177 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

No, two choices to reflect the design of ME3's dialogue wheel, which occurred three times.

And the options in ME1, at the very least, were equally as vague and could be classified as "auto-dialogue".

[Massa FX]

Gimme a ship, a loyal crew, and the galaxy to roam. I don't want to lead nations, or be any type of god. Just a person that has options to be an angelic goody 2 shoes or a vicious ball busting **** and everything in-between.

[ruggly]

People hate Badimal Hackspit?

[AlexMBrennan]

In ME3, My Shepard who is obviously no longer mine lets the Grand Admiral take his spot on his ship...

Shepard's isn't a pony either, so if you expected Shepard to be the supreme grand master chief general or whatever then that's too bad for you. Shepard's a soldier, and that means there is a chain of command and I seriously doubt the Alliance military would promote a guy that far if he has that much disdain for the organisation that he'd revert to being a psychopathic thug given the slightest excuse (being made a spectre)

[Remix-General Aetius]

I hate Hackett and the Alliance overall. If I made my own ME movie with myself as Shepard, I'd kick the lot of them to the kerb in ME2, especially after I was treated post-ME1, making me out to be some raving lunatic.

"I don't answer to any of you anymore, I'm dead!"

I laugh at and spit in the face of the chain of command.

Modifié par TheGarden2010, 25 janvier 2014 - 05:15 .

[Hazegurl]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

In ME3, My Shepard who is obviously no longer mine lets the Grand Admiral take his spot on his ship...

Shepard's isn't a pony either, so if you expected Shepard to be the supreme grand master chief general or whatever then that's too bad for you. Shepard's a soldier, and that means there is a chain of command and I seriously doubt the Alliance military would promote a guy that far if he has that much disdain for the organisation that he'd revert to being a psychopathic thug given the slightest excuse (being made a spectre)

This is why renegades should have been given a choice to forsake the military altogether and form their own group.  The alliance paragons can keep reporting to Hackett.

[MACharlie1]

They could have made Hackett a much better character - if he stayed like his ME1 counterpart.

Should NEVER have seen his face in ME2. And we shouldn't have seen it until his coming on the Normandy. On top of that, he should have either been indoctrinated or a Cerberus agent. Point is - should have betrayed Shepard.

[RangerSG]

Hazegurl wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

In ME3, My Shepard who is obviously no longer mine lets the Grand Admiral take his spot on his ship...

Shepard's isn't a pony either, so if you expected Shepard to be the supreme grand master chief general or whatever then that's too bad for you. Shepard's a soldier, and that means there is a chain of command and I seriously doubt the Alliance military would promote a guy that far if he has that much disdain for the organisation that he'd revert to being a psychopathic thug given the slightest excuse (being made a spectre)

This is why renegades should have been given a choice to forsake the military altogether and form their own group.  The alliance paragons can keep reporting to Hackett.

Meh. I love it how 'renegade' gets equated by people to 'not military.' Even after appeals to the military chain-of-command repeaedly fall in the renegade options. 

Not to mention that all these space-pirate ME3 love affairs never address how you'd bring enough strength to defeat the Reapers.

I wouldn't mind a Firefly style story in the ME universe. But ME3 wasn't the time for that sort of game. 

[Hazegurl]

RangerSG wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

In ME3, My Shepard who is obviously no longer mine lets the Grand Admiral take his spot on his ship...

Shepard's isn't a pony either, so if you expected Shepard to be the supreme grand master chief general or whatever then that's too bad for you. Shepard's a soldier, and that means there is a chain of command and I seriously doubt the Alliance military would promote a guy that far if he has that much disdain for the organisation that he'd revert to being a psychopathic thug given the slightest excuse (being made a spectre)

This is why renegades should have been given a choice to forsake the military altogether and form their own group.  The alliance paragons can keep reporting to Hackett.

Meh. I love it how 'renegade' gets equated by people to 'not military.' Even after appeals to the military chain-of-command repeaedly fall in the renegade options. 

Not to mention that all these space-pirate ME3 love affairs never address how you'd bring enough strength to defeat the Reapers.

I wouldn't mind a Firefly style story in the ME universe. But ME3 wasn't the time for that sort of game. 

The majority of the renegade options seem to fall along the DIY approach more than "run it by the Alliance" actually there are several Paragon/Alliance options while the Renegade options in that same wheel is "DIY"

Who is gathering all alliances in ME3? Who is making appeals to the Council? Who acquired the Crucible plans? Who has the Shadow Broker on his ship? Not saying the Alliance isn't doing anything at all but that was Shepard's operation more than it ever was the Alliance. The Alliance participated they most certainly did not bring the strength to defeat the Reapers. All those allies reporting in are there because of Shepard. Even squadmates quickly correct Anderson on Priority Earth when he tries to give credit to the Alliance.

[ImaginaryMatter]

To be fair the Alliance did manage to get the Crucible built without the Reapers ever finding it and the massive disadvantage of cut supply lines.

Modifié par ImaginaryMatter, 25 janvier 2014 - 04:57 .

[o Ventus]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

To be fair the Alliance did manage to get the Crucible built without the Reapers ever finding it and the massive disadvantage of cut supply lines.

The Alliance, plus every single friendly unit involved in the war, regardless of faction.

[Hazegurl]

True and they were the ones who found the plans and believed in it enough to begin work on it. But they did have help.  What I also like about Alliance is that they seemed to believe Shepard more than anyone about the Reapers. Even though they didn't do any real prep for them, which knocks them down some points. lol!

Modifié par Hazegurl, 25 janvier 2014 - 05:35 .

[Massa FX]

Hazegurl wrote...

True and they were the ones who found the plans and believed in it enough to begin work on it. But they did have help.  What I also like about Alliance is that they seemed to believe Shepard more than anyone about the Reapers. Even though they didn't do any real prep for them, which knocks them down some points. lol!

They believed Shepard enough to throw her in detention for 6 months. Until the Reapers invaded and they needed her again.

By Bioware's own codex, Spectres report to no-one but the Council. Not Alliance. If anything, Shepard should have ended up testifying before a Citadel Council, not the Alliance brass.

[KikoChuN7]

My renegade Shep is irked by Hackett because he claims to "trust my judgement" and then nag/second-guess everything I do. I thought he was tolerable for the most part. Until the Arrival DLC, where he got uppity because I had to destroy the relay after I took the time to rescue his psycho friend. I don't like being bossed around by a holographic old man. *humph*

I love Anderson though.

[congokong]

shodiswe wrote...

congokong wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

I don't hate Hackett. In fact, I really like him.

However, I do find a few elements of him to be a bit shady. Every one of those elements has good reasoning behind it though.

Works well enough for ME1-3.

But yes, Shepard is probably more of a tool to him than anything else. Funny enough, I think TIM is being more bluntly honest (in ME3, once the charade is dropped) about that than Hackett/Anderson

For the record, I don't think Hackett is a bad character for the series. I just really don't like him.

And that's just it. Hackett simply sees Shepard as a tool and yet Shepard is always doing him favors. What does Hackett give in return? He holds off tipping off the batarians that Shepard "acted alone" in Arrival? As I said, he backstabs my Shepard several times in small and big ways.

About TIM; he sees Shepard as a tool just as much as Hackett but at least gives Shepard some appreciation. Maybe it's because I'm not in the military but I feel people need appreciation. It's an emotional need. Hackett is the opposite of someone like Liara or Chakwas.

Shepard knew what the price for discovery would be, Shepard could decline taking the mission and blame if the Batarians learned of the human involvement.

Shepard chooses to bear the burden of that mission, it's not something you have to do.
It's not a stab in the back if you have been told what will happen beforehand if you are discovered and how sensitive it is.
Your choice, there is no backstabbing you were told what was involved beforehand.

If you refuse Hacket sends a squad of marines instead that suceeds with the mission, but they die in the process.

Shepard wasn't discovered; as in captured by the batarians. There was enough evidence for a witchhunt as Hackett puts it so he decides to sell Shepard out as a lone infiltrator to appease the batarians.

[congokong]

StreetMagic wrote...

Torfan seems to meld so well with a pissed off Vanguard (maybe a colonist?). It's all about charging in and close combat assault. I can just see it.. charging in there, beating the crap out of them face to face and then executing them with a shotgun straight to their ugly batarian heads (ahem.. sorry getting into character here).

Then to top it off, the side mission with Major Kyle melds well with a biotic. Maybe he flipped out and formed a cult for biotics, because he saw how ruthless a biotic Shep was. Maybe he thought he could guide them better.

That's just my take though. What this has to do with Hackett, I don't know. Hackett's always giving you missions to take out biotics though, coincidentally.

edit: I shouldn't say "take out". He wants you to help them, of course. Just need the persuasion checks to make it work. I think both Anderson and Hackett see a future in human biotics.. especially Anderson, what with hiring Alenko and (potentially) Shep as senior officers. Then his stories with Kahlee. But maybe Hackett deals with it more  impersonally, and uses you more as a tool. Ruthless Biotic Shep would be seen as a potent killer. Much like going Renegade on Jack in her Pragia mission - you can tell her she's just a killer and nothing more. Maybe Hackett doesn't know better and this is how he approaches you in ME1.

Voila. That's my justification on why Hackett is a dick in ME1. :happy:

Ironically the Shepard I mentioned in my OP is a vanguard specifically for that reason. Also it's fun. It's the most ruthless class and fits well with Torfan.

[congokong]

RatThing wrote...

For me the Butcher of Torfan fits perfectly with the colonist background. And not just because Shepard seeks revenge for the death of her family (my Butcher of Torfan is female). We learn that on Mindoir Alliance Marines were present but didn't / couldn't intervene. In her view it could look like the Alliance sacrifised the civilians to save the soldiers.
So on Torfan she basically did what the Marines on Mindoir didn't do, sacrifice soldiers' lives for the sake of victory (and security for the colonists). This background combination shaped my whole renegade character (also with a little inspiration from the character Nascimento from Tropa de Elite). She wasn't some thug or villain, in fact she hated that kind of people. She was a security fanatic and someone who is willing to do sacrifices and terrible things if they serve the right purpose.

That's why I chose that background. Mindoir was Shepard's motivator for taking part in the brutal campaign to end the batarian slavers and explains why she was so merciless in killing those trying to surrender (not prisoners as some claim) in the final battle on Torfan. At that point because of the long conflict and her desire for vengeance/justice for Mindoir Shepard believed negotiations were long past. And I can't blame her. They only surrendered when the war was truly over. All they were doing was trying to save their skin at that point. Of course this is all based on Emily Wong's one comment that Shepard did these things. The codex says nothing of it.

[congokong]

FlyingSquirrel wrote...

RatThing wrote...
Also what comes to mind is the battle with Sovereign at the end, when some Alliance captain says they need to fall back because Sovereign is too strong. Hackett replies to this "Negative. Take this monster down, no matter the cost." This is a little "Torfan style" for me. I've always seen Hackett as slightly renegade in contrast to paragon Andersson, so for my renegade'ish Shepard he was a little like a mentor. 

I'd argue that the typical Paragon/Renegade divisions don't apply in quite the same way in that situation, where we're led to believe that Sovereign establishing full control of the Citadel will mean the immediate beginning of an invasion for which the galaxy clearly isn't ready. If you pick "Concentrate on Sovereign," for example, you get +8 Paragon and +9 Renegade, which is about right IMO - it's not as if Shepard is saying the Council is worthless, just that the tactical priority should be on stopping Sovereign. Obviously, we know as players that it is in fact possible to save the Ascension *and* stop Sovereign, but in terms of Shepard's in-character perspective, a Paragon could still plausibly think that trying to do both is too risky.

So Hackett may simply think that if they were to retreat or wait for more reinforcements, Sovereign will have already started the invasion in the meantime. For that matter, Anderson orders Hammer into a rush for the beam in ME3 that he openly acknowledges is going to get many of them killed. I expect he'd have given the same order as Hackett in the battle against Sovereign.

Torfan was apparently a raid on batarian slavers who, while they may be thoroughly loathsome, did not pose the same level of immediate existential threat to the entire galaxy. So I'd say Shepard pressing ahead with the attack in that situation even after losing a huge portion of the squad is a little more uniquely callous and single-minded, and more typical of the Renegade choices presented throughout the series.

Realistically most of the major paragon choices in the games are stupid. But because we know as gamers we can have our cake and eat it too we do things like save the council and stop Soverign. If you play as a Shepard who doesn't have a crystal ball into the future you'd be making mostly renegade choices I think.

And unlike Hackett who just sends people to die to stop Sovereign and open the Citadel arms Shepard actually LEAD the assault on Torfan. And yet Hackett judges Shepard for Torfan?! Yes, the slavers weren't a galactic threat but they were a major one and they couldn't just be ignored.

And what has Hackett done in his career for Shepard the spectre who saves the galaxy to take Hackett's orders and do him continous favors only to get backstabbed as thanks?

Modifié par congokong, 26 janvier 2014 - 12:19 .

[Hazegurl]

Massa FX wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

True and they were the ones who found the plans and believed in it enough to begin work on it. But they did have help.  What I also like about Alliance is that they seemed to believe Shepard more than anyone about the Reapers. Even though they didn't do any real prep for them, which knocks them down some points. lol!

They believed Shepard enough to throw her in detention for 6 months. Until the Reapers invaded and they needed her again.

By Bioware's own codex, Spectres report to no-one but the Council. Not Alliance. If anything, Shepard should have ended up testifying before a Citadel Council, not the Alliance brass.

That's what I ment by them not preparing for the invasion. You have two high ranking members of the alliance (Hackett and Anderson) who believed Shepard and yet the Alliance still allow him to get locked up and did nothing until they were there.

I agree that Shepard should have had to deal with the Council not the Alliance and if the Council isn't looking for him then the Alliance should kiss his a**. I think a Shepard who got reinstated as a Spectre in ME2 should have not faced an Alliance detention.

[Nightwriter]

I never played half the content you're mad about, so it's hard to relate, but if your intent was to play a "reasonable
renegade" I don't doubt that you walked away unhappy. Fear that the game would not allow me to roleplay Torfan any other way but "I'm a cold-hearted bastard" is what made me shy away from it in my first playthrough.

Assuming you have dick motives for hard actions is a mistake Mass Effect often makes. Still stuck in that Dark Side/Light Side, Open Palm/Closed Fist mindset. So yes, by the time you have 85% renegade the game assumes you're a douche and Hackett is surprised you didn't go on a douche rampage.

As for the rest of your assertions about Hackett, they just seem off base to me. He never seemed overly preoccupied with keeping his hands clean. He's not above manipulation or cover-ups. He seems willing to do unpopular things. A Shadow Broker file made it clear the Alliance brass were putting pressure on him to put a team out to capture Shepard, and Hackett just gave them a Sten "No." He sacrificed the entire Second Fleet to the Reapers to save the rest.

And I think you confuse "sitting on the sidelines" with "leading". Hackett is an admiral. Admirals rarely perform the role of ground troops. Admirals also don't become admirals without seeing plenty of action on the way up. Hackett fought in the First Contact War and was on the frontier of exploration beyond our solar system. I don't really see him as a layabout simply because he is in a position of leadership now, as Shepard would probably have been had he stayed in the Alliance until he was Hackett's age.

I don't find it particularly strange that Hackett is liked. He's voiced by Lance Henriksen. He's practical. I always felt like he was part of the machine that deals with political BS rather than part of the machine that manufactures it. He just sort of shows up when stuff needs to get done, and doesn't mince words. He's not forced on you as buddy-buddy mentor quite as much as Anderson, which helps circumvent everyone's "I hate characters the writers want me to like" button. He is introduced in ME1 as the source of much player choice feedback. Tbh I think I just still associate him with that feeling of anticipation I got right before I activated the galaxy map to talk to him about how I handled my UNC mission. "I haz DIS outcome, SPEAK WORDS. Speak HENRIKSEN words."

[FlyingSquirrel]

RatThing wrote...

We know little about Torfan so it's hard to evaluate the situation. However, the Batarians were definitely a threat to humanity (Mindoir, Elysium) and it was the victory on Torfan that ended or at least reduced the threat. So Shepards actions there can be seen as justified and not just typically renegade/evil (depending on how much his/her actions actually contributed to that victory).

Yes, but it's not as if the batarian slavers were attacking another colony every single day, and if the Alliance already had a presence on the planet, they could have likely taken some measures to prevent the slavers from escaping while waiting for backup. All I'm saying is that it didn't sound like quite the same "now-or-never" situation as existed with Sovereign and the Citadel. But you're right that this is all kind of speculative since we aren't told many details about Torfan. (That's why I assumed that it was simply a very bloody operation as opposed to Shepard actually executing people who were trying to surrender, especially since nobody besides Emily Wong seems to have any inkling of that.)

Modifié par FlyingSquirrel, 27 janvier 2014 - 04:18 .

[jamesp81]

I always thought Hackett was one of the best recurring characters.  JMO