172 réponses à ce sujet

[slimgrin]

Meshaber wrote...

I really don't see where people are getting this "ME1 story and writing were so much brilliantlier than everything else ever" from.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game, and it has one huge advantage over the other two story-wise (Saren)...but what part of it is it that makes people **** all over the story/writing/pacing?

ME1 is filled to the brim with Shepard saying dumb-ass things (in autodialogue), companions just tag along for no good reason (Garrus, Wrex, Tali and Liara are all badly introduced. Especially Liara), Shepard is a robot (when he doesn't go on childish rampages against the schtupid politischians who don't believe hish schcary schtoriesch (bwaaaaahhhh)), it has very little character development, and several key parts of the plot are full of serious derp. Good ending, not amazing.

ME2 has an incredibly weak start. Everything from Lazarus station until you meet Joker is a pure pain, but the rest of the game is amazing even if the main plot doesn't fit in too well with the trilogy. There are derpy moments, but nothing too serious. The ending kicks balls and has this http://www.youtube.c...?v=e2z28mutY1E.
Also, Jack. And this is where Garrus went from a lump of plastic to muddafukkin' batman in space, plus three jupitermasses of pure awesome.

Mass Effect 3 has...issues. It's not perfect, but it trumps the other two games (and pretty much everything else ever made) in every single department, except for the ending. Nothing more to say.

Jade Empire still has the best ending. Ever.

ME1 makes sense from beginning to end, it has better pacing, and by far the best ending. Almost all the pistons are firing in that game. The plot in ME2 dropped everything in favor of a character driven experience. And it did indeed have better characters, better combat too. But sooner or later Bioware had to scramble and pick up the plot again. Let's not forget that Mac Walters, the lead writer for ME2, fully admitted they had written themselves into a corner in ME2. He said killing Shepard was a bad idea. This is sloppy writing, plain and simple. They never properly planned the story arc from the beginning and that has finally become painfully apparent.

Also, don't get butthurt just becasue people choose to look at this objectively.

Modifié par slimgrin, 30 mars 2012 - 06:06 .

[ile_1979]

jess05 wrote...

Why I think ME1 was the better RPG.

Where you put your points mattered more, and allowed for a bit more unique character builds. Beyond the class Choice.

classes were restricted to certain armor types. Heavy, Medium, Light. Some classes could train to the next highest tier.
classes were restricted to certain weapons, unless they trained to use something else.

Not only could you armor Shepard, but squadmates. Quarian, Krogan, Turian specific armors.
You could also swap Biotic amps, tech amps etc...

Now, any class can use any weapon and theres armor. Plain and simple. Choose a color.


Placing skill points was much better in 1 IMO, becasue you had to decide what was important to your build, and also made squad choice a bit more important.

For example, If Shepard had no Decrypt skill in ME1, try opening doors without Tali there to hack it for you.
Now, Shep can hack anything.  It made characters individual strenghts mean something.

More Skills overall, not just 4.

Basically what Jess is saying
-Armor and weapon restrictions as they were in ME1
+The rising of the red Supergiant on a desolated class 2 hazzard planet

And keep all the different guns from ME3 as well as the encumberance thingy. That was pure gold IMO.
But don't ever remove weapon training skills and utility skills (like hacking and bypass) from a game and still call it an RPG.
Keep the useful new skills from ME2 and 3 but don't replace the existing ones.
Make a game like this and you will have a good old fashioned RPG of the century.

[Meshaber]

slimgrin wrote...

ME1 makes sense from beginning to end, it has better pacing, and by far the best ending. Almost all the pistons are firing in that game. The plot in ME2 dropped everything in favor of a character driven experience. And it did indeed have better characters, better combat too. But sooner or later Bioware had to scramble and pick up the plot again. Let's not forget that Mac Walters, the lead writer for ME2, fully admitted they had written themselves into a corner in ME2. He said killing Shepard was a bad idea. This is sloppy writing, plain and simple. They never properly planned the story arc from the beginning and that has finally become painfully aparent.

Also, don't get butthurt just becasue people choose to look at this objectively.

It's not "objective" because you agree with it, and I'm not butthurt because I don't.

I will agree about the pacing, it was better in many ways. Killing Shepard wasn't a bad idea, although not a particularly good one either, and it could've been handled better. Or worse. In any case, it picks itself up after freedom's progress.

[freestylez]

slimgrin wrote...

Meshaber wrote...

I really don't see where people are getting this "ME1 story and writing were so much brilliantlier than everything else ever" from.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game, and it has one huge advantage over the other two story-wise (Saren)...but what part of it is it that makes people **** all over the story/writing/pacing?

ME1 is filled to the brim with Shepard saying dumb-ass things (in autodialogue), companions just tag along for no good reason (Garrus, Wrex, Tali and Liara are all badly introduced. Especially Liara), Shepard is a robot (when he doesn't go on childish rampages against the schtupid politischians who don't believe hish schcary schtoriesch (bwaaaaahhhh)), it has very little character development, and several key parts of the plot are full of serious derp. Good ending, not amazing.

ME2 has an incredibly weak start. Everything from Lazarus station until you meet Joker is a pure pain, but the rest of the game is amazing even if the main plot doesn't fit in too well with the trilogy. There are derpy moments, but nothing too serious. The ending kicks balls and has this http://www.youtube.c...?v=e2z28mutY1E.
Also, Jack. And this is where Garrus went from a lump of plastic to muddafukkin' batman in space, plus three jupitermasses of pure awesome.

Mass Effect 3 has...issues. It's not perfect, but it trumps the other two games (and pretty much everything else ever made) in every single department, except for the ending. Nothing more to say.

Jade Empire still has the best ending. Ever.

ME1 makes sense from beginning to end, it has better pacing, and by far the best ending. Almost all the pistons are firing in that game. The plot in ME2 dropped everything in favor of a character driven experience. And it did indeed have better characters, better combat too. But sooner or later Bioware had to scramble and pick up the plot again. Let's not forget that Mac Walters, the lead writer for ME2, fully admitted they had written themselves into a corner in ME2. He said killing Shepard was a bad idea. This is sloppy writing, plain and simple. They never properly planned the story arc from the beginning and that has finally become painfully apparent.

Also, don't get butthurt just becasue people choose to look at this objectively.

QFT. I'll even go out and say the storyline for ME1 is the best I've see in a game.

None of the Mass Effect games can never hang it's hat on the third-person shooter aspect. Even though Mass Effect 3 has the most polished combat, it still lags behind a game like Gears of War (2007). That's the not the reason I fell in love with ME.

ME2 was a fun game but really did nothing for the storyline. Killing Shepard, shoehorned into joining Cereberus, making a random new Antagonist with an unclear purpose...Human Reapers...They really missed an opportunity to flesh out ideas on dark energy, maybe a bit on HOW to beat the Reapers (Crucible hints maybe?), and maybe just a better plan by the Reapers rather than using the Collectors for Guerilla warfare tactics.

By the time ME3 comes, so much has to be rushed. they skip over everything from the end of ME2 and now you gotta quickly find a blueprint for an ancient Prothean device. This could've been developed in ME2.

Overall the concept and storytelling of ME1 is leaps and bounds better tan the subsequent games.

Modifié par freestylez, 30 mars 2012 - 06:22 .

[Batviper]

I still think the first game is the best game of the series.Much more freedom, auto dialogue is nearly non existant, more hubs and side quests in it, side quests where you actually make choices etc.My only problems with that game were the same prefab buildings again and again and same generic planets, but hey at least we could explore them freely.Of course then there is the reskinned armor and weapons apart from some few model differences but that didn't bother me much as I was used to that kind of thing from BioWare games.

Mass Effect 3 was epic until the end, but apart from the customization options for weapons and armor and more detailed leveling up system than the first two games it doesn't really fit the action-RPG genre.It has too few dialogue options, Skyrim is an action-RPG too and it's nowhere near Morrowind or Kotor but it's more of an RPG than ME3, even though they removed attributes.

Modifié par Batviper, 30 mars 2012 - 06:28 .

[Siansonea]

Meshaber wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

ME1 makes sense from beginning to end, it has better pacing, and by far the best ending. Almost all the pistons are firing in that game. The plot in ME2 dropped everything in favor of a character driven experience. And it did indeed have better characters, better combat too. But sooner or later Bioware had to scramble and pick up the plot again. Let's not forget that Mac Walters, the lead writer for ME2, fully admitted they had written themselves into a corner in ME2. He said killing Shepard was a bad idea. This is sloppy writing, plain and simple. They never properly planned the story arc from the beginning and that has finally become painfully aparent.

Also, don't get butthurt just becasue people choose to look at this objectively.

It's not "objective" because you agree with it, and I'm not butthurt because I don't.

I will agree about the pacing, it was better in many ways. Killing Shepard wasn't a bad idea, although not a particularly good one either, and it could've been handled better. Or worse. In any case, it picks itself up after freedom's progress.

Actually, it was a bad idea, because it was a story solution to a gameplay problem. They wanted to reset the skill tree and overhaul the combat system, but instead of just doing that and handwaving it, they gave us this big song and dance about Shepard dying with Big Dramatic Moments and...then he's alive again, and it really doesn't matter. It's two years later (Time jump! Time for exposition for the new players!) and Shepard finds himself in unfamiliar surroundings, trying to escape a facility that was sabotaged...because we needed an exciting opening sequence with Shepard fighting for his life and to learn the combat mechanics. Seriously, why did Wilson sabotage Lazarus Station and try to kill Shepard? The same guy who had just spent two years bringing Shepard BACK TO LIFE? Because the Shadow Broker was going to pay him a lot of money? Wilson was a tool, but he wasn't an idiot. Did he really think he could have escaped the Illusive Man's retribution. Has he MET Miranda and Kai Leng? And then Risen Shepard joins Cerberus, and Being Dead And All That Implies is swept under the rug. Old acquaintances see Risen Shepard and are all "Weren't you dead? OMG? So like, welcome back." And THAT'S IT. So yeah, the sequence was "written" to perform gameplay functions, the story was just a layer they added to shoehorn it into the existing narrative. And they probably thought we wouldn't notice how absurd it is. Pretty unequivocally bad from where I'm standing.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 30 mars 2012 - 06:36 .

[AkiKishi]

tehturian wrote...

 All I can say is...what an ending. This is perhaps the 6th or 7th time I've completed it however I still get shivers down my spine when I see Shepherd emerging from the rubble with a smirk. It's a shame that the other Mass effect games couldn't capture that "f yeah" emotion. 

Second one was just as good when you walk down the line after the suicide mission. Third... less said the better I guess.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 30 mars 2012 - 06:39 .

[loungeshep]

I like how a giant Reaper claw crashes through the tower, probably hits Shepard and all she walks away with is a broken arm, maybe.

[BatmanPWNS]

The only thing I miss from ME1 is all those dialogue tree's. To even see dialogue tree's in ME3 makes me so depress.

[freestylez]

ME2:

Anderson: The council doesn't believe you.
Shep: A big f****** reaper exploded on the Citadel. Didn't anyone test samples?
Anderson: Only scraps were recovered. Humungous Reaper scraps. Inconclusive.

[Zjarcal]

Shepard's disney death... that's actually something I really hated from the ME1 ending (I loved the whole end sequence except for that).

[kalle90]

Meshaber wrote...
Jade Empire still has the best ending. Ever.

Now that Kyda mentioned KOTOR 2's ending and you mentioned this:

I don't agree, at all. I felt that Jade Empire ended all too soon and suddenly just like ME3. It was all good until you were betrayed by your master. Then it was a rush through spirit realm to the last palace and confrontration.

Actually makes me wonder if Bioware has had more bad endings than good endings. Though KOTOR 2 shouldn't count.

[slimgrin]

loungeshep wrote...

I like how a giant Reaper claw crashes through the tower, probably hits Shepard and all she walks away with is a broken arm, maybe.

Actually I liked it too, cause it was just a claw and not the whole Reaper, Ie; plausible.




If you think that even comes close to entering a planet's atmospehere in nothing but body armor and being resurrected, or the Starboy of ME3, you're on crack. 

Modifié par slimgrin, 30 mars 2012 - 06:47 .

[Heather Cline]

ME1 had the better story and the better replayability. ME2 didn't really have that replayability and the story was lacking in every area. It was a mishmash of short stories strung together to try and make a coherent whole but failed.

ME3... I'm not even touching that game with a ten foot pole with how bad the game is overall not including the endings. Auto-dialogue, lack of being able to actually talk to people when clicking on them and finding out more deep stuff.

Yeah... ME3 is worse than ME2 and that's saying a lot when ME2 had better implementation of the dialogue control.

[Meshaber]

Siansonea II wrote...

Actually, it was a bad idea, because it was a story solution to a gameplay problem. They wanted to reset the skill tree and overhaul the combat system, but instead of just doing that and handwaving it, they gave us this big song and dance about Shepard dying with Big Dramatic Moments and...then he's alive again, and it really doesn't matter. It's two years later (Time jump! Time for exposition for the new players!) and Shepard finds himself in unfamiliar surroundings, trying to escape a facility that was sabotaged...because we needed an exciting opening sequence with Shepard fighting for his life and to learn the combat mechanics. Seriously, why did Wilson sabotage Lazarus Station and try to kill Shepard? The same guy who had just spent two years bringing Shepard BACK TO LIFE? Because the Shadow Broker was going to pay him a lot of money? Wilson was a tool, but he wasn't an idiot. Did he really think he could have escaped the Illusive Man's retribution. Has he MET Miranda and Kai Leng? And then Risen Shepard joins Cerberus, and Being Dead And All That Implies is swept under the rug. Old acquaintances see Risen Shepard and are all "Weren't you dead? OMG? So like, welcome back." And THAT'S IT. So yeah, the sequence was "written" to perform gameplay functions, the story was just a layer they added to shoehorn it into the existing narrative. And they probably thought we wouldn't notice how absurd it is. Pretty unequivocally bad from where I'm standing.

Bad execution =/= Bad idea. I think the entire killing Shepard...thing...just didn't add anything, but it wasn't that bad either. It was unnecessary and rushed. Everything in ME2 from Shepards death to the Normandy reborn is trash. Except for eye candy.

Bioware intros tend to be pretty crappy though.

[vyvexthorne]

From an infiltrator standpoint the combat in 3 is so much more fun than the combat in me1. No matter what level or how good you were in 1 your sniper rifle constantly moved about when looking through the scope. At level 60 I used nothing but my pistol and just took tali and liara wherever I went.. they decimated everything for me.
The changes in each game are so drastic that you almost have to take each one as a separate game. Infiltrators lost out on being hacking specialists.... anyone could hack or break a safe in 2 and in 3 that stuff isn't even there.
From a role playing aspect I liked 1 the best. For combat I've liked 3 the best. 2 was only fun because of the plethora of crew members you had.. 2 was the worst in taking all the fun out of leveling a character though.

[loungeshep]

slimgrin wrote...

loungeshep wrote...

I like how a giant Reaper claw crashes through the tower, probably hits Shepard and all she walks away with is a broken arm, maybe.

Actually I liked it too, cause it was just a claw and not the whole Reaper, Ie; plausible.




If you think that even comes close to entering a planet's atmospehere in nothing but body armor and being resurrected, or the Starboy of ME3, you're on crack. 

Noooooo. I won't even begin to touch on somehow suriving intact through planet fall in light body armor (yes I know she was dead.) or the Lazarus PRoject.  And if you asked my opinon the Guardian alone, I'd say I was hoping for something more Borg Queen like. 

[N7Menma]

I agree. I've beaten the original Mass Effect 12 times, loved it each time.

[sillyrobot]

slimgrin wrote...

ME1 makes sense from beginning to end, it has better pacing, and by far the best ending. Almost all the pistons are firing in that game. The plot in ME2 dropped everything in favor of a character driven experience. And it did indeed have better characters, better combat too. But sooner or later Bioware had to scramble and pick up the plot again. Let's not forget that Mac Walters, the lead writer for ME2, fully admitted they had written themselves into a corner in ME2. He said killing Shepard was a bad idea. This is sloppy writing, plain and simple. They never properly planned the story arc from the beginning and that has finally become painfully apparent.

Also, don't get butthurt just becasue people choose to look at this objectively.

Although I agree ME was very strong, there were two large plot inconsistencies -- both correctable though.

1) Tali has been on the Citadel for several days carrying a recording of Saren and Benezia discussing the success on Eden Prime.  The success that took place about 15 hours ago according to your doctor.

2) Saren searching for the Conduit when all it was was a way back to the Citadel.  As a Spectrre, instead of arranging an attack on Eden Prime, he should have walked up to the control and turned it on.  Sovereign knew about the internal controls after all.

1) can be fixed by giving Tali a recording of a planning session as opposed to a mission debrief.

2) can be repaired by having Saren seeking out how the signal was changed do as to undo the Prothean damage.

Modifié par sillyrobot, 30 mars 2012 - 07:24 .

[Batviper]

sillyrobot wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

ME1 makes sense from beginning to end, it has better pacing, and by far the best ending. Almost all the pistons are firing in that game. The plot in ME2 dropped everything in favor of a character driven experience. And it did indeed have better characters, better combat too. But sooner or later Bioware had to scramble and pick up the plot again. Let's not forget that Mac Walters, the lead writer for ME2, fully admitted they had written themselves into a corner in ME2. He said killing Shepard was a bad idea. This is sloppy writing, plain and simple. They never properly planned the story arc from the beginning and that has finally become painfully apparent.

Also, don't get butthurt just becasue people choose to look at this objectively.

Although I agree ME was very strong, there were two large plot inconsistencies -- both correctable though.

1) Tali has been on the Citadel for several days carrying a recording of Saren and Benezia discussing the success on Eden Prime.  The success that took place about 15 hours ago according to your doctor.

2) Saren searching for the Conduit when all it was was a way back to the Citadel.  As a Spectrre, instead of arranging an attack on Eden Prime, he should have walked up to the control and turned it on.  Sovereign knew about the internal controls after all.

1) can be fixed by giving Tali a recording of a planning session as opposed to a mission debrief.

2) can be repaired by having Saren seeking out how the signal was changed do as to undo the Prothean damage.

Well actually, Saren did need the Conduit for a surprise attack inside the Citadel, otherwise he wouldn't be able to board the station with all those troops and just walk up to the console, especially not before the geth and Sovereign attack the Citadel, a single Spectre has no chance against the whole C-sec force.I agree with your first point though.

Modifié par Batviper, 30 mars 2012 - 07:32 .

[sillyrobot]

Batviper wrote...

Well actually, Saren did need the Conduit for a surprise attack inside the Citadel, otherwise he wouldn't be able to board the station with all those troops and just walk up to the console, especially not before the geth and Sovereign attack the Citadel, a single Spectre has no chance against the whole C-sec force.I agree with your first point though.

Saren needed a covert way back onto the Citadel because he was implicated in the attack on Eden Prime which he made... to get a covert way onto the Citadel.

Before the attack on Eden Prime, Saren wouldn't have had any resistance to activating the console -- no one would even question his approach being a respected Spectre and with no threat being identified.  Sovereign and geth fleet sit in deep space waiting to jump in (like they did), Saren resets the controls, the fleet jumps in and charges the Citadel just like at the end only with fewer defences in place.  Sovereign shuts down the mass relays, activates the connection to dark space and voila! No more galactic civilisation.

[Batviper]

sillyrobot wrote...

Batviper wrote...

Well actually, Saren did need the Conduit for a surprise attack inside the Citadel, otherwise he wouldn't be able to board the station with all those troops and just walk up to the console, especially not before the geth and Sovereign attack the Citadel, a single Spectre has no chance against the whole C-sec force.I agree with your first point though.

Saren needed a covert way back onto the Citadel because he was implicated in the attack on Eden Prime which he made... to get a covert way onto the Citadel.

Before the attack on Eden Prime, Saren wouldn't have had any resistance to activating the console -- no one would even question his approach being a respected Spectre and with no threat being identified.  Sovereign and geth fleet sit in deep space waiting to jump in (like they did), Saren resets the controls, the fleet jumps in and charges the Citadel just like at the end only with fewer defences in place.  Sovereign shuts down the mass relays, activates the connection to dark space and voila! No more galactic civilisation.

Good point.Guess I never actually thought it like this.I still don't think they would just let him use the Citadel controls though, especially since it's in the council chambers and noone even knew about it.How would Saren know?Wouldn't they be suspicious about what he is trying to do?

[mauro2222]

sillyrobot wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

ME1 makes sense from beginning to end, it has better pacing, and by far the best ending. Almost all the pistons are firing in that game. The plot in ME2 dropped everything in favor of a character driven experience. And it did indeed have better characters, better combat too. But sooner or later Bioware had to scramble and pick up the plot again. Let's not forget that Mac Walters, the lead writer for ME2, fully admitted they had written themselves into a corner in ME2. He said killing Shepard was a bad idea. This is sloppy writing, plain and simple. They never properly planned the story arc from the beginning and that has finally become painfully apparent.

Also, don't get butthurt just becasue people choose to look at this objectively.

Although I agree ME was very strong, there were two large plot inconsistencies -- both correctable though.

1) Tali has been on the Citadel for several days carrying a recording of Saren and Benezia discussing the success on Eden Prime.  The success that took place about 15 hours ago according to your doctor.

2) Saren searching for the Conduit when all it was was a way back to the Citadel.  As a Spectrre, instead of arranging an attack on Eden Prime, he should have walked up to the control and turned it on.  Sovereign knew about the internal controls after all.

1) can be fixed by giving Tali a recording of a planning session as opposed to a mission debrief.

2) can be repaired by having Saren seeking out how the signal was changed do as to undo the Prothean damage.

1) You awake aboard the Normandy, then you travel to the Citadel, it takes several days.

2) Sovereign needed to know what the hell the Protheans did to the Keepers or the Citadel itself, that's why he needs the beacons... the use of the Conduit was a side effect of all that investigation, that's why he and the geth attacked the Citadel and its fleet, the ground troops have a clear way to the Citadel by using the Conduit.

Modifié par mauro2222, 30 mars 2012 - 07:53 .

[Siansonea]

Meshaber wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Actually, it was a bad idea, because it was a story solution to a gameplay problem. They wanted to reset the skill tree and overhaul the combat system, but instead of just doing that and handwaving it, they gave us this big song and dance about Shepard dying with Big Dramatic Moments and...then he's alive again, and it really doesn't matter. It's two years later (Time jump! Time for exposition for the new players!) and Shepard finds himself in unfamiliar surroundings, trying to escape a facility that was sabotaged...because we needed an exciting opening sequence with Shepard fighting for his life and to learn the combat mechanics. Seriously, why did Wilson sabotage Lazarus Station and try to kill Shepard? The same guy who had just spent two years bringing Shepard BACK TO LIFE? Because the Shadow Broker was going to pay him a lot of money? Wilson was a tool, but he wasn't an idiot. Did he really think he could have escaped the Illusive Man's retribution. Has he MET Miranda and Kai Leng? And then Risen Shepard joins Cerberus, and Being Dead And All That Implies is swept under the rug. Old acquaintances see Risen Shepard and are all "Weren't you dead? OMG? So like, welcome back." And THAT'S IT. So yeah, the sequence was "written" to perform gameplay functions, the story was just a layer they added to shoehorn it into the existing narrative. And they probably thought we wouldn't notice how absurd it is. Pretty unequivocally bad from where I'm standing.

Bad execution =/= Bad idea. I think the entire killing Shepard...thing...just didn't add anything, but it wasn't that bad either. It was unnecessary and rushed. Everything in ME2 from Shepards death to the Normandy reborn is trash. Except for eye candy.

Bioware intros tend to be pretty crappy though.

Well, I'm not talking about the execution, I'm talking about the idea. 

The idea was introduced ONLY to provide a means for pushing the time frame to two years after the first game, to take Shepard out of the equation for that length of time, and to reset the combat system and skill trees. It's obvious that the death of Shepard wasn't something that organically arose in the story, that was a key element to the entire arc, it was a Band-Aid solution to a programming problem. So the idea is bad, because it came not from a place of story integrity and internal consistency, but as a "wouldn't it be cool if" pitch to address the nuts-and-bolts conditions of making a new game with an existing character that needs to be reset to 1st Level. And since that's ALL that Lazarus Project accomplishes, you can't say it was done for any other reason. Really, you'd have to be blind not to see it. And even though it was a misguided idea, instead of trying to capitalize on it in ME3, and retroactively justify it, they simply threw in some clips of the Illusive Man and his various henchmen "explaining away" some of the criticism from the fan community. So, bad idea from the get-go. I get that you sometimes need a story solution to a practical problem, but really, in those instances, Fake Drama and Super Magic Technology are not ever the answer.

[Siansonea]

Actually, didn't we get the codes to reactivate the Citadel in ME1 from Vigil? He gave Shepard some kind of file, and told Shepard to follow Saren to the control panel. That's how Shepard was able to open the relay's arms.