3478 réponses à ce sujet

[Beholderess]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Beholderess wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Well giving it to anyone else is not an option since its in the Terminus and Cerberus are the only ones with Tech to reach the Collector base

Hmm, as far as I understand, the only tech needed to reach the base is an IFF. Which is, currently, on Normandy. So, whoever it is given to could reach the base, and those who don't have IFF - can't.

If you see the ending where Shepard dies, Cerberus have already launched ships to that location.  Which would make it seem like they already had the IFF and that the one you picked up was the prototype. 

But Joker returns to TIM with Normandy in that ending. So, of course they are able to launch ships after that. However, if Normandy was not returned in the first place - I'm not so certain.

[Beholderess]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I wish you could've at least suggested turning the base over to the Alliance/Council. I know it's impossible, but I just would've liked to see that conversation go down.

I suppose I wish that Shepard could destroy the base for reasons other than, "I won't let fear compromise who I am."

Why? I quite liked this phrase.

[lovgreno]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I wish you could've at least suggested turning the base over to the Alliance/Council. I know it's impossible, but I just would've liked to see that conversation go down.

I suppose I wish that Shepard could destroy the base for reasons other than, "I won't let fear compromise who I am."

I agree. That line doesn't mean anything at all.
It would make more sense to do something stupid like mooning TIM and say: "Kiss this for humanity!"
While we are at it the council should be mooned as well: "Here's your proof! Dismiss this!"

[Massadonious1]

It doesn't have the same emotional impact.

[ObserverStatus]

lovgreno wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I wish you could've at least suggested turning the base over to the Alliance/Council. I know it's impossible, but I just would've liked to see that conversation go down.

I suppose I wish that Shepard could destroy the base for reasons other than, "I won't let fear compromise who I am."

I agree. That line doesn't mean anything at all.
It would make more sense to do something stupid like mooning TIM and say: "Kiss this for humanity!"
While we are at it the council should be mooned as well: "Here's your proof! Dismiss this!"

It seems like he'd have trouble dropping is pants while he's in his hardsuit.

[lovgreno]

Shandepared wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

It seems like he'd have trouble dropping is pants while he's in his hardsuit.

Not like he needs that hard suit in the first place.

EDI:TIMmy want's to talk with you in the debreefing room Shepard.
Shepard: Right. I'll just change into the jeans then. Tell Garrus to come too. And tell Tali to bring a portable x-ray so she can join the fun as well.
EDI: Very well Shepard.

[Foolsfolly]

Wait, what's wrong with not letting fear compromise who he is?



The Reapers are the greatest threat Humanity and the Council races have ever faced. Shepard says he will not become a monster to stop monsters.



There's a reason why every crew member disagrees with you keeping the base. That's called foreshadowing to bad things to come. No good can come from keeping that base. But every Cerberus fanboy in the forums will disagree with that until the shoe drops in ME3.

[LorDC]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Wait, what's wrong with not letting fear compromise who he is?

The Reapers are the greatest threat Humanity and the Council races have ever faced. Shepard says he will not become a monster to stop monsters.

There's a reason why every crew member disagrees with you keeping the base. That's called foreshadowing to bad things to come. No good can come from keeping that base. But every Cerberus fanboy in the forums will disagree with that until the shoe drops in ME3.

By destroying base Shepard shows that he is afraid of Cerberus. So he lets fear to compromse him by destroying base. This stuff works either way.
And if you pull out argument that any Reaper tech is inherently bad why not go all the way? Shepard should Destroy all mass effect based weapons, scrap all FTL drives, blow up Normandy, turn off EDI and so on.

[Kenrae]

Sajuro wrote...

Kenrae wrote...

implodinggoat wrote...
If you want to take the Reapers down you need to hit them with something they don't understand, not weapons based upon tech which they've been mastering for millions of years.

So, we have to fight them using rocks? Because, you know, everything we have is Reaper-based.

no, we fight them using all human weaponry. The Atom bomb, The Hydrogen bomb, and every other nuke we have and will have come up with by then. Remember, we have enough bombs to kill every human 60 times and literally blow up the earth ten times (I believe).

Yeah, and a Magnum .477:?.
That's veeeeery outclassed against Reapers. So you pretend to NOT use mass effect cores, shields and mass accelerated weapons? To not use the relays? We are currently using all of that on ME2, by the way, better stop jumping from system to system because that's Reaper tech too. That cool armor and those cool shields are based on Reaper tech, so you shouldn't be using them. The same with the weapons. EDI is based on Reaper tech too, let's discard her. Etc.

[STG]

It seems to me that what Shepard meant was: I won't let fear of reapers force me to do something I normally wouldn't (that being giving Cerberus weapons and tech).

[LorDC]

STG wrote...

It seems to me that what Shepard meant was: I won't let fear of reapers force me to do something I normally wouldn't (that being giving Cerberus weapons and tech).

But that means that all those fear blah-blah-blah is nothing but plain words and there are other reasons for destroying base. Thus claiming that Shepard destroyed base to not let fear compromise him is just escaping from answer.

[Dean_the_Young]

STG wrote...

It seems to me that what Shepard meant was: I won't let fear of reapers force me to do something I normally wouldn't (that being giving Cerberus weapons and tech).

Since Shepard already spent half the game scrounging Reaper and Collector tech and data which was shared with Cerberus, and spent the other half giving technology to Cerberus (in the form of tech bounties that you get for scanning just about anything that gives you credits), that wrings rather hollow.

Rather, most people do seem to be letting fear change what they've been doing up to this point (ie using Reaper tech and tech derivatives, scanning technology to give to Cerberus). They just fear Cerberus more than the Reapers.,

[JohnnyBeGood2]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

STG wrote...

It seems to me that what Shepard meant was: I won't let fear of reapers force me to do something I normally wouldn't (that being giving Cerberus weapons and tech).

Since Shepard already spent half the game scrounging Reaper and Collector tech and data which was shared with Cerberus, and spent the other half giving technology to Cerberus (in the form of tech bounties that you get for scanning just about anything that gives you credits), that wrings rather hollow.

Rather, most people do seem to be letting fear change what they've been doing up to this point (ie using Reaper tech and tech derivatives, scanning technology to give to Cerberus). They just fear Cerberus more than the Reapers.,

It's about not giving into fear or allowing arguments of fear change your thinking.
Threats of Reaper destruction are clear, so Shep goes about defeating them.
Threats of Cerberus are maybe less so, but not unfounded, so Shep goes about defeating them.

The 2 threats are not the same, but they have to be assessed and fought. What he's saying is: "I know what I think is right and I'm really not convinced you are going to do what's right with this base so I'm gonna blow it"

Giving up the base to Cerberus is not Sheps method. It's a matter of sticking to your guns and battling the way you know how and the way that works - he's sticking to him principles, and they are not baseless at all regarding Cerberus.

[guacamayus]

well i think most people forgot to mention the implications of keeping the base in ME3, my renegade shepard always keeps the base intact for that reason xD



but seriously now, it really comes down to what kind of playthrough you are doing; I believe a renegade shepard would have absolutely no problem using that technology to secure human domination, shep does what is necesary (as proven in torfan for instance), on the other hand a true 'hero' would never even think about using research that was obtained through killing thousands of humans just because of the reaper threat, as he says ingame; 'I wont let fear compromise who I am' or something like that.. xD

[FROST4584]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Wait, what's wrong with not letting fear compromise who he is?

The Reapers are the greatest threat Humanity and the Council races have ever faced. Shepard says he will not become a monster to stop monsters.

There's a reason why every crew member disagrees with you keeping the base. That's called foreshadowing to bad things to come. No good can come from keeping that base. But every Cerberus fanboy in the forums will disagree with that until the shoe drops in ME3.

I disagree and am NOT a Cerberus fanboy. I find it funny that people (including the writers of ME2) say nothing good can come from the base. Do some people not know what a base is? A base just doesn't fit on catogory of use, it could have vital information. It could have weapons, numbers, information on weakness, the direction the Reapers are coming from do to Hambger signal, and any number of things.

 The game is one of the most hypocritical games I've played.  Explain how will destorying the base will solve anything. The main reason to keep the base to study information the fight against the Reapers The second the prove that you need to prove the threat is real.

Let me put it another way.

In fact I want all those who destoryed the Collector Base to answer this question especially you FoolsFolly:

Did YOU USE the THANIX Cannon to beat the Collector ship with only two hits?

Chances are very high that most people did. Guess what you saved at least 1 of your squadmates by doing to. So studying Reaper tech isn't all that bad right?  Think at how many lives will be saved if possible information from the base is used in the final show down.

In fact if you do very thing right such as get all upgrades and all loyal missions before you get the IFF, what does Shep say just before he or she hits the Omega 4 relay. Shep says; "We have Reaper Technogly backing us , we are ready."  Another example of the writter hypocritical writting. When they get a Reaper BASE then they want to destory Reaper tech. If that was the case Shep should have destoryed the Normandy's EDI, since they can't trust it since it is Reaper tech.

The writters of Mass Effect 2 just made up very lame reasons to destory the Collector base.

Modifié par FROST4584, 09 juin 2010 - 03:24 .

[Neuzhelin]

1) Can't have an organisation like cerberus indoctrinated or with that kind
of technology. The risk is too high as it might destroy not only human but all races again in the cycle. Otherwise Humans will end up as dictators of the galaxy only to have all races unify and rebel. It might be better short term but not when it comes to the grand strategy.


2) It indoctrinates as reaper technology (sure, some date can be recovered like on crashed reaper but at a wrong cost).

3) Legion and Mordin explain to you how culture, technology and civilisations function using collectors and heretic geth as examples. You can't take that kind of leaps, the cost seems to high.


On my primary character I focus on the grand strategy. In ME1 You save council not only because of reputation but also because you save 10.000 Ascension staff, 300x20 Turian lives and probably some asari and salarian that have not been mentioned. You bring stability in the human relations. In ME2 you advance as you should, together with Allies where humanity is valued not feared. You do not give the indoctrinating reaper technology to the Illusive (ILL-USIVE) man to tyranize the galaxy, to make humans even more hated and feared. In the long run it will not pay off. Many lives will be lost for the research and you already have Illusive man using reaper technology on humans in the next novel. If you act like reapers, sacraficing lives, you will end up like them and cycle will continue one way or another. It is by people like Cerberus the first reaper was built in the first place, I believe.

Modifié par Neuzhelin, 09 juin 2010 - 03:53 .

[Aniki_21]

I doubt Illusive Man's intentions with dangerous alien technology are trustworthy

[LorDC]

Neuzhelin wrote...

1) Can't have an organisation like cerberus indoctrinated or with that kind
of technology. The risk is too high as it might destroy not only human but all races again in the cycle. Otherwise Humans will end up as dictators of the galaxy only to have all races unify and rebel. It might be better short term but not when it comes to the grand strategy.

Seriously, guys why everyone thinks that Cerberus want humans to become galactic empire and oppress everyone? Solely on the TIM words that he puts humanity's interests above all? Cerberus is no worse than any other galactic-scale organization and they sure are better than Reapers.

Neuzhelin wrote...

2) It indoctrinates as reaper technology (sure, some date can be recovered like on crashed reaper but at a wrong cost).

You will need to deal with indoctrination sooner or later. It is not like indoctrination problem will suddenly disappear after you blow base up. Base gives perfect opportunity to study it.

Neuzhelin wrote...

3) Legion and Mordin explain to you how culture, technology and civilisations function using collectors and heretic geth as examples. You can't take that kind of leaps, the cost seems to high. 

You can't compare that things. Heritics and Krogans cases have major difference from Base situation. In both cases there was some outside force that wanted them for some purpose. Sovereign wanted Heretics to assist him in conquering the Citadel and Salarians wanted Krogans to fight Rachni. Both Krogans and Geth were given technology for free and after that served someone else's purposes. In case with Base wee take that tech by our own and use it only for our own good.

Modifié par LorDC, 09 juin 2010 - 04:06 .

[STG]

I wonder how a renegade player who also destroyed the base will fare in ME3. Considering you have only a few groups watching your back.



That thought leads me to believe that the base won't matter much in the long run.

[baldmop]

      Cerberus inept ?  I saw this I would go out on a limb . This cell of Cerberus is far from inept . TIM has resources . By the way I destroyed the base it was to take TIM down a peg after being served up to the collectors . On my second play through now I am beginning to think TIM is info broker .

[LorDC]

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

Well, ... I think the foremostly reason why people (and I) think that TIMmy and ultimately Cerberus is not trustworthy is the point that Mr. Illusive thinks he actually represents humanity (his type of argumentation and justifications clearly show on how he is convinced about that). I don't trust anyone who actually believes he is able to speak for more than a few fellow friends, and thinking one has the right to act like he does because "he's got humanity's best interests at heart" is one big malus.
Reminds me of Louis XIV., and I wouldn't have let this fellow get the Collector base either.

It is valid point. But problem is that TIM actually tries to save and advance humanity. His deeds come before his words. I think his anti-Collector operation alone earns him right to say that he represents humanity.

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

Logically, having the base and possibly deciding on not to use it because of its dangers is the only right choice, but, for example, would you have given Stalin schematics on nuclear bombs just in hope he only uses them against WW2 Germany? I doubt people would have trusted Stalin to do the "right" thing. Same here with Cerberus.

Wrong comparison. Reapers are not n@zi and Stalin isn't TIM. Comparisons never actually say anything about problem itself, only about man who uses it.

Side-note. I am pretty sure that at least one reason why Bioware kept such polar choices about Base is to give fuel to this kind of discussions. Because if there was some kind of "give it to Council" decision 99% of people would stick with it.

[Neuzhelin]

LorDC wrote...

Neuzhelin wrote...

1) Can't have an organisation like cerberus indoctrinated or with that kind
of technology. The risk is too high as it might destroy not only human but all races again in the cycle. Otherwise Humans will end up as dictators of the galaxy only to have all races unify and rebel. It might be better short term but not when it comes to the grand strategy.

Seriously, guys why everyone thinks that Cerberus want humans to become galactic empire and oppress everyone? Solely on the TIM words that he puts humanity's interests above all? Cerberus is no worse than any other galactic-scale organization and they sure are better than Reapers.

Neuzhelin wrote...

2) It indoctrinates as reaper technology (sure, some date can be recovered like on crashed reaper but at a wrong cost).

You will need to deal with indoctrination sooner or later. It is not like indoctrination problem will suddenly disappear after you blow base up. Base gives perfect opportunity to study it.

Neuzhelin wrote...

3) Legion and Mordin explain to you how culture, technology and civilisations function using collectors and heretic geth as examples. You can't take that kind of leaps, the cost seems to high. 

You can't compare that things. Heritics and Krogans cases have major difference from Base situation. In both cases there was some outside force that wanted them for some purpose. Sovereign wanted Heretics to assist him in conquering the Citadel and Salarians wanted Krogans to fight Rachni. Both Krogans and Geth were given technology for free and after that served someone else's purposes. In case with Base wee take that tech by our own and use it only for our own good.

You are revealed a lot on cerberus in ME1, ME2 and Ascension. You present the renegade path and it is fine, I understand that some want to go for a human supremacy, it just won't work long term especially if it corrupts every race it has contacted so far.

You can speculate all you want that Cerberus will suddenly become paragon but that is all you have - speculation. I based my statement on both games and books that describe Cerberus' actions, motives nad future goals. You have provided emotionally loaded speculations and unless you provide something informational, I can't take you seriosly when you say a black ops xenophobic organisation ruled by a Slalinistic leader that puts goals higher then not only life but human life, that indoctrination for some reason will be countered. Cerberus kills Alliance soldier, officers, provides unethical experiments, assasinates for political dominance, hell they even invaded the Quarians because of 1 human. I don't want a divided galaxy when Reapers attack. History has shown that was where other civilizations failed and became a part of the cycle. If you study the differences between saving the council and killing it, you will understand what fragile position humanity is in. Having Cerberus allied with Shephard will in the long run weaken all.

When in Revelation you have a genious, one of worlds richest people and a spectre falling for it, when you already have an example of a cerberus cell going reaper. And when you say reaper technology can be integrated without any negative (cultural and political) impact it had on other races such as Rachni, Krogan AND Geth, I can not take you seriosly.

Yes, it is fine to roleplay a pro-cerberus brute, and I have one character like that myself but this is not the point of this thread.

Modifié par Neuzhelin, 09 juin 2010 - 05:38 .