383 réponses à ce sujet

[N7Raider]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

I don't see Cerberus doing evil for evils sake with what I read from the data mine.  Cerberus always has ulterior motives that relate to their end game, stoping the Reapers is obviously a must for their end game, however they look at Reaper technology as a key aquisition for their end game. 

You can see this in ME2, no spoilers neccesary:

TIM even says it, the Collector base will provide strength for humanity (read: Cerberus) against the Reapers and beyond.

TIM was already looking at the end game as he wants it.  To have the vision Cerberus has, and to make that vision achievable, TIM has to look past the now and plan for opening opportunities in the future.  Once the Reapers are "taken care of" TIM will go back to business as usual.

If TIM wants the Reaper tech to dominate the other council races, he's going to need to make sure Shepard and his allies don't destroy them in the process of saving the Galaxy from them.

Well, beside that the conclusion is only half-true (you don't need the Reapers themselves to have Reaper tech), Cerberus's goal in the spoilers isn't to protect the Reapers from Shepard... and their goal could just as reasonably (from a writing perspective) work by them being on the same organic side of the war.

So does the leak tell you why Cerberus is trying to kill shepard/side with the reapers?  If it does please don't tell me in detail, just a yes or no.  

[DPSSOC]

Just had a thought, didn't notice it skimming the first few pages or since I started following so apologies if it's been discussed, but what do we mean when we say choices do/do not matter? What's the benchmark we're working with here. For example are we saying that BDtS mattered because it was mentioned on the news, and that any choice that get's a mention matters, or are we talking about choices that actually effect and change the story.

For example two ways the Council decision could be handled in ME3.
Scenario 1
Alive - Anderson: We've been keeping the Council up to date on our progress in trying to find a way to beat the Reapers, they've got their own projects going and promise that when the time comes they'll stand with us against the Reapers.

Dead - Anderson: The Council refuses to share any progress they've made but at least we managed to convince them the Reapers are coming. They may grumble about it but when the time comes they'll fall in line.

This is the only reference made to the choice in game and nothing changes; forces available and requirements to gain aid are the same regardless of choice.

Scenario 2
Alive - Shepard must complete one or more missions to secure the aid of each Council race.

Dead - Shepard must complete more missions and/or get's less assistance resulting in more human casualties and/or might not be able to get any help at all from some races.

So which scenario qualifies, for you, as having the choice matter? Or do you feel it's somewhere in between (continual mention though no actual change for example). Just interesting to see if the "Choices will matter" side and the "Choices won't matter" side are working off the same criteria.

[Dean_the_Young]

Saphra Deden wrote...

N7Raider wrote...

So does the leak tell you why Cerberus is trying to kill shepard/side with the reapers?  If it does please don't tell me in detail, just a yes or no.  

Yes.

No.


Cerberus's end-goal is explained, but not how/why siding with the Reapers advances that.

[Seboist]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

N7Raider wrote...

So does the leak tell you why Cerberus is trying to kill shepard/side with the reapers?  If it does please don't tell me in detail, just a yes or no.  

Yes.

No.


Cerberus's end-goal is explained, but not how/why siding with the Reapers advances that.

The TIM character arc does....

[Gatt9]

Phaedon wrote...

I would love that Sebbie. I am sure Gatt remembers my remarks about his source, and how I dubbed it.

Seeing an attempt to derail the thread,however,is there any answer to Genshie's argument?

I remember your remarks.

Just like I remember you spending weeks claiming RPGs were board games,  or claiming a truck is a car,  or getting the concept of inheritence completely wrong,  or trying to use Wikipedia as a source,  or being completely unable to understand what a LARP is.

I remember you insisting everyone who believed ME3 would have multiplayer was an idiot too.  Good to see you've finally gotten brave enough to post again since you turned out dead wrong on that too.

I also remember you strawmanning,  and just outright making things up.  I remember you driving off a half dozen posters at least,  I received plenty of PM's from people who were stopping posting because of your "debate" tactics.

What I don't remember is you ever dubbing anything.

@didymose

If my posts sound repetitive,  it would be because I limit myself to certain topics only.  Please note,  I do not thread crap on happy threads. 

[Labrev]

GodWood wrote...

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...
Also bare in mind the selective memory of the posters on here that complain the most.

Yeah, that Hah Yes Reapers guy is the worst.

I complain? That's news to me. Last I checked, I tend to back up all my opinions with thought-out ideas and don't otherwise submit a post that I can't defend later (try me). On the flip side, I call out lots of BS posting around this site and don't get as much as a response from those people about 9 times out of 10.

Except that every decision that backfires for the paragon backfires for the renegade too.

Selective memory - Exhibit A. Obviously I'm not going to fact-check any spoilers here, but will just say you're dead wrong on this post. (What else is new?)

I don't know why you continue denying that a pure paragon playthrough = best outcome.

First-hand experience. As in, I've played through several careers and many of them predominantly red, and did not feel it to be "better" or "worse" than any paragon career. Especially when paragon options can prove to fail a mission or take risks with big potential downside where renegades do not.

A lot of these supposed "positive outcomes" that the hardliners on this site talk about are nothing more than irrelevant throwaway lines and cameos that don't make the game any easier for a paragon player than renegade.

I'm thinking you're suffering from the Arcian sydrome of 'a renegade was mean to you so now you have some personal vendetta'.

Oh look, you have some very demented idea behind why I post rational thoughts and responses. Unsurprising.

This may come as a major shock to you, but my business here is merely to discuss the game. If I have an opinion on a topic at hand, I will share it. If I am in agreement with someone, I will say so. If I am in disagreement, I will often times post my opposing opinions as well.

That's it. I have no vendettas. But I will say this: there are a group of people on here that post garbage. They (1) insult and call names; (2) bash the game in an off-topic manner (thus diluting the quality of discussion overall); (3) post baseless BS posts. And it's the usual suspects every time. They know who they are, everyone else does too. They are free to do as they please, but that isn't going to stop me from telling them what I think of their own opinions either, and I don't care whether they like what I have to say or not.

And I must say, I laugh at the notion that these same individuals also consider themselves "renegades" at all. When you're so sensitive to slight criticism of your convictions and can't handle dissenting opinions, how renegade are you really? 

What made me really grow to appreciate my own renegade character was that hostile turian on the Citadel. There's a guy that tries to antagonize you, only for my character to make a fool out of him and then bend over backwards for a store discount. That's what a renegade does when something stands in their way, kick-ass and move on. OTOH, renegades on this site may play that way themselves, but come crying to this site about how that meanie turian treated them and the game is against them because a paragon doesn't have to deal with that. And look at yourself: you think I post the way I do because someone was mean to me or whatever. Like you can't even grasp the simple concept of one's own strong sense of convictions.

If my mere opinion is that hard for you to handle, then leave, because I don't have any plans to do so atm. In truth, I've been thinking lately that I should really quit posting on this site. Only thing that really makes me think otherwise is knowing that all the wrong people will be really happy if I do so. But until I can get over that, I'm here to stay.

[Il Divo]

DiebytheSword wrote...

I don't see Cerberus doing evil for evils sake with what I read from the data mine.  Cerberus always has ulterior motives that relate to their end game, stoping the Reapers is obviously a must for their end game, however they look at Reaper technology as a key aquisition for their end game. 

You can see this in ME2, no spoilers neccesary:

TIM even says it, the Collector base will provide strength for humanity (read: Cerberus) against the Reapers and beyond.

TIM was already looking at the end game as he wants it.  To have the vision Cerberus has, and to make that vision achievable, TIM has to look past the now and plan for opening opportunities in the future.  Once the Reapers are "taken care of" TIM will go back to business as usual.

If TIM wants the Reaper tech to dominate the other council races, he's going to need to make sure Shepard and his allies don't destroy them in the process of saving the Galaxy from them.

Good point. Let me elaborate a tad: based on the advertising and Game Informer issue, it seemed that Cerberus (at first glance) was placed back into that evil role. If the data leak hints at a more substantial motivation, then I'm completely game. Bring on the plot twists, I say!

But at the same time, I am a bit disappointed with the direction the indocrinated Cerberus is heading towards, even in the explanation is pretty sound. Initially I was hoping that Cerberus could serve as a source of political tension in the fight against the Reapers, perhaps in a more direct manor than in ME2 where it's less pronounced. We are technically "allies" in the fight agains the Reapers, but I was hoping to see TIM pull some machiavellian move in an attempt to give Cerberus greater power, while still aiding against the Reaper fight. With this direction, I'm not certain if that's really possible.