376 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

If it means anything, the council that was around during the rachni wars saw fit to have them totally wiped out as well. One problem I see with capturing the queen and handing her over to the Council is: how the heck is Shepard supposed to bring a captured rachni queen back with them? Can't just shove it in the Mako's trunk and lug it back to Port Hanshan. Shepard would have to leave it there gift wrapped for anyone else from the Council to eventually pick up. In the meantime, anyone left that may fear any blowback from experimentation with the rachni would probably just finish the job and dispose of the queen with the acid. 

[Ahglock]

You are in a facility where they are trying to weaponize the rachni. Do you really feel safe turning her over to anyone even the council? Would the council do any different than corpX.

[KaiserShep]

You are in a facility where they are trying to weaponize the rachni. Do you really feel safe turning her over to anyone even the council? Would the council do any different than corpX.

 

Especially since the salarians just seem to do whatever they want. 

[Dantriges]

Ah the Rachni, the species we genoide because they were a threat in the time of the roman empire. We should genocide these italians, too, they could try to do it again. Hey, they already tried once during WW2.

[Fixers0]

With Regards to the Rachni, Bioware's pathetic attemp to justify as to why killing the Rachni Queen effectively led to the same scenario was that if they removed the mission if the Queen was dead it would lock players out of content. If Bioware is not willing to give choices the proper consequence then why have them at all.

[Wulfram]

If it means anything, the council that was around during the rachni wars saw fit to have them totally wiped out as well. One problem I see with capturing the queen and handing her over to the Council is: how the heck is Shepard supposed to bring a captured rachni queen back with them? Can't just shove it in the Mako's trunk and lug it back to Port Hanshan. Shepard would have to leave it there gift wrapped for anyone else from the Council to eventually pick up. In the meantime, anyone left that may fear any blowback from experimentation with the rachni would probably just finish the job and dispose of the queen with the acid. 

 

The Council during the rachni wars was never able to negotiate with a Rachni.  Thus they never really had much of a choice.  The situation of dealing with an apparently peaceful Rachni queen who is negotiating is novel.

[Hazegurl]

I dunno. It doesn't make sense to me to execute her when you could've just as easily had her detained. She already spilled the beans on Saren and his entire operation, and might've had more valuable information if she'd been taken in for further questioning. Not to mention her value as a victim of both Reaper and Thorian mind control. It might've paid off greatly to run medical tests and observations and possibly gain valuable data on indoctrination and the extent of its effects on the mind of a sentient organism. But no, let's waste that opportunity to just execute her (or let her go for that matter), because Renegade Shep is extreme, yo.

 

Also, the Renegade Rachni Queen choice is actually even more of a ripoff because later the Reapers pull another Rachni Queen out of their ass anyway, and for some reason give you a choice to either save or kill that one even though you already killed the one before. And conversely, they give you the choice to kill the first Rachni Queen again even if you previously saved her. Which makes me wonder why they even bothered featuring the Rachni Queen in ME3 at all.

I agree, imprisonment seems like the overall best option for both scenarios and it sucks we didn't get them. I would have knocked Shiala out, cuffed her, and had her on her way to the Council which could have aided in proving Shepard was right by showing the Cipher. But I guess that would have made too much sense. lol!

 

I agree, the Rachni Queen choice was derpy at best. Especially when they switched the Paragon/Renegade points for it. Suddenly allowing the new Queen go is Renegade.    lol!

 

Y'know, at this point I actually think I'd like this series better if they just cut out most of the superfluous dialogue and storyline "choices" and just made plain ol' TPS games. Maybe have you select Paragon or Renegade during character creation and the story unfolds differently based on which one you picked.

 

That could work. I wouldn't mind it being a more natural progression though. Like TW2. The first part of the story is the same and then the player is given a choice which pushes them on two different paths.

 

Edit: No, on the TPS idea though.

[In Exile]

The logic is the Rachni are dangerous aggressive aliens. She tells a sweet story but I'm sure Stalin could make himself sound good too. That falls into the pragmatic category to me j just like not curing the genophage and whacking Wrex in 1. There are bigger concerns about galactic security and peace that I might be concerned with.

The real question would be if they re skinned the Rachni but had the same lore and instead of them being all bug looking freaky things if they looked like a cross between baby harp seals, kittens and pandas how many fewer players would choose to whack them.

We don't know that the Rachi are dangerous or aggressive. We know some of the rachni we meet are aggressive. That's not the same.

The Council wiped them out, but we weren't there for it. All we have are alleged historical records, and the Rachni Queen playing the indoctrination card. We don't know if she can control the other workers/soldiers or if she's right. There's no evidence to make any kind of life or death judgement - there's no pragmatism there.

The confrontation with Wrex is different, because he's actively threatening you. And it's centered around talking him down. He only gets shot when he actively moves to kill you - which among other things is a mutiny.

A random footsoldier with no information - which is ultimately all that Shepard is despite being apparently immunised from the law by being made a Spectre - is not really qualified to render decisions about what's in the interest of "galactic peace".

This is why securing the rachni queen - with an actual military force - and allowing the Council to take possession of her is the sane choice.

Because - among other things - the fact Binari Helix was planning to *enslave a sapient race to create a legion of shock troops footsoldiers* gets completely ignored. That's the real issue there, not that Shepard is allowed to do much about it.

[pdusen]

Y'know, at this point I actually think I'd like this series better if they just cut out most of the superfluous dialogue and storyline "choices" and just made plain ol' TPS games. Maybe have you select Paragon or Renegade during character creation and the story unfolds differently based on which one you picked. Padding out the games with deceptive non-choices like they did got people far more invested in the series than they should have, which is largely what led to the massive disappointment people experienced when the end credits rolled on ME3. Everything really boiled down to the final choice at the end, and everything before it is effectively rendered null and void. So really, they could've just not had any choices at all before then and nothing would change.

 

There are moments that I'm really, really glad devs don't come here much.

[KaiserShep]

Y'know, at this point I actually think I'd like this series better if they just cut out most of the superfluous dialogue and storyline "choices" and just made plain ol' TPS games. Maybe have you select Paragon or Renegade during character creation and the story unfolds differently based on which one you picked. Padding out the games with deceptive non-choices like they did got people far more invested in the series than they should have, which is largely what led to the massive disappointment people experienced when the end credits rolled on ME3. Everything really boiled down to the final choice at the end, and everything before it is effectively rendered null and void. So really, they could've just not had any choices at all before then and nothing would change.

 

How exactly does this make anything better at all? People who are more concerned about straight-up TPS gameplay already have multiplayer, and are pretty much guaranteed to have it again in this game. 

 

Just gutting the game and making it a "plain ol' TPS" sounds plain ol' sh*tty.

[Seboist]

How exactly does this make anything better at all? People who are more concerned about straight-up TPS gameplay already have multiplayer, and are pretty much guaranteed to have it again in this game. 

 

Just gutting the game and making it a "plain ol' TPS" sounds plain ol' sh*tty.

 

How so? There's no real difference between paragon vs renegade, imported vs default state, or femshep vs maleshep; someone playing "action mode" in ME3 isn't missing out on anything of substance vs regular mode. Plain TPS is simply Mass Effect without the farce.

 

The core TPS w/ casting gameplay is the series' saving grace when one looks past the Ed Wood level schlock writing, faux choices and Tommy Wiseau level romances that bizarrely get so much attention despite how brief(and abysmal) they are.

[Jorji Costava]

How so? There's no real difference between paragon vs renegade, imported vs default state, or femshep vs maleshep; someone playing "action mode" in ME3 isn't missing out on anything of substance vs regular mode. Plain TPS is simply Mass Effect without the farce.

 

The core TPS w/ casting gameplay is the series' saving grace when one looks past the Ed Wood level schlock writing, faux choices and Tommy Wiseau level romances that bizarrely get so much attention despite how brief(and abysmal) they are.

 

If the combat mechanics were the saving grace of ME, then the series would have died long ago with ME1, and justifiably so. Its combat mechanics are barely playable for most of the game. Even ME2's combat had serious limitations, with its "one button to rule them all" approach and its insistence on telegraphing every combat sequence with obviously placed chest-high cover. On top of that, the centrality of combat often contributed to the obtuseness of the writing, as central conflicts had to be twisted and contorted in such a way that they could be resolved by combat (Robo Saren and the Reaper baby are the most notable and egregious examples of this).

 

The strengths of the series, as I see it, were primarily in its worldbuilding and its intentional callbacks to scifi works and tropes that were formative for the target audience (i.e. the usual suspects of Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Alien, etc.). Space opera was in relatively short supply at the time ME1 came out; the series filled a market niche that badly needed filling, and here we all are, almost 8 years later.

[KaiserShep]

How so? There's no real difference between paragon vs renegade, imported vs default state, or femshep vs maleshep; someone playing "action mode" in ME3 isn't missing out on anything of substance vs regular mode. Plain TPS is simply Mass Effect without the farce.

 

The core TPS w/ casting gameplay is the series' saving grace when one looks past the Ed Wood level schlock writing, faux choices and Tommy Wiseau level romances that bizarrely get so much attention despite how brief(and abysmal) they are.

 

 

I'm of the opinion that plain TPS ME would have been dead and buried a long time ago. No one would care about any of this crap if it was all combat, especially for those who have been with the series since ME1. Jesus, I can only imagine what that game would be like if it was all combat. It'd basically be 10 hours of Pinnacle Station or something.

[KaiserShep]

If the combat mechanics were the saving grace of ME, then the series would have died long ago with ME1, and justifiably so. Its combat mechanics are barely playable for most of the game. Even ME2's combat had serious limitations, with its "one button to rule them all" approach and its insistence on telegraphing every combat sequence with obviously placed chest-high cover. On top of that, the centrality of combat often contributed to the obtuseness of the writing, as central conflicts had to be twisted and contorted in such a way that they could be resolved by combat (Robo Saren and the Reaper baby are the most notable and egregious examples of this).

 

The strengths of the series, as I see it, were primarily in its worldbuilding and its intentional callbacks to scifi works and tropes that were formative for the target audience (i.e. the usual suspects of Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Alien, etc.). Space opera was in relatively short supply at the time ME1 came out; the series filled a market niche that badly needed filling, and here we all are, almost 8 years later.

 

I'm guessing that Cerberus and the rachni in ME3 could also stem from the greater focus on combat. I doubt very much that we'd have the clone of the queen appear out of nowhere in ME3 if they weren't reduced to more reaper troops. The more combat that exists in the game, the more diverse the enemy types have to be. 

[Hazegurl]

I'm saying that I would've preferred that over what we ended up getting, and that it might've been a better experience overall since it all ended up being really linear anyway.

I like the idea of giving us different story paths based on renegade and paragon but that doesn't mean ME3 was so bad it should have been an even worse TPS.  I loved ME3, the ending just wasn't that good.  That doesn't mean the entire experience should be scrapped.

[KaiserShep]

I like the idea of giving us different story paths based on renegade and paragon but that doesn't mean ME3 was so bad it should have been an even worse TPS.  I loved ME3, the ending just wasn't that good.  That doesn't mean the entire experience should be scrapped.

 

ME1 kind of did something similar by applying a certain number of points to either Paragon or Renegade based on the background you chose for your character. I don't think I'd like it to go any further than that. My Shepard's a spacer/war hero, which gets 20 Paragon right out the gate. I liked having the character get rougher around the edges as time went on. I wouldn't want the game to determine how Shepard changes, just because of what I chose during character creation. 

[pdusen]

How so? There's no real difference between paragon vs renegade, imported vs default state, or femshep vs maleshep; someone playing "action mode" in ME3 isn't missing out on anything of substance vs regular mode. Plain TPS is simply Mass Effect without the farce.
 
The core TPS w/ casting gameplay is the series' saving grace when one looks past the Ed Wood level schlock writing, faux choices and Tommy Wiseau level romances that bizarrely get so much attention despite how brief(and abysmal) they are.

You know what? Even if I accepted your premise that choices don't change anything (which I don't), I would still disagree with you. Even small choices that affect nothing are roleplaying opportunities, and for me that's a big part of what I find appealing about Mass effect. Third person mechanics aren't enough. I've never played Gears and see no reason to start.

[Ahglock]

Ah the Rachni, the species we genoide because they were a threat in the time of the roman empire. We should genocide these italians, too, they could try to do it again. Hey, they already tried once during WW2.

I'd say consistently the races you potentially genocide have 1 trait in common. Absurd reproduction capabilities. The even if they are peaceful in a few generations they will come for more territory level of reproduction. That and a trait for violence is a pretty logical reason to stomp them out ir genophage them.

That being said there should have always been 3 options for these situations.

1 set free
2. Imprison
3. Kill.

Have companions and the x voice reasons to go with each. It's why I loved the final choice in me1 even if my renegade ways made it end up the same as the full renegade option.

1. Save council.
2. Focus on sovereign.
3. Let the council burn.

While 2 and 3 have the same result and similar results in me 2 they are different. Similarly if you imprisoned the rachni the council may have executed her for her potential threat making those choices the same result while being totally different decisions.

[Mdizzletr0n]

I think they should allow you take it as far as possible on both ends of the spectrum and in between. In addition , I'd rather not have companions that never really said anything in response to whatever you do or say.

[Gwydden]

How so? There's no real difference between paragon vs renegade, imported vs default state, or femshep vs maleshep; someone playing "action mode" in ME3 isn't missing out on anything of substance vs regular mode. Plain TPS is simply Mass Effect without the farce.

 

The core TPS w/ casting gameplay is the series' saving grace when one looks past the Ed Wood level schlock writing, faux choices and Tommy Wiseau level romances that bizarrely get so much attention despite how brief(and abysmal) they are.

Other people have pointed out the problems with this view with no shortage of eloquence, so I'll just put it simply:

 

Mass Effect is a crappy shooter.

[Hazegurl]

ME1 kind of did something similar by applying a certain number of points to either Paragon or Renegade based on the background you chose for your character. I don't think I'd like it to go any further than that. My Shepard's a spacer/war hero, which gets 20 Paragon right out the gate. I liked having the character get rougher around the edges as time went on. I wouldn't want the game to determine how Shepard changes, just because of what I chose during character creation. 

I agree, I wouldn't want the entire story decided for me based on the CC. My Shep was pure Renegade in he CC (Earthborn, Ruthless) but he lightened up depending on the situation so i wouldn't want to be pigeonholed into selecting only one option based on that.  However,   I wouldn't mind it if they did what TW2 did and give us a different story path based on a Renegade/Paragon choice.