80 réponses à ce sujet

[CrutchCricket]

Sorry I forgot to add "human" to the words "mooks to shoot".

 

It's about appealing to the lowest common denominator (i.e. CODtards)

 

Reapers are cool and all but they're all monsters. And fighting monsters is so early 90s (Doom anyone?)

[Invisible Man]

Cerberus was made the Space SS in order to provide legions of acceptable target mooks for the player to shoot at.
 
The batarians might've worked in this role. Though I wonder if there wouldn't be cries of racism if they went that route. There's already some grumblings that all batarians we see are scumbags (not true).

 
because slavery is built into their culture most of the batarians we encounter are... well, evil-ish slaver commandos, or cowardly murderous terrorists. so i don't really have an issue butchering the batarian indoctrinated military.
 

Eh, maybe, nobody likes Batarians though.
 
I always thought they would have had a much bigger role in the narrative though. Instead they have about as much impact as the Drell.

 
i agree, it would have been nice to see batarians in a larger role. with more of them to shoot. 

Sorry I forgot to add "human" to the words "mooks to shoot".
 
It's about appealing to the lowest common denominator (i.e. CODtards)
 
Reapers are cool and all but they're all monsters. And fighting monsters is so early 90s (Doom anyone?)

monster fraging is always in style. like zombie movies.

[Perpetual Nirvana]

Cerberus was made the Space SS in order to provide legions of acceptable target mooks for the player to shoot at.

 

The batarians might've worked in this role. Though I wonder if there wouldn't be cries of racism if they went that route. There's already some grumblings that all batarians we see are scumbags (not true).

 

Well there's Bray. Otherwise we have...erm...

 

EDI does say that Batarians on the Citadel are more agreeable without the Hegemony watching but that's an easily missed line of dialogue and we never meet any of these agreeable Batarians.

 

EDIT: Forgot about that Priest you do a fetch quest for. Okay that's two.

[Invisible Man]

Well there's Bray. Otherwise we have...erm...
 
EDI does say that Batarians on the Citadel are more agreeable without the Hegemony watching but that's an easily missed line of dialogue and we never meet any of these agreeable Batarians.
 
EDIT: Forgot about that Priest you do a fetch quest for. Okay that's two.

before the citadel coup there's a conversation between a human & a batarian in the refugee holding area, near the memorial wall, he didn't seem quite so bad, a tad angry maybe, but not bad.

[von uber]

Well there's Bray. Otherwise we have...erm...

 

I liked Bray. He was quite interesting for the short time we meet him.

 

[Darks1d3]

I know this has been mentioned, but I'm still disappointed that we never had a Batarian squadmate. I think someone like Bray would have fit the bill nicely.

[CrutchCricket]

Why do people like Bray? Apart from having a name I found nothing remarkable or even distinguishing about him relative to any other random batarian NPC.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Why do people like Bray? Apart from having a name I found nothing remarkable or even distinguishing about him relative to any other random batarian NPC.

 

I guess it's because he's a nice Batarian, and we don't get too many of those.

 

I kinda liked him because he was some what of a gentle giant for someone serving as Aria's lieutendant.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

There was a "nice" batarian in ME2, one of the plague victims on Omega. If you give him medi-gel and then listen to his comments after the mission, it sounds like Shepard really changed his perspective of humans. 

 

I don't remember who Bray is. 

 

ME3's portrayal of Cerberus is even more ridiculous when you consider that the writers had a far more reasonable and perfectly viable alternative: the Batarians. We know they were the first to fall to the Reapers, we know that their High Command was indoctrinated, and they actually have a standing army. It would have also killed two birds with one stone: give the players a different enemy faction to shoot at, and tie up the "Batarian Rebellions" plot thread.

I really like this idea. My MainShep is a Colonist who hates batarians, so this would have been great for her. 

[von uber]

Bray is Aria's right hand batarian.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

Bray is Aria's right hand batarian.

 

Then I probably spoke to him in ME2, if I'm thinking of the right guy. I don't remember much about his personality though. I guess he was nice enough, or at least professional. I would remember a batarian being a jerk to my Shepard. 

[von uber]

He's in the omega dlc too.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

He's in the omega dlc too.

 

I wouldn't know him from that. I haven't played any of the DLC. Maybe I'll check the Invasion comics and see if he shows up there. 

[Nightwriter]

Yeah definitely. I don't understand why they assigned the Reaper personalities the way they did.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Yeah definitely. I don't understand why they assigned the Reaper personalities the way they did.

 

They didn't write the thing out ahead of time. So, I think when writing the first game they wrote down Sovereign and when it came to game two they basically made Harbinger the opposite of that.

[SwobyJ]

To OP:

Nope. It's right where it should be.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

I agree, it's seems like the Reaper motivation and personality type changes in each game. I like Sovereign's best. 

[Killdren88]

I agree, it's seems like the Reaper motivation and personality type changes in each game. I like Sovereign's best. 

 

Yeah. Sovereign screamed a commanding presence. Like royalty, hence the  name Sovereign.  He would have made for a better Reaper leader for me personally. Harbinger was good, and he could have been improved as a character if he wasn't brushed aside. But the arrogance he portrayed is standard for most Reapers. Not to mention the name Harbinger means one who foretells of things to come. Plus while being obsessive with his experiments was Harbinger's quirk, his menacing overall personality to me came off more like a young buck who was loving the power he had commanded, and then taken down a peg by Shepard.

 

Sovereign on the other hand, while more robotic, it makes sense. If he and Harby where to swap, he would be the first Reaper. So naturally the first model so to speak would sound a little robotic. And we didn't engage Sovereign until the very end. This makes sense. Sovereign would have been doing this since the beginning and the constant extermination of organic life would be nothing to him, so his cold contempt would make sense. He didn't engage Shepard until he had no choice, that is what a Reaper should be like. Focus on the cycle and allow your minions to squash the insects. 

 

For Sovereign to have Harby's place, his character arch could have been stronger. While Harby had a personality, Sovereign didn't outside his cold contempt. So as ME 2 and 3 would have gone on, we would see a change in his personality. As Shepard continues to foil Sovereign, we would have seen him grow anger, and possibly more violent. And from what we got from ME1, his contempt shows he sees himself above organics. Thus this one organic and his band who constantly halts his plans and making him feel angry, he would feel offended, he would be enraged that this single little pest has made him feel this way. More "Organic" if you will. So the longer his plans kept blowing up in his face the more this would occur, and as far as we know, machines have little concept for emotions and thus would not have a great grasp on them. So Sovereign would feel, anger, rage, more inclined to sadism over more efficient means of extermination. And finally insanity and in the end and we have a messed up Reaper out for blood.

[SwobyJ]

Why should Sovereign be mad? Everything is working out for him. /tinfoilhat

[The Sarendoctrinator]

Now that I think about it, yeah, Sovereign's personality type probably would fit better as the oldest Reaper, with the "later models" having more organic emotions. That might fit better with the Reapers' plans changing along the way too. I would still keep Sovereign in ME1 and Harbinger in ME2 though. 

 

As interesting as it could have been for Sovereign to evolve over three games, the end of ME1 might not have felt as much like a victory (or a game that could stand alone, as BioWare wants them to be capable of doing). His plan would have been defeated, but it wouldn't really feel like he was defeated - if that makes sense. My Shepards and I both tried everything we could to save Saren. Now, I think Sovereign is too cool to hate him for it. My Shepards, on the other hand, would have been angry if Sovereign escaped from that. While that could make for a good storyline, it might end up feeling too much like a failure for the player. "We were able to stop his plan this time with heavy losses, but the bad guy got away." The losses seem more worth it when they're taking the Reaper down with them. 

 

But now I want to see a genuinely insane Reaper. That would have been a nice addition to the lacking Reaper presence in ME3. 

[Killdren88]

Now that I think about it, yeah, Sovereign's personality type probably would fit better as the oldest Reaper, with the "later models" having more organic emotions. That might fit better with the Reapers' plans changing along the way too. I would still keep Sovereign in ME1 and Harbinger in ME2 though. 

 

As interesting as it could have been for Sovereign to evolve over three games, the end of ME1 might not have felt as much like a victory (or a game that could stand alone, as BioWare wants them to be capable of doing). His plan would have been defeated, but it wouldn't really feel like he was defeated - if that makes sense. My Shepards and I both tried everything we could to save Saren. Now, I think Sovereign is too cool to hate him for it. My Shepards, on the other hand, would have been angry if Sovereign escaped from that. While that could make for a good storyline, it might end up feeling too much like a failure for the player. "We were able to stop his plan this time with heavy losses, but the bad guy got away." The losses seem more worth it when they're taking the Reaper down with them. 

 

But now I want to see a genuinely insane Reaper. That would have been a nice addition to the lacking Reaper presence in ME3. 

 

You can still have the Victory in the end, but that is why the two switch Places. It is Harbinger you kill while you have Sovereign pulling the strings in the other two games. Now the problem comes up that without Harbinger, who commands the collectors? We could use Sovereign. But you may say why would Sovereign bother with Portheans mashed with tech when established he holds organic life in contempt? Quite simply he knows that it is necessary for their procreation. He is far from foolish after all.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

You can still have the Victory in the end, but that is why the two switch Places. It is Harbinger you kill while you have Sovereign pulling the strings in the other two games. Now the problem comes up that without Harbinger, who commands the collectors? We could use Sovereign. But you may say why would Sovereign bother with Portheans mashed with tech when established he holds organic life in contempt? Quite simply he knows that it is necessary for their procreation. He is far from foolish after all.

 

There would still be the issue of their different methods of indoctrination (subtle control of Saren vs direct control of Collectors) and confrontation (Sovereign mostly working behind the scenes vs Harbinger commonly engaging in large-scale battles with his Collector army). If they were to switch games, it would totally alter the plot because the two of them would act in different ways to accomplish their goals. 

 

Unless you're saying keep Sovereign as a constant in all three games and have other Reapers, like Harbinger, being the ones who get destroyed early on? 

[Killdren88]

There would still be the issue of their different methods of indoctrination (subtle control of Saren vs direct control of Collectors) and confrontation (Sovereign mostly working behind the scenes vs Harbinger commonly engaging in large-scale battles with his Collector army). If they were to switch games, it would totally alter the plot because the two of them would act in different ways to accomplish their goals. 

 

Unless you're saying keep Sovereign as a constant in all three games and have other Reapers, like Harbinger, being the ones who get destroyed early on? 

I am, yes. I would envision Sovereign to be the Chess master type of character. Moving all the pieces where they need to be.

[The Sarendoctrinator]

I am, yes. I would envision Sovereign to be the Chess master type of character. Moving all the pieces where they need to be.

 

So if Sovereign is still the one who influenced Saren and gave the speech on Virmire, what part would another Reaper play in ME1? Sovereign sends him to attack the Citadel instead of coming personally (because organics are too insignificant to bother with them in person)? 

[Killdren88]

So if Sovereign is still the one who influenced Saren and gave the speech on Virmire, what part would another Reaper play in ME1? Sovereign sends him to attack the Citadel instead of coming personally (because organics are too insignificant to bother with them in person)? 

That is the line of thinking. In my mind of how it would work. Since Harbinger was able to direct the Collectors from Dark space as we see him arrive with the rest of the Reapers at the end of ME2. With Sovereign in his place he could do the same by directing and influencing things.