This thread is about genocide in BioWare games
No this thread is about Hitler
No this thread is about personal life struggles
No this thread is about healthcare
No this thread is about WIZARDS, DARK WIZARDS, COMMUNIST DARK WIZARDS IN FEZ HATS WITH ACID REFLUX
how averse are you to selling other body parts?
If you don't have insurance you are SOL
That's what I suspected. Strange system you have over there.
'Mericuh
This thread is about genocide in BioWare games
No this thread is about Hitler
No this thread is about personal life struggles
No this thread is about healthcare
No this thread is about WIZARDS, DARK WIZARDS, COMMUNIST DARK WIZARDS IN FEZ HATS WITH ACID REFLUX
Don't mind me, just popping in. I KNEW Massively was in his early twenties. Nice to have that confirmed.
Anyway. The internet is a silly place. There's nothing wrong with power fantasies, and despite what the television box wants you to believe, no one is required to be nice and squishylove all the time, or even most of the time. Everyone has bad thoughts. It's all about learning not to act on them! Murderin' things that defy you in a video game is fine. It's antisocial IRL, but ... Look, every writer who writes a decent villain who does something horrible isn't a bad person.
Anyway, if you feel like you need help, you should get it. Especially if you're on or near a campus. Those people train to help with problems like yours. It's like how you expect a plumber to know how to handle a leaking pipe better than a carpenter. And they spend almost as much time in school as is involved with a good apprenticeship program for your plumber. >> X3
How can the wizards be communists if they aren't red?
How can the wizards be communists if they aren't red?
Enchantment!
I can make it about task group-based artillery tactics in the German military in the latter part of the First World War if you want.
I could do theoretical fluid dynamics and their application within civil engineering, if anyone wants..
I could do theoretical fluid dynamics and their application within civil engineering, if anyone wants..
That's fine with me, as long as your fluid dynamics doesn't interfere with the purity and essence of our precious natural fluids.
Ah, this phrase brings me back to the heyday of Geth/Quarian debates, Auld Wolf, and accusations of everyone supporting the Quarians having a fetish for genocide.
Good times...
Oh yeah that guy. He and several others like to boast how they were more evolved than the rest of us because they were Synthesis zealots.
I could do theoretical fluid dynamics and their application within civil engineering, if anyone wants..
I'm still waiting for the thread (I'll settle for post) where my knowledge will be relevant to the discussion.
I actually kinda hated Shepard's dialogue for exterminating the rachni in ME1. Why couldn't they have some kind of "I'm sorry -- I can't afford to put the whole galaxy at risk just on your word" line? Instead Shepard says something like "forget it, the rachni are a dead race lol!" and then "this time stay dead stupid bugs!" Like the rachni are just old news and Shepard is gleefully squashing them back into oblivion.
I better stop before this expands into a srsly outdated rant
Nope screw it momentum's already going rant inertia can't stop
Yeah no this is not about "old news races" or Shepard being killhappy. This is about the fact that the rachni nearly freaking laid waste to the galaxy the last time they roamed free, it's quite possible that a single queen could do the same thing again in a scarily short amount of time, and the only thing telling us this won't happen again is her promise.
It's like the game saw that the player was picking a destructive path and figured it had to be for dick reasons so here's some dick dialogue. Meanwhile the paragon option, which contains the only non-dick dialogue and which the player meta-knows will probably pan out better because that's just the way the Mass Effect team is, seems based on very shaky reasoning and even comes off seeming irresponsible if you take it too seriously.
I'm just saying, why does the paragon option have to seem irresponsible so often and why does the renegade option have to seem dickish so often?
Give me an option to kill her without malice. It's very plausible that a Shepard would do this out of a sense of simple responsibility, and thus would carry out the deed without any particular contempt or ill will. And if I free her, and a squadmate protests, let me point out that I'm releasing her into an arctic wasteland with subzero temperatures so hostile to life that "letting the weather in" is the general failsafe -- and if she's going to be released anywhere, maybe the best place is a planet where nukes can at any time be fired from orbit on any problem areas. I don't need any guarantees that it's a safe choice -- it's not supposed to be a safe choice -- just let me make a case for why my Shepard thought it wasn't totally pants-on-head stupid at the time. Just because I picked the paragon option doesn't mean my only defensive arguments must be moral.
The pragmatic paragon and the thoughtful renegade -- undersold, undersold.
The problem is that the P/R system is as much a personality system as it is a morality system ("Be the ultimate hero!" "Be the ultimate badass!" These lines actually appear during ME2 loading screens), but there's no reason why personality and morality have to be joined at the hip they way they are in the P/R system.
Still, there are one or two times where it's possible to make the expedient decision without seeming like a total jerk. The best example I can think of is saving or not saving the council in ME1, and you get three options. The paragon and renegade options are predictably, "Save the council for great justice!", and "Let the council die! Muahahaha!" But there is a middle option in which you allow the council to die and explain your reasoning in terms of the need to concentrate everything on fighting Sovereign. Even though it's the least beneficial option in terms of P/R points, it always struck me as the most sensible option, and I wish that kind of thing was available more often.
OT, but I wonder when David the Blob is going to scream in about how the P/R system isn't messed up.
The problem is that the P/R system is as much a personality system as it is a morality system ("Be the ultimate hero!" "Be the ultimate badass!" These lines actually appear during ME2 loading screens), but there's no reason why personality and morality have to be joined at the hip they way they are in the P/R system.
Still, there are one or two times where it's possible to make the expedient decision without seeming like a total jerk. The best example I can think of is saving or not saving the council in ME1, and you get three options. The paragon and renegade options are predictably, "Save the council for great justice!", and "Let the council die! Muahahaha!" But there is a middle option in which you allow the council to die and explain your reasoning in terms of the need to concentrate everything on fighting Sovereign. Even though it's the least beneficial option in terms of P/R points, it always struck me as the most sensible option, and I wish that kind of thing was available more often.
I think some of my favorite dialogue for a renegade decision was in BDtS.
Guest_Magick_*
Can genocide ever be truly justified? Especially in situations like "us or them."
Can genocide ever be truly justified? Especially in situations like "us or them."
Holy necro, batman!Can genocide ever be truly justified? Especially in situations like "us or them."
Can genocide ever be truly justified? Especially in situations like "us or them."
Yes. I would destroy the galaxy to save humanity.
If an alien race came down to earth with the sole intent of wiping us out, I would say that wiping them out first would be perfectly justified.
It's amusing to think that no matter whether the player considers the "death" of the geth in Destroy to be genocide or collateral damage, they're committing genocide no matter what against the Reapers.
Well, to many people machines don't really count.It's amusing to think that no matter whether the player considers the "death" of the geth in Destroy to be genocide or collateral damage, they're committing genocide no matter what against the Reapers.
I'll commit genocide against the reapers. It's them or us. They are thinking nothing of committing genocide against us. Why should I hesitate?
Retour en haut