Renegade Shepard's got your answer: "I think the work you were doing here was more important."
Thing is, I still think she came across the plans for the Crucible completely by accident. I don't think she was doing anything more important.
Meanwhile, ho and hum, Cerberus was working towards a solution.
I was able to more or less get through the game right up until vendetta on Thessia. Sure there was a lot of stupid stuff going on before hand, but I could ignore it all in the name of fun gameplay, and I quite enjoyed Tuchanka and Rannoch despite some numerous nitpicks going on in my head.
However, then Mass Effect went and tried to pull a Battlestar Galactica with Vendetta. Essentially, my thoughts at the time were "Cyclical time? Same conflict every cycle? And you say it's not the reapers doing this, that they are servants?! What kind of BS is this!!! The reapers barely ever leave any evidence of previous species, but now the protheans were able to track the cycle and find patterns? If I find out that the reapers are controlled by some kind of god or something so help me!". It was one All Along the Watchtower away from being a straight up parody.
The whole "all of this has happened before, all of this will happen again" thing really has been overplayed in modern science fiction.I was able to more or less get through the game right up until vendetta on Thessia. Sure there was a lot of stupid stuff going on before hand, but I could ignore it all in the name of fun gameplay, and I quite enjoyed Tuchanka and Rannoch despite some numerous nitpicks going on in my head.
However, then Mass Effect went and tried to pull a Battlestar Galactica with Vendetta. Essentially, my thoughts at the time were "Cyclical time? Same conflict every cycle? And you say it's not the reapers doing this, that they are servants?! What kind of BS is this!!! The reapers barely ever leave any evidence of previous species, but now the protheans were able to track the cycle and find patterns? If I find out that the reapers are controlled by some kind of god or something so help me!". It was one All Along the Watchtower away from being a straight up parody.
The second point is untrue according to every single statement from most developers on the subject. Their statements were that 'the player would be given as much possible control over their individual Shepard's personality, looks, psychology, attitude, behaviors, etc.' It was only in ME3 where this idea of player inflection was downplayed for the sake of making Shepard less of a brick and more of a character. I preferred him as a brick/canvas for me to make him into whatever type of person I wanted him to be instead of some generic action hero in a black and white universe. BW themselves said that you'd be able to play as a Shepard who is overall sympathetic to Cerberus' views and methods while opposing them out of necessity. They said that it would be possible to play an anti-alliance Shepard (which was a complete lie).
https://www.youtube....h?v=-opEshcecMY
This video presentation tells a different story, at 09:55, Armando Troisi, cinematic designer on mass Effect 1 & 2, explains the design philosphy Bioware used when developing the Mass Effect games and how Mass Effect is an example of an "objective story" in which the player avatar has their own motivations an goals as opposed to traditional roleplaying models. Ironicly, this presentation was intended for Mass Effect 2.
The whole "all of this has happened before, all of this will happen again" thing really has been overplayed in modern science fiction.
I actually really appreciated the Battlestar homage that was the Quarian/Geth conflict. That was all fine and dandy and made for one of the more interesting conflicts in the series. But ya, the whole "cyclical universe" trope is getting to be quite the annoyance. What ever happened to good old fashioned chaos and unpredictability? If this pattern was going on regardless of the reapers, it kind of (further) negates their whole "we are the order to organic chaos" schtick.
I could never understand why a trilogy romanced Liara didn't bother visiting Shep in prison.
Did any of the other love interests visit Shepard? I got the impression that Shepard was in total lockdown (no outside communication with anyone).
Did any of the other love interests visit Shepard? I got the impression that Shepard was in total lockdown (no outside communication with anyone).
LIara and Miranda both imply that they could have gotten in, but thought it was was unwise.
Nope, not that I know of.Did any of the other love interests visit Shepard? I got the impression that Shepard was in total lockdown (no outside communication with anyone).
LIara and Miranda both imply that they could have gotten in, but thought it was was unwise.
So does Ashley. Shep in fact outright asks why she didn't visit.
Ah, well. Guess I'll have to wipe you out again, whatever the hell you are.
"You promised you would disappear forever if I let you go!"
Wait, what? 
"We know you seek the ones who soured the songs of our mothers. When the time comes, our voice will join with yours, and our crescendo will burn the darkness clean"
Since my femshep had no love interest to worry about not visiting her, she didn't care. She was more concerned that she sat around for 6 months doing nothing. Thanks for that Alliance. Idiots.
https://www.youtube....h?v=-opEshcecMY
This video presentation tells a different story, at 09:55, Armando Troisi, cinematic designer on mass Effect 1 & 2, explains the design philosphy Bioware used when developing the Mass Effect games and how Mass Effect is an example of an "objective story" in which the player avatar has their own motivations an goals as opposed to traditional roleplaying models. Ironicly, this presentation was intended for Mass Effect 2.
And Casey Hudson, Mac Walters, Patrick Weekes, and Drew Karpyshyn all disputed that. They all said that the player would be given as much control over Shepard's personality, behavior, thoughts, ideas, and opinions as much as was possible in a game, like any BW RPG. This goes against everything that BW has done previously and next to with all their other work, including internal consistency.
I place no weight in what that guy says compared to the people who actually write the games. They all clearly stated that Shepard, while not necessarily being able to physically support every angle, would have the ability to have a modular philosophy up to the players will. Come ME3, they took that function away rather irresponsibly. And I think you're not understanding of the phrase 'objectively'. What he's saying is that the character states opinions that are picked by a paraphrased dialogue. There's also nowhere where he says that the player has no control over many of Shepard's thoughts and opinions, and that he is to objectively despise Cerberus, or force him to think one thing over the other. If that's the case, then it's also a factor of misleading marketing because BW outright promised players that Shepard was a more active version of a player avatar.
In the end, it ends up that players are often times forced to play a Shepard that goes against how they'd RP them. More than just actions; you can't even dictate what your Shepard feels on matters. You have no control on how Shepard views certain characters, no control on how Shepard responds to them, and no control how Shepard reacts to events and sentiments (including the entire 'drop everything and save Earth' mentality).
So does Ashley. Shep in fact outright asks why she didn't visit.
Ashley states she didn't want to face her feelings. IMO, much, much weaker than either Miranda or Liara. Liara has a practical consideration, while Miranda knows that doing so would be dangerous to both of them.
Ashley is still whiny over her feelings.
This. See also the reaction to Thessia.And Casey Hudson, Mac Walters, Patrick Weekes, and Drew Karpyshyn all disputed that. They all said that the player would be given as much control over Shepard's personality, behavior, thoughts, ideas, and opinions as much as was possible in a game, like any BW RPG. This goes against everything that BW has done previously and next to with all their other work, including internal consistency.
I place no weight in what that guy says compared to the people who actually write the games. They all clearly stated that Shepard, while not necessarily being able to physically support every angle, would have the ability to have a modular philosophy up to the players will. Come ME3, they took that function away rather irresponsibly. And I think you're not understanding of the phrase 'objectively'. In the end, it ends up that players are often times forced to play a Shepard that goes against how they'd RP them. More than just actions; you can't even dictate what your Shepard feels on matters. You have no control on how Shepard views certain characters, no control on how Shepard responds to them, and no control how Shepard reacts to events and sentiments (including the entire 'drop everything and save Earth' mentality).
This. See also the reaction to Thessia.
I thought it'd be interesting if, after Garrus shot Ashley after the coup, we could roleplay Shepard (who previously romanced her) as being angry with Garrus. When we talk to him at the memorial wall, the only options available boiled down to "it was my fault, don't blame yourself" and "it was her fault, don't blame yourself." Had to settle with that Shepard essentially shunning Garrus from that point on.
That's fine.
Just as I wanted to RP a Shepard who was much more vindictive towards Ashley, and telling the crew to forget scum like her, and that she deserved what was coming to her.
Another thing. I'm early in ME2 and EDI is this alien thing. Not inferior to me, but clearly not like me. ME2 AI is one of the few places where I feel a genuine sense of wonder. And then they're all going to turn into Pinocchios who aren't valid life until they're exactly like us. I'm tempted to kill them on principle.
And Casey Hudson, Mac Walters, Patrick Weekes, and Drew Karpyshyn all disputed that. They all said that the player would be given as much control over Shepard's personality, behavior, thoughts, ideas, and opinions as much as was possible in a game, like any BW RPG. This goes against everything that BW has done previously and next to with all their other work, including internal consistency.
I place no weight in what that guy says compared to the people who actually write the games. They all clearly stated that Shepard, while not necessarily being able to physically support every angle, would have the ability to have a modular philosophy up to the players will. Come ME3, they took that function away rather irresponsibly. And I think you're not understanding of the phrase 'objectively'. What he's saying is that the character states opinions that are picked by a paraphrased dialogue. There's also nowhere where he says that the player has no control over many of Shepard's thoughts and opinions, and that he is to objectively despise Cerberus, or force him to think one thing over the other. If that's the case, then it's also a factor of misleading marketing because BW outright promised players that Shepard was a more active version of a player avatar.
In the end, it ends up that players are often times forced to play a Shepard that goes against how they'd RP them. More than just actions; you can't even dictate what your Shepard feels on matters. You have no control on how Shepard views certain characters, no control on how Shepard responds to them, and no control how Shepard reacts to events and sentiments (including the entire 'drop everything and save Earth' mentality).
The presentation in it's entirety in fact is actually about how bioware intents to enpower the player by having the them interfacing with the narrative on a large scale.
I quoted the phrase "objective story" directly from the presentation, which as explained in the video explains the difference in design approach between Mass Effect and traditional rpg's. The point i'm making here though, as mentioned in the video is that Shepard differs from a traditional rpg protagonist in being not a direct representation of the player but rather an allready established character whose actions can be influnced to a large degree by the player.
The presentation in it's entirety in fact is actually about how bioware intents to enpower the player by having the them interfacing with the narrative on a large scale.
I quoted the phrase "objective story" directly from the presentation, which as explained in the video explains the difference in design approach between Mass Effect and traditional rpg's. The point i'm making here though, as mentioned in the video is that Shepard differs from a traditional rpg protagonist in being not a direct representation of the player but rather an allready established character whose actions can be influnced to a large degree by the player.
And that established character is also augmented by input from the players over how Shepard thinks, feels, and reacts. His psychology and mentality, his personality, up to ME3 when that was wrestled away from the player, is very much in the players control, and that was BW's intent. No, you're not really living as vicariously as with other protagonists, but this established character's thoughts and opinions are largely up the player. And when that was taken away, it was jarring and very weak writing.
For example, my Shepard is an Unfettered, True-neutral/amoral, byronic, semi-sociopathic nominal hero who's above good and evil. He's very much an end justifies the needs type person, who believes that he does what he has to do, with his own motivations to boot. To some extent, he is he who fights monsters. And come ME3, I'm no longer able to play him entirely like this.
There are several quotes that fit my Shepard and his philosophy:
From CoD: WaW; 'Chernov: April 30th, 1945: When he first spoke of Dimitri, Reznov told tales of a hero, someone we should all aspire to be like. At times, I have seen him show mercy to foe and friend alike, and at others, complete brutality... to foe and friend alike. I do not understand him. Perhaps heroes need not question their actions.'
'Necessity knows no law.' - Arnold Schoenberg
'I've seen horrors... horrors that you've seen. But you have no right to call me a murderer. You have a right to kill me. You have a right to do that... but you have no right to judge me. It's impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror... Horror has a face... and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not, then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies! I remember when I was with Special Forces... seems a thousand centuries ago. We went into a camp to inoculate some children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn't see. We went back there, and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried, I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out; I didn't know what I wanted to do! And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it... I never want to forget. And then I realized... like I was shot... like I was shot with a diamond... a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought, my God... the genius of that! The genius! The will to do that! Perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure. And then I realized they were stronger than we, because they could stand that these were not monsters, these were men... trained cadres. These men who fought with their hearts, who had families, who had children, who were filled with love... but they had the strength... the strength... to do that. If I had ten divisions of those men, our troubles here would be over very quickly. You have to have men who are moral... and at the same time who are able to utilize their primordial instincts to kill without feeling... without passion... without judgment... without judgment! Because it's judgment that defeats us.' - Colonel Kurtz, Apocalypse Now.
'Ser Jaime, I have seen terrible things in my time, Wars, battles, murders most foul... I was a boy in Oldtown when the grey plague took half the city and three-quarters of the Citadel. Lord Hightower burned every ship in port, closed the gates, and commanded his guards to slay all those who tried to flee, be they men, women, or babes in arms. They killed him when the plague had run its course. On the very day he reopened the port, they dragged him from his horse and slit his throat, and his young son’s as well. To this day the ignorant in Oldtown will spit at the sound of his name, but Quenton Hightower did what was needed. Your father was that sort of man as well. A man who did what was needed.' - Maester Pycelle, A Song of Ice and Fire
'There are no true knights, no more than there are gods. If you can’t protect yourself, die and get out of the way of those who can. Sharp steel and strong arms rule this world, don’t ever believe any different.' - Sandor Clegane, A Song of Ice and Fire
'The only limit to my freedom is the inevitable closure of the universe, as inevitable as your own last breath. And yet, there remains time to create, to create, and escape. And escape will make me God.'
— Durandal, Marathon
'Only the insane have strength enough to prosper, only those that prosper truly judge who is sane.'
— Imperial proverb, Warhammer 40,000
'I didn't betray my dream. That's all.'
— Griffith, Berserk
In the moment when I truly understand my enemy, understand him well enough to defeat him, then in that very moment I also love him. I think it's impossible to really understand somebody, what they want, what they believe, and not love them the way they love themselves. And then, in that very moment when I love them... I destroy them. I make it impossible for them to ever hurt me again. I grind them and grind them until they don't exist.
— Ender Wiggin, Ender’s Game
Ender Wiggin is no killer. He just wins. Thoroughly.
— Ender’s Game
Let me ask you something: if the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?
— Anton Chigurh, No Country for Old Men
A threat this big, rules go out the window.
— Commander Shepard (Renegade), Mass Effect 2
Do not care what others think. Do you what you must.
— Javik, Mass Effect 3
You think I've crossed a line. There is no line. For the safety of this planet, there is no one I will not sacrifice, no monster I will not call friend, no enemy I will not sleep with.
— Special Agent Abigail Brand, X-Men
Littlefinger: So many men, they risk so little, they spend their lives avoiding danger and they die. I'd risk everything to get what I want.
Sansa: And what do you want?
Littlefinger: Everything.
—Game of Thrones
Faultline: All of the war crimes, kidnapping people, human experimentation, creating monsters, creating psychopathic monsters, letting millions die… and you think it’s for nothing?
Doctor Mother: It's very likely.
Weld: Then why?
Doctor Mother: Because we decided in the very beginning that we don’t want to be left wondering if we could have done more, in the moments before humanity ceases to exist. Why did we make you into what you are, Weld? Because it was an option, a step forward. Why did we keep it secret? It improved our chances. Why did we not tell you about Scion? Because it improved our chances.
Weaver: You made sacrifices, you made sacrifices on the behalf of others, and you made the hard calls, but it was all for something greater. I bet you think you won’t have any regrets at the end.
Doctor Mother: It’s been some time since I lost sleep because of a heavy conscience.
—Worm, Extinction 27.2
Dispassionate, a rather mundane word to describe one of history's most controversial figures. Some revere him as a savior, some revile him as a monster, but if you ever met Paul Redeker, ever discussed his views of the world and the problems, or more importantly, the solutions to the problems that plague the world, probably the one word that would always cling to your impression of the man is dispassionate.
Paul always believed, well, perhaps not always, but at least in his adult life, that humanity's one fundamental flaw was emotion. He used to say that the heart should only exist to pump blood to the brain, that anything else was a waste of time and energy. His papers from university, all dealing with alternate "solutions" to historical, societal quandaries, were what first brought him to the attention of the apartheid government. Many psychobiographers have tried to label him as a racist, but, in his own words, "racism is a regrettable by-product of irrational emotion." Others have argued that, in order for a racist to hate one group, he must at least love another. Redeker believed both love and hate to be irrelevant. To him, they were "impediments of the human condition," and, in his words again, "imagine what could be accomplished if the human race would only shed its humanity." Evil? Most would call it that, while others, particularly that small cadre in the center of Pretoria's power, believed it to be "an invaluable source of liberated intellect."
— Xolelwa Azania, World War Z
Another thing. I'm early in ME2 and EDI is this alien thing. Not inferior to me, but clearly not like me. ME2 AI is one of the few places where I feel a genuine sense of wonder. And then they're all going to turn into Pinocchios who aren't valid life until they're exactly like us. I'm tempted to kill them on principle.
ME2 Legion >ME3 Legion
Yeah, they never really specify what Liara was doing on Mars other than random research in which she happened to come across the plans for the Crucible. Did she really have nothing better to do with her time as the shadow broker to prepare for the Reapers?
Yeah, they never really specify what Liara was doing on Mars other than random research in which she happened to come across the plans for the Crucible. Did she really have nothing better to do with her time as the shadow broker to prepare for the Reapers?
Indeed, the implication not coming until the Homeworlds comics that she decided that she wasn't the Broker anymore and she was the Prothean researcher she always thought she was. It makes Shepard's response of 'you had more important things going on' seem very odd, considering that while she did in deed have more important things going on, she was shirking them to go digging on Mars.
The archive on Mars was a treasure trove of information that they'd only scratched the surface on. When Hackett asked her to help, why wouldn't she go there?
Because she has a criminal information dealing empire to run? There were other Prothean researchers in the galaxy, and there was no way anyone knew that some miraculous anti-Reaper superweapon could be found in the archive.
She never actually found the plans. She only found bits and pieces, clues really, that led to plans that are in the archives. She had access to the archives given to her by Hackett, but I would guess she never been in the archives until Shepard showed up. If she did find the plans, why didn't she forward them, or at least a copy, to Hackett so he and his team can look them over while she continues to find more information explaining what exactly this "weapon" does?
Because she has a criminal information dealing empire to run? There were other Prothean researchers in the galaxy, and there was no way anyone knew that some miraculous anti-Reaper superweapon could be found in the archive.
Retour en haut