3478 réponses à ce sujet

[Raphael diSanto]

Cpl_Facehugger wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Look Johnny...as far as we knoiw even Shepard becomes a failure to Cerberus if you pick the Paragon path and rebell to them.......what does that tell you?

Actually, that's not true. TIM did not resurrect Shepard to become a beacon of darkness (heh) for Cerberus. TIM resurrected Shepard to beat the Collectors. And s/he did.

At no point in the story does is it ever even implied that TIM wants Shepard's opinion of Cerberus to change. Miranda might try and change Shepard's mind, but she's not TIM. This is exact reason why TIM did -not- want a control chip placed in Shepard's brain.

TIM wanted the exact same Shepard, including the same moral values. TIM knows that that means that a Cerberus-hating Shepard is going to remain a Cerberus-hating Shepard.

The difference between Miranda and TIM is that TIM doesn't care if Shepard hates Cerberus. He brought Shepard back to do a specific job, which was subsequently accomplished. The experiment was a complete success.

When you put it like that, I start to wonder how TIM couldn't see that a paragon-Shep wouldn't keep the base. I also start to wonder if this is all part of TIM's plan in some fashion.

Oh, I agree with you 100% (about the keeping the base) .. I mean, you have to bear in mind that BioWare have to (to a greater or lesser degree) sort of write dialogue for EveryShep, especially when it comes down to NPC dialogue that's not a response to PC-chosen dialogue.

So when TIM shows up at the end, you can play it however you want. If you're playing a RenShep, then you can take it as 'Hey, bud, I had a better idea, whatcha think of this?'. If you're playing a boy scout, then you can think of it more as a 'Shepard, wait! Reconsider!'

The job of a BioWare dialogue writer in ME is not an enviable one.

[Chuvvy]

Because metagaming. Since those Paragon points popped up nothing bad will happen. And because those renegade points popped up something bad will happen.

Modifié par Slidell505, 02 juin 2010 - 06:24 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

Cpl_Facehugger wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Look Johnny...as far as we knoiw even Shepard becomes a failure to Cerberus if you pick the Paragon path and rebell to them.......what does that tell you?

Actually, that's not true. TIM did not resurrect Shepard to become a beacon of darkness (heh) for Cerberus. TIM resurrected Shepard to beat the Collectors. And s/he did.

At no point in the story does is it ever even implied that TIM wants Shepard's opinion of Cerberus to change. Miranda might try and change Shepard's mind, but she's not TIM. This is exact reason why TIM did -not- want a control chip placed in Shepard's brain.

TIM wanted the exact same Shepard, including the same moral values. TIM knows that that means that a Cerberus-hating Shepard is going to remain a Cerberus-hating Shepard.

The difference between Miranda and TIM is that TIM doesn't care if Shepard hates Cerberus. He brought Shepard back to do a specific job, which was subsequently accomplished. The experiment was a complete success.

When you put it like that, I start to wonder how TIM couldn't see that a paragon-Shep wouldn't keep the base. I also start to wonder if this is all part of TIM's plan in some fashion.

Oh, I agree with you 100% (about the keeping the base) .. I mean, you have to bear in mind that BioWare have to (to a greater or lesser degree) sort of write dialogue for EveryShep, especially when it comes down to NPC dialogue that's not a response to PC-chosen dialogue.

So when TIM shows up at the end, you can play it however you want. If you're playing a RenShep, then you can take it as 'Hey, bud, I had a better idea, whatcha think of this?'. If you're playing a boy scout, then you can think of it more as a 'Shepard, wait! Reconsider!'

The job of a BioWare dialogue writer in ME is not an enviable one.

You can also easily make a Paragon or Renegade argument for either decision, regardless of which points the game allocates to you. A Renegade destroying the base can justify it as personal hatred, revenge, against TIM. A paragon can save the base for being the best hope to saving the largest part of the galaxy. Paragons and Renegades don't have to be slotted in the holes for a skilled RPG justifier.

[Dean_the_Young]

Nightwriter wrote...

I think that's a very apt evaluation Ieldra.

So are you saying I feel as though my fear of social instability makes me destroy the base or my fear/survivalism instinct makes me keep it? 

Dean_the_Young wrote...

I'm impressed at how much you let the opinions of others decide you choices for you.

You are so no fun. Where is your humor. Where.

I know it's in there somewhere. I know it, I tell you. And I'll find it. You can't hide these things from me.

I'm always humerus. And radius. And phalanges. I keep it all on my arm.

[Sajuro]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I think that's a very apt evaluation Ieldra.

So are you saying I feel as though my fear of social instability makes me destroy the base or my fear/survivalism instinct makes me keep it? 

Dean_the_Young wrote...

I'm impressed at how much you let the opinions of others decide you choices for you.

You are so no fun. Where is your humor. Where.

I know it's in there somewhere. I know it, I tell you. And I'll find it. You can't hide these things from me.

I'm always humerus. And radius. And phalanges. I keep it all on my arm.

tuh-dum-ch
In all seriousness, I would have thought Mordin urging to keep the collector base was spur of a moment since he talked about how culture suffered if technology moved too fast.

[InHarmsWay]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

Cpl_Facehugger wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Look Johnny...as far as we knoiw even Shepard becomes a failure to Cerberus if you pick the Paragon path and rebell to them.......what does that tell you?

Actually, that's not true. TIM did not resurrect Shepard to become a beacon of darkness (heh) for Cerberus. TIM resurrected Shepard to beat the Collectors. And s/he did.

At no point in the story does is it ever even implied that TIM wants Shepard's opinion of Cerberus to change. Miranda might try and change Shepard's mind, but she's not TIM. This is exact reason why TIM did -not- want a control chip placed in Shepard's brain.

TIM wanted the exact same Shepard, including the same moral values. TIM knows that that means that a Cerberus-hating Shepard is going to remain a Cerberus-hating Shepard.

The difference between Miranda and TIM is that TIM doesn't care if Shepard hates Cerberus. He brought Shepard back to do a specific job, which was subsequently accomplished. The experiment was a complete success.

When you put it like that, I start to wonder how TIM couldn't see that a paragon-Shep wouldn't keep the base. I also start to wonder if this is all part of TIM's plan in some fashion.

Oh, I agree with you 100% (about the keeping the base) .. I mean, you have to bear in mind that BioWare have to (to a greater or lesser degree) sort of write dialogue for EveryShep, especially when it comes down to NPC dialogue that's not a response to PC-chosen dialogue.

So when TIM shows up at the end, you can play it however you want. If you're playing a RenShep, then you can take it as 'Hey, bud, I had a better idea, whatcha think of this?'. If you're playing a boy scout, then you can think of it more as a 'Shepard, wait! Reconsider!'

The job of a BioWare dialogue writer in ME is not an enviable one.

You can also easily make a Paragon or Renegade argument for either decision, regardless of which points the game allocates to you. A Renegade destroying the base can justify it as personal hatred, revenge, against TIM. A paragon can save the base for being the best hope to saving the largest part of the galaxy. Paragons and Renegades don't have to be slotted in the holes for a skilled RPG justifier.

I agree. Arguments can be made for keeping the base or destroying it.

Modifié par InHarmsWay, 02 juin 2010 - 11:28 .

[Bhatair]

I'm fine with keeping the base for its tech.

I'm not fine with giving it to Cerberus.

[Vaenier]

A race of technologically superior sentient dreadnoughts that have killed countless people, wiped entire civilizations from existence, reaped the galaxy of multitudes of races for hundreds of millions of years without fail are on there way back again to do the same to you.

Do you give WMDs to a mad man, or do you sit on your ass hoping for yet another miracle to show up and slap you in the face before it is to late? This is hard why?

[Kaiser Shepard]

AwesomeEffect2 wrote...

Did anyone destroy the base because of Akuze?

Aye, though that was my last Sole Survivor: not being able to confront TIM or Miri with Akuze just bothers me too much.

[ResidentNoob]

• Reason 1: Whether you destroy it, or give it to TIM, the general outcome will be the same: You gonna get f*cked over in ME3, bro. Better for the damn thing to be dead and gone than in the hands of terrorists.
• Reason 2: Because whenever we use Reaper tech directly(which excludes Thanix Cannon, EDI, etc.), we seem to get screwed over rather efficiently. Just ask your potentially dead crew how the IFF performed. Oh wait...<_<
• Reason 3: Because it is the most epic FU that I have ever seen, in my entire life.
• Reason 4: *coughsplosionscough*

[RyuAzai]

I agree with the 'repeating past mistakes'



Every single time we've tried to mess with Reaper tech it has screw us over big time.



The more we depend on it, the more advantage they have on us. Just look at the Mass relays, we HAVE to use them. The Reapers wanted it that why.



So I destroy it, and when the reapers came well I got a secret weapon.



His name is Blasto.

[smudboy]

ResidentNoob wrote...
Reason 1: Whether you destroy it, or give it to TIM, the general outcome will be the same: You gonna get f*cked over in ME3, bro. Better for the damn thing to be dead and gone than in the hands of terrorists.

a) How do you know this?
I'd rather get ****ed over, as opposed to dying.  Galactically.  In a cycle.  Again.  Take every chance you get to beat the Reapers, cause ME2 did dick and all to help us in that.
c) Cerberus seems to be the only group willing to go and do things to stop the Reapers, or their oragnic counterparts.  Why wouldn't you want that help?  "Oh they're terrorists..."  Who cares?  We're all (as in the GALAXY) gonna die.  Do you understand the scope here?
d) It's really just the lesser of two evils.  Unfortunately, your reasoning is...not reasonable.

Reason 2: Because whenever we use Reaper tech directly(which excludes Thanix Cannon, EDI, etc.), we seem to get screwed over rather efficiently. Just ask your potentially dead crew how the IFF performed. Oh wait...<_<

I don't know how mental influence relates to being screwed over rather 'efficiently' in regards to death.  That seems rather inefficient if you ask me.  You're saying because it's too risky/people will get screwed over and then they'll die?  Guess what?  If someone doesn't get a break on even attempting to beat the Reapers, they'll be wiped out.  Everyone.  Oh, but nevermind the complete need for EDI in ME2, with whom we wouldn't have gotten this far without it to even make the completely retarded choice.

Reason 3: Because it is the most epic FU that I have ever seen, in my entire life.

You lack life.

Reason 4: *coughsplosionscough*

Oh, and the other explosion wasn't, what, red enough for you?  Yes.  The argument for esthetics of something, after the fact.  Wonderful.

Modifié par smudboy, 03 juin 2010 - 02:49 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

Because the Island told me to

[HTTP 404]

why wouldnt you not want to blow something up?

[Cheese Elemental]

I wouldn't trust Cerberus with the technology to create Reapers. Listen to TIM in the Paragon ending; he says that it would have "secured human dominance in the galaxy, against the Reapers and beyond." He'd use it to establish dominance over the rest of the galaxy. There's absolutely no way Cerberus can use it responsibly.

You know something else? We don't even know if you need the tech from that base to win. The reason the Protheans and all the other civilisations got wiped out was because they couldn't anticipate the arrival of the Reapers. What if the Protheans had advanced weapons tech? They could have defeated the Reapers, or at least hurt them badly, and they were just one civilisation.

[snfonseka]

Cra5y Pineapple wrote...

I fail to see the point in doing it. Preserving the base seemed convientient and perhaps increased the chances of getting collector weapons and tech in ME3. I don't get why the majority of the community destroy it. The last person I asked just said it was "to get a more satifying explosion" but it seems like more than that.

Because the GAME says it is the PARAGON thing to do...

[Pacifien]

Slidell505 wrote...
Because metagaming. Since those Paragon points popped up nothing bad will happen. And because those renegade points popped up something bad will happen.

Why do people always assume renegade decisions are going to lead to something bad? Is it because of how the Council decision from the end of ME1 played out in ME2? I can't think of other renegade decisions that have resulted in "bad" outcomes.

Then again, I actually like the added tension that sacrificing the Council gave to your time on the Citadel in ME2, so it's not a bad outcome to me.

[Rzepik2]

I'm 100% sure uncle TIM is going to do something really, REALLY EVIL with that base.
But I'm still saving it. Because - hello? Wake up everybody - we're going to fight reapers! We need every advantage. The base, the ancients ships around it...

And this:

Modifié par Rzepik2, 03 juin 2010 - 03:13 .

[snfonseka]

Pacifien wrote...

Why do people always assume renegade decisions are going to lead to something bad? Is it because of how the Council decision from the end of ME1 played out in ME2? I can't think of other renegade decisions that have resulted in "bad" outcomes.

Then again, I actually like the added tension that sacrificing the Council gave to your time on the Citadel in ME2, so it's not a bad outcome to me.

Agreed.........

[Mirthadrond]

If you didnt destroy it in ME2, you'll likely get another chance in ME3.



It will be an "oops" we screwed up "save us Shepard!" mission.



Haven't needed much reaper tech to beat them so far, doubt keeping the base will really help much.

Besides, the main advantage the reapers had in the past was surprise, which I've eliminated.



Another note: if keeping/destroying the base has a major impact in ME3, lots of people will be screwed.

[FROST4584]

Mirthadrond wrote...

If you didnt destroy it in ME2, you'll likely get another chance in ME3.

It will be an "oops" we screwed up "save us Shepard!" mission.

Haven't needed much reaper tech to beat them so far, doubt keeping the base will really help much.
Besides, the main advantage the reapers had in the past was surprise, which I've eliminated.

Another note: if keeping/destroying the base has a major impact in ME3, lots of people will be screwed.

Mordin countermeasures worked by studying the Quanian's scanned Collectors Seeker swarms.
EDI is based on Reaper tech, which helped out many times in the game.
Thanix Cannon based on reaper tech that destroyed the collector vessel within two hits.

and more are all a result of studying Reaper Tech, so learning  and understanding reaper tech has been useful in Mass Effect 2. Without it reaching the Omega 4 relay and making out alive would not have been possible without Reaper tech. A lot of people are forgetting that this is a war and fighting wars mean causalities , of course you are going to loose people. So it is logical to risk people trying to understand Reaper Tech now, so the galaxy can be saved.
 
The stakes are much higher than dead Cerberus officers.  I don't like losing people myself, but in war you lose people. Keeping the Collector base is NO different from what the Prothans did which saved the Galaxy in Mass Effect 1. Without the information that Prothans provided in Mass Effect 1 by studying Reaper tech and providing information the galaxy would have been screwed. Destroying the Collector base changes nothing from a realistic point of view. The only way it will change is when the writers make up something silly that has negative effects in saving the base.

[Vaenier]

snfonseka wrote...

Cra5y Pineapple wrote...

I fail to see the point in doing it. Preserving the base seemed convientient and perhaps increased the chances of getting collector weapons and tech in ME3. I don't get why the majority of the community destroy it. The last person I asked just said it was "to get a more satifying explosion" but it seems like more than that.

Because the GAME says it is the PARAGON thing to do...

That is the most compelling argument in this thread...

[GreenDragon37]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

I didn't do so in my "personal canon Shepard," but I think the main reason would be not to deliver possibly dangerous technology into the hands of an untrustworthy racially motivated terrorist leader.

This.