385 réponses à ce sujet

[MrGuse]

Arkitekt wrote...

Stop saying stupid things. Of course that if you have a "good enough reason", then logically (and I mean that in the logical inevitable sense) mass killings are justified, right the frak there.

The real question is if whether the case as presented in ME3 is "good enough reason". For this we have to understand TIM's strategy. Now you indignated folks should pause for a second and understand that we are dealing with the almost inevitable scenario of extinction of every advanced organic race in the galaxy. If TIM had the idea that the only possible solution was to cut corners in the most extreme (and evil) of ways, would he be right to do it or not?

I'm posing it as an open question. I am not saying that TIM isn't evil.

Stop being so pedantic. It doesn't make you look smarter. You clearly understood what I was saying but felt my wording made a good ad hominem. So, good on you!

[Arkitekt]

Yeah, kinda funny. Shep kills 300 000 batarians, but TIM is the evil one.

ROFL

[MrGuse]

They didn't give me a choice not to, did they?

[Random citizen]

I never considered him "evil", just an megalomaniac extremist trying to save humanity at any cost.

[Arkitekt]

MrGuse wrote...

They didn't give me a choice not to, did they?

*FACEDESK*

Did you really went there?

[Zubi Fett]

I think the Illusive man original goal was to save humanity and protected at all cost and that later it just degrees to humanity first by all means.

I think the Illusive mans history is a tragic one where a visionary with noble goals degrees into a dark path.

M i the only one who think this?

[Farbautisonn]

MrGuse wrote...

They didn't give me a choice not to, did they?

-So... you would have NOT blown up the relay? 

Very admirable, and actually that would have made for a very nice beginning for ME3. "A galaxy in cinders, pls reload another character".

[AkiKishi]

Zubi Fett wrote...

I think the Illusive man original goal was to save humanity and protected at all cost and that later it just degrees to humanity first by all means.

I think the Illusive mans history is a tragic one where a visionary with noble goals degrees into a dark path.

M i the only one who think this?

Road to Hell is paved with good intentions and all that.

[MrGuse]

Oh for God's sake. In a full game, Shepard would have spent 10 hours trying to figure out how to stop the Reapers without destroying the system. In Arrival, they gave you 1 option and then tried to set up a scenario where it would be justified.

You were railroaded into a choice with your only moral option being to warn them 4 minutes before their doom.

-edit-

-So... you would have NOT blown up the relay? 

Very admirable,
and actually that would have made for a very nice beginning for ME3. "A
galaxy in cinders, pls reload another character".

Thinking about it, how would it have changed the beginning of the game at all? It's not like the time you bought earth really amounted to much.

Modifié par MrGuse, 28 mars 2012 - 03:23 .

[Farbautisonn]

MrGuse wrote...

Oh for God's sake. In a full game, Shepard would have spent 10 hours trying to figure out how to stop the Reapers without destroying the system. In Arrival, they gave you 1 option and then tried to set up a scenario where it would be justified.

You were railroaded into a choice with your only moral option being to warn them 4 minutes before their doom.

-Actually... thats not really the "Moral and ethical choise".  Its the selfish and paladin-esque one. The one where you doom people to go amok in mass panic and having people storm for ships that cant take them and then still only a handfull survivies.

[garf]

I'm just bemused at all the people who can't discern between concentration camps, (invented by the British to end the Boer War) and **** death camps which were a different animal. Although admittedly, the same species.

We can rant about Godwin's law all we like but just because someone brought ****s in a post about good vs. evil, ends and means, genocidal slaughter doesn't make them stupid. Of course it would help if we all knew the history we were talking about.

[Catastrophy]

TIM has already given up humanity. His vision is an entirely different concept. And he didn't just realized it, or denies that he went over the line a while ago. This guy is obsessed. Good reason is as poor an excuse for murder as being intoxicated.
Shepard still clings to a set of value that doesn't compromise humanity. Law enforcement takes its toll sometimes, though.

[Zubi Fett]

MrGuse wrote...

Oh for God's sake. In a full game, Shepard would have spent 10 hours trying to figure out how to stop the Reapers without destroying the system. In Arrival, they gave you 1 option and then tried to set up a scenario where it would be justified.

You were railroaded into a choice with your only moral option being to warn them 4 minutes before their doom.

-edit-

-So... you would have NOT blown up the relay? 

Very admirable,
and actually that would have made for a very nice beginning for ME3. "A
galaxy in cinders, pls reload another character".

Thinking about it, how would it have changed the beginning of the game at all? It's not like the time you bought earth really amounted to much.

There where only few hours left for the return of the reapers, not much time to think.

[Farbautisonn]

MrGuse wrote...
Thinking about it, how would it have changed the beginning of the game at all? It's not like the time you bought earth really amounted to much.

-there wouldnt have been "months of waiting for a tribuneral" and whatever preparation was made in the meantime. That time was pretty essential.

[MrGuse]

Farbautisonn wrote...

-there wouldnt have been "months of waiting for a tribuneral" and whatever preparation was made in the meantime. That time was pretty essential.

Maybe! How would saving that system have effected your Readiness Rating?  See?!? Possibilities! Maybe the Paragon choice isn't always the best.

[kalle90]

Daforth wrote...

I never thought TIM's goals are evil (at least from human viewpoint), however his methods are.

When games are full of Malaks, Nihiluses, Jokers, Fontaines, Jerichos, Graveminds, Weskers and so on, I can't say TIM seems "evil" in the least. I even symphatized him and hoped he would finally change his ways - he has the wits and determination to be an amazing asset.

I also think sticking with Cerberus should have been possible, as a double agent if nothing else. After ME2 I didn't get the impression I had completely cut my ties with him. I was ready to stand up against him, but I didn't plan to go all "I don't want anything to do with you, I kill you if necessary"

[Farbautisonn]

MrGuse wrote...

Maybe! How would saving that system have effected your Readiness Rating?  See?!? Possibilities! Maybe the Paragon choice isn't always the best.

-Wat? Saving that system? It would have been ground zero for the reaper invasion in a matter of minutes or tens of minutes before it gets blown up? How the hell would you gain anything from keeping a system fully under the controll of the reapers, and infact helping them get faster to other systems and relays? 

Im really... REALLY interested in hearing the logic here? 

[MrGuse]

Farbautisonn wrote...
-Wat? Saving that system? It would have been ground zero for the reaper invasion in a matter of minutes or tens of minutes before it gets blown up? How the hell would you gain anything from keeping a system fully under the controll of the reapers, and infact helping them get faster to other systems and relays? 

Im really... REALLY interested in hearing the logic here? 

I'm spitballing here, so bear with me (and this is incredibly off-topic).

Mass Effect is all about choice, right? So, what if you were given the choice to save the Arraraock (or whatever) system in Arrival (or at least think you were)? You're right, it would absolutely be Ground Zero for a Reaper invasion and would most likely make like tons more difficult. All-in-all, a bad freakin' idea, but very in line with what Paragon Shepard does throughout the series ("I won't sacrifice the council", "We have to save these civilians even if the Blue Suns leader gets away", etc.)

ME does great with choice but too often makes Paragon the best choice. I wonder how the game would have been different if some paragon choices were the worst you could make (i.e. saving the Rachni queen is just a bad idea no matter what)?

Again, just spit-balling. Make it A choice, not the BEST choice.

Modifié par MrGuse, 28 mars 2012 - 03:36 .

[Farbautisonn]

MrGuse wrote...
I'm spitballing here, so bear with me (and this is incredibly off-topic).

Mass Effect is all about choice, right? So, what if you were given the choice to save the Arraraock (or whatever) system in Arrival (or at least think you were)? You're right, it would absolutely be Ground Zero for a Reaper invasion and would most likely make like tons more difficult. All-in-all, a bad freakin' idea, but very in line with what Paragon Shepard does throughout the series ("I won't sacrifice the council", "We have to save these civilians even if the Blue Suns leader gets away", etc.)

ME does great with choice but too often makes Paragon the best choice. I wonder how the game would have been different if some paragon choices were the worst you could make (i.e. saving the Rachni queen is just a bad idea no matter what)?

Again, just spit-balling. Make it A choice, not the BEST choice.

- I agree with the paragon being "obvious good" and renegade being "obvious bad" bit, but saving that system would have lead to a "Sorry, game over screen" the second you loaded up ME3. Sure its sometimes ok to give people ample chance to mess up. My old Pen and Paper DM used to revel in it. But this would make zero sense and would do nothing but get people pissed off further.

Im sure that it would be a nice "lesson" to some but Im equally sure it would cause a small fecal gust of its own.

[Jonny110]

By the end wasn't TIM completely under the influence of the reapers? I mean he is clearly pro-human in ME2 and I doubt he would of sacrificed earth or billions of human lives if he wasn't, personally I would of thought that he would add all of Cerberus's resources to Sherpard's cause as he believed shepard was the only one capable of stopping them (in ME2)

[Mylia Stenetch]

MrGuse wrote...

Farbautisonn wrote...
-Wat? Saving that system? It would have been ground zero for the reaper invasion in a matter of minutes or tens of minutes before it gets blown up? How the hell would you gain anything from keeping a system fully under the controll of the reapers, and infact helping them get faster to other systems and relays? 

Im really... REALLY interested in hearing the logic here? 

I'm spitballing here, so bear with me (and this is incredibly off-topic).

Mass Effect is all about choice, right? So, what if you were given the choice to save the Arraraock (or whatever) system in Arrival (or at least think you were)? You're right, it would absolutely be Ground Zero for a Reaper invasion and would most likely make like tons more difficult. All-in-all, a bad freakin' idea, but very in line with what Paragon Shepard does throughout the series ("I won't sacrifice the council", "We have to save these civilians even if the Blue Suns leader gets away", etc.)

ME does great with choice but too often makes Paragon the best choice. I wonder how the game would have been different if some paragon choices were the worst you could make (i.e. saving the Rachni queen is just a bad idea no matter what)?

Again, just spit-balling. Make it A choice, not the BEST choice.

I would not say that Paragon is the best choice, since it is not based on the good/evil paradim shift. When I am discussing the system with my friend we identified Paragon as altruist while Renegade is pragmatic. Both sides are in the "good" it is all up to interpretation afterwards. This is after the evolution on the system after ME1.

So when it came to the Batarian system it truly showed to me, you cannot save them all even if you are an altruist, you had to make a sacrifice, but still tried to warn them to save what you could. Beliving even if some of them are saved then you did the "right" thing. 

While if you went renegade, you looked at the facts in front of you. The Galaxy is boned, instead of causing a panic on the streets which could cause a greater issue, you do not tell them, leaving them ingornant and have a quick death. In situations of survival they teach you to lie or not tell whole truths to people, due to chaos that could happen. Because you lessened the pain that they would suffer it could be viewed as the "right" issue.

[Tirigon]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Lulz... "the card" pulled in post 3.

But rightfully so. TIM is really kind of space-hitler, with the only difference being that he likes all humans and not just some of them.

[BogdanV]

Riight, ... Because the entire point of ME3 wasn't gathering allies without sacrifices.
Look, right now we're talking about survival of advanced sapient life, not some vague ideological mojo. Get it ? Sapient life as opposed to just Hanars, Asari or billions of people ?
The concept itself is so bloody vast that it makes a million deaths seem like cakewalk !

You can't afford going boy-scout when the entire Galaxy is at stake. People will die anyway so at least give their deaths a purpose.

Major advances in medicine were achieved because people were willing to dig up dead and dissect them a couple of centuries ago. Lots of folks were outraged, yes, but because of it we owe them our current lifes.

Of all people, TIM was actually the most cautious one. As Hackett, he knew it all along that this war can not be won through conventional means. We owe our victory to god damned chance and even this Crucible sacrificed more lifes in the past cycles than TIM in this one.
If we had nothing but our own bones and skin to support us against the Reapers, we had to follow the Illusive Man's route. Only by reverse-engineering the Reapers can we develop actual countermeasures.

As a side note, I was honestly surprised to see Javik view Cerberus with such disgust. As someone who saw first hand the annihilation of his people, he'd understand that anything is prefferable to certain death.

[Captian Cornhole]

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

MrGuse wrote...

Farbautisonn wrote...
-Wat? Saving that system? It would have been ground zero for the reaper invasion in a matter of minutes or tens of minutes before it gets blown up? How the hell would you gain anything from keeping a system fully under the controll of the reapers, and infact helping them get faster to other systems and relays? 

Im really... REALLY interested in hearing the logic here? 

I'm spitballing here, so bear with me (and this is incredibly off-topic).

Mass Effect is all about choice, right? So, what if you were given the choice to save the Arraraock (or whatever) system in Arrival (or at least think you were)? You're right, it would absolutely be Ground Zero for a Reaper invasion and would most likely make like tons more difficult. All-in-all, a bad freakin' idea, but very in line with what Paragon Shepard does throughout the series ("I won't sacrifice the council", "We have to save these civilians even if the Blue Suns leader gets away", etc.)

ME does great with choice but too often makes Paragon the best choice. I wonder how the game would have been different if some paragon choices were the worst you could make (i.e. saving the Rachni queen is just a bad idea no matter what)?

Again, just spit-balling. Make it A choice, not the BEST choice.

I would not say that Paragon is the best choice, since it is not based on the good/evil paradim shift. When I am discussing the system with my friend we identified Paragon as altruist while Renegade is pragmatic. Both sides are in the "good" it is all up to interpretation afterwards. This is after the evolution on the system after ME1.

So when it came to the Batarian system it truly showed to me, you cannot save them all even if you are an altruist, you had to make a sacrifice, but still tried to warn them to save what you could. Beliving even if some of them are saved then you did the "right" thing. 

While if you went renegade, you looked at the facts in front of you. The Galaxy is boned, instead of causing a panic on the streets which could cause a greater issue, you do not tell them, leaving them ingornant and have a quick death. In situations of survival they teach you to lie or not tell whole truths to people, due to chaos that could happen. Because you lessened the pain that they would suffer it could be viewed as the "right" issue.

Exactly. This reminds me of when getting the *soilers* becon on Thessia. Liara gets all upset and goes on the verge of a complete breakdown, cause entire asari culture and religion is based on a lie. However Javik lies to her, telling Liara that the Protheans tries to uplift the Asari cause they thought they were teh best hope for the next cycle. An obvious lie, but that lie gives liara strenght to stay in the fight.

Renegade isn't bad all the times, sometimes faced with crazy situations it is the best route.

Modifié par Captian Cornhole, 28 mars 2012 - 03:56 .

[Farbautisonn]

Problem with "paragon/renegade" is both that its not really either, and that it reeks of symbolism for "good and bad". Plus the way the choises are worded are usually hamfisted and ignorant on the renegade side whilst somewhat more intelligent and elequant on the other.

Take Jacks quest where you save that guy who wants to restart teltin. You let him go. Is that really a "paragon" choise? You let a guy go who is hellbent on starting a Mengele-esque medical facility. Even if we blow up the facility we have zero guarantee that he wont restart elsewhere. We are basically writing out cheques that other children like Jack has to cash.

And the dialogue option is some vile and crude "Kill him, you're evil, its who you are`?" Really?

How about the slightly more intelligent and correct: "We cant let him live. He will restart somewhere else causing the precise same pain to other kids. If you dont kill him, I will".