359 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

Ladi wrote...

People saying "If you commit forces to saving them you might not be able to defeat Sovereign!" are a little too good at suspending their disbelief. It's a video game, he's the final boss, there's no way in hell you're not going to be able to win.

And this is metagaming. IN-GAME Shepard doesn't know he/she is a computer game character. So the "right" choice for him/her is the one that does not involve this "final boss" reasoning.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 24 avril 2010 - 10:17 .

[SlipperehPuppeh]

Saving the counsel is worth it just to see that damn Turian do the air quotes...

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

Multifarious Algorithm wrote...

The Council's alleged "history" is of one species - the Krogan. And the Krogan weren't stabbed in the back - they were stabbed in the face, for being jerks. The history of the Krogan is that they took off and exterminated the Rachni, then realized they had a bigass army and were content to annex everything they wanted even if someone else was there first.
"Stabbed in the back" is entirely NOT what happened.

Not quite as cut and dried as that, I think.  The Krogans were "uplifted" by council races and used as living shields against the invading Rachni.

So, after those curious little Salarians stepped into the bugs' nest by diving willy-nilly through mass relays, they decided they needed someone to stand between them and the threat they'd unleashed.  After the Krogans rolfstomped the Rachni, they continued acting like Krogans.  The Council races then green-lighted Operation Millions of Stillborn Babies to return the balance to the Force.

Now, we're asked to believe that the Salarians ran bazillions of simulations and that they all pointed to the genophage as the one and only option.  Of course, these are the same guys who predicted that jumping randomly through mass relays would work out fine; that arming the Krogan with all sorts of new technology would work out fine; that encouraging the Krogan to spread throughout the galaxy would work out fine, and that introducing a genetic defect that causes preborn children to grow without a functioning nervous system would balance things out just fine, without any catastrophic psychological or cultural effects.

Salarian predictions ain't real credible.

Yeah, Krogans are brutes.  But they were brutes content to kill each other before the Council decided that sentient beings should be used as meatshields and attack dogs for them.  I'm not a big fan of Krogan culture, but I'm not much happier with the Council's brutally utilitarian oligarchy, either.

The only good thing in the whole damned galaxy seems to be Shepard.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

As far as saving the Council goes, soldiers have value to me--politicians do not. A soldier is trained and willing to step between his people and a threat and take the bullets for people who don't even know him.  I wouldn't spend one extra soldier to "save the Council". The lives of allied soldiers, sure. But self-important functionaries? They're like bugs. Kick over a rock and you can scoop up a whole new council.

Modifié par Tantum Dic Verbo, 24 avril 2010 - 10:41 .

[Ladi]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Ladi wrote...

People saying "If you commit forces to saving them you might not be able to defeat Sovereign!" are a little too good at suspending their disbelief. It's a video game, he's the final boss, there's no way in hell you're not going to be able to win.

And this is metagaming. IN-GAME Shepard doesn't know he/she is a computer game character. So the "right" choice for him/her is the one that does not involve this "final boss" reasoning.

I know, and I'm pretty sure I've made it clear that my thought processes and the ones made by my Shepard (who is only loosely like me in that we share some ideals) are different. I metagame everything, it's why my ingame Pokemon team consists of a Dragonite, a Tyranitar and two HM slaves.

[Elessie]

I guess I'll have to pay more attention to what they actually say about the Destiny Ascension next time I replay ME1. I kinda got the impression that shields and maybe movement were down, but not necessarily all their guns. After all the characters made such a big deal about that ship and its firepower when you first go to the Citadel, it seemed like a resource we'd want to save, especially with more Reapers coming in the future.

[Habelo]

Ladi wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Ladi wrote...

People saying "If you commit forces to saving them you might not be able to defeat Sovereign!" are a little too good at suspending their disbelief. It's a video game, he's the final boss, there's no way in hell you're not going to be able to win.

And this is metagaming. IN-GAME Shepard doesn't know he/she is a computer game character. So the "right" choice for him/her is the one that does not involve this "final boss" reasoning.

I know, and I'm pretty sure I've made it clear that my thought processes and the ones made by my Shepard (who is only loosely like me in that we share some ideals) are different. I metagame everything, it's why my ingame Pokemon team consists of a Dragonite, a Tyranitar and two HM slaves.

haha lol i do that too! i even role play RTW xD

[Dean_the_Young]

Asheer_Khan wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

People who fall back on tactics are overthinking it. The game narritive (painfully, which is why people over analyze) simplifies the choice for you in all that you need to know. Most of what else goes on (like the space fighting), Shepard isn't even in a position to see.

Focus on Sovereign, keep ships. Save the DA, lose ships before Sovereign. That's it. There is no 'Focus on Sovereign but lose ships' route, nor is there 'save Destiny Ascension and get beaten by the Geth ships' option, though either could-or-could-not-if-we-argued-circles-forever happen.

The tactical choice, and the implications of each, are simplified for your judgement.

Excuse me but do we have played in this same version of Mass Effect?

As far as i remember letting council die is HIGH RENEGADE choice not PARAGON.... and whit all due respect but i think you try to misslead us here and maybe you say as well that picking Udina as new council lead is paragon choice too?<_<.

Paragon and Renegade are irrelevant to which saves the most lives. Indeed, many paragon actions directly risk great calamity in giving mercy/friendship to known historic threats on the grounds that they say they're friendly. Rachni, Geth, and so on. Paragon does not mean better.

Actually most Alliance causalties were inflicted by SOVIEREGIN"s main guns not the Geth ships.

Foresight fallacy again. Regardless of how the game cutscene played, in making the choice sending the Alliance fleet against the Geth weakens them at a critical time.

On one aspect you are correct.
Writers don't gather in off courage to create real combat stance scenario for ignoring Ascension scenarios because here will be fury of hate from community when 90% Alliance ships would be wiped out by incoming after Destiny's destruction Sovieregin's Geth support.

First, it's enough. Second, don't feel stingy: I'm correct about a lot of things.

And next thing.
What if Sovieregin would posess some sort of EMP weapon  strong in off to knock out ALL ships in citadel area so they would become plainly unable to defend themselfs against not only Sovieregin but previously ignored Geth ships?
Blind charging at the Reaper was foolish strategy as could be because we didn't have even a slightest informations about what type of weapons Sovieregin posess so could be very possible that incomming Alliance fleet could be pretty easy wiped out by some sort super lasers shooting from each directions of Reaper hull.

If Sovereign had that ability, he would have used it and won regardless by having time to open the relay. He doesn't, and you can't even argue forward foresight on that: you're literally making things up.

If Sovereign was that superior, then the Universe would have died. Nothing would have been able to take him down in time: this is a Dreadnaught that flew through cruisers without noticing, after all:. Therefore, it's useless to fixate on that. When time is running against you, your best hope is to do your strongest hit possible. You simply don't have the time or strength for anything else.

So from tactical poit of view true strategy was in first place saving Ascension and get rid of the Geth support to made clear rear part of the fleet. and of course create safe whitdraw route for damaged ships.
Then very cautiously close up to Reaper area and normaly in first place should be sended in fighter squadrons to asses any possible threaths for capital ships.
Then after such recon capital ships should close up and start bombardament.

And inbetween shrugging off the eventual pittance of mass accellerator fire, Sovereign retakes control of the Citadel and calls the Reapers, killing everyone because you took your sweet time. Way to go, hero: you forgot you were on a time limit.

The game summarized the tactical situation for you in all that you needed to know. The geth fleet is not a threat to your rear. Why? Because the game makes clear what the tactically supperior decision is, and all speculation has to support the game.

[Zulu_DFA]

Ladi wrote...

 my ingame Pokemon team consists of a Dragonite, a Tyranitar and two HM slaves.

Interesting... & creepy. (Just TBH.)

[Fiery Phoenix]

I have faith that saving the Council will prove to be the right choice in ME3. After all, an all-human council is unlikely to stop the Reaper threat. The galaxy needs to unite if it's to survive.



That's simply my justification for saving the Council. I did kill them in a Renegade playthrough, though (unofficial playthrough), but that's just to see the different outcomes.

[Tlazolteotl]

Well, the lack of repercussions for paragon choices is both annoying and unrealistic.

Seriously. There ought to be a dozen instances of paragon Shep being shafted by opportunists .. but I guess Bioware just doesn't want to go with the "real life" lesson of nice guys finishing last.

[Zulu_DFA]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

The galaxy needs to unite if it's to survive.

The galaxy needs more dreadnoughts to survive. And that is achieved by abandoning the Council to their fate.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

The galaxy needs to unite if it's to survive.

The galaxy needs more dreadnoughts to survive. And that is achieved by abandoning the Council to their fate.

Well, seeing as how you have the Illusive Man in your avatar, it's anything but surprising that you say so.

[Alamar2078]

There is no "right" choice in an RPG.



However [for me] it was right to save them for most of my characters. Even the "racist human" Renegades should save the council esp. if you get to see their faces just before they are blown to bits

[Platypus92]

Alanosborn1991 wrote...

Saving them, no matter how stupid they may be. We all need to come together in a diverse group to stop the Reapers.

Not saving them results in everyone thinking humans are racist, and all human council wont even speak to Shephard.

Not even reinstating his Spectreness

I thought Anderson reinstates your status as a spectre when you visit him. That's what happened to me anyway

[Zulu_DFA]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

The galaxy needs to unite if it's to survive.

The galaxy needs more dreadnoughts to survive. And that is achieved by abandoning the Council to their fate.

Well, seeing as how you have the Illusive Man in your avatar, it's anything but surprising that you say so.

Sadly, if BioWare makes the BIG CHOICES meaningful, the ME1 endgame renegade choice being right will require the ME2 endgame renegade choice to be wrong. Which means TIM will indeed go nuts or something like that, to the great joy of all his haters...

BTW, if I am right on this one, BioWare seems to have put some "hints" pointing us kids to the right direction. First, the ME1 endgame decision has a neutral option, which is exactly the same as the renegade one, and this "Ah, Reapers" thing which apperantly shows the Council's insignificance in the Big Picture... Secondly, in the end of ME2 all your squadmates unanimously express their concern with your saving the C-Base or approval with your destroying it.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 25 avril 2010 - 01:01 .

[Dean_the_Young]

The only way not to have the option to have your Spectre status reinstated is to have both killed the Council AND chosen Udina. Udina doesn't like giving out Spectre status, because he's afraid that a Spectre might go wild and do something not conductive to galactic stability like, I don't know, join a racial supremacist terrorist group.

[mentosman8]

I have always saved the Council. My reasoning? Vigil made a pretty repeated point that the Reapers first cut off galactic government causing instability which made things easier for them. Now, of course without the Citadel relay that doesn't have as big of an effect, but the key from that conversation was that a united galactic front is necessary. If we took down Sovreign but the galaxy was entirely unstable from the political upheaval, it would be pretty much worthless. It was a risk to save the Ascension, but you make sure that galactic government will hold together, and nobody will be weakened by major civil wars.

[Dean_the_Young]

Indeed. You get a stable galaxy... that refuses to believe in the Reapers.

[Bigdoser]

There is no right choice both are valid.

[mentosman8]

Or you get a much less stable galaxy that also doesn't believe in the Reapers But really, either way, looking at it from the in the moment perspective, not metagaming based on future knowledge, galactic stability is a big thing to look at

[Tlazolteotl]

mentosman8 wrote...

Or you get a much less stable galaxy that also doesn't believe in the Reapers But really, either way, looking at it from the in the moment perspective, not metagaming based on future knowledge, galactic stability is a big thing to look at

Not metagaming based on future knowledge, having a galaxy at all is a big thing to look at.