3478 réponses à ce sujet

[didymos1120]

Shandepared wrote...

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

And tbh, that's what it's really about for pro-Cerberus... go luck! I am not pro-Cerberus.

"whatever they can grab and hold to" - imo that's not the endgame, that's called losing sight of the real game: living a life beyond what you can "grab"... Cerberus = "I want lotsa stuff for me!!!!"

Nations are selfish, species are selfish. Living beings are selfish. If they weren't they'd be extinct. Altruistic animals don't survive long in the wild.

You do realize that cooperation is often an extremely effective evolutionary strategy, right? And yes, altruism does exist in nature.  Quite common in fact:

http://en.wikipedia....uism_in_animals

Yes, generally it isn't "true" altruism, but so what?  Point is, in many, many instances, such altruistic behavior turns out to be more beneficial than naive, grab-what-I-can selfishness.  I.e., plenty of grab-what-I-can selfish animals don't survive long in the wild either.   Try reading Dawkins'  The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype.  Spoiler alert: that 'selfish' in the former's title?  Does not mean what you might think it means:

Emphasize 'selfish' and you will think the book is about selfishness, whereas, if anything, it devotes more attention to altruism.

[lovgreno]

The galaxy in Mass Effect has been a place with extreme competition for centuries. Wich applies to everything: culture, finance, military, politics atc. If you don't prove you can be trusted to help those in need you are considered a liability rather than a resource and thrown into a downward spiral of lost allies. In such a big and diverse place as the galaxy you need as many different and powerfull allies as you can. And if you don't like some them you just have to swallow your pride.

[Asheer_Khan]

I really wish that Walters was NEVER appointed as ME 2 lead writer... then maybe we will get what ME games were planned from the beginning instead of this stand alone "elegy for pride and glory of cerberus" thing...

[JohnnyBeGood2]

Shandepared wrote...

Asheer_Khan wrote...
I really wish that Walters was NEVER
appointed as ME 2 lead writer... then maybe we will get what ME games
were planned from the beginning instead of this stand alone "elegy for
pride and glory of cerberus" thing...

You and I actually
agree on something.

didymos1120 wrote...
You do realize that cooperation is often an extremely effective evolutionary strategy, right? And yes, altruism does exist in nature.

I knew this post was common. If it isn't "true" altruism then it isn't altruism, period. Cooperation for mutual benefit or sacrifice for the greater whole (the group, herd, pack, whatever) is not altruism.

Shand, It was you who called it "altrusim" in the first place. You introduced it into the conversation. I never called it altrusim and nor did didy.

[Simpfan]

I simply do it to fit with whatever personality Ive fixed to my Shep.

[lovgreno]

Good of you to bring enlightment about the only truth to the ignorant Shand.

[JohnnyBeGood2]

Shandepared wrote...

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

Shand, It was you who called it "altrusim" in the first place. You introduced it into the conversation. I never called it altrusim and nor did didy.

You were spouting a naive worldview. As a compassionate man who cannot stand to watch others wallowing in ignorance I was compelled to correct you. You were attacking a proven fact of life.

You have only what rights you can protect. You own only what you can hold on to. You are entitled to only what you can take.

I'm not saying it is pretty, but that's just the way it is.

Huh? He said that cooperation is a part of successful groups? You're trying to say it's not. The evidence is against you

??

[Mecha Tengu]

didymos1120 wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

And tbh, that's what it's really about for pro-Cerberus... go luck! I am not pro-Cerberus.

"whatever they can grab and hold to" - imo that's not the endgame, that's called losing sight of the real game: living a life beyond what you can "grab"... Cerberus = "I want lotsa stuff for me!!!!"

Nations are selfish, species are selfish. Living beings are selfish. If they weren't they'd be extinct. Altruistic animals don't survive long in the wild.

You do realize that cooperation is often an extremely effective evolutionary strategy, right? And yes, altruism does exist in nature.  Quite common in fact:

http://en.wikipedia....uism_in_animals

Yes, generally it isn't "true" altruism, but so what?  Point is, in many, many instances, such altruistic behavior turns out to be more beneficial than naive, grab-what-I-can selfishness.  I.e., plenty of grab-what-I-can selfish animals don't survive long in the wild either.   Try reading Dawkins'  The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype.  Spoiler alert: that 'selfish' in the former's title?  Does not mean what you might think it means:

Emphasize 'selfish' and you will think the book is about selfishness, whereas, if anything, it devotes more attention to altruism.

survival of the nicest

[Cheese Elemental]

You know, I think this thread needs to die.

Like, right now. This forum has lazy moderators.

[Nizzemancer]

Mecha Tengu wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

And tbh, that's what it's really about for pro-Cerberus... go luck! I am not pro-Cerberus.

"whatever they can grab and hold to" - imo that's not the endgame, that's called losing sight of the real game: living a life beyond what you can "grab"... Cerberus = "I want lotsa stuff for me!!!!"

Nations are selfish, species are selfish. Living beings are selfish. If they weren't they'd be extinct. Altruistic animals don't survive long in the wild.

You do realize that cooperation is often an extremely effective evolutionary strategy, right? And yes, altruism does exist in nature.  Quite common in fact:

http://en.wikipedia....uism_in_animals

Yes, generally it isn't "true" altruism, but so what?  Point is, in many, many instances, such altruistic behavior turns out to be more beneficial than naive, grab-what-I-can selfishness.  I.e., plenty of grab-what-I-can selfish animals don't survive long in the wild either.   Try reading Dawkins'  The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype.  Spoiler alert: that 'selfish' in the former's title?  Does not mean what you might think it means:

Emphasize 'selfish' and you will think the book is about selfishness, whereas, if anything, it devotes more attention to altruism.

survival of the nicest

There's no "I" in "Wolfpack"

[numotsbane]

This thread is hilarious. surely it is earmarked for the volus of doom now that its gone all socio-political.

needless to say shand, you're probably wrong. I'm not going to try to argue with you though, because I can understand that nothing I say will change your mind... you simply don't believe the evidence I believe in, and I don't believe the evidence you believe in.
and this isn't the time or place.

Modifié par numotsbane, 18 juillet 2010 - 10:22 .

[Spartas Husky]

numotsbane wrote...

This thread is hilarious. surely it is earmarked for the volus of doom now that its gone all socio-political.

get popcorn....we ran out of our 15 buckets already. Is someone turn to refill the machine.

And, get some juice...soda is starting to taste weird

[chucktheduck]

As has been said in the last 60-something pages in the forum: The Illusive Man is untrustworthy, so it seems like a bad Idea to give the tech. Plus, I bet there is some kind of fail-safe for the base... like indoctrination. Your crew was there for, what, a few days tops? I also wanted to see what humans would become after Shepard brings down the reapers in a paragon, non-evil way.

[smudboy]

chucktheduck wrote...

As has been said in the last 60-something pages in the forum: The Illusive Man is untrustworthy, so it seems like a bad Idea to give the tech. Plus, I bet there is some kind of fail-safe for the base... like indoctrination. Your crew was there for, what, a few days tops? I also wanted to see what humans would become after Shepard brings down the reapers in a paragon, non-evil way.

As been said multiple tiems before, the Reapers are going to kill us all, so it seems like a bad idea to blow up the base.  I bet there is some kind of way to blow up the base later if we want to, like with bombs, in case something like indoctrination starts happening.  I also wanted to help stop the Reapers in any way possible, because being a Paragon or Renegade in this kind of choice making is absolutely irrelevant and has nothing to do with morals or ethics.

[chucktheduck]

smudboy wrote...

chucktheduck wrote...

As has been said in the last 60-something pages in the forum: The Illusive Man is untrustworthy, so it seems like a bad Idea to give the tech. Plus, I bet there is some kind of fail-safe for the base... like indoctrination. Your crew was there for, what, a few days tops? I also wanted to see what humans would become after Shepard brings down the reapers in a paragon, non-evil way.

As been said multiple tiems before, the Reapers are going to kill us all, so it seems like a bad idea to blow up the base.  I bet there is some kind of way to blow up the base later if we want to, like with bombs, in case something like indoctrination starts happening.  I also wanted to help stop the Reapers in any way possible, because being a Paragon or Renegade in this kind of choice making is absolutely irrelevant and has nothing to do with morals or ethics.

Hey, I'm just looking for a challenge. My other guy is pretty much the same thing, but did keep the collector base.
And collector cloning. The EM pulse killed everything on the collector base, and left the machines intact. Big red light.

[Nightwriter]

Shandepared wrote...

A dead Reaper wouldn't prove anything to the Council. They already had one, after all.

No. In fact a lot of the whole "lack of evidence" argument hinged on the fact that they only recovered very small pieces.

An enormous, intact Reaper that has the ability to passively indoctrinate would, at the very least, give the Council pause, and make them think, "Okay, maybe Shepard's not totally crazy, s/he's at least offering us this to look at."

That Cerberus hoarded it is just awful.

[wulf3n]

Nightwriter wrote...
That Cerberus hoarded it is just awful.

But why Cerberus' did that doesn't make any sense. They've stated many times before that they have "influence" within the Alliance, an example being the first Normandy was a way for Cerberus to get a look at Turian technology.

So why couldn't they just make up some cover story that gets the reaper into Alliance hands, proving to the Council the validity of the Reaper threat, while still allowing Cerberus to study the Technology?

[Spartas Husky]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...


No. In fact a lot of the whole "lack of evidence" argument hinged on the fact that they only recovered very small pieces.

Yes, because the Council apparently wasn't able to manage the recovery very well. Each Council race grabbed what it could and hid it from the others. What makes you think the Collector base or derelict Reaper would be any different? Not to mention with the derelict Reaper they'd run into indoctrination. When it comes to the Collector base it is an incredibly inconvenient asset to acquire. How would they get enough ships and personnel that deep into the Terminus? They'd probably blow you off.

Even if they didn't... it wouldn't prove the Reapers are real. What you need to do is prove that there is a massive fleet of these things waiting in dark space. How will you do that? The Collector base and derelict Reaper don't necessarily prove the existence of that fleet.

Remember that Proof of a polititian, means show me a burning building that is a direct attack by that enemy and I'll believe you.

Like Clinton and Osama....he is dangerous....but the international backlash would be worse if we attack to openly.....

I guess Clinton got his answer.....and so did the idiot that followed.

Politicians are "til I dont see it dont believe it".....hence why they are poor defense policy makers

[JohnnyBeGood2]

smudboy wrote...

chucktheduck wrote...

As has been said in the last 60-something pages in the forum: The Illusive Man is untrustworthy, so it seems like a bad Idea to give the tech. Plus, I bet there is some kind of fail-safe for the base... like indoctrination. Your crew was there for, what, a few days tops? I also wanted to see what humans would become after Shepard brings down the reapers in a paragon, non-evil way.

As been said multiple tiems before, the Reapers are going to kill us all, so it seems like a bad idea to blow up the base.  I bet there is some kind of way to blow up the base later if we want to, like with bombs, in case something like indoctrination starts happening.  I also wanted to help stop the Reapers in any way possible, because being a Paragon or Renegade in this kind of choice making is absolutely irrelevant and has nothing to do with morals or ethics.

It's a tactical choice Smud: What are the gains? (given various factors and their likelihoods playing out), versus: what are the losses? (again given certain factors, circumstances and scenarios playing out).

TIM and Cerberus are a rogue and unproven quantity. Giving him the base assures nothing because the trust factor with him plays very heavily in the equation.

The main thing is this: when the crisis point arrives, you don't want TIM playing politics with the other races, over tech, to further his end game... that's a huge liability, huge risk, huge red flag. TIM's a playa and that's not what we need.

[smudboy]

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

smudboy wrote...

chucktheduck wrote...

As has been said in the last 60-something pages in the forum: The Illusive Man is untrustworthy, so it seems like a bad Idea to give the tech. Plus, I bet there is some kind of fail-safe for the base... like indoctrination. Your crew was there for, what, a few days tops? I also wanted to see what humans would become after Shepard brings down the reapers in a paragon, non-evil way.

As been said multiple tiems before, the Reapers are going to kill us all, so it seems like a bad idea to blow up the base.  I bet there is some kind of way to blow up the base later if we want to, like with bombs, in case something like indoctrination starts happening.  I also wanted to help stop the Reapers in any way possible, because being a Paragon or Renegade in this kind of choice making is absolutely irrelevant and has nothing to do with morals or ethics.

It's a tactical choice Smud: What are the gains? (given various factors and their likelihoods playing out), versus: what are the losses? (again given certain factors, circumstances and scenarios playing out).

TIM and Cerberus are a rogue and unproven quantity. Giving him the base assures nothing because the trust factor with him plays very heavily in the equation.

The main thing is this: when the crisis point arrives, you don't want TIM playing politics with the other races, over tech, to further his end game... that's a huge liability, huge risk, huge red flag. TIM's a playa and that's not what we need.

Tactical choice?  Destroying enemy plans, an enemy making device, is a tactic?  Should I quite Sun Tzu here?

All these social issues of trust or implied politics are moot; the alternative is unthinkable.  Use every break and chance you get to stop them, since ME2 did nothing to help anything toward that.  And if TIM even bothers with the other races or the Council, and they still don't buy that the Reapers are coming after showing them a base full of new technology?  What has the Council done for Shepard aside from Spectre status and giving him leads on Saren?  TIM and Cerberus have been the only factors involved in anything in ME2.  Trust over TIM is not the issue here, and politics and whatever liabilities you're talking about are irrelevant to the enemy you're facing.