Nothing evil about that. Shepard had no idea it would end up the way it did.
Here's what Shepard can do. One of my favorite playthroughs
Yes.
Wrex might be a cool character for you, but he's not for me. I prefer Wreav over Wrex
Did you call your Shepard Darh Vader?
I hated Legion's loyalty mission for this. There was just no way to choose and have any confidence that you were doing the right thing. Despite the suppose urgency of the moment, I stood there forever trying to decide.
Heh....I loved it for that. It felt....real. Things aren't black and white and such decisions aren't easy. In the end, it made me act instinctively (usually favouring kill) instead of rationally considering my decision, as when I did so, I couldn't reach one.
Now if only there had actually been a timer on it and if you can't make your mind up all the geth activate. If the character doesn't have time to consider things like this, the player shouldn't either....
Did you call your Shepard Darh Vader?
That character can have that name. It wouldn't work with the Shepard I play
They do, and it's easy to see why intent should matter from a moral perspective, but I can't defend its use from a legal perspective.agreed. I think even judges recoginze intent in most court of laws, and allow it to affect judgement don't they?
I completely disagree. If my character is markedly different from me, then having me act instinctively (whatever that means) breaks my character. Perhaps he should act instinctively, but my instincts would have nothing to do with that.Heh....I loved it for that. It felt....real. Things aren't black and white and such decisions aren't easy. In the end, it made me act instinctively (usually favouring kill) instead of rationally considering my decision, as when I did so, I couldn't reach one.
Now if only there had actually been a timer on it and if you can't make your mind up all the geth activate. If the character doesn't have time to consider things like this, the player shouldn't either....
If I choose to do Legions loyalty mission, if I have it on the squad, I usually choose to destroy the geth more than rewrite them
I barely remember that loyalty mission, if you go paragon on it, isn't it easier to make the Migrant Fleet back down in Mass Effect 3?
Rewriting them makes them worth more war assets in ME3.
Destroying the heretics lowers the requirements to have peace, so in terms of optimizing the game to get the best results, it's technically better to go renegade at heretic station.I barely remember that loyalty mission, if you go paragon on it, isn't it easier to make the Migrant Fleet back down in Mass Effect 3?
Not choosing to spread the cure for the Krogan and then trying to lie to Wrex.
Nothing wicked about not wanting an ultra-violent race of man turtle brutes to multiply faster than rats without any kind of cultural reform. I personally killed Wrex back in ME1 for pointing his weapon at Shepard, so I didn't need to worry about lying to him.
And push that guy out of the window in Mass Effect 2.
Nothing wicked about killing a merc when the alternative is allow him to run free in the middle of a battle where i'm engaging his comrades.
U.S paratroops executed plenty of surrendered german troops on D-Day as they couldn't afford to be bogged down by taking care of them and the alternative of letting them go was stupid as hell, the same principle applies here.
How about letting hundreds of civilians burn alive so a merc can get revenge on a petty warlord?
Unlike those civilians, Zaeed's the one that'll have Shepard's back in the SM. So having him focused on his game is more important.
There were only a handful of civilians killed btw.
Nothing wicked about not wanting an ultra-violent race of man turtle brutes to multiply faster than rats without any kind of cultural reform. I personally killed Wrex back in ME1 for pointing his weapon at Shepard, so I didn't need to worry about lying to him.
Well your avatar is Cersei Lannister so I'm not surprised by your comment
I can't believe the Americans wouldn't detain the German prisoners. Killing is wasteful, only slightly better than letting them go. A live trooper can provide information, or labor, or even be paid to turn sides if they fit the mercenary mindset.
My problem with Legion's loyalty mission was that both options seemed equally evil. If there's a moral angle at all, it stems from the Geth being a sapient race that deserves to exist. Killing or rewriting them were equally abhorrent from that perspective.
Shepard didn't perceive herself as being in conflict with the Geth, so she has no cause to destroy them. But both options did that.
That was a choice that needed a refuse option. Just walk away and accept that you don't get Legion's loyalty.
Shepard is an alliance operative no matter what else you imagine him/her to be.
The heretic Geth are an active threat to the alliance, they killed a large number of humans.
Any kind of fuzzy feeling have no place in this equation, they are an enemy and need to be neutrelised - one way or another.
And that's if you don't simply consider them a bunch of malfunctioning toasters.
Nothing wicked about not wanting an ultra-violent race of man turtle brutes to multiply faster than rats without any kind of cultural reform. I personally killed Wrex back in ME1 for pointing his weapon at Shepard, so I didn't need to worry about lying to him.
Nothing wicked about killing a merc when the alternative is allow him to run free in the middle of a battle where i'm engaging his comrades.
U.S paratroops executed plenty of surrendered german troops on D-Day as they couldn't afford to be bogged down by taking care of them and the alternative of letting them go was stupid as hell, the same principle applies here.
Unlike those civilians, Zaeed's the one that'll have Shepard's back in the SM. So having him focused on his game is more important.
There were only a handful of civilians killed btw.
Even if you may be right on principle, society as whole would condemn that act as an atrocity...and it's society (collectively) which dictates what is good and evil.
They do, and it's easy to see why intent should matter from a moral perspective, but I can't defend its use from a legal perspective.
Not to mention that I don't think another person's intent is ever knowable.
when has justice ever been as simple as a rule book?
Justice is at best an ill-defined and at worst a meaningless concept.when has justice ever been as simple as a rule book?
Paragon/Renegade morality is way too simplistic and arbitrary it should be scrapped completely.
They're malfunctioning toasters to exactly the same degree that the Salarians are.Shepard is an alliance operative no matter what else you imagine him/her to be.
The heretic Geth are an active threat to the alliance, they killed a large number of humans.
Any kind of fuzzy feeling have no place in this equation, they are an enemy and need to be neutrelised - one way or another.
And that's if you don't simply consider them a bunch of malfunctioning toasters.
Shepard didn't perceive herself as being in conflict with the Geth, so she has no cause to destroy them. But both options did that.
That was a choice that needed a refuse option. Just walk away and accept that you don't get Legion's loyalty.
Even if you may be right on principle, society as whole would condemn that act as an atrocity...and it's society (collectively) which dictates what is good and evil.
And which society would that be? Council space which grants spectres the ability to do just that or the lawless terminus?
They're malfunctioning toasters to exactly the same degree that the Salarians are.
I value sapience.
One problem with this: the heretics threaten everyone else. Remember also, the heretics were planning on implementing a virus that would make all geth side with the reapers. Legion even tells you this before even going on the mission. To ignore the mission and leave the heretics be would be to disregard all sapient life throughout the galaxy, because you are now willingly letting a hostile faction dedicated to the extermination of galactic society.
Retour en haut