177 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

[quote]Jzadek72 wrote...
Yes, it's a good thing people were masacred, now we have a better weapon. Cerberus aren't evil at all.[/quote]
I'm glad you see it now.


[quote]ThisIsMadness91 wrote...
you can convince Toombs to stand down with a high enough Charm skill.
[/quote]
But, part of role playing is that you act like IRL, that is as if you don't know for sure if your words will be enough.


[quote]Some Dude wrote...
*catches grenade and returns it to sender*[/quote]
*watches the grenade exploding a foot and a half on its way back*

Four second fuses last only three seconds!


[quote]C9316 wrote...
hmm... Cerberus=Human Supremacists, Supremacists=those who believe in the belief that a particular race, religion, gender, species, sexual orientation, belief system or culture is superior to others and entitles those who identify with it to dominate, control or rule those who do not. so................... Supremacists= KKK, ****s, Al-Queda, Taliban therefore Cerberus in a way is equal to KKK, ****s, Al-Queda, Taliban IMO thats why I hate cerberus
[/quote]
Those who believe that supremacism is bad, imlpy that it's inferior to their own beliefs. That is their beliefs are superior to those of the supremacits. That they, goody-two-shoes tolerant liberals are superior to the KKK, NАZIs, Al-Qaida, the Commies, homophobes... etc. Liberals are supremacists!!!


[quote]Steel Dancer wrote...
So they stood by and let it happen? Didn't do anything to warn anyone or try and prevent it?
[/quote]
First, Cerberus ain't no frikking Chip 'n Dale.
Secondly, in this particular case, as I said, the single Cerberus operative obtained his delivery and took off. He wasn't "standing by and letting it happen". Cerberus knew what happened to the colony from your report.


[quote]GreenDragon37 wrote...
So? Cerberus sent those marines, not just marines HUMAN MARINES to their deaths just so they could get a new toy!? **** Cerberus. How can they claim to protect humanity if they are willing to sacrifice the very people they want to protect? Cerberus saw those men as expendable. They don't care about freaking LIVES! This is why I hate Cerberus. They don't care about Humanity, they only want power. And if anyone, even humans, get in their way, so they die. Freaking animals! And Human supremecists at that, they are unbelieveable! [/quote]
First, "Mako" is not a toy. It's a new infantry fighting vehicle. Which means billions of credits of military spending. Something liberal cry-babies in parliaments and media are always opposed to. And it sometimes takes a lot of ugly news and field reports, to convince them, and even some dumb arses in the brass that our fighting men need the best equipment available.

Secondly, Cerberus sacrifices 50 people to save a thousand. They would sacrifice thousands to save billions. It's simple math.


[quote]Terraneaux wrote...
As far as the Akuze op goes, if it was a behavioral experiment to determine the combat readiness of Marines that was one thing, but they ended up abducting them and injecting acid in their veins.  I guess TIM must have skipped high school chemistry when they explained what acid does.[/quote]TIM? Or maybe Toobs skipped high school chemistry, so he wasn't too accurate in reporting what had been done to him?
[quote]Terraneaux wrote...
And at the people claiming that Kahoku was a traitor: HE was hunting down a rogue element, which was actually already operating outside the chain of command at that point.  It's extremely ironic to call Kahoku a traitor, when he was literally hunting traitors at the time.
[/quote]
Or so he was led to believe. Maybe intentionally by the Shadow Broker, or by the incomplete information provided by the Shadow Broker. It appeared before that Kahoku never even heard of Cerberus. I admit, that Kahoku's intent wasn't selfish or malcontent... But he was utterly incompetent in his decision making. Just like his marines on Edolus.


[quote]DOYOURLABS wrote...
They are still responsible for akuze. Your point is irrelevant.[/quote]
Your point is irrelevant, because, at the time of Akuze, Alliance was fully responsible for Cerberus. Toombs never brings up the notion that Cerberus was "rogue". And Hackett, while briefing you beforу you touch down on Ontharom says that somebody is killing the scientists that worked on a secret project for the Alliance.


[quote]Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...
*catches grenade*
it didn't asplode.[/quote]
Of course it didn't. To you. Because the very instant it exploded, you died, so it never happened in you life.

Now, proceed to the load game menu.


[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
I overwrote nothing. I am the sole survivor. My unit did get killed.
Everything else is for players to fill in. How you survived, why you survived, even who picked you up.
Now, one might think that TIM and Shepard's first meeting would have introductions that invalidate that, but it really doesn't. You can choose the lines such that it may as well be continuing an old, top-secret relationship.
[/quote]
I've already said this is brilliant, and most legit... Tell me, did you picked up the "Why didn't you recruit me earlier" option in one of the Miranda conversations? You know, just so that she wouldn't surmise the truth?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 22 mai 2010 - 07:48 .

[Nightwriter]

Oh, bother. I wanted to join the argument.

Now the whole thing has devolved into block text responses, how inconvenient, it'll take forever to read them all and catch up on the debate.

Someone just make a stand-alone statement I can latch onto and jump in on. Something really easy and simple, like, "Cerberus kills babies and I think that's the best thing for the galaxy, no one else is killing babies to stop the Reapers. Being aginst baby-killing is naive and impractical, we must do what needs to be done, you stupid paragons."

[2A92 Legion]

Platform operational. Information recieved. "Cerberus anihilation" protocol loaded. "We are ready to do what needs to be done"

[Onyx Jaguar]

KKs_45 wrote...

Platform operational. Information recieved. "Cerberus anihilation" protocol loaded. "We are ready to do what needs to be done"

RICO, YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO

[lovgreno]

Nightwriter wrote...

Oh, bother. I wanted to join the argument.

Now the whole thing has devolved into block text responses, how inconvenient, it'll take forever to read them all and catch up on the debate.

Someone just make a stand-alone statement I can latch onto and jump in on. Something really easy and simple, like, "Cerberus kills babies and I think that's the best thing for the galaxy, no one else is killing babies to stop the Reapers. Being aginst baby-killing is naive and impractical, we must do what needs to be done, you stupid paragons."

True. You can simplify if even further though: Being pro Cerberus/anti Cerberus is stupid. Therefore I am smarter than you stupid anti Cerberus/pro Cerberus people.
I guess such generalising is easier than trying to come up with arguments BOTH for Cerberus and against it that doesn't contradict eachother too much. If I understood the story of ME right there isn't any black and white, absolute thruths or simple sollutions.

[superimposed]

Sure there are.

[Zulu_DFA]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

KKs_45 wrote...

Platform operational. Information recieved. "Cerberus anihilation" protocol loaded. "We are ready to do what needs to be done"

RICO, YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO

Johny, I am "sorry" it had to be your unit on Planet 3.1416...

[uhdnrt]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

GothamLord wrote...

Huh? They didnt experimetn on Admiral Kahoku.  They killed him because he started sticking his nose into black ops related work and became a major security leak.  He was expendable.

Well... he was found in a cage full of experimental monster test subjects with needle marks in his arm.

They terminated the traitor by a lethal injection, then they were disposing of the remains. And maybe studying rachni reaction to dead humans, but in any case it wasn't experimentation on Kahoku.

Haven't we already dealt with this?  You have NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE to claim Kohaku was a traitor.  None.  Zero.  You have only a statement made from a single unreliable source (an agent for the Shadow Broker).  The codex also dissagrees with your statements. 

Kohaku was slain by a former Alliance group that went rogue and became terrorists.  This is incontrovertable fact.
Your arguments have no validity.

[Homebound]

jynthor wrote...

Sleepicub09 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Collider wrote...

I wish Cerberus would catch a grenade.

Sounds like the Taliban to me...

sounds like a talihater to me.

anyways they other experiments like the on kahoku. Explain that one to me.

Kahoku was black, black people always die first.


Just the way this cruel world works.

LMAO now that I think about it, Kohaku was potentially the first plot character that could die.  If u dont do Wrex's recruitment mission with him or skip it altogether.

[Zulu_DFA]

uhdnrt wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

GothamLord wrote...

Huh? They didnt experimetn on Admiral Kahoku.  They killed him because he started sticking his nose into black ops related work and became a major security leak.  He was expendable.

Well... he was found in a cage full of experimental monster test subjects with needle marks in his arm.

They terminated the traitor by a lethal injection, then they were disposing of the remains. And maybe studying rachni reaction to dead humans, but in any case it wasn't experimentation on Kahoku.

Haven't we already dealt with this?  You have NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE to claim Kohaku was a traitor.  None.  Zero.  You have only a statement made from a single unreliable source (an agent for the Shadow Broker).  The codex also dissagrees with your statements. 

Kohaku was slain by a former Alliance group that went rogue and became terrorists.  This is incontrovertable fact.
Your arguments have no validity.

INCONTROVERTIBLE. Reminds me of my favorite game before Mass Effect One - StarCraft Brood War... There was one mission this lovely word was used in the briefing...

OK. I have all the evidence I need to prove Kahoku was a traitor. He gave away information about Cerberus to... ME!!! More precisely to the Council Spectre Shepard, formerly with the Systems Alliance Navy's 63rd Scout Flotilla.

USArmy generals are not authorized to disclose CIA-related information to the freaking UN peace-keeping corps! If they do, that's treason!!!

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 22 mai 2010 - 12:00 .

[superimposed]

He's not an US army general, ******.

[Zulu_DFA]

superimposed wrote...

He's not an US army general, ******.

No, he isn't. And the Alliance is f*uckin 10 times as much ruthless a government as US, ******.

[superimposed]

No.

[Zulu_DFA]

superimposed wrote...

No.

No what? Is it 20 times?

BAaT, L2 biotics abuse, AI research, Torfan, Corsair, Lord Darrius, Akuze (& other early Cerbs stuff), Kaije Okuda's secrets, Shepard of the recruitment posters, no reaction to breakaway colonies' disappearences, compliance with Council's Reaper cover-up...

Shall I continue?

[Asheer_Khan]

Alliance didn't react at abductions because all those colonies were OUTSIDE Citadel controlled space so there was not a single option to protect them without causing huge political and MILITARY **** storm using Udina's remark.



Recall what that engineer on Horizon says, colonists there settle that planet to GET AWAY FROM ALLIANCE regulations so they chose to scratch any options of Alliance protection.

So please stop whit "Alliance didn't do anything to stop abductions" because they can do absolute NOTHING to do without throw Alliance in war whit Terminus...



But of course any twisting of events is acceptable as long as will serve to protect cotton white picture of SS Cerberus...

[Arijharn]

superimposed wrote...

He's not an US army general, ******.

...He was using it as an analogy you moron.

[Zulu_DFA]

Asheer_Khan wrote...

Alliance didn't react at abductions because all those colonies were OUTSIDE Citadel controlled space so there was not a single option to protect them without causing huge political and MILITARY **** storm using Udina's remark.

Recall what that engineer on Horizon says, colonists there settle that planet to GET AWAY FROM ALLIANCE regulations so they chose to scratch any options of Alliance protection.
So please stop whit "Alliance didn't do anything to stop abductions" because they can do absolute NOTHING to do without throw Alliance in war whit Terminus...

But of course any twisting of events is acceptable as long as will serve to protect cotton white picture of SS Cerberus...

This Horizon example I love. It proves as follows:

1. There are people who hate the Alliance (for the lulz I suppose, because the Alliance, as we all know, is good, with the Benign Alien Council, and against the nefarious Cerberus and Reapers).

2. If the Alliance want, they absolutely can protect the colonies, with GARDIAN battaries, sh*tting on all Council's misgivings about political fallout and the colonists' aversion to the Alliance protection.

3. The Alliance want to protect the colonies only when TIM tips them off about a major situation upcoming there.

Now, I wonder, Asheer_Khan, do you honestly believe yourself in the BS of which your post is so full, as I have just shown?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 22 mai 2010 - 01:06 .

[Arijharn]

Not to mention that of all the 'good guys' it was only Cerberus that we know of who has sent aid to the Horizon survivors. But no, dig your head in the sand deeper if that runs contrariwise to the lofty heights that you place the Citadel Council on.

[MadCat221]

I can see that Zulu_DFA is starting to Wharrgarbl now, judging from the ranting and raving about teh librulz...

TIM's biggest flaw?  He doesn't let anyone else in the loop.  If he briefed at least Shepard about the Horizon setup and the possibility that the adrift Collector ship seemed fishy, I wouldn't have had issue with it.  But he doesn't.  He tells me after the fact after things go haywire, and after I'm ticked off at him.  TIMmay Knows Best, according to him.  That, and his casual regard to the value of his subordinates' lives.  Up to 50% of humanity and 100% of other species are expendable in TIM's eyes.  Oh, and 0% of TIM.  See: Quarians' antipathy to Cerberus.

*catches grenade*

Ya see.. this thing here on the 'nade is called the lever.  You have to pull it off too after you pull the pin.  The pin is just a safety feature to keep the lever from being pulled 'till you're ready.

Like this...

*pulls lever, cooks it, returns to sender*

Modifié par MadCat221, 13 juillet 2010 - 02:36 .

[Giggles_Manically]

Maybe if Cerberus didnt screw up royaly enough to make joining TEAM ROCKET look like a sound carrer choice I wouldnt laugh at them so much,

[angj57]

A lot of people here say Cerberus is racist. I don't see any justification for that. They put humanity first and are concerned with human interests, but if we insist on drawing a parallel to real life, I'd say it's more like a nationalist who puts his own country's interests above the UN's. I haven't seen any evidence that they hate aliens, just that they don't trust them politically so they want to ensure that humanity can take care of itself.

I don't fully support Cerberus, but I think they have a point. Humanity can't trust the other aliens to protect their interests. Just look at how angrily other species reacted to humanity getting a seat on the council. There are anti-human politicians in the citadel and anti-human rhetoric all over. The Council shows its incompetence about every time we see them in game, and they are supposed to manage our defense????

Cerberus is there because there are a lot of aliens who hate humans, and the Council is often too incompetant or unwilling to protect legitimate human interests. Do they go too far sometimes? Sure. It is quite well established that the Salarian Special Tasks Group does too, and they are a legal and accepted organization with goals that aren't too different from Cerberus's.

Modifié par angj57, 13 juillet 2010 - 02:49 .

[MadCat221]

angj57 wrote...

A lot of people here say Cerberus is racist. I don't see any justification for that. They put humanity first and are concerned with human interests, but if we insist on drawing a parallel to real life, I'd say it's more like a nationalist who puts his own country's interests above the UN's. I haven't seen any evidence that they hate aliens, just that they don't trust them politically so they want to ensure that humanity can take care of itself.

I don't fully support Cerberus, but I think they have a point. Humanity can't trust the other aliens to protect their interests. Just look at how angrily other species reacted to humanity getting a seat on the council. There are anti-human politicians in the citadel and anti-human rhetoric all over. The Council shows its incompetence about every time we see them in game, and they are supposed to manage our defense????

Cerberus is there because there are a lot of aliens who hate humans, and the Council is often too incompetant or unwilling to protect legitimate human interests. Do they go too far sometimes? Sure. It is quite well established that the Salarian Special Tasks Group does too, and they are a legal and accepted organization with goals that aren't too different from Cerberus's.

So the solution is to prove their misgivings right?

STG and the Spectres are different from Cerberus because they're still held accountable by a higher governmental power. Cerberus isn't.

Modifié par MadCat221, 13 juillet 2010 - 03:18 .

[angj57]

So the solution is to prove their misgivings right?

STG and the Spectres are different from Cerberus because they're still held accountable by a higher governmental power. Cerberus isn't.

In theory, maybe. It doesn't seem like anybody every held the STG accountable for creating the Genophage (arguably a lot worse than anything Cerberus has ever done). The point is that galactic government is pretty bad-- just ask the Krogan-- and it isn't unreasonable to have an organization that looks out for human interests. I don't think that's a bad goal, although I do think the means that Cerberus uses to achieve that goal are often wrong.

[MTN Dew Fanatic]

Why are you so obsessed with Cerberus?

[RiouHotaru]

 Zulu, I don't know whether you actually like Cerberus, or your rantings and ravings and claims of solid, factual evidence are simply done to run counter to the fanatical Cerberus haters.  Either way, I think you take the same logical extreme as the haters do: That you state your claims as clear facts doesn't do anything to either make your claims feisable or logical.

1) Kohaku is a "traitor"

I use this term in airquotes because your evidence largely relies on your claim that Cerberus is still a part of the Alliance, a claim for which your evidence is based solely on supposition.  While EDI does state that there are connections still between high-ranking Alliance officials and Cerberus, none of it leads to the conclusion "Cerberus is still Alliance."  It's certainly a possibilty, but given that Bioware had to purposefully give Cerberus hefty does of 'Pet The Dog' (I do so love TVTropes) moments to ease the sting of ME1, otherwise no player would ever consider wanting to work with Cerberus in any capacity.  Of course, even these don't stop players from hating them anyway.

Also, Kohaku giving you any information doesn't make him a traitor.  Even using your analogy to how things work in reality, that doesn't mean the same circumstances applies to Mass Effect, especially since we're dealing with interstellar politics.  Also, equating the Spectres (or the Council) to UN Peace Corps is laughable at best.  The two are only vaguely similar, and even that's a stretch.  Shepard holds a unique position, both in the Alliance, AND as a Spectre.

2) Cerberus' misdeeds

Honestly, you seem to find fault with any of the claims about the things Cerberus has done.  It's true, we've not seen the full scope of their projects, but it's quite clear in both the games, the novels, and the comics, that they aren't on the up-and-up.  In any capacity.  For example, Akuse, and Toombs.  You claim you role-played and had to shoot Toombs when he wouldn't drop his gun, and therefore came off as a lunatic.  What about those of us who DID convince him to put down his gun and surrender, and arrested the scientist.  ME2 news reports states the scientist is offered immunity for his testimony against Cerberus, clearly indicating a link between Akuse and Cerberus.  Even if they weren't responsible for the colony being attacked, the fact they had Kohaku's team killed in almost the same method as Akuse makes the implication of their involvement fairly strong (luring the marines in to see what would happen)

Also, you can't claim Exogeni and Cerberus aren't connected.  How else did Cerberus get Thorian creepers or the idea to try and utilize them as shock troops (a fact Miranda explicitly admits to) unless they got them through Exogeni, since Exogeni is the only corporation with knowledge of the Thorian besides Saren.  It likely means that their Exogeni is one of Cerberus' corporate fronts from where they get their several billion credit budgets from, or that Cerberus has NUMEROUS plants within the company itself.

And while you flatly state Cerberus has NO involve with the "Colony Of The Dead" incident, the fact remains, only Exogeni and likely Cerberus had access to any Dragon's Teeth.  And since it's quite obvious that Exogeni and Cerberus are connected, you cannot claim there's absolutely no mutual involvement.  Either Exogeni had the Teeth shipped to the colony for Cerberus to study, or Cerberus used contacts in Exogeni to ship the Teeth to the colony.  Either way, Cerberus is explicitly implied to be responsible for the demise of the colonists.  Statements in-game even point to such.  so unless you're denying that the game is being honest...

Also, Overlord and Tetlin are two glaring examples of where Cerberus just goes flat over the Moral Event Horizon.  Even though TIM claims that he doesn't condone the brutality in either project, it's quite clear (at least in Overlord, that he's willing to overlook the horrendous unethical actions simply for the results, which MIGHT prove useful)  Overlord quite blatantly pushes this into Unforgiveable territory with David.  TIM clearly hires people who are willing to push and destroy any form of moral or ethical boundary, but then claims disappointment and condemnation when he learns what they did simply to avoid their project being ganked.  Clearly Cerberus is in need of people who know when enough is enough, because as it is it seems very few folks know when to draw the line.

I could go on, but I have no doubt you'll find some way to whitewash it or spin it as a positive note in Cerberus' book.  You said yourself that Cerberus would sacrificed tens to save thousands, thousands to save millions.  So when do the numbers become such that the ends no longer justify the means.  After all, according to your logic, A Million Is Just A Statistic.  If a million lives will save a billion, is that alright?

4) "Cerberus > Alliance"

This boggles my mind, why the Cerberus-fans believe this statement.  I'm not saying the haters using the reverse is any more justified, but often you and your supporters are quick to claim how Cerberus is obviously looking out for humanity, and like to use things like Horizon as examples of how the Alliance is either inefficient, dumb, or simply useless.  As MadCat pointed out, TIM is notoriously unreliable, often giving less than full information, being purposefully misleading or simply outright lying to you, under the idea that "I knew you could do it, so why bother giving you ALL the details?" is somehow correct or justified.  The fact he wants you to destroy the Collectors, then pops up at the last minute to tell you "Hold on, that base where the Collectors were performing horrific experiments and using humans to make a Reaper that I wanted you to blow up?  Keep it." is all the more shocking.

His ego is also astonishing.  "Cerberus is humanity."  I'm sorry, I didn't ask TIM to represent me, and I'm fairly certain a good chunk of the human race wouldn't want him being their representative either.  I'm not saying that TIM and Cerberus are necessarily evil, but they do blur the thin line between Well-Intentioned Extremists and Complete Monsters just a bit too much for my taste.  Sure, without them, Shepard wouldn't be alive, but TIM's only reason to use Shepard was as his icon and piece in the galactic chess-game.

Also, this may come as a surprise (or not), but the Council's inability to believe Shepard on the Reaper threat is completely and totally justified.  No concrete evidence of any kind has ever come out, and to openly admit to the entirely of galactic civilization that there's a fleet of killer robots all flown by AIs (which are all crapshoots too!) out to annihlate the entirety of them would likely not cause any sort of a orderly response.  Although, I'm of the belief that the Salarian Councilor DOES believe you, and simply isn't saying so (C'mon, the codex states that Salarians don't reveal their plans until victory is a foregone conclusion!)

In conclusion, if you want people to believe that Cerberus might not be monsters, you should try to argue the stance in a way that shows you're willing to consider other possible interpretations.  But simply punching holes in everyone else's evidence while ignoring the holes in your own, will do little to help you.

Modifié par RiouHotaru, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:46 .