553 réponses à ce sujet

[crimzontearz]

RatThing wrote...

Who backed Shepard is irrelevant to me. What's relevant is, are there reasons not to. And yeah, there are tons of reasons as already explained.

and in spite of those reasons everybody but Ashley backed Shepard. Thank you for proving by point

[Xilizhra]

Ashley is the perfect fit for Shepard. Perfect! She has it all wrapped up in one package that mirrors Shepherd. Do you not agree?

No.

Why or why not?

She's straight.

Also, we clash politically, Liara seems smarter (or at least a deeper thinker) overall, and nothing really specifically attracts me to her. Of course, even if it did, my Shepard couldn't romance her.

[RatThing]

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

Who backed Shepard is irrelevant to me. What's relevant is, are there reasons not to. And yeah, there are tons of reasons as already explained.

and in spite of those reasons everybody but Ashley backed Shepard. Thank you for proving by point

Proving your point by pointing out the naivity of the other? Hardly.

Modifié par RatThing, 24 octobre 2013 - 01:47 .

[AresKeith]

Dubozz wrote...

Chris L'Etoile left Bioware. Ashley lost her character.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

and even in THAT case Ashley's suspicion of Shepard being just a replicant or a tool are unfounded

They are hardly unfounded - Shepard chose to work with Cerberus rather than return to the Alliance, after all.

Sure, the player was never given a choice and will thus rationalize (i.e. invent reasons) why Shepard becoming a terrorist (something the players knows to be bad) is not bad to resolve this conflict but the fact remains that Ash is right and that Shepard should have been executed for his crimes based on applicable law.

"invent reasons"

I'd like to know why you think that everyone who likes Cerberus secretly hates themselves and what reasons they 'invent' and why we should all subscribe to your opinion of what constitutes good and bad. And why we should follow the law for two groups that have denied and ignored the threat to galactic security.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

AresKeith wrote...

Dubozz wrote...

Chris L'Etoile left Bioware. Ashley lost her character.

I like Chris L'Etoile, but I still always disliked Ashley. Granted, I'll say her writing was a lot better with him.

[crimzontearz]

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

Who backed Shepard is irrelevant to me. What's relevant is, are there reasons not to. And yeah, there are tons of reasons as already explained.

and in spite of those reasons everybody but Ashley backed Shepard. Thank you for proving by point

Proving your point by pointing out the naivity of the other? hardly.

 
So....suddenly a councilor/Admiral, a Krogan warlord (several hundreds years old) a Turian merenary and the council are all naive BUT Ashley sees the truth (turns out she was wrong about it)?


 
Don't make laugh, I do not need a second guessing fake friend in my crew TYVM

[RatThing]

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

Who backed Shepard is irrelevant to me. What's relevant is, are there reasons not to. And yeah, there are tons of reasons as already explained.

and in spite of those reasons everybody but Ashley backed Shepard. Thank you for proving by point

Proving your point by pointing out the naivity of the other? hardly.

 
So....suddenly a councilor/Admiral, a Krogan warlord (several hundreds years old) a Turian merenary and the council are all naive BUT Ashley sees the truth (turns out she was wrong about it)?


 Don't make laugh, I do not need a second guessing fake friend in my crew TYVM

Be happy with all your sycophants then. Seriously, you can't disprove one argument about why there is reason enough not to trust Shepard from the other point of view. Pointing out to all the people who followed Shepard doesn't prove anything. It's a roleplay game and they wanted to give the player some of his old buddies, that's all.
 

[crimzontearz]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

and even in THAT case Ashley's suspicion of Shepard being just a replicant or a tool are unfounded

They are hardly unfounded - Shepard chose to work with Cerberus rather than return to the Alliance, after all.

Sure, the player was never given a choice and will thus rationalize (i.e. invent reasons) why Shepard becoming a terrorist (something the players knows to be bad) is not bad to resolve this conflict but the fact remains that Ash is right and that Shepard should have been executed for his crimes based on applicable law.

which crimes? The relay explosion in arrival? You do know that happens after horizon right? And it might actually NOT happen  at all to your Shepard?

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Uh...BULL****

Garrus, Tali, Liara and Wrex (and more, joker, chakwas and even Adams in ME3) have no issues believing Shepard and trusting him in spite of the paintjob of the Normandy.

Sure Anderson is wary of Cerberus but he backs Shepard immediately and defends him with the council. The council reinstates him as a spectre, which is not to be taken as an intimidating thing but more that he is, even in their eyes, still trustworthy enough.

Hackett is NOT a tricky thing, he specifically orders the fleet NOT to get in Shepard's way, yes, he has him covered.

So, when push came to shove, when it was time for friends to show support and trust the old crew, ALL THE OLD CREW is there....Ashley is not. And her streak of idiocy continues un ME3.

Sorry, that is just not something I will condone.

Of course some will say the same about Liara and her little Faux Pas in ME2...BUT she redeems herself in LOTSB, I am sure it is not enough for some but had Ashley had something like LOTSB I would be less harsh on her. It also does not help at ALL that Bioware did this because "they wanted to track the cheaters"...translation, they wanted to push is in the arms of someone else

And if Miranda had installed that control chip and Shepard went rogue, then what? Let's say after Sur'kesh TIM said to himself "You know what, I can't keep having him interfer with my plans. Intiate order 84." Shepard is then controlled by TIM and ordered to kill every key member of the Normandy one by one. Who'd be able to stop him?

Except that if Shepard bring either Garrus or Liara (or both) along that arguement would make no sense. Or does the VS believe that Liara and Garrus are all in on the big evil Cerberus conspiracy?

[rekn2]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Dubozz wrote...

Chris L'Etoile left Bioware. Ashley lost her character.

I like Chris L'Etoile, but I still always disliked Ashley. Granted, I'll say her writing was a lot better with him.

everything he was in charge of was better when he was there, ashley and legion as examples.

[crimzontearz]

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

Who backed Shepard is irrelevant to me. What's relevant is, are there reasons not to. And yeah, there are tons of reasons as already explained.

and in spite of those reasons everybody but Ashley backed Shepard. Thank you for proving by point

Proving your point by pointing out the naivity of the other? hardly.

 
So....suddenly a councilor/Admiral, a Krogan warlord (several hundreds years old) a Turian merenary and the council are all naive BUT Ashley sees the truth (turns out she was wrong about it)?


 Don't make laugh, I do not need a second guessing fake friend in my crew TYVM

Be happy with all your sycophants then. Seriously, you can't disprove one argument about why there is reason enough not to trust Shepard from the other point of view. Pointing out to all the people who followed Shepard doesn't prove anything. It's a roleplay game and they wanted to give the player some of his old buddies, that's all.
 

oh you want more material proof?

Ok, Chackwas examins Shepard, I believe IF she found a control chip she would have said something, Miranda herself says she did not implant one, Shepard goes through the scans at the citadel and the C-sec clears him.


 
But BESIDES THAT, if you can make the argument that I cannot disprove someone's reasons by using someone else's decision neither can you. It remains, as a fact, that she is THE ONLY ONEA pulling this ****.

Justify her if you want...I will not

[Iakus]

Ah, yet another bash Ash thread

Yay

[crimzontearz]

iakus wrote...

Ah, yet another bash Ash thread

Yay

sorry man, she just rubbed me in all the wrong ways in ME2


 
sad, I kinda liked her in ME1

[Xilizhra]

iakus wrote...

Ah, yet another bash Ash thread

Yay

It probably comes of the subtle implication in the OP that non-Ashley options are somehow inferior due to not being perfect.

[RatThing]

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

Who backed Shepard is irrelevant to me. What's relevant is, are there reasons not to. And yeah, there are tons of reasons as already explained.

and in spite of those reasons everybody but Ashley backed Shepard. Thank you for proving by point

Proving your point by pointing out the naivity of the other? hardly.

 
So....suddenly a councilor/Admiral, a Krogan warlord (several hundreds years old) a Turian merenary and the council are all naive BUT Ashley sees the truth (turns out she was wrong about it)?


 Don't make laugh, I do not need a second guessing fake friend in my crew TYVM

Be happy with all your sycophants then. Seriously, you can't disprove one argument about why there is reason enough not to trust Shepard from the other point of view. Pointing out to all the people who followed Shepard doesn't prove anything. It's a roleplay game and they wanted to give the player some of his old buddies, that's all.
 

oh you want more material proof?

Ok, Chackwas examins Shepard, I believe IF she found a control chip she would have said something, Miranda herself says she did not implant one, Shepard goes through the scans at the citadel and the C-sec clears him.


 
But BESIDES THAT, if you can make the argument that I cannot disprove someone's reasons by using someone else's decision neither can you. It remains, as a fact, that she is THE ONLY ONEA pulling this ****.

Justify her if you want...I will not

And you really think Cerberus would implant a chip that would be detected that easily?  It's Cerberus, they know their sh*t. Plus the control chip is one of many possibilities. The possibility that Shepard actually agrees with Cerberus ideals is reason enough to distrust him. Also Kaidan pulled this off as well.

[crimzontearz]

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

RatThing wrote...

Who backed Shepard is irrelevant to me. What's relevant is, are there reasons not to. And yeah, there are tons of reasons as already explained.

and in spite of those reasons everybody but Ashley backed Shepard. Thank you for proving by point

Proving your point by pointing out the naivity of the other? hardly.

 
So....suddenly a councilor/Admiral, a Krogan warlord (several hundreds years old) a Turian merenary and the council are all naive BUT Ashley sees the truth (turns out she was wrong about it)?


 Don't make laugh, I do not need a second guessing fake friend in my crew TYVM

Be happy with all your sycophants then. Seriously, you can't disprove one argument about why there is reason enough not to trust Shepard from the other point of view. Pointing out to all the people who followed Shepard doesn't prove anything. It's a roleplay game and they wanted to give the player some of his old buddies, that's all.
 

oh you want more material proof?

Ok, Chackwas examins Shepard, I believe IF she found a control chip she would have said something, Miranda herself says she did not implant one, Shepard goes through the scans at the citadel and the C-sec clears him.


 
But BESIDES THAT, if you can make the argument that I cannot disprove someone's reasons by using someone else's decision neither can you. It remains, as a fact, that she is THE ONLY ONEA pulling this ****.

Justify her if you want...I will not

And you really think Cerberus would implant a chip that would be detected that easily?  It's Cerberus, they know their sh*t. Plus the control chip is one of many possibilities. The possibility that Shepard actually agrees with Cerberus ideals is reason enough to distrust him. Also Kaidan pulled this off as well.

and again it comes down to trust, Ash has none, thus I have no compassion for her.

Also, Csec Scans can pick up gene mods and even cloning degradation. Cerberus might know what they are doing (OMG I cannot say that with a straight face) but so do chackwas and C-sec

[Xilizhra]

StreetMagic wrote...

RatThing wrote..
The possibility that Shepard actually agrees with Cerberus ideals is reason enough to distrust him.

I don't know about that. The first game at least set things up for you to choose human centricism/protectionism (much like Ash), which could in turn lead Shepard to embracing an organization like Cerberus. Not that many would, but it was up to the player then. You weren't automatically pushed into peace/love/unity Star Trek Federation mode, like ME3 does with the Alliance, alien allies, and Anderson.

I remember when I firsted played, it was one of the first things that stood out.. how removed from Star Trek it was. How frustrated and distant I felt from the Council. I didn't like it at first. I wanted the whole unity thing, but then I started seeing things another way.

You get the unity thing. Literally the only problem is imperfect politicians, just like everywhere else.

[RatThing]

StreetMagic wrote...

RatThing wrote..
The possibility that Shepard actually agrees with Cerberus ideals is reason enough to distrust him.

I don't know about that. The first game at least set things up for you to choose human centricism/protectionism (much like Ash), which could in turn lead Shepard to embracing an organization like Cerberus. Not that many would, but it was up to the player then. You weren't automatically pushed into peace/love/unity Star Trek Federation mode, like ME3 does with the Alliance, alien allies, and Anderson.

I remember when I firsted played, it was one of the first things that stood out.. how removed from Star Trek it was. How frustrated and distant I felt from the Council. I didn't like it at first. I wanted the whole unity thing, but then I started seeing things another way.

Not exactly what I meant (bad wording from my side). Whether you are human centric or not, I think Cerberus and Allianze aren't exactly allies (even if they seem to work together occasionally). I mean Cerberus sacrificed Alliance Marines and killed an Alliance Admiral. Ash is Alliance through and through, so I can't picture her not being worried about Cerberus goals or at least their methods even if she agrees with their core ideals of a strong humanity.  

Modifié par RatThing, 24 octobre 2013 - 02:28 .

[crimzontearz]

That said...

With bad writing all around I can't exactly blame it all on Ash, (again Bioware wanted us to distance ourselves from her and Liara)

Shepard is ALSO stricken with the DERP in ME2....

[AlexMBrennan]

which crimes?

Being a member of a terrorist organisation? The Asari councillor called for Shepard's execution because being a member of a terrorist organisation is a capital offence in Citadel space.

Seriously, have you never heard of Gitmo? How can "terrorism is bad" be a new and confounding idea for BSN dwellers?

[And before you try to use the Spectre excuse, no, Shepard was not a Spectre at that point because he was only later reinstated]

[RatThing]

crimzontearz wrote...
and again it comes down to trust, Ash has none, thus I have no compassion for her.

Also, Csec Scans can pick up gene mods and even cloning degradation. Cerberus might know what they are doing (OMG I cannot say that with a straight face) but so do chackwas and C-sec

All I can say to this is some people who are more about trust and friendship (and rainbows and butterflies) than common sence might want to stick to my little pony instead.