264 réponses à ce sujet

[RangerSG]

Invisible Man wrote...

if you didn't do the arrival dlc, and played the by the book paragon in me2, I have a hard time with Anderson's "the s**t you've done... any other soldier would have been tried, court-martialed and discharged" (also note being court-martialed is being tried, no need to say it twice)
I wish my shepard could have replied something like... name me one thing... I'm only asking for one you could court-martial me over!

I agree. My idealist paragon who didn't do Arrival really wanted to say the same thing. And then remind them that Spectres are outside the Alliance Chain of Command. And if the Alliance didn't repsect his judgment, they shouldn't have recommended him to be the first human Spectre.

[wright1978]

StreetMagic wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Well i'd have preferred to have seen Shep being waterboarded and tortured or as you say at least  the option to be p*ssed off in his/her quarters. Just being forced into happy chilling at Alliance Hq was annoying.

It's more than annoying. It kind of describes a lot of the personality switch in ME3 in general. Whoever wrote the new Shepard went out of their way to suppress negative emotions and held up patience and compliance and acting professional at all times. A lot of the "edge" of ME2 is gone. What we have now is a model soldier.

As for prisoners.. What's sad is I know they're capable of presenting things in cooler ways. Look how they introduced Jack in ME2. The minute I got on that ship, I couldn't wait to see what kind of angry prisoner this "Jack" was. And Shepard doesn't need to be even a fraction of that. Just having some balls would've been cool.

Anyways..

Yeah i really liked the ME2 approach where Shep's type of relationship with TIM and Cerberus is largely up to the player to establish via dialogue. I was lulled into believing it would be a similar approach in ME3 especially when Casey said it was possible to 'roleplay anti-alliance'. However instead they went for a fixed version of Shep.

[wright1978]

StreetMagic wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Yeah i really liked the ME2 approach where Shep's type of relationship with TIM and Cerberus is largely up to the player to establish via dialogue. I was lulled into believing it would be a similar approach in ME3 especially when Casey said it was possible to 'roleplay anti-alliance'. However instead they went for a fixed version of Shep.

Curious. When did Casey say that?

At one of the events before release where they were taking questions.

[wright1978]

StreetMagic wrote...

I can't think of even one minor instance when I can express anti-Alliance actions or views.

And I think I know the game's ins and outs well enough now. The only thing that comes to mind is.... avoiding scanning planets with Alliance "war assets". lol

Yep only way i can express my Shep's Anti-Alliance sentiments is via refusing to wear the uniform apart from those pre-ordained moments when they force it on Shep.

[wright1978]

StreetMagic wrote...

Personally, I don't want to be anti-Alliance. I still like the Alliance.. I just want to kick their asses a bit. Even if just verbally. The same as ME1. Hell, just about all of Kaidan's and Ashley's dialogue is about hashing out these viewpoints (either pro or con).

I am anti-Council though.

I want to be able to chafe at Alliance control just as i chafed at TIM's rather than the implied its a dream come true to be back in blue. A few dialogue options and a bit less auto-salute and i'd have felt a lot better able to carry forward my imported Shep.

[CrutchCricket]

StreetMagic wrote...
Personally, I don't want to be anti-Alliance. I still like the Alliance.. I just want to kick their asses a bit. Even if just verbally. The same as ME1. Hell, just about all of Kaidan's and Ashley's dialogue is about hashing out these viewpoints (either pro or con).

I am anti-Council though.

The Alliance is just as ineffectual, complacent and downright moronic as the Council. The only difference is Hackett and Anderson give it a slightly better face. I'd work with those two any day. Unfortunately they're not quite as in charge as they'd need to be for the Alliance to be worth it.

Though I would say the new council is slightly better than the old one, at least the Turian and Salarian Councilors. The former isn't as much of a dick as his predecessor and I appreciate the reaching out. And the latter knows better than to let a temper tantrum potentially cost the war. I know the same roles would play out with the old council as well but since I'll never see that, I mark it as the tiniest of improvements.

[FlyingSquirrel]

I think the Spectres are a bad idea as they are constituted and portrayed in the games. It seems like their mandate consists of, "Go do whatever you think is necessary, including breaking the law and murdering people if you see fit, but cross some vaguely defined line and we'll revoke your status and declare you an outlaw." There's way too much potential for abuse and capricious decisions, both by the Council *and* by the individual Spectres.

That's not to say that the Council doesn't need intelligence operatives or special forces, just that it would make more sense and be more ethical to have them operate under a structured agency with clear rules and guidelines. Actually, I imagine they probably do have that in addition to the Spectres.

We've only met a few Spectres over the course of the games, but it's not an especially encouraging picture from what we do see. Two of them (Saren and Tela Vasir) are thoroughly corrupt, ruthless bastards, and Saren not only attacked Eden Prime but managed to lay quite a bit of groundwork for the Reaper invasion before anyone caught on to what he was doing. Jondum Bau seems OK, and the Virmire survivor is new to the job but can be safely expected not to become another Saren or Vasir. As for Shepard, it depends a lot on the player's choices - there are opportunities for petty corruption in addition to the more extreme Renegade choices. So at best that's something like 3 out of 5 proving to be trustworthy and not abusing power.

(Though, maybe most Spectres are just out there quietly doing their jobs and thus aren't coming to Shepard's attention at any point.)

Modifié par FlyingSquirrel, 18 février 2014 - 08:33 .

[FlyingSquirrel]

RangerSG wrote...

Invisible Man wrote...

if you didn't do the arrival dlc, and played the by the book paragon in me2, I have a hard time with Anderson's "the s**t you've done... any other soldier would have been tried, court-martialed and discharged" (also note being court-martialed is being tried, no need to say it twice)
I wish my shepard could have replied something like... name me one thing... I'm only asking for one you could court-martial me over!

I agree. My idealist paragon who didn't do Arrival really wanted to say the same thing. And then remind them that Spectres are outside the Alliance Chain of Command. And if the Alliance didn't repsect his judgment, they shouldn't have recommended him to be the first human Spectre.

I interpreted it as just being about having worked with Cerberus in that context. If, for example, an American special forces soldier was reported KIA, then turned back up two years later working with Iranian intelligence and claiming that it was a temporary alliance against some terrorist group, my guess is that he gets thrown in the brig while the higher-ups try to sort this out and make sense of the story. Even if the operation was apparently successful and did not get any civilians killed (i.e. analogous to not doing Arrival), that guy probably wouldn't just get a pat on the back and an immediate reinstatement after turning himself in.

And Shepard is presumably still under the Alliance's jurisdiction as a citizen, if not as a soldier, at the time of ME2 and the start of ME3. I'm guessing that associating with Cerberus for any reason is a criminal offense under Alliance law.

[Reorte]

FlyingSquirrel wrote...

I think the Spectres are a bad idea as they are constituted and portrayed in the games. It seems like their mandate consists of, "Go do whatever you think is necessary, including breaking the law and murdering people if you see fit, but cross some vaguely defined line and we'll revoke your status and declare you an outlaw." There's way too much potential for abuse and capricious decisions, both by the Council *and* by the individual Spectres.

At the very least you'd have to be very, very careful about who you give the role to, someone capable of judging very reliably when any particular end justifies the means, although Saren would seem to have enough of a background to call that into question long before the events of ME1 start.

It's possible that there would be too much of a backlash against the Council if they abused the use of Spectres.

[shodiswe]

RangerSG wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Ubermench seems to be the rule rather than the exception in the galaxy.

Turian Hirarchy
Quarian Admiralty
Baratian Hirachy
Salarian Dalatrass

Assari Matriarchs (maybe, even if it's democratic)

Quarians have the Conclave to check the power of the Admiralty in all non-military matters, though. So while it's less Democratic than the Alliance, it's still has a representative element. Especially since if the Admiralty overrides the Conclave, it has to resign.

The Asari are clearly said to be democratic. The Matriarchs are simply gifted advisors. Now the Turians and Batarians, absolutely. Salarians? I'm not sure we're ever told enough. 

The Quarian Admiralty chooses their own sucessors, so one could say it's a completely ineffective control mechanism. Also, we wern't told that the old Admirals can't become Admirals again. They could keep trading places with their bestfriend/lieutenent.
I'm not sure if the whole Admiralty would have to step down if it's just one Admiral pushing and the others are keeping their mouths shut.
In most cases they wouldn't have to worry since the Conclaves power is very limited to distribution of food and low value supplies. The most valuable highend supplies are controlled by the Admiralty. In Reality the Admiralty would have very few reasons to step in on Conclave bussines since they don't care much for the strife of the Conclave or the people.

The Dalatrass is like an absolute Monarch.

The Matriarchs in power might be elected but it doesn't sound like non-Matriarchs has any chance at claiming that power. I guess that's more of a, rule of the Oldest deal. Only Matriarchs has any chance of getting elected. After that they have to have built a powerbase. Though, normaly elected leaders in democracies has large and influential powerbases, making them the super Ubermench. Though they risk loosing their power if they loose face.

The greatest power there is, is to have the ability to make others do what you want them to. It can in most cases be far more powerful than the ability to beat the crap out of another guy.

Modifié par shodiswe, 18 février 2014 - 06:25 .

[shodiswe]

The Dalatrass is the born Queen of the most influential Salarian "clan". Til she dies then she's replaced by the next one in sucession.

Kind of like a Rachni Queen. She's the top Matriarch of the Matriarchy.

Modifié par shodiswe, 18 février 2014 - 06:22 .

[Han Shot First]

Yes, I'd like to the Spectres return. I think they are good idea within the game universe for giving an explanation as to why the player character can get away with certain actions. Also at this point they are firmly part of the lore.

That being said if the MEU were our reality, Spectres would be a very bad idea. No person should have the power to be judge, jury, and executioner.

Cerberus I hope is gone for good. They are a writer's pet that has long outlived its welcome. There was too much Cerberus in ME3 as it was. Hopefully they were canonically destroyed in all outcomes of the Reaper War.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 18 février 2014 - 06:34 .

[DeinonSlayer]

Where is it said the admirals choose their own successors? In ME2 Tali says after the trial that some in the Conclave are talking about choosing her for the role. Seems to me the Admiralty is elected by the Conclave, who in turn are elected by the people. Like how the UK Parliament chooses their Prime Minister.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 18 février 2014 - 06:51 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Where is it said the admirals choose their own successors? In ME2 Tali says after the trial that some in the Conclave are talking about choosing her for the role. Seems to me the Admiralty is elected by the Conclave, who in turn are elected by the people.

And if the Admirals are not in agreement, the Fleet holds a Conclave and elect a new Admiralty. The decision to go to war must be unianimous. With Koris clearly opposed to going to war, Bioware did a retcon of that as well. Someone didn't listen to Tali's conversation in ME1. Someone named Patrick Weekes because he wanted to paint the Quarians as a bunch of war mongering racists.

[Han Shot First]

The Quarian government (as of ME2/ME3) reminds me of the government of Imperial Japan during the Second World War. Imperial Japan had a civilian government, but it was ultimately subordinate to the whims of the Supreme War Council, all of whom were generals and admirals.

[DeinonSlayer]

Han Shot First wrote...

The Quarian government (as of ME2/ME3) reminds me of the government of Imperial Japan during the Second World War. Imperial Japan had a civilian government, but it was ultimately subordinate to the whims of the Supreme War Council, all of whom were generals and admirals.

Were those admirals elected to office by the civilian government, though? I think not. Generally, the civilian government (Congress and the President in US parlance) choose to go to war, at which point how the war is conducted is turned over to the military. They can't convene a Conclave vote over which ship to devote fighter protection to or wait for someone to break a filibuster while some dreadnought is tearing them apart.

That said, I can't say the system of electing admirals is a good one. Tali, by her own admission, is not Admiralty material. Raan is a cop who doesn't know how to wage war - the heavy fleet gets ripped up if you side with her over Gerrel. I'm sure Shodiswe is chomping at the bit over the issues with Gerrel (I'd argue he's the only one with his head on straight regarding the Reaper situation, but this isn't the thread for it).

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 18 février 2014 - 07:16 .

[shodiswe]

What was said is that the geth Quarrian war never ended.
Going to war against the reapers would requier a unanimous vote, but not the Geth. There was never a peace accord, just a 300 year long retreat.

Gerrel didn't need a vote, and a unanimous decision wasn't needed for an attack.
Koris wanted to negotiate peace, Gerrel wanted to attack th Geth.

There was no retcon, Gerrel and Xen just claimed they were already at war, Koris could do nothing and the Conclave had no say in daily operations.

You might not agree with Gerrel or his methods but he's doing what evety ubermench does best, grab power and bend the rules to serve his desires. 

Modifié par shodiswe, 18 février 2014 - 08:14 .

[shodiswe]

StreetMagic wrote...

CrutchCricket wrote...

The Alliance is just as ineffectual, complacent and downright moronic as the Council. The only difference is Hackett and Anderson give it a slightly better face. I'd work with those two any day. Unfortunately they're not quite as in charge as they'd need to be for the Alliance to be worth it.

There's a bigger difference than that. The Alliance is human. And that's mostly what I care to represent. And I still like viewing humanity as a seperate, competitive entity (not necessarily a hateful or antagonistic one though).

There's a good scene in the first novel with Ambassador Goyle (predecessor to Udina), where she's about to present herself to the Council for some problem the Alliance has caused. And as she's approaching the Council Chambers, she's going through all of her fears and notions about how best to appease them. But once she gets there, and sees them speaking down to her, she realizes how much they just view humanity and the Alliance as children. And how much humanity needs to apologize for simply being itself. In that moment, she forgets her fears, and cuts into them. She's sick for apologizing for just being human. She reclaims her self-respect.

This is kind of the spirit of ME1 Renegade's politics. And by extension, most in the Alliance. To not apologize for being human  (ME2 I think is more about whether you'll distance yourself from extremist humans like Cerberus). Some Paragon lines in ME1 are about how we're too independent for our own good.. that we need to ingratiate ourselves with the "galactic community". Or even care about some ideal of the "galactic community" to begin with. Kaidan is like this. Liara tries to guilt you into thinking like this. Ash is trying keep you from thinking like this.

Err... Now I forget where I was going with this. Basically though, just the fact that the Alliance is human is a night and day difference to me, compared to the Council. Even if they are incompetent.

She also realised the economic strength of humanity and that the council needed/wanted humanitys support to secure the attican traverse.