinking was "oh man, this is going to be awesome for the players" and not "realistically, does anyone think that Shepard wouldn't be strapped down to the table by Dr. Kensen? Or that he/she could recover from unconsciousness AND knock out two fully armoured and armed guards before they could react?".

I'm coming to peace with it. Fanfiction.net and the wonderful and creative writers there help a lot.

[Gemini1179]

Luc0s wrote...

Now let me ask you this: Do you REALLY think it's that weird that I'm a LITTLE skeptical about ME3 having "real consequences"? Do you REALLY think it's that strange that people believe (past) decisions won't make a damn difference at all, except for just a minor narrative difference (just like ME1 and ME2)?

I don't blame you at all. This is one of my biggest fears of the game. For a "consequence" to be that a different NPC gives you a quest... well, quite frankly, it's a letdown.

ESPECIALLY for all BioWare's bluster about their games being "about choice". I guess they aren't lying, they just don't say that the "choice" has very little to do with the "consequence".

What probably ticked off a lot of people, myself included, was that BW lapped up the praise for DAO and the choices making the Epilogues show that your choices did in some cases have a dramatic effect on the world and then turn around for DA2 when everyone complained about Anders, etc only to say that the "Epilogues in DAO are more heresay and rumour and not to be taken as fact.". That was a big kick to CHOICE's groin as far as I was concerned.

Now, I'm not nieve enough to think that as a gamer I can't expect to be herded into certain places in order to move the game along, but don't talk the talk if you aren't going to walk the walk.

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

The consequences have been delayed until ME3. That's why we have not seen them yet. ME2 is the middle game of a trilogy. I wouldn't know why Bioware would do their worst in ME3. And if you expect that then I don't know why you are still here.

BioWare promised us consequences for our actions back when ME1 was being developed. I was like: "Ohhhhhh a game with epic choices with actual consequences!"

Turns out the choices in ME1 didn't have any consequences at all. For god sakes, I sacrificed the Council in my first playthrough because I was really affraid saving the Council would lead to a "game over" screen, since saving the Coucil means wasting time and Alliance forces better spent on Sovereign, the real threat. But when I chose to save the Council in my 2nd playthrough and found out it worked out just perfectly fine with no actual consequences at all, my jaw dropped on the floor. I was like: "Okay, what the f*ck? So saving the Council has no negative consequences whatsoever? Okaayyyyyyy.....:huh:"

I mean, do you imagine how I felt? I played almost pure-Paragon in my 1st playthrough and it really made me feel bad when I had to sacrifice the Council for the greater good, but it turns out I did it all for nothing. I really felt cheated. Can you imagine why?


Now, during the development of ME2, BioWare promised us that THIS TIME, we would ACTUALLY GET heavy consequences in this game! They said: "You have to make really hard and difficult decisions, and making the wrong decisions can really turn out into a bad ending." 

So I was really psyched about ME2. Finally, actual consequences! Finally, Shepard can die if I don't make my decisions carefully!

Turns out, that winning the game is really f*cking easy and you really have to TRY to get Shepard killed if you want to get the bad ending. And again, no real consequences. It doesn't matter if you're Paragon, Renegade or mixed, ME2 is pretty much exactly the same regardless of your morality.


Now let me ask you this: Do you REALLY think it's that weird that I'm a LITTLE skeptical about ME3 having "real consequences"? Do you REALLY think it's that strange that people believe (past) decisions won't make a damn difference at all, except for just a minor narrative difference (just like ME1 and ME2)?

- ME3 if you kept the base: "Good Shepard, you kept the Collector base! Thanks to you we have salvaged the base, which gave us new tech!"

- ME3 if you destroyed the base: "Good Shepard, you destroyed the Collector base! After you blew it up, we were able to salvage the remains, which gave us new tech!"

^
ME3 is going to be exactly like that and you know it.

It is a trilogy. The conclusion usually comes in the last part, until then they raise the tension. And you could lose squadmates in ME2. All of them. If you want to see consequenses in ME3, make a playthrough with all squaddies dead. I am not going to do that because I know it is going to suck.

Trust me, I am going to be one of the first on the barricades if ME3 sucks and ruins the the franchise for me. I am expecting nothing less than a worthy conclusion of the story. If ME3 is going to be a POS I'll join the choire of people bashing it as hard as they can. But ... until then Bioware still has alot of credit. At least the dev team working on the ME franchise.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 22 décembre 2011 - 08:21 .

[AlexXIV]

jreezy wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Consequence =/= Negative consequence. Just saying.

And what are you trying to say with that?

That any complaints of a lack of consequences are wrong.

Well to be fair if there were only positive consequences, then there are basically no consequences.

So you need to have both, positive and negative to make it work.

[PnXMarcin1PL]

jreezy wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Consequence =/= Negative consequence. Just saying.

And what are you trying to say with that?

That any complaints of a lack of consequences are wrong.

+1 jreezy, there are consequences that people dont even expect

[Lotion Soronarr]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Probable outcomes. If the base was necessary and Cerberus ws necessary, then you DID doom the galaxy.
You are willing to risk to satisfy your petty ego. I'm not.

You are proving to be irrational.

I'm irrational when you're the one who discounts all risks and dangers as irrelevent?   LoL.

I'm not discoutning them.

You're infalting them to proprtions that make the universe look small, all the while dismissing the reapers as a real threat.

When have I dismissed the reapers as a real threat?

I just don't see the risk of leaving the base sitting there when a Reaper or more Collectors or some other threat or something hidden in the base itself could make the whole op go pear shaped at any moment as rational.  I don't see the risk of handing it over to a bumbling, confused organization like Cerberus as rational.

Yes, you have dismissed them. Since you think that we can take em on - and everything shows we can't.
Yes, because you inflate Cerberus incompetence and faliure.
Yes, becasue even if the base op fails, as at least you tried to change the fubar situation the galaxy is in.
And yes, because there aren't any more Collectors since the pulse killed em all. If you have to invent famtasy scenarios just for everything to fail, you already failed.

How does anything you say discount your assertion of dominance? It doesn't. You're just trying to throw a smokescreen now that the game is up.

Governments regulary treat soldeirs and underlings as disposable - becasue they generally ARE.
The Council is no better than TIM when it comes to "caring" about the people.

And thus they're in dire need of reform, as I said. 

But replacing a group of petty, myopic, bureaucratic oligarchs with a self-righteous megalomaniacal ****** (TIM) is at best a step sideways. 

Except you won't be replacing them. Because you aren't. You're just giving him the base. You conclude that we will conquer the galaxy with it - which is a baseless and redicolous fear.
Krogan without the genophage are a bigger theat to other races than Cerberus. Ya, know..cause there's million of them and they are violent, walking tanks.

And you've yet to prove TIM would be any worse in that position. At least he's far more aware of what's going around then the council and at least he's smart enough to do something about the threat.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Medhia Nox wrote...
If they decided that the Collector Base was a giant trap - you, Lotion, Saphra, Kaiser - etc. etc. would be crying about how they were ****ty writers anyway - so why should they care at all?
 

Not really. Since I consider that a possiblity (altough a very unlikely one) I would accept that. As long as the whole crew doesn't do another 180° that is...

But given that ME2 and ME3 leaks already cemented the "****ty writers" thing, that point is moot.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Ya know, it's not Cerberus rummaging trough the remain that bothers me - it's to be expected they would do that. They'd have to be morons not to examine every wreack in that system.

What bugs me is that the result is the same. Surely an in-tact base would yield more.

[Killjoy Cutter]

@ Lotion:

Regarding the base, what makes you assume that all the Collectors everywhere were all on the base, and that the ship we've seen is in fact the only Collector ship? What makes you assume that there are no other threats on the base? What makes you assume that none of the Collectors will survive the pulse, other than TIM's assurances? What makes you assume you can trust TIM after all the lies?

I get that you're willing to take those risks. The real problem here is that you think any player who isn't willing to take that risk is a naive sobbing moron. Rather than someone who weights risks and potentials differently. Rather than someone who looks at TIM and says "What makes you think you're anything like my boss? You're supposed to be my partner in this, and yet you keep treating me like a lackey. Enough."

----

And you have yet to prove that TIM would be any better...

Given the way almost every Cerberus project ends up (Teltin, Overlord, every project Shep comes across in ME1, many more examples), there's plenty to indicate that TIM is a ******-poor leader. So far, the only things we've seen him get right are the things directly needed to make TIM the benefactor for Shep in ME2 -- Lazarus (which still ended with the loss of the station and the death of almost everyone involved), Normandy SR2, and EDI.

As for replacing the council, I was directly responding, in the context of discussing TIM/Cerberus dominance, to your assertion that the council should be assassinated. Don't set up an obvious avenue of discussion and then try to blast someone for taking a few steps down it.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 22 décembre 2011 - 08:46 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Luc0s wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Ya know, it's not Cerberus rummaging trough the remain that bothers me - it's to be expected they would do that. They'd have to be morons not to examine every wreack in that system.

What bugs me is that the result is the same. Surely an in-tact base would yield more.

Yes, that's exactly what I was trying to say. And that's why I'm starting to hate BioWare's writers.

I still think ME3 will be an epic game with epic gameplay and epic cinematics and an okay story, but I don't get my hopes up that my choices are going to matter at all.

I'll bet in the end, all of us, both Paragon-players and Renegade-players, will be playing exactly the same ME3 with exactly the same events, exactly the same story and only a few small narrative differences.

And why I keep saying that Bioware's games are becoming more and more "interactive cinematic experiences".  The player lacks more and more agency within the games over time.  

ME3 will be the last game in the trilogy, and yet they can't make themselves come up with a significant difference in the story even on major decisions like "kept base" vs "destroyed base". 

And given what we saw if we did destroy the base, there should be nothing left to salvage.  Everything should either be vaporized, or departing at significant velocity.