231 réponses à ce sujet

[Arijharn]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...
The stuffy council has a human representative after ME 1, and it was the council that stopped the Turians from completely destroying the Alliance. Hard to ignore "some past mistakes" when it includes a lot of downright evil.

The Council is still an 'old boys' club. It's obvious to me that the human councillor isn't really taken as seriously as the others amongst that little power house.

The only reason why the Council prevented the Turians from 'completely destroying the Alliance' is because this new species came along and squarely kicked the resident bad boys right in their family jewels.

The Council didn't support humanity in this time out of altruism, surely you're not so naive as to say that.

The Council has never really acted in the interests of the galactic community other than in lip service, the council exists solely for the first amongst equals.

[krimesh]

I will refrain from quoting, and countering every petty point that was made. My patience has limits. Especially when the details of my speculations, which are in no way crucial to the main argument, and are simply made as examples to make my posts more readable, keep on to be would-be refuted with an air of righteous "haha! your argument is faulty!!!", which just shows that the point, the actual point was never even spotted, or is being ignored.
In a last attempt though:
The only reason I separate reaper tech in two groups, is that the "raw form" (the stuff that gows, the reaper stem cells if you want) is extremely dangerous. True, one could simply refrain from studying it for the time being (you have succeeded in convincing me of that) - as long as there are no effective countermeasures - but Cerberus DOES NOT. Grayson.

Also this thread is supposed to be specifically about how and why Retribution influenced our take on Cerberus. Retribution is a great illustration of how, according to one of the main writer's vision of ME, Cerberus keeps messing with things they cannot handle, causing damage to themselves and others. And before someone comes up with it again - although I am sure they will anyway - it does not bloody matter WHY Cerberus failed to control Grayson. He got out, thats what counts.
Some say Grayson was never such a big threat. Never mind my opinion! Your beloved Illusive Man thought he was.

Up till now we know one single way for the reapers to get out of the void. The citadel. This is their preferred way in, and depending on how far out they are it even might be their only way in. This is why I suggested that there might be a second group of reaper operatives, or why they might attempt to OBTAIN new operatives: to get the bloody front door open. If they manage to do that too soon everyone is screwed. Grayson definitely was a risk in that direction.

To summarize:
* When it comes to reaper tech, Cerberus messed up in the past when they tried to handle more than they were ready to - not all their projects fail, but they don't quit on the kind that often does. I am not saying that they are incompetent: just not good enough to handle something like CB.
* Grayson is yet another, post suicide mission, example of this.

No doubt, Cerberus had its use in ME2, and might still help in ME3. But this does not mean that they should be given the collector base. For all we know, this might just produce another 100 Graysons - a risk I am not willing to take.

You might disagree with my conclusion. Please do, but from now on, please fight someone else about it.
Finally to all those who would not hand the base to Cerberus: ya, I know that there are other reasons not to. But I seem to fail at getting even the simplest one across, so...

Modifié par krimesh, 23 août 2010 - 06:46 .

[Arijharn]

Who are you talking too krimesh?

[krimesh]

 "I will refrain from quoting, and countering every petty point that was made. " ? Mostly Dean, but also you, when you say that Cerberus ops failing is often not their fault, as I don't think that it actually matters why they fail, just that they do. Sorry about the "petty" though, but I feel a lot better after insulting  a few people 

[Arijharn]

I'd agree with you wholeheartedly in situations where Cerberus tries something and it doesn't actually work despite their efforts but I think that's entirely different to situations where it fails because something outside their control interfere's, especially since Cerberus operations work on the basis that they aren't discovered.



In other words, is Cerberus planning to fail, or failing to plan? That almost seems to be the crux of most people's arguments about their endeavours, but that just seems so stupid considering Cerberus is still around, therefore it's implied that they've had numerous successes at least, otherwise their 'influential backers' wouldn't remain either 'influential' or even 'backers.'

[krimesh]

As I said: I am not saying that they are incompetent: just not good enough to handle something like the collector base.

When I blew up the collector base on my first play-through, I sort of felt bad about it, because the game didn't seem to acknowledge this reason. But after the suicide mission Samara actually makes this point if you talk to her.

In ME2 you can make both, the final paragon and renegade choice, without emotional reasons. Thats great. I get pissed when people claim that this is not so.

[Zulu_DFA]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

But
they do. Even a couple of treacherous Alliance admirals, a Council
spectre and a Turian commando brigade can't stop them. They've earned
their pass on that so far.

Organizations unable to currently deal with them does not mean that they get a pass; that was the whole reason why the Turians struck at multiple installations and arrested multiple Cerberus agents.

I will comment only on this one.

The whole reason the Turians hit Cerberus, is that they perceive Cerberus as anti-Turian. They give no crap about the "unethical" part of it. In fact, it's explicitly stated in the book, when during the mission briefing Anderson tells Kahlee to refrain from further stressing the Grayson issue, since the Turians might abort if they understand that the whole point is search and rescue.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 23 août 2010 - 09:41 .

[Neuzhelin]

krimesh wrote...

As I said: I am not saying that they are incompetent: just not good enough to handle something like the collector base.
.

And then it hit me, this is what what Cerberus appologists fail to acknowledge. There is not 1 single factor that is at stake, there are at least 10 major threats to consider.  I have noticed that the pro-Cerberus crowd presents a plausable rationalisation on 1 thing followed by another failing to see the greater picture of all 10 combined.
 

[krimesh]

Yea, its even visible that every single sentence gets countered all by itself, if you just look at the format.

Still, its a really narrow gap between blowing the base up and handing it to Cerberus. Both sides have valid concerns, and in the end it comes down to what people's guts tell them. This thread shows how the hole working with cerberus thing is a real issue, not just a role-play decision no one really cares about.

[Soviet Vodka]

I like the Cerberus storyline even more now, why? Not because of some juvenile admiration of the "bad guys" but rather because that Tim is shown to be just as flawed as the rest of us. Now he is finally human and not the stone faced chain smoker we are shown in ME2.



Also I hide some resentment as I had so much admiration for Grayson and his "new" life, I wished they would have let him at least say something before obligatory Asian assassin double tapped him.

[Neuzhelin]

krimesh wrote...

Yea, its even visible that every single sentence gets countered all by itself, if you just look at the format.
Still, its a really narrow gap between blowing the base up and handing it to Cerberus. Both sides have valid concerns, and in the end it comes down to what people's guts tell them. This thread shows how the hole working with cerberus thing is a real issue, not just a role-play decision no one really cares about.

Kudos for Bioware as there are so many different and outlandish perceptions. Now there are actually people claiming that Retribution was a major success for Cerberus. I guess, Bioware did get a thing or two right in ME2 (compared to ME1) storywise after all, yet I am to see a single valid concern of the other side. 

[krimesh]

Neuzhelin wrote...
yet I am to see a single valid concern of the other side.

Well, as far as I am concerned leaving the collector base to Cerberus, just as supporting them in general, is gambling high. They might fail catastrophically and go down with a big bang, taking everyone with them, or actually gain some considerable edge against the reapers.
Suppose for example that CB has no indoctrination devices like a reaper, and neither has the larva-wreck. The Keepers don't seem to need them, so why the Collectors? On the other hand the Collector's job required more overseeing, so who knows. Anyway, if there is no indoctrination on board, a very considerable amount of valuable information could be gleaned from the wreck of the reaper larva, say. That would be worth a lot, and it has been done before, albeit not in that extent: the Thannix and EDI proved very helpful, didn't they?

Now, for me this would neither be worth the risk nor all the dead bodies a strengthened Cerberus would cause. Also I'd rather go down against the reapers, then let Cerberus sacrifice humanities soul - if they did (which btw is not guaranteed in either case), there'd be nothing left which would be better than the reapers.

But the paragraph above is not necessarily true for everyone. If for example someone has a vision of a reaper-ish humanity, but free of the reapers themselves, then Cerberus is the way to go.

Modifié par krimesh, 23 août 2010 - 10:14 .

[Darian4]

krimesh wrote...

 Also I'd rather go down against the reapers, then let Cerberus sacrifice humanities soul.

From an ethical point of view, do you think you can make that call for the whole galaxy? Shepard hasn’t been elected, he can only talk for himself and for those who choose to follow him.
 
 Maybe the rest of the galaxy would rather see a Cerberus domination. After all domination never last forever, extermination on the other hand… (Ok, not if you are Rachni). Can you sacrifice these people just because you think their only way to survive is not noble enough?
 
You are probably right about Cerberus but it doesn’t matter, you can’t decide how so many people should live and die. You don’t know what they want, and in doubt you have to do everything you can do to save lives.

[ExtremeOne]

Neuzhelin wrote...

My question to fellow ME fans is whether their attitude towards TIM and/or the organisation as a whole has changed.

Also, would you still save or destroy the Collector Base AFTER knowing all the new facts about the backfiring reaper technology is pointed out as a great threat.

To clarify, I am not talking about roleplaying, I am talking about the most rational choice there is.

***SPOLIERS OF THE NOVEL BELOW***

Personally, I am still sceptical when it comes to the dangers of integrating technology of a reaper constructing base (not only indoctrinating but functioning as a trap) under the supervision of TIM. The project of Retribution backfired, revealing some of the most classified on Alliance to the Reapers because of a single experiment. A Cerberus cell working on something of Collector base proportions is not a risk I am willing to take.

  


I'm still pro Cerberus and TIM

[Zulu_DFA]

Darian4 wrote...

krimesh wrote...

 Also I'd rather go down against the reapers, then let Cerberus sacrifice humanities soul.

From an ethical point of view, do you think you can make that call for the whole galaxy? Shepard hasn’t been elected, he can only talk for himself and for those who choose to follow him.
 
 Maybe the rest of the galaxy would rather see a Cerberus domination. After all domination never last forever, extermination on the other hand… (Ok, not if you are Rachni). Can you sacrifice these people just because you think their only way to survive is not noble enough?
 
You are probably right about Cerberus but it doesn’t matter, you can’t decide how so many people should live and die. You don’t know what they want, and in doubt you have to do everything you can do to save lives.

Finally! A paragon, who is not a self-righteous metagamer...

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 24 août 2010 - 01:18 .

[Arijharn]

Darian4 wrote...

From an ethical point of view, do you think you can make that call for the whole galaxy? Shepard hasn’t been elected, he can only talk for himself and for those who choose to follow him.
 
 Maybe the rest of the galaxy would rather see a Cerberus domination. After all domination never last forever, extermination on the other hand… (Ok, not if you are Rachni). Can you sacrifice these people just because you think their only way to survive is not noble enough?
 
You are probably right about Cerberus but it doesn’t matter, you can’t decide how so many people should live and die. You don’t know what they want, and in doubt you have to do everything you can do to save lives.

Thank you, you've said something I've been arguing for months now, although probably not so eloquently.

I honestly believe that some people here on this board see that I might be arguing pro-Cerberus (I argue more so to be pro-humanist, but I guess that is splitting hairs that people don't differentiate) and automatically tune out. They list rebuttals like  'this doesn't count' but don't actually argue why it doesn't count trusting that the truth is 'painfully obvious.'

As I said though, if I was in the situation of Commander Shephard, I'd do whatever it takes, and I'd even say that someone could lynch me afterwards -- when the dust has settled. This would be unlikely of course, I would have massive amount of galactic importance (real or perceived) but I still stand by that statement.

Modifié par Arijharn, 24 août 2010 - 01:59 .

[Cheese Elemental]

I destroyed the base because I like crafting my own stories, and unlike far too many people here (on BOTH sides), I don't consider it serious business.

[krimesh]

Darian4 wrote...

krimesh wrote...

 Also I'd rather go down against the reapers, then let Cerberus sacrifice humanities soul.

From an ethical point of view, do you think you can make that call for the whole galaxy? Shepard hasn’t been elected, he can only talk for himself and for those who choose to follow him.
 
 Maybe the rest of the galaxy would rather see a Cerberus domination. After all domination never last forever, extermination on the other hand… (Ok, not if you are Rachni). Can you sacrifice these people just because you think their only way to survive is not noble enough?
 
You are probably right about Cerberus but it doesn’t matter, you can’t decide how so many people should live and die. You don’t know what they want, and in doubt you have to do everything you can do to save lives.

I don't know. If Cerberus sacrifices their "souls", am I still saving *their* lives then? No, Shepard has not been elected, but it is he who had to make that call nonetheless. There is no default choice a non-elected representative should take here.

"you can’t decide how so many people should live and die" - fact is, back there you do, no matter WHAT you decide.

Modifié par krimesh, 24 août 2010 - 09:23 .

[krimesh]

Cheese Elemental wrote...

I destroyed the base because I like crafting my own stories, and unlike far too many people here (on BOTH sides), I don't consider it serious business.

Nah, its not about considering things serious business or not. We are debating a philosophical point here. The story may be taken form a fictional world, but that does not make the discussion any more or less valuable.

[ExtremeOne]

krimesh wrote...

Cheese Elemental wrote...

I destroyed the base because I like crafting my own stories, and unlike far too many people here (on BOTH sides), I don't consider it serious business.

Nah, its not about considering things serious business or not. We are debating a philosophical point here. The story may be taken form a fictional world, but that does not make the discussion any more or less valuable.

  


we could have real discussion if people on here would be open minded and look at Mass Effect 2 as its own game. but no there are  too many on here who view Cerberus as how it was portrayed in Mass Effect 1. which make for real discussion hard to come by 

[KainrycKarr]

ExtremeOne wrote...

krimesh wrote...

Cheese Elemental wrote...

I destroyed the base because I like crafting my own stories, and unlike far too many people here (on BOTH sides), I don't consider it serious business.

Nah, its not about considering things serious business or not. We are debating a philosophical point here. The story may be taken form a fictional world, but that does not make the discussion any more or less valuable.

  


we could have real discussion if people on here would be open minded and look at Mass Effect 2 as its own game. but no there are  too many on here who view Cerberus as how it was portrayed in Mass Effect 1. which make for real discussion hard to come by 

Of course they would think about how Cerberus was in ME1. ME2 is a SEQUEL.

Cerberus is a combination of both representations in the games.

[krimesh]

Arijharn wrote...

Darian4 wrote...

From an ethical point of view, do you think you can make that call for the whole galaxy? Shepard hasn’t been elected, he can only talk for himself and for those who choose to follow him.
 
 Maybe the rest of the galaxy would rather see a Cerberus domination. After all domination never last forever, extermination on the other hand… (Ok, not if you are Rachni). Can you sacrifice these people just because you think their only way to survive is not noble enough?
 
You are probably right about Cerberus but it doesn’t matter, you can’t decide how so many people should live and die. You don’t know what they want, and in doubt you have to do everything you can do to save lives.

Thank you, you've said something I've been arguing for months now, although probably not so eloquently.

I honestly believe that some people here on this board see that I might be arguing pro-Cerberus (I argue more so to be pro-humanist, but I guess that is splitting hairs that people don't differentiate) and automatically tune out. They list rebuttals like  'this doesn't count' but don't actually argue why it doesn't count trusting that the truth is 'painfully obvious.'

As I said though, if I was in the situation of Commander Shephard, I'd do whatever it takes, and I'd even say that someone could lynch me afterwards -- when the dust has settled. This would be unlikely of course, I would have massive amount of galactic importance (real or perceived) but I still stand by that statement.

Just for emphasis: When you stand in the collector base, you make that choice for all humans, and also for all other intelligent biological lifeforms in the galaxy, NO MATTER WHAT YOU CHOOSE. The fact alone that I would disagree with your choice and vice versa, shows that there is no default version that works fine for everyone. Different people may want different futures for themselves and for humanity. There is no way to tell which one is better. After all, what is so bad about being a reaper. Seriously. All this stupid discussions we are having here, incapable to see each others points... being a reaper might be more effective. But maybe there is another way for our species to evolve. Maybe we can become better than a reaper, by not loosing our individuality. Fact is, we don't know. So what happens is, that a lot of people follow their guts, and yes, make big decisions they have not been elected for (lol). And in the end the strongest side will win, and humanity will take their path. We have no way to know which outcome will be most powerful, most pleasant, or most whatever, and we don't even know which of these is most important.
So when you stand there, in the collector base, make your choice, but don't judge the choice of others, as you have not the insight to do so.

Modifié par krimesh, 24 août 2010 - 09:50 .

[krimesh]

KainrycKarr wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

krimesh wrote...

Cheese Elemental wrote...

I destroyed the base because I like crafting my own stories, and unlike far too many people here (on BOTH sides), I don't consider it serious business.

Nah, its not about considering things serious business or not. We are debating a philosophical point here. The story may be taken form a fictional world, but that does not make the discussion any more or less valuable.

  


we could have real discussion if people on here would be open minded and look at Mass Effect 2 as its own game. but no there are  too many on here who view Cerberus as how it was portrayed in Mass Effect 1. which make for real discussion hard to come by 

Of course they would think about how Cerberus was in ME1. ME2 is a SEQUEL.

Cerberus is a combination of both representations in the games.

Besides ME2 Cerberus is not really different. As mentioned before, its just TIM showing you Cerberus in such a way, that Shepard might be inclined to work with them. Honestly, Gabby and Ken, the Alliance soldiers who left for Shepard, Kelly the Alien-Lover... thats not Cerberus, just a ploy. Now, Pel and Leng, those two are what Cerberus is really all about.

[Arijharn]

krimesh wrote...

Besides ME2 Cerberus is not really different. As mentioned before, its just TIM showing you Cerberus in such a way, that Shepard might be inclined to work with them. Honestly, Gabby and Ken, the Alliance soldiers who left for Shepard, Kelly the Alien-Lover... thats not Cerberus, just a ploy. Now, Pel and Leng, those two are what Cerberus is really all about.

Aren't they both what Cerberus is all about? How can you so selectively pick and choose what you want and conveniently ignore aspects that doesn't suit your argument and then label your decision as the definitive?

[krimesh]

Arijharn wrote...

krimesh wrote...

Besides ME2 Cerberus is not really different. As mentioned before, its just TIM showing you Cerberus in such a way, that Shepard might be inclined to work with them. Honestly, Gabby and Ken, the Alliance soldiers who left for Shepard, Kelly the Alien-Lover... thats not Cerberus, just a ploy. Now, Pel and Leng, those two are what Cerberus is really all about.

Aren't they both what Cerberus is all about? How can you so selectively pick and choose what you want and conveniently ignore aspects that doesn't suit your argument and then label your decision as the definitive?

Well, thinking back to all Cerberus encounters in ME1, ME2 and the books, Cerberus as on the Normandy only exists there, while every other Cerberus cell is Pel-and-Leng-ish. So yea, sounds like a ploy to me.