If you're referring to MW2 it's pretty obviously a collection of scenarios strung together by voice-overs on a loading screen.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Why did Shephard do what he did?
Printable View
If you're referring to MW2 it's pretty obviously a collection of scenarios strung together by voice-overs on a loading screen.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Why did Shephard do what he did?
Dragon Age definitely had fantastic writing, just not a fantastic story. The story is pretty simple and not all that original.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntRid
Wow! it's really pretty cool awesome. i feel happy to this
Because he was pissed at the world for ignoring the tens of thousands of American dead in the invasion, not doing anything about the Russians, whose nuke it was, and who had since come to be ruled by the Ultranationalists. He wanted a war partly to get revenge on Russia for this. That's why he betrayed Allen to Makarov; the US would be blamed for the attack on Zakhaev Intl. and given the Russian mindset, a serious response was plausible. As for killing Ghost and Roach, the evidence they gathered from Makarov's retreat would almost certainly make it clear that Shepard had tipped him off. Why would Shepard and Makarov work together? Because whilst they hate each other's countries, they also both want what the other wants - a war. They want different outcomes, but in starting it there's little conflict.Quote:
Originally Posted by BolivarIf you're referring to MW2 it's pretty obviously a collection of scenarios strung together by voice-overs on a loading screen.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Why did Shephard do what he did?
More broadly, he clearly states in-game: The US is weak and needs to become far more militant to avoid another 30,000 dead soldiers in a nuclear explosion. "Tomorrow there will be no shortage of patriots, no shortage of volunteers." Aside from the 30,000 dead, remember that the US will have lost probably many $billions in equipment etc. After 'Nam the US decided "Nah, don't fancy that much". After losing tens of thousands of soldiers and billions in gear in one day, I wager there would be a huge sentiment that the US should retreat behind her borders and ignore the rest of the world. Popular and Congressional support for replenishing the military would be very low. There would need to be a threat, a major one, one to the US directly, to encourage the US to rearm in a manner Shepard desired.
And all that, of course, ties in neatly with the success of the Russians in their (SPOILER)invasion attempt. At first glance I thought that was pretty stupid and implausible, and it still is somewhat, but given that A) they achieved total surprise and B) the US was so weakened after the nuke, chances are there's been a big reduction in funding for, well, damn near everything. Five years is plenty of time for government to either react or be elected in a different form, institute new policies, and have those filter into practice.
However, there is one area which is stupendously stupid. As soon as (SPOILER)D.C. gets EMP'd, the US should have responded in kind. There are plenty of contingencies for ensuring the ability remains even if the govt. is decapitated or out of contact. When (SPOILER)the missile was in flight it was enough to warrant a full-scale, continent-flattening response.
The fact you have to explain the plot means it fails in basic story telling. When he was giving his final speech I was thinking, what 30,000 people? What do you mean by no shortage of volunteers? Another America Army game going up what?
What it sounds like he only turned after the invasion of the US? I always thought he was corrupt to begin with and purposely sent Allen for the purpose of being killed? And what’s with the nuke killing 30,000 citizens? The only nukes I recall are the one in the first game in the middle of nowhere and (SPOILER)the one Price detonated over Washington to cause a blackout. Or did this happen in the 5 year gap between titles?
Wet... really?