86 réponses à ce sujet

[ComTrav]

If you're looking for a rationale...consider that if you tried to get Garrus to go the Paragon route in ME1, he seems to have forgotten everything you tried to teach him. It's not so much about what Sedonis deserves, it's what Garrus's quest for revenge is doing to Garrus. (Lines like, "This isn't you, Garrus," etc.)



Though it is a tense moment, mainly because the two have history. It's one thing to tell (say) Jack she shouldn't kill, it's another thing to stand up to one of your friends from the first game--even if you think it's for their own good.

[tmp7704]

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

I would have let him shoot the Turian if that's what he really wanted but somehow I think it is better to walk away. What if Garrus finds out the guy was threatened? He might think of it as another mistake, it could haunt his entire life if you ask me.

Garrus knows the guy was threatened, he can hear the explanation Sidonis provides to justify his actions. But he doesn't believe it's justified to get 10 of your own mates killed just to save one's own life. And it's actually hard to argue with him on this point, especially from paragon's point of view.

[Splinter Cell 108]

tmp7704 wrote...

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

I would have let him shoot the Turian if that's what he really wanted but somehow I think it is better to walk away. What if Garrus finds out the guy was threatened? He might think of it as another mistake, it could haunt his entire life if you ask me.

Garrus knows the guy was threatened, he can hear the explanation Sidonis provides to justify his actions. But he doesn't believe it's justified to get 10 of your own mates killed just to save one's own life. And it's actually hard to argue with him on this point, especially from paragon's point of view.

I know but I like Garrus too much. What good will killing someone else bring to him? If he really wanted it he wouldn't have let him go at all. I think it's a bad for him if you ask me, I don't want him to end up ruining his life over one mistake. Like I said before if he would have persisted then yes  I would have not objected. Besides Sidonis said he would make it up to him, maybe we'll see what happens with that in ME3. That's my opinion though, I don't think he should kill him.

[InvaderErl]

Imagine if during Dragon Age (for those that played it), somebody had stopped you moments before killing Arl Howe and told you not to do it because it would lead you down a dark road. You would have promptly told them to shut the **** up and killed the bastard.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 02 février 2010 - 11:49 .

[Sursion]

Sidonis betrayed his friends and allies and let 10 good people die. He doesn't get to walk away.

[ThatDancingTurian]

I let Sidonis live. He wasn't actively a threat, just a coward, and my Shep doesn't kill people just for being cowards. More importantly, Garrus was really to kill him without even knowing the truth, and my Shepard didn't like what this was doing to Garrus. She saved Sidonis to save Garrus from his dark path.

[morel142]

Find out the truth... Then kill him.



The game allows this very logical and common sense solution to it.. )

[tmp7704]

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

I know but I like Garrus too much. What good will killing someone else bring to him? If he really wanted it he wouldn't have let him go at all. I think it's a bad for him if you ask me, I don't want him to end up ruining his life over one mistake.

The way that particular scene went (after you question Sidonis about his motives but then insist to let him live) i got impression Garrus would let Sidonis go purely out of the respect he had for Shepard. It felt like abusing the bond with him to forcefully change him into a person you'd prefer him to be rather than let him make his own decisions. And so i couldn't really do that, ironically enough also because i like Garrus too much

As for what good would killing the traitor bring to him... like they both say themselves, the closure. This can be a very good thing.

Modifié par tmp7704, 03 février 2010 - 12:07 .

[ComTrav]

InvaderErl wrote...

Imagine if during Dragon Age (for those that played it), somebody had stopped you moments before killing Arl Howe and told you not to do it because it would lead you down a dark road. You would have promptly told them to shut the **** up and killed the bastard.

I really wish someone would've pointed out to me that Harrowmont was a tool before I killed Bhelen...

[InvaderErl]

Shavon wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Imagine if during Dragon Age (for those that played it), somebody had stopped you moments before killing Arl Howe and told you not to do it because it would lead you down a dark road. You would have promptly told them to shut the **** up and killed the bastard.

EXACTLY why I let him take the shot everytiome.  It's the same as if trying to recruit Loghain, or letting Vaughn Urien live. . .  Paragon choice makes a choice for Garrus.  Garrus is a big boy, and can make his own decisions.  For Sheo to allow him to hunt Sidonis down just to steal the thunder, is condesceding.  I's not Shepard's place to show Sidonis mercy.  Only Garrus should be able to have that choice.

Completely agreed.

And its ridiculous when you've literally killed a few dozen or so people to reach that point to back out because "it would be the wrong thing to do".

Modifié par InvaderErl, 03 février 2010 - 12:31 .

[Eradyn]

Shavon wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Imagine if during Dragon Age (for those that played it), somebody had stopped you moments before killing Arl Howe and told you not to do it because it would lead you down a dark road. You would have promptly told them to shut the **** up and killed the bastard.

EXACTLY why I let him take the shot everytiome.  It's the same as if trying to recruit Loghain, or letting Vaughn Urien live. . .  Paragon choice makes a choice for Garrus.  Garrus is a big boy, and can make his own decisions.  For Sheo to allow him to hunt Sidonis down just to steal the thunder, is condesceding.  I's not Shepard's place to show Sidonis mercy.  Only Garrus should be able to have that choice.

Garrus does make that decision, however.  Ultimately, he's staring Sidonis down the scope and finally tells him to just go.  That was Garrus, not Shepard, making that decision.  And his dialogue afterward also shows this.

[OverlordNexas]

I let him go. Later I heard a news report that he turned himself in for the murder of his squadmates.

[Eradyn]

Shavon wrote...

Eradyn wrote...

Shavon wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Imagine if during Dragon Age (for those that played it), somebody had stopped you moments before killing Arl Howe and told you not to do it because it would lead you down a dark road. You would have promptly told them to shut the **** up and killed the bastard.

EXACTLY why I let him take the shot everytiome.  It's the same as if trying to recruit Loghain, or letting Vaughn Urien live. . .  Paragon choice makes a choice for Garrus.  Garrus is a big boy, and can make his own decisions.  For Sheo to allow him to hunt Sidonis down just to steal the thunder, is condesceding.  I's not Shepard's place to show Sidonis mercy.  Only Garrus should be able to have that choice.

Garrus does make that decision, however.  Ultimately, he's staring Sidonis down the scope and finally tells him to just go.  That was Garrus, not Shepard, making that decision.  And his dialogue afterward also shows this.

Not without being strongarmed by Shepard first

Garrus looked through the scope and made the decision after hearing Sidonis out.  He later said he could still see good in him and thus could not pull the trigger.  Shepard pleading and attempting to reason with Garrus is not strong-arming him, certainly not when he ultimately makes the decision for himself.

[FriendofGarrus]

I really wish that it would have been impossible to get everyone's loyalty by playing a strict paragon or renegade. Garrus had every right to take revenge on a coward and a traitor. There definitely should NOT have been a paragon way of recruiting Zaeed....

[Eradyn]

That's why I go Paragade. Best of both worlds, imo.

[Evil_Sarevok]

I let him shoot him, even as a paragon.

[Gill Kaiser]

Deuterium_Dawn wrote...

MrVincent wrote...

Bio Addict wrote...

Quick question for those who took that paragon way.

When I first went through the game, roleplaying as just myself, I was determined to help Garrus get revenge so I just stepped out of the way and let him shoot Sedonis. It wasn't until later that I realized that there was probably more to the story. So what I wonder is if you save him, and get his side of the story, does it turn out that he actually didn't betray Garrus?

*Spoiler*


He did, but he was threatend by the mercs.  He says how he is already a dead man, how he can't sleep at night...well here.

So he's a coward and a traitor. Glad I let Garrus take the shot.

It's basically exactly the same plot as Niko and Darko in GTA 4.

[tmp7704]

Eradyn wrote...

Garrus looked through the scope and made the decision after hearing Sidonis out.  He later said he could still see good in him and thus could not pull the trigger.  Shepard pleading and attempting to reason with Garrus is not strong-arming him, certainly not when he ultimately makes the decision for himself.

While that's what he says, Garrus is also visibly upset and sounds quite unhappy about that resolution. I don't think Shepard's influence can or should be downplayed here -- while the ultimate decision is Garrus', it can't be really considered entirely his own.

[Eradyn]

tmp7704 wrote...

Eradyn wrote...

Garrus looked through the scope and made the decision after hearing Sidonis out.  He later said he could still see good in him and thus could not pull the trigger.  Shepard pleading and attempting to reason with Garrus is not strong-arming him, certainly not when he ultimately makes the decision for himself.

While that's what he says, Garrus is also visibly upset and sounds quite unhappy about that resolution. I don't think Shepard's influence can or should be downplayed here -- while the ultimate decision is Garrus', it can't be really considered entirely his own.

Obviously. It IS a game, after all, and one of the game's features is the player's ability to interact with the NPC's.  That said, again, in-universe it is Garrus who makes the final call after getting all the information and coming to his "own" conclusion.  And yes, he is conflicted; most people would be, I think.  He admits that he can handle black and white, but shades of gray are difficult for him.  That's where the conflict lay.

Modifié par Eradyn, 03 février 2010 - 03:07 .

[tmp7704]

Eradyn wrote...

And yes, he is conflicted; most people would be, I think.  He admits that he can handle black and white, but shades of gray are difficult for him.  That's where the conflict lay.

That part of dialogue made little sense imo, given there is hardly any 'shades of grey' there to speak of. Like the writers were forced to come up with some sort of reasoning why Garrus would comply with Shepard's inane whim to mash the 'paragon route' button and simply couldn't come up with anything sensible. Which given the situation is quite understandable.

Modifié par tmp7704, 03 février 2010 - 03:20 .