207 réponses à ce sujet

[CynicalShep]

Seboist wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

CynicalShep wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

What dialogue? "**** you've done"? Really? Like what, save the galaxy f**kin' TWICE?

Yes and the Batarian Terrorist does not ID you as responsible, and Anderson does not mention it at the beginning, so in my for all I know Arrival might nit gave involved Shepard, the fact the books say otherwise means little to people playing the game and being given a different scenario...you know like the way the choice of councilor was handled in the books

So how and why does the Alliance arrest and detain a spectre who saved the galaxy twice and didn't blow up a star system?

So that Shepard's on Earth in preparation for ME3's opening sequence, six months pass so the Reapers have time to arrive, and the squad is split up and sent away around the galaxy so they can cameo later on.

Oh, you were looking for a logical, narritve reason? Cerberus involvement. Shepard and Cerberus's noble intentions don't exactly matter, since Cerberus are still terrorists. 

I don't think Shepard should have let themselves get arrested or agree to stay if they knew they'd be sitting around on Earth for six months, but I can understand why they'd be arrested or taken in by the Alliance at least at first. 

"Cerberus involvement" doesn't make sense since the council and alliance are fully aware of it during ME2 and do nothing about it. They could've easily arrested him then and there on the citadel.

But he was needed to save their gullible backsides

[GreyLycanTrope]

dreamgazer wrote...
Talk about railroading.

Now we know how TIM feels

[AlanC9]

CynicalShep wrote...

But he was needed to save their gullible backsides

Right. You arrest terrorists after they're no longer useful, not before.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seboist wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

CynicalShep wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

What dialogue? "**** you've done"? Really? Like what, save the galaxy f**kin' TWICE?

Yes and the Batarian Terrorist does not ID you as responsible, and Anderson does not mention it at the beginning, so in my for all I know Arrival might nit gave involved Shepard, the fact the books say otherwise means little to people playing the game and being given a different scenario...you know like the way the choice of councilor was handled in the books

So how and why does the Alliance arrest and detain a spectre who saved the galaxy twice and didn't blow up a star system?

So that Shepard's on Earth in preparation for ME3's opening sequence, six months pass so the Reapers have time to arrive, and the squad is split up and sent away around the galaxy so they can cameo later on.

Oh, you were looking for a logical, narritve reason? Cerberus involvement. Shepard and Cerberus's noble intentions don't exactly matter, since Cerberus are still terrorists. 

I don't think Shepard should have let themselves get arrested or agree to stay if they knew they'd be sitting around on Earth for six months, but I can understand why they'd be arrested or taken in by the Alliance at least at first. 

"Cerberus involvement" doesn't make sense since the council and alliance are fully aware of it during ME2 and do nothing about it. They could've easily arrested him then and there on the citadel.

I think it makes perfect sense. The Council and the Alliance are pretty well renowned for brushing problems under the rug. It was convenient to let Shepard run around the Terminus Systems, dealing with the Collectors, out of sight and out of mind. 

When the Collectors are actually defeated, however, I competely understand them wanting answers. They don't know the specifics of what Shepard's been up to. Working with terrorists, flying a ship based on secret military technology, fighting an old, enigmatic galactic institution like the Collectors, talking to notorious warlords like Aria and Wrex/Wreav, hiring all sorts of dangerous and wanted criminals into their little gang, the list goes on. And that's not mentioning the fact that Shepard died two years before.

All I'm saying is that the Alliance and the Council have plenty of reasons to bring Shepard in after the Collectors are defeated. I don't necessarily think it makes sense for everyone's Shepard to hand over the Normandy and let themselves be tried and detained for months on end, if they even let themselves be arrested in the firs place.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 10 décembre 2013 - 05:57 .

[Steelcan]

@NightMammoth, him being brought in is not the issue, the issue is that ALL Shepards willingly turned themselves in

[Dean_the_Young]

Greylycantrope wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...
Talk about railroading.

Now we know how TIM feels

ME1: "I hate kittens! Make mutant-kitten zombie soldiers!"
ME2: "I don't particularly care for kittens, but I can see a use for keeping them if it advances human interests."
ME3: "Rarh! Indoctrinated TIM curb stomp kittens to control Reapers! Rarh!"

[CynicalShep]

AlanC9 wrote...

CynicalShep wrote...

But he was needed to save their gullible backsides

Right. You arrest terrorists after they're no longer useful, not before.

Nah, apparently they all turn themselves in when they're "done"

[Erez Kristal]

Creating kitten killers doesnt mean tim will unleash them on the kittens. :-0

[JamesFaith]

crimzontearz wrote...

Right and the game EXPOSES that to me thus while Bioware canonized the fact Udina is councilor in ME3 they never canonized HOW and even if the books state one way or the other it matters very little to players who are exposed to their logically unfolding scenario

There are two versions of Udina and Anderson's Codex entries for both situations and when Anderson stepped down as Councilor, there is brief explanation how it was happenned. 

[CDR David Shepard]

I say this from experience...it's better to think of ways that the scenario can make sense, instead of dwelling on how it doesn't make sense.

[Nole]

When are they going to permaban you, erezike?

[CronoDragoon]

3DandBeyond wrote...

There's Saren getting the upgrades from Sovereign and then later on instantly going full synthetic. 

Yes, let's gloss over this and skip right to how ME3's story was bad.

Between making humans a Council race, this crap, and the mind-blowing logic of Anderson and your squad that you are obviously dead and they needn't even check before you run up a pile of rubble, ME1's ending is lame but gets a pass because it fulfills power fantasies. Whatever. I like ME1 but the nostalgia is pretty gross sometimes.

[Argentoid]

erezike wrote...

It was never a problem with me2. the problem started with me3.
You are welcome to check the reimagined site to see how we approached that issue.

It is. ME2 should have been about trying to find a way to deal with the Reaper threat, not piff-paff Collectors. We could have avoided things like the Crucible, for example.

EDIT: I just read what you stated about the Normandy crash site being so "tidy". It's a gameplay design choice: Would you like to have Shepard roam the site for 2 KM? Yeah! So much fun!

Modifié par Argentoid, 10 décembre 2013 - 06:45 .

[AlanC9]

Argentoid wrote...

It is. ME2 should have been about trying to find a way to deal with the Reaper threat, not piff-paff Collectors. We could have avoided things like the Crucible, for example.

Assuming Bio had ever wanted to avoid using something like the Crucible, of course.

[CronoDragoon]

Argentoid wrote...

It is. ME2 should have been about trying to find a way to deal with the Reaper threat, not piff-paff Collectors. We could have avoided things like the Crucible, for example.

I actually like the idea behind the Crucible, so instead I'd suggest centering ME2 around the Crucible somehow (and probably make the Catalyst the end plot twist for 2 so it isn't as "wtf end of of series" in 3), so it isn't as convenient in ME3.

[LinksOcarina]

CronoDragoon wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

There's Saren getting the upgrades from Sovereign and then later on instantly going full synthetic. 

Yes, let's gloss over this and skip right to how ME3's story was bad.

Between making humans a Council race, this crap, and the mind-blowing logic of Anderson and your squad that you are obviously dead and they needn't even check before you run up a pile of rubble, ME1's ending is lame but gets a pass because it fulfills power fantasies. Whatever. I like ME1 but the nostalgia is pretty gross sometimes.

Yeah. Pretty much. It is why I stand back and look at the trilogy with reverence because despite all the complaints and issues people can have, it's still a damn fun game series to experience. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 10 décembre 2013 - 08:05 .

[Han Shot First]

dreamgazer wrote...

And because no one in authority was trying to even prepare for any Reaper invasion, the writers had to create this foolish scenario where there was no possible way, outside of the little God-boy and the crucible to create a real path to victory.

That's less a problem with ME3 and more a problem with ME2, really.

Agreed.

The problem here isn't with Mass Effect 3, it is with Mass Effect 2 retconning the results of Mass Effect 1. At the end of Mass Effect 1 Shepard had the Council's full backing and support against the Reapers. In ME2 they're back to air quoting and treating Shepard like he's the Ancient Aliens guy.

The only reason this was done was to shoehorn Shepard into Cerberus.

The sad part is that retconning the Council wasn't necessary. Instead they could have had the war with the Reaper-allied Geth still be raging fiercely. Meanwhile isolated colonies outside of Council space are vanishing. Shepard is convinced the vanishing colonies are linked in some way to the Reapers, the Council (except for Anderson) disagrees and thinks its a distraction from the real threat...the Geth, and that a military excursion into the Terminus might spark a war with the Terminus Systems.

And there you go, Shepard has a reason to ally with Cerberus without the Council denying the existence of Reapers. They just disagree on where resources should be allocated.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 10 décembre 2013 - 08:29 .

[Nero Narmeril]

The problem here isn't with Mass Effect 3, it is with Mass Effect 2 retconning the results of Mass Effect 1. At the end of Mass Effect 1 Shepard had the Council's full backing and support against the Reapers. In ME2 they're back to air quoting and treating Shepard like he's the Ancient Aliens guy.

You know the Council cannot officialy confirm existence of the Reapers, because there would be lot of 'hurr durr, we're gonna die, so let's have anarchy, because there's no hope for us' from citizens?

Also - Shepard is officialy dead (MIA at best) and there's no proof he's real (word of officer who takes bribes is... not legitimate at least).

[Rotward]

The whole point of me2 was to retcon me1's ending, right down to Shepard surviving. I really, really disliked me2. I played right after finishing me1, so it went something like this:

End of me1: Oh hey, Shepard got hit by the reaper fragment, guess Shepard's dead. No, wait, that whole sequence was pointless, Shepard's alive. Hey, at least people believe in the reapers now.

Start of me2: Guess they did want Shepard dead after all. Cerberus brings Shepard back, but no longer a specter, no longer in the alliance, and no one believes in the reapers anymore.

Me3 is just the culmination of mistakes that began in the end of me1, which was god awful too. The whole series was riddled with flaws. The character design and gameplay are fantastic, and people overlook how terrible the story is.

Modifié par Rotward, 10 décembre 2013 - 08:57 .

[Han Shot First]

Nero Narmeril wrote...

The problem here isn't with Mass Effect 3, it is with Mass Effect 2 retconning the results of Mass Effect 1. At the end of Mass Effect 1 Shepard had the Council's full backing and support against the Reapers. In ME2 they're back to air quoting and treating Shepard like he's the Ancient Aliens guy.

You know the Council cannot officialy confirm existence of the Reapers, because there would be lot of 'hurr durr, we're gonna die, so let's have anarchy, because there's no hope for us' from citizens?

Also - Shepard is officialy dead (MIA at best) and there's no proof he's real (word of officer who takes bribes is... not legitimate at least).

There is a difference between not officially confirming the existence of the Reapers to the general public, and not believing they exist. The Council does the latter in Mass Effect 2.

[CronoDragoon]

Han Shot First wrote...
There is a difference between not officially confirming the existence of the Reapers to the general public, and not believing they exist. The Council does the latter in Mass Effect 2.

According to the Citadel archives, that's incorrect. When Shepard's spectre status is confirmed, the archive reclassifies Sovereign from a geth ship to a Reaper. They always believed the Reapers didn't actually exist.

[Han Shot First]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...
There is a difference between not officially confirming the existence of the Reapers to the general public, and not believing they exist. The Council does the latter in Mass Effect 2.

According to the Citadel archives, that's incorrect. When Shepard's spectre status is confirmed, the archive reclassifies Sovereign from a geth ship to a Reaper. They always believed the Reapers didn't actually exist.

The Citadel DLC introduced a retcon to try and whitewash some of the more mind-boggling actions of the Council in Mass Effect 2. Unfortunately it only created more problems, as the Council stonewalling Shepard and the lack of general military preparedness makes even less sense if they believe the Reapers exist.

As of Mass Effect 2 the Council didn't believe in the Reapers. This was even carried over into Mass Effect 3, before DLC. Garrus for example tells a story about how he pulled strings with his father to get a Task Force assembled that might have helped the Turians prepare for the Reapers. Had the Council believed in the Reapers, Garrus would not have had to work outside the system to get things done.

The Citadel DLC introduced a rewrite.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 10 décembre 2013 - 09:47 .

[Rotward]

Han Shot First wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...
There is a difference between not officially confirming the existence of the Reapers to the general public, and not believing they exist. The Council does the latter in Mass Effect 2.

According to the Citadel archives, that's incorrect. When Shepard's spectre status is confirmed, the archive reclassifies Sovereign from a geth ship to a Reaper. They always believed the Reapers didn't actually exist.

The Citadel DLC introduced a retcon to try and whitewash some of the more mind-boggling actions of the Council in Mass Effect 2. Unfortunately it only created more problems, as the Council stonewalling Shepard and the lack of general military preparedness makes even less sense if they believe the Reapers exist.

As of Mass Effect 2 the Council didn't believe in the Reapers. The Citadel DLC introduced a rewrite.

Retcon-ception at its finest.