LiarasShield wrote...
Why allow the players to be able to customize shepard to make him or her do the actions that the player or the person would probably do why give us mostly the free rain to be ourselves wether trying to save everybody or destroy everybody in mass effect 1 and 2 our how our choices change or alter certain events and then take it away at the end of mass effect 3
ME1 and ME2 ended with two big decisions (saving the council, saving the collector's base). ME3 ended similarly with a huge renegade/paragon decision with a third option thrown into the mix perhaps since the story is over and they didn't have to narrow it down.
The third option represents a 50% increase in options.
What if shepard didn't want to die what if he or she would've sacrificed someone else or not choose the catalysts options
If Shep didn't want to die then he/she wouldn't have activated the Crucible and the galaxy would've been screwed. Sacrifice was a big theme in ME, and the ultimate goal requires the ultimate sacrifice.
Not activating the Crucible is still an option in-game though you get a game-over screen.
The options are that of the crucible, NOT the catalyst.
What if shepard wanted to find another way?
Conventional warfare won't win. The story was written that way. What other way would there be besides a superweapon? This isn't Bioware confining player choices. This is how their story was told. The Crucible itself has 3 options to fire, which is more than we got in the end of previous games.
Also if all player choices or previous actions are rendered pointless then I'm curious why control is a option when shepard was fighting against the illusive man the entire time about how it was a bad idea or how control wouldn't work that we have to destroy the reapers and how the reapers are having us fight among each other instead of fighting them so why would shepard automaticlly pick the choice that he or she argued with the illusive man during the course of the entire game
The Catalyst BELIEVES it is protecting all organics.
Shepard would take control of the Reapers to protect organics (doesn't have to do what the Catalyst did and do the cycles, but the idea is that).
TIM would take control of the Reapers to subjugate all organics.
There is a huge difference there. Kind of like how Harry gets the sorcerer's stone in the first book because he's "worthy" and wants it for the "right reasons", control is presented as a similar option. If you don't like it, then don't pick it.
Also if all choices are only you die options then it is the illusion of a choice because what if shepard wants to live or tries to fight back
You die in all the choices, yes. But what happens after HASN'T BEEN DETAILED, so we don't know if it's the same afterwards or not. All the endings have very different philosophies and visions driving them, so chances are things are not the same, just the Crucible's cutscene activation was.
And I can accept the Crucible activated the same. It's like a gun firing incendiary, cryo, or ammo-piercing rounds. It's the same, but different color, and with different purpose.
Their not really choices cause you can't decide wether to really live or die or wether to do what the catalyst says or oppose it
Choosing to live or die isn't the point. You are choosing how you combat the Reapers rather than being forced down one path (destroy). In the spirit of ME, you have true choice here in how to combat the Reaper threat.
I thought the story wasn't about Shepard's life or death; it was about defeating the Reaper threat. That doesn't necessarily mean all Reapers have to die, though that is an option. Imagine if destroy was the only ending. Then there'd be ZERO choice.
Now if you're talking about the consequences of your choices, that's the EPILOGUE which we weren't given, which EC will give. They didn't take control AWAY from the player, they just didn't show the actions. Hopefully the EC will tell us more. Until then, we can't tell whether or not they took control.
EDIT: Forgot to mention you can live in destroy. But still.
Modifié par JShepppp, 24 juin 2012 - 07:38 .
Retour en haut
