139 réponses à ce sujet

[Naughty Bear]

HellbirdIV wrote...

Because if you agreed with the Illusive Man you'd be kind of an idiot. It's very, very obvious that what he's doing isn't a valid plan, and that his steps to attaining that plan were out and out bat**** insane and evil.

"Renegade" is not "Evil". Murdering thousands in the name of a power-hungry grab at human supremacy is literally the kind of thing that our dear Nazzy friends did during the 1936-1945 period.

It's not a valid idea, the Illusive Man is out of his goddamn mind.

If it was not for the Illusive Man, we would not have as many Biotics as we do now. Because of him, Shepard was able to come back, stop the Collectors from harvesting Humans, destroy a Human Reaper, defeat the Reapers AND stop himself from handing over the Crucible to the Reapers.

However, Bioware turned The Illusive Man into a pantomine villain and they just became a 'being evil for the sake of it'. Poor writing.

I think a system like Splinter Cell: Conviction where you choose decisions that effect your trust with JBA and whoever Sam was with.

Cerberus wants Humanity as the leader, not want Humanity as the superior being over other non-Human beings, he wanted Humanity to have every advantage as possible, in his manifesto he even wrote that Humanity may live with aliens and work with them, but when in the face of danger, Humanity stands alone.

His goals were noble, for us Humans anyway but his methods were ruthless but i believed some of those were justified in what he wanted to achieve.

Modifié par Naughty Bear, 19 mai 2012 - 02:50 .

[LegionMan]

Katamariguy wrote...

I mean, he sounded like he had some good ideas. Not ethical ideas, but good ones. I didn't immediately shout "Indoctrinated!" when he proposed to control the reapers. But no, instead I have to deny him, and instantly assume he's indoctrinated, even though it sounds like a perfectly valid idea.

To add insult to injury, Shepard has the option to control the reapers, right after insisting to TIM that the reapers cannot be controlled! <_<

OP is Indoctrinated.
Also, to be serious for a minute it's due to the game branching and the need for a whole nother storyline.  Hence why those of us who were strongly anti-Cerberus were pissed at not being able to break away once we got the Normandy back 

Naughty Bear wrote...
I think a system like Splinter Cell:  Conviction were you choose decision that effect your trust with JBA and whoever Sam was with.

ARRRGH - THIS is what I had wanted for ME2

Modifié par LegionMan, 19 mai 2012 - 03:03 .

[chengthao]

A-Slice-of-Pink wrote...

chengthao wrote...

i wish BW gave the option to go "rogue" and join Cerberus or stay loyal and join the Alliance

that way you can really play renegade and paragon

yes that would have been lovely but would have required bioware to essentially make two games, as already said can you imagine any of you're current squadmembers or or Admiral Hackett and Anderson agreeing to you rejoining cerberus? Many levels would have to be changed or scrapped altogether (cerberus base, Priority:citadel, sur kesh, mars etc). although its a nice idea it would simply not have been feasible in the time and the budget Bioware had.

well you can still do it

i just don't want to post any spoilers . . . . but you don't have to create a new game

even missions like Mars, or priority:citadel, just a few different lines of dialogue

[Michale_Jackson]

napushenko wrote...

Michale_Jackson wrote...

Because any more choices would have broke the game's linear direction, and required the dev team to add several more months of work to the game and miss their planned vacation with the earnings they could make if they release the game as-is unpolished, poorly written and broken.

tell me which things were not linear in me1 and me 2 
i dare you 

ME1 plays nothing like ME2 or ME3.  There's numerous non-linear avenues you can take in the original Mass Effect

[napushenko]

numerous meh meh, tell me at least one of them ? all you could do is choose in which order you would finish the missions. and there were limitations to that too.
sleight of hand. but i do agree that it gives you more options then me 2 and me 3 but you people make it sound like everything you do in them branches out different story paths. like hell it does.

[napushenko]

LegionMan wrote...

Katamariguy wrote...

I mean, he sounded like he had some good ideas. Not ethical ideas, but good ones. I didn't immediately shout "Indoctrinated!" when he proposed to control the reapers. But no, instead I have to deny him, and instantly assume he's indoctrinated, even though it sounds like a perfectly valid idea.

To add insult to injury, Shepard has the option to control the reapers, right after insisting to TIM that the reapers cannot be controlled! <_<

OP is Indoctrinated.
Also, to be serious for a minute it's due to the game branching and the need for a whole nother storyline.  Hence why those of us who were strongly anti-Cerberus were pissed at not being able to break away once we got the Normandy back 

Naughty Bear wrote...
I think a system like Splinter Cell:  Conviction were you choose decision that effect your trust with JBA and whoever Sam was with.

ARRRGH - THIS is what I had wanted for ME2

i only played "double agent"  long ago. and i think thats the mechanism you guys are talking about ? is the conviction any good. i like the sound of it. going to check it out  

[LegionMan]

Michale_Jackson wrote...

ME1 plays nothing like ME2 or ME3.  There's numerous non-linear avenues you can take in the original Mass Effect

I would argue that ME2 plays closer to ME1 in terms of structure.  The only thing that sets it apart is that one is effectiely forced into storyline (Horizon, Collector Ship) at several points whereas ME1 let you free-roam at your leisure.  At the least, you are given the option to board the Derelict Reaper when one deems it appropriate...

[napushenko]

Naughty Bear wrote...

HellbirdIV wrote...

Because if you agreed with the Illusive Man you'd be kind of an idiot. It's very, very obvious that what he's doing isn't a valid plan, and that his steps to attaining that plan were out and out bat**** insane and evil.

"Renegade" is not "Evil". Murdering thousands in the name of a power-hungry grab at human supremacy is literally the kind of thing that our dear Nazzy friends did during the 1936-1945 period.

It's not a valid idea, the Illusive Man is out of his goddamn mind.

If it was not for the Illusive Man, we would not have as many Biotics as we do now. Because of him, Shepard was able to come back, stop the Collectors from harvesting Humans, destroy a Human Reaper, defeat the Reapers AND stop himself from handing over the Crucible to the Reapers.

However, Bioware turned The Illusive Man into a pantomine villain and they just became a 'being evil for the sake of it'. Poor writing.

I think a system like Splinter Cell: Conviction where you choose decisions that effect your trust with JBA and whoever Sam was with.

Cerberus wants Humanity as the leader, not want Humanity as the superior being over other non-Human beings, he wanted Humanity to have every advantage as possible, in his manifesto he even wrote that Humanity may live with aliens and work with them, but when in the face of danger, Humanity stands alone.

His goals were noble, for us Humans anyway but his methods were ruthless but i believed some of those were justified in what he wanted to achieve.

Or Illusive Man wasnt a villain at all but he was forced to resort to extreme measures because Reapers were invading the Earth ? 

But you are playing Shepard, and Shepard, renegade or paragon would never agree with Illusive Man`s tactics in ME 3. 

Modifié par napushenko, 19 mai 2012 - 03:41 .

[Naughty Bear]

napushenko wrote...

LegionMan wrote...

Katamariguy wrote...

I mean, he sounded like he had some good ideas. Not ethical ideas, but good ones. I didn't immediately shout "Indoctrinated!" when he proposed to control the reapers. But no, instead I have to deny him, and instantly assume he's indoctrinated, even though it sounds like a perfectly valid idea.

To add insult to injury, Shepard has the option to control the reapers, right after insisting to TIM that the reapers cannot be controlled! <_<

OP is Indoctrinated.
Also, to be serious for a minute it's due to the game branching and the need for a whole nother storyline.  Hence why those of us who were strongly anti-Cerberus were pissed at not being able to break away once we got the Normandy back 

Naughty Bear wrote...
I think a system like Splinter Cell:  Conviction were you choose decision that effect your trust with JBA and whoever Sam was with.

ARRRGH - THIS is what I had wanted for ME2

i only played "double agent"  long ago. and i think thats the mechanism you guys are talking about ? is the conviction any good. i like the sound of it. going to check it out  

Ah yeah, that was the one. Double Agent. Not Conviction, my bad!

Conviction was okay, multiplayer was fun and the gameplay was great over all. Just got bored of really and gave up half way.

Modifié par Naughty Bear, 19 mai 2012 - 03:36 .

[napushenko]

Naughty Bear wrote...

napushenko wrote...

LegionMan wrote...

Katamariguy wrote...

I mean, he sounded like he had some good ideas. Not ethical ideas, but good ones. I didn't immediately shout "Indoctrinated!" when he proposed to control the reapers. But no, instead I have to deny him, and instantly assume he's indoctrinated, even though it sounds like a perfectly valid idea.

To add insult to injury, Shepard has the option to control the reapers, right after insisting to TIM that the reapers cannot be controlled! <_<

OP is Indoctrinated.
Also, to be serious for a minute it's due to the game branching and the need for a whole nother storyline.  Hence why those of us who were strongly anti-Cerberus were pissed at not being able to break away once we got the Normandy back 

Naughty Bear wrote...
I think a system like Splinter Cell:  Conviction were you choose decision that effect your trust with JBA and whoever Sam was with.

ARRRGH - THIS is what I had wanted for ME2

i only played "double agent"  long ago. and i think thats the mechanism you guys are talking about ? is the conviction any good. i like the sound of it. going to check it out  

Ah yeah, that was the one. Double Agent. Not Conviction, my bad!

I dont remember that game gave you anything new if you are gunning for one side over the other. It was about balancing deeds for one side and another and your deeds had repercussions which werent visible like our war assets kind of things as i remmber ?
 And its just my opinion, but i dont think it would be good for game and the cause if we are playing double agent when reapers are wreaking havoc everywhere around you.  

It could have worked in ME 2  somewhat though considering the story.

Modifié par napushenko, 19 mai 2012 - 03:40 .

[xsdob]

Why cant I agree with loghain in drainage?

Characters who put their organizations or there own goals ahead of everyone else tend to not be people the character can agree with in game.

You can spare him and you end up lecturing him on how he was wrong this whole time, have him accept death gracefully, or flat out kill him.

Never can you choose to forsake the grey warden and be like, "I agree with loghain, ferelden must Stand alone.

[Richard 060]

Katamariguy wrote...

Still, it ticks me off that we're given the choice to control the reapers anyway.

And that AWFUL line of auto-dialogue:

"So the Illusive Man was right..."

Right about controlling the Reapers? Apparently.

Right in his methods and motivations, though? The murder, genocide, corruption, sick experiments, and evil committed by Cerberus under his command?

I'm pretty certain that's NOT what the line is meant to convey, but for the love of decent script-writing, Shepard could have said something similar, but without simultaneously implying VALIDATION of every heinous act of TIM's...

[Michale_Jackson]

napushenko wrote...

Michale_Jackson wrote...

napushenko wrote...

Michale_Jackson wrote...

Because
any more choices would have broke the game's linear direction, and
required the dev team to add several more months of work to the game and
miss their planned vacation with the earnings they could make if they
release the game as-is unpolished, poorly written and broken.

tell me which things were not linear in me1 and me 2 
i dare you 

ME1 plays nothing like ME2 or ME3.  There's numerous non-linear avenues you can take in the original Mass Effect

numerous meh meh, tell me at least one of them ? all you could do is choose in which order you would finish the missions. and there were limitations to that too.
sleight of hand. but i do agree that it gives you more options then me 2 and me 3 but you people make it sound like everything you do in them branches out different story paths. like hell it does.

I'll tell you two. 

If I didn't want to do Novera or Ilos, I could freely just go to a different galaxy and explore the various explorable planets via the Mako, or better yet go out and explore old school on foot, and walk unkown explorable planets in search for treasures, salvageable items, metal, and other quests available for when exploring planets.  Sure some planets were barren of any life, yet plenty of others weren't, you could freely do whatever you wanted and spend hours in the game till you met your personal goal.

With a fully managible inventory system the original game had I could deviated from the main game and simply became a space merchant, collect, buy and sell items and weapons and play the game with a goal of getting rich till my heart content, or collecting or buying some of the most advanced items, armor and weaponry.  It's very possible to do this with the original, you can't do this in ME2 or ME3 because Bioware became lazy on the inventory system, to the point you couldn't even freely change weapons or armor without having to be on the Normandy.


 

[napushenko]

Richard 060 wrote...

Katamariguy wrote...

Still, it ticks me off that we're given the choice to control the reapers anyway.

And that AWFUL line of auto-dialogue:

"So the Illusive Man was right..."

Right about controlling the Reapers? Apparently.

Right in his methods and motivations, though? The murder, genocide, corruption, sick experiments, and evil committed by Cerberus under his command?

I'm pretty certain that's NOT what the line is meant to convey, but for the love of decent script-writing, Shepard could have said something similar, but without simultaneously implying VALIDATION of every heinous act of TIM's...

Why would someone lecture some ai child of unimaginable power who created most powerful force galaxy has ever saw about TIM`s morals ? 
That would be all but not decent script-writing.  
And it would take an idiot to assume TIM was right in everything just because of that sentence. 

[napushenko]

Michale_Jackson wrote...

napushenko wrote...

Michale_Jackson wrote...

napushenko wrote...

Michale_Jackson wrote...

Because
any more choices would have broke the game's linear direction, and
required the dev team to add several more months of work to the game and
miss their planned vacation with the earnings they could make if they
release the game as-is unpolished, poorly written and broken.

tell me which things were not linear in me1 and me 2 
i dare you 

ME1 plays nothing like ME2 or ME3.  There's numerous non-linear avenues you can take in the original Mass Effect

numerous meh meh, tell me at least one of them ? all you could do is choose in which order you would finish the missions. and there were limitations to that too.
sleight of hand. but i do agree that it gives you more options then me 2 and me 3 but you people make it sound like everything you do in them branches out different story paths. like hell it does.

I'll tell you two. 

If I didn't want to do Novera or Ilos, I could freely just go to a different galaxy and explore the various explorable planets via the Mako, or better yet go out and explore old school on foot, and walk unkown explorable planets in search for treasures, salvageable items, metal, and other quests available for when exploring planets.  Sure some planets were barren of any life, yet plenty of others weren't, you could freely do whatever you wanted and spend hours in the game till you met your personal goal.

With a fully managible inventory system the original game had I could deviated from the main game and simply became a space merchant, collect, buy and sell items and weapons and play the game with a goal of getting rich till my heart content, or collecting or buying some of the most advanced items, armor and weaponry.  It's very possible to do this with the original, you can't do this in ME2 or ME3 because Bioware became lazy on the inventory system, to the point you couldn't even freely change weapons or armor without having to be on the Normandy.


 

But you cant advance gameplay till you finish Noveria and Ilos. And all the things you said had absolutely nothing to do with story linearity which is my point all along 
And gamers are raging here about story nonlinearity as opposed to.. what exactly ? 
Btw, even those complaints of yours, even if i agree with them, and i do, would be better suited for ME 2 which all haters of this game for some reason i cant fathom loved 10x more then ME 3 even if ME 2 dont differs from ME 3 in any major point whatsoever. 

Did someone expect ME 3 to be more ME 1 then ME 2 ? 

[Oldbones2]

Katamariguy wrote...

I mean, he sounded like he had some good ideas. Not ethical ideas, but good ones. I didn't immediately shout "Indoctrinated!" when he proposed to control the reapers. But no, instead I have to deny him, and instantly assume he's indoctrinated, even though it sounds like a perfectly valid idea.

To add insult to injury, Shepard has the option to control the reapers, right after insisting to TIM that the reapers cannot be controlled! <_<

Because Cerberus is bad, the Reapers are good and the your choices don't matter.

Seriously.  Bioware is basically saying in ME3 that it doesn't matter what YOU thought of various factions, it only matters what they thought of them.

Sure its their IP to do with as they please.  But did they have to make Cerberus ambiguous in ME2 with you having an option to support them, if they were just going to throw it out the window later.  I mean, couldn't they have just autodialogued you in ME2 to be FORCED to work with them (control chip anyone?).


Woo frickin hoo.

[Volus Warlord]

Politcal peen flex.

[AlanC9]

Richard 060 wrote...
I'm pretty certain that's NOT what the line is meant to convey, but for the love of decent script-writing, Shepard could have said something similar, but without simultaneously implying VALIDATION of every heinous act of TIM's...

It implies that? I thought it only meant that control was possible.

[Spitfire_mcguire]

chengthao wrote...

A-Slice-of-Pink wrote...

chengthao wrote...

i wish BW gave the option to go "rogue" and join Cerberus or stay loyal and join the Alliance

that way you can really play renegade and paragon

yes that would have been lovely but would have required bioware to essentially make two games, as already said can you imagine any of you're current squadmembers or or Admiral Hackett and Anderson agreeing to you rejoining cerberus? Many levels would have to be changed or scrapped altogether (cerberus base, Priority:citadel, sur kesh, mars etc). although its a nice idea it would simply not have been feasible in the time and the budget Bioware had.

well you can still do it

i just don't want to post any spoilers . . . . but you don't have to create a new game

even missions like Mars, or priority:citadel, just a few different lines of dialogue

I think the one game out of the trilogy where something like this could work would be ME2, following in the example of the Witcher 2 where you have the choice between two groups...*Witcher spoilers* The Temerian soldiers or non-human rebels, but where you started with Temeria, and after the first chapter, could choose what side to finish with. Sure, the basic plot of the game is still there, whatever side you choose, but it feels like a completely other game too.

Something like this could have been done in ME2, where you start with Cerberus, up to Horizon, but given the choice to either continue with them or go Alliance to defeat the Collectors. The basics of the game would still be there...build a team, find ways to defeat the Collectors, the suicide mission, etc. But, whatever side you choose, you risk alienating certain people, such as Miranda and Jacob. Each side has negatives and positives, and your choices do reflect in ME3.

I don't think that this type of story telling would have worked in ME3, since one of the major factors in Reaper indoctrination is control, and TIM wants to control the Reapers...a bad sign from the get go.

...good idea for a alternate universe fanfic though.

[napushenko]

Oldbones2 wrote...

Katamariguy wrote...

I mean, he sounded like he had some good ideas. Not ethical ideas, but good ones. I didn't immediately shout "Indoctrinated!" when he proposed to control the reapers. But no, instead I have to deny him, and instantly assume he's indoctrinated, even though it sounds like a perfectly valid idea.

To add insult to injury, Shepard has the option to control the reapers, right after insisting to TIM that the reapers cannot be controlled! <_<

Because Cerberus is bad, the Reapers are good and the your choices don't matter.

Seriously.  Bioware is basically saying in ME3 that it doesn't matter what YOU thought of various factions, it only matters what they thought of them.

Sure its their IP to do with as they please.  But did they have to make Cerberus ambiguous in ME2 with you having an option to support them, if they were just going to throw it out the window later.  I mean, couldn't they have just autodialogued you in ME2 to be FORCED to work with them (control chip anyone?).


Woo frickin hoo.

So, what about people who didnt like working with Cerberus in ME 2 ? Did their "choice" mattered ? Where did you had option to support them ? Ofcourse i doesnt matter what did you think of various factions. Where did you ever had such influence on the story in previous parts ?
If nothing, the most power they gave you is in ME 3 where you can choose between geth & quarians to help you in war, or cure Genophage to bring in Krogans vs not cure them to get Salarians. You can get two of them combined but you needed to make some tough choices in both me 1 & me 2 so it could happen. 


Woo frickin hoo 

Maybe consider that TIM was allways ambiguous, even in ME 3 and he was never out of character, but Reapers invaded and there was no time to play coy anymore, he had  to make tough decisions and that decision involved sacrificing couple of thousand humans for betterment of humanity. Imagine if he could control the Reapers. Why is that an evil thing ? 

[Gogzilla]

Katamariguy wrote...

I mean, he sounded like he had some good ideas. Not ethical ideas, but good ones. I didn't immediately shout "Indoctrinated!" when he proposed to control the reapers. But no, instead I have to deny him, and instantly assume he's indoctrinated, even though it sounds like a perfectly valid idea.

To add insult to injury, Shepard has the option to control the reapers, right after insisting to TIM that the reapers cannot be controlled! <_<

They could have done that with the end.

Turn the final converstaion into a choice between TIM and Anderson.
Basen on who you side with the Crucible options also vary slightly.

That adds a lot more weight to the final conversation.

Imagine confronting the Catalyst with the other of your choice and you have to convince them to make the right decision, because Sheapard is near death and can't push on any longer.

but instead
Killing TIM and then giving you the option of control. Why ?

Modifié par Gogzilla, 19 mai 2012 - 05:55 .

[HellbirdIV]

Naughty Bear wrote...

If it was not for the Illusive Man, we would not have as many Biotics as we do now.

So killing countless innocents in intentional industrial sabotage, causing wide-spread cancer death among young children across three separate colonies is a good thing in your book?

I'm not going to continue discussing with you, because it's obvious you're out of your damn mind.

[Gogzilla]

HellbirdIV wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

If it was not for the Illusive Man, we would not have as many Biotics as we do now.

So killing countless innocents in intentional industrial sabotage, causing wide-spread cancer death among young children across three separate colonies is a good thing in your book?

I'm not going to continue discussing with you, because it's obvious you're out of your damn mind.

"The ends justify the means"
You don't need to condone or condem, only understand.

You think "youmanity" got a place on the council for good behavior.
TIM does not blink when it comes to sacrifices,
I agree he sacrifices too much, but i would'nt remove him from play.

Without Cerbeurs the events that allowed Sheaprd to become a specter may never have transpiered at all.

[Naughty Bear]

HellbirdIV wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

If it was not for the Illusive Man, we would not have as many Biotics as we do now.

So killing countless innocents in intentional industrial sabotage, causing wide-spread cancer death among young children across three separate colonies is a good thing in your book?

I'm not going to continue discussing with you, because it's obvious you're out of your damn mind.

What?

If we didn't have Biotics, the other species would probably look down upon us. It gives us a huge advantage when in combat and i am more than sure that it is not only just used in combat and also a useful tool.

Disabled children could use Biotics for everyday activities, and if this gene could be passed down generations, so that Humanity overall eventually get Biotics.

With so many species on the Citadel, we need every advantage we can get to compete with the others, if we are not dominating, we are getting dominated.

I'd say all those deaths was a necessary sacrifice. The advantages outweigh the disadvantages, the Asari did not play far with the Prothean beacon, the Salarian did not play far with the Genophage, why should we? Everyone is competeing agaisnt each other and Humanity is alone.

Modifié par Naughty Bear, 19 mai 2012 - 06:17 .