173 respuestas en este tema

[Tibilicus]

I only played through ME once and din't save the council, I still don't get how my actions were bad.

For a start, unlike many which played ME I didn't read what the best option was and didn't use any guides to make moral choices. I always tried to make decisions in a way which reflected what I would personally do in the situation. Here then is my rationality behind not saving the council.

1) At the point in the game where your forced to make the decision, your informed saving the council will cost lots of ships. I couldn't predict what effect this would have (turns out it meant squat) so I chose to "focus on sovereign". To me that wasn't making a calculated decision to destroy the council, that was a logical decision. If sovereign had successfully opened the mass relay the whole galaxy would be dead. My Shepard has always been about getting the mission done and acting in a utilitarian way, this to me then made sense.

2) I never wanted the council to die but I figured after it happened that a human led council would be the best way to react to the reaper threat. The council which perished proved on numerous occasions they weren't up to the task, I believe a human led council would be. I was mislead though apparently seeming the ME2 writers decided the new human led council consisted of morons.

3) It specifically states a "human led" council in ME, this doesn't seem to be the case in ME2 though. I'm under the impression that the council is all humans, I may be wrong but this seems to be the case. This also doesn't make sense seeming why would the other races let the humans monopolise the council. The Alliance is restricted by treaty to a certain military capacity and the council races could easily stop humanity if they tried something shifty. Yet apparently in ME2 the humans have taken over and whilst the turians seem really annoyed about it they still wont do anything about it. It doesn't make sense.


My point being that the best action from my point of view back when ME was released was to "focus on sovereign". I personally feel the ME2 writers cocked it up as a human led council is completely different to a human council..

Editado por Tibilicus, 21 marzo 2010 - 01:10 .

[Dave the Seagull]

abstractwhiz wrote...

 It strikes me as unrealistic that humanity was able to just waltz in and assume control.

I'd like to be the first to point out this glorious unintentional pun.

[SimonTheFrog]

IccaRa wrote...

Is there any discernible different in ME2 when it comes to the Paragon Council Dead ending and the Renegade Council Dead ending? Are you still hated?

My MainShep saved them, but I'm playing through as a secondary Shep who chose to "focus on Sovereign" and encouraged a new alien council.

Well, generally, the whole gaming experience is not changed at all. There is hardly different content on either side.
But you do get quite different dialogs from a number of NPC's, especially on the citadel
And some stuff you hear describes the fate of humanity among the other races as changed. Like the anti-human riots on the citadel that you hear about (but you won't see) or how the "relationship" between Turians with humans is now either screwed or improved. 
But that's just stuff you hear but cannot see.

[abstractwhiz]

Dave the Seagull wrote...

abstractwhiz wrote...

 It strikes me as unrealistic that humanity was able to just waltz in and assume control.

I'd like to be the first to point out this glorious unintentional pun.

What makes you think it was unintentional? 

[SimonTheFrog]

Tibilicus wrote...

I only played through ME once and din't save the council, I still don't get how my actions were bad.

For a start, unlike many which played ME I didn't read what the best option was and didn't use any guides to make moral choices. I always tried to make decisions in a way which reflected what I would personally do in the situation. Here then is my rationality behind not saving the council.

1) At the point in the game where your forced to make the decision, your informed saving the council will cost lots of ships. I couldn't predict what effect this would have (turns out it meant squat) so I chose to "focus on sovereign". To me that wasn't making a calculated decision to destroy the council, that was a logical decision. If sovereign had successfully opened the mass relay the whole galaxy would be dead. My Shepard has always been about getting the mission done and acting in a utilitarian way, this to me then made sense.

2) I never wanted the council to die but I figured after it happened that a human led council would be the best way to react to the reaper threat. The council which perished proved on numerous occasions they weren't up to the task, I believe a human led council would be. I was mislead though apparently seeming the ME2 writers decided the new human led council consisted of morons.

3) It specifically states a "human led" council in ME, this doesn't seem to be the case in ME2 though. I'm under the impression that the council is all humans, I may be wrong but this seems to be the case. This also doesn't make sense seeming why would the other races let the humans monopolise the council. The Alliance is restricted by treaty to a certain military capacity and the council races could easily stop humanity if they tried something shifty. Yet apparently in ME2 the humans have taken over and whilst the turians seem really annoyed about it they still wont do anything about it. It doesn't make sense.


My point being that the best action from my point of view back when ME was released was to "focus on sovereign". I personally feel the ME2 writers cocked it up as a human led council is completely different to a human council..

Yes, the "focus on sovereign" is exactly what i felt is the only option that makes sense.
I think they should have left this one out of the decision and more clearly tell the player that he only decides which part of the fleet dies: human or alien.

What now lingers for me is the question about "human led". The council, is it just the three dudes we see in the holograms? The galaxy is run by three dudes?
I always thought that "human led" means a majority in some parliament. And that the seats are given according to military might. 
Ah.. anyway... i hate politics :happy:

[Dave the Seagull]

abstractwhiz wrote...

Dave the Seagull wrote...

abstractwhiz wrote...

 It strikes me as unrealistic that humanity was able to just waltz in and assume control.

I'd like to be the first to point out this glorious unintentional pun.

What makes you think it was unintentional? 

Well then, that makes it twice as glorious, since it was a stealth pun.

Also, whenever I hear a character say something about how much they hate "politicians" for some abstract reason (ESPECIALLY Ashley, with her "Aaaaand thats why I hate politicians) I want to jam forks in their eyes.

Editado por Dave the Seagull, 21 marzo 2010 - 01:25 .

[Nostradamoose]

"Ah yes, the Council, the Galactic government of the Milky way controlled by the 3 most powerful species of the galaxy, we have dismissed that claim"



Yea... I guess killing them "can" be bad.

[Bigdoser]

wizardryforever wrote...

Wow, I can't believe that people think killing the council would be the right thing to do.  Maybe if Shepard were an unfeeling robot (though even Geth have feelings now), then focusing on Sovereign would be the right thing to do.  But seriously, letting the council that has successfully run a huge interstellar government die just because they annoyed you is even worse than focusing on pure logic.  What's even worse is that people like the OP are now asking "WTF, all I did was completely take over your government and effectively kick everyone else out, what's the big deal?"

Think about it, if such a thing happened to a council that we were part of, and some upstart species, lets say Turians, killed off our representation and replaced it with all Turians, don't you think we would be royally pissed off at the Turians for doing such a thing?  That's why I was so surprised that the council dying was the default situation.

I'll admit, I was really annoyed at the council the first time I played ME2, because things seemed so positive when I saved them, like they finally believed me.  Now they go back to being their willfully ignorant selves just cause I die.  Still, much better for everyone if the council lives.

EER just to let you know i always save the council i just wanted to see what happens when you let them die >_>

[Bigdoser]

IccaRa wrote...

Is there any discernible different in ME2 when it comes to the Paragon Council Dead ending and the Renegade Council Dead ending? Are you still hated?

My MainShep saved them, but I'm playing through as a secondary Shep who chose to "focus on Sovereign" and encouraged a new alien council.

Pretty much lol its the same XD.

[GenericPlayer2]

IccaRa wrote...

Is there any discernible different in ME2 when it comes to the Paragon Council Dead ending and the Renegade Council Dead ending? Are you still hated?

My MainShep saved them, but I'm playing through as a secondary Shep who chose to "focus on Sovereign" and encouraged a new alien council.

Well there are the news reports - Turians start building more ships than previous treaties allow them because they no longer feel safe. The Asari seem to take a step back from Galactic responsibilities, heard nothing about Salarians, though they are always obsessed with the Krogan threat and don't care about anything else.

In terms of actual interactions with Shep, the turian shopkeeper at Rodan Expeditions (on level 28 of Zakera Ward) is hostile to humans, but I find the 'renegade' discount option with him to be entertaining. 

Also the two Asari who need the fake ID are more critical to humans, but the optional "f**** off " dialog has Shep saying a few lines that summarize my view of the old council - again very entertaining.

Aside from that, obviously the meet with Anderson is different. If you let the council die and picked Udina as successor, I don't think there is a way to get your Spectre status back, and that only affects a tiny amount of dialog.

[Unata]

Asari wrote...

Wild Still wrote...

They had it coming, and the only good Asari is a dead Asari.

OMG I spit out my coffee on that one! great reply!

[Wild Still]

Lord Coake wrote...

Asari wrote...

Wild Still wrote...

They had it coming, and the only good Asari is a dead Asari.

No worries, ma'am.  Internal Security already has him and the rest of Terra Firma under watch by conceled snipers.

Captain Kirk will protect me. He knows just how to handle alien wiminz.

[david46]

I assume there is an oath taken when becoming an Alliance military officer. Shep is bound by that oath. The Paragon decision should be to protect the Alliance ships by concentrating on the greatest threat first. Saving the council by risking your fleet should be the oath breaking Renegade Option.



Although how a mere commander winds up making that decision rather than Admiral Hackett is beyond me.

[wizardryforever]

You realize that "focus on sovereign," as in letting the council die, doesn't make that much tactical sense either.  You're essentially leaving all those Geth ships attacking the Ascension behind you in a critical firefight.  So once they finish off the Ascension (ethical ramifications aside), they will hit you from behind while you "focus on sovereign."  That and the fact that the Ascension could come in handy in this and in future battles.  Just saying that "focus on sovereign" is not necessarily the most sound decision.

I too have trouble believing that the humans could so easily take over the citadel in the aftermath, considering that, by treaty, the humans only have 1/3 the fleet of the asari and salarians, and only 1/5 the fleet of the turians.  How exactly does the Alliance plan on keeping control of the galactic government, especially when the Reapers arrive and everything hits the fan?

[SavagePassenger]

Lalandrathon wrote...

Saving the council always seemed like the right move tactically to me, politics be damned. Fighting the Geth fleet while they are concentrating fire on the destiny ascension and then fighting sovereign seems a lot less dangerous than letting Sovereign and the Geth fleet meet up with human ships being the only targets left.

That is a good point. They would have had to fight the Geth that were left anyway, so might as well attack while they are distracted. The game kind of ignores that it seems; they point out that a lot of human lives were sacrificed to save the council, but there would have been casualties finishing off the Geth after Sovereign went down anyway.

edit: didn't see you posted almost the same thing ^  oh well.

Editado por SavagePassenger, 21 marzo 2010 - 04:34 .

[david46]

The Turians, Asari and Salarians don't believe in the Reapers so I let their ships fight the enemy they believe is behind it all. The fact that they are not up to the task is not my problem. If you save the Destiny they do the Brave Sir Robin bit. Me I am going to have my ships focus on the real threat, defeating Sovereign before it can invite some pals to the party. Seeing their "god" blown to bits has to destroy the Geth's morale and make them a non factor in the cleanup. The admiral also makes this choice later.

[screwoffreg]

Whats weird is that we never see any other dreadnoughts at the Citadel other than the Destiny Ascension. Even during the battle with Sovereign all the human ships were cruisers. Where were the heavies?

[devilsgrin]

screwoffreg wrote...

Whats weird is that we never see any other dreadnoughts at the Citadel other than the Destiny Ascension. Even during the battle with Sovereign all the human ships were cruisers. Where were the heavies?

/\\ /\\ this

there are enormous plotholes in ME1, that incidently carry over into ME2. The lack of anything resembling an actual fleet defending the Citadel is ludicrous, especially considering that the Turian fleet would be only as far away as the Alliance - - - a Mass Relay jump away... Of course the apparent stupidity of the Council is the biggest plothole of all. how a trio of sentients that essentially guide the actions of the Galaxy could be so foolish is staggeringly poor writing. Arrogance is a small rationale, resistance to the Human influence in Council space being another. But once Saren is confirmed as a Rogue, their obstinancy is unbelievable.

Letting the Council die IS bad. Even a paragon Shep, military-minded or not, would know the value of "protecting the king" at the cost of some "pawns"... The Destiny Ascention, damaged or not, is still the single most powerful ship in Citadel space (Aside from Sovereign, and its an entity not just a weapon). As a weapon its immensely powerful. But as a symbol, it represents the strength of the Council. The strength and pride of many millennia of cultural advancement. It essentially symbolises everything that Shep should be fighting for. Allowing it to be destroyed, along with losing without question some of the most brilliant Asari commanders (and no doubt commandos) around, would be a great loss to the galaxy, both symbolically and militarily. Especially knowing, as shep does, whats coming on the horizon.


This is why i only let the council die once, and only to see what happens in the cut-scenes.

[valttu]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

I saved them, so far i am dissapoint. But i really want that "i told you so" moment with them. It would be most satisfying.

Agreed! In ME3 there should be a moment when Council tries to give you orders or get help from you, but you can say:

"You should've listened to me long ago. Now it's too late..."

or the same thing you can say to TIM in the end of ME2:

"I'm sorry, I'm having trouble hearing ya. I'm getting a lotta' bull**** on this line."

Editado por valttu, 21 marzo 2010 - 12:43 .

[Saberwolf116]

I chose to save the council, but that was before I realized how staggeringly stupid they would be in ME2.



Now I save them because I want to use air quotes on them in ME3.

[devilsgrin]

Shandepared wrote...

devilsgrin wrote...


Letting the Council die IS bad. Even a paragon Shep, military-minded or not, would know the value of "protecting the king" at the cost of some "pawns"... The Destiny Ascension, damaged or not, is still the single most powerful ship in Citadel space (Aside from Sovereign, and its an entity not just a weapon).

Completely irrelevant if Sovereign opens the relay.

Come on, guys, this **** is not complex.

yes, if Sovereign opens the relay, its game over. However, Sovereign had also closed the arms of the Citadel... theres little that focussing on Sovereign can accomplish whilst theres no way to attack it. With the Destiny Ascension outside the arms, saving it makes sense. since as the Alliance arrives, there's no direct attack route to Sovereign.