293 réponses à ce sujet

[DeinonSlayer]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Cobalt2113 wrote...

My canon Shep got Tali exiled and rewrote the Geth heretics so peace was never an option for me. I side with the Quarians and I'll try to explain why.

Legion: "Yes, but with free will. Each Geth unit would be a true intelligence. We would be alive, and we could help you."

The obvious subtext here is that they are not alive now. And that they will not be "alive" or a "true intelligence" until after they receive the reaper upgrade. So while many people seem to take it as a choice between two races, it isn't. It's a choice between one living race and one race that could become living if you let it destroy the other. But at the moment is not truly intelligent or alive.

If you've watched enough Star Trek or Dr Who you should know that creating a new life/race at the cost of sacrificing an already existing life/race is simply morally wrong.

Part of the reason I dislike the Rannoch ark is because of the Geth retcons (and I think they are retcons, 98% conifident) and a lot of what Legion says regarding the Reaper upgrades and the Geth are part of that retcon. The ME2 Legion did believe the Geth were alive and disagreed with the use of Reaper upgrades to change themeselves.

All right, all right, fine, I'll post it again.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

I'd choose the quarians. Yeah, they were foolish to start a war with the geth when everyone should be focused on the Reapers... but the geth wanted to upload the Reaper code into their systems. Shepard has no way of knowing that it won't indoctrinate them. Even some of my Shepards who could choose peace wouldn't be able to make themselves do it just for that reason.

Ryzaki wrote...

What boggles me is why that *isn't* a romance ender. Shep very nicely tells her he's her commanding officer and he's not interested.

WHY WHY DOES THAT CONTINUE THE ROMANCE.

True still wasn't as bad as getting renedouche ninja'd by Liara. Least with Ashley I never went "wait what? wait...WHAT. I said I wasn't interested! (well until today ) There has to be a way to get out of this...no. No no no no no. The save from when I said no was 8 hours ago? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" (That was when I was crazy enough to pick up Liara first D: )

This reminds me of my reaction to Liara's ninjamance. It was almost exactly the same as yours, but I think the number of hours was longer. Unfortunately, I recruited her first and found out that the romance was locked in at the Normandy grounding scene. At that point I figured it would be best to just finish up the game, reject her at the final scene, and correct my playthrough with a NG+ by recruiting her last.

Thanks for the warning about Ashley. My Shepard must have shot her down when she talked about the aliens on the ship because he didn't have any problems. I'm surprised that he didn't also use the dialogue you mentioned about her religion though. It's been a while since I played last, but that sounds like something he would say. Does it happen before or after the aliens talk? Maybe they cancelled each other out.

[Glitchfull]

I was thinking of a non color based Shepard run too. Possibly excluding interrupts (Shooting mercenaries off buildings and stabbing them in the back is too fun). Would be a very interesting story and maybe even more believable at times. Just wish that some options, like the Tali/Legion argument in ME2 had a "You're both wrong" option with them not just turning around saying "Friends!". A persuasion would be interesting in itself so you could see what happens if you couldn't change their minds.

I may have to fidget that rule for that play through around at times though, because I was always annoyed that I needed a high paragon/renegade score to simply say "You're both wrong". There are ways around that though possibly.

Though I can still end up with a peace option and did by being sorta neutral, so dunno if it would matter in this case.

[DeinonSlayer]

Glitchfull wrote...

I was thinking of a non color based Shepard run too. Possibly excluding interrupts (Shooting mercenaries off buildings and stabbing them in the back is too fun). Would be a very interesting story and maybe even more believable at times. Just wish that some options, like the Tali/Legion argument in ME2 had a "You're both wrong" option with them not just turning around saying "Friends!". A persuasion would be interesting in itself so you could see what happens if you couldn't change their minds.

I may have to fidget that rule for that play through around at times though, because I was always annoyed that I needed a high paragon/renegade score to simply say "You're both wrong". There are ways around that though possibly.

Though I can still end up with a peace option and did by being sorta neutral, so dunno if it would matter in this case.

You can fail persuasions in DA:O. It's pretty cool.

[ImaginaryMatter]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

All right, all right, fine, I'll post it again.

I like your Rannoch idea, that was a lot of effort.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

You can fail persuasions in DA:O. It's pretty cool.

It can happen in DA2 as well. My normally diplomatic Hawke pulled a knife on someone, and he just laughed at her.

[Ryzaki]

The Sarendoctrinator wrote...
This reminds me of my reaction to Liara's ninjamance. It was almost exactly the same as yours, but I think the number of hours was longer. Unfortunately, I recruited her first and found out that the romance was locked in at the Normandy grounding scene. At that point I figured it would be best to just finish up the game, reject her at the final scene, and correct my playthrough with a NG+ by recruiting her last.

Thanks for the warning about Ashley. My Shepard must have shot her down when she talked about the aliens on the ship because he didn't have any problems. I'm surprised that he didn't also use the dialogue you mentioned about her religion though. It's been a while since I played last, but that sounds like something he would say. Does it happen before or after the aliens talk? Maybe they cancelled each other out.

It's after the aliens talk.

ME1 just refuses to let me play my doesn't mind hearing out his crew or being hit on but doesn't want romance Shep. It's either all or nothing apparently  

[DeinonSlayer]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

All right, all right, fine, I'll post it again.

I like your Rannoch idea, that was a lot of effort.

Thanks. You might also like Dean_The_Young's re-imagining as well.

[Glitchfull]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

You can fail persuasions in DA:O. It's pretty cool.

I've played DA:O, one of my favorite RPG. Though I was always bothered that I could practicaly rush it and not be punished in other fields.It is nice to be able to play someone that isn't very good at it though too.

Easiest solution was to make the other skills effect the story more than just the odd ball sidequest which is secretly a tutorial. Like you can lose a major battle if you don't have the tactical points, you lose a fight for lack of combat, and/or you can get criticaly injured or lose party memebers if you don't have the right survival points to make it through a forest.

Still was a great game none the less.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

Ryzaki wrote...

It's after the aliens talk.

ME1 just refuses to let me play my doesn't mind hearing out his crew or being hit on but doesn't want romance Shep. It's either all or nothing apparently  

I'll have to remember not to choose it then.

Funny thing is, my Shepard wasn't even nice to everyone on his crew. I played him as being kind of paranoid, so he came off as hostile and defensive towards Liara. Someday, I'm going to play my EvilShep who uses the ninjamance to his advantage - tells Liara honestly that he's not interested, and when she seems to believe they're in a romance anyway, he'll just go along with it. I'll have him think Liara chased down his body to have him resurrected because he's really that good at manipulating people.

[Ruadh]

Might as well post a one sided argument that gets us nowhere. Again.

Ahem . . .

I'd agree with you OP, but then we'd both be wrong.

Lets see if I have this right. In a galaxy wide war where you're trying to stop a race of killer robots (Reapers) from wiping out all organic life, you willingly let a race of killer robots (Geth) wipe out an entire species of organics. The same killer robots (Geth) that willingly and habitually side with the even worse killer robots (Reapers)???

And your reasoning behind this is that the Geth didn't commit genocide (They wiped out 99% of the Quarian population with chemical weapons, which is genocide), but the Quarians did commit genocide (Attempted shut down of Geth mobile platforms, which would've resulted in no deaths as they weren't targeting their hardware, since they relied on the Geth). And the Geth get extra points for being nice and not hunting down the few escaping Quarians???

From my own experience, if the Geth had been more like the Rachni, forced to work for the Reapers instead of bending over, I may have had to actually think twice about getting rid of the Geth. But no, this is how I see the Geth as it is . . .

ME2 - 'Shepard Commander. Those Geth that previously joined the Reapers, tried to kill you and take over the galaxy, killing every organic in the process. That wasn't us, that was totally the bad guy Geth. We're the good guy Geth. We would never side with the old machines, the Quarian genocide was just a missunderstanding and we make our own future.'

ME3 - 'Shepard Commander. The Quarians tried to retake their homeworld. The one we've occupied for the last 300 years despite having no use for it except for a place to build our war machine. Why they do this? We cleaned up. Anyway, we sided with the Reapers again and were hoping you'd let us upload their instant-awesome-code, so we could finally destroy the Quarians. P.s. If you don't let us I'm gonna murder you and do it anyway, cause we're actually good guys, member?'

But hey, maybe I just don't trust genocide committing robots, despite what they claim.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 I "choose" peace. If forced to take a side, I pick geth, if only because of realpolitik.

However, if my decision were dictated by moral concerns, I'd pick the quarians -- geth have no "civilians."

... and that basically sums up my whole stance on the issue. I'm so glad I don't generally give a hoot about this topic.

[ElSuperGecko]

I negotiated peace between the Quarians and the Geth on my first playthrough, but ever since then I've sided with the Quarians.

I simply (roleplaying as Shepard) cannot trust the Geth. They've aligned themselves with the Reapers twice, allowed themselves to be modified by Reaper code in the second time in the process (which as we see in the Geth collective acts like a self-replicating virus that cannot entirely be eradicated)

Legion/the Geth VI is consistently evasive about it's motives with Shepard in ME3, it lies to us by omission and it's motives for using the Reaper code at the end of the Rannoch arc contradict everything it told us in ME2.

That's without saying they're the race responsible for more deaths during the course of the game than any bar the Reapers themselves.

As far as my Shepard is concerned, allowing Legion to upload the Reaper code presents far too much of a risk. Sorry Legion, but I'm taking the Renegade interrupt every time. All three of them.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

You can fail persuasions in DA:O. It's pretty cool.

I didn't like that system. It's like, you can say the exact same thing in the exact same circumstance, but successfully persuading someone depends on whether or not you have this "aura" of persuasiveness around you by investing in Coercion.

I much prefer what DA2 had. Your hero's personality determines what kind of dialogue works/doesn't work on people. It makes sense -- heroes that lean "aggressive" will probably be good at persuading people through intimidation. It was like ME2's system, but better. And because of this, you didn't always have your persuasion to save you from everything.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 19 novembre 2013 - 01:11 .

[ruggly]

If forced to choose? The Quarians. Both made a lot of bad choices along the way, but I didn't like the whole "I want to be a real boy" route they made the Geth take, in that they're not alive until they're like organics. Twice I've made peace (and then chose destroy, lelelelelel), and one time I had the Geth VI and chose the Quarians. But normally I don't care too much about this.

[Xilizhra]

Geth. Most importantly, they have more war assets in my playthrough. Aside from that, I will not preside over a galaxy where just destroying the only example of a synthetic race as traitors to the cause was the right thing to do; the precedent's too terrible.

Also, if the quarians refuse to back down, their deaths are entirely on Gerrel's head, not mine.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 19 novembre 2013 - 02:26 .

[DeinonSlayer]

Xilizhra wrote...

Geth. Most importantly, they have more war assets in my playthrough. Aside from that, I will not preside over a galaxy where just destroying the only example of a synthetic race as traitors to the cause was the right thing to do; the precedent's too terrible.

Also, if the quarians refuse to back down, their deaths are entirely on Gerrel's head, not mine.

> Chooses to upload the "we're gonna kick your ass" code
> Chooses not to tell them you're doing it, fully aware of the consequences
> Lets them believe the Reapers took over again, in which case ceasing fire wouldn't spare them

Yeah, that's totally Gerrel's fault. Sure. War assets I can understand, but I admit it's funny to see someone arguing for picking a side to prove how not-racist they are.

Also... "presiding over"... *shudders*

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 19 novembre 2013 - 02:38 .

[Xilizhra]

> Chooses to upload the "we're gonna kick your ass" code
> Chooses not to tell them you're doing it
> Lets them believe the Reapers took over again, in which case ceasing fire wouldn't spare them

If I may...

My question is to exclude this possibility from the equation. Say the Qurians absolutely refuse to back off, who do you choose?

Logically, it's impossible for the quarians to refuse to back down if they have nothing to back down from. Ergo, especially since the out-of-game knowledge of peace being impossible would not prevent my Shepard in-universe from trying to get the quarians to back down, I come to the conclusion that the impossibility of peace rests on trying to convince the quarians and them not going along with it.

Also... "presiding over"... *shudders*

Control's a separate thing, don't worry.

[ElSuperGecko]

Xilizhra wrote...

Geth. Most importantly, they have more war assets in my playthrough...

Why I not surprised... *facepalm*

[KaiserShep]

I'd simply pick the quarians if I couldn't make peace. Each and every geth is a ready-made combatant, while the quarians do have children and civilians, and I'd put their welfare on higher priority without a second thought.

[DeinonSlayer]

@Xil
Good thing "absolutely refuse to back off" doesn't happen in-game then. The only way the Quarians die is if Shepard chooses to stab them in the back (through inaction, not in the literal sense as happens if you go the other way).

Of course Autoshep then turns around and blames them... disgusting, IMO.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 19 novembre 2013 - 02:56 .

[Xilizhra]

Good thing "absolutely refuse to back off" doesn't happen in-game then. The only way the Quarians die is if Shepard chooses to stab them in the back (through inaction, not in the literal sense as happens if you go the other way).

It does not happen in-game, but the question posited by this thread was not an in-game one. In-game, I always make peace because I consider both alternatives idiotic.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

KaiserShep wrote...

I'd simply pick the quarians if I couldn't make peace. Each and every geth is a ready-made combatant, while the quarians do have children and civilians, and I'd put their welfare on higher priority without a second thought.

That's almost exactly why I'd choose the Geth over the Quarians in a heartbeat.

Intellectual arguments aside, civilians don't win wars. Women and children don't win battles. Innocents don't contribute to victory. Their welfare is meaningless to me.

I want the machines that can fight. The machines that are highly advanced and can fight in conditions without any loss in efficiency where organics would struggle. I want them because they are don't rest or act according to laws of war. I want them to go all out and be the best use to me that they can.

[KaiserShep]

These are also the same machines that ran off to the reapers (albeit to save themselves), and Allers isn't exactly off the mark when she mentions the reapers' hacking capabilities. Frankly, even with the option to make peace, I still lean on driving the geth extinct simply because I can at least trust that the only thing that can happen to the quarians is that they get killed off or some get indoctrinated, but can't get some crazy signal boost to hijack them all at once. It's just a matter of which one I would prefer to have around once the war is over. Considering that the quarians were actually winning before the geth ran off to the reapers, I wouldn't really consider them slouches either.

But in any case, I stick strictly to the moment when it comes to picking which race to see completely wiped out.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 19 novembre 2013 - 03:07 .