#fshepdebplaythrough

[omegastation]

several things come to mind as I'm doing this fshep playthrough and none of those things are popular in the fandom and i think it's something, really, to realize more and more that you just don't vibe with what a lot of people are saying. not all of them (fandom is not a monolith deb!!!), but still

if i have to make a list i'll start with garrus, who i truly love, but who knew people who had a personal history on omega would be best attached to his cause, while he didn't have that personal history at all:

he said it himself, he was looking for a place with no "red tape" to let his rage out. genuinely the first conversation back on the normandy is just a typical "watch out for a guy's red flags" vid on my fyp lmao

and fandom wants us to believe that he's the one Truly Grieving, the One and Only Who Felt Pain, and that's just... not true to me. I think crew members and squad members grieved just as much and grief can be seen in different ways. grief is not about being stuck somewhere, it's not about behaving in a specific way and if you think this is it, you are truly lucky because you've never gone through it, so you don't know how it feels like

joker is obviously in a lot of pain and anger and his grief is expressed in a very different way than garrus. liara's grief is also another example of a grief expressed very differently. but it's still grief, and you can't take that away from those characters. i say so lol

and what garrus is doing on Omega is extreme, but it's extreme because it's not just linked to grief, it's linked to accumulated anger over the years with no way to handle it with a clear purpose. it's linked to someone who can't see shades of grey, and lack of nuance in a person is a terrible terrible thing to have

the most important moment is when he says "and now they're dead. shows what i know" because that's the beginning of his character development during me2, and that's why i love him despite the red flags and everything, there is a point to his storyline in me2. garrus in me3 is a different person than garrus in me1 and me2, there's growth. but before growth you gotta see what's worth changing and at this point in me2 there's work to do. even in me1 there was a lot of work to do tbh

[omegastation]

I love Mass Effect when it's unintentionally hilarious.

Example 1: A very sad scene is ending when Shepard suddenly yells "THIS COULD BE USEFUL!"

Example 2: Same order of idea: you end a loyalty mission that destroys your heart (let's say, Kasumi dealing with Keiji's graybox), the 'Mission Complete' screen appears and you hear Shepard say, as if commenting the weather: "This is valuable."

Example 3: The villain is telling you they're going to crush you and the fight is about to start (basically Tela Vasir right in front of you) when Shepard suddenly yells: "WE'VE BEEN SPOTTED!"

[omegastation]

always extraordinary to me that we went from this Jack:

"I figure every time someone dies and it's not me, my chances of survival go up."

to this Jack:

"Anyone screws with my students, I will tear them apart."

To me, her wanting others to live is also linked to wanting herself to live. The act of taking care of others means she also takes cares of herself. Makes me happy every time.

[omegastation]

Sometimes I wish I was a bit smarter or more knowledgeable about certain topics so you can be sure I'm not speaking with confidence in this post but I do think most stories in ME2 are really about cults or cult-like organizations (often abusing children) and the illusion of justice.

All characters end up linked to a cult-like organization -Cerberus- with a charismatic leader, but even in their personal stories you find hints of ideologies, propaganda and non-Reaper indoctrination starting at an early age.

Lately I've seen a lot of Thane critical posts and while I get that what he's saying can be shocking (about his body and lack of responsibility), let's not forget he's a direct product of an ideology and childhood propaganda. He was introduced to fighting at 6 and made his first kill at 12. He's very clear with the fact that he was "trained" as an "investment". That's a 6 years old kid being manipulated into being an assassin. And when he talks about the hanar, he immediately rushes to apologize on their behalf and say they "regretted their need" for him, which shows a reasoning he was forced to accept when he was too young to know better. The things he's saying about himself and his role as an assassin don't come out of nowhere.

To me, that's abuse, just like many other characters in ME2 were abused as children or have abuse in their stories linked to cults. And when it's not a direct organization, it's a dangerous ideology often linked to eugenics (Miranda, Grunt). In some cases, like Samara, it's linked to a spiritual or religous purpose but most organizations of that nature don't have the deadly power that the Justicars have. They're so dangerous and with such a strict code that everyone is shaking in their boots just by the presence of a member somewhere, as if they will be shot right away if they so much as move. That's not normal.

The way I see it, those organizations or cult-like behaviors and ideologies can have the power they have because there is a complete lack of due process in Mass Effect. There's the illusion of justice, but no real or fair justice (or as close to the concept being put into practice if you believe it can exist). And I believe the worldbuilding in the games fully embraces that. In ME2, we get Purgatory as an example but also Tali's treason trial where a speech reminding the military honor of the accused can save the hour and no evidence needs to be shown. We also get other examples of a justice system not working quite well in ME1 and ME3.

And sure, saving Tali from treason feels good, but in that universe, lack of evidence in a trial like this co-exists with other situations where cult and cult-like organizations can keep moving either openly or in the shadows, abusing children and directing propaganda at them.

All of this combined means some people get really angry. So they take justice into their own hands, and the narrative has no choice but to validate those choices somehow because what else is there to do in this context?

[omegastation]

that feeling when you come home after a long day at work, you have your Iced cold water, a snack and you're about to talk to the shaman on TUCHANKA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

KROGAN LORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[omegastation]

You know I've done many posts about Khalisah Al-Jilani, why I enjoy her character and don't understand the sheer joy players get out of punching her (people can do what they want obviously, I just think some people enjoy it too much for a specific reason, let's leave it at that).

Anyway. If you look at Shepard's first meeting with Khalisah in ME1, which I had yesterday (finally done planet hopping!!!!), her questions are so... general and obvious, the kind you expect Shepard to get. They're nowhere near controversial.

Sure, she's biased: very focused on humanity and having huge expectations put on people like Shepard.

But her questions? Rather harmless considering everything she could ask. How is Shepard feeling as a Spectre? Did the Council ask Shepard to put their needs before humanity? How does Shepard feel about being in command of the Normandy? Etc.

When Shepard mentions turians helping to build the Normandy, she reacts to it in the most obvious way:

So the turian have knowledge of the Normandy that is being kept secret from the Alliance public? Do you think it was appropriate to hand Earth's most advanced warship over to the Citadel?

Again, very humanity-focused, but those are valid questions and humans viewers might be concerned about that. Her role is not to ask questions that will please the person being interviewed. Journalists/reporters ask difficult questions sometimes, but they also give the person the opportunity to answer. And Shepard does answer.

Now the question about Noveria is my favorite:

"Speaking of your new job, did the Council order you to sabotage human research concern on Noveria?"

The woman knows what she's doing. In French, I would say "prêcher le faux pour savoir le vrai" - saying something false to learn the truth.

Because if you replied that there was an accident in a Binary Helix lab, she said: "That's a surprising revelation, Commander. We've had nothing but stonewalling from Binary Helix".

And look... If you live in the world of Mass Effect, wouldn't you want someone to ask questions and bother Binary Helix, the company at the center of the Peak 15 incident on Noveria, the one who tried to breed rachni???? Because I'm in support of Khalisah bothering them, 100%.

Next she asks about a rumor (Shepard tracking a rogue spectre), and if you said you can't answer her (neither confirm nor deny), she doesn't insist, she just says: "Don't worry. We'll find out."

And she ends with "The eyes of Earth are on you. Don't let us down"

So of course, she's biased. She has this need to represent the "Alliance public"/"the people of the Alliance" (as she said in ME3). She's scared that they will be let down.

"What about all the people suffering (...)" is a sentence she said in ME3 during the Reaper War. And while we can see her as anti-Council, anti-authority, anti-Spectres or even anti-Shepard, I think she's desperate to see people with authority do their job well. I think she wants them to be good people. And her fear that they might not be scares her, because it means the "people" will be forgotten, put aside.

So while she's no angel, I really enjoy her - flaws and all. I find her character very interesting.

[omegastation]

Yeah, doing Horizon again but this time with Ash (I switch every playthrough), I'm always going to think the VS is 100% right with their worries.

The way the dialogue is structured shows a sound reasoning:

Hero worship of Shepard, a "god" coming back from the dead -someone the VS would have followed anywhere, more than our "Commander". The use of "our" here implies that the VS is also thinking about the person dead on Virmire as well as crew members who have died - meaning Shepard's legacy is linked to a large group of people who all trusted them. In a way, the VS is "last one standing" there to represent them on Horizon (as Joker's on a different path). With both Ash and Kaidan, survivor's guilt and grief have been a part of their story so the impact of all of this is quite great.

Shepard didn't contact them and the VS feels they're now acting as if "nothing happened" which is shocking after everything they've gone through.

VS learns Shepard is with Cerberus and we know there is no way Cerberus is innocent. In all three games of the trilogy, they're a real problem. The fact that they resurrected Shepard doesn't change the horrifying nature of the organization.

We get another perspective than the one at the beginning of the game: from "the Alliance is doing nothing" to "the Alliance thinks Cerberus is behind the kidnapping and that's why the VS is here".

The argument that Shepard is the element of trust in all of this - that the VS should know them and trust them no matter what doesn't hold. The circumstances of this meeting mean the VS has every right to question that element of truth, because Shepard's existence has been changed/altered by Cerberus - who is not trustworthy and has done horrifying experiments that the VS has seen with their own eyes in ME1.

The VS knows who they are and who they stand for - that's the Alliance.

They still wish Shepard good luck.

IDK. The frustrating part is not coming from the VS at all, it's coming from the lack of options we have as Shepard. We had no way of contacting the VS before Horizon and we have no way of picking better dialogue options to convince the VS. Les dés sont jetés, basically.

[omegastation]

I started Virmire last night, and I love that this name has so much meaning to us, that we know immediately what it's about and how it ends.

But before you basically have to pick who live or die, I find the confrontation with Wrex so sad. it's not so much the dialogue itself, it's everything around it: the game basically sets you up to think Wrex is the enemy. And it's heartbreaking, with everyone saying his loyalty is changing, that he's going to become violent, etc.

When I played it the first time (a long time ago, I'm feeling old), he got killed on Virmire. And saving him later -understanding that I needed his family armor- and going through everything with him (you know "Shepard, my friend!") showed me how fiercely loyal he is, how amazing his character is and how much I loved loved the krogan.

But you can't know that when you begin this journey, there's really no "HEY, this character is going to matter SO MUCH to you." At that time, you just get a lot of suspicion, to the point that Shepard tells Ash to get ready. Like he can be gunned down at any moment.

Someone replied to one of my posts (or was it in a tag? sorry can't remember, edit: it was the greatest @camalyng) about words used to dehumanize characters and mentioned "the krogan" as an example. That applies here: Wrex is not really Wrex at that moment, he's "the krogan", even to the Normandy squad. You hear horrible things said about him or his species. That's ME1, anyway, with a lot of characters still being built up and a lot of prejudice between them (ahem, Garrus in the elevator...........). It's far from what we get in ME3. But still, Wrex was told krogan were a mistake. He got angry for a reason.

And later, after he calms down and he knows he's going to help destroy a potential cure for his people, he still says: I'm ready, Shepard. Just say the word.

Anyway, I love you Wrex as always <3 I'm sorry I didn't save you the first time, but so happy you were around every time after that. You're a good friend. Can't imagine ME3 without you leading the krogan or without you jumping around everywhere with your catchphrases and your happy laugh.