401 réponses à ce sujet

[VibrantYacht]

Jack & Kai Leng.

[Vexille]

Zix13 wrote...

InsaneAzrael wrote...

Vexille wrote...

actually... that DOES make your reasoning ridiculous

Go on...

Killing a man because he attacks you while you are trying to rescue a group of hostages is different that killing a man who just called you a **** in a bar. 

Letting an innocent die to save 10,000 innocents is different than just killing an innocent.

Need I continue?

thank you

[InsaneAzrael]

Zix13 wrote...

Killing a man because he attacks you while you are trying to rescue a group of hostages is different that killing a man who just called you a **** in a bar. 

Letting an innocent die to save 10,000 innocents is different than just killing an innocent.

Need I continue?

Please do.. with non straw man examples please. You know, like ones relevant to what I was saying.
If you want to give examples of motives too that would be nice. Because what you noted above were consequences.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Zix13 wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

People blaming Jack for having been a criminal are hilarious, because it ignores just about every other character's action.

Garrus tortured dudes at C-Sec, also vigilantism is not legal nor is it really more justified than a thug killing any other citizen.
Thane did it for a living.
Ditto Zaeed.
Ditto Wrex.
Kasumi steals valuables for a living.
Miranda works for a morally-questionable black ops group, Jacob too.
Shepard can douche-kill some NPCs
Grunt is a sick child.
Samara is a zealot who'll kill cops/civilians solely on the grounds of "they're in my way."
Mordin committed cultural genocide.
Who knows what Liara is up to as the Shadow Broker. Sure seemed pretty ruthless on Illium.

... Tali is about the only squeaky-clean person left. And either VS.

Exactly, though even Tali covers up her father's horrific experiments on sentient beings.  Almost everyone in the series (especially ME2) have some dark part of their personality.  Jack just lets hers through. 

Except Jack has no redeeming qualities to make up for it, and her motivations weren't good or morally ambiguous. She kills because she can, not for any worthwhile goal or ideal. 

Jack only kills people who are a legitimate threat to her own life. She hi-jacked some ship but did not kill the passengers (hence the "piracy" thing she talked about). She can't even kill Aresh without Renedouche Shepard talking her into it (and to that end, can be talked out of it by simply telling her to take the high road).

So no, Jack still has plenty of good in her. And that is evidenced by the fact she turns her life around come ME3 (even if Shepard tried to reinforce the "killer" in her at Pragia!). I can get it if somone says "don't like her, she just rubs me the wrong way" but trying to justify it by saying she had a bad past = epic fail.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 15 avril 2012 - 11:33 .

[Vexille]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

People blaming Jack for having been a criminal are hilarious, because it ignores just about every other character's action.

Garrus tortured dudes at C-Sec, also vigilantism is not legal nor is it really more justified than a thug killing any other citizen.
Thane did it for a living.
Ditto Zaeed.
Ditto Wrex.
Kasumi steals valuables for a living.
Miranda works for a morally-questionable black ops group, Jacob too.
Shepard can douche-kill some NPCs
Grunt is a sick child.
Samara is a zealot who'll kill cops/civilians solely on the grounds of "they're in my way."
Mordin committed cultural genocide.
Who knows what Liara is up to as the Shadow Broker. Sure seemed pretty ruthless on Illium.

... Tali is about the only squeaky-clean person left. And either VS.

Exactly, though even Tali covers up her father's horrific experiments on sentient beings.  Almost everyone in the series (especially ME2) have some dark part of their personality.  Jack just lets hers through. 

Except Jack has no redeeming qualities to make up for it, and her motivations weren't good or morally ambiguous. She kills because she can, not for any worthwhile goal or ideal. 

Jack only kills people who are a legitimate threat to her own life. She hi-jacked some ship but did not kill the passengers (hence the "piracy" thing she talked about). She can't even kill Aresh without Renedouche Shepard talking her into it (and to that end, can be talked out of it by simply telling her to take the high road).

So no, Jack still has plenty of good in her. And that is evidenced by the fact she turns her life around come ME3 (even if Shepard tried to reinforce the "killer" in her at Pragia!). I can get it if somone says "don't like her, she just rubs me the wrong way" but trying to justify it by saying she had a bad past = epic fail.

her becoming a teacher was one of the dumbest things that happened in ME3... you are going to let a sociopath teach kids? WHAT?

6 months and she goes from convicted killer/lunatic to a teacher at a prestigious school for gifted youth?

Im sorry but that was space magic nonsense.

[Zix13]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

People blaming Jack for having been a criminal are hilarious, because it ignores just about every other character's action.

Garrus tortured dudes at C-Sec, also vigilantism is not legal nor is it really more justified than a thug killing any other citizen.
Thane did it for a living.
Ditto Zaeed.
Ditto Wrex.
Kasumi steals valuables for a living.
Miranda works for a morally-questionable black ops group, Jacob too.
Shepard can douche-kill some NPCs
Grunt is a sick child.
Samara is a zealot who'll kill cops/civilians solely on the grounds of "they're in my way."
Mordin committed cultural genocide.
Who knows what Liara is up to as the Shadow Broker. Sure seemed pretty ruthless on Illium.

... Tali is about the only squeaky-clean person left. And either VS.

Exactly, though even Tali covers up her father's horrific experiments on sentient beings.  Almost everyone in the series (especially ME2) have some dark part of their personality.  Jack just lets hers through. 

Except Jack has no redeeming qualities to make up for it, and her motivations weren't good or morally ambiguous. She kills because she can, not for any worthwhile goal or ideal. 

Jack only kills people who are a legitimate threat to her own life. She hi-jacked some ship but did not kill the passengers (hence the "piracy" thing she talked about). She can't even kill Aresh without Renedouche Shepard talking her into it (and to that end, can be talked out of it by simply telling her to take the high road).

So no, Jack still has plenty of good in her. And that is evidenced by the fact she turns her life around come ME3 (even if Shepard tried to reinforce the "killer" in her at Pragia!). I can get it if somone says "don't like her, she just rubs me the wrong way" but trying to justify it by saying she had a bad past = epic fail.

Yea, just pretend the warden didn't warn you she was a scumbag, or that the psychotic killer on purgatory warned you that she was a bigger phycotic killer. And she was about to kill Aresh. You have to talk her out it, not talk her into doing it. And no, her appearence in me3 was just bioware retconning her entire character, and ignoring the fact that the alliance would never hire a sociopath, especially for the position of teaching children. She has no redeeming qualities in ME2. Stealing a ship without killing passengers is not a redeeming quality. She just stole a ****ing ship and ruined everyone on its day. I don't remember the details of that dialogue, but I doubt the hijacking was completely bloodless. She's says "Hey shep, you should do piracy". Piracy is not bloodless. She doesn't "only kill people who are a legitimate threat to her own life". Sleeping with her has clearly clouded your judgement. 

Modifié par Zix13, 15 avril 2012 - 11:40 .

[Zix13]

InsaneAzrael wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Killing a man because he attacks you while you are trying to rescue a group of hostages is different that killing a man who just called you a **** in a bar. 

Letting an innocent die to save 10,000 innocents is different than just killing an innocent.

Need I continue?

Please do.. with non straw man examples please. You know, like ones relevant to what I was saying.
If you want to give examples of motives too that would be nice. Because what you noted above were consequences.

But the motives are all about the concequences. Shep has never killed anyone who hasn't either
 a) they are a very real threat to him
  posed a very real threat to others.
 c) protected someone who posed a threat to others
 d) prevented Shepard from completing his objective of saving the galaxy. 

The genophage is no different, just on a larger scale.


Jack kills because either
 a) she felt threatened 
  she felt like it 
 c) that guy looks like he might be cerberus
 d) cerberus cheerleader disagreed with her

That distinction is very important, whether you like it or not

Modifié par Zix13, 15 avril 2012 - 11:47 .

[jinxter69]

SergeantSnookie wrote...

Casey Hudson and Mac Walters.

Someone had to.

LOL

[Zeroth Angel]

Tali and Ashley.

[Heretic19]

Yeah the Jack haters still don't have a point to me. So you don't think her childhood had anything to do with how she grew up? She wasn't exposed to love or attachment, much like the current situations in Korean work camps where people sell out there own families just to get some extra food. What makes her better than that, though, is her ability to change completely by ME3. So you get ACTUAL character development rather than Jacob just... well getting even more boring by trying to settle down. I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality. And if you don't give her character a chance, then obviously she's always going to be the ****y murderer.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Zix13 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

People blaming Jack for having been a criminal are hilarious, because it ignores just about every other character's action.

Garrus tortured dudes at C-Sec, also vigilantism is not legal nor is it really more justified than a thug killing any other citizen.
Thane did it for a living.
Ditto Zaeed.
Ditto Wrex.
Kasumi steals valuables for a living.
Miranda works for a morally-questionable black ops group, Jacob too.
Shepard can douche-kill some NPCs
Grunt is a sick child.
Samara is a zealot who'll kill cops/civilians solely on the grounds of "they're in my way."
Mordin committed cultural genocide.
Who knows what Liara is up to as the Shadow Broker. Sure seemed pretty ruthless on Illium.

... Tali is about the only squeaky-clean person left. And either VS.

Exactly, though even Tali covers up her father's horrific experiments on sentient beings.  Almost everyone in the series (especially ME2) have some dark part of their personality.  Jack just lets hers through. 

Except Jack has no redeeming qualities to make up for it, and her motivations weren't good or morally ambiguous. She kills because she can, not for any worthwhile goal or ideal. 

Jack only kills people who are a legitimate threat to her own life. She hi-jacked some ship but did not kill the passengers (hence the "piracy" thing she talked about). She can't even kill Aresh without Renedouche Shepard talking her into it (and to that end, can be talked out of it by simply telling her to take the high road).

So no, Jack still has plenty of good in her. And that is evidenced by the fact she turns her life around come ME3 (even if Shepard tried to reinforce the "killer" in her at Pragia!). I can get it if somone says "don't like her, she just rubs me the wrong way" but trying to justify it by saying she had a bad past = epic fail.

Yea, just pretend the warden didn't warn you she was a scumbag, or that the psychotic killer on purgatory warned you that she was a bigger phycotic killer. And she was about to kill Aresh. You have to talk her out it, not talk her into doing it. And no, her appearence in me3 was just bioware retconning her entire character, and ignoring the fact that the alliance would never hire a sociopath, especially for the position of teaching children. She has no redeeming qualities in ME2. Stealing a ship without killing passengers is not a redeeming quality. She just stole a ****ing ship and ruined everyone on its day. I don't remember the details of that dialogue, but I doubt the hijacking was completely bloodless. She's says "Hey shep, you should do piracy". Piracy is not bloodless. She doesn't "only kill people who are a legitimate threat to her own life". Sleeping with her has clearly clouded your judgement. 

No, she hesitates to kill Aresh even when you tell her to. She points her gun at him, then she question it "is this right? will killing him fix my head?" and she will actually conclude on her own that it won't if you don't do the Intimidate response ("killing him isn't gonna fix my head.")

The piracy thing was obviously just one of Jack's many empty threats. She'd never actually do it, she just fantasizes about those things. Did she kill Miranda in ME3 like she said she'd do in ME2? No. So there goes your "she'll just kill anybody" argument AND "she's pyscho" argument.

Her character was not retconned, there was ALWAYS good in her. WHen she hears about the Alliance Ascention program she gets mad thinking Cerberus might have started up somewhere else. Someone like you thinks she doesn't care about anybody else but she was angered at the thought of other kids going through what she did.

That was just from ME2. And somebody who'd be concerned about other kids developing their biotics would naturally be a very good candidate to teach biotic students. And BOOM! There you go. I just made sense of Jack becoming a teacher being consistent with her character.

It might not make sense to a simpleton who thinks "oh hurr Jack is just a killer" but anyone who has critical thinking skills above a middle-school level would understand it. 

[Heretic19]

HYR 2.0 wrote...


No, she hesitates to kill Aresh even when you tell her to. She points her gun at him, then she question it "is this right? will killing him fix my head?" and she will actually conclude on her own that it won't if you don't do the Intimidate response ("killing him isn't gonna fix my head.")

The piracy thing was obviously just one of Jack's many empty threats. She'd never actually do it, she just fantasizes about those things. Did she kill Miranda in ME3 like she said she'd do in ME2? No. So there goes your "she'll just kill anybody" argument AND "she's pyscho" argument.

Her character was not retconned, there was ALWAYS good in her. WHen she hears about the Alliance Ascention program she gets mad thinking Cerberus might have started up somewhere else. Someone like you thinks she doesn't care about anybody else but she was angered at the thought of other kids going through what she did.

That was just from ME2. And somebody who'd be concerned about other kids developing their biotics would naturally be a very good candidate to teach biotic students. And BOOM! There you go. I just made sense of Jack becoming a teacher being consistent with her character.

It might not make sense to a simpleton who thinks "oh hurr Jack is just a killer" but anyone who has critical thinking skills above a middle-school level would understand it. 

Seconded. And I didn't even romance her. 

[Zix13]

Heretic19 wrote...

Yeah the Jack haters still don't have a point to me. So you don't think her childhood had anything to do with how she grew up? She wasn't exposed to love or attachment, much like the current situations in Korean work camps where people sell out there own families just to get some extra food. What makes her better than that, though, is her ability to change completely by ME3. So you get ACTUAL character development rather than Jacob just... well getting even more boring by trying to settle down. I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality. And if you don't give her character a chance, then obviously she's always going to be the ****y murderer.

Retconning her character is not "good". Its stupid. She's a psychotic murderer in me2, and a teacher in the military in me3 6 months later. Its idiotic in every way.
She doesn't deserve a chance for character development, she has killed people for fun and is useless and dangerous to your mission. If she was a stable sociopath( like Morinth) I wouldn't have as much of a problem with her on my ship, since she wouldn't throw a hissy fit and kill someone because she got angry. If that were the case, she'd at least have some practical value to balance her crimes. 

" I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality " Right, people who hate her are smart enough to realize she is unstable( thus dangerous to your team) and/or morally responsible enough to believe she should be held accountable for her actions. There is no reason, ethical or logical, to help Jack escape purgatory. 

[InsaneAzrael]

Zix13 wrote...

But the motives are all about the concequences. Shep has never killed anyone who hasn't either
 a) they are a very real threat to him
  posed a very real threat to others.
 c) protected someone who posed a threat to others
 d) prevented Shepard from completing his objective of saving the galaxy. 

Ok. So you seem to be thinking on the paragon route then. Think for a second of how much you are emphasising your Shepard plays.

I can think of one simple dilemma to undermine the "motives" you noted:

The lone merc on Illium.
Renegade option includes pushing him out the window and killing him. How does the list play out in that scenario?

a) No real threat to him - 3:1, advantage shepard.
Could incapacitate the merc without lethal force.
c) Protecting no-one
d) Was no real obstacle to shepard completing his objective.

Then there are other nuggets:
Killing the vorcha to recruit the blood pack.
Its not really necessary to kill them when he is armed with a pistol and surprise.. Take em down, sure, no need to take em out all together.

Balak (DLC back up).
Yeah, threatened at first (pistol pointed at your back).
Shepard quickly disarms him (not really threatened then) and can go ahead and kill him.

So yeah, there are ways in which Shepard violates those maxims.

Seeing as the genophage thing is an option.. The points you made aren't exactly cut-n-dry.
Jack is simply a character that emphasises the jerky "renegade" options in the extreme. So yeah, I get you dislike the character, but she is not an objectively vacuous scumbag.

Guess the fact that the character is somehow "redeemed" means nought to ya.

As for what I was saying earlier. The motives of Shepard as you see em are actually consequences of the choice to act in a particular manner based on the conditions of the player's personality. As for Jack, its a mixture of backstory and genuine survival instincts gone awry.

HYR made some good points about the other characters, which could apply to jack's actual backstories. Seems a bit short of you to assume that it was all done for shets and giggles as you put it. Based on the charcter's facade when telling you about it, and how the inmates react to her. Damn son, she's in a prison. She is going to bark loud to get people off her back.

[Vexille]

Heretic19 wrote...

Yeah the Jack haters still don't have a point to me. So you don't think her childhood had anything to do with how she grew up? She wasn't exposed to love or attachment, much like the current situations in Korean work camps where people sell out there own families just to get some extra food. What makes her better than that, though, is her ability to change completely by ME3. So you get ACTUAL character development rather than Jacob just... well getting even more boring by trying to settle down. I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality. And if you don't give her character a chance, then obviously she's always going to be the ****y murderer.

Jeffrey Dahmer was abused and molested as a child, should I feel bad for him? Jack is no different then any pschotic killer...

would you let Jeffrey Dahmer teach children?


yea, Jacks "progression" is unrealistic

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Vexille wrote...

Heretic19 wrote...

Yeah the Jack haters still don't have a point to me. So you don't think her childhood had anything to do with how she grew up? She wasn't exposed to love or attachment, much like the current situations in Korean work camps where people sell out there own families just to get some extra food. What makes her better than that, though, is her ability to change completely by ME3. So you get ACTUAL character development rather than Jacob just... well getting even more boring by trying to settle down. I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality. And if you don't give her character a chance, then obviously she's always going to be the ****y murderer.

Jeffrey Dahmer was abused and molested as a child, should I feel bad for him? Jack is no different then any pschotic killer...

would you let Jeffrey Dahmer teach children?


yea, Jacks "progression" is unrealistic

That might seem like a good anology to a hater, but it's actually an awful one. Being a criminal doesn't mean Jack = Jeffery Dahmer or anything close.

Liek OMGZ Donald Driver abused drugs and sold drugs as a youth! No way should he be doing any charitable work that he does for children in need nor should kids look up to him for being a successful pro football player and class act off the field! ... that's basically your logic.

There is a dude who came from my neighborhood who's an activist for racial tolerance. He was a neo-Nazi before that who beat people to death for being minorities or gay. People change, it's not unbelieveable.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 16 avril 2012 - 12:18 .

[Heretic19]

Zix13 wrote...

Heretic19 wrote...

Yeah the Jack haters still don't have a point to me. So you don't think her childhood had anything to do with how she grew up? She wasn't exposed to love or attachment, much like the current situations in Korean work camps where people sell out there own families just to get some extra food. What makes her better than that, though, is her ability to change completely by ME3. So you get ACTUAL character development rather than Jacob just... well getting even more boring by trying to settle down. I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality. And if you don't give her character a chance, then obviously she's always going to be the ****y murderer.

Retconning her character is not "good". Its stupid. She's a psychotic murderer in me2, and a teacher in the military in me3 6 months later. Its idiotic in every way.
She doesn't deserve a chance for character development, she has killed people for fun and is useless and dangerous to your mission. If she was a stable sociopath( like Morinth) I wouldn't have as much of a problem with her on my ship, since she wouldn't throw a hissy fit and kill someone because she got angry. If that were the case, she'd at least have some practical value to balance her crimes. 

" I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality " Right, people who hate her are smart enough to realize she is unstable( thus dangerous to your team) and/or morally responsible enough to believe she should be held accountable for her actions. There is no reason, ethical or logical, to help Jack escape purgatory. 

Logic failure 1: If she is such a hazard, then why did she help me get through the suicide mission, save her students and then join the efforts on taking back Earth? Logic failure 2: It doesn't take a ragamuffin to realize that all her threats and stories are a defense mechanism. She proves this during the Pragia mission when she hesitates to kill Aresh...even if you try to convince her to do it. Logic failure 3: It is pretty obvious that her character isn't retconned from ME2. If you actually take the time to talk to her in ME 2, she voices her concerns for children given biotic abilities. Hint hint. Wink wink. Shoulder nudge. That's called breaking down emotional walls. 

Modifié par Heretic19, 16 avril 2012 - 12:18 .

[Salarious]

There are plenty of Characters that I don't like because they are supposed to be hated, Kai Leng. for example. but many of those are well written and add to the story.
Ones I truly dislike, as in they have no business being there:
-Allers( I think we all know why)
-Jacob(boring, useless when compared with other people who have the same abilities, and since I usually play Femshep he totally bombs as a romance option)
-Vega(to a certain degree, ability wise he is a male Ashley, suppose he makes up for the loss of her on Virmire, although I almost always let Kaiden go, and personality wise, he is outdone by a space hamster)
-Chambers(did not like her, I'm with Shepard a VI could do her job. I feel Traynor fills that role a bit better)

[Zix13]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

No, she hesitates to kill Aresh even when you tell her to. She points her gun at him, then she question it "is this right? will killing him fix my head?" and she will actually conclude on her own that it won't if you don't do the Intimidate response ("killing him isn't gonna fix my head.")

 

"What about him?"
"That's easy"
*biotic execution charge-up maneuver. 

The piracy thing was obviously just one of Jack's many empty threats. She'd never actually do it, she just fantasizes about those things. Did she kill Miranda in ME3 like she said she'd do in ME2? No. So there goes your "she'll just kill anybody" argument AND "she's pyscho" argument.

So, she hadn't done piracy in the past and thus couldn't possibly be serious? Your move.
So, Shep didn't have to step in when Jack was throwing **** around the office and getting worked up? Your move.

Her character was not retconned, there was ALWAYS good in her. WHen she hears about the Alliance Ascention program she gets mad thinking Cerberus might have started up somewhere else. Someone like you thinks she doesn't care about anybody else but she was angered at the thought of other kids going through what she did.

She hates what was done to her. She wants to kill anyone who would think about doing it.... Aresh. Aresh also happens to be one of those kids that suffered from such a program. She never had good in her, name one redeeming quality in ME2. You still haven't. 

That was just from ME2. And somebody who'd be concerned about other kids developing their biotics would naturally be a very good candidate to teach biotic students. And BOOM! There you go. I just made sense of Jack becoming a teacher being consistent with her character.

So why would the alliance take a convicted multi-murderer? To teach kids? It's the military, not a merc band. 

It might not make sense to a simpleton who thinks "oh hurr Jack is just a killer" but anyone who has critical thinking skills above a middle-school level would understand it. 

Personal attacks don't help your argument. Besides, I'm quite confident my critical/logical thinking abilities are much stronger than the majority of the population, certainly stronger than those of a person who embraces their ignorance by insulting someones thinking skills with no real knowledge of that individual. 

[Vexille]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Vexille wrote...

Heretic19 wrote...

Yeah the Jack haters still don't have a point to me. So you don't think her childhood had anything to do with how she grew up? She wasn't exposed to love or attachment, much like the current situations in Korean work camps where people sell out there own families just to get some extra food. What makes her better than that, though, is her ability to change completely by ME3. So you get ACTUAL character development rather than Jacob just... well getting even more boring by trying to settle down. I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality. And if you don't give her character a chance, then obviously she's always going to be the ****y murderer.

Jeffrey Dahmer was abused and molested as a child, should I feel bad for him? Jack is no different then any pschotic killer...

would you let Jeffrey Dahmer teach children?


yea, Jacks "progression" is unrealistic

That might seem like a good anology to a hater, but it's actually an awful one. Being a criminal doesn't mean Jack = Jeffery Dahmer or anything close.

Liek OMGZ Donald Driver abused drugs and sold drugs as a youth! No way should he be doing any charitable work that he does for children in need nor should kids look up to him for being a successful pro football player and class act off the field! ... that's basically your logic.

There is a dude who came from my neighborhood who's an activist for racial tolerance. He was a neo-Nazi before that who beat people to death for being minorities or gay. People change, it's not unbelieveable.

she was described vividly as a pychotic serial killer. Name a serial killer who was reformed into a school teacher and ill concede that Jacks "character progression" wasnt laughable hand waving by bioware

Modifié par Vexille, 16 avril 2012 - 12:24 .

[PorcelynDoll]

Heretic19 wrote...

Yeah the Jack haters still don't have a point to me. So you don't think her childhood had anything to do with how she grew up? 

Everyone has choices and free will. I was physically and sexually abused from the time I was 2 until I was 14. I made choices to be a good person and not let the past control me. My brother ended up a lot like Jack. I love him but I do not condone his behavior. He has made his choices to be mean and angry. I tried to give Jack a chance. I felt bad for her and wanted to be kind to her and help. Shep shows up to save the academy and Jack punches her. That just ruined everything for me. I felt it was completely unnecessary. I just don't buy having a horrible childhood as an excuse to be rude and mean.

[Zix13]

Heretic19 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Heretic19 wrote...

Yeah the Jack haters still don't have a point to me. So you don't think her childhood had anything to do with how she grew up? She wasn't exposed to love or attachment, much like the current situations in Korean work camps where people sell out there own families just to get some extra food. What makes her better than that, though, is her ability to change completely by ME3. So you get ACTUAL character development rather than Jacob just... well getting even more boring by trying to settle down. I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality. And if you don't give her character a chance, then obviously she's always going to be the ****y murderer.

Retconning her character is not "good". Its stupid. She's a psychotic murderer in me2, and a teacher in the military in me3 6 months later. Its idiotic in every way.
She doesn't deserve a chance for character development, she has killed people for fun and is useless and dangerous to your mission. If she was a stable sociopath( like Morinth) I wouldn't have as much of a problem with her on my ship, since she wouldn't throw a hissy fit and kill someone because she got angry. If that were the case, she'd at least have some practical value to balance her crimes. 

" I just think the hate for a character like Jack can say a lot about a person's judgement of morality " Right, people who hate her are smart enough to realize she is unstable( thus dangerous to your team) and/or morally responsible enough to believe she should be held accountable for her actions. There is no reason, ethical or logical, to help Jack escape purgatory. 

Logic failure 1: If she is such a hazard, then why did she help me get through the suicide mission, save her students and then join the efforts on taking back Earth?


Logic failure 2: It doesn't take a ragamuffin to realize that all her threats and stories are a defense mechanism. She proves this during the Pragia mission when she hesitates to kill Aresh...even if you try to convince her to do it.


Logic failure 3: It is pretty obvious that her character isn't retconned from ME2. If you actually take the time to talk to her in ME 2, she voices her concerns for children given biotic abilities. Hint hint. Wink wink. Shoulder nudge. That's called breaking down emotional walls. 

1. Hindsight is 20/20. She was on the verge of killing Miranda when you broke that up. It was quite clear that she was a danger to your mission given the fact that she a) is a psychopath has a personal hatred for cerberus and c) starts off by antagonizing everyone. Her appearence in ME3 is irrelevant since it is not even remotely similar to her ME2 personality. Why'd she help you? Because you made a deal with her when she got on your ship, betray cerberus for her help. 

2. She's killed many, many people and is a convicted criminal, so obviously not. She moves to kill Aresh.  Her first instinct is "kill this guy". She's confused. Left to her own devices it seems quite likely that she would have killed him. 

3. She's not killing people, shes not talking about killing people, she's not talking about how much her childhood sucked, she's not talking about how few ****s she gives. Pretty obvious that her character was retconned. Also, her Me3 appearence involved her being in a position she never would have been given had the writing made sense. 

[InsaneAzrael]

Vexille wrote...

she was described vividly as a pychotic serial killer. Name a serial killer who was reformed into a school teacher and ill concede that Jacks "character progression" wasnt laughable hand waving by bioware

lol, even I thought this was a good one. They allowed a space ninja into the series man.. A whole bunch of them in fact. I hardly think they needed to justify characters with 'real-world examples'.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

[quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

No, she hesitates to kill Aresh even when you tell her to. She points her gun at him, then she question it "is this right? will killing him fix my head?" and she will actually conclude on her own that it won't if you don't do the Intimidate response ("killing him isn't gonna fix my head.")

[/quote] 

"What about him?"
"That's easy"
*biotic execution charge-up maneuver. [/quote]

Except it actually wasn't easy at all, as she questions it a few times before actually doing it (IF she's encouraged to do it).


[quote]So, she hadn't done piracy in the past and thus couldn't possibly be serious? Your move.
So, Shep didn't have to step in when Jack was throwing **** around the office and getting worked up? Your move.[/quote]

What she described as piracy wasn't really even piracy at all. It was only piracy because she chose not to kill the passengers (chose not to kill... there it is again! )

How about after the mission when Jack is free to do whatever the hell she pleases, and chooses she'd rather teach biotic students than hunt down Miranda and get revenge. Based on empirical evidenced, you'd have obviously guessed she'd do the latter if you didn't know better.

[quote]She hates what was done to her. She wants to kill anyone who would think about doing it.... Aresh. Aresh also happens to be one of those kids that suffered from such a program. She never had good in her, name one redeeming quality in ME2. You still haven't. [/quote]

Redeeming quality: conscience. She displays a moral compass in spite of having zero guidance of right-and-wrong in her life and living only on the basis of survival by any means necessary. She displays conscience by admitting that "killing him won't fix my head."

Redeeming quality: respect. She is not a soldier but adapts to being a squadmate very quickly. She gives Shepard little trouble outside of one catfight, and even if you ****** her off by taking Miranda's side, all she'll do is sulk. And taking Miranda's side in the fight has 0 consequences later. That shows maturity.

[quote]So why would the alliance take a convicted multi-murderer? To teach kids? It's the military, not a merc band. [/quote]

Because she's a savior of the galaxy who's turning her life around, like many people have done. Having a criminal record is not the end-all-be-all in life.

[quote]Personal attacks don't help your argument. Besides, I'm quite confident my critical/logical thinking abilities are much stronger than the majority of the population, certainly stronger than those of a person who embraces their ignorance by insulting someones thinking skills with no real knowledge of that individual.[/quote]

Sorry, I thought you'd embrace attacks since you thought it was OK to use a crude/crass comment like "sleeping with her clowded your judgement!"




[/quote]

[mechalynx]

Anderson. No spine, boozes it up instead of nagging on the rest of the Council, useless as it may be, stonewalling Shepard, forced friend/mentor, tried to steal the Normandy from Shepard and turn it into his personal pleasure yacht before the Reapers rolled in. Probably the one who sold all my gear and ship models from ME2, the greedy bastard, and let Boo out of its cage to fend for itself.

Also forced Ashley on my team, the "super useful" soldier that never got out of the cargohold save for that nuke guarding duty on Virmire. And no renegade option to tell him to suck a fat one in ANY of the games.

Would gladly shoot him of my own free will, TIM doesn't really HAVE to make me.

Love Keith David, though.

Now that I think about it, scratch the Ashley part. Good thing I had someone to leave behind. It'd tear me up to waste someone I really liked.

Modifié par mechalynx, 16 avril 2012 - 12:39 .