3478 réponses à ce sujet

[Myrmedus]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

[quote]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.[/quote]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.[/quote][/quote]

Er, no it isn't. Guerilla warfare is the ability to turn an enemy's perceived strengths into weaknesses ie. a huge army seems stronger but its weakness is slow mobilization - with Reapers you could say their size is a strength but it also makes them susceptible to "invasion" of their body.  It's to use your enemy's strengths against them when you're significantly outnumbered or outgunned aswell, like striking at particular squadrons of the enemy force, taking their weaponry and then using it against them to even the odds.The hiding in populations thing etc. is generally just a tactic used to that end but it's one of many and is not the definition of guerilla warfare.

[quote][quote]
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![/quote]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.[/quote]

The point you seem to completely miss - I don't know if you do it intentionally or not - is that possessing technology you don't develop yourselves is like giving a 3 year old a nuclear missile to play with. In addition, there's a difference between understanding a technology and something you use completely being based upon it. We use Mass Effect tech which is based upon Reaper tech, true, but everything else is 'homegrown' technology.

[quote][quote]
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.[/quote]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?[/quote]

Er, no. He says IN THE GAME (duh) that he'll use it to assert human dominance against the Reapers and beyond. Have you ever considered what the "and beyond" means? Besides, "human dominance" is not "co-existence" - it means we're top dog and tell everyone else what to do - that isn't a good vision unless you're a racist.

[quote][quote]
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.[/quote]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.[/quote]

Yes, but there's a difference between reverse-engineering technology and having the whole thing handed to you on a silver platter. The Tharix cannon, for example, was still at least developed by Turians themselves and it's just one facet of Reaper tech. The Collector Base tech is so far reaching, so high-scale that it's quite honestly insane, and worse still is we're handing it to one of the most morally bankrupt individuals in the galaxy - if you can't see the potential issue with the decision then that's a concern.

It's still a decision I will stick with (keeping the base) but there are serious issues with that decision nonetheless, the biggest being that the person who ultimately decides to keep it (Shepard) isn't the one controlling it.

I also see a parallel between this choice and another plot arc in a different BioWare game: the Mandalorian Wars in KotOR.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 05 août 2010 - 02:01 .

[Inverness Moon]

Myrmedus wrote...

The point you seem to completely miss - I don't know if you do it intentionally or not - is that possessing technology you don't develop yourselves is like giving a 3 year old a nuclear missile to play with. In addition, there's a difference between understanding a technology and something you use completely being based upon it. We use Mass Effect tech which is based upon Reaper tech, true, but everything else is 'homegrown' technology.

First of all, your analogy is pure nonsense. You also both insulted humanity and held the reapers on a pedestal in the same sentence, and I don't appreciate it. I'm sure the reapers do though, since you seem to be playing into the idea that their technology is too far beyond us to understand, which I'm sure they would want their enemies to think.

Too many people have become intimidated by either Sovereign's words, the indoctrination technology, or the reaper IFF incident, that they're willing to ignore things like the collector base and the differences between it and those previous incidents.

As far as I'm concerned, believing that reaper technology is beyond us or that we shouldn't try to use it against them is exactly what they want us to think.

Myrmedus wrote...

Er, no. He says IN THE GAME (duh) that he'll use it to assert human dominance against the Reapers and beyond. Have you ever considered what the "and beyond" means? Besides, "human dominance" is not "co-existence" - it means we're top dog and tell everyone else what to do - that isn't a good vision unless you're a racist.

Firstly, what TIM says doesn't mean he is going to try to build a reaper as so many people seem to think. And I'm quite sad that so many people would believe something as ridiculous as that.

Secondly, human dominance does not necessarily mean that we tell everybody else what to do, but it probably means that other people can't tell us what to do, which is what TIM would want.

Myrmedus wrote...

Yes, but there's a difference between reverse-engineering technology and having the whole thing handed to you on a silver platter. The Tharix cannon, for example, was still at least developed by Turians themselves and it's just one facet of Reaper tech. The Collector Base tech is so far reaching, so high-scale that it's quite honestly insane, and worse still is we're handing it to one of the most morally bankrupt individuals in the galaxy - if you can't see the potential issue with the decision then that's a concern.

TIM compared the jump in human technology to when humans discovered the prothean data cache on Mars. In which case, I think we'll handle the technology just fine.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 05 août 2010 - 07:32 .

[Dean_the_Young]

smudboy wrote...

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?

Pretty much. I'll admit, it's a literary shorthand an english teach talked about, so it's not a precise definition.

By the nature of story telling, the narrator and the characters within give us most of our information. These are a large part of what we use to evaluate conditions in the story: if a character gives some information, we can usually assume it to be honest and true. If there is some deception, it is later revealed and openly exposed. That in general is what an honest narrative style is: you can trust what people say until proven otherwise. An example would be how in Mass Effect 1 we start off thinking the Protheans created the Mass Relays, until we are told they didn't. It's big, bold, and pretty clearly overturned, and for the most part the rest of the cast and interrogations are completely honest: no one doubts the data in the collector ship trap, for example, even though it would have been so easy for the Collectors to poison the bait.

Not all narratives are honest, however. The mystery and conspiracy genres are especially replete with dishonest characters and misleading points. Metal Gear Solid is probably the most obvious to come to mind, but Fallout can also apply: these are stories in which characters and data uncovered can and often do contradict eachother and outright lie to the player regularly, and in which the truth can be much harder to decipher. The truth can and often does come out, but rarely from the start. While the general rule of an honest narrative is 'if you hear it, it's true', a dishonest narrative needs verification in-story to believe various things.


I'll be the first to admit that's hardly a clear cut distinction (maybe a mit more than Paragon/Renegade), but it seems to fit. Mass Effect 1 and 2 have always gone by the 'if you're told it, it's most likely true', with the exceptions few, far between, and almost always immediately overturned (like the Nassana Dantius quest in ME1).

[DarthFrylock007]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

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.

???

Why would Shepard not believe s/he was brought back from the dead?  Shepard was there when the original Normandy was destroyed, was there when s/he was spaced, and was there when s/he woke up in a Cerberus facility 2 years later. And while s/he may have a hard time accepting it at first, Shepard does come to accept the fact that s/he was, in fact, dead.  That is something that Shepard the character can easily verify, based upon A) Shep's own experiences; testimony from numerous other people; C) all of those Cerberus logs at the Lazarus facility.

No s*** the narrative is for the player's benefit and not the character's.  The point is that the character doesn't know there's a narrative at work.

[lovgreno]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

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.

I thought you didn't like metagaming? But you do have a point, it is up to our imagination and personal opinions to fill in what is not told in this story, or any story. In other words you see what you want to see. Personaly I can see both keeping the base and blowing it as reasonable with a little imagination, wich I also think is one of the major messages the writers wanted to tell us. Everything is a opportunity and a risk.
But even so Shepard was written as just a single individual in a very complex world that he have no chance of fully understanding. We players can act as all knowing gods in Shepards world but Shepard doesn't have that role in the story. There are no second chances for Shepard. No story, plot or drama. Shep can just make his/her choice from what very little he/she knows and hope to be able to handle the consequences. Much like us real humans actualy. Considering that I think it makes sense for Shepard to play it safe and remove the very real threat instead of hoping for a vague deus ex machina.

Modifié par lovgreno, 06 août 2010 - 04:51 .

[Myrmedus]

[quote]Inverness Moon wrote...

[quote]Myrmedus wrote...

The point you seem to completely miss - I don't know if you do it intentionally or not - is that possessing technology you don't develop yourselves is like giving a 3 year old a nuclear missile to play with. In addition, there's a difference between understanding a technology and something you use completely being based upon it. We use Mass Effect tech which is based upon Reaper tech, true, but everything else is 'homegrown' technology.[/quote]First of all, your analogy is pure nonsense. You also both insulted humanity and held the reapers on a pedestal in the same sentence, and I don't appreciate it. I'm sure the reapers do though, since you seem to be playing into the idea that their technology is too far beyond us to understand, which I'm sure they would want their enemies to think.[/quote]

Sorry I just had to point this part out but: what? Rofl, it's a game mate O.o - I mean, I play it like it's real when I'm on the game but...it's not real, rofl.

Anyway, your response was kind of pointless since you refuted my statement yet actually provided no logical reasoning as to why you did. The only thing I could get from this quote was that you think the Reapers aren't too advanced for us to understand their tech? Well, I don't disagree with you there, so I don't understand why you're arguing. However, there's a big difference between understanding tech and using it in the right way.

In addition, I didn't insult humanity but rather Cerberus. Don't forget it isn't "humanity" that is getting access to the base but Cerberus specifically, and you can bet they'll keep it for their own selfish ends.

[quote]Too many people have become intimidated by either Sovereign's words, the indoctrination technology, or the reaper IFF incident, that they're willing to ignore things like the collector base and the differences between it and those previous incidents.[/quote]

Er, no. People are generally intimidated by the fact we're facing sentient beings that are 2km long, millions of years old with technological development/advancement to match that age, virtually impervious against an entire fleet of ships, a collective of minds inside a single body and able to mobilize entire battalions of "servants" (Collectors) through sheer will alone.

Forget Sovereign's words just look at the events of ME. They're ****ing uber, end of.

[quote][quote]Myrmedus wrote...

Er, no. He says IN THE GAME (duh) that he'll use it to assert human dominance against the Reapers and beyond. Have you ever considered what the "and beyond" means? Besides, "human dominance" is not "co-existence" - it means we're top dog and tell everyone else what to do - that isn't a good vision unless you're a racist.[/quote]Firstly, what TIM says doesn't mean he is going to try to build a reaper as so many people seem to think. And I'm quite sad that so many people would believe something as ridiculous as that.

Secondly, human dominance does not necessarily mean that we tell everybody else what to do, but it probably means that other people can't tell us what to do, which is what TIM would want.[/quote]

I didn't say I think he'll build a Reaper, that was an intentional exaggeration from Shepard to make his point, but you seem to have gotten the Martin Sheen lovebug, seriously. I think he'll use the base the same way he's used every other research base Cerberus had...I don't need to elaborate further on that I don't think, just play the Overlord DLC for an idea.

Anyway, I suggest you look up the word "dominance" -.-

The other species are looking to establish an equal collective which is to say equal co-existence. What TIM is looking for is humans on top, that what "dominance" means. You seem to be getting the word "dominance" mixed with "assertiveness".

Besides, look at Cerberus' track record so far, have you even read the Codex either? They're pro-human to the point of mild ****sm and it's reflected by the events in Retribution. TIM claims to be ignorant of their more "extreme" acts and likely there were a few cells that went Rogue but there is no way that he's ignorant and innocent of all their despicable crimes.

[quote][quote]Myrmedus wrote...

Yes, but there's a difference between reverse-engineering technology and having the whole thing handed to you on a silver platter. The Tharix cannon, for example, was still at least developed by Turians themselves and it's just one facet of Reaper tech. The Collector Base tech is so far reaching, so high-scale that it's quite honestly insane, and worse still is we're handing it to one of the most morally bankrupt individuals in the galaxy - if you can't see the potential issue with the decision then that's a concern.[/quote]TIM compared the jump in human technology to when humans discovered the prothean data cache on Mars. In which case, I think we'll handle the technology just fine.[/quote][/quote]

And again you forget one important thing: HUMANS aren't getting access to the Collector Base, CERBERUS is. Not only that, you've said in an earlier quote about how you think people have become intimidated by Sovereign and thus taking his word as gospel yet you seem to be doing the same with TIM. Half of what the man says is a complete lie, and the other half is a truth in order to manipulate you.

I love the character of TIM, he's great and morally ambigious characters are the best. My Shepard needs him for now but if you're seriously trusting him then more fool you.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 06 août 2010 - 05:28 .

[silverfoxIII]

Have you every thought if there was something of real value there harbinger would of 'STAYED IN CONTROL' and set a self destruct ??? I mean what bad guy doesn't have the option?

Modifié par silverfoxIII, 06 août 2010 - 06:04 .

[Inverness Moon]

Myrmedus wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

First of all, your analogy is pure nonsense. You also both insulted humanity and held the reapers on a pedestal in the same sentence, and I don't appreciate it. I'm sure the reapers do though, since you seem to be playing into the idea that their technology is too far beyond us to understand, which I'm sure they would want their enemies to think.

Anyway, your response was kind of pointless since you refuted my statement yet actually provided no logical reasoning as to why you did. The only thing I could get from this quote was that you think the Reapers aren't too advanced for us to understand their tech? Well, I don't disagree with you there, so I don't understand why you're arguing. However, there's a big difference between understanding tech and using it in the right way.

In addition, I didn't insult humanity but rather Cerberus. Don't forget it isn't "humanity" that is getting access to the base but Cerberus specifically, and you can bet they'll keep it for their own selfish ends.

And how do you think we could not know how to use tech that we build using information gained from the collector base? Other than indoctrination, what have we seen the reapers or their agents do that is all that different from what we can already do? It's not hard to figure out how to use more advanced offensive and defensive technologies the right way, so I don't see where you're coming from.

And it would be too illogical for Cerberus to keep the technology to themselves. They don't have the manpower to do anything significant with it that would be beneficial in a direct confrontation with the reapers. At the very least the Alliance fleets would need to be upgraded with the technology.

Myrmedus wrote...

Too many people have become intimidated by either Sovereign's words, the indoctrination technology, or the reaper IFF incident, that they're willing to ignore things like the collector base and the differences between it and those previous incidents.

Er, no. People are generally intimidated by the fact we're facing sentient beings that are 2km long, millions of years old with technological development/advancement to match that age, virtually impervious against an entire fleet of ships, a collective of minds inside a single body and able to mobilize entire battalions of "servants" (Collectors) through sheer will alone.

Forget Sovereign's words just look at the events of ME. They're ****ing uber, end of.

Yea and you don't beat those odds by being scared of researching their technology because they're so powerful or because it might be risky. I find it ridiculous that some people claim the collector base is too dangerous or something as if we can afford to tip-toe around the situation in the face of imminent galactic genocide.

Myrmedus wrote...

I didn't say I think he'll build a Reaper, that was an intentional exaggeration from Shepard to make his point, but you seem to have gotten the Martin Sheen lovebug, seriously. I think he'll use the base the same way he's used every other research base Cerberus had...I don't need to elaborate further on that I don't think, just play the Overlord DLC for an idea.

I think you're letting your opinion of TIM cloud your judgement if you think he is going to keep everything to himself in the face of the reaper threat. That is too illogical to consider.

Myrmedus wrote...

Anyway, I suggest you look up the word "dominance" -.-

The other species are looking to establish an equal collective which is to say equal co-existence. What TIM is looking for is humans on top, that what "dominance" means. You seem to be getting the word "dominance" mixed with "assertiveness".

You think other species are trying to establish an equal co-existence? Then explain why there have been only 3 races on the Citadel Council for hundreds of years. Explain why the quarians have been kicked out and left to rot by the Council as their species collective reputation falls into the gutter. Explain why most people don't give a **** that the krogan are a slowly dying race. The batarians are self-explanatory.

As far as I'm concerned, TIM is right to want humanity to carry the biggest stick so that other races don't try to elevate themselves at our expense. And with the collector base, our rise to the top won't even need to involve the other races.

Myrmedus wrote...

Besides, look at Cerberus' track record so far, have you even read the Codex either? They're pro-human to the point of mild ****sm and it's reflected by the events in Retribution. TIM claims to be ignorant of their more "extreme" acts and likely there were a few cells that went Rogue but there is no way that he's ignorant and innocent of all their despicable crimes.

While I might disagree with quite a few of Cerberus's methods, I don't disagree with their goal.

Myrmedus wrote...

And again you forget one important thing: HUMANS aren't getting access to the Collector Base, CERBERUS is. Not only that, you've said in an earlier quote about how you think people have become intimidated by Sovereign and thus taking his word as gospel yet you seem to be doing the same with TIM. Half of what the man says is a complete lie, and the other half is a truth in order to manipulate you.

I love the character of TIM, he's great and morally ambigious characters are the best. My Shepard needs him for now but if you're seriously trusting him then more fool you.

What I trust is that TIM understands the threat of the reapers and will not do something stupid like try to keep all of the technology in the hands of Cerberus who clearly don't have the manpower to do anything significant with it if the reaper issue comes down to a ship-to-ship war. I certainly don't take his word as gospel, but I expect him to be intelligent enough to know what courses of action are stupid. For Cerberus to keep the technology for itself, or for TIM to want to rule the galaxy is quite stupid.

I find it surprising that you claim to love his character, but you think he would do what you're suggesting.

[smudboy]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

smudboy wrote...

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?

Pretty much. I'll admit, it's a literary shorthand an english teach talked about, so it's not a precise definition.

By the nature of story telling, the narrator and the characters within give us most of our information. These are a large part of what we use to evaluate conditions in the story: if a character gives some information, we can usually assume it to be honest and true. If there is some deception, it is later revealed and openly exposed. That in general is what an honest narrative style is: you can trust what people say until proven otherwise. An example would be how in Mass Effect 1 we start off thinking the Protheans created the Mass Relays, until we are told they didn't. It's big, bold, and pretty clearly overturned, and for the most part the rest of the cast and interrogations are completely honest: no one doubts the data in the collector ship trap, for example, even though it would have been so easy for the Collectors to poison the bait.

Not all narratives are honest, however. The mystery and conspiracy genres are especially replete with dishonest characters and misleading points. Metal Gear Solid is probably the most obvious to come to mind, but Fallout can also apply: these are stories in which characters and data uncovered can and often do contradict eachother and outright lie to the player regularly, and in which the truth can be much harder to decipher. The truth can and often does come out, but rarely from the start. While the general rule of an honest narrative is 'if you hear it, it's true', a dishonest narrative needs verification in-story to believe various things.


I'll be the first to admit that's hardly a clear cut distinction (maybe a mit more than Paragon/Renegade), but it seems to fit. Mass Effect 1 and 2 have always gone by the 'if you're told it, it's most likely true', with the exceptions few, far between, and almost always immediately overturned (like the Nassana Dantius quest in ME1).

Oh.

I'd just call that someone lying to someone else.  When I thought of narrative, I thought of, well, the narrative, not dialog.

I remember some movies that I strongly dislike because the narrative (what we see and hear) is in fact lying to us.  That would be A Tale of Two Sisters, which the story's "great twist" hinges upon.  It's like a slap in the face to the viewer.  While others found it brilliant, I found it completely insulting.  Fight Club comes to mind.

As for other stories, like murder mysteries, you pretty much have to concede that every suspect is lying for one reason or another.

Modifié par smudboy, 06 août 2010 - 11:26 .

[Myrmedus]

Inverness Moon wrote...

And how do you think we could not know how to use tech that we build using information gained from the collector base? Other than indoctrination, what have we seen the reapers or their agents do that is all that different from what we can already do? It's not hard to figure out how to use more advanced offensive and defensive technologies the right way, so I don't see where you're coming from.

You're misreading what I'm saying. When I say using the tech in the right way I don't mean using it correctly - as in logistics-wise - I mean using it in the right way morally.

And it would be too illogical for Cerberus to keep the technology to themselves. They don't have the manpower to do anything significant with it that would be beneficial in a direct confrontation with the reapers. At the very least the Alliance fleets would need to be upgraded with the technology.

They're not going to share it, I guarantee you.

Yea and you don't beat those odds by being scared of researching their technology because they're so powerful or because it might be risky. I find it ridiculous that some people claim the collector base is too dangerous or something as if we can afford to tip-toe around the situation in the face of imminent galactic genocide.

Again, you don't seem to be reading my posts in their entirety - I clearly stated in my post that I chose to keep the base. I stand by that choice aswell so I'm not disagreeing with you, what I'm disagreeing with is the notion that there's no risk involved because there's a huge one involved: Cerberus. If I was handing that base over to the Council - as inept as they can be - I'd feel alot more secure in that decision than handing it over to TIM because at least with the Council there is a consensus between multiple species not just one pro-human vigilante.

I think you're letting your opinion of TIM cloud your judgement if you think he is going to keep everything to himself in the face of the reaper threat. That is too illogical to consider.

It doesn't make sense for Cerberus to reliquish that base to the Alliance, quite simply. Now, if you're one of those people of the belief that Cerberus is still a splinter cell of the Alliance rather than a rogue organization then I can see your point, but I personally think that while there is undoubtedly still some official connection between the two, Cerberus still has its very own clearly set out agenda. In addition, they don't find the Alliance particularly competent so that's another reason I can't see them giving its resources out.

There's a consistent theme throughout the story aswell that when you use another's operations to "spear-head" yourselves you become vulnerable, for example using the Mass Relays, the Citadel and giving the Krogan's advanced technology all caused problems. Now note, this isn't the same as reverse engineering superior technology and constructing your own because that gives you an understanding of what you're doing.

The instances of this in ME worked out fine: the Protheans building their own Mass Relay on Ilos, The Tharix Cannon etc. The issue with the Collector Base is that it's already there. It'll allow for reverse engineering of some of the tech but the base is still a pre-constructed entity like the Citadel.

You think other species are trying to establish an equal co-existence? Then explain why there have been only 3 races on the Citadel Council for hundreds of years. Explain why the quarians have been kicked out and left to rot by the Council as their species collective reputation falls into the gutter. Explain why most people don't give a **** that the krogan are a slowly dying race. The batarians are self-explanatory.

The Krogan is obvious, heh. While I sympathise with their plight a single trip to Tuchunka was enough to demonstrate why they were a seriously dangerous species. They're essentially the Mandalorians of Mass Effect. You have to try and look at Krogan in general - not just Wrex, who I see as an exceptional Krogan - and as a species they're in no way ready to be involved in galactic politics I mean Christ.

Having said that, I still chose to keep the genophage cure information from Mordin's loyalty quest because I don't fully agree with what was done to them but I can see it from the Council's side too because they're a serious threat due to their nature.

As for the Quarians, my personal belief here is simply that because they're so nomadic it's hard for them to have any direct political affiliation with something static like a Council. Perhaps once/if they reclaim their homeworld they'll be instated.

As far as I'm concerned, TIM is right to want humanity to carry the biggest stick so that other races don't try to elevate themselves at our expense. And with the collector base, our rise to the top won't even need to involve the other races.

You see, I agree with you here on the overall point, but I don't agree that TIM just wants us to carry the biggest stick. Why? On my ME2 game the Council is gone, I sacrficed them, and therefore humanity is already carrying the biggest stick and yet he's still pushing for more. All you need to do is examine his dialogue throughout and you'll see his agendas interwoven. A great example is when you plant the bomb in the Collector Base he says "You've acquired the base" - he doesn't say you've completed your mission or you've thwarted the Collectors etc. but specifically acquired the base - it was his objective all along. Things like this, little hints the dialogue, are always important in well written literature and with TIM there are many of them.

While I might disagree with quite a few of Cerberus's methods, I don't disagree with their goal.

The means is just as important as the end. Sometimes one goes up in priority more than the other, like - for example - during a war such as what we face now in ME2. However, even when the end becomes more important than the means that doesn't equate to the means being irrelevant because it is very important. It's this kind of thinking that has seen influential people of the past become corrupt because it's like a domino effect: the longer you follow that belief, the more depraved your morality becomes until eventually it's more or less gone.

What I trust is that TIM understands the threat of the reapers and will not do something stupid like try to keep all of the technology in the hands of Cerberus who clearly don't have the manpower to do anything significant with it if the reaper issue comes down to a ship-to-ship war. I certainly don't take his word as gospel, but I expect him to be intelligent enough to know what courses of action are stupid. For Cerberus to keep the technology for itself, or for TIM to want to rule the galaxy is quite stupid.

Again, inspect the dialogue. Also, look at TIM's expressions during the game. When you 'acquire' the Collector Base and he says "...but keep the technology intact", he makes this fist-clenching animation that is customary of villains (found here: ): a prime example from elsewhere is when Darth Vader tells Luke Skywalker he's his father (found here: www.youtube.com/watch)

Another example is when he grins deviously after your meeting with him where he has the Collector Base.

When it comes to literature these are all clues the writers put in. They're moments of weakness from TIM where he gives away his intentions.

I'm not saying he doesn't understand the threat of the Reapers, because he sure as hell does, but I also believe that if he can use the conflict as a proxy war to gain power on the galactic stage he certainly will. And I don't believe he will share the tech with the Alliance officially either...I believe Cerberus are bigger than we're lead to believe.

I find it surprising that you claim to love his character, but you think he would do what you're suggesting.

I love his character but as a character, if you know what I mean. If he were a real person I'd hate his guts, but I do see alot of the logic in what he does...and in fact that makes me even more weary of him. A nutcase who has no logic to what he does is easy to deal with, just point your gun and shoot, but someone who has shades of sense and good in them is difficult to gauge and therefore twice as dangerous.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 07 août 2010 - 01:52 .

[mosor]

silverfoxIII wrote...

Have you every thought if there was something of real value there harbinger would of 'STAYED IN CONTROL' and set a self destruct ??? I mean what bad guy doesn't have the option?

They didn't forsee the base falling to the enemy. They thought the relay and defenses would protect them enough that they wouldn't need a fail safe.

[RDSFirebane]

I'm sorry to ask this but were dose everyone get that Cerberus is a small organization ME1 says they use to be part of the alliance but go awol and disappear right? and then through out ME1 your going from different bases that belong to them. plus they built a new Normandy and rebuilt CS kind of hinting to a company of thousands of people with a vast network of allies as far as businesses go or am I missing something? just asking

[mosor]

RDSFirebane wrote...

I'm sorry to ask this but were dose everyone get that Cerberus is a small organization ME1 says they use to be part of the alliance but go awol and disappear right? and then through out ME1 your going from different bases that belong to them. plus they built a new Normandy and rebuilt CS kind of hinting to a company of thousands of people with a vast network of allies as far as businesses go or am I missing something? just asking

If you talk to EDI after you destroy the collector base you get that info. Just because they're a small organization, it doesn't mean they don't have a lot of people who help them unknowingly. They have dozens of front companies after all.

[Spectreshadow]

Anyone saying the Reapers won't "foresee" us using their tech against them forgets that the act of using their tech is all part of the whole evolving along the path we desire bit.

[Dean_the_Young]

That was a literal metaphor: the paths they desire are using the Mass Relays to the Citadel for the whole Citadel trap. It doesn't matter what technology exactly you use, whether you fly in living star ships (Leviathan of Dis), communicate in mind-touching FTL beacons (Protheans), build stealth frigates (Humanity/current Council), the Reapers looked for a given level of technology as the point to spring the trap. Where you are parallel to any given path (those so-called alternative paths) is irrelevant to if you're at a certain point in advancement.



The technology the Reapers foresaw us using is the relatively technology of the current cutting-edge: the Reaper technology in the base is far in advance of that, and the Reapers (for various reasons already mentioned many times) never wanted us to be in a position to capture or destroy the base, let alone use that technology. Equating them is comparable to saying that if you expected and planned on someone having muzzle-loaded muskets, them having assault rifles and machine guns is of no consequence.

[ckriley]

Some interesting posts in this thread, though I admittedly I didn't read through all 2000 of them or whatever. But here's my reasoning for destroying the base. I just completed a full Renegade playthrough and did every ruthless, uncaring and cruel thing I could do in the game (except be rude to Wrex and his krogans; I just can't do that, I like them too much).

But when it came to destroying or saving the Collector base, I chose the former. And the funny thing is, I fully planned on keeping the base for this playthrough because I wanted to see what the ramifications would be for ME3. However, once I REALLY thought about it, it just didn't make any sense to keep that base. I completely stayed in character and thought, what if when the Reapers get here they simply send out a signal that reprograms the machines that we would create with their technology and turn them against us.

It's not outside the realm of possibility that they may even be counting on that. We know next to nothing about them except that all organic life in the galaxy evolves along the ways they want it to evolve. And plus, they've been doing this for tens of millions of years. During that time span, whose to say that some other civilization didn't also stumble upon a derelict Reaper and try to triangulate their technology, only to have it backfire on them with catastrophic results?

And then there was the whole Reaper IFF mission. As soon as EDI integrated the program into the Normandy's systems, all hell broke loose. It signaled the Collectors to the Normandy's position. That was a little bit of a red flag if you ask me. Now imagine something like that but on a much larger scale had we decided to keep the Collector base and try to coop Reaper technology. And I haven't even mentioned putting that unbelievably advanced technology in the hands of Cerberus and TIM. A man and an organization that my Shepard has no love or trust for, regardless of if he or she is Paragon or Renegade. In fact, my Renegade Shepards have an even bigger problem with TIM than my Paragon Shepards do.

For all these reasons I just didn't see the positives outweighing the negatives, and thus, I always chose to destroy the base. Maybe on another playthrough I'll finally decide to keep it, but I doubt it.

Modifié par ckriley, 09 août 2010 - 09:06 .

[Inverness Moon]

ckriley wrote...

I completely stayed in character and thought, what if when the Reapers get here they simply send out a signal that reprograms the machines that we would create with their technology and turn them against us.

I'm sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense and renders your whole argument illogical, imho. What you're suggesting would be best described as magic.

[Dean_the_Young]

If they could magically reprogram their own technology, it also begs the question why they wouldn't send a signal to reprogram current galactic technology.



Since it is, you know, technology they knew, mastered, and set out for civilizations to get eons before Humanity was an embryo.

[redplague]

Because I don't trust The Illusive Man.

[Dean_the_Young]

To fight the Reapers?

That fighting the Reapers will save more lives than he might kill in abuse of technology?

To not break all character and precedent and come out as an Emperor Palpatine figure?

[Lord Jaric]

removed for double post.

Modifié par Lord Jaric, 09 août 2010 - 08:10 .

[Lord Jaric]

Last time I checked, messing around with reaper tech never ends well, just look at what happened to the Cerberus operatives aboard the derelict reaper.

[ckriley]

I was mostly referring to how it could be a trap. (Insert Ackbar meme here).  Kind of like the Reaper IFF situation.  EDI installed it, and it sent out a signal to the Collectors letting them know the Normandy's position.  And there's always the possibility that the Reapers wanted Shepard to get to the Collector base and try to use Reaper technology against the Reapers.

However, I will say this, in real life if something like this were to happen, we would have absolutely kept the base.  Not to Godwin this thread, but the US already did something like this at the end of WWII.  There were many **** labs and **** scientists that we simply took over after the war and made them American labs instead of destroying them completely.

But in a fantasy world of a video game where there are clear good and evil choices, I chose the former.

Modifié par ckriley, 09 août 2010 - 09:06 .

[ckriley]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If they could magically reprogram their own technology, it also begs the question why they wouldn't send a signal to reprogram current galactic technology.

Since it is, you know, technology they knew, mastered, and set out for civilizations to get eons before Humanity was an embryo.

They actually did do that and it's been part of ther endless cycle of destruction and creation for eons.  The only difference was, this time when the Reapers signaled the Keepers to open up the Citadel Mass Relay, the Protheans had a counterprogram in place that blocked the signal.  If it wasn't for that, we'd all be wiped out or indoctrinated.  And by the way, Indoctrination is just another example of this so-called magic you guys are referring to.  If they can take over the consciousness of an entire species, then why is sending out a simple signal to reprogram THEIR OWN FREAKING TECHNOLOGY so outside the realm of possibility?

[Giggles_Manically]

I mainly dont do it since I have no idea what Cerberus will do with it after the war.

Turn over a unknown weapon/data to an extremist group? No.



Then again after Retribution Cerberus is now on the run so even with the base they wont be able to do much really. Maybe that is why everything they did in 2 got wiped out.