Yeah but we only get this in the codex and a slight hit to our EMS scores. It doesn't really FEEL like a real negative consequence.
Heh, to you maybe. What's your threshold for a significant consequence? Is it -20 EMS? -50? -100? If we'd had a cutscene of Rana running into a crowded building and blowing up everyone inside it, then would it have mattered? I dunno about you, but the first time I read about her actions, I thought, "oh that b*tch. Next time I see her on Virmire she dies."
The scene could play the same as Elnora when recruiting Samara except Rana doesn't draw her weapon on Shepard
"not this time, Rana." *shove off the edge of building. Zaeed greatly approves.* ...oh wait, wrong game. 
The fact that Kelham was a criminal doesn't excuse torture. Sure he hired Kolyat to do a hit on Talid, but torture doesn't work. He could have given Shepard the wrong information to make it stop, but because this is a video game he didn't. Shepard also has the option of killing Talid to end the stand off with no consequence.
All irrelevant, the point was that these were criminals. The woman is innocent. Even if they WERE innocent people it wouldn't matter anyway. Like I said, Shepard could be Hitler and it wouldn't change anything. Vasir's actions are not magically made 'okay' just because Shepard isn't perfect.
But Aresh? You know it's okay to admit that you're wrong about this. It is a pretty clear cut case to me. Let him go or take him to a facility where he can get help.
What am I wrong about? Is he not crazy? Is he not trying to start up a facility for torturing kids? That's what he's doing there, the narrative makes that very clear. I never said it was right to kill him, only that it isn't a clear-cut case. To you it might be, but just because you're unwilling to see the the other perspectives doesn't magically make them wrong. If it makes you sleep better, I never kill the guy. I don't see it as worth it nor do I see him as a threat. That doesn't mean I can't understand why someone might. The situation is open to different interpretations.
Niket wasn't innocent, but does he deserve death? All you have to go on is Miranda's word about things. You know nothing about Henry Lawson. Miranda took Oriana from her father. The mission should have been called "Daddy Issues."
I never said he did deserve death. All I said is that it isn't a clear cut case. He isn't innocent. I don't like to absolutely say something is RIGHT and anything else is wrong just because its something I don't agree with personally. The only thing I see as absolutely wrong without any room for being right is when someone takes an innocent civilian hostage to protect their own ass, that isn't open for subjectivity for me and is objectively bad, period. I made that much clear from the start, this is not something I can see any other side on. It's just evil, there is no justification to make for it that makes it okay. Yet people are respecting and commending her for such actions.
I don't just have Miranda's word on it. He did betray her, he admits as much. He is helping mercenaries kidnap a girl, he admits as much. I'm not saying Miranda is any better here, she kidnapped the kid too. However what Miranda says is true, the guy is trying to kidnap the girl from the only family she's ever known. That is wrong. You don't just kidnap kids from their family because you're rich and can afford to do so. I don't care how you justify it. I don't think Miranda was right to kidnap either, but thats irrelevant. There are far better, legal methods one can use for this kind of thing that doesn't involve having a platoon of gun-touting mercenaries kidnapping some innocent girl and taking her away from her family.
The Base. You didn't give the base to the Alliance, though. You gave it to Cerberus. You told The Illusive Man to use it to stop the reapers. Cerberus is a known terrorist organization that has a history of giving us tomorrow's problems today. You can't whitewash this.
I save the base because I see it as the right thing to do. There are valid reasons to save it and valid reasons not to. I am not saying everyone else is wrong, I acknowledge their reasons. I just don't share them. Unlike you, apparently, who seem to refuse seeing any valid reason for saving the base. At least I am willing to see the other perspective on things and accept my way isn't the only way.
I know the significance of the Alpha Relay. What I was saying is that the only reason you knew for a fact that the reapers were indeed doing that end run to that relay was that ME3 was coming out, and that the tweets had said that "the reapers started moving there after the battle of the citadel." It was metagaming. Shepard had only visions and rantings of an insane scientist. There was no concrete proof. It was an act of faith. Blow up the relay and stop the invasion. So 300,000 die.
I don't use twitter, so that had no influence on me. I took it at face value because its a videogame, nothing more. If it says the reapers are coming, the reapers are coming. Thats the limit of how much I'm willing to metagame as I feel that takes from the experience. I save the base regardless, I don't like changing my decisions based on user-knowledge of the consequences. It was more than just the ravings of an indoctrinated. Or did you forget the science they used behind measuring it? The pulses the reaper artifact were sending. There's also the detail of Shepard getting the vision as well (IT fans love mentioning this).
But the Alliance was going to blow it up anyway. Hackett sent in the marines to do it if Shepard didn't do it. Did it really have to do with the reapers? Or was it just a test to see what happened if a relay blew up, and Shepard working for Cerberus, was a perfect patsy for the job? The reaper business being secondary and all that.
You can either speculate all the reasons for it you want or just take it at face value and accept that it was to stop the reapers. Its up to you. It's just a game, imo you're looking too deeply into this stuff.
My point is that both Vasir and Shepard did bad things. Bioware had to use the general Cerberus judgement because not everyone's Shepard did all the bad things. Otherwise, she could easily point fingers if she had access to the same information. They're really not much different.
There are decisions in the game that Shepard has to do that are canon that can be criticized so I wouldn't be so quick to wave this off as being Biowares only option. The turian councilor in the first game certainly didn't have any problem judging and criticizing Shepard no matter what decisions you made. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
You say they're not much different, I say they are. She is judging Shepard due to the deeds and activities of someone else. He is being judged for something he didn't actually do or necessarily even condone. Shepard can judge her for the actions SHE did. To me this distinction couldn't be farther apart. These are completely different things. Blaming someone for something they did is NOT the same as blaming them for something someone else did.
Shep is not above sacrificing civilians. Look at Zaeed's loyalty mission for example.
I never said he was. The difference is that Zaeed put them in that position (somewhat accidentally) and not Shepard where as Vasir purposely and with clear intent blew up a building full of people, had survivors shot and took an innocent hostage to save herself. These two situations are not comparable as far as I'm concerned. Even if they were SO WHAT. Like I keep saying it does not matter at all how good or evil Shepard is, it does not suddenly make her actions any more or less respectable. It changes nothing.
Let's just agree to disagree. Its clear neither side is going to move on this.
Heh, to you maybe. What's your threshold for a significant consequence? Is it -20 EMS? -50? -100? If we'd had a cutscene of Rana running into a crowded building and blowing up everyone inside it, then would it have mattered? I dunno about you, but the first time I read about her actions, I thought, "oh that b*tch. Next time I see her on Virmire she dies."
Honestly the scores don't mean anything to me. Nor should they to anyone, the numbers are rather inconsistent with any scale of importance. I meant it in the sense that its only mentioned briefly and that's it. There was no real substance to the loss. Which is a shame, really. This happened to nearly all the side characters of the trilogy, with everything being summed up, often times vaguely and briefly, in little codex lines or mail. Like Reeger, for example. Having a cutscene for it actually would had been better, imo, though I'm not sure how they'd incorporate it into the story. What if during the attack for Earth we see her one of the Asari dreadnaughts ships sabotaging it?
Heh, to you maybe. What's your threshold for a significant consequence? Is it -20 EMS? -50? -100? If we'd had a cutscene of Rana running into a crowded building and blowing up everyone inside it, then would it have mattered? I dunno about you, but the first time I read about her actions, I thought, "oh that b*tch. Next time I see her on Virmire she dies."
It's a weird problem. The EMS system is so random and abstract that the number doesn't really matter, but I do think it should have been at least represented. From a game play stand point the EMS system is supposedly a reflection of the galaxies handling of the war effort and reinforces the narrative that our choices are building up to something. Without the EMS though, the Rana decision is just a brief narrative point and without that other ludic leg to stand on it is deprived of impact.
Yeah but even the STG requested the Alliance send in a fleet. So really, both the nuke and the idea of sending in a fleet all come from the STG. If anyone should be judged for the nuke shouldn't it be the STG that planned the whole thing?
Well I guess they could have sent another message and hoped it got received correctly this time and waited; although I think the point about Virmire being politically sensitive still stands and the Council might have just said no. If we really want to get into it it could be another *time period in which it took Shepard to get there* and Kirahe was tired of waiting and continuously losing men. Maybe, they should have but in the option to say somthing to that degree and just have Kirahe shut it down. As for the nuke the Council loves getting mad at Shepard and they did send him to deal with the situation.
I can excuse Zaeed's loyalty mission. Unless you're playing an Engineer, seriously... a refinery fire? Where's the protective clothing? Where's the self contained breathing apparatus? Where's the training in how to put out a damned fire? And is your team trained? How do you put out a fire in a refinery? If you don't know how, then get the hell out of there. There are toxic fumes all over the place. That one is on Zaeed.
Vasir is a Spectre doing what is necessary to get the job done. The Council gave a very loose definition. They drew the line at destroying colonies and allying with the Geth. Shepard also might not have been a Spectre in ME2. Shepard might simply have been a Cerberus agent.
I really don't think you can take the plot seriously. I've said it too many times. It's an interactive Arnold movie. The Council is the boss that always yells at Shepard. Udina also fills that role. They're the comic relief. Shepard is the action hero who shoves mercs out windows and is a general bad ass, and no matter what she does, Shepard always seems to skate by on morality - even to the point of executing Joram Talid (hey, the guy was having his thugs shake down human merchants!).
That's why Kelham ordered the hit - some merchant probably paid Kelham enough money to put out a hit - "we gotta do somethin' about this guy. If he gets elected we're outta business. Here. Here's 50,000 CR. Can you get rid of him?" "Sure, no problem. We'll take care of him." Enter Kolyat. Talid gets killed by an alien. But Shepard comes in stops Kolyat and can kill Talid herself.
Shepard can be a real ass in this game. Punching reporters.
She's not a villain. She's a spectre.
Yep, but I can see why people often get the two confused.
It's a weird problem. The EMS system is so random and abstract that the number doesn't really matter, but I do think it should have been at least represented. From a game play stand point the EMS system is supposedly a reflection of the galaxies handling of the war effort and reinforces the narrative that our choices are building up to something. Without the EMS though, the Rana decision is just a brief narrative point and without that other ludic leg to stand on it is deprived of impact.
It's subjective. Everybody has a different experience. Those two previous encounters with her were what heightened the impact of that ANN article for me. It was an example -- however minor -- of a trilogy spanning encounter, and I love those. So... when I read about dear Rana in ME3, I remembered letting her go on Virmire, thinking she was just an innocent nobody caught between geth shooting at me, and me shooting at geth. Then I remembered letting her go again on Korlus, even though there was that nagging thought about lightning striking twice in the back of my mind, supported by Zaeed's comments -- he actually was on the Korlus mission that first time I played it, heh. I didn't care about blaming indoctrination for what Rana did, I only felt a brief but intense desire to go back in time and strap her to the twenty-kiloton nuke we left behind on Virmire; for just one brief instant, gone as quick as it arrived, I would have sacrificed both Kaidan and Ashley to make that happen. 
It's subjective. Everybody has a different experience. Those two previous encounters with her were what heightened the impact of that ANN article for me. It was an example -- however minor -- of a trilogy spanning encounter, and I love those. So... when I read about dear Rana in ME3, I remembered letting her go on Virmire, thinking she was just an innocent nobody caught between geth shooting at me, and me shooting at geth. Then I remembered letting her go again on Korlus, even though there was that nagging thought about lightning striking twice in the back of my mind, supported by Zaeed's comments -- he actually was on the Korlus mission that first time I played it, heh. I didn't care about blaming indoctrination for what Rana did, I only felt a brief but intense desire to go back in time and strap her to the twenty-kiloton nuke we left behind on Virmire; for just one brief instant, gone as quick as it arrived, I would have sacrificed both Kaidan and Ashley to make that happen.
My point was that the Rana decision is only a narrative one. Since the game has a mechanic that should be affected by the decision but isn't, it robs it of impact. Like Rana taking out X Asari officials didn't effect the war effort because the war effort number didn't budge. I think because of that the news isn't going to be as effective as something like the faux-Rachni queen.
My point was that the Rana decision is only a narrative one. Since the game has a mechanic that should be affected by the decision but isn't, it robs it of impact. Like Rana taking out X Asari officials didn't effect the war effort because the war effort number didn't budge. I think because of that the news isn't going to be as effective as something like the faux-Rachni queen.
Gotcha. I was thinking a different kinda impact, but fair enough.
I wouldn't call blowing up a building full of civilians, shooting those that try to escape and taking an innocent woman hostage as a shield as being 'exactly what Shepard has done". I also, again, never said there weren't things to judge Shepard for. I was saying that the things Vasir spouts at him are insufficient justification to counter herself being judged. She doesn't call Shepard out on the **** HE has done. She calls him out on the stuff Cerberus has done. She judges him because of Cerberus (sounds familiar to a certain someone on Horizon) whereas Shepard can judge her for the things SHE has done.
"You blew up a building full of innocent people!"
"Yeah, so, Cerberus has done bad things!"
Instead of throwing any kind of judgement really on Shepard or mentioning some of the shady **** SHEPARD has done, all she has to complain about is stuff Cerberus did. She is judging Shepard for what exactly? Working with them? All her judgement is really going towards Cerberus, really. Everything she brings up are things CERBERUS did, not Shepard. The thing's Shepard can bring up are things VASIR did. If she wants to go "don't judge me because you're no saint" she should at least criticize the things Shepard has done and not focus squarely on some terrorist organization that Shepard potentially hates working for but is forced to do so.
Considering how quick everyone else is on here to judge Shepard I'm surprised I'm the only one who feels that judging him just for Cerberus is insignificant. I can think of much better things to judge Shepard for, personally, rather than saying Shepard is bad because of the actions of some terrorist organization. It was a lame justification and seemed like she was just fishing for excuses to redeem herself.
Well, you've got a point, she was ragging on Cerberus' actions rather than Shepard's, can't argue with that. But isn't it somewhat similar though? IIRC it was the Broker's agents who were behind the bombing and she went along with it. Not to diminish her responsibility, I'm sure she knew exactly what the plan was and was in on it.
I don't know, like I said I don't actually approve of everything she did. I guess the big difference in their situations is agency, Shepard doesn't have a choice but to work for Cerberus (for them, not with them or using them as he likes to claim throughout ME3) because no one else has the means or inclination to tackle the Collectors, but Vasir takes orders from the Broker with no such obligations. But she never came off to me as inherently evil because ultimately she did it for the greater good. Not in the same sense as TIM's 'greater good' which is really all about domination which humanity doesn't even deserve, but Vasir's job is to save lives and in her judgement protecting the Broker is the best way to keep doing that. Through the whole mission I was thinking about whether taking the Broker down was really a good idea at all (so I was pleasantly surprised by Liara's decision), so I guess I could understand Vasir's position.
On Shepard, all I'm saying is that pretty much all the situations he's confronted with are designed to make him a hero, because it's just that kind of story. We're never really put in a situation where we have to do something objectively cruel to an innocent. And when we do do something kind of unacceptable, the game usually doesn't make us feel that bad about it (with exceptions). We can extinct the Quarians in favour of the Geth and the way we're presented with it is pretty much tailored to make us feel like we're being nice by doing it. Even blowing up the Relay wasn't Shep's idea, he just pushed the button, and it's not that terrible because it's only Batarians who get blown up and we're not supposed to like them. Execute this guy, that guy, doesn't matter, he had a bad attitude.
Spectres as a group exist to do the shady stuff that keeps the billions out there safe and I just like the fact that Vasir's actions embody that. The difference between Shep and Vasir is largely perspective; we know why Shep does things cos we're the ones doing them.
tl;dr Shep and Vasir are both trying to save lives, so I don't think she's evil and Shep's just lucky he never has to be as much of a dick as she does to single mothers just trying to feed their kids, because he's mostly confronted by people who kind of deserve it, or don't but the game will let us pretend they do. Or if they don't we at least know why Shep has to do it. Or he can paragon his way around logic and probability and everything will work out.
It's a weird problem. The EMS system is so random and abstract that the number doesn't really matter, but I do think it should have been at least represented. From a game play stand point the EMS system is supposedly a reflection of the galaxies handling of the war effort and reinforces the narrative that our choices are building up to something. Without the EMS though, the Rana decision is just a brief narrative point and without that other ludic leg to stand on it is deprived of impact.
The ems system is crap. Some ME2 squadmates are worth 25 ems and putting 4 of them together are worth more then some Alliance fleets. Yeah right. Along comes Anderson who is worth 200 ems if you "save" him vs losing 100 ems if the player lets TIM kill him. The idea was ok, but the execution was crap
With Rana, I would like to see her actually killing those asari. I don't like the asari so that would be cool. And because of her actions, the player loses 100 war assets instead of nothing. The same can be said about fighting Cerberus at Chronos station if Shepard wasn't able to track Kia Leng.
The ems system is crap. Some ME2 squadmates are worth 25 ems and putting 4 of them together are worth more then some Alliance fleets. Yeah right. Along comes Anderson who is worth 200 ems if you "save" him vs losing 100 ems if the player lets TIM kill him. The idea was ok, but the execution was crap
With Rana, I would like to see her actually killing those asari. I don't like the asari so that would be cool. And because of her actions, the player loses 100 war assets instead of nothing. The same can be said about fighting Cerberus at Chronos station if Shepard wasn't able to track Kia Leng.
Indeed, the rating system is a mess and makes no sense, but I guess it's a case of the bottom line being all that really matters. I mean, by gathering every resource I could, I've previously gotten the total -- before halving it for no MP -- up over 8000. More than enough to have every option open to me at the end.
In my last game, I let the rachni queen die on Utukku, and chose the geth over the quarians and betrayed Wrex, and ... I dunno, a few minor changes to my usual decisions, like a transfer for private Talavi and I let Aria choke out Pretrovsky, and no Jacob or Jack or Kirrahe (cuz Thane was already dead), stuff like that... and it was still over 7000 in the end, so I still could get the breath scene if I chose destroy.
1) Let him go, I think. Pushing him out the window seems unnecessary
2) Let her go (or send her to the Normandy for further examination). I always thought Rana might be useful in finding some sort of defense against indoctrination. She has researched it, she got some results...and she seemed healthy. Not my best idea 
3) I guess Ash would shoot him because I don't have Shepards silver tongue of diplomacy +1
4) Make a scene.
5) Legion (but I wouldn't have Tali's loyalty, so there won't be a confrontation)
6) Jack, and talk with Miranda later
7) Rewrite, more help against the reapers
8) drop them, I trust in Liara's abilities here
Indeed, the rating system is a mess and makes no sense, but I guess it's a case of the bottom line being all that really matters. I mean, by gathering every resource I could, I've previously gotten the total -- before halving it for no MP -- up over 8000. More than enough to have every option open to me at the end.
In my last game, I let the rachni queen die on Utukku, and chose the geth over the quarians and betrayed Wrex, and ... I dunno, a few minor changes to my usual decisions, like a transfer for private Talavi and I let Aria choke out Pretrovsky, and no Jacob or Jack or Kirrahe (cuz Thane was already dead), stuff like that... and it was still over 7000 in the end, so I still could get the breath scene if I chose destroy.
I think the major problem is that we're never told what an 'EMS' is. It works in theory because it boils all the choices into an easy to read set of numbers that can be calculated, compared, etc but the writers never give those numbers context. The comparison of different assets to each other makes it worse because, for example, sets of individuals can be just as valuable as entire fleets of ships, which makes it difficult to discern what exactly the system is supposed to be measuring. It just ends up feeling so arbitrary.
Agreed. It'd be completely different if we got to see some of those war assets in action, even if it was just cutscenes, bit... Oh well. It still just comes down to the bottom line.I think the major problem is that we're never told what an 'EMS' is. It works in theory because it boils all the choices into an easy to read set of numbers that can be calculated, compared, etc but the writers never give those numbers context. The comparison of different assets to each other makes it worse because, for example, sets of individuals can be just as valuable as entire fleets of ships, which makes it difficult to discern what exactly the system is supposed to be measuring. It just ends up feeling so arbitrary.
I think the major problem is that we're never told what an 'EMS' is. It works in theory because it boils all the choices into an easy to read set of numbers that can be calculated, compared, etc but the writers never give those numbers context. The comparison of different assets to each other makes it worse because, for example, sets of individuals can be just as valuable as entire fleets of ships, which makes it difficult to discern what exactly the system is supposed to be measuring. It just ends up feeling so arbitrary.
The idea behind EMS is that it's, well, Effective Military Strength. A squadmate on a key position may do more for the war effort than a cruiser that is just one of the ships in the allied fleet.
Implementation is lacking though, could've been much more.
1. I'd disarm the merc and let him go.
2. Rana? I'd let her go... too bad there wasn't an option to take her prisoner.
3. I have a bit of a silver tongue, so I'd bank on my ability to talk down Wrex.
4. That bartender poisoned me. And he just tried a second time? Drink it!
5. Tali - Tali is my friend.
6. Jack
7. Destroy - there is a non-zero probability that the rewrite won't work, and they've done nothing but shoot at me the entire time. They sided with the reapers. Legion explains it in the beginning - rewriting is replacing the data file. Destroying is eliminating the data files. Either way what they were before is dead. That's how alien they are. So go with the sure thing.
8. Thermal clips on the ground. This isn't television.
Here's another choice I thought of.... After the Cerberus coup attempt there's a retired Alliance captain, sitting in the C-Sec office on the presidium in civilian gear, waiting for his partners to distract the guard so he can go in and kill a prisoner who helped Cerberus when they attacked, going as far as killing at least one person himself. As you are wandering the Presidium, you overhear captain Sommers talking to his partners over the comm, telling them he's ready to do the deed.
You go to the C-Sec office and talk to captain Sommers and find out what's going on. Do you invoke your spectre authoriteh and gain access to the cells for Sommers so he can evoke his own brand of justice, or do you talk Sommers out of it, invoking respect for the chain of command he once served as a soldier?
Here's another choice I thought of.... After the Cerberus coup attempt there's a retired Alliance captain, sitting in the C-Sec office on the presidium in civilian gear, waiting for his partners to distract the guard so he can go in and kill a prisoner who helped Cerberus when they attacked, going as far as killing at least one person himself. As you are wandering the Presidium, you overhear captain Sommers talking to his partners over the comm, telling them he's ready to do the deed.
You go to the C-Sec office and talk to captain Sommers and find out what's going on. Do you invoke your spectre authoriteh and gain access to the cells for Sommers so he can evoke his own brand of justice, or do you talk Sommers out of it, invoking respect for the chain of command he once served as a soldier?
I probably won't do either. Won't talk with Sommers at all
Here's another choice I thought of.... After the Cerberus coup attempt there's a retired Alliance captain, sitting in the C-Sec office on the presidium in civilian gear, waiting for his partners to distract the guard so he can go in and kill a prisoner who helped Cerberus when they attacked, going as far as killing at least one person himself. As you are wandering the Presidium, you overhear captain Sommers talking to his partners over the comm, telling them he's ready to do the deed.
You go to the C-Sec office and talk to captain Sommers and find out what's going on. Do you invoke your spectre authoriteh and gain access to the cells for Sommers so he can evoke his own brand of justice, or do you talk Sommers out of it, invoking respect for the chain of command he once served as a soldier?
I let Sommers kill him.
Here's another
Do you tell Aria to have General Oraka killed? Or take the time to go scan the planet and come back and give the pieces to the salarian to get the war assets?
Retour en haut