167 réponses à ce sujet

[mosor]

[quote]Kijin wrote...

If I may go back to your original question briefly; what I have said may not be enough to trust Legion, but aside from Tali and Garrus, the game gives you no real reason to trust any of your companions, other than the fact that there is no hostility between Shepard and them. Miranda or Samara is just as trustworthy as Legion.

[/quote]

Yet there are plenty that do not trust Miranda, even if she does give the middle finger to TIM if you destroyed the base

[quote]
You also asked for proof of Legion's claims. Legion has no proof, other than his words. Keep in mind that for most of Mass Effect 2, there is no 'proof' that the Reapers were even behind the Collector attacks. All you had to go on was The Illusive Man's word, which isn't saying much, as the game wanted you to at least be suspicious of him.
[/quote]

Human colonists are disappearing. Sheppard is a hero. He has evidence that collectors are adbucting entire colonies as soon as he hit freedom's progress. Stopping those attacks, regardless of reaper involvement is something sheppard would do. He got some confirmation that reapers are involved by horizon. Which is still pretty early in the game.

[quote]
Proof in Mass Effect 2 was not forthcoming. So, while there may be evidence to suggest that Legion should be trusted, there is no proof. But as I have said in earlier posts, I do not think there is a reason not to trust him, and that works fine for me.
[/quote]

Blind trust. People should be more critical of their trust. If people applied the same standards to legion as some do to miranda, he'd be skewered.


[/quote]

Modifié par mosor, 20 juillet 2010 - 02:37 .

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

mosor wrote...

I don't trust him at all.

1. Legion isn't some normal geth. He doesn't need other geth around to remain intelligent. That is suspicious. Maybe the reapers modified him.

Wow, you are completely ignorant. Or you weren't paying attention...in ME1 OR ME2. 

Legion doesn't need other "geth" (which is YOUR wrong phrasing - First of all, it's other "mobile platforms" - the Geth describe the VI processes within each mobile platform) because he, the mobile platform, carries over 1000 geth within him. In contrast, the typical mobile platform carries 100-200, and before the geth uprising, we can assume that the mobile platforms carried a handful of geth to carry out the functions that the Quarians demanded from them. 

The other Geth need to be networked to each other to increase their intelligence - i.e. one mobile platform with 100 geth networked to nine other mobile platforms effectively creates an entity with 1000 geth available for...whatever it is that geth do.

Legion is a special platform designed to work autonomously. 

mosor wrote...
2. Geth can lie, just not to each other while linked to the collective. He has provided absolutely no evidence that the heretics are the ones who are really working for sovereign.

Now you're just talking out of your ***. I would ask you to provide a reference but there aren't any.  

mosor wrote...
3. Too convenient that he knew the location of that derelict reaper. Geth didn't have the freedom to study Klendeggon and retrace the mass accelerator blast. Human scientists did. There is probably a good chance they got that info from sovereign while he was still alive.

Legion could've got that info from a heretic geth.

mosor wrote...
4. The term heretic. It's a term usually used by religious people to designate non religious people or other religious people who don't share their exact views. It's not a very secular term. There is no evidence that geth not aligned with sovereign have religion, That term is more likely to be used by a follower of sovereign to designate the geth who did not follow him.

First of all, heresy is a lot more severe than that - its used to describe other religious sects/beliefs that are in direct contradiction with the fundamental doctrine of a religion. "It's a term usually used by religious people to designate non religious people or other religious people who don't share their exact views," is a poor way to describe "heresy."

And now you're arguing semantics and using this as "proof"?   

, 

5. Legion may have got us to do the dirty work to rub out geth who opposed the reapers, because he knew the Normandy had stealth systems.

6. Legion could be the "fail safe" and spy for the reapers. Maybe geth can infiltrate after all.

Sure, whatever you say.

Modifié par V0luS_R0cKs7aR, 20 juillet 2010 - 02:42 .

[CroGamer002]

mosor wrote...

I don't trust him at all.

1. Legion isn't some normal geth. He doesn't need other geth around to remain intelligent. That is suspicious. Maybe the reapers modified him.

He has diffrent hardware so he can maintain more Geth programs.
You know, 1183 of them!

2. Geth can lie, just not to each other while linked to the  collective. He has provided absolutely no evidence that the heretics are the ones who are really working for sovereign.

I have no comment for this stupidity.

3. Too convenient that he knew the location of that derelict reaper. Geth didn't have the  freedom to study Klendeggon and retrace the mass accelerator blast.  Human scientists did. There is probably a good chance they got that info from sovereign while he was still alive.

That doesn't make any sense at all.

4. The term heretic. It's aterm usually used by religious people to designate non religious peopleor other religious people who don't share their exact views. It's not avery secular term. There is no evidence that geth not aligned with sovereign have religion, That term is more likely to be used by a follower of sovereign to designate the geth who did not follow him.

Please explain this!

5. Legion may have got us to do the dirty work to rub out geth who opposed the reapers, because he knew the Normandy had stealth systems.

So he knew Normandy will get to Derelic Reaper, knew that Shepard  wouldn't left him there or sell him to Cerberus and that Shepard would  care about his loyalty?

6. Legion could be the "fail safe" and spy for the reapers. Maybe geth can infiltrate after all.

So Reapers just let him to destroy Collector base and Human Reaper just so he can be" fail safe" and spy and not you know kill him/her or capture him so they can do research on him/her?!

Modifié par Mesina2, 20 juillet 2010 - 03:02 .

[Kijin]

[quote]mosor wrote...

[quote]Kijin wrote...

If I may go back to your original question briefly; what I have said may not be enough to trust Legion, but aside from Tali and Garrus, the game gives you no real reason to trust any of your companions, other than the fact that there is no hostility between Shepard and them. Miranda or Samara is just as trustworthy as Legion.

[/quote]

Yet there are plenty that do not trust Miranda, even if she does give the middle finger to TIM if you destroyed the base

[quote]
You also asked for proof of Legion's claims. Legion has no proof, other than his words. Keep in mind that for most of Mass Effect 2, there is no 'proof' that the Reapers were even behind the Collector attacks. All you had to go on was The Illusive Man's word, which isn't saying much, as the game wanted you to at least be suspicious of him.
[/quote]

Human colonists are disappearing. Sheppard is a hero. He has evidence that collectors are adbucting entire colonies as soon as he hit freedom's progress. Stopping those attacks, regardless of reaper involvement is something sheppard would do. He got some confirmation that reapers are involved by horizon. Which is still pretty early in the game.

[quote]
Proof in Mass Effect 2 was not forthcoming. So, while there may be evidence to suggest that Legion should be trusted, there is no proof. But as I have said in earlier posts, I do not think there is a reason not to trust him, and that works fine for me.
[/quote]

Blind trust. People should be more critical of their trust. If people applied the same standards to legion as some do to miranda, he'd be skewered.


[/quote]
[/quote]

Yup, you're right about Miranda; many people don't trust her. This is because the game gives you little reason to do so. Either you trust her, because the game has apparently has a low standard of evidence when it comes to issues of loyalty, or you trust none of them (save for Garrus and Tali, for obvious reasons). Let's be honest; how suspicious you are of Miranda or Legion isn't going to change the gameplay much at all. If one of them is going to betray you, they'll do so regardless of how much you trusted them. And the fact that you don't trust either Miranda or Legion will not make it easier to avoid being betrayed. Granted, with Legion it was optional to turn him on, but my statement does apply to most of the other party members. 

Yes I realize that Shepard would want to stop the abduction of human colonies. My point wasn't that Shepard was willing to do so, despite the lack of proof. My point was that during Shepard's first meeting with the Illusive Man, the Illusive Man claims that the Reapers were behind the attacks, and Shepard just takes him at face value. During Freedom's Progress, Shepard was quick to blame the abductions on the Reapers, even though he had no evidence of such. The game expects you to take characters on their word. The Reapers were behind the attacks because the Illusive Man said so. Similarly, Legion is a character that should be trusted, as the game gives you no explicit reason not to trust him. While this may be simplistic, this is clearly the logic the game expects players to use while playing Mass Effect 2. 

Onto your third point about Blind Trust. I believe I've already addressed this point, but I'll reiterate briefly. If you activated Legion, at no point can you simply kick him out of an airlock. This goes for all of your other party members as well. Once they are on your team, you cannot get rid of them. You can talk about blind trust all you like, but the fact of the matter is the game does not allow you to act on your suspicion. In most cases, recruitment is mandatory. Even if you don't trust certain characters, you have no choice but to bring them along. Your suspicion does not make you less likely to be betrayed.

[mosor]

V0luS_R0cKs7aR wrote...


Wow, you are completely ignorant. Or you weren't paying attention...in ME1 OR ME2. 

Legion doesn't need other "geth" (which is YOUR wrong phrasing - First of all, it's other "mobile platforms" - the Geth describe the VI processes within each mobile platform) because he, the mobile platform, carries over 1000 geth within him. In contrast, the typical mobile platform carries 100-200, and before the geth uprising, we can assume that the mobile platforms carried a handful of geth to carry out the functions that the Quarians demanded from them. 

Legion is a special platform designed to work autonomously. 

Nothing you wrote contracticts what I said. Legion is the exception, not the norm. I'm still betting on sovereign on adjusting legion to carry more programs than other geth normally do.

Now you're just talking out of your ***. I would ask you to provide a reference but there aren't any.  

Funny too see a debate on a video game story can make you lose your head. Ha Ha Ha, thanks for the morning laugh. Anyway, regarding your question. The heretic geth were spying on legions geth without their knowledge. That shows they are capable of deceit if not linked to the collective,

mosor wrote...
3. Too convenient that he knew the location of that derelict reaper. Geth didn't have the freedom to study Klendeggon and retrace the mass accelerator blast. Human scientists did. There is probably a good chance they got that info from sovereign while he was still alive.

Legion could've got that info from a heretic geth.

Then why didn't heretic geth ever bother to secure their "God" Religious fanatics go all bonkers for their gods, even momentos from crippled ones.

mosor wrote...
4. The term heretic. It's a term usually used by religious people to designate non religious people or other religious people who don't share their exact views. It's not a very secular term. There is no evidence that geth not aligned with sovereign have religion, That term is more likely to be used by a follower of sovereign to designate the geth who did not follow him.

First of all, heresy is a lot more severe than that - its used to describe other religious sects/beliefs that are in direct contradiction with the fundamental doctrine of a religion. "It's a term usually used by religious people to designate non religious people or other religious people who don't share their exact views," is a poor way to describe "heresy."

Who cares. The point stands that it's usually used by religions people. It implies that legion's geth are the religious ones.

If you had better reading comprehension skills, you would know the main point of my post is that we shouldn't take legion at face value. That we should apply the same level of criticism of what legion says as many people do about miranda and cerberus. It was never about absolute proof, only suspecions.

[lovgreno]

Let's not invite the flamers by using insults please. It tends to ruin interesting conversations.



Since Shepard knows basicaly nothing about what the Geth want's s/he have no reason to trust them. But this is also a reason to at least talk to the first Geth interested in communication. Letting him out of the cage however is perhaps a bit too risky and also it will make the crew nervous.

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

mosor wrote...

Nothing you wrote contracticts what I said. Legion is the exception, not the norm. I'm still betting on sovereign on adjusting legion to carry more programs than other geth normally do.

I wasn't trying to contradict what you said. I was trying to show that you being suspicious of Legion because he doesn't need other geth around to be intelligent is ridiculous. 

Of course Legion is the exception, and he never tried to hide that fact. He was designed to operate autonomously, which is why he has more geth (the actual programs are geth, which you can't seem to comprehend) than the normal mobile platform. There are no "true" geth for him to network with beyond the Perseus Veil. 

mosor wrote...

Funny too see a debate on a video game story can make you lose your head. Ha Ha Ha, thanks for the morning laugh. Anyway, regarding your question. The heretic geth were spying on legions geth without their knowledge. That shows they are capable of deceit if not linked to the collective,

Spying without being discovered is NOT lying. Hahaha, epic fail. 

mosor wrote...
Then why didn't heretic geth ever bother to secure their "God" Religious fanatics go all bonkers for their gods, even momentos from crippled ones.

Did you play Legion's loyalty mission? The heretics already got the hardware they needed from the Reapers, which allowed them to build that "virus." Hence why Legion had to go to the derelict Reaper to see what the heretics could've gotten from using Reaper hardware. Hence the subsequent loyalty mission.

Fail again, but not as epic.

mosor wrote...

Who cares. The point stands that it's usually used by religions people. It implies that legion's geth are the religious ones.

If you had better reading comprehension skills, you would know the main point of my post is that we shouldn't take legion at face value. That we should apply the same level of criticism of what legion says as many people do about miranda and cerberus. It was never about absolute proof, only suspecions.

And if you were smarter, you would know that this argument is absolutely fail. What exactly is "suspecions" btw?

[Kroesis-]

Wasn't Legion surprised to see Shepard on the derelict Reaper? From what can remember it was trying to investigate into how to gain access the virus or the system that contains the virus that Nazara gave to the Heretic Geth specifically to overwrite the true Geth. Something like that...

[Edit] Ha, I was a couple of minutes late, post above mentioned it!

Modifié par Kroesis-, 20 juillet 2010 - 03:32 .

[V0luS_R0cKs7aR]

lovgreno wrote...

Let's not invite the flamers by using insults please. It tends to ruin interesting conversations.

It's not possible to have interesting conversations if some people don't even know that the term "Geth" refers to the VI processes loaded onto each mobile platform, not the mobile platforms themselves. 

[Kroesis-]

mosor wrote...

Who cares. The point stands that it's usually used by religions people. It implies that legion's geth are the religious ones.

Keyword highlighted. Note that Heretic is derived from Latin and Greek versions of the word. Specifically the Greek version means "action of taking, choice, sect". The Heretic Geth are the ones who want to be lead by the Old Machines, they chose to  "take" their future from the hands of the Old Machines. The true Geth, according to Legion, want to create their own future. Also whilst it is generally connected to religion, heresy is basically a difference in beliefs from the normal so in both aspects, Heretic is an applicable word.

Modifié par Kroesis-, 20 juillet 2010 - 03:45 .

[mosor]

[quote]V0luS_R0cKs7aR wrote...


Nothing you wrote contracticts what I said. Legion is the exception, not the norm. I'm still betting on sovereign on adjusting legion to carry more programs than other geth normally do.

I wasn't trying to contradict what you said. I was trying to show that you being suspicious of Legion because he doesn't need other geth around to be intelligent is ridiculous. 

Of course Legion is the exception, and he never tried to hide that fact. He was designed to operate autonomously, which is why he has more geth (the actual programs are geth, which you can't seem to comprehend) than the normal mobile platform. There are no "true" geth for him to network with beyond the Perseus Veil.

[/quote]

Designed by who? Why not more? Legion's platform is obviously more effecient than the rest? Why arn't they the norm?

[quote]mosor wrote...

Funny too see a debate on a video game story can make you lose your head. Ha Ha Ha, thanks for the morning laugh. Anyway, regarding your question. The heretic geth were spying on legions geth without their knowledge. That shows they are capable of deceit if not linked to the collective,[/quote]

Spying without being discovered is NOT lying. Hahaha, epic fail. 
[/quote]

Ha ha ha come on now, you can't be serious? Spying at bare minimum is deceit and a lie by omission.



[quote]mosor wrote...
Then why didn't heretic geth ever bother to secure their "God" Religious fanatics go all bonkers for their gods, even momentos from crippled ones.[/quote]

Did you play Legion's loyalty mission? The heretics already got the hardware they needed from the Reapers, which allowed them to build that "virus." Hence why Legion had to go to the derelict Reaper to see what the heretics could've gotten from using Reaper hardware. Hence the subsequent loyalty mission.

Fail again, but not as epic.

[/quote]

You still ignore my point. If legion got that info from the heretics, why didn't the heretics secure their "god"?


[quote]mosor wrote...

Who cares. The point stands that it's usually used by religions people. It implies that legion's geth are the religious ones.

If you had better reading comprehension skills, you would know the main point of my post is that we shouldn't take legion at face value. That we should apply the same level of criticism of what legion says as many people do about miranda and cerberus. It was never about absolute proof, only suspecions.[/quote]

And if you were smarter, you would know that this argument is absolutely fail. What exactly is "suspecions" btw

[/quote]


What you're not smart enough to discern words spelt incorrectly? Actually the only thing at fail here is your inability to control you temper debating a video game story. Did I make you cry or something that I cast some suspicion on your favorite LI? Man you must be easy troll bait acting as you do.

Modifié par mosor, 20 juillet 2010 - 04:16 .

[mosor]

[quote]Mesina2 wrote...


[quote]4. The term heretic. It's aterm usually used by religious people to designate non religious peopleor other religious people who don't share their exact views. It's not avery secular term. There is no evidence that geth not aligned with sovereign have religion, That term is more likely to be used by a follower of sovereign to designate the geth who did not follow him.[/quote]

Please explain this!

[/quote]

Does a capitalist call a communist a heretic? Does a non-religious secular person call a religious person heretic? That usually a term applied by religious people. That makes me suspicious nothing else

[quote]

[quote]5. Legion may have got us to do the dirty work to rub out geth who opposed the reapers, because he knew the Normandy had stealth systems.[/quote]

So he knew Normandy will get to Derelic Reaper, knew that Shepard  wouldn't left him there or sell him to Cerberus and that Shepard would  care about his loyalty?

[/quote]

Religious nut jobs attempt suicide missions all the time if there is even a small chance of sucess. Legion took that chance. If it didn't work out they would try another way. it's not like they value individual geth like we value individual people.

[quote]6. Legion could be the "fail safe" and spy for the reapers. Maybe geth can infiltrate after all.[/quote]
So Reapers just let him to destroy Collector base and Human Reaper just so he can be" fail safe" and spy and not you know kill him/her or capture him so they can do research on him/her?![/quote]

If you take him to the reaper embryo, he actually advocates saving the base, not destroying it. Reapers have other plans, maybe some plans are more important.

Modifié par mosor, 20 juillet 2010 - 04:35 .

[pprrff]

Can AI actively deceive? I always thought since Legion was AI, he either tells the truth or tells you nothing.

[Kijin]

Probably not. I can't remember a single time where an AI either directly or indirectly lied to you. Even if the AI in question wants you dead, they never seem to be deceptive about it.

Although to be fair, EDI can crack jokes, and can even flirt with Joker, so it's not completely ridiculous that she could lie.

Edit: The point being, if EDI is capable of lying, then presumably other AI could potentially lie as well.

Modifié par Kijin, 20 juillet 2010 - 05:00 .

[CroGamer002]

[quote]mosor wrote...

[quote]Mesina2 wrote...


[quote]4. The term heretic. It's aterm usually used by religious people to designate non religious peopleor other religious people who don't share their exact views. It's not avery secular term. There is no evidence that geth not aligned with sovereign have religion, That term is more likely to be used by a follower of sovereign to designate the geth who did not follow him.[/quote]

Please explain this!

[/quote]

Does a capitalist call a communist a heretic? Does a non-religious secular person call a religious person heretic? That usually a term applied by religious people. That makes me suspicious nothing else

[quote]

[quote]5. Legion may have got us to do the dirty work to rub out geth who opposed the reapers, because he knew the Normandy had stealth systems.[/quote]

So he knew Normandy will get to Derelic Reaper, knew that Shepard  wouldn't left him there or sell him to Cerberus and that Shepard would  care about his loyalty?

[/quote]

Religious nut jobs attempt suicide missions all the time if there is even a small chance of sucess. Legion took that chance. If it didn't work out they would try another way. it's not like they value individual geth like we value individual people.

[quote]6. Legion could be the "fail safe" and spy for the reapers. Maybe geth can infiltrate after all.[/quote]
So Reapers just let him to destroy Collector base and Human Reaper just so he can be" fail safe" and spy and not you know kill him/her or capture him so they can do research on him/her?![/quote]

If you take him to the reaper embryo, he actually advocates saving the base, not destroying it. Reapers have other plans, maybe some plans are more important.

[/quote]


WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...?!

[FourSixEight]

Shandepared wrote...

Liberalism.

Are you ****ing kidding me?

[mosor]

Mesina2 wrote...



WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...?!

Yep, if you take legion with you to the end he says:

"Shepard-Commander, this facility is data. It has no inherent ethical value. Destroying it will not return those lost. Keeping it may save others."

Modifié par mosor, 20 juillet 2010 - 06:02 .

[CROAT_56]

mosor wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...



WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...?!

Yep, if you take legion with you to the end he says:

"Shepard-Commander, this facility is data. It has no inherent ethical value. Destroying it will not return those lost. Keeping it may save others."

i think this depends on who is in your squad.  I believe if you choose two paragon SMs one automaticly says the Renagade option.  I may be wrong though

Modifié par CROAT_56, 20 juillet 2010 - 06:24 .

[kondel]

^^

If you destroy the base, he later agrees it was the right choice. Suspicious hmm...

[Neo Hex Omega]

Kijin wrote...


Yup, you're right about Miranda; many people don't trust her. This is because the game gives you little reason to do so. Either you trust her, because the game has apparently has a low standard of evidence when it comes to issues of loyalty, or you trust none of them (save for Garrus and Tali, for obvious reasons). Let's be honest; how suspicious you are of Miranda or Legion isn't going to change the gameplay much at all. If one of them is going to betray you, they'll do so regardless of how much you trusted them. And the fact that you don't trust either Miranda or Legion will not make it easier to avoid being betrayed. Granted, with Legion it was optional to turn him on, but my statement does apply to most of the other party members. 

Yes I realize that Shepard would want to stop the abduction of human colonies. My point wasn't that Shepard was willing to do so, despite the lack of proof. My point was that during Shepard's first meeting with the Illusive Man, the Illusive Man claims that the Reapers were behind the attacks, and Shepard just takes him at face value. During Freedom's Progress, Shepard was quick to blame the abductions on the Reapers, even though he had no evidence of such. The game expects you to take characters on their word. The Reapers were behind the attacks because the Illusive Man said so. Similarly, Legion is a character that should be trusted, as the game gives you no explicit reason not to trust him. While this may be simplistic, this is clearly the logic the game expects players to use while playing Mass Effect 2. 

Onto your third point about Blind Trust. I believe I've already addressed this point, but I'll reiterate briefly. If you activated Legion, at no point can you simply kick him out of an airlock. This goes for all of your other party members as well. Once they are on your team, you cannot get rid of them. You can talk about blind trust all you like, but the fact of the matter is the game does not allow you to act on your suspicion. In most cases, recruitment is mandatory. Even if you don't trust certain characters, you have no choice but to bring them along. Your suspicion does not make you less likely to be betrayed.

In regards to trust, I was referring more to the general sentiment of posters here, and of many people who have played the game.

Obviously, within the confines of the game, you as Shepard basically have to go along with the characters as presented, taking them at their word.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Am I the only one who's starting to seriously laugh at some posts here?

[pprrff]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Am I the only one who's starting to seriously laugh at some posts here?

No, its especially funny when I picture 'Geth Inquisition' in my head. Each heretic program are force to repent debug  their errors, or be burned at the stake decompiled  by Legion.

Modifié par pprrff, 20 juillet 2010 - 06:53 .

[NanQuan]

Some of the points brought up are interesting and some I never thought of before. However, I still choose to trust Legion, but more for personal reasons than pure logic. I'm rarely surprised by stories anymore, and it's extremely rare that I don't see a twist coming. Comes with being a writer I guess. As of yet, there has been no literary evidence (the usual tricks and cues in the writing) that indicate a betrayal from any of the main characters. ME3 may change that and there will be warning signs, but even if I'm betrayed and don't see it coming I don't think I'll mind. I like to throw myself into the game and get the most emotional responses that I can from it. It'd be kinda nice if I'm surprised in some way, since I don't feel that often with stories, movies, games, etc.

[mosor]

CROAT_56 wrote...

mosor wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...



WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...?!

Yep, if you take legion with you to the end he says:

"Shepard-Commander, this facility is data. It has no inherent ethical value. Destroying it will not return those lost. Keeping it may save others."

i think this depends on who is in your squad.  I believe if you choose two paragon SMs one automaticly says the Renagade option.  I may be wrong though

Only in the first game. In the second legion just  encourages the renegade response, he doesn't have a paragon one from what I can tell. Grunt and Garrus do as well, but when you get back to your ship they revert to the opinion that destroying it was the right choice. Inconsistant bioware writing? I dunno.

Modifié par mosor, 20 juillet 2010 - 07:30 .

[Landline]

Because Legion said he'd be nice.



I do trust that he is honest in the fight against the Reapers, but for anything else I trust him about as far as I can throw him.