1765 réponses à ce sujet

[DeinonSlayer]

Yeah, I don't think my politics are relevant to this thread, and I definitely don't need to be insulted for them. There's a reason I ignored that guy.

I actually do hate Ashley though. I was honestly expecting a lot more confrontation in ME3, and an ability to be a lot harsher and critical of her and her views/judgement.

If they were going to give us the option to be pro-Cerberus in ME2, it'd have been nice to have the option to at least behave as though we had been in ME3 - it was blisteringly clear from the beginning of Mars where they were putting us on the Cerberus-Alliance spectrum.

Be sure to snap your heels together and salute that garbled transmission, Shepard.

Hackett gets killed at the beginning and Petrovsky replaces him. I would be happy with that.

I like the way you think.

[themikefest]

I'd be curious how many VS-mancers stayed loyal in their ME2 playthroughs.

I did. The one trilogy run with Ashley as my LI from beginning to end.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I'd be curious how many VS-mancers stayed loyal in their ME2 playthroughs.

 

I was never a huge Ashley fan in ME1. I only romanced her because she was the only human. I really had no care for her character, beliefs, or attitude. After her reaction in ME2, her fate in ME3 was sealed. 

[DeinonSlayer]

I did. The one trilogy run with Ashley as my LI from beginning to end.

I got ninjamanced by Ashley in my first playthrough of ME1 and discarded that Shepard before Horizon (looked more like a skeleton than anything... f$@&ing cheek gaunt...). My canon FemShep was loyal to Kaidan throughout, and I'm working on a Vanguard MShep who's loyal to Ashley right now.

Granted, just about every model used for her in ME3 has been replaced by various mods...

[dreamgazer]

I'd be curious how many VS-mancers stayed loyal in their ME2 playthroughs.

 

Ditched Ashley for Jack without a moment's hesitation. 

[Iakus]

It's not speculation and headcanon. It's questioning the relevance of what having these would be. He doesn't say any of those things because there's no point to saying any of it. And yes, he can defend his position. He really shouldn't have too, considering what just happened. And even when he does try, Ashley shoots him down. What more do you want? The failure of communication is not on Shepard's end, it's on Ashley's end. Her mind's made up as soon as 'Cerberus' has left his mouth. If she can't be bothered to listen to someone she's worked closely with, and supposedly has deep feelings for, especially after said ordeal, then maybe she's not worthy of him or joining the crew or even being put in any relevant position against the Reapers.

 

 

And yet you expect her to fall into line as soon as Shepard says "Reapers."  Because that's the only lame explanation that comes out of Shepard's mouth.  Well, besides "I've got an idea, go AWOL and come with me!" *facepalm*

 

If Shepard's going to work for terrorists, yeah, he has to explain himself to the Alliance soldier he's talking to.  How Cerberus, the Collectors, and the Reapers fit together.  And why the hell Shepard's working with Cerberus rather than the Alliance or the Council.

[DeinonSlayer]

I wonder if Spectres have something akin to the Right of Conscription? Seems Shepard's companions get away with breaking regs all the time, like carrying arms on the Citadel in ME2.

[wolfhowwl]

The Cerberus alignment was probably the single greatest mistake in the trilogy to me. When all these jokers start bugging Shepard about working with them, I wish I could pull a Tyrion and tell them that I should have let the Collectors build that baby reaper and snuff out their worthless lives.

 

The whole Cerberus plot was a dumb, forced idea that shouldn't have made it past the first draft. The execution was awful in its own right but it also stunted development for an entire game.

 

Apparently this is what happens when people are obsessed with their creation and get appointed lead writer.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

And yet you expect her to fall into line as soon as Shepard says "Reapers."  Because that's the only lame explanation that comes out of Shepard's mouth.  Well, besides "I've got an idea, go AWOL and come with me!" *facepalm*

 

If Shepard's going to work for terrorists, yeah, he has to explain himself to the Alliance soldier he's talking to.  How Cerberus, the Collectors, and the Reapers fit together.  And why the hell Shepard's working with Cerberus rather than the Alliance or the Council.

 

Cerberus aren't terrorists. And yes, I do expect her to actually jump in line behind the Reapers. She knows the stakes with fighting them and preparing. And she knows that her alliance and the Council aren't doing anything, and even if they do, they aren't going to do enough. 

[MassivelyEffective0730]

The whole Cerberus plot was a dumb, forced idea that shouldn't have made it past the first draft. The execution was awful in its own right but it also stunted development for an entire game.

 

Apparently this is what happens when people are obsessed with their creation and get appointed lead writer.

 

I disagree completely. I believe it was actually a very good opportunity to see what was going on outside the alliance and to look at alternative methods of coming ahead to beat the Reapers and bring advancements in science and technology.

[Barquiel]

The whole Cerberus plot was a dumb, forced idea that shouldn't have made it past the first draft. The execution was awful in its own right but it also stunted development for an entire game.
 
Apparently this is what happens when people are obsessed with their creation and get appointed lead writer.

That's one of the main reasons why I welcome fresh eyes to the franchise. No Cerberus 2.0, I hope.

[SporkFu]

I'd be curious how many VS-mancers stayed loyal in their ME2 playthroughs.

I've done one romance with each VS, from beginning to end. Staying with Ash in ME2 was tougher than staying with Kaidan, probably because I only did the Kaidan romance just to have done it. 

[Iakus]

Cerberus aren't terrorists. And yes, I do expect her to actually jump in line behind the Reapers. She knows the stakes with fighting them and preparing. And she knows that her alliance and the Council aren't doing anything, and even if they do, they aren't going to do enough. 

 

And Cerberus will?  Ash has seen firsthand the terrible things they have done.  And none of the benefits.  they are branded terrorists and she has seen absolutely nothing to disabuse her of the notion.  And certainly nothing to show they will be any better at fighting the Reapers than the Alliance

 

And you are expecting a faithful Alliance soldier to simply up and leave because "The Shepard" says so?  With no supporting data?

[Bob from Accounting]

I remember playing it in the ME3 demo, thinking "is this what it's going to be?" Lots and lots of autodialogue, wave after wave of identical enemies. Moar dakka.

 

Reading this, a person would almost think that 'waves of identical enemies' are somehow an uncommon thing in shooters and indicative of some sort of problem.

 

But I suppose I'm expecting a little too much by thinking people should recognize how silly such whining is.

[Fixers0]

Oh, how good I remember the ceberus railroading debate, Somehow, the people iIargued with were never able to provide a reasonable justification as to how Shepard ended up working for Cerberus.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

And Cerberus will?  Ash has seen firsthand the terrible things they have done.  And none of the benefits.  they are branded terrorists and she has seen absolutely nothing to disabuse her of the notion.  And certainly nothing to show they will be any better at fighting the Reapers than the Alliance

 

And you are expecting a faithful Alliance soldier to simply up and leave because "The Shepard" says so?  With no supporting data?

 

Yes, they will. They're willing to do the terrible things that Ashley has seen. They're willing to due a lot dirtier things to beat the Reapers as well. They're branded terrorists by people who don't know what a terrorist is. I don't know what she's seen that shows that Cerberus would fare less well against the Reapers. Tough to do worse than nothing, which the alliance is doing.

 

No, I guess not. That's why I don't want 'faithful alliance soldiers'. They're too bound up in self righteousness do ever do anything that they need to do. What supporting data does she need? The Collectors just attacked. The alliance is doing nothing to stop them. Reaper involvement or no, Shepard is doing something to stop them with Cerberus. Ashley is conscientiously deciding that, unless and until the alliance says otherwise, the Collectors aren't a threat.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Oh, how good I remember the ceberus railroading debate, Somehow, the people iIargued with were never able to provide a reasonable justification as to how Shepard ended up working for Cerberus.

 

What reasonable justification do you need? Shepard died, and Liara recovered his body and gave it to Cerberus to resurrect. Seems simple enough to me.

[Fixers0]

What reasonable justification do you need? Shepard died, and Liara recovered his body and gave it to Cerberus to resurrect. Seems simple enough to me.

 

Oh, boy is there something wrong with that, and it's just get's worse after that.

[wolfhowwl]

I don't mind Ash not joining up with Shepard for ME2.  I don't even mind her being suspicious of Shepard.  What I do mind is that it was done in such a clumsy, heavy-handed manner.

 

Ashley is being used as a vehicle for the game to call the player out on its own retconning and railroading.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Oh, boy is there something wrong with that, and it's just get's worse after that.

 

I don't see anything wrong with it. Do you?

[Fixers0]

I don't see anything wrong with it. Do you?

 

I can't get into a discussion right now, but it  basicly comes down to classic narrative stupidity, that is everything between the opening of ME2 and Freedom's progress.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I can't get into a discussion right now, but it  basicly comes down to classic narrative stupidity, that is everything between the opening of ME2 and Freedom's progress.

 

Beyond a few hiccups (namely the really rapid drop of being thrown straight into the action and no exposition or reflection by Shepard covering his death and resurrection) and the admittedly Rasputin-esque death of Shepard in the intro (which bordered on hilarious overkill, since there's no chance in reality that there'd be any semblance of a body to recover), I still don't see the problems you do with that. We'll have to talk about it later.

[dreamgazer]

If Shepard's going to work for terrorists, yeah, he has to explain himself to the Alliance soldier he's talking to.

Cerberus aren't terrorists.

Haven't seen one of these in a while.

[wolfhowwl]

Reading this, a person would almost think that 'waves of identical enemies' are somehow an uncommon thing in shooters and indicative of some sort of problem.

 

But I suppose I'm expecting a little too much by thinking people should recognize how silly such whining is.

 

The problem here is that a climactic moment of the trilogy, one that players have been looking forward to for years, is wasted on a shitty tutorial. This was a moment to go all out on setpieces instead we get lame combat against a handful of cannibals. How disappointing.

 

Whoever made this decision is pretty inept.

 

The cutscene is also laughably bad.

[Bob from Accounting]

This is evidently a very complex idea for you, but tutorials exist for a reason. Developers are thankfully smart enough to understand that not all players are familiar with the previous game or with third person shooters in general. In addition, it's a very delusional argument. The opening level has plenty of setpieces. Apparently you're upset with the premise of a game based on combat having combat?