152 réponses à ce sujet

[cdzander]

I've never stopped Garrus from killing Sidonis. Sidonis is not my concern, In ME2, Collectors and Reapers are my concern. It's Garrus' mission. It's his call. We go back a long way. I trust him. The guy betrayed his own team, costing most of them their lives. I'll not shed a tear over his fate. I'm busy with more important things. I have a whole galaxy to save.

[MysticSpace]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Umm what the hell does Sidonis have to do with the ending?


And I've never heard a good reason for letting that bastard live.

  Remember before ME3 came out that bioware said that our choices in previous games would matter?  I thought for sure that a character from a loyalty mission would atleast be mentioned or contribute to the ending in some positive or negative way but he's never mentioned not even in an email.

[rohanks]

Sure. I'll try. It's a good question. And again, this is only my interpretation.

Although not touched upon in my earlier post, Redemption in this case is redemption from the path of revenge. That within the context of Garrus's mission, his desire for revenge at any cost is, to me, placing Garrus's character in jeopardy.

As you are no doubt aware, Archangel was a name given by the local population of Omega to Garrus and to the actions of his team to fight back against organised crime sponsored by all 3 merc groups: Blue Suns, Eclipse and the Blood Pack.

It's not a name that he chose for himself. However it appears to be a name and a title that Garrus embraces and bashfully acknowledges when we first meet him in his holdout on Omega.

I interpreted this to mean that Garrus of ME1, the C-Sec officer tired of playing by the rules and watching criminals prey on the weak and sometimes walk free had become the 'non-sanctioned authority' in the moral vacuum of Omega. He is transformed and to some degree has become the logical conclusion of the disgruntled C-Sec officer who no longer operates within the framework of 'sanctioned authority'.

With Paragon Shepherd in a coma/dead for the past two years, he was no longer restrained to 'going by the book' or questioning his motives and ultimately led to his decision to leave C-Sec. It was almost as if, and this is one possible scenario, we get to see Garrus as he would have been if he had not met Shepherd.

Maybe he would have remained in C-Sec. I am suggesting that he would not and the mantle of Archangel was always waiting for him to claim it. Somewhere. Out there. In the universe.

So. With that interpretation. It raised the question for me. Who's mission is this? Is it Garrus Vikarian's or is it Archangel's? I interpreted this mission to be Archangels and went with that premise. This is partly confirmed by his defensive posture of "Not getting in my way" - literally or figuratively.

So, put simply. That if I as the player pursued Archangel's agenda of a revenge killing against Sidonis would this have ultimately 'destroy' that 'good' part of my friend Garrus? I wasn't sure, but as Paragon Shepherd, was not prepared to take that risk.

Sidonis chose to betray his comrades-in-arms rather than risk injury and/or death. Maybe we all like to think we have what it takes to make a stand against intimidation and corruption and take that risk for what we believe in? Maybe you could, maybe I could? Sidonis clearly could not and perhaps that is more the honest, if unpalatable truth. The nagging doubt.

Weakness in the face of adversity. Clearly something that Garrus is not.

Sidonis's life has been permanently changed by his betrayal. Finding no joy in anything. Existing as opposed to Living. He is already 'lost' though wants to make amends. As Shepherd remarks to Garrus "Look at him. He's already dead".

It is a pity that the backstory in ME3, as introduced by a previous post, did not occur. Sidonis saving Garrus's family from Palaven. As this gives a clear motive to the player to persuade Garrus 'not to take the shot' in subsequent playthroughs.

However, left as it is, it provides a range of interesting questions about Betrayal and the Quality of Mercy.

Finally I didn't spare Sidonis's because it felt better for me. Nothing to feel good about here either way as I see it. Which is again a credit to the writers.

As in my previous post, it sat right for me in terms of Garrus and what I understood about his character in ME1. Hope this explains a little more.

What did you choose and why did you choose it?

Modifié par rohanks, 24 juin 2013 - 09:02 .

[The Heretic of Time]

^

I still don't see how killing Sidonis would compromise Garrus' character after all that bloodshed he and Shepard (paragon or renegade, doesn't matter) have been through together.

Garrus has killed plenty of crooks for a whole lot less than what Sidonis did, so why all of the sudden go preachy on him when he wants to kill Sidonis? He'd just be the next guy on the lonnnnnnnnnngggggggg list of crooks Garrus and Shepard already killed in the past.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 24 juin 2013 - 12:17 .

[AlexMBrennan]

Yes, shooting someone in broad daylight on the citadel is obviously the best solution for everything - what could possible go wrong...

[NeonFlux117]

Sidonis was a punk and a traitor, and he deserved a traitors death. Come on. he tried to kill Space Batman-well he didn't but his double cross did, WTF up wit dat?!?!?

[Redbelle]

To be frank, Sidonis is nothing to my Shep, so I honour Garruses friendship and let him have his way since he has a legitamate grievance......

All things considered, I can't think of a reason not to let Garrus off him. No other information is forthcoming other than the betrayal of trust and the deaths that betrayal caused. If there had been a slither of redemption offered in a dialogue exchange I wouldn't be so clearcut about it. But I could never find one that would result in a different consequence. Whether Sidonis lives or dies, the game and trilogy plays out the same.

Thinking back to ME1, there was a pirate gang I could choose to kill or let go. In ME2 you can meet the leader in Omega who has given up the life of crime and does good works, provided you let her live.

As this does not happen for Sidonis, I feel validated letting Garrus kill him. As I never have to ask myslef, 'What if I'd let him go'?

Modifié par Redbelle, 24 juin 2013 - 12:33 .

[shodiswe]

Sidonis doesn't seem that important and I can't see any reason he would be important.

There is nothing special about that turian, he's just somone who snapped during torture. A broken wreckage who lives in agony and fear and shame for the rest of his life. How could that possibly affect the endings in any relevant way?

It's more about what type of "life" lession you want to teach Garrus.

Modifié par shodiswe, 24 juin 2013 - 02:15 .

[Wolfva2]

MysticSpace wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Umm what the hell does Sidonis have to do with the ending?


And I've never heard a good reason for letting that bastard live.

  Remember before ME3 came out that bioware said that our choices in previous games would matter?  I thought for sure that a character from a loyalty mission would atleast be mentioned or contribute to the ending in some positive or negative way but he's never mentioned not even in an email.

But...didn't it matter?  The first time you played that mission, before you knew about the ending, did you pause and think about what you were doing?  Wonder if it was the right thing?  Worry, perhaps, about the repercusions? 

People have this idea that 'choices matter' means every little detail would have universe shaking ramifacations for the game.  "OMG!  I didn't kill Sidonis this time and Harbinger BLEW UP!  WOWWWW!  My choice MATTERED!!!"  A choice can matter...to YOU...and still not be a game changer.

Besides, you just helped Garrus commit murder in a place he used to be a cop.  Not exactly something you reminisce about...."Ah Shep, remember that time you were an accomplice to a cold blooded assassination?  Good times good times! "

In my games I let Garrus kill him.  Not because I thought it would have something to do with the ending, but because it was a choice that mattered...to Garrus.  I couldn't see betraying his trust like that.

[KaiserShep]

Eh, I didn't let Garrus shoot Dr. Saleon, though he tried to escape so he got shot anyway, so I didn't let him shoot Sidonis either. The way I saw it, Garrus was not really in the business of shooting unarmed people. Even on Omega, if he was a "vigilante", at least he was killing merc scum that were active aggressors that took advantage of the less fortunate.

[Dextro Milk]

I pity Sidonis as Bilbo pitied Gollum.

Normally I would agree with Garrus about traitors, but Sidonis clearly regrets what he did, and is willing to make up for it.

Modifié par Dextro Milk, 24 juin 2013 - 02:41 .

[AlexMBrennan]

I'm playing a space marine.

Huh, where I live soldiers don't act as judge, jury and executioner and your Shepard should have simply notified the appropriate authorities (C-Sec) and let them handle it.

[The Night Mammoth]

I have no idea what Sidonis has to do with the ending of the third game, but meh, whatever. No, I don't let Garrus shoot him, because what's the point? Garrus protects the weak, petty, personal revenge is beneath him.

[The Night Mammoth]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

I'm playing a space marine.

Huh, where I live soldiers don't act as judge, jury and executioner and your Shepard should have simply notified the appropriate authorities (C-Sec) and let them handle it.

Shepard isn't a regular soldier. At that point they're quite possible a Spectre, who is judge, jury, and executioner. 

[KaiserShep]

I wonder how the other Spectres would feel about one of their order being an accomplice to an assassination in the capital of council space.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 24 juin 2013 - 03:00 .

[The Night Mammoth]

KaiserShep wrote...

I wonder how the other Spectres would feel about one of their order being an accomplice to an assassination in the capital of council space.

Of the three Spectres we meet, I don't think any of them would bat an eye. 

[KaiserShep]

Dunno about Nihilus, but Jondam Bau doesn't strike me as the type to support revenge assassinations. Vasir doesn't really count, because she's just a Shadow Broker goon who would kill lots of people, just to arrange the death of one person like some sort of terrorist, all on the whim of some info-hoarding mob boss.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 24 juin 2013 - 03:13 .

[The Night Mammoth]

I don't know about support either, but I don't think any of them would care about a turian who betrayed his friends and teammates to a criminal gang and went to another criminal in order to hide from the consequences. They wouldn't try to stop Garrus because they thought it was wrong. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 24 juin 2013 - 03:23 .

[Hazegurl]

Why would I spare Sidonis? That's Garrus' issue to deal with not mine and Garrus chose to kill him.

[Gold Dragon]

I don't let Garrus kill Sidonis, not because of Sidonis, but to help Garrus.


Garrus isn't hunting Sidonis down for justice, but out of vengeace.  That almost never turns out well.  I don't care about Sidonus, but I DO care for Garrus.

If there had been a renegade intterupt that would allow Shepard to do the deed, I'd likely use it, even if full paragon.


It's the same reason I don't let Miri kill Niket, nor Mordin kill Maelon.   They are letting things get entirely too personal.   And would regret it.

[wright1978]

Most of my Shep's respect that it is Garrus' decision & let him shoot Sidonis. If Sidonis had killed Shep's entire squad doubt anyone would be merciful.

[CronoDragoon]

Dextro Milk wrote...

I pity Sidonis as Bilbo pitied Gollum.

Normally I would agree with Garrus about traitors, but Sidonis clearly regrets what he did, and is willing to make up for it.

This is pretty much the way I see it.

[Bleachrude]

What about Aresh from Jack's loyalty mission?