122 réponses à ce sujet

[Fiery Phoenix]

NanQuan wrote...

Mass Effect, as a story, is about molding one's own destiny (both individuals and entire species). We see that in how the player can shape shepard into an avatar for themselves, and this theme runs through the entire story. The lesson Mass Effect tries to teach the player is that allowing someone or something else to shape your destiny is dangerous.

That being said, I think the best option is to destroy the base. There is no question of who should get it. I never paused for a second when thinking about the choice TIM gave me. It was never a matter of whether I trusted TIM or Cerberus. That never crossed my mind. I was more concerned with the overarching themes of the Mass Effect story.

When you first meet Soveriegn, it tells you that civilization has grown along the Reaper's desired path because we relied on the technology of the mass relays. Legion also tells you how there are many paths to the same end, but taking someone else's path blinds you to alternatives. The heretics chose the path of the Old Machines and were doomed because of it (the reapers would not spare them in the apocalypse, just use them). These lessons should not be ignored, I think.  If you kept the base and developed technology based off of it, then you are playing into the Reaper's hands.

The big question for survival is how to differentiate ourselves from the countless civilizations that were destroyed before. What will make us different? All the civilizations before would have likely kept the base and used it in the fight against the Reapers. By rejecting this technology we refuse to develop along the path the Reapers desire. We strike a path that is different from all the others and stand a hope at survival.

This is indeed very well said. Exactly how I view things when it comes to making such a huge decision in ME.

Modifié par FieryPhoenix7, 13 juillet 2010 - 06:53 .

[FROST4584]

Judging from the massive wasteland of ships no one has made it close enough to the Collector base. The only reason why Shep was sucessfull in Mass Effect 1 was because the Prothens studied Reaper tech for the data file that stopped the Reaper invasion.How is that playing into Reaper hands? Also not to mention Mass Effect 2 was brought into part of getting Reaper tech to make it to the Omega 4 relay. There is nothing wrong with studing the Reaper base. If something goes wrong you can always destory it later. Destorying the base because of fear is the wrong choice in my opinion.

Modifié par FROST4584, 13 juillet 2010 - 07:13 .

[Lisa_H]

I would destroy it anyway. There is no group Alliance or Council that I think are capable to deal with that kind of power or knowledge that might be hidden there. Beside using reaper tech has always turned out badly.

[The Big Nothing]

My Shepard just likes to stick it to "The Man", be it the Council, Udina, or the Illusive Man. When offered Spectre reinstatement, he also suggested that the Council, whom he saved, cram it up their asses.

[mosor]

BurningArmor wrote...

Would I give the Collector Base to the Alliance?
- No.  "Alliance" is way too general a term even if I considered keeping the station around a viable option.

Would I give the Collector space station to the Council?
- Udina's council would be not just no, but He!! no!
- The paragon council - It would have been fun to have Shepard talk over a video connection to the paragon council while Shepard was loading the explosives in the node to destroy the Collector Base.  Let the council see a little of what was really happening.  I hope Shepard  got some good video while Shepard was in there in either case.

My feeling is destroying the Cllector Base was for the best for the following reasons:
1.)  How many human colonists died on that thing?  A little justice was in order for closure.
2.)  Could we be sure there wasn't another Collector or Reaper Base just waiting for the chance to send in troops to take the base back? 
3.)  Indoctrination - There is still no defense against it.  Harbinger could clearly turn that on and off both remotely, and at will.  If a team was left aboard, who would they really be working for in a week?
4.)  If Humanity got by 1 through 3, do we actually have the wisdom to use it?  The Mad Prophet's fear of man being the hands of the Reapers could be well founded if the owners of the base began building Reapers with it.
5.)  If the large numbers of Reapers the enemy has is true, and someone is actually willing to committe genocide to build one or two of these Reapers, the best we could hope for in "our" Reapers is a diversionary force. 

I think the final battle will be Shepard's team boarding Harbinger's ship or base to kill Harbinger and destroy that facility.  If there is nobody left to power them back up, then the Reapers are not a threat floating around in Dark space. 

Sorry for perhaps getting a little off topic there. 

1. Plenty. Do we allow those people to die in vain? Especially when there is the possibility of saving trillions more by studying it? Even Aushwitz was saved, and that served no other purpose than a reminder of evil that was comitted during WW2.
2. Don't know, but humans are running the automated defences now, so they will have a tough time getting back in. They can always set off a bomb instead of letting it fall back into collector hands.. Besides, even a few days of study might turn up important info.
3. Don't think there is a significant chance of indoctrination. Usually those devices are in reapers or technology the reapers hoped organics will one day find. The collectors where controled through mechancical implants and a machine to link with Harbringer. There was no need for indoctrination tech there.
4. I don't think you give humanity enough credit. Unlike the Korgan we didn't have a nuclear winter when we split the atom. Could have happened, but it didn't, and that says something. Considering the progress made by humanity in 30 years after discovering the martian data without destroying ourselves, humans are suprisingly adaptive of new tech.
5. No way in hell would even TIM build a new reaper. The millions of humans to build even 1 is beyond his organization. All that sacrifice to build one and you can't even be sure to control it. Not gonna happen. However, if you have 19th century tech and find a 21st century automobile plant, there are plenty of things you can learn without building a single car. Plenty of technology supports that plant. Even if you understand nothing more than learning a reaper's weakness.

[mosor]

NanQuan wrote...


That being said, I think the best option is to destroy the base. There is no question of who should get it. I never paused for a second when thinking about the choice TIM gave me. It was never a matter of whether I trusted TIM or Cerberus. That never crossed my mind. I was more concerned with the overarching themes of the Mass Effect story.

When you first meet Soveriegn, it tells you that civilization has grown along the Reaper's desired path because we relied on the technology of the mass relays. Legion also tells you how there are many paths to the same end, but taking someone else's path blinds you to alternatives. The heretics chose the path of the Old Machines and were doomed because of it (the reapers would not spare them in the apocalypse, just use them). These lessons should not be ignored, I think.  If you kept the base and developed technology based off of it, then you are playing into the Reaper's hands.

Quaint, but I don't buy it. If there was no immediate threat I probably would, but there is. We've already progressed down the line the reapers wanted, and now we're ripe for harvesting. We probably don't have decades or centuries to progress along a different path. Since we're already down the path the reapers wanted, our only chance is to learn the information the reapers did not want us to possess. Besides, our whole history is about sharing knowledge and using it to jump start a civilation. Thats why the old world at the time of Columbus was significantly more advanced than the isoloated americas, who in most regions were barely past the stone age.

The big question for survival is how to differentiate ourselves from the countless civilizations that were destroyed before. What will make us different? All the civilizations before would have likely kept the base and used it in the fight against the Reapers. By rejecting this technology we refuse to develop along the path the Reapers desire. We strike a path that is different from all the others and stand a hope at survival.

You can't assume that other civilizations even knew about the base, let alone would have kept it. We know almost nothing about them. One thing I'm sure is that we at least have forwaring that other civilizations did not.

Modifié par mosor, 13 juillet 2010 - 01:01 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Just added a poll. Go back to the original post for a link.

[EffectedByTheMasses]

SandTrout wrote...

I destroy all Reaper tech unless it is of clear advantage not to. It has proven far too dangerous to be left to power-mongers or bureaucrats. If I had known EDI had Reaper Tech in her at the start, I would have had her ejected immediately. She's just lucky she proved useful and trustworthy before I found out.
So, in short, no I would not give the Collector base the the Alliance.

Wait. EDI what?

[mosor]

EffectedByTheMasses wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

I destroy all Reaper tech unless it is of clear advantage not to. It has proven far too dangerous to be left to power-mongers or bureaucrats. If I had known EDI had Reaper Tech in her at the start, I would have had her ejected immediately. She's just lucky she proved useful and trustworthy before I found out.
So, in short, no I would not give the Collector base the the Alliance.

Wait. EDI what?

Yes, EDI is made from reaper tech. So are other normandy systems. Provided to you by that so called power monger named TIM. Another reason to keep the base:D

[EffectedByTheMasses]

mosor wrote...

EffectedByTheMasses wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

I destroy all Reaper tech unless it is of clear advantage not to. It has proven far too dangerous to be left to power-mongers or bureaucrats. If I had known EDI had Reaper Tech in her at the start, I would have had her ejected immediately. She's just lucky she proved useful and trustworthy before I found out.
So, in short, no I would not give the Collector base the the Alliance.

Wait. EDI what?

Yes, EDI is made from reaper tech. So are other normandy systems. Provided to you by that so called power monger named TIM. Another reason to keep the base:D

When/how did that happen? I totaly missed it...

[smudboy]

[Dinnertable]

I'd give the base to the Alliance and the council, provided Shep and the Normandy crew were still in the loop with regards to the goings on. Every species could be involved in decision making, and if one species was going to try to dominate and take the tech for themselves, the other races would stop them.

But because the only person you COULD give it to was TIM, I destroyed the base. I don't like the idea of one species, even if it IS humanity, having all that power

[LorDC]

Imo the poll is bad. It should be:

1) I will destroy base anyways

2) I destroyed it but would have given it to Alliance if it was possible.

3) I saved it but would have given it to Alliance if it was possible.

4) I will give base to Cerberus anyways.

[Fiery Phoenix]

LorDC wrote...

Imo the poll is bad. It should be:
1) I will destroy base anyways
2) I destroyed it but would have given it to Alliance if it was possible.
3) I saved it but would have given it to Alliance if it was possible.
4) I will give base to Cerberus anyways.

I was actually going to do something like that, but thought I'd make the poll basic enough, because any further elaboration can be included in the thread here. Thanks for your opinion, though.

[NICKjnp]

I would have given it to the Council... not Cerberus or the Alliance. I was taught to share things.

[kelmar6821]

The last thing I gave the council, victory over Saren, they squandered by denying the truth about it and all but calling me crazy. I don't want to give it to TIM either though, I would have prefered being able to give it to alliance.

[LorDC]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

LorDC wrote...

Imo the poll is bad. It should be:
1) I will destroy base anyways
2) I destroyed it but would have given it to Alliance if it was possible.
3) I saved it but would have given it to Alliance if it was possible.
4) I will give base to Cerberus anyways.

I was actually going to do something like that, but thought I'd make the poll basic enough, because any further elaboration can be included in the thread here. Thanks for your opinion, though.

Well, "not give it to Alliance" mixes up those who are "Reaper tech is baaaad" knights-in-shining-armor with "Humanity first" pro-Cerberus nationalists. It is like making a poll with "My character is lawful good OR chaotic evil." And "give it to Alliance" mixes up TIM-haters with "lesser evil" guys.

[Fiery Phoenix]

LorDC wrote...

Well, "not give it to Alliance" mixes up those who are "Reaper tech is baaaad" knights-in-shining-armor with "Humanity first" pro-Cerberus nationalists. It is like making a poll with "My character is lawful good OR chaotic evil." And "give it to Alliance" mixes up TIM-haters with "lesser evil" guys.

I know what you mean, but you can fix that by simply making a comment and elaborating further. I don't usually make polls with so many options. Sorry.

[Splinter Cell 108]

No the technology is too dangerous and in my opinion nobody in the galaxy not the Alliance or the Council will ever use it responsibly or maybe they might but what happens when a bad leader comes around. Then there's also Cerberus who have lots of people in the Alliance including admirals. Giving it to the Alliance would be like giving it to Cerberus.

[LorDC]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

LorDC wrote...

Well, "not give it to Alliance" mixes up those who are "Reaper tech is baaaad" knights-in-shining-armor with "Humanity first" pro-Cerberus nationalists. It is like making a poll with "My character is lawful good OR chaotic evil." And "give it to Alliance" mixes up TIM-haters with "lesser evil" guys.

I know what you mean, but you can fix that by simply making a comment and elaborating further. I don't usually make polls with so many options. Sorry.

Four options aint too many. And with such options poll is almost pointless. But, hell, it's your thread so do as you wish.

[Kranq]

The council is weak. They prefer to stick their heads in the sand instead of actively trying to save themselves. The base would be locked up in bueracratic BS until some other group came and took it away. While Cerberus is not the optimal choice, at least they try. So, turn it over to the coincil? No way in hell.



It would make a great new quest hub for a DLC if saved though... It would provide a foothold in a new galaxy with a big grave yard full of alien ships floating around waiting to be salvaged. Ancient races and their technology on ice.

[atheelogos]

NICKjnp wrote...

I would have given it to the Council... not Cerberus or the Alliance. I was taught to share things.

After everything they've done to Shepard you would still hand the base over to them?

[atheelogos]

Splinter Cell 108 wrote...

No the technology is too dangerous and in my opinion nobody in the galaxy not the Alliance or the Council will ever use it responsibly

Luddite

[jlb524]

Definitely not, I would have blown it up regardless of who were to get it.

[NanQuan]

mosor wrote...

NanQuan wrote...


That being said, I think the best option is to destroy the base. There is no question of who should get it. I never paused for a second when thinking about the choice TIM gave me. It was never a matter of whether I trusted TIM or Cerberus. That never crossed my mind. I was more concerned with the overarching themes of the Mass Effect story.

When you first meet Soveriegn, it tells you that civilization has grown along the Reaper's desired path because we relied on the technology of the mass relays. Legion also tells you how there are many paths to the same end, but taking someone else's path blinds you to alternatives. The heretics chose the path of the Old Machines and were doomed because of it (the reapers would not spare them in the apocalypse, just use them). These lessons should not be ignored, I think.  If you kept the base and developed technology based off of it, then you are playing into the Reaper's hands.

Quaint, but I don't buy it. If there was no immediate threat I probably would, but there is. We've already progressed down the line the reapers wanted, and now we're ripe for harvesting. We probably don't have decades or centuries to progress along a different path. Since we're already down the path the reapers wanted, our only chance is to learn the information the reapers did not want us to possess. Besides, our whole history is about sharing knowledge and using it to jump start a civilation. Thats why the old world at the time of Columbus was significantly more advanced than the isoloated americas, who in most regions were barely past the stone age.

The big question for survival is how to differentiate ourselves from the countless civilizations that were destroyed before. What will make us different? All the civilizations before would have likely kept the base and used it in the fight against the Reapers. By rejecting this technology we refuse to develop along the path the Reapers desire. We strike a path that is different from all the others and stand a hope at survival.

You can't assume that other civilizations even knew about the base, let alone would have kept it. We know almost nothing about them. One thing I'm sure is that we at least have forwaring that other civilizations did not.

While I agree with you that ideally civilization would have had centuries to develop along another path, I don't see the harm in learning a lesson and acting accordingly.  Using technology that the Reapers understand and that they created gives them the advantage. I'm extremely wary of the Reapers because as Soveriegn said, we cannot possibly understand their motives or intentions.  Relying on them for anything seems like a mistake.

As for other civilizations knowing about the base: I'm sure they didn't know about it, but what I'm saying is that if they had been forced to make the decision, they likely would have kept the base. I imagine they would have done it for all the reasons you've cited because they are good reasons when taken at face value. The prospect of increasing technology tenfold in a short amount of time is appealing and of course knowing one's enemy is a clear advantage. However, the Reapers are not organic, and not truly senthetic either. The overarching themes of Mass Effect leads me to believe that what would normally hold true against any other enemy, does not for the Reapers. Their capacity for manipulation is limitless.