3478 réponses à ce sujet

[Sago_mulch]

HEY BROS THIS QUESTION APPEARS ALOT IN MY NOW.

I HAD THE FATE OF TEH ENTIRE GLAXY IN MY HANDS AS I WAS COMTEMPLATING THIS DESCISION, MY BROS HELPED ME OUT ON THIS DESCISION

GRUNT: SHEPARD. SAVE THE BASE. DO IT ****GOT.
SMUDSMUGBOY: IT WILL NOT MAEK ANY SENSE IF YOU DESTROY THIS BASE.
MARTIN SHEEN: SHEPARD. DON'T BE A MORAL**** BY DESTROYING THE BASE, WE CAN USE IT.

THEN I WAS LIKE LETS DESTROY THE BASE.

MARTIN SHEEN:




COMRADE SHEPARD: SORRY BRO. I'MA HAVING TROUBLE HEARIN' YOU, BRO. I'M GRTTING SOME BULL**** ON THIS LINE.

http://thm-a01.yimg....f51b178759c9918

THERE WAS NO REASON AND NO LOGIC BEHIND THE DESCISION
I DESTROYED IT FOR TEH LULZ.

[Dean_the_Young]

Luc0s wrote...

Arijharn wrote...
I project too much into it because I try to equate what the real person is like rather than just the game character. I'd rather sacrifice my humanity than let the galaxy burn, but I'm unsure if that's me being prudent or me being some sort of martyr.

Quote from Shepard himself in ME1 (converstation with Alliance investigator about the body from Samesh Bhatia's wife):

Shepard: "What point is there in fighting for humanity if we lose our humanity in the progress?" (blue paragon response)

I think that quote basically sums it all up. It's exactly the reason why I destroy the Collector Base. I don't like how Cerberus operates for this very reason. They say they fight for human interrests, but they don't do it in a very humane way...

One would hope that your vision of humanity would, you know, involve protecting and saving as many people as you can and not gambling with the lives of billions simply because you feel sqeamish.

But, if your vision of humanity does see it preferable to increase the certainty of a lot more civilians and allied soldiers die simply so you can serve and maintain moral continuity, that's your own vision of what humane actions are.

[lovgreno]

Luc0s wrote...
Keeping the base is as much of a gamble as destroying it.

Yep, that about sums it up realy.

[Myrmedus]

Cra5y Pineapple wrote...

Why is it that nobody likes TIM anyway?

I mean...that cigar.

Everyone likes TIM and that's the problem - he's like the devil in disguise; very intelligent, persuasive, charismatic and charming - and a thunder**** underneath. Alot of what he says makes sense aswell, which once again makes him even more dangerous.

In my canon playthrough I kept the base but damn did I regret it afterwards. There's two facets to the decision:

Firstly, the obvious ramifications of using it for guerilla warfare against the Reapers. I can see it being a huge asset and you can't ****** such a gift down the drain when your race faces total annihilation. Having said that, the threat here is that the Reapers know more about that technology than we do and reliance on it - on our part - could be dangerous. Imagine we build new ships using the technology but the Reapers know how to corrupt some algorithm in its programming. There you go, the Alliance Navy is now totally ****ed. I did keep it though I just hope those fears don't come true!

Secondly, you have to consider exactly WHO is inheriting that base because you sure aren't. You're not keeping that base you're GIVING it to TIM. This the facet of the decision that made me think twice, heh.

I mostly kept it because I thought it was necessary considering what we were up against and I thought if Cerberus goes out of line with its use we'll just kick their ass in ME3 and assassinate TIM (maybe commission Thane to do it just before he kicks the bucket!) if we have to but then I wondered, with BW wanting your choices to stick and all, whether that'll even be possible. I hope it is though and it'd make a GREAT plot arc I tell you.

There's also more far-reaching consequences: what happens after the Reaper War? TIM says as much as he plans to use it against the alien races after the Reapers are dealt with.

It all comes down to whether you believe ME3 will have the capacity, in its story, for you to put TIM down. If you're not sure about that then you'll destroy the base. The worst ending is keeping the base and Shepard dying. Not only do Cerberus get this base but Shepard isn't around to keep TIM in line - oh ****

Modifié par Myrmedus, 04 août 2010 - 04:23 .

[smudboy]

Luc0s wrote...

@Dean

Keeping the base is as much of a gamble as destroying it. You assume that destroying the base will somehow result in more casulties but thats inductive reasoning friend. In reallity you really don't know what good the base can cause. However, we DO know what bad it can cause. The knowlegde that the base is an abomination is enough for me to destroy it. Besides I don't trust TIM, even more reason to destroy the base.

Besides, at the end you see Joker with skematics of a reaper so I have the strong feeling that it doesnt even matter if you keep or destroy the base, you'll still have Intel on the reapers.

Blown up base: nothing left, no danger from base.
Keep base: something there, potential danger.

The knowledge of the base is not an abomination.  It's knowledge.  The application of that knowledge could be too much for your mind to take.  Knowledge is simply itself.

At the end you see 4 jpgs of a Reaper.

I too, believe, the choice is immaterial, but that's just how ME choices go.

[Dean_the_Young]

Luc0s wrote...

@Dean

Keeping the base is as much of a gamble as destroying it. You assume that destroying the base will somehow result in more casulties but thats inductive reasoning friend. In reallity you really don't know what good the base can cause.

One only needs to be an amateur historian to understand the difference relative technology gaps bring in the casualties of war. The less advanced one side is, the greater chances for defeat (extinction, in our case) and the greater it's casualties in victory. The more extreme the difference, the worse the costs: Indians on the Great Plains lost to the US even with guns and horses and a hard-won immunity to European diseases, but they did far better than the Aztecs and others when they opposed Spanish guns, germs, and steel without any of their own.

Besides history and uncommon common sense, we also have the game's own implications: TIM will point out the difference in lives, and no one, no matter how anti-Cerberus, will dispute it.

However, we DO know what bad it can cause. The knowlegde that the base is an abomination is enough for me to destroy it. Besides I don't trust TIM, even more reason to destroy the base.

The bad that it could cause was that the Collectors would use it to build a Reaper which could then try and open the Citadel Relay and jumpstart the Reaper invasion.

For many reasons already addressed over and over, Cerberus has no ability, motive, or reason to do the same, since exploiting the fruits of technology is so much easier than building a full-born Reaper from the corpses of millions.

Besides, at the end you see Joker with skematics of a reaper so I have the strong feeling that it doesnt even matter if you keep or destroy the base, you'll still have Intel on the reapers.

Here is a link to a picture of an Abrams Tank. Now build it.

A picture is not schematics. Even skematics are vastly inferior to the knowledge and tools to build something.

You've switched your own argument to claim that a pittance of knowledge of Reaper technology (your schematic) is desirable, even though TIM was being forwarded everything EDI had. Now it's up to you to explain why galactic survival should hang on a pittance.

[Darth_Ultima]

I do not think that any of the examples you used are really very valid. You mentioned only the operations that were either taken down by Shepard which there is no way of stopping Shepard because Shepard is a bad*** or the obvious failures. Cerberus has many clandestine dealings that do not go wrong at all which is why they are so dangerous. Besides what does the Illusive Man care if some of his scientists get killed because they got stupid.  He will just hire more. He probably plans for them to fail in an epic way knowing that everyone will die but in doing so provide him with more data then he would have gotten in the first place.

Modifié par Darth_Ultima, 04 août 2010 - 06:57 .

[freeman2008]

The Collectors were still onboard, who's to say there wouldn't be survivors? Who's to say that TIM could hold the base in light of the fact that there are still hundreds of reapers still out there? Who can say whether the technology could be researched and be made useful before the Reapers attack? What are TIM's true intentions once the war is over? Too much power for Cerburus who would use it to gain power for themselves and not the galaxy at large. All races need to work together to win. Not just Cerburus against everybody.

Too many variables makes it too big of a risk to waste time and resources on. The Geth had the right idea. Choose your own route and take down the base.

[Dean_the_Young]

Myrmedus wrote...
In my canon playthrough I kept the base but damn did I regret it afterwards. There's two facets to the decision:

Firstly, the obvious ramifications of using it for guerilla warfare against the Reapers.

What guerilla warfare? Guerilla warfare is dependent on the ability to hide in the populations and the wilderness. Reapers kill the populations, and then destroy the wilderness.

I can see it being a huge asset and you can't ****** such a gift down the drain when your race faces total annihilation. Having said that, the threat here is that the Reapers know more about that technology than we do and reliance on it - on our part - could be dangerous. Imagine we build new ships using the technology but the Reapers know how to corrupt some algorithm in its programming. There you go, the Alliance Navy is now totally ****ed. I did keep it though I just hope those fears don't come true!

The Reapers already understand all our technology better than we do. That's why they have superior technology. It's the entire reason why the Collectors could be so effective at trading: they already know where we're going to develop our technology (which they invented), and can offer us precisely what will be galactic standard five/ten years in advance.

The idea that staying technologically stagnant, right at about the levels the Reapers always intended to kill us at anyway, is somehow going to hide our abilities or technology from them is ludicrous.

Secondly, you have to consider exactly WHO is inheriting that base because you sure aren't. You're not keeping that base you're GIVING it to TIM. This the facet of the decision that made me think twice, heh.

Because TIM is going to start a war against Cerberus by abducting millions/billions of humans/aliens in order to make his own private Reaper when he could just figure out the basics and reproduce tech with standard materials like we do the Thannix?

There's also more far-reaching consequences: what happens after the Reaper War? TIM says as much as he plans to use it against the alien races after the Reapers are dealt with.

After the Reaper War, everyone else will be scrambling to research and reverse the Reaper tech as well. The Turians already made their own ability to wage intergalactic war stronger by secretly developing the Thannix. Significant elements of the Quarian high command want to use Reaper tech against the Geth. The Alliance is doing something highly suspect to the Council. The Salarians have already expressed an interest in Indoctrination. The Geth are already building their own Reaper equivalent.

Reaper tech exists, everyone is already trying to decipher it, and it isn't going away.

[Dean_the_Young]

freeman2008 wrote...

The Collectors were still onboard, who's to say there wouldn't be survivors?

Are you seriously going to argue that the game is lying to you when it tells you what the choices are? Even when none of the crew or EDI tell you that the facts presented are wrong?

A neutron purge or some such wipes out the base. The game tells you this.

Who's to say that TIM could hold the base in light of the fact that there are still hundreds of reapers still out there?

Completely irrelevant, since TIM doesn't have to hold the base once the Reapers arrive. Whether you destroy it or not, if the Reapers win they can rebuild it and build their next Reaper regardless.

Who can say whether the technology could be researched and be made useful before the Reapers attack?

TIM, who is in a valid position to know and thinks he can use it, and the crew, who all one way or another agree that the technology can be used.

What are TIM's true intentions once the war is over?

What they have always been.

Too much power for Cerburus who would use it to gain power for themselves and not the galaxy at large.

Cerberus has never claimed to be the Council. Of course, the Council doesn't act for the galaxy at large either.

All races need to work together to win. Not just Cerburus against everybody.

Why would it be Cerberus against everybody, when human interests (the Cerberus goal) are much better served without a direct confrontation?

Moreover, why does giving the base prevent aliens from working with the Alliance and even Cerberus? Are you really going to argue that they are so petty that the Council species, so in need to be top dog, won't ally in the face of galactic extinction?

Too many variables makes it too big of a risk to waste time and resources on. The Geth had the right idea. Choose your own route and take down the base.

Ignorring the minor detail that all human/geth technology possible at this point is evolved along Reaper lines, and that 'own path' is a meaningless distinction, why don't you find us all some historical examples as proof the Geth had it right?

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 04 août 2010 - 07:09 .

[Crespire]

Shandepared wrote...
"It's just a game and Bioware would never screw their customers like that."

WINNER IS YOU!

[Hathur]

Well, if I had the means to give it to the alliance or council, I'd have kept it... but the only option was to give it to TIM.... and I get the distinct impression that fella would gladly conquer the known universe if he had the means to do it... my Shep wasn't willing to put an uber weapon into the hands of a man who wouldn't hesitate to use it on other species or even non-compliant human factions.

So... I smashed it.

Would you have given the atomic bomb to Hitler, even if he was helping you to defeat the Soviet Union / Communism? I should hope not..

Modifié par Hathur, 04 août 2010 - 09:57 .

[DarthFrylock007]

This thread is still going?!?  Might as well jump in...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

freeman2008 wrote...

The Collectors were still onboard, who's to say there wouldn't be survivors?

Are you seriously going to argue that the game is lying to you when it tells you what the choices are? Even when none of the crew or EDI tell you that the facts presented are wrong?

A neutron purge or some such wipes out the base. The game tells you this.

From a strictly logical point, there really is no good reason to blow up the base. It's neither good nor evil, it's just a base. The ideal thing would be to hand it over to the Council so that you can get the combined resources of the Citadel races working on some way to combat the Reaper threat. Leaving it up to Cerberus would still be better than nothing, but their resources pale in comparison to what the Council could provide. Even if the Collectors manage to erase all the databanks, you still have something to study.  Heck, if nothing else it's irrefutable proof that Sovereign was not a geth construct.

However, from a roleplaying point, there's no way for Shep to know that the radiation pulse is guaranteed to work.  If I were to find myself in that situation, where I've managed to overcome impossilbe odds and reach the heart of the Collector base, only to have some dude tens of thousands of lightyears away suddenly demand a radical change to the mission objective... yeah I don't think so.

Doesn't have anything to do with whether I think he's a bad guy or not, makes no difference to me whether it's TIM, Captain Anderson, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, or the freaking Tooth Fairy. The bottom line is that the guy proposing to keep the base has had all of 5 seconds to look at the schematics before coming up with that plan, excuse me if I have serious doubts about its reliability.

[DarthFrylock007]

True, there's no guarantee that plan would work either. Which actually drives the point home further, Shep's already attempting something very risky that has no guarantee of success. Attempting to destroy the base outright is still safer than trying to kill all the collectors while leaving the base intact.



It's a theme Mordin touches on when talking about the creation of the genophage. Wiping out the krogan completely would have been far easier than trying to find the optimal 1-in-1000 birthrate. Likewise, it's far easier to try to make a reactor overload so that it causes as much destruction and death as possible than it is trying to do something that will only cause death to the collectors without destroying any equipment. Will the radiation pulse be strong enough to kill everyone aboard? Will it be too strong and fry all the equipment as well? Are there any areas of the base that are especially hardened against radiation?



Shep has no way of knowing if either plan is a sure thing, but one plan has more question marks surrounding it.

[Dean_the_Young]

'It might not work' fears don't drive the point further: they ignore the point. Mass Effect is a game which follows an honest narration formula: the information we receive is always reliable, and the times it is wrong/can be debated is when it either (a) is openly and explicitly overturned later on (the truth about the Protheans to the Reapers) or ( is identified as a rumor in the first place.

Mass Effect doesn't send up false flags for its choices, and what the gave narrative (through all it's characters) says will/will not work, is reliable. This is the way the story is told, and more than a narrative technique (of keeping it simple for the stupid), it's reflected in the plot. Shepard and TIM do have grounds to be confident their 'blow up the generator' options will both work: this is the medium and manner in which the Mass Effect universe works.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 05 août 2010 - 03:06 .

[Thatguy38]

Cpl_Facehugger wrote...

DaBigDragon wrote...

Not destroying the Collector Base would be like not stopping the **** Concentration Camps in World War II because we could "learn from" the methods and technologies used there.

That's not a very good analogy. Don't get me wrong, I think keeping the base is foolish, but there was no looming threat to make grabbing new tech vital in WWII. This would be more like stopping the concentration camps... But knowing that if you let them run, they might give you a significant advantage against Cthulhu or something. 

Matriarch Aethyta implies the asari would be capable of building their
own mass relays if they so desired.

Matriarch Aethyta says lots of things. Don't take them all at face value. 

 
If only the reapers could by stopped by reading some moldy old book, like Cthulu.

Harbinger Ftagn

[Legion 2.5]

I destroyed it because I like blowing up things in video games.

[Revan061]

freeman2008 wrote...

The Collectors were still onboard, who's to say there wouldn't be survivors? Who's to say that TIM could hold the base in light of the fact that there are still hundreds of reapers still out there? Who can say whether the technology could be researched and be made useful before the Reapers attack? What are TIM's true intentions once the war is over? Too much power for Cerburus who would use it to gain power for themselves and not the galaxy at large. All races need to work together to win. Not just Cerburus against everybody.

Too many variables makes it too big of a risk to waste time and resources on. The Geth had the right idea. Choose your own route and take down the base.

Of the available options, this.

[DarthFrylock007]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

'It might not work' fears don't drive the point further: they ignore the point. Mass Effect is a game which follows an honest narration formula: the information we receive is always reliable, and the times it is wrong/can be debated is when it either (a) is openly and explicitly overturned later on (the truth about the Protheans to the Reapers) or ( is identified as a rumor in the first place.

Mass Effect doesn't send up false flags for its choices, and what the gave narrative (through all it's characters) says will/will not work, is reliable. This is the way the story is told, and more than a narrative technique (of keeping it simple for the stupid), it's reflected in the plot. Shepard and TIM do have grounds to be confident their 'blow up the generator' options will both work: this is the medium and manner in which the Mass Effect universe works.

Sigh....

From a pure logic standpoint, yes keeping the base is the smart choice. And in a couple of paragon playthroughs I've still kept it.

However, from a strict roleplaying standpoint, I've also had a renegade destroy it. The fact that ME's narrative formula is always honest is irrelevant because Shepard the character can't possibly know that it's always honest, Shep doesn't even know that there is a narrative formula.

[Dean_the_Young]

So how many other things does your Shepard not believe? He must be consistent, after all. Does he doubt he was brought back from the dead, and consider himself some attempt at playing God? That would be interesting role playing.



The honest narrative is for the player's benefit to explain why all the characters act and can believe what they do. It's not for the characters.

[Arijharn]

Hathur wrote...

Well, if I had the means to give it to the alliance or council, I'd have kept it... but the only option was to give it to TIM.... and I get the distinct impression that fella would gladly conquer the known universe if he had the means to do it... my Shep wasn't willing to put an uber weapon into the hands of a man who wouldn't hesitate to use it on other species or even non-compliant human factions.

So... I smashed it.
.

That's exactly the point though. You didn't have enough information and had to act on the spur of the moment based on what you did know (or thought you did) at that exact moment. People's tired comments and woeful moans of 'what if' is, as I feel, the entire point of the exchange. In short; **** happens, and its up to you to deal with it.

Also, I hate to mention it, but the (ultra) tired analogy you gave of Hitler, the Atomic Bomb and the Soviet Union does not hold any merit compared to the Reapers. I'm sure no one is actually retarded enough to equate Hitler with the Reapers from a philosophical level because:
1) Hitler did not like some 'undesirables.'
2) The Reapers do not like any (organic?) species.
Can you now see just where you went wrong? 

[smudboy]

Sorry Dean, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Honest narrative? Does that mean there are scenes which are supposed to be false, and revealed later to be as such?