RiouHotaru wrote...
See, this is what I like. You made a stance, provided evidence, and acknowledged the weakness in your own argument, but providing counter-evidence as well. The problem I have with Zulu's arguments is the infammatory way he presents them.
I acknowledge that Cerberus has done some good, including the resurrection of Shepard. The problem is that those achievements tend to be immediately overshadowed when things like Overlord or Akuze or Chasca come into play. It wouldn't be so bad if these awful experiments were something Cerberus only occasionally dabbled in, or people did without Cerberus' consent and the organization actively condemned such behavior.
The problem is that this isn't rare. Cerberus regularly engages is amoral activities and research, often at the expense of people's lives, and only condemn it when it fails. If it succeeds, then they pat themselves on the back and use the fruits of their atroc- I mean labors to "benefit humanity", though I wonder how many results of said projects actually got back to the general population to "benefit" them.
This is why we seem to fixate on their failures, because yes, we realize they do good things. But man, the bad things they do are BAD. Really, really bad.
Also I don't see going to turians as bad. Anderson needed a military answer, and as the Alliance is compromised, he needed to get help elsewhere. And who do you go to when you need a problem shot at? The turians. I actually think this incident will IMPROVE diplomatic relations, rather than the hinderance a lot of folks assume will happen. There's nothing wrong with admitting you need help with something and asking someone for help. It's not a weakness. It's actually a sign of strength.
Obviously, a major factor into the whole idea of Cerberus being fallible is for the sake of story. Would Cerberus be more interesting to you if you knew for a fact that the atrocities committed on Pragia was counterbalanced by the major success of the Ascension program
after Cerberus expertise was added? Or how about the latest jumps in capability of the Lx biotic implants was born from understanding the effects of custom building as pioneered by Jack's unique bio-amps?
Would Cerberus be more palatable if for example you knew that the experiments upon Corporal Toombs improved the 'response' time for Medi-Gel application to take effect?
Honestly, a little bit of mystery regarding Cerberus is what makes Cerberus fascinating, to the point that even now months after ME2's release, and what two years+ after ME1's that we are still talking about it and its perhaps disproportionate influence it has on the citizens of the the galaxy.
As it is, we know about EDI (no small feat of accomplishment in itself), we know about SR-1 and 2 and we know about Project Lazarus... and sure I'd like to hear strong circumstancial evidence of Cerberus' other successful developments (to the benefit of humanity), but it isn't as much of a priority.
I come as close to trust Cerberus into doing what it thinks is necessary for the benefit for humanity simply because they are there. Cerberus doesn't (theoretically) recruit top tier scientists for their personal glory, there must be an implicit understanding that everything they do will be credited to another party, and yet they still get interested parties (just stop and think how much a lecture circuit would be worth to a scientist who successfully brought the dead back to life, not to mention the other deals resulting from this endeavour...).
In a strange way; I can understand their need to push boundaries, because who knows when or where the next threat can come along? Many would disagree, but to me the ethical thought process of leaving a
civilisation to die because you didn't want to understand biotic potential through children (who are known to 'bounce' back psychologically speaking from trauma far in excess than adults) is more abhorrent than the alternative... although it doesn't make the thought any easier. What is at stake? What do we have to loose? Everything, nothing? Are 100 people worth the lives of potentially billions? Yes, no? The only answer I can give is that it
has to be. If I can believe that (wholly), then I wouldn't regret my decisions when it comes time for me to stand at the Peter's gates.
I trust Cerberus with the collector base because I can't trust anyone else. I trust Cerberus with the Collector Base because I believe they will work their
asses off to understand it's secrets as fast as possible... and too me that is the true crux, because I can never be sure (metagaming aside) when the Reapers will arrive. It could be in 10 seconds, 10 months, 10 years or 10 decades or anywhere in between... but leaving that into the hands of the intergalactic scientific community to me would only lead to beaucratic mismanagement of resources.
I judge any potential mis-use of Collector base materials after the Reaper threat on the part of Humanity to be more preferable than
utter extinction from a species that has thus far shown no interest in communication (save taunts) or diplomacy. I find the notion of Cerberus to 'melt' down people to make their own Reaper to be laughable and more to the point, totally at odds to Cerberus' (and the Illusive Man's) Modus Operandi to be a by product of the well... moronic. I judge that should Cerberus enact a form of humanity's 'divine manifest' to take over the other species to be a total longshot that isn't realistic, and in the case that it does happen, to be unwieldy simply because humanity itself would likely baulk at the suggestion.
Sorry for the wall of text...
Retour en haut
