43796 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightwriter]

Anyone giggle when you take Miranda to Tuchanka and you make that comment about Cerberus where she says, "I'm putting that in my report"?

[Prudii Aden]

Kabraxal wrote...
And for those interested, Chapter 12 is up.

Short chapter, but iinteresting.

[kraidy1117]

Nightwriter wrote...

Anyone giggle when you take Miranda to Tuchanka and you make that comment about Cerberus where she says, "I'm putting that in my report"?

I also like Garrus comment when you enter the hospital. My fav comment miri makes is about Omega. "What a pisshole"

[fongiel24]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Well as I see it, Bioware has done made two ages for each character. Chronologically and biological.

Because Miri was made to be perfect, and live longer, her body would age slower then most humans. The good thing with Shepard and Miri is that both will live a long time, longer then most humans, thus they are perfect for each other.

There is no guarantee that Shepard will live longer than the average human. Enhancements that improve his combat abilities will not necessarily improve his lifespan. Things like increased muscle-mass will actually decrease lifespan due to the greater strain placed on vital organs. I would actually guess that Shepard will have a shorter life than the average human.

[kraidy1117]

fongiel24 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Well as I see it, Bioware has done made two ages for each character. Chronologically and biological.

Because Miri was made to be perfect, and live longer, her body would age slower then most humans. The good thing with Shepard and Miri is that both will live a long time, longer then most humans, thus they are perfect for each other.

There is no guarantee that Shepard will live longer than the average human. Enhancements that improve his combat abilities will not necessarily improve his lifespan. Things like increased muscle-mass will actually decrease lifespan due to the greater strain placed on vital organs. I would actually guess that Shepard will have a shorter life than the average human.

Remember, he was dead for two years, this can and might have screwed up his body. Plus he has alot of implants in his heart and other organs. Theres a good chance Shepard will live a long time, not as long as Miri butl onger then other humans.

[fongiel24]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Remember, he was dead for two years, this can and might have screwed up his body. Plus he has alot of implants in his heart and other organs. Theres a good chance Shepard will live a long time, not as long as Miri butl onger then other humans.

How do any of these factors imply Shepard has a better chance of living a long life? Lazarus' objectives were to bring him back ready to fight, not turn him into Methuselah. Where improvements have been made, they have been made for increased performance, not increased longetivity. The two objectives are not always mutually exclusive, but there is not always a correlation between them either.

Given that Shepard is being brought back for a suicide mission, it would actually seem more likely that any improvements made would be geared towards short-term combat effectiveness at the expense of long life.

[Nightwriter]

I wondered the same thing, fongiel - whether Shepard's life had been extended, I mean. It was just a natural train of thought I had, since I knew they'd made an effort to optimize Shepard in general.

The truth is they don't address it at all and give no indication one way or the other. In fact their lack of focus on the details of the Lazarus Project bugged me.

[fongiel24]

Nightwriter wrote...

I wondered the same thing, fongiel - whether Shepard's life had been extended, I mean. It was just a natural train of thought I had, since I knew they'd made an effort to optimize Shepard in general.

The truth is they don't address it at all and give no indication one way or the other. In fact their lack of focus on the details of the Lazarus Project bugged me.

It is frustratingly vague, isn't it?

Miranda and Shepard are different because their "creators" did not design them with the same goals in mind. Miranda was designed to run a business empire and continue a dynasty. Her body must be designed to operate at optimal efficiency with above-average performance over a very long period of time.

Shepard is designed for one purpose: stop the Collectors, and if he's still in one piece, perhaps stop the Reapers. Cerberus anticipates that Shepard's objectectives will be fulfilled in a very short amound of time (a few years at most). Therefore, Cerberus bio-engineers would have an incentive to gear his body towards very high performance for that short period it will take him to fulfill his objectives and neglect the long term effects.

Miranda is a beautiful Ferrari designed to be driven for years. Shepard is a state-of-the-art F1 car designed to win one race. They're both marvels of science, but the initial design objectives are different.

[jtav]

I really shouldn't be reading a romance novel while plotting my fic. Does funny things to my brain, not to mention encouraging my tendencies to turn Shep into the Perfect Boyfriend™

[MrNose]

Nightwriter wrote...

I wondered the same thing, fongiel - whether Shepard's life had been extended, I mean. It was just a natural train of thought I had, since I knew they'd made an effort to optimize Shepard in general.

The truth is they don't address it at all and give no indication one way or the other. In fact their lack of focus on the details of the Lazarus Project bugged me.

Agreed.  Everytime someone saw Shepard I expected their mind to be blown, but it never was!

[jtav]

Unless there's a really big plot twist in ME3, Shep should have been in a coma for two years. Feels like the only reason he died was shock value.

[kujoe1982]

I think I read somewhere that humans can live much longer now due to the advancements in medical technology. It's not unheard of for people to live over the age of 100 (up to around 150 years accordong to the wiki), especially if they can afford higher standards of living.

However, such leaps in medical technology have not effectively lengthened the average lifespan of humanity as of yet, since such advancements are still new and most likely not that widespread across different societies. Their technology has only served to eliminate most diseases, thus upping the potential lifespan up to 150 years.

With that said, I doubt Shepard's lifespan has been lengthened, nor has it been shortened due to the enhancements he has received. I don't really imagine him to be that advanced compared to the average human that would already have some degree of enhancement in that day and age. The impression I get is that his cybernetics only serve to affect physical performance and endurance, as they helped repair his more serious injuries when he got spaced. I assume his lifespan is still 'average' barring any major event or condition that would cost him his life.

Clearly, this is much different to Miranda's situation, who had been genetically born to live longer than most of her species.

Modifié par kujoe1982, 09 mai 2010 - 11:48 .

[kraidy1117]

Lookie what I made (yes I was bored)

[TheSixthghoul]

kraidy1117 wrote...



Lookie what I made (yes I was bored)

Now that's a rating grabber!

[Whole Particle]

kraidy1117 wrote...



Lookie what I made (yes I was bored)

Definitely made the right choice.

[Nightwriter]

Sometimes I feel sorry for Yvonne.

[Prudii Aden]

Why's that Nightwriter?

[Ieldra]

Here a few comments on some topics discussion in the last 48 hours. I'll probably write several posts.

The Miranda/Jack confrontation:

This all started with the modified dialogue wheel screenshot with the option "slap her" (Miranda). Before I get to the question of whom to side with and why, let me say I consider this picture insulting and demeaning to Miranda, and I was quite annoyed at its appearance in our thread. Fortunately we were mature enough about it that it lead to a debate rather than a flame war - I can imagine how something like that would've gone down somewhere else. Even so, I would prefer it if controversial topics were not introduced by provocations like that.

Now to the question at hand: why would you want to side with Miranda in this confrontation?

The confrontation takes place in Miranda's office, which meant that Jack initiated the confrontation. Knowing Jack, it's a safe bet that she came there looking to start a fight. Second, when asked about what this is all about, Jack says "the cheerleader refuses to admit that what Cerberus did to me was wrong". She is incorrect in that. At Pragia, Miranda appears shocked by what happened there and consequently would probably not hesistate to admit it's wrong if approached in a less confrontative manner and in a way that let her keep her face. What Miranda does refuse is to admit that Cerberus was responsible. While this is an easy way out, in this special case, there is some supporting evidence. Personally, I don't buy it - TIM probably did know, that the cell didn't know that he knew is just for plausible deniability - but the case is not as clear-cut as Jack makes it appear.

So, if you side with Miranda, there can be a number of reasons for it:
(1) Jack started the fight at a time when it would possibly endanger the mission against the Collectors.
(2) Shepard believes - at least in this case - that the Cerberus cell went rogue.
(3) Shepard trusts Jack less than Miranda and let that influence his reply.
(4) Miranda is not *personally* responsible for what happened to Jack, which, from a certain viewpoint, makes it wrong for Jack to confront her in the way she did.
(5) Shepard believes Jack is an expendable part of the mission in the first place while Miranda is not, and/or shouldn't have been recruited considering her personality.

Having said that, none of these reasons is exactly appropriate for a Paragon Shepard - only option (2) may be borderline acceptable for a somewhat naive Paragon Shepard. For siding with Miranda instead of using one of the persuasion options, Shepard would need a Renegade streak in his personality. Personally, I almost always use the Paragon persuasion option to end this confrontation, sometimes the Renegade option. I do not side with Jack for a combination of some of the reasons I gave above (differring for different Shepards in importance), and I do not side with Miranda because she reacted in an unsympathetic way and did nothing to defuse the situation. "Clearly, you were a mistake" is demeaning and an escalation where Miranda uses her own strengths. While as a rule, I like Miranda's detached attitude and cool and tactical mind which guided her in this situation - it is all very much in-character here for both sides, which is why I like this scene - goading Jack does not serve any purpose here.

So, the balanced approach to this situation would be to use one of the persuasion options and not side with Jack or with Miranda. Of course, not everyone wants to play a balanced Shepard.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 10 mai 2010 - 09:37 .

[Nightwriter]

Prudii Aden wrote...

Why's that Nightwriter?

I just saw that Attack of the Show interview recently - the one where the guy asks her creepy invasive questions.

She was so uncomfortable, it made me appreciate what it must be like to know your body's being used that way by men everywhere.

Then I see pictures like the one above and I can't help think, how would she feel if she saw that? "Do everything to her"? "Slap her ass"? "Take the bra off"? It must be hard, knowing you're now masturbatory aid.

@ Ieldra - jlb was just making a little joke, she wasn't being serious or mean or anything, and she participated in the debate maturely and good-naturedly.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 10 mai 2010 - 09:47 .

[fongiel24]

Ieldra2 wrote...

(5) Shepard believes Jack is an expendable part of the mission in the first place while Miranda is not, and/or shouldn't have been recruited considering her personality.

I used to always use a renegade/paragon option but lately I've been trying to roleplay a lot more so I've been siding with Miranda and choosing this option. Here's my reasoning...

I like Jack as a character, but if I'm Shepard I don't recruit her for this mission. She's a little too volatile and unpredictable for a mission of this importance and if she gets out of control, I'm not sure I can control her. Given a choice, if I'm Shepard I find a nice padded cell where I can drop Jack off after this incident so she can get some badly-needed psychiatric help.

Nightwriter wrote...

I just saw that Attack of the Show
interview recently - the one where the guy asks her creepy invasive
questions.

She was so uncomfortable, it made me appreciate what
it must be like to know your body's being used that way by men
everywhere.

Then I see pictures like the one above and I can't
help think, how would she feel if she saw that? "Do everything to her"?
"Slap her ass"? "Take the bra off"? It must be hard, knowing you're now
masturbatory aid.

I agree with this. As a guy, I can appreciate Miranda's physical attractiveness as much as anybody else but the degree to which she is sexualized at times makes me uncomfortable. If you're looking for a nice body, there's plenty of candidates on the internet that can fulfill that role.

In a way, Miranda's allure to me is in spite of her attractiveness, not because of it. Does this mean I would like Miranda just as much if she were "ugly"? Probably not. But it was the fact she's so much more than just a pretty face and a nice body that made me stop and really become a fan.

*realizes Night's quote was about Yvonne Strahovski and not the character*

Dammit... starting again...

I have similar thoughts about Yvonne as an actress. She's obviously very attractive on Chuck, but why I love her character on the show is the natural sweetness she brings to the part. She can't be stereotyped simply as "the hot girl". If you watch Chuck, you know what I'm talking about.

[Prudii Aden]

Ieldra, fongiel, Nightwriter - I agree with you there. While both the character and the actress are stunning, the reason why I like both is that they have spirit. When I heard Yvonne was the VA for Miranda I was of the mindset to find out about Miranda/do the romance sub plot to see how it panned out, but when the 'Loyalist' trailer came out, that's what sold me. Miranda has spirit and it was after watching that trailer that reaffirmed my decision. Going the loyalty mission and romane dialogue only added to my decision. Hell, I'm currently slogging through a fresh ME1 playthrough and avoiding romance in that just so that character won't have any baggage come ME2 and Miranda can be his one and only.



As for her role in Chuck, again, as you've said - it's not because she's eyecandy. She's so much more - she's competent, and as a friend of mine says, competence is sexy.

[Caihn]

Nightwriter wrote...

Prudii Aden wrote...

Why's that Nightwriter?

I just saw that Attack of the Show interview recently - the one where the guy asks her creepy invasive questions.

She was so uncomfortable, it made me appreciate what it must be like to know your body's being used that way by men everywhere.

Then I see pictures like the one above and I can't help think, how would she feel if she saw that? "Do everything to her"? "Slap her ass"? "Take the bra off"? It must be hard, knowing you're now masturbatory aid.

I agree too.

[Ieldra]

This is my take on the question posted by someone:

Why would anyone in his right mind side with Cerberus?

That's a question with a complex answer, mainly dividable into matters of goals and matters of methods. I'll give some consideration ot both:

The human advancement/dominance agenda

It is unclear what TIM has in mind with his "advancement of the human species" agenda. But I think we can all agree that it combines advancement of technological capabilities, advancement of individual traits and political dominance. One thing to consider is that none of these as such can be challenged on grounds of morality. Political dominance is not necessarily a bad thing. There have been a number of empires in human history, and while none of them were "clean", so to speak, nations and tribes also never were, and while there were some "evil empires", others have been cultural melting pots that increased diversity and open-mindedness within their sphere of influence. So the question is: is TIM simply pro-human, or is he racist? There is no way to tell for sure, but given the setup of ME2 it is not altogether unreasonable to assume that TIM has nothing against non-humans as such, he's simply more concerned with the fate of his own species. I think what people who argue against the pro-human agenda forget is that all politics is a power game. Power is what politics is about, and it's nothing evil as such. What you do with it once you've got it, that matters.

The technological / individual advancement agenda saves the same purpose. It is a matter of control of our own species' fate, and of individuals' control over their own fate (if you take the positive interpretation), as opposed to being controlled by the preferences of someone else who may or may not understand you. Again, it is a matter of power: power gained by technology or individual capability is just as political as any other kind of power and subject to the same games played by all sentient species.

So I find it easy to find at least something to agree to in Cerberus' agenda. Does that make me trust TIM? Not at all. But it explains why someone "in his right mind" might side with Cerberus.

The methods - brute force research and "the ends justify the means"

The first thing to accept here is that to have power means to encounter situations where you're unable to make morally acceptable choices if you want to do your job right. The morally clean hero does only exist in stories. Reality is not like that, and personally, I like stories which are realistic in this aspect much more than the other kind.

Having said that, the main question is how far do you go? How much do you compromise yourself in working towards an important goal? I'd like to make one important difference between ME1 and ME2 here: in ME1, everyone but Shepard is unaware of the Reaper threat. Which means, any atrocities commited by Cerberus in ME1 serve nothing more but a pro-human agenda. There is no reason to believe that humanity's survival is at stake then, so even if you restrict yourself to a rule of commensurability the experiments were not justified. Which one of Cerberus' actions deserve to be called atrocities is a matter for debate, but I think everyone can agree that what was done on Akuze or Pragia (the events there predate ME1) fits any reasonable definition. And whatever you think of Pragia (rogue cell or not), Cerberus as the institution that started the cell must be at least held partially responsible. Both events took place before the Reaper threat was recognized.

Tp the question: "Who in their right mind would side with Cerberus?", considering the situation we're presented with in ME1, my answer would be: no one.

Cerberus as presented in ME2 is much different. The most important aspect is that now, survival itself is threatened. I would still find myself unable to justify Pragia, even when confronted with the question: if humanity dies, it was all for nothing - which is, of course, why we're presented with the easy way out of accepting that Pragia was a rogue cell. But in the face of the Reaper threat, taking some risks with human life in research becomes more acceptable. Considering, for instance, the events of ME:Ascension, up to the point where Gillian collapses from Cerberus' newest concoction it's nothing more than an admittedly risky experiment gone wrong by the unknown influence of a pre-existing condition. In this case, it's more the uncaring attitude of some people which I find repulsive, rather than the experiment itself.

The second aspect here is: Cerberus does something. If the Alliance or the Council were seen to act, or even to be seen to be prepared to act, things would be very different. If the Alliance or the Council really didn't want Shepard to work with Cerberus, they could have said "OK, we pretend we know nothing, but there's this and that secret project and we're really working on it. There may be work for you there." Of all people, Shepard would surely have the clearance to know such things. But no, they didn't go to any efforts to prevent Shepard from continuing to work with Cerberus after his revival. I can only conclude that they either really didn't believe in the Reaper threat, or concluded Shepard and Cerberus would do their dirty work for them while they kept their hands clean. The former is naive, the latter dishonest.

So, considering the setup of ME2, to the question "Who in their right mind would side with Cerberus", I'd give this answer: I'd side with Cerberus because in the face of the Reaper threat, some of their methods have just become more acceptable, but first and foremost, because it is the only option except for doing nothing. And doing nothing is not acceptable.

The situation on the Collector base

This matter has been debated at length. I think there are some arguments for both decisions, but the matter is, even on the surface, not so clear-cut that you could make a "who in their right mind would...." kind of question of it. For the record, I prefer to keep the base because (1) I consider the benefit of the knowledge gained worth the risk, and (2) I am, as a rule, critical of the kind of intuition-driven, unreflected ethics used by those squadmates (and some people on this forum) who argue the Paragon position. Arguing with things like "betrayal", the "soul of the species", the "taint of technology used for evil", or even some kind of "these are things beyond what we should know" instead of any real damage or pain caused does not convince me.

So, considering the situation at the Collector base,  to the question "Who in their right mind would side with Cerberus", I'd
give this answer: Everyone who accepts my points (1) and (2) as valid. That does, I think, include a lot of people who are in their right mind.

I should add that this is not an argument that you should side with Cerberus. It is an argument that you *can* side with Cerberus without being insane, ideologically dogmatic or racist.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 10 mai 2010 - 11:34 .