1121 réponses à ce sujet

[silverexile17s]

iakus wrote...

Darks1d3 wrote...

I'm surprised you all are still arguing with him. He clearly thinks he is right and everyone else wrong. "Never argue with someone who knows they're right".

Wrong!

Thank you :innocent:

[wolfhowwl]

silverexile17s wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

Hackett is one of the highest ranking officers in the military. Maybe there is a difference between what he knows about Cerberus and can get away with versus Ashley, who is what, a Lieutenant?

Vs the entirety of the Alliance High Command?
Did it ever occur to you that maybe it's equivilant that Hackett standing before the entire Alliance Leadership would even out compared to Ashley standing before an Admiral?

Hackett is, per the codex, head of the Alliance military.

It is not equivalent.

Wrong. He is the head of one single fleet out of EIGHT. He becomes head of the Alliance military only after the Reapers kill everyone else in the attack on Earth and Arcturus Station. Prior to ME3, he is one fleet commander out of eight that reports to the Alliance Admiralty Board (the three Admirals that get wasted in the Earth prolouge when the Reapers land). So, yes, it is equivilant.
Honestly, dude, check your timestamps - this is pre-ME3.

From the codex:

Admiral Steven Hackett is a decorated officer in the Systems Alliance, currently assigned to Arcturus Station on the far side of the Sol Relay. In the battle for the Citadel, Admiral Hackett commanded the Fifth Fleet. Following that victory, he was promoted to head of the Alliance military.

masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Codex/Known_Associates#Steven_Hackett

Also I checked up on Ashley too, she's an Operations Chief. You are comparing an NCO to the head of the military. How can you argue in good faith that their situation is at all equivalent?

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 13 novembre 2013 - 04:36 .

[silverexile17s]

wolfhowwl wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

Hackett is one of the highest ranking officers in the military. Maybe there is a difference between what he knows about Cerberus and can get away with versus Ashley, who is what, a Lieutenant?

Vs the entirety of the Alliance High Command?
Did it ever occur to you that maybe it's equivilant that Hackett standing before the entire Alliance Leadership would even out compared to Ashley standing before an Admiral?

Hackett is, per the codex, head of the Alliance military.

It is not equivalent.

Wrong. He is the head of one single fleet out of EIGHT. He becomes head of the Alliance military only after the Reapers kill everyone else in the attack on Earth and Arcturus Station. Prior to ME3, he is one fleet commander out of eight that reports to the Alliance Admiralty Board (the three Admirals that get wasted in the Earth prolouge when the Reapers land). So, yes, it is equivilant.
Honestly, dude, check your timestamps - this is pre-ME3.

From the codex:

Admiral Steven Hackett is a decorated officer in the Systems Alliance, currently assigned to Arcturus Station on the far side of the Sol Relay. In the battle for the Citadel, Admiral Hackett commanded the Fifth Fleet. Following that victory, he was promoted to head of the Alliance military.

masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Codex/Known_Associates#Steven_Hackett

Also I checked up on Ashley too, you are comparing an NCO to the head of the military.

Following the complete and utter collapse of the Alliance military. And FYI, Alliance military isn't the entire Alliance.

So, NO, I'm not. Hackett reports to a Council of Admirals just like Tali did on the quarian Admiralty board. Gerrel was head of his military, but he still answered to the Board. Same for Hackett. So, compared to them, no, it's NOT an inaccurate comparison.

[AresKeith]

silverexile17s wrote...

No, it's because unlike Kaidan, who admits having been wrong and needing to clear the air, Ashley will completely ignore how she called you a Traitor that "turned your back on everything you stood for." Kaidan will admit he was wrong about Shepard and doesn't blame you if you're pissed off about Horizon, wheras Ashley seems to think she's entitled to be trusted, even after Horizon.
That's the simple truth -- Kaidan is more willing to try and work through the issues, wheras Ashley will not even acknowledge having been wrong about you.

Well let's see in ME2 Ashley actually can email you apologizing for how she acted, which shows that she actually can work out the issues

In ME3 on Mars, Cerberus randomly shows up and that sparking the doubts that still remains in Ashley makes sense (even though I still found the whole thing poorly written)

The event during the Coup Attempt was just plain bad writing period

[Xilizhra]

Well let's see in ME2 Ashley actually can email you apologizing for how she acted, which shows that she actually can work out the issues

If you romance her, which I somehow don't think Silverexile did.

[silverexile17s]

AresKeith wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

No, it's because unlike Kaidan, who admits having been wrong and needing to clear the air, Ashley will completely ignore how she called you a Traitor that "turned your back on everything you stood for." Kaidan will admit he was wrong about Shepard and doesn't blame you if you're pissed off about Horizon, wheras Ashley seems to think she's entitled to be trusted, even after Horizon.
That's the simple truth -- Kaidan is more willing to try and work through the issues, wheras Ashley will not even acknowledge having been wrong about you.

Well let's see in ME2 Ashley actually can email you apologizing for how she acted, which shows that she actually can work out the issues

In ME3 on Mars, Cerberus randomly shows up and that sparking the doubts that still remains in Ashley makes sense (even though I still found the whole thing poorly written)

The event during the Coup Attempt was just plain bad writing period

Only if you romance her. You know, you shouldn't need to share a bunk with her just to have her apologize for Horizon. If you didn't, she never brings it up again. At least Kaidan doesn't need to share your bunk to admit he screwed up on Horizon.

Same for Kaidan, so that's a moot point.

In the hospital, Kaidan talks it out more, and on the Normandy, he is more willing to accept the idea that he was wrong about everyone in Cerberus being like the Illusive Man following your resuce of Jacob Taylor.

[eyezonlyii]

she still follows you into battle. /thread

[Dextro Milk]

Silver, what point are you trying to make in this thread? Because I can't glean anything from your posts.

[silverexile17s]

eyezonlyii wrote...

she still follows you into battle. /thread

Like a soldier, not a comrade. You don't need unresolved baggage like that.

[Mathias]

Given my experiences with all kinds of Mass Effect fans these past 5 years, I feel confident and sure enough to say that roughly around 90% of the people who hate Ashley, usually don't truly understand her character.

[eyezonlyii]

silverexile17s wrote...

eyezonlyii wrote...

she still follows you into battle. /thread

Like a soldier, not a comrade. You don't need unresolved baggage like that.

as long as she follows orders, i could care less. it's the same thing for all of the ME2 crew before their loyalty missions, only not directed at shepard. and though, i don't have a playthrough with her in 3 yet, i would most like consider the coup attempt her loyalty mission, same as Kaidan,

[Obadiah]

eyezonlyii wrote...

she still follows you into battle. /thread

It's too bad that Marksman bug is still there on her abilities.

Modifié par Obadiah, 13 novembre 2013 - 04:49 .

[silverexile17s]

Dextro Milk wrote...

Silver, what point are you trying to make in this thread? Because I can't glean anything from your posts.

The point is that Ashley isn't really all that dependible a character. She's self-rightious and has a rather closed "black and white" view of the world. She doesn't even acknowledge that she was wrong on Horzion to call you a traitor. I mean sure, Kaidan isn't a shining example of how to act -- too indiscive for me -- but he at least admits that he was wrong to doubt you on Horizon and owns up to having been wrong.

To put it bluntly, I'm validating that her character isn't all that great.

[AresKeith]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Given my experiences with all kinds of Mass Effect fans these past 5 years, I feel confident and sure enough to say that roughly around 90% of the people who hate Ashley, usually don't truly understand her character.

Pretty much

*looks back at them calling her a racist*

[silverexile17s]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Given my experiences with all kinds of Mass Effect fans these past 5 years, I feel confident and sure enough to say that roughly around 90% of the people who hate Ashley, usually don't truly understand her character.

Or maybe they do, and that's the point -- perhaps others feel too confident that she's so forgivable that they let it slide that she doesn't even think she was wrong to call you a traitor on Horizon.

[Mathias]

Ashley's 65% Weapon Damage buff combined with the N7 Typhoon also makes her the most powerful party member in the entire series. She can kill Banshees and Brutes on Insanity absurdly quick.

[Mathias]

silverexile17s wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Given my experiences with all kinds of Mass Effect fans these past 5 years, I feel confident and sure enough to say that roughly around 90% of the people who hate Ashley, usually don't truly understand her character.

Or maybe they do, and that's the point -- perhaps others feel too confident that she's so forgivable that they let it slide that she doesn't even think she was wrong to call you a traitor on Horizon.

No they don't. There's a reason why I'm saying 90%, not all. But most of the ones i've seen are idiots who are so quick to hate people without understanding them.

[wolfhowwl]

Ashley had every right to say what she did, the Alliance had branded Cerberus a terrorist organization and she seen first hand their atrocities in ME1 including murdering an Alliance admiral.

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 13 novembre 2013 - 04:52 .

[Obadiah]

AresKeith wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Given my experiences with all kinds of Mass Effect fans these past 5 years, I feel confident and sure enough to say that roughly around 90% of the people who hate Ashley, usually don't truly understand her character.

Pretty much

*looks back at them calling her a racist*

It's a fine line easily crossed and open to interpretation. I'm glad they wrote her that way.

[Dextro Milk]

silverexile17s wrote...

Dextro Milk wrote...

Silver, what point are you trying to make in this thread? Because I can't glean anything from your posts.

The point is that Ashley isn't really all that dependible a character.

That's just silly.

She's self-rightious and has a rather closed "black and white" view of the world.

Not Really.

She doesn't even acknowledge that she was wrong on Horzion to call you a traitor.

So what? If I was in her shoes, I wouldn't say sorry either. If I saw my best friend working for terrorists... umm yeah...

She had the right not trust you, and she doesn't *have* to say sorry.

To put it bluntly, I'm validating that her character isn't all that great.

That's just stupid.

[silverexile17s]

eyezonlyii wrote...

silverexile17s wrote...

eyezonlyii wrote...

she still follows you into battle. /thread

Like a soldier, not a comrade. You don't need unresolved baggage like that.

as long as she follows orders, i could care less. it's the same thing for all of the ME2 crew before their loyalty missions, only not directed at shepard. and though, i don't have a playthrough with her in 3 yet, i would most like consider the coup attempt her loyalty mission, same as Kaidan,

Didn't the Suicide Mission teach you how dangerous it is having unresolved garbage trailing you around like that? If you don't take care of that stuff, if you don't build, or re-build, that mutuial trust, they die. And as a news flash for you -- Kaidan has more to say about Horizon then she does, opting to clear the air about it rather then ignore it, and admits that he went too far and should have trusted that you had good reasons for what you were doing. He also has more development on the Normandy, with a scene after you rescue Dr. Brynn's team about him beginning to have doubts about Cerberus, and if everyone in the group is really like the Illusive Man or not.

[silverexile17s]

AresKeith wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Given my experiences with all kinds of Mass Effect fans these past 5 years, I feel confident and sure enough to say that roughly around 90% of the people who hate Ashley, usually don't truly understand her character.

Pretty much

*looks back at them calling her a racist*

You mean how they ignore the fact that her ideals are why the galaxy doesn't trust each-other?

*looks back at galaxy burning because no-one could see past their "bear and the dog" mentalities*

Yeah, that worked out great (scarcasim).

[Star fury]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Given my experiences with all kinds of Mass Effect fans these past 5 years, I feel confident and sure enough to say that roughly around 90% of the people who hate Ashley, usually don't truly understand her character.

Pretty much, and that really bothers her writer.

[silverexile17s]

wolfhowwl wrote...

Ashley had every right to say what she did, the Alliance had branded Cerberus a terrorist organization and she seen first hand their atrocities in ME1 including murdering an Alliance admiral.

The collectors had abducted upwards of 1 million people. Both Hackett and Anderson disagree with that notion, and once again, Garrus, Tali, Joker, Dr. Chakwas, and every other non-Cerberus member of the crew stated that they were working for Shepard, not Cerberus.
"Cerberus and I have the same goals - to stop the attacks on human colonies. That doesn't mean I answer to them."

[AresKeith]

Obadiah wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Given my experiences with all kinds of Mass Effect fans these past 5 years, I feel confident and sure enough to say that roughly around 90% of the people who hate Ashley, usually don't truly understand her character.

Pretty much

*looks back at them calling her a racist*

It's a fine line easily crossed and open to interpretation. I'm glad they wrote her that way.

It's not, just because she doesn't trust the aliens (mostly their government) and acts ignorant about it doesn't make her a racist