Orogun01

The writers are human therefor there must be a humane element to every fictional alien race, the only thing that I can accuse them of is of oversimplifying the aliens. You can summarize all races in three words or less. This is fine as a generalization of their culture but I would really enjoy to see more deviations from the established archetypes for each race. Boo@: to be fair to the writers a lot of the characteristics of the aliens are woven into their culture and biology, so even when they can be equated to humans there is a tie in inside the ME universe to explain their behavior.

We could all ask an astrobiologist.

Revisited one of my childhood favorites: The Lawnmower Man.

I would buy that gladly, but since it's a biogame, I don't think anything cool as total destruction of life is going to happen. The thought that game to my mind, is that the race that created the reapers ages ago evolved to a point that they became more like "energy" or something that's beyond life and death. They became just about immortal, but their minds couldn't take it and it was more like hell to them. Who would want to live forever anyway? So to ensure that no other race will achieve that level they created the reapers to sweep them under the carpet every 50000 years. At the end of the ME3 would be a sniff sniff waah waah dialogue with the creator race how they just wanted to help. I think the Reapers maybe were not created but evolved to what they are now. Maybe their ancestors were the equivalent to our transhumanists, believing that their then current state of evolution was merely a trantitional state and they would evolve into higher beings by merging with their technology. What the devs try to covey through the Reapers is to personify a force of nature. All that the Reapers do is to enforce out the natural cycle of rise and destruction that happens in real life. They also seem to be as Legion, the conscience of all the beings that went into their making and I'm fairly sure that their creation will remain unknown for a long time; or so I hope.

What a twist!

Not if I can help it! The only problem I had with ME2's story is that Shepard can die, because what's the point in including a major plot outcome that will not be used in ME3? To teach the player a lesson for making unwise choices and to suffer the consequences? Why not save that for ME3, make an ending possible where Shepard dies and the Reapers win. Probably because it was conceived alongside the whole Shepard is dead campaign.

So the formula translates to: Storyteller=Developer GM=Computer And everything else remains the same.

Badly, the codex entries can only fit in a trilogy.

Lest this thread be derailed by trolling let's be back on the subject. IMO is all about number crunching, but the label RPG has grown wider and does include elements such as storytelling. But as it was originally conceived was to port Pnp into a PC game.

As a way to extract information; reliable information, it is useless. As a way to force a signed confession is very successful those are the thousands of years past; a bunch of crimes pinned on the most likely culprit. And Ill bet you that the persons here would consent to have the knowledge the torturer seeks, just to make the pain go away.

There is no way to translate that into meaningful information, there are many images that are bound to cause responses due to nature or the nurture of the individual. Is less effective and the information, more confusing.

Clockwork Orange style. Still not moral

Why? Did you see what Duncan did to that dude! Deserting isn't a matter of just walking to the door and saying you want to live. You are not compelled to do anything and if you are they may as well made another "Shepard-esque" character who sounds heroic at every turn and done away with all the coward and thug like dialog option. I mean why would any real person with all his senses try to venture the world to fight an untold horror with a whiny emo bitch and a gothic wannabe witch?

But Shepard is a natural leader with a great charisma which explains the "you had me at hello" romances and the undying loyalty of every member of the crew after you get better rations.

Then what precisely are you waffling on about? The opposite?

Fine. Cleavage. You happy now? honestly, some people... Okay, that's a good start. Now tell us, how does it taste?

And in this here category goes Ashley!

But it feels nice to hear them talk instead of reading through faceless lines of dialog. Besides games need VO otherwise Claudia Black wouldn't have a job.

I'm sure I have played that game before.

How can it be both wrong and necessary? Wrong how and necessary for what? How about we keep the intellectually hollow aphorisms to a minimum? They sure sound cool, but aren't good for much. @Wals: thanks for the recommendation. I'm adding that to my wishlist - even if it completely misses the point. I haven't disputed the effectiveness of interrogation methods that don't involve torture, even if it's impossible for any technique to reach 100% success rate. I also don't accept your rationale that using it would mean sacrificing one's morality, as that concedes the point that torture is the wrong choice. Sorry old boy but you're not going to win this one so easily. Morally is wrong, but that's why not everybody is cut out to make the decision to go ahead with it if it means that a greater good is achieved. Is matter less universal and more relative, if the situation warrants for the use of torture and the individuals involved have no qualms about it then it may seem as viable option. Specifically referring to torture as means of information extraction I would soon left it to individual discretion, if the agent out on the field feels that it is necessary and it achieves the goal there won't be any complaints. As for the ethics, I'm sure that a consensus won't be found and that the subject is going to be blurred by aphorisms used to push a point forward. It would be morally wrong to use torture, but once we enter the gray zone of morals and the ends justify the means it becomes a necessary wrong.

SATs = a joke all strategy, not to mention you can take them as many times as you want. they are a horrible measure of intellect IMO you shouldn't be worried unless you didn't prepare for them. the only excuse for not doing well is not putting in the effort to get a good score. I'm worried because i need to beat my archrival... which I didn't... So I'm retaking it... "archrival"? how old are you buddy He is taking his SAT, just how old you think?

Hypothetical scenario: Mr. X is known to have very close ties to Organization O, whose members have been convicted for committing random acts of violence against innocent civilians in the past. State Security Organization S has intercepted information that an attack on a population center identified only by codename is imminent. As a precautionary measure, all members of Organization O have gone into hiding, save for Mr. X. Procedure P is proven to be a reliable method for extracting information from uncooperative subjects, but will subject the individual to considerable physical pain and mental stress. It will, however, leave no lasting scars. Question: would it be wrong for S to detain Mr. X and subject him to P in order to acquire the information necessary to prevent the attack? Aye or Nay? Hypothetical scenario: Mr. X is a mean bad baby rapist and puppy-kicker. State Security Organization S has him in their custody. State Security Organization S knows that if it performs Procedure P on Mr. X, magical fairies will descend from the sky and grant the human race wealth, peace and genuine democratic socialism without fault. The only problem is that Procedure P is a brutal attack which involves psychologically breaking down Mr. X until he's a blubbering, hallucinating child. Question: would it be wrong for S to subject Mr. X to procedure P in order to create a glorious utopia? Aye or Nay? Preform Procedure P with some Preparation H to ease Mr. X suffering and it all be all right

Probably have FTL drives or something. Or maybe there's -another- Citadel they can use. Heeh, no

Torture becomes counterproductive for extracting information since after a while people will agree and say anything to make the pain stop. I clarify that in this case I mean the act of damaging the subject and not just depriving him. E.G. every confession extracted by the catholic church during the Middle ages.

True