Meaning that you don't think those were actually problems, or that you think it'd have been worth spending a whole bunch of zots to handle those problems?I read it, I just don't agree with it.
I read it, I just don't agree with it.
Well as long as there was an option to throw Hackett under the bus. Haha. Lets put him on trial! Seriously though, good point. Nothing from the previous games suggested they could've handled it well.
Uh.
Money?
Deadlines?
I'm talking theoretically. Obviously there was a deadline issue, otherwise I would apply the same argument you used against me towards Dean.
Meaning that you don't think those were actually problems, or that you think it'd have been worth spending a whole bunch of zots to handle those problems?
Meaning I don't think those were actual problems that couldn't be worked around or actually used in a way that worked.
Touche. She's right, though, and it would've been silly to have the Reapers invade shortly after (or during) the trial or something. Lots of opportunities for it to be really clumsy. And considering the politicking of ME1 and especially ME2, it probably would've been lackluster anyway. Complaints about not having enough dialogue options, complaints about the structure of the trial, complaints about morality, complaints about this and that and the other for something that really wouldn't have mattered at all in the grand scheme of things.
Actually I was thinking months after the verdict.
Actually I was thinking months after the verdict.
So, uh, what happens in those months afterwards? And I'm guessing the verdict will always be "Not Guilty"?
Either Shepard is in prison, or Alliance HQ working with the Defense Committee, Anderson and Hackett.
Uh.
Money?
Deadlines?
Either Shepard is in prison, or Alliance HQ working with the Defense Committee, Anderson and Hackett.
Nonsense, clearly they should waste time and resources on something that, by design, will ultimately disregard your choices and clumsily recap the events from ME1 and ME2 in dumb political speak and airquotes.
The problem with your argument that you've been laying out for the past few posts, is that half of it is based on your assumption that it would be executed horribly. Maybe it would've, maybe it wouldn't. But I'm not here to talk about that. I'm here to talk about whether or not keeping the trial in ME3 as a way to give flavor and variation to the first mission, and to recap certain events the previous two games was a good concept in general. I say it is, and I say what we actually got in it's place was poorly written uninspired dreck.
And either way, Shepard's eventually pushed front and center to become the galaxy's savior, right?
Yes because Shepard has always been the one to immediately take action against the Reaper threat, has the most experience against it, and Anderson and Hackett have always believed him.
Given the juvenile nature of the "politics" in ME1 and 2, where the council served as little more than Shepard's verbal punching bags to stroke the players ego', the lack of a trial was for the best in ME3.
Yes because Shepard has always been the one to immediately take action against the Reaper threat, has the most experience against it, and Anderson and Hackett have always believed him.
If that was the case why didn't they try and find a way to stop the reapers after the SR1 was destroyed? Or the six months that Shepard was in lock up?
Anderson never cared? In ME2 he tells Shepard its up to her/him to stop the reapers
The problem with your argument that you've been laying out for the past few posts, is that half of it is based on your assumption that it would be executed horribly. Maybe it would've, maybe it wouldn't. But I'm not here to talk about that. I'm here to talk about whether or not keeping the trial in ME3 as a way to give flavor and variation to the first mission, and to recap certain events the previous two games was a good concept in general. I say it is, and I say what we actually got in it's place was poorly written uninspired dreck.
Yes because Shepard has always been the one to immediately take action against the Reaper threat, has the most experience against it, and Anderson and Hackett have always believed him.
I still can't get over how in ME1 you can cut off the council in mid-sentence and the only consequence is them complaining about it before being given the option to do it again.
I still can't get over how in ME1 you can cut off the council in mid-sentence and the only consequence is them complaining about it before being given the option to do it again.
If that was the case why didn't they try and find a way to stop the reapers after the SR1 was destroyed? Or the six months that Shepard was in lock up?
Anderson never cared? In ME2 he tells Shepard its up to her/him to stop the reapers
As far as I know they did but never had a lot of a support. In Hackett's case he kept tabs with Liara in recovering the Crucible blueprints.
Based on prior experience with politics in the MEU, it would've also been uninspired dreck. Especially had Drew Karpyshyn stuck around. I can only imagine a trial in the vein of the council conversations in the previous two games. Remember?
Yeah, no thanks. I'll take the railroading we got, which involves much more palatable stumbles.
So ... what's the point? That's actually the argument, along with the issues involved with why, exactly, Shepard was going to be brought to trial.
It's a thorough mess of an idea just for "flavor", a waste of resources towards something that would also earn complaints about choices ultimately not mattering, let alone how this trial would reach "guilty" and "not guilty" verdicts.
You come off as someone who just thinks all the writing in Mass Effect is bad, which makes me question why you're even a fan. And who's to say it would be a "waste of resources" if it's going towards something that can add fun and variety to the story? You want railroading in these games? Sorry I don't, because I was promised something else. I was hyped into believing my choices matter. So excuse me for thinking otherwise.
I wonder how that would fly in this theoretical trial.
Who cares? I know my Shepard wouldn't
So ... what's the point? That's actually the argument, along with the issues involved with why, exactly, Shepard was going to be brought to trial.
It's a thorough mess of an idea just for "flavor", a waste of resources towards something that would also earn complaints about choices ultimately not mattering, let alone how this trial would reach "guilty" and "not guilty" verdicts.
SImply flavor?
You come off as someone who just thinks all the writing in Mass Effect is bad, which makes me question why you're even a fan.
Nah, I'm realistic about the positives and negatives across the entire series, and the bias involved with certain fans.
I actually enjoy all three games to certain degrees, though ME3 improves with time as ME2 gets weaker and weaker.
You only enjoy them to certain degrees? What does that mean? Because it doesn't exactly sound like good praise. And you're not "realistic" about the positives and negatives. You have an opinion just like everyone else.
There should be a recap of the previous games for new players and more casual fans but you can do that more effectively with a short cutscene.
As far as I know they did but never had a lot of a support. In Hackett's case he kept tabs with Liara in recovering the Crucible blueprints.
As far as I know, no one, not even the characters that were on SR1 that were helping Shepard chase Saren made any effort to find a way to stop the reapers after the SR1 was destroyed. They all turned into c**kroaches scattering all over the galaxy.
Why is Hackett in contact with Liara? If she's the shadow broker, if the dlc was completed, did someone tell him that she is the broker for him to contact her? Did Liara recover the blueprints? From what I remember they were in the archives. So it would be hard for her to recover them unless you mean after Shepard stop the charging evabot and she downloaded the blueprint from the evabot's omnitool?
You only enjoy them to certain degrees? What does that mean? Because it doesn't exactly sound like good praise.
And you're not "realistic" about the positives and negatives. You have an opinion just like everyone else.
Instead of adding a trial, why not just rework why Shepard is on Earth instead?
There should be a recap of the previous games for new players and more casual fans but you can do that more effectively with a short cutscene.
As far as I know, no one, not even the characters that were on SR1 that were helping Shepard chase Saren made any effort to find a way to stop the reapers after the SR1 was destroyed. They all turned into c**kroaches scattering all over the galaxy.
I won't defend ME2's tangent from the Reaper storyline. Forget Anderson and Hackett. Everyone should've been preparing for the Reaper invasion after Mass Effect 1.
Why is Hackett in contact with Liara? If she's the shadow broker, if the dlc was completed, did someone tell him that she is the broker for him to contact her? Did Liara recover the blueprints? From what I remember they were in the archives. So it would be hard for her to recover them unless you mean after Shepard stop the charging evabot and she downloaded the blueprint from the evabot's omnitool?
I think it's safe to assume Liara probably contacted Hackett, knowing he was an Admiral that she could trust given Shepard's history with him.
Retour en haut