214 réponses à ce sujet

[Sir DeLoria]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Necanor wrote...
Thanks, Captain Kar'Danna's last distress call and Tali's suicide were bad enough.

I thought they were well done. It's a shame the Quarians couldn't listen to reason, but they did it to themselves, and the fate they got was the fate that they made for themselves. At the end of the day, my Shepard simply stopped caring about trying to save the Quarians from themselves.

"the Quarians couldn't listen to reason", "saving the Quarians from themselves" do you really think the entire race is responsible for the actions of two(maybe three) Admirals? If the world was represented by the UN and they made a bad choice, would all of humanity be responsible?

Sorry, but I find your argument of collective guilt pathetic.

[Sir DeLoria]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

Why are you against choice in an RPG?

Count your blessings, players who chose the Geth only got a cutscene of the Quarians being wiped.

If ME3 had handled this like DA:O's werewolves and elves we could have disposed of your precious Tali and Quarians in a much more...personal fashion.

Don't tease me like that. Now you're just making me hate ME3 even more...

"I don't despise the Quarians" right, right<_<

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Necanor wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Necanor wrote...
Thanks, Captain Kar'Danna's last distress call and Tali's suicide were bad enough.

I thought they were well done. It's a shame the Quarians couldn't listen to reason, but they did it to themselves, and the fate they got was the fate that they made for themselves. At the end of the day, my Shepard simply stopped caring about trying to save the Quarians from themselves.

"the Quarians couldn't listen to reason", "saving the Quarians from themselves" do you really think the entire race is responsible for the actions of two(maybe three) Admirals? If the world was represented by the UN and they made a bad choice, would all of humanity be responsible?

Sorry, but I find your argument of collective guilt pathetic.

Yes, actually I do. I hold the Quarians responsible for their own mistakes, mistakes that they refuse to take ownage of, and mistakes that they seem to been on remaking. The Quarians are fundamentally responsible for their own political socialization and the political culture of their race. They haven't bothered to actually learn from their issues. They haven't bothered to try to reverse their error's without violence. And now, their compliance to their own cause is now hampering my effort to build a unilateral coalition and fleet. So yes. I hold them collectively responsible as a people. Not as individuals, with exceptions of course, but as a singular entity.

Your argument is invalid on the basis of the UN not actually representing the World. The UN is an international organization that doesn't have any real sovereign power and lacks a jurisdiction over any particular zone or region. It is also a collection of other international organizations and non-governmental organizations that don't really hold any political power. The only real claimant to power is the Security Council, and to do anything, they have to have a unanimous decision among the 5 permanent member states (The United States, the United Kingdom, France, The People's Republic of China, and the Russian Federation). 

So no, your argument doesn't work. Without futher argumentation on your end, you're making a genetic contrarian argument fallacy: You're discrediting what I say simply because I'm the one saying it (or you don't like my opinion, therefore it's not valid) and you're simply arguing to the contrary for the sake of arguing to the contrary. That's fine, but you're going to need a lot more than that to combat me. Especially an opinion.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 31 juillet 2013 - 02:41 .

[Sir DeLoria]

You're completely missing the point Massively. It is impossible to fairly judge a large number of people as one entity. Even if only one individual were opposed to the actions of the rest, he'd be held responsible by your logic. For example: the Vietnam war was unnecessary, by your logic every citicizen of the US should be held responsible for the mistakes of the war, even the ones opposed to it in the first place. Dorn'Hazt explicitly says: "the Civilian fleet never wanted this war". The majority of the Quarian people was forced into this war by their leaders, who in their right minds would shift responsibility towards them?

You're also completely missing or ignoring the point of my UN example. Of course the UN doesn't represent the world, I was being hypothetical. If there were a union of nations representing the world, would the human race have to pay for their mistakes? By your logic, yes.

[Steelcan]

Massively and Necanor at it again?

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Kill the suit rats and the lamp heads!

THE BLOOD AND SYNTHETIC FLUIDS MUST FLOW! KHORNE DEMANDS IT!!!!

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Steelcan wrote...

Massively and Necanor at it again?

I'd rather not. I'm not even trying to argue against him. I'm just defending my opinion.

I'm more than willing to agree to disagree. I know what my opinions are and I know that I'll vocalize them if I feel it's appropriate. He doesn't have to agree with me, but he doesn't have to get upset with all of my opinions because he doesn't like them.

So lets not get into a Geth/Quarian debate. In his world, the Geth die. In my world, the Quarians die. I have my reasons and justifications for why I think the Quarians are getting what they deserve, and he has his opinion about why the Geth have earned their death.

[TopSun]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Kill the suit rats and the lamp heads!

THE BLOOD AND SYNTHETIC FLUIDS MUST FLOW! KHORNE DEMANDS IT!!!!

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! KHORNE FOR THE KHORNE FLAKES!

[JonathonPR]

The ending. The outcome should be determined by previous choices. The story was not set up for it in any form. I would have preferred to have the outcome determined by what factions the player sided with. Rather than just following some ancient plan a super weapon would have been under development. Its function would be determined by what resources were put into it, which factions scientists were recruited for it, and what type of technology was recovered. Would have required a different type of Cerberus but it would have been interesting to be able to choose whether to oppose, help, or let them achieve their missions. Could have done that to some extent for each faction.

[Sir DeLoria]

Steelcan wrote...

Massively and Necanor at it again?

Forevermore, I guess.

[Sir DeLoria]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Massively and Necanor at it again?

I'd rather not. I'm not even trying to argue against him. I'm just defending my opinion.

I'm more than willing to agree to disagree. I know what my opinions are and I know that I'll vocalize them if I feel it's appropriate. He doesn't have to agree with me, but he doesn't have to get upset with all of my opinions because he doesn't like them.

So lets not get into a Geth/Quarian debate. In his world, the Geth die. In my world, the Quarians die. I have my reasons and justifications for why I think the Quarians are getting what they deserve, and he has his opinion about why the Geth have earned their death.

Fair point, I guess it's for the better.

[AsheraII]

I understand what you mean, but overall, I just think the execution of those results of our decisions wasn't executed too well. The results were logical, but they were somewhat overdone, a bit too dramatic effect, though also with very minimal impact to the story. And although the impact to the story overall wasn't too big, the impact to the setting was too big. And I still feel that player decisions should NEVER impact the setting as a whole, but ony affect the story.

The Samara/Morinth decision actually hardly affected either, but it was a rather illogical decision to make overall. Story-wise, there wasn't any carrot for selecting Morinth. She was portrayed as too dangerous, too much as a diva, too predatorial, with too little compassion or sympathy or affection or anything for any Shepard, Paragon or Renegade, to EVER choose Morinth over Samara. The only reason to help Morinth was a game-technical reason: to get a special ability from her. But that is information the PLAYER would be privy to, Shepard simply wouldn't know!

I actually liked Morinth as a character, but helping her on one of my Shepards was the most illogical thing I did on any of my playthroughs. If Morinth had been portrayed slightly more as a character in pain, torn between her need for affection and her affliction, hurt because sharing her love will only bring loss, then things would've been different and I would've had a hard time choosing between her and her mother. But as it is, the only reason I picked her on one of my playthroughs was simple curiosity because I hadn't done so on any of my other playthroughs. Metagaming, not roleplaying.

Modifié par AsheraII, 31 juillet 2013 - 07:18 .

[HellbirdIV]

KaiserShep wrote...

All the geth need to do is have access to any kind of conventional weapons and they're already in a position to gain the upper hand, provided their numbers are sufficient. They have the capacity to use any technology the Quarians have in place, so they could simply use their own resources against them. You'd think that the Quarians would've developed some kind of EMP to knock out the geth in groups to whittle down their collective effectiveness.

A society with the level of technology to travel at FTL through the galaxy would probably have more powerful weapons than rifles lying around - I just question the logic of how the geth got a hold of heavy ordnance. If the quarians had, say, tanks or combat aircraft, how were the geth to fight back against that?

The only logical conclusions are that either the geth were so numerous and the quarian military so weak that they could overwhelm their military bases with sheer numbers, or that the quarians were dumb enough to already give them access to heavy munitions, in which case, as I said, the quarians only have themselves to blame.

Necanor wrote...

"the
Quarians couldn't listen to reason", "saving the Quarians from
themselves" do you really think the entire race is responsible for the
actions of two(maybe three) Admirals? If the world was represented by
the UN and they made a bad choice, would all of humanity be responsible?

As I've explained previously: The quarians are not ruled by the Admirals. They are free to choose not to join the war with the geth while the galaxy burns around them. They did not.

The quarians as a people are responsible for their own actions. They did not oppose their violent military dictators even though the captain of every ship has the authority to refuse to join a fleet action and leave the Migrant Fleet temporarily. The choice to attack the geth was not made without the consent of the people - it was made at their behest. They wanted war.

[Son of Shepherd]

 One or two could have been removed, sure but there were simple ways to input all major choices:

Rachni = seperate missions for aralakh co. OR as someone said on here one day, just fight Klixen instead. Well it'd be a lot better than what they did do.

Council = not gonna make much difference although maybe you got more immediate support from asari councillor at start of 3.

Collector base = you occasionally fight a praetorian if you gave to cerberus, but you also get your hands on a collector heavy weapon. Blew it up? you don't see the cerberus trooper on mars having implants. or feel guilty.

Re-wrote heretics? Tougher fight for Quarians. Depending on Rannoch choice you could either have more Quarian ships or more Geth primes for hammer. 

Which brings me to war assets. The numbers make little sense. Should have said exactly how many ships and how many potential ground troops you have, the cost of victory being higher the less you have, squadmates/ allies die just like suicide mission with low numbers. Only with the highest numbers should the very best ending have been possible, but not without sacrifice. Disney ending? no thanks.

[Clayless]

Destroying the Collector base.

Seriously, giving us the option to destroy the plot did nothing to help anything.

[HellbirdIV]

Robosexual wrote...

Destroying the Collector base.

Seriously, giving us the option to destroy the plot did nothing to help anything.

Well it wouldn't make sense to force Shepard to give it over to Cerberus, and it's not like you can "give it to the Alliance". You can't MOVE the Collector base. It's stationary. IN THE CENTER OF THE GALAXY.

Destroying it is the most sensible option, really. What sucks is that Cerberus still used a ton of Reaper tech in ME3 regardless of your choice.

[Jorji Costava]

JonathonPR wrote...

The ending. The outcome should be determined by previous choices. The story was not set up for it in any form. I would have preferred to have the outcome determined by what factions the player sided with. Rather than just following some ancient plan a super weapon would have been under development. Its function would be determined by what resources were put into it, which factions scientists were recruited for it, and what type of technology was recovered. Would have required a different type of Cerberus but it would have been interesting to be able to choose whether to oppose, help, or let them achieve their missions. Could have done that to some extent for each faction.

That makes sense to me; I'm pretty much done with ending-o-trons (i.e. pick a button at the last five minutes of the game to get an ending). I'd also like it if the ending had more clearly resolved the whole pro-human versus pro-council arc of the series; if there was going to be any final choice at all, I'd have preferred it to be centered around this concept.

@HellbirdIV:

As far as the collector base goes, it might be possible to turn it over to the Alliance by turning over the Reaper IFF (along with the Normandy SR-2) to the Alliance, since presumably having it is the only means of getting through the Omega IV relay and gaining access to the base.

[chemiclord]

HellbirdIV wrote...

Well it wouldn't make sense to force Shepard to give it over to Cerberus, and it's not like you can "give it to the Alliance". You can't MOVE the Collector base. It's stationary. IN THE CENTER OF THE GALAXY.

Destroying it is the most sensible option, really. What sucks is that Cerberus still used a ton of Reaper tech in ME3 regardless of your choice.

And how much of a ****storm do you think Bioware would have gotten from "Renegades" that their game was harder than Paragons because of that choice?

Don't worry about answering that, because I already know the answer... the BSN would have gone into meltdown.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Many of ME3's problems regarding lack of choice can be traced directly back to BW going all out with the Suicide mission. Yeah, that should have been saved for ME3.

[Clayless]

HellbirdIV wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Destroying the Collector base.

Seriously, giving us the option to destroy the plot did nothing to help anything.

Well it wouldn't make sense to force Shepard to give it over to Cerberus, and it's not like you can "give it to the Alliance". You can't MOVE the Collector base. It's stationary. IN THE CENTER OF THE GALAXY.

Destroying it is the most sensible option, really. What sucks is that Cerberus still used a ton of Reaper tech in ME3 regardless of your choice.

The Alliance aren't doing anything to stop the Reapers. It would make less sense to give it to them.

[KaiserShep]

Robosexual wrote...

The Alliance aren't doing anything to stop the Reapers. It would make less sense to give it to them.

I'm of the opinion that the incompetence of the Alliance and the Council is overdone throughout the series. I don't expect any organization, government, military, whatever to be perfect at its job, but come on. If the Alliance, and by extension the Council, had access to the base and EDI's data on the Collectors' Prothean origins, and was able to see for themselves the horrible human processing plant for the reaper erector set, along with the actual dead human proto reaper, they're not going to go "Ah yes, 'Reapers'" after looking at all that (I mean is Dr. Chakwas' eyewitness account now meaningless too?). There's only so much indecision and stupidity you could write into politicians and military leaders in fiction until it strains believability that they could even continue to operate.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 01 août 2013 - 11:21 .

[Clayless]

KaiserShep wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

The Alliance aren't doing anything to stop the Reapers. It would make less sense to give it to them.

I'm of the opinion that the incompetence of the Alliance and the Council is overdone throughout the series. I don't expect any organization, government, military, whatever to be perfect at its job, but come on. If the Alliance, and by extension the Council, had access to the base and EDI's data on the Collectors' Prothean origins, and was able to see for themselves the horrible human processing plant for the reaper erector set, along with the actual dead human proto reaper, they're not going to go "Ah yes, 'Reapers'" after looking at all that (I mean is Dr. Chakwas' eyewitness account now meaningless too?). There's only so much indecision and stupidity you could write into politicians and military leaders in fiction until it strains believability that they could even continue to operate.

The problem with that is it would take a complete rewrite of ME2. They could possibly have revealed, in ME3, that the Alliance and the Council were actually doing things, but it wouldn't have made sense for them to reveal anything to Cerberus, AKA ME2 Shepard, in ME2.

So even with that scenario, from Shepard's perspective in ME2, only one organisation is trying to stop the Reapers. Deliberately sabotaging pretty much the best, and only, chance of stopping the Reapers just doesn't make sense. But it really shouldn't have been a choice as it literally destroys the plot of ME2 and ultimately detracts from the series.

[nos_astra]

Robosexual wrote...
The Alliance aren't doing anything to stop the Reapers. It would make less sense to give it to them.

Bioware love to paint factions with one big brush as incompetent, annoying, useless whenever they oppose the protagonist or should be naturally stealing his/her spotlight. Though Cerberus certainly doesn't fair much better when they are allies: We do all this creepy, violent stuff for THE MANATEE. All of our exploits are for more power and stuff which will lead to THE MANATEE'S dominance ... somehow ... We swears. You be our friend nao. We loves you.

Edit:
Oh, you just acknowledged the problem in your next post. So yeah, it would require a rewrite of ME2 to fix that.
(Can't entirely absolve ME1 of this problem, too.)

Robosexual wrote...
So even with that scenario, from Shepard's perspective in ME2, only one organisation is trying to stop the Reapers. Deliberately sabotaging pretty much the best, and only, chance of stopping the Reapers just doesn't make sense. But it really shouldn't have been a choice as it literally destroys the plot of ME2 and ultimately detracts from the series.

I'd still think Shepard must be pretty self-absorbed and a moron if he expected the Council or the Alliance to share critical information with him and concludes that gasp, nobody is doing anything. Must now trust Cerberus that saving colonists from random aliens will somehow help defeat the Reapers because TIM said so.

Modifié par klarabella, 01 août 2013 - 12:24 .

[KaiserShep]

Robosexual wrote...

The problem with that is it would take a complete rewrite of ME2. They could possibly have revealed, in ME3, that the Alliance and the Council were actually doing things, but it wouldn't have made sense for them to reveal anything to Cerberus, AKA ME2 Shepard, in ME2.

So even with that scenario, from Shepard's perspective in ME2, only one organisation is trying to stop the Reapers. Deliberately sabotaging pretty much the best, and only, chance of stopping the Reapers just doesn't make sense. But it really shouldn't have been a choice as it literally destroys the plot of ME2 and ultimately detracts from the series.

Beyond things like bolstering supply lines, personnel, ships, etc., there's not much else they could do in 2 anyway. In ME2, Cerberus already had a leg up by having access to largely intact reaper tech, not to mention zero concern for operating in the Terminus systems. This wouldn't really require a rewrite of ME2. Shepard, technically operating as a Cerberus operative despite his/her objections, wouldn't be privy to a whole lot on the Alliance anyway, and I wouldn't expect the Illusive Man to be forthcoming with much beyond what he wants Shepard to know. The same kind of goes for the Council. If your plot requires the complete and total inability of an entire military and political body to be bogged down by indecision and incompetence to the point of impasse, then your plot may be problematic. However, this is all based on what the Illusive Man tells us. His manipulation of Shepard is a big part of the story. Is Cerberus really the only organization willing and able to do something about the reapers, or is the Illusive Man using Shepard to get the upper hand first? 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 01 août 2013 - 12:24 .

[Clayless]

KaiserShep wrote...

Beyond things like bolstering supply lines, personnel, ships, etc., there's not much else they could do in 2 anyway. In ME2, Cerberus already had a leg up by having access to largely intact reaper tech, not to mention zero concern for operating in the Terminus systems. This wouldn't really require a rewrite of ME2. Shepard, technically operating as a Cerberus operative despite his/her objections, wouldn't be privy to a whole lot on the Alliance anyway, and I wouldn't expect the Illusive Man to be forthcoming with much beyond what he wants Shepard to know. The same kind of goes for the Council. If your plot requires the complete and total inability of an entire military and political body to be bogged down by indecision and incompetence to the point of impasse, then your plot may be problematic. However, this is all based on what the Illusive Man tells us. His manipulation of Shepard is a big part of the story. Is Cerberus really the only organization willing and able to do something about the reapers, or is the Illusive Man using Shepard to get the upper hand first? 

The Council should have the most Reaper tech, given the fact that Sovereign exploded on the Citadel. While it's true sections of him were snatched up, the vast majority of him should be in the hands of the Council.

Anyway, the point still stands that, at the end of ME2, the only evidence we have is the Alliance and the Council stood around and did nothing as hundreds of thousands of colonists were being abducted, and were even denying the existence of Reapers. Even if TIM was manipulating Shepard, ultimately he wants what's best for humanity, Shepard owes him his life, and he's the only one actually doing anything. Even worse (though it technically isn't a problem with ME2) it turns out the Council and Alliance did actually do nothing.

The main point is that destroying the Collector base should never have been a choice. Destroying and Controlling the Collectors should have replaced it.