194 réponses à ce sujet

[squigian]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only the Reapers as a extinction threat.

Would you consider the continued existence of the Rachni an extinction level threat?

[Dean_the_Young]

squigian wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only the Reapers as a extinction threat.

Would you consider the continued existence of the Rachni an extinction level threat?

Of the galaxy? Not likely.

Then again, (urgh, I hate bringing this card to play), Hitler never had a snowballs chance of invading Britain, let alone the US. Didn't mean he wasn't dangerous.

[Barquiel]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Indoctrination was discovered and understood at that point, so her story has validity. What's your point? They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only
the Reapers as a extinction threat.

My point is that no court would convict Shiala...only (your) renegade Shep thinks she is guilty of "willingly joining a rogue spectre in acts of treason, crimes against humanity, and genocide" and deserves the death penalty (without a trial).

They believed Saren used the reapers myth to bend the geth to his will and Sovereign is just some advanced geth dreadnought. I doubt they believed Saren or Benezia are indoctrinated. I don't really know what Udina or the council believe in ME2.

[JamieCOTC]

"Frankenstein" should be required reading for ALL Cerberus personnel.

[Dean_the_Young]

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Indoctrination was discovered and understood at that point, so her story has validity. What's your point? They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only
the Reapers as a extinction threat.

My point is that no court would convict Shiala...only (your) renegade Shep thinks she is guilty of "willingly joining a rogue spectre in acts of treason, crimes against humanity, and genocide" and deserves the death penalty (without a trial).

On the information you had on hand, when you have to make a decision.

Proof of indoctrination is not something you have at the time, and can no more be brought in as evidence than the outcome of ME3.

They believed Saren used the reapers myth to bend the geth to his will and Sovereign is just some advanced geth dreadnought. I doubt they believed Saren or Benezia are indoctrinated. I don't really know what Udina or the council believe in ME2.

They don't have to believe Saren and Benezia were indoctrinated to believe that they couldn't use indoctrination on others. The two aren't mutually inclusive.

In short, the Council believes that Sovereign was a technologically advanced Geth warship. No one disputes it's technology, only the role of who was in charge for what purpose.

[squigian]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

squigian wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only the Reapers as a extinction threat.

Would you consider the continued existence of the Rachni an extinction level threat?

Of the galaxy? Not likely.

Then again, (urgh, I hate bringing this card to play), Hitler never had a snowballs chance of invading Britain, let alone the US. Didn't mean he wasn't dangerous.

What steps do you think the Council would take?  The reason I ask is because the threat of the Rachni, especially sexed up by 2000 years of self-congratulating history, is a threat that they can understand and believe in, unlike the Reapers.  It could motivate them into military build-up at an earlier stage than the Reaper menace.

[Dean_the_Young]

squigian wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

squigian wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only the Reapers as a extinction threat.

Would you consider the continued existence of the Rachni an extinction level threat?

Of the galaxy? Not likely.

Then again, (urgh, I hate bringing this card to play), Hitler never had a snowballs chance of invading Britain, let alone the US. Didn't mean he wasn't dangerous.

What steps do you think the Council would take?  The reason I ask is because the threat of the Rachni, especially sexed up by 2000 years of self-congratulating history, is a threat that they can understand and believe in, unlike the Reapers.  It could motivate them into military build-up at an earlier stage than the Reaper menace.

...change a few words, and you have an absolutely Renegade justification there.

Alas, there is no real justifying it as an alternative buildup to the Reapers, because no one (even Shepard) really knows who/what the Reapers are yet, and have even less proof. You don't even know what a Reaper is until Virmire.


However... my Renegade does use the Rachni as a dirty politic tool to advance human interests in a zero sum game. Either the Turians, as the galactic peace keepers, take on the Rachni and shoulder all the cost and boosting humans relative, the Turians are forced to ask for human assistance, boosting the position and role of the Alliance, or the Council refuses all help and makes the humans take on the Rachni alone, both villifying the Council in human eyes (weakening alien-appeasers across human space) and de fact necessitating a human arms buildup that, once the blood is dry, will make the humans stronger relative to the rest of the Council, and with less desire to be cowed.

Or the Rachni prove no threat whatsoever, and the Council has coniptions while Humanity basks in the virtue of not comitting genocide, for soft power points.

Any way, 'humanity' as a whole gets stronger. But I recognize this is a highly ethically dubious approach, and not something a Paragon should consider.

[Inquisitor Recon]

I must say it took me awhile, but on my main character (who is pretty Renegade) I let Archer have him. I indeed felt bad for David and thought that Archer went too far, too fast. Yet the project still had potential. The geth under human control, an entire, expendable army ready to fight the reapers or any other threat. You could tell Dr. Archer was pained by his decision and undoubtedly believed his brother deserved better. Both him and TIM stated David would be well cared and receive the best medical care Cerberus could provide. David may indeed be sacrificing his freedom, but the goal if achieved would be worth the cost.

From TIM's letter it sounded like David wouldn't be used in the same manner, and while TIM may not be the most trustworthy person, I hope the man has some scrap of morality in him.

Modifié par ReconTeam, 21 juin 2010 - 10:57 .

[Barquiel]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Indoctrination was discovered and understood at that point, so her story has validity. What's your point? They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only
the Reapers as a extinction threat.

My point is that no court would convict Shiala...only (your) renegade Shep thinks she is guilty of "willingly joining a rogue spectre in acts of treason, crimes against humanity, and genocide" and deserves the death penalty (without a trial).

On the information you had on hand, when you have to make a decision.

Proof of indoctrination is not something you have at the time, and can no more be brought in as evidence than the outcome of ME3.

On Feros, you have proof of indoctrination: thorian "indoctrination"
The thorian controlled the colonists as well. You have no doubts that the rest of her story could be true?
Let's pretend there is an "arrest" option. Would you still execute her?

[squigian]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
...change a few words, and you have an absolutely Renegade justification there.

Alas, there is no real justifying it as an alternative buildup to the Reapers, because no one (even Shepard) really knows who/what the Reapers are yet, and have even less proof. You don't even know what a Reaper is until Virmire.


However... my Renegade does use the Rachni as a dirty politic tool to advance human interests in a zero sum game. Either the Turians, as the galactic peace keepers, take on the Rachni and shoulder all the cost and boosting humans relative, the Turians are forced to ask for human assistance, boosting the position and role of the Alliance, or the Council refuses all help and makes the humans take on the Rachni alone, both villifying the Council in human eyes (weakening alien-appeasers across human space) and de fact necessitating a human arms buildup that, once the blood is dry, will make the humans stronger relative to the rest of the Council, and with less desire to be cowed.

Or the Rachni prove no threat whatsoever, and the Council has coniptions while Humanity basks in the virtue of not comitting genocide, for soft power points.

Any way, 'humanity' as a whole gets stronger. But I recognize this is a highly ethically dubious approach, and not something a Paragon should consider.

Well played, sir.  As for the Reapers, Shepard seems pretty adamant about the danger they pose in the first meeting with the Council given how strongly the vision evidence comes into play.  I always took Shepard to be at least a little unhinged and such an emotive response might hint at how strongly they are considered a threat in the Commander's mind, provoking such a justification as I suggested.  As for Paragons, they can always use the justification that everyone deserves a second chance to free her or that genocide/murder is inherently wrong if other options exist.  It's a shame that there's no renegade option for releasing her, though I suppose it's worth bearing in mind that it's a reputation system, not a morality scale; people perceive your action in a certain way, regardless of motive.

[JKoopman]

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Indoctrination was discovered and understood at that point, so her story has validity. What's your point? They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only
the Reapers as a extinction threat.

My point is that no court would convict Shiala...only (your) renegade Shep thinks she is guilty of "willingly joining a rogue spectre in acts of treason, crimes against humanity, and genocide" and deserves the death penalty (without a trial).

On the information you had on hand, when you have to make a decision.

Proof of indoctrination is not something you have at the time, and can no more be brought in as evidence than the outcome of ME3.

On Feros, you have proof of indoctrination: thorian "indoctrination"
The thorian controlled the colonists as well. You have no doubts that the rest of her story could be true?
Let's pretend there is an "arrest" option. Would you still execute her?

Comparing Thorian mind-control through spores implanted in the nervous systems of infected colonists, the effects of which you have seen all around you first hand, to mystical and unexplainable compulsion due simply to being in the presense of Saren, of which you only have the word of an admitted follower of Saren as proof, is quite a leap of faith.

Modifié par JKoopman, 21 juin 2010 - 11:43 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Indoctrination was discovered and understood at that point, so her story has validity. What's your point? They never discounted indoctrination, to my recal: only
the Reapers as a extinction threat.

My point is that no court would convict Shiala...only (your) renegade Shep thinks she is guilty of "willingly joining a rogue spectre in acts of treason, crimes against humanity, and genocide" and deserves the death penalty (without a trial).

On the information you had on hand, when you have to make a decision.

Proof of indoctrination is not something you have at the time, and can no more be brought in as evidence than the outcome of ME3.

On Feros, you have proof of indoctrination: thorian "indoctrination"
The thorian controlled the colonists as well. You have no doubts that the rest of her story could be true?

The Thorian is not indoctrination (magical persuasion skill by Saren's ship), it is pain-enforced slavery from a unique creature. No one makes any claim that the Thorian made the Asari join with Saren or follow him more willingly.

Let's pretend there is an "arrest" option. Would you still execute her?

Of course not: it would be hard to interrogate her about Saren if she's dead.

But, since there is no arrest option...

[JustValiant]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

StarMarine wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Or some guys have apparently such a bad conscience for shooting an unarmed woman in the back that they try to talk her into some kind of supervillain. (I'm surely hyperbolic, am I not!?)  

And quite possibly mistaken about the gender.

Lol, gosh, aren't we picky today! But of course you are right.(sarcasm on) So maybe it's easier to shoot an unarmed surrendering asari in the back! Are we feelig better? (sarcasm off)

Should I give her back her gun, since her biotics apparently aren't enough to make her dangerous?

Why not since you let her into your mind and she did not change you into a mindless bubbling, sabbing idiot. If a renegade shepard regards her really such dangerous and criminal why is he so ridicolously careless to deliver himself in her mercy? 

[Dean_the_Young]

StarMarine wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

StarMarine wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Or some guys have apparently such a bad conscience for shooting an unarmed woman in the back that they try to talk her into some kind of supervillain. (I'm surely hyperbolic, am I not!?)  

And quite possibly mistaken about the gender.

Lol, gosh, aren't we picky today! But of course you are right.(sarcasm on) So maybe it's easier to shoot an unarmed surrendering asari in the back! Are we feelig better? (sarcasm off)

Should I give her back her gun, since her biotics apparently aren't enough to make her dangerous?

Why not since you let her into your mind and she did not change you into a mindless bubbling, sabbing idiot.
If a renegade shepard regards her really such dangerous and criminal why
is he so ridicolously careless to deliver himself in her mercy?

Since when could any Asari do that in the first place? 

We've already covered why a liar or a traitor would cooperate at that stage.

[Mmotor10]

tjey did en experment with gamers ,giving them a choice of saving some kids from falling of a brige in bus,or saving them. more than 90% killed them.Its a game not real life.But i mostly like to go paragon,but thats me.But I do indulge in going renegade plays when I feel like being bad.Again Is who I am!!!!!

[didymos1120]

Mmotor10 wrote...

tjey did en experment with gamers ,giving them a choice of saving some kids from falling of a brige in bus,or saving them. more than 90% killed them.Its a game not real life.

Uh,yeah, gonna need a cite for that one.

[JustValiant]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

StarMarine wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

StarMarine wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Or some guys have apparently such a bad conscience for shooting an unarmed woman in the back that they try to talk her into some kind of supervillain. (I'm surely hyperbolic, am I not!?)  

And quite possibly mistaken about the gender.

Lol, gosh, aren't we picky today! But of course you are right.(sarcasm on) So maybe it's easier to shoot an unarmed surrendering asari in the back! Are we feelig better? (sarcasm off)

Should I give her back her gun, since her biotics apparently aren't enough to make her dangerous?

Why not since you let her into your mind and she did not change you into a mindless bubbling, sabbing idiot.
If a renegade shepard regards her really such dangerous and criminal why
is he so ridicolously careless to deliver himself in her mercy?

Since when could any Asari do that in the first place? 

We've already covered why a liar or a traitor would cooperate at that stage.

Shiala doesn't have to been able to do harm him, but it's simply unlogical for a renegade shepard at that pont to think of her as a dangerous criminal who has no right to live one one hand and on the other hand letting her into his mind without being sure wether it could be dangerous or not. He didn't seem to have any asari mind melding experience before the events of ME1 so it has to appear high risky to him.
Ironically the renegade Shep doesn't claim not to believe her story, his only justification for his death sentence is "I cannot let you live, you changed the sides too often" which is simply bloody stupid, because if he believes her the cipher story and the indoctrination, then Shiala didn't change any sides - she never was on Saren's side by choice.

I find it irritating that you condemn this poor soul who was abused in more than one way, who is ethical more victim than criminal in such a fanatic way. Before killling her the Renegade Shep never kept her covered obviously holding her threat level very low. The Renegade options in the conversation let him appear as a narrowminded, primitive slaughterman, a butcher who is not able to listen, scoffing at his defenseless victim  and escaping in the poor excuse "I have no choice" before needlessly exstinguishing a life in an almost fascistic way. 

[Palladium_876]

The entire purpose of project overlord was to control the geth. But since their "isolationists" who wish to understand organic life (not destroy them) and are (most likely) preparing to fight the reapers, their entire project was worthless. (Also, if you completed legion's loyalty mission, then letting cerberus keep david is just evil and pointless).

[JamieCOTC]

Cerberus scientists may have the best of intentions, but they all seem to be ethically challenged, at best. Worse, they are sloppy, cutting corners whenever they can. Even Miranda admits to using cybernetics to speed things along w/ Shep. The galaxy needs to be saved FROM these heartless idiots not saved BY them. "At any cost" is not a choice motto for the incompetent or the impatient.



So for me, leaving David in the hands of his brother (or Cerberus) isn't just inhuman, it's ridiculously stupid as well. Leave him in their hands and they are bound to try and again ... and fail.

[hamtyl07]

StarMarine wrote...

MaaZeus wrote...

Kronner wrote...

I am mostly Paragon, had full paragon bar in all but one pure Renegade playthorugh, but I always leave the guy there, one guy is suffering, so what, it will most likely save many more lives.

One severely autistic person who is unable to comprehend what is happening and is terribly frightened about it. Its no better than leaving a child to some madman scientist from my POV.

I agree and for me that seems to be the major problem with some of the renegade choices. They lack this certain necessity and by that only appear cruel, sadistic and life-despising. In the case of Overlord at least Shepard seems to feel some kind of reluctance.

i will have to agree as well, leaving him is just plain cruel how can you leave somone whose severly autistic with somone who does not seem to care and would most likely just take advantage of them with no remourse. what happend to renegade options that have comedic value.

[Dean_the_Young]

Palladium_876 wrote...

The entire purpose of project overlord was to control the geth. But since their "isolationists" who wish to understand organic life (not destroy them) and are (most likely) preparing to fight the reapers, their entire project was worthless. (Also, if you completed legion's loyalty mission, then letting cerberus keep david is just evil and pointless).

It can only be judged worthless with hindsight. Just two years prior, those same isolationist geth just launched an unprovoced invasion of Alliance space and allied with the Reapers in an attempt to destroy all organic life. No one knows any differently until late, late in the game.

[Dean_the_Young]

StarMarine wrote...

Shiala doesn't have to been able to do harm him, but it's simply unlogical for a renegade shepard at that pont to think of her as a dangerous criminal who has no right to live one one hand and on the other hand letting her into his mind without being sure wether it could be dangerous or not. He didn't seem to have any asari mind melding experience before the events of ME1 so it has to appear high risky to him.

All descriptions of Asari mind melds to date are that, with a certain exception that Shiala has no relation to, Asari mindmelds are about as dangerous as a sponge. If the galactic common understanding is that Asari mindmelds are not dangerous, then how is it a risk as opposed to a risk-less opportunity?

Ironically the renegade Shep doesn't claim not to believe her story, his only justification for his death sentence is "I cannot let you live, you changed the sides too often" which is simply bloody stupid, because if he believes her the cipher story and the indoctrination, then Shiala didn't change any sides - she never was on Saren's side by choice.

...I can't believe you actually wrote that with a straight face. Shiala admits to changing sides. Several times. Do we need to recount?

First she was an upstanding galactic citizen. Then she joined Benezia in a conspiracy with higher hopes. Then 'indoctrination' made her a sincere follower of Saren. Then she tried to kill you a half dozen times for the Thorian. Now she claims to want to help you. Then she says she'll stay with the colonists.

The girl's been in bed with enough different factions to need to be checked for herpes.

I find it irritating that you condemn this poor soul who was abused in more than one way, who is ethical more victim than criminal in such a fanatic way.

A criminal who becomes a victim of their own designs is still a criminal. You have yet to make any sort of real case that her actions in willingly joining Saren with the intent to help him are in any way legal.

Before killling her the Renegade Shep never kept her covered obviously holding her threat level very low.

If you intend to hold cinematics to military standards, why are you here? Mass Effect is militarily retarded on many levels, both in concept and depiction. Shall we start with why only three people ever accompany Shepard at any time, or would you rather we start the laughable nature of the Krogan/Rachni threat on grounds of breeding rates?

The Renegade options in the conversation let him appear as a narrowminded, primitive slaughterman, a butcher who is not able to listen, scoffing at his defenseless victim  and escaping in the poor excuse "I have no choice" before needlessly exstinguishing a life in an almost fascistic way.

Let's see here:

Narrowminded: that would require not being able to see certain things. Like the potential risk someone can pose. The Renegade sees that.

Primitive: You're just throwing words around now.

Butcher not able to listen: Not automatically trusting someone you have little reason to believe is entirely sincere is not an inability to listen. It is a valuable life skill.

Defenseless: It's amazing how often you forget biotics. That's surprisingly... narrowminded of you.

Victim: Shiala is only a victim in the same way any geth who joined Saren and fell to the Commander is a victim: she chose a side, and her side lost.

Fascistic way: Oh, broaden your horizons. 'Too dangerous to let go' is not only fascistic, but communist, republican, monorachial, confederatorial, and democratic.

[hamtyl07]

Shandepared wrote...

We should have been able to offer up Veetor as a replacement.

come on now,  thats not very nice