2146 réponses à ce sujet

[DPSSOC]

wizardryforever wrote...
Just reposting something I said earlier that answers this.

And seriously, considering how much research and tech came out of
looking at Sovereign's wreckage, there's no reason we couldn't simply
do the same with the Collector base wreckage.  This kinda punches a
hole in the "if you destroy the base you're left with nothing" argument.

Now maybe I'm forgetting something but we've got a gun out of it.  Now I could be missing something as I don't really read the Codex as well I possess a sub par memory.

And yes you could get something out of the wreckage but we don't know what will be left standing.  Also any of the data I mentioned will be lost, we'll be left with the hard tech, badly damaged, and nothing else.  If there is any information stored on that base it is just as, if not more, important than the hard tech research.  That is lost with the destruction of the base.  And speaking of Sovereign imagine how much more we would have been able to do if he'd been intact (or at least accounted for).  If you smash a clock with a sledge hammer you can piece together how the insides probably worked, but you get a much clearer idea if you carefully take it apart.

[wizardryforever]

Of course salvaging the base is better for studying said technology, but some might consider it too dangerous.  I'm not here to argue that point, just saying that you won't be left with nothing if you blow the base.  You'll most likely not recover deadly weapons or traps intact, which is probably better.  You destroy, or at least break (most likely), the potential of any Reaper traps or indoctrination devices that could turn it into another Cerberus "Gone Horribly Wrong" scenario.  I just think its silly to claim that study is now completely impossible if you destroy the base.

[Spectre_907]

DPSSOC wrote...
And speaking of Sovereign imagine how much more we would have been able to do if he'd been intact (or at least accounted for).  If you smash a clock with a sledge hammer you can piece together how the insides probably worked, but you get a much clearer idea if you carefully take it apart.

I think it would have been more dangerous to study Sovereign if it was intact. Consider that the science team on the derelict Reaper were studying it and they ended up indoctrinated. We know that even disabled, a Reaper can still alter the minds of those studying it. We don't even know how to disable such a method, if we even can.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Depends on how potent the explosion was. Sovereign broke into pieces but didn't suffer a massive explosion like the Collector Base did.

Making matters worse is that it's near a massive black hole. If the Collector Base maintained its safe zone though its technology then there's no saving it when it goes belly-up. From the look of things and given TIM's reaction, there was nothing to salvage from the base should you destroy it.

It very well could've been completely incinerated.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 03 octobre 2010 - 12:59 .

[DPSSOC]

Spectre_907 wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...
And speaking of Sovereign imagine how much more we would have been able to do if he'd been intact (or at least accounted for).  If you smash a clock with a sledge hammer you can piece together how the insides probably worked, but you get a much clearer idea if you carefully take it apart.

I think it would have been more dangerous to study Sovereign if it was intact. Consider that the science team on the derelict Reaper were studying it and they ended up indoctrinated. We know that even disabled, a Reaper can still alter the minds of those studying it. We don't even know how to disable such a method, if we even can.

Admittedly yes the risk is greater but if we never take risks we'll never get anywhere.  Every big step in science is made with considerable risk.  Even as basic as mastering fire would have been very risky (fire, created but uncontrolled, could cause many problems for primitive man).  Sometimes you have to grab the bull by the horns and hang on.

[Spectre_907]

DPSSOC wrote...

Spectre_907 wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...
And speaking of Sovereign imagine how much more we would have been able to do if he'd been intact (or at least accounted for).  If you smash a clock with a sledge hammer you can piece together how the insides probably worked, but you get a much clearer idea if you carefully take it apart.

I think it would have been more dangerous to study Sovereign if it was intact. Consider that the science team on the derelict Reaper were studying it and they ended up indoctrinated. We know that even disabled, a Reaper can still alter the minds of those studying it. We don't even know how to disable such a method, if we even can.

Admittedly yes the risk is greater but if we never take risks we'll never get anywhere.  Every big step in science is made with considerable risk.  Even as basic as mastering fire would have been very risky (fire, created but uncontrolled, could cause many problems for primitive man).  Sometimes you have to grab the bull by the horns and hang on.

Of course. If we had never attempted to find the Reapers because of risk, the galaxy would be devoid of life now.

[Arijharn]

Shandepared wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

Dean, would you rather:
a) Give the Collector Base to the Council
Give the Collector Base to Cerberus
and why?

I have a similar question I posed in another thread a week or so back. This one is mainly directed at we "renegades".

Would you still save the Collector base if instead of giving it to a human supremacist organization you were giving it to an alien one? Say a turian special forces group were the ones to bring you back and go after the Collectors.

I have to agree with Dean's points that he puts up Shand, if only because I think maintaining the status quo is more important in the long run after the Reapers are pushed back. I don't think it'll be easy for the Council to come aboard though (if they did though; queue smugface)

I may prefer to keep a slight military edge to humanity if only because I'm prone to trusting my own species over another, but it wouldn't be leaps and bounds.

[tommyt_1994]

So I've been reading this thread and two things keep coming to mind.

For most people who destroy the base, they claim they do so because of Cerberus/TIM, but have you considered that the CB choice shouldn't be about Cerberus/TIM, but rather, the reapers?

Also, it seems to be a pretty general consensus that uniting the galaxy is vital in defeating the reapers, (including the council who has been reluctant to believe Shep so far) the question is, which CB choice makes uniting the galaxy more plausible? Not looking at this like a game, but by role-playing, do you really believe that anyone will trust/believe a Shepard aligned with Cerberus? Shep could call up the council and say "Hey come into the galactic core to see this cool base I found. I have some little piece of equipment I found on a reaper (no one believes in them by the way) that will make it so your ships can pass through this relay that no ship has every returned from. Except for my ship of course, which I have no proof of, you'll just have to take my Terrorist group-aligned word for it. (I know their not actually terrorists by definition but everyone else in the galaxy see's them as such) OH! and just disregard the Cerberus troops/Scientists crawling all over it, they're cool with you looking around and they pinkie-swore they woudn't attack you."

Not to mention that you would have to convince TIM to let them snoop around as well. From a role-playing perspective, keeping the base may grant you possibly (and I stress this deeply) better technology, but as far as alliances go your chances are slim. However, the council may actually listen to a Cerberus-screwing Shep who comes baring possible reaper evidence that EDI extracted while scanning the base.

This is of course all speculation, but I felt the need to speak up for my points.

Pick away as you will

Edited for additions.


Keep in mind that all this is coming from someone who hasn't made up his mind yet  over the decision. But I think these 2 points are good enough reason make either choice.

Modifié par tommyt_1994, 03 octobre 2010 - 05:02 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

If you so chose (also not meta-gaming) you could leave Ceberus or be a secret agent/mole for the Council and continue working with Cerberus. Either way you could be preparing yourself against the Reapers.

The other thing is that the Omega 4 Relay is beyond Council jurisdiction so unfortunately they may not be able to get there even if they wanted to. Cerberus may be the only group who "can" research that tech without legal ramifications.

Keeping the base probably won't be a deal killer when it comes to uniting the galaxy.  You captured advanced enemy technology and didn't destroy it because it warrants study.  While dangerous, it'll be that much more dangerous when unleashed upon the unprepared galaxy later on.

Ideally I'd want to stay allied to the Alliance/Council while working "with" Cerberus to confront this reaper threat.  The Council doesn't need a reason to go after TIM (they're enemies already) so Shepard could eliminate TIM at any time should the need arise.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 03 octobre 2010 - 04:17 .

[james-mac-paddywack]

I went paragon... and I still saved it.

Much like I went paragon in ME1... and still killed the council.



My overarching objective is to save the galaxy... but I'd be a poor soldier if I had the option of either saving the galaxy, or saving the galaxy whilst advancing my own species, and didn't take the second alternative.

[tommyt_1994]

james-mac-paddywack wrote...

I went paragon... and I still saved it.
Much like I went paragon in ME1... and still killed the council.

My overarching objective is to save the galaxy... but I'd be a poor soldier if I had the option of either saving the galaxy, or saving the galaxy whilst advancing my own species, and didn't take the second alternative.

Being the almighty Shepard, who goes around righting wrongs and saves all galactic life in his spare time wouldn't advance humanity?

[Nightwriter]

tommyt_1994 wrote...

So I've been reading this thread and two things keep coming to mind.

For most people who destroy the base, they claim they do so because of Cerberus/TIM, but have you considered that the CB choice shouldn't be about Cerberus/TIM, but rather, the reapers?

Also, it seems to be a pretty general consensus that uniting the galaxy is vital in defeating the reapers, (including the council who has been reluctant to believe Shep so far) the question is, which CB choice makes uniting the galaxy more plausible? Not looking at this like a game, but by role-playing, do you really believe that anyone will trust/believe a Shepard aligned with Cerberus? Shep could call up the council and say "Hey come into the galactic core to see this cool base I found. I have some little piece of equipment I found on a reaper (no one believes in them by the way) that will make it so your ships can pass through this relay that no ship has every returned from. Except for my ship of course, which I have no proof of, you'll just have to take my Terrorist group-aligned word for it. (I know their not actually terrorists by definition but everyone else in the galaxy see's them as such) OH! and just disregard the Cerberus troops/Scientists crawling all over it, they're cool with you looking around and they pinkie-swore they woudn't attack you."

Not to mention that you would have to convince TIM to let them snoop around as well. From a role-playing perspective, keeping the base may grant you possibly (and I stress this deeply) better technology, but as far as alliances go your chances are slim. However, the council may actually listen to a Cerberus-screwing Shep who comes baring possible reaper evidence that EDI extracted while scanning the base.

This is of course all speculation, but I felt the need to speak up for my points.

Pick away as you will

Edited for additions.


Keep in mind that all this is coming from someone who hasn't made up his mind yet  over the decision. But I think these 2 points are good enough reason make either choice.

Well what a rockin' post. I deem you a Collector base thread Person of Interest.

You have great points. I totally agree - uniting the galaxy is important. I'm guessing most renegades would say they won't need to win the Council's allegiance through kissy faces diplomacy by the time ME3 arrives, or that it simply isn't enough reason to destroy "galaxy-saving information".

To this, I say, "Meh." It's unclear how people will react to the base or how it will affect your chances at uniting the galaxy. However I think that if anything it will hurt your chances.

Yeah, I know that the Collector base decision should be made with the Reapers in mind. The thing is, my feelings about TIM have everything to do with the Reapers. The foreshadowing almost guarantees that TIM will do something with the base that will make you sorely regret it.

Renegades want to say that this doesn't matter, short term survival is more important than the long term.

Only I think the consequences of handing the base to TIM will be a threat to our short term survival.

[Arijharn]

The problem is; I don't think it's a decision of 'either' you keep the base or you unite the galaxy. I think it will happen regardless either way although it may be that they might invest more 'faith' in you if you did destroy it.



The reason why I don't think it's an 'either' choice is because the game allows for a lot of permutations. If there are basically 4 results to your decision to save the Council, then there should be at least 4 results from your decision to destroy the base as well (destroy as renegade, destroy as paragon, save as renegade and save as paragon)

[lovgreno]

Spectre_907 wrote..
Of course. If we had never attempted to find the Reapers because of risk, the galaxy would be devoid of life now.

True but in this case there is very much at risk while the possible gains are far from certain. It is a active piece of reaper equipment wich we all know how it often ends. The main objective should be to stop the abductions of humans. Remember that the Collector cruiser was designed to harvest Earth and there is no reason to assume that Harbringer would stop after making a human reaper even though it seems to be quite a earthling fanboy. As long as that base stands it can do so again. No one can say that they can guarantee to keep it in controll, especialy not the small and isolated Cerberus alone. In this case a burned earth tactic should at least be considered as a alternative.

Modifié par lovgreno, 03 octobre 2010 - 05:47 .

[Nightwriter]

Arijharn wrote...

The problem is; I don't think it's a decision of 'either' you keep the base or you unite the galaxy. I think it will happen regardless either way although it may be that they might invest more 'faith' in you if you did destroy it.

The reason why I don't think it's an 'either' choice is because the game allows for a lot of permutations. If there are basically 4 results to your decision to save the Council, then there should be at least 4 results from your decision to destroy the base as well (destroy as renegade, destroy as paragon, save as renegade and save as paragon)

I agree with that, as usual. But I don't think it's necessarily about the base at all - I think it's about Cerberus, and your affiliations with them.

If you keep the base, you are almost certainly still in league with Cerberus. Even a paragon Shepard who keeps the base is fooling himself if he thinks TIM will ever give up that base.

I have no illusions about TIM - he will want control. This will not please the Council. This will cause snags. The other races will want access to the base. TIM will want full control of the distribution of technology and resources. If not that, he will see to it that the technology he gives out is a trojan horse, a gift that can be turned to his advantage later on. In short, TIM's control issues will cause rifts.

[lovgreno]

I am kind of hoping that TIMmy would be smart enough to share vital information for the common good of all but I must admit that he doesn't seem very good at thinking beyond his own personal ego. "Cerberus IS humanity" and "Don't think you can understand my reasons Shepard".

Modifié par lovgreno, 03 octobre 2010 - 05:53 .

[Nightwriter]

Oh, I have no doubts he would share vital or necessary information. But I do not believe he would share everything. I think he would always keep something to secure his own power. I think TIM wants an edge on other races and that he would always find a way to make sure he keeps it.

And I also think the problem would lie more in the galaxy's distrust of him and anything he may offer.

[fongiel24]

What makes me very, very uncomfortable about destroying the base is that it's an irreversible decision. You can't change your mind later and go back and change things - once it's gone, it's gone. What if there really was something in there that we missed, something that could prove to be the difference against the Reapers?

While keeping the base and turning it over to Cerberus might make other factions suspicious, we might be able to patch things up with them, maybe by having Shepard turn over information collected by EDI, thus bypassing TIM altogether. I guess what I'm saying is regaining the trust of the galaxy might be difficult, but un-destroying the base is impossible. Better to not need it and have it, than have it and not need it. Besides, if the base becomes a problem we can always launch another "suicide mission" and finish the job, can't we?

lovgreno wrote...

The main objective should be to stop the
abductions of humans. Remember that the Collector cruiser was designed
to harvest Earth and there is no reason to assume that Harbringer would
stop after making a human reaper even though it seems to be quite a
earthling fanboy. As long as that base stands it can do so again.

I always thought this was BS and Bioware just trying to be overdramatic. Even an unupgraded SR-2 toasts the Collector cruiser. What chance does the Collector cruiser have against the Arcturus fleet? It's not a Reaper.

Modifié par fongiel24, 03 octobre 2010 - 06:04 .

[EffectedByTheMasses]

Nightwriter wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

The problem is; I don't think it's a decision of 'either' you keep the base or you unite the galaxy. I think it will happen regardless either way although it may be that they might invest more 'faith' in you if you did destroy it.

The reason why I don't think it's an 'either' choice is because the game allows for a lot of permutations. If there are basically 4 results to your decision to save the Council, then there should be at least 4 results from your decision to destroy the base as well (destroy as renegade, destroy as paragon, save as renegade and save as paragon)

I agree with that, as usual. But I don't think it's necessarily about the base at all - I think it's about Cerberus, and your affiliations with them.

If you keep the base, you are almost certainly still in league with Cerberus. Even a paragon Shepard who keeps the base is fooling himself if he thinks TIM will ever give up that base.

I have no illusions about TIM - he will want control. This will not please the Council. This will cause snags. The other races will want access to the base. TIM will want full control of the distribution of technology and resources. If not that, he will see to it that the technology he gives out is a trojan horse, a gift that can be turned to his advantage later on. In short, TIM's control issues will cause rifts.

Either way though, it;s not like you really have a choice about being pro-cerberus. Shepard quite clearly gives TIM a verbal thrashing at the end of the game.

[Nightwriter]

fongiel24 wrote...

What makes me very, very uncomfortable about destroying the base is that it's an irreversible decision. You can't change your mind later and go back and change things - once it's gone, it's gone. What if there really was something in there that we missed, something that could prove to be the difference against the Reapers?

Except it is a reversible decision, lol. I know, I know, I'm not supposed to think that way, but...

It just seems so obvious to me that keeping the base will be, at the very least, a mixed blessing. It is blatantly foreshadowed. I really, really wish they'd made it less blatant, so that I could judge the decision realistically. As it stands, I have a really hard time ignoring such obvious evidence. I'm just not that good of a roleplayer.

And I know my paragon Shepard gave TIM a verbal thrashing, but I guess I assumed the renegades or the people who kept the base didn't.

[tommyt_1994]

Nightwriter wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

The problem is; I don't think it's a decision of 'either' you keep the base or you unite the galaxy. I think it will happen regardless either way although it may be that they might invest more 'faith' in you if you did destroy it.

The reason why I don't think it's an 'either' choice is because the game allows for a lot of permutations. If there are basically 4 results to your decision to save the Council, then there should be at least 4 results from your decision to destroy the base as well (destroy as renegade, destroy as paragon, save as renegade and save as paragon)

I agree with that, as usual. But I don't think it's necessarily about the base at all - I think it's about Cerberus, and your affiliations with them.

If you keep the base, you are almost certainly still in league with Cerberus. Even a paragon Shepard who keeps the base is fooling himself if he thinks TIM will ever give up that base.

I have no illusions about TIM - he will want control. This will not please the Council. This will cause snags. The other races will want access to the base. TIM will want full control of the distribution of technology and resources. If not that, he will see to it that the technology he gives out is a trojan horse, a gift that can be turned to his advantage later on. In short, TIM's control issues will cause rifts.

In regards to the last paragraph: I think that point is vital. Anyone and everyone will want their hands on that base and TIM will want to be the one who decides what  "piece of the pie" everyone gets. Everyone will want their fair share of the pie and TIM will not comply. A base that advanced would more than likely cause uproar and chaos between the races, which is moving in the opposite direction

[fongiel24]

Nightwriter wrote...

Except it is a reversible decision, lol. I know, I know, I'm not supposed to think that way, but...

It just seems so obvious to me that keeping the base will be, at the very least, a mixed blessing. It is blatantly foreshadowed. I really, really wish they'd made it less blatant, so that I could judge the decision realistically. As it stands, I have a really hard time ignoring such obvious evidence. I'm just not that good of a roleplayer.

And I know my paragon Shepard gave TIM a verbal thrashing, but I guess I assumed the renegades or the people who kept the base didn't.

From a metagaming perspective I know blowing up the base won't come back to bite me in the ass, just like I know that keeping it won't cause a galaxy-wide war that will doom everyone either. You're also probably right that there will be consequences for keeping the base. I'm not sure this last part is necessarily bad for me as a gamer though, because more consequences means more story and more action for me to play through.

From an RP perspective though, I (I being Shepard now) can't foresee my inevitable victory over the Reapers. I can't really take anything for granted, so as much as I might be suspicious of TIM's intentions and despite the fact I have that nauseous feeling in my stomach that tells me it'll probably bite me later, I keep the base for fear that I might be destroying intelligence that could be vital later.

[Phaedon]

[quote]smudboy wrote...

[quote]Phaedon wrote...


Here you go, http://social.biowar...2753/19#4934960 , but let's please not recycle the same arguments over and over again.
[/quote]
Where is this proof of racism?  That's like saying someone promoting black culture is a racist.[/quote]
UN disagrees with you: the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.


[quote][quote]
He did sacrifice a part of the colony, but my argument lies on the 'Who made you god' point.
[/quote]
That's not a point, that's a subjective opinion.  He lured the enemy into a place he wanted them.  This was preferable to them simply taking MORE, and entire, colonies.  In doing so, he saved half the colony or so, and attacked them.  This is win-win.  It could've gone better, I'm sure, but it's better than what's been going on the past 2 years.

But I'm sure TIM would've been much better if he did jack-squat.  Yeah.[/quote]
It's a moral issue. We are not trying to prove if TIM is a good leader or not. He also forgot to mention it to Shepard...again. Old age I guess.

[quote][quote]
Could you please post a few ways he could have tipped them off ? Bringing more teams with him ? 
[/quote]
Seriously, use your imagination.  If you know something's going to be a trap, you're going to behave differently.  The fact is TIM believed Shepard's team would've gotten the job done regardless of the risk, and it worked out.

This is a point I'm in favor of, simply because I can think up a few really good things to do to not only get the data, but disable the ship.[/quote]
Eh ? How is raiding a ship worse than walking into a trap ?

[quote][quote]
My point, which I have to admit is partially speculation is that he knew everything about the projects. I base this on the fact that he is defending the concept of Project Overlord and the unfortunate timing on Pragia.
[/quote]
Dude, the narrative is very clear on this issue.  I really can't stress that enough.  We can speculate that Miranda or Jacob knew about all this stuff too, but it's pure guessing.[/quote]
I'll explain this later on, in this post.

[quote][quote]
http://social.biowar...2753/15#4926156
http://social.biowar...2753/15#4926511
[/quote]
The only thing relevant there is the assassination of the Pope, and we don't know his involvement in it.[/quote]
Yeah, I bet SB's secretary forgot to put in the right directory. It's clear that he killed a Pope and abducted and experimented on live asari. I am going to guess that he didn't let them go either.

[quote][quote]
This is an objective view at what happenned:
A quarian brought 3 humans that were hunted by Cerberus to the flotilla. The Quarians gave them asylum and they were attacked by Cerberus and a traitor, Golo.
http://masseffect.wi...fect:_Ascension
Attacking a flotilla that also contains hundrends unarmed civilians in each ship ? I'd say this makes TIM a bad guy.
[/quote]
Whereas I do appreciate objective views, I'm basing my information on the game, not supplemental material.  We have to work with what we're given only within the game.  Supplementary material no longer makes it objective, even if it points to stuff in another story, we must only get that information from this story.

Now if TIM did something evil or morally gray in ME2, then we could make some good comparisons, and it certainly hints at making us believe he knows more than he's letting on; but that's pure speculation.[/quote]
It's still obvious that TIM attacked the Migrant Fleet in a way, and every ship has unarmed civilians.

[quote][quote]
Definitely not a traitor. Someone lured his squad to a thresher maw (Akuze anyone ?). Shep finds out, tells him, Kahoku goes to the SB to find more info. All evidence leads to Cerberus and Cerberus knows that, so they are hunting Kahoku. Shepard raids the various Cerberus bases and finds Kahoku's dead body.
[/quote]
Working with the SB, giving us and others information on Cerberus/Alliance?  That's a traitor right there.  If he's a Rear Admiral and gave information about the Alliance to someone of lower rank or the SB, or even a Spectre, that's a breach in protocol.  You don't divulge military secrets to anyone.  His intentions may have been good, but he ultimately got caught up in something he shouldn't.[/quote]
Why shouldn't he ? After all, for all we know, he didn't share specific info about his team or the operation that they were working on. All he had to do was send him the Cerberus transmitter, which would lead him to Cerberus. Either way, this makes Cerberus, if not an evil organization, a renegade one.

[quote][quote]
Morgues only examine bodies to provide physical evidence to the police.
Medical labs/universities only use cadavers after permission (or in some countries DBs from John/Jane Does)Respect  towards a dead body, as well as a proper burrial is a human right.
[/quote]
I seem to recall this very issue raised in regards to Samesh Bhatia, but that's in regards to a person being killed by Geth, not turned into husks or a cloned Thorian creeper.

And do those morgues have husks?  Do they know that said person was converted into those?  Creepers were  produced by the Thorian, in much the same way the it produced Shiala clones.  Shall we ship all those clones to their families?  Is there a way to understand which person because what husk?  This issue isn't even raised.  These are mindless if not already dead things.  The narrative provided no semblance of rights to these people (the husks.)  The only thing we get is an email from some obscure people asking Shepard to look out for their family members who were lost in a colony abduction.[/quote]
I have to disagree, the victims of the Dragon's teeth would have to be burried in a mass grave, or several group graves. The Alliance would have to pay for the ceremony. The creepers are probably either humans or protheans that were collected by the Thorian. Both husks and Thorian Creepers don't deserve being used as tools.


[quote][quote]
Supplemental content is cannon. The only reason for not including them in our arguments is because we want to justify why a random Shepard would save/destroy the base (without having access to this material).
[/quote]
If the content is not in the game, it's not in the game.  Over my head, over the average viewer's head, and has no purpose or point in this discussion.

You can only work with what you're given in THIS story.[/quote]
You are still repeating the same thing that I have replied with the above post. Is TIM a bad guy ? Yes or No ? It makes no sense to skip all the evidence that we have just because it's not part of ME2. In fact, if we are not trying to justify what a random Shepard did, excluding this material makes no sense at all.

[quote][quote]
I never claimed that TIM or Ceberus didn't trust Shepard, I just don't see how this is an argument.
[/quote]
Because that's the only meaning the concept of trust plays into this.

Ones opinion of TIM and how much we subjectively trust him is irrelevant.

However, TIM and Cerberus completely trust Shepard to do the right thing.  And they trust us with destroying the base.  And we can throw all that trust away simply because "the soul of humanity" or whatever idiocy they spout.[/quote]
Moralism is an idiocy now ?

[quote][quote]
How much is your humanity worth ?
In the ME universe, there are no bad choices, there are only moral dillemas. 
[/quote]
This isn't about humanity: this is about all life.[/quote]
This is actually a good argument to use against Cerberus actually :happy:, anyway, by 'humanity' I meant 'morality'  or if you are feeling dramatic, 'soul'. The essence of the CB argument is this:
Would you risk giving Cerberus the ability to build a Reaper, a helpful tool in ME3, even though you know they would use it against the Reapers and beyond ? Is the priiiiize worth the risk ? Would you sell your soul to the devil ? 

[quote][quote]
Don't you consider the timing in Pragia suspicious ?
[/quote]
The narrative is clear.[/quote]
You are missing the point of the Pragia mission. They were hiding something from TIM, we don't know what (probably Jack or the high mortality rates), but the purpose of the facility didn't change. TIM started this operation so that he could abduct/buy kids with biotics and experiment on them. Heck, if that doesn't make him an evil character, then infiltrating Ascension or blowing up a ship carrying Eezo in order to turn some of the kids of a colony (the other simply died) biotic doesn't count ?

[quote][quote]
By otherwise, I did mean supplemental material. If you take them in account, then it is absolute that TIM is a morally grey character. If you don't. well then, considering him good or bad is debatable. And that's what we are debating on, right ? [/quote]

And I never will.  And anyone else who does is automatically wrong and their points moot.  You need to remain objective.  You have to argue the facts as this story gives us, not some OTHER story.  This is ME2, not ME2 Ascension, not ME2 Redemption, or whatever.

I'm sure the supplemental materials paint an entirely different picture of things.  I hear it turns Liara into a superhero on stupid.  It's completely irrelevant.  You can only work with what you're given.
[/quote]
My initial question was this: Do you think that TIM is an immoral character ? Taking the canon supplement material into account, what do you say ?

[Gibb_Shepard]

The collector base was built primarily to build a reaper. The technology inside of said base is technology to build reapers. What do you think TIM, a man who has already implanted reaper tech into a human, will do with the base that was designed solely to build reapers?



It may seem like the technology will be helpful, IN THE RIGHT HANDS. We all know what TIM will do with the base, and i'm sure most of us can predict the repercussions that will come of it.

[Phaedon]

I believe that this sums up the 'Destroy the Base' argument nicely, Gibb_Shepard.

Modifié par Phaedon, 03 octobre 2010 - 11:31 .