2146 réponses à ce sujet

[tallinn]

Inverness Moon wrote...

Jabarai wrote...

What is so wrong about the Reaper cycle? They seem to know their purpose and we merely toddle along, trying to beat them at their own game. What do we have that should be preserved at all cost?

That is a silly question. Humans as a species have an interest in self-determination. That need not be justified to anyone.

Edit: It sounds like you're gearing up towards a "we're only worth saving because we have special things like emotions, love, etc." argument, or something similar.

No, he is gearing up towards "The fundamental reason of all what we are doing has no rational base." Every fundamental cause for our actions is a wish and nothing more. It's pure "emotion", not "rational". The root of the word "emotion" is latin: "ex motio" and means "the cause of motion".

Rationalism helps us to get our wishes fulfilled. It is a tool.

The fundamental wish in question is to defeat the Reaper threat. Rationalism jumps in to answer the question wether keeping the base will make life easier or not. The base would be more helpful then a threat on its own if the Illusive Man would be more trustworthy then he is. When it did come down on me to make that decision the first time I asked myself "The council does not really see the Reaper threat. But how can I be sure that TIM does take it as serious as it should be taken? Couldn't it be that for him everything ends here?" TIM lied and tricked so many times that there was the danger that he would abandon the quest to defeat the Reapers after having obtained the base, that being his real goal.

Blame on him if he is more trustworthy then he acts. He gambled with Shephards body, he used a complete human colony as a lure to get Shephard into confrontation with the Collectors and in combination with the overall nature of Cerberus operations he looks much more like a totalitarian leader heading for power then a friend of all civilizations of the galaxy. IMHO TIM would probably try to seize the power in the galaxy even if he believes that the Reaper tjhreat is real, just to make sure that the threat is handled in a way he thinks it should be handled (i.e. demanding more sacrifice from any other race but mankind). Not very attractive to have the galaxy struggling with a rascist terrorist group while the Reapers are approaching.

The story told up to the point the decision was to be made showed so much warning signs all over the place it looked completely unwise to hand the base over to TIM.

Modifié par tallinn, 11 octobre 2010 - 02:28 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Barquiel wrote...

renegade Shepard = obsessed with human dominance

Not in BioWare's books definitely.

It's the renegade option to bicker with TIM over his "need-to-know-basis" modus operandi. It's the renegade option to critisize Liara for giving the body to Cerberus. And, of course, it's the renegade option to screw up any Human you can screw up in the both games (except maybe Zaeed on his loyalty)...

So no, the renegade's main definition is "uber-badass" (aka jerk), not "pro-Human". It just so happens that being pro-Human (i.e. jerk to the aliens) is considered jerkish any time, when the alternative isn't ever more plain jerkish.

Which only confirms that telling TIM to "shove it" by destroying the Base could as well be made a renegade option with a slighly different dialogue.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 11 octobre 2010 - 02:55 .

[Count Viceroy]

Indeed, the same way you could play pro/anti alien renegade in Me1 as well.

[Finnish Dragon]

smudboy wrote...

I find that line to be the worst in the entire game.

The ultimate fear is the Reaper threat.  Which you have stated.  So how on earth, do you then, conclude that researching the base would blahblahblah compromise one's "view" on who the enemy is?  You just stated ultimate fear = Reapers.  How does ultimate fear then translate to changing a viewpoint on the enemy?  What?  You might want to look over your logic one more time, cause all I'm listening to is more  trying to explain .

Saren´s worst fear was the mankind. In order to contain the mankind he used every available mean to contain the mankind and to achieve his objectives. In this way, there isn´t much differences between Saren and the renegade Shepard. Both of them are/were willing to achieve their goals what ever it takes. That was Saren´s methodology and that is renegade Shepard´s methodology as well. That is also TIM´s methodology. The end justifies the means.

The Collector Base may have useful technologies in a struggle against the Reapers. However, it may be a great Trojan Horse. The problem is that we don´t which is it. We don´t know enough about the base´s history and how the Collectors got that base. In the end, if we decide to take that base we would be acting being blind and deaf in darkness hoping to find something useful and hoping to avoid beasts. 

The fact is that TIM deliberately lied on Shepard regarding the Collector Ship and regarding Liara. He told that the Collector Ship was crippled by Turians and Turians sent a distress signal which Cerberus intercepted. He knew that the Collectors sent that message in order to lure Shepard to a trap. TIM told Liara worked for the Shadow Broker while he knew that Liara was instrumental delivering Shepard´s body to Cerberus and he knew that Liara was after Shadow Broker. Sorry, but TIM cannot be trusted. He can say whatever he want but once you lost someone´s trust then regaining it will be very hard thing to achieve.

No, TIM doesn´t deserve the base. The track record of Cerberus research is awful and it would be probable that either Cerberus would fail that as well with drastic consequences or TIM would gain something that would benefit him and Cerberus but not the rest of the Galaxy. Organisations like Cerberus aren´t well known for sharing their information with other parties. They will most likely keep some of the information they achieve and only give the results of their research on need-to-know basis.

Other races like Asaris, Turians and Salarians will probably be much more useful when fighting against the Reapers than TIM and Cerberus. Asaris and Turians had experience fighting with the Sovereign and if Shepard chose to save the Destiny Ascension then he/she saved Asaris with that knowledge and experience and possibly many Turians as well. I would expect that both Asari and Turian navies will study the information they got from that battle.

I think that information from actual combat situation is much more important than any information what the Collector Base can offer if saved. The fact is that intelligent military leaders want to learn not only from mistakes which they made but also mistakes that leaders from other nations made. I assume that Asari, Turian and human military leaders are doing this which means that they do have pretty much information regarding how individual reaper perform in a combat situation. I think the most important issue regarding saving the Destiny Ascension is that a large part of that combat experience is saved as well and that is much more important than the life of the Citadel Council in a long run.

Modifié par Finnish Dragon, 11 octobre 2010 - 02:45 .

[Zulu_DFA]

tallinn wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

Edit: It sounds like you're gearing up towards a "we're only worth saving because we have special things like emotions, love, etc." argument, or something similar.

No, he is gearing up towards "The fundamental reason of all what we are doing has no rational base." Every fundamental cause for our actions is a wish and nothing more. It's pure "emotion", not "rational". The root of the word "emotion" is latin: "ex motio" and means "the cause of motion".

Rationalism helps us to get our wishes fulfilled. It is a tool.

This is true, to a degree. But it immediatley backfires at you by that there is actually no border between "sentience" and "non-sentience", so there can't be a definition of sentience, so there is all the justification needed to use any other group, race, species, etc. for SLAVE LABOR. So I'd suggest that you dropped this "emotions rule" stuff before TIM used it for enslaving all the aliens (and Humans alike).

In any case, it is used already by the Reapers for their recycling of life. How about we grow up and beat the Reapers at their own game (by proving that we have more reason to exist the way we want, than they)?

[Barquiel]

Count Viceroy wrote...

Indeed, the same way you could play pro/anti alien renegade in Me1 as well.

Yes, you can play a pro-alien renegade in ME1...but your pro-alien renegade still ends up with an all-human council. There is no way to prevent that.
But if a paragon destroys the DA (the same decision)...you get a human lead council (of course, it makes no difference in ME2)

It's also renegade to support Charles Saracino, or dialogue options like "It's too bad Cerberus has never made me an offer" or "cerberus has the right ideas"

Modifié par Barquiel, 11 octobre 2010 - 02:54 .

[smudboy]

tallinn wrote...

The base would be more helpful then a threat on its own if the Illusive Man would be more trustworthy then he is.

Nonsense.  As we are introduced to him at the start of the game, TIM wants to stop the Reapers.  He goes so far as to come up with a means (but no method) to fight their proxy, and win.

You can be guaranteed that TIM will fight the Reapers.

When it did come down on me to make that decision the first time I asked myself "The council does not really see the Reaper threat. But how can I be sure that TIM does take it as serious as it should be taken? Couldn't it be that for him everything ends here?" TIM lied and tricked so many times that there was the danger that he would abandon the quest to defeat the Reapers after having obtained the base, that being his real goal.

TIM just spent 2 years and ungodly amounts of money just to bring a corpse back because they fought the Reapers and won.  In fact, this is so insane it borders on hero worship, though definitely matches the eccentric rich ****** persona.

This tells me TIM is just about as serious as it gets.  (Mind you the actualization of Shepard's status as The Chosen doesn't get fulfilled through the story, but TIM still accomplishes his goal: Stop the Reapers, or at least, their proxy.)

Blame on him if he is more trustworthy then he acts. He gambled with Shephards body

Yes.  TIM completely trusts Shepard, enough to cheat death.  This man's a miracle worker.  Which is what we'll need to fight our uber machine gods.

, he used a complete human colony as a lure to get Shephard into confrontation with the Collectors

Win-win.  Save a colony while another just gets half-saved, and confront and attack your mysteriuos enemy.  This is a very good thing.

and in combination with the overall nature of Cerberus operations he looks much more like a totalitarian leader heading for power then a friend of all civilizations of the galaxy.

Who wants a friend of the galaxy?  We want a guy who can stop the Reapers.

IMHO TIM would probably try to seize the power in the galaxy even if he believes that the Reaper tjhreat is real, just to make sure that the threat is handled in a way he thinks it should be handled (i.e. demanding more sacrifice from any other race but mankind). Not very attractive to have the galaxy struggling with a rascist terrorist group while the Reapers are approaching.

Yet this is not his opinion.  He wants help from the other races just as much (ask TIM about being a Spectre and getting help.  "By all means.")  He gets a crew together of various species to Stop the Reapers (Collectors.)  The issue isn't how he'll handle the threat, but that he is.  One man's method of dealing with a problem is better than not dealing with the problem at all.

The story told up to the point the decision was to be made showed so much warning signs all over the place it looked completely unwise to hand the base over to TIM.

What warning signs?  The only thing TIM did which was bad was lied to us (into a trap), but even that was for the purpose of being successful in that trap.

[mosor]

Aramintai wrote...


Where does it say that EDI is a Reaper tech? 

Talk to EDI after she is unshackled, or read the mass effect wiki entry on her.

I can agree to allow Cerberus to conduct boundary pushing projects that do not involve fumbling with a completely unfamiliar tech taken from a hostile entities of unknown origin, as they are at least more or less explored and precaution measures can be implemented.

It's easy to put in good precautions when you're working with concepts you understand. With alien concepts and technology it's a lot harder to account for everything. Why? Because we have no real baseline for it.

But when the result is completely based on luck then the outcome can be extrapolated based only on the success rate of similar projects, which is not looking good.

Plenty of breakthroughs were based on luck. Like penecilin. The fact is you can only get data by investigating, luck or not.

So I can logically expect the worst and make the choice not in Cerberus favor. Not dismissing the danger of failure and expecting the worst is as valid as dismissing it and hoping for the best. And as it was said here before the decision in the game must be made in mere seconds during which TIM is not really making his case any better, reminding Shepard once again just how ruthless and heedless of danger Cerberus can be. 

You're dismissing the wrong danger. The only danger that shouldn't be dismissed is the reapers.

[Zulu_DFA]

mosor wrote...

So I can logically expect the worst and make the choice not in Cerberus favor. Not dismissing the danger of failure and expecting the worst is as valid as dismissing it and hoping for the best. And as it was said here before the decision in the game must be made in mere seconds during which TIM is not really making his case any better, reminding Shepard once again just how ruthless and heedless of danger Cerberus can be. 

You're dismissing the wrong danger. The only danger that shouldn't be dismissed is the reapers.

Let's see...

No Base = assured destruction.
Base & Cerberus fail = assured destruction.

So what's the point of blowing it up?

Ah, yes, Shepard will find some way to stop the Reapers... I think I've heard that one before.

[mosor]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

mosor wrote...

So I can logically expect the worst and make the choice not in Cerberus favor. Not dismissing the danger of failure and expecting the worst is as valid as dismissing it and hoping for the best. And as it was said here before the decision in the game must be made in mere seconds during which TIM is not really making his case any better, reminding Shepard once again just how ruthless and heedless of danger Cerberus can be. 

You're dismissing the wrong danger. The only danger that shouldn't be dismissed is the reapers.

Let's see...

No Base = assured destruction.
Base & Cerberus fail = assured destruction.

So what's the point of blowing it up?

Ah, yes, Shepard will find some way to stop the Reapers... I think I've heard that one before.

Besides, don't these people realize that Cerberus is the Rocky fricken Balboa of the galaxy? Sure they take their body shots, even get knocked down from time to time, but they get back up and so far have always scored a knockout.....when it counts!

[Flamewielder]

The only reason to blow up the base instead of keeping it is the possibility of other Collector vessels returning and winning it back from Cerberus before TIM or the Alliance could fortify it. The risk of wasting a scientific investigation opportunity is less than the risk of allowing the Collectors to resume their Reaper construction process and reprogramming the IFF, locking us out of the Omega-4 relay permanently.



If that happened, our only possible response would be to destroy the relay, cutting off the base from its supply of raw material, in which case we'd lose the base anyway.

[lovgreno]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

mosor wrote...

So I can logically expect the worst and make the choice not in Cerberus favor. Not dismissing the danger of failure and expecting the worst is as valid as dismissing it and hoping for the best. And as it was said here before the decision in the game must be made in mere seconds during which TIM is not really making his case any better, reminding Shepard once again just how ruthless and heedless of danger Cerberus can be. 

You're dismissing the wrong danger. The only danger that shouldn't be dismissed is the reapers.

Let's see...

No Base = assured destruction.
Base & Cerberus fail = assured destruction.

So what's the point of blowing it up?

Ah, yes, Shepard will find some way to stop the Reapers... I think I've heard that one before.

That is just what you assume. Nothing is assured at the moment, the only things we have are potential risks and potential gains.

[tallinn]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

tallinn wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

Edit: It sounds like you're gearing up towards a "we're only worth saving because we have special things like emotions, love, etc." argument, or something similar.

No, he is gearing up towards "The fundamental reason of all what we are doing has no rational base." Every fundamental cause for our actions is a wish and nothing more. It's pure "emotion", not "rational". The root of the word "emotion" is latin: "ex motio" and means "the cause of motion".

Rationalism helps us to get our wishes fulfilled. It is a tool.

This is true, to a degree. But it immediatley backfires at you by that there is actually no border between "sentience" and "non-sentience", so there can't be a definition of sentience, so there is all the justification needed to use any other group, race, species, etc. for SLAVE LABOR. So I'd suggest that you dropped this "emotions rule" stuff before TIM used it for enslaving all the aliens (and Humans alike).

In any case, it is used already by the Reapers for their recycling of life. How about we grow up and beat the Reapers at their own game (by proving that we have more reason to exist the way we want, than they)?

With english not being my mother-tongue I do not understand the "no border between "sentience" and "non-sentience"". The border is clear and easy to realize.

On the other hand it is true that human ethics is ethics for humans and not for e.g. the "Black Widow" spider (if that animal would have enough brain to develop an ethics that is). A different emotional structure leads to different ethical consequences. I cannot argue what is a good thing to do for a Krogan based on ethics developed for and by Humans (but I think that Krogans as described in the ME universe are impossible life forms, unable to survive evolution as for their interior aggression, but that is another story). However most alien species in the ME universe are "android", sharing some basic emotional structure with human beings. This gives the base for both understanding and mutual respect, thus effectively denying slavery of one race by the other.

The task to prove to the Reapers that we have more REASON (i.e. an argument acknowledgeable by any rational thinking life form) to live the way we want then they want us to change is an impossible one for the same reason we cannot convince the black widow spider to stop eating her husband. The Reapers do not respect our wish to live as we want. Period, End of story. Their wish is a different one and it is in conflict with our one. In an unresolvable way by peaceful means.

[mosor]

lovgreno wrote...

Ah, yes, Shepard will find some way to stop the Reapers... I think I've heard that one before.
That is just what you assume. Nothing is assured at the moment, the only things we have are potential risks and potential gains.

Alright. List the potential risks, the potential gains and the ultimate consequences for each decision.

Modifié par mosor, 11 octobre 2010 - 03:39 .

[Barquiel]

mosor wrote...

lovgreno wrote...

Ah, yes, Shepard will find some way to stop the Reapers... I think I've heard that one before.
That is just what you assume. Nothing is assured at the moment, the only things we have are potential risks and potential gains.

Alright. List the potential risks, the potential gains and the ultimate consequences for each decision.

potential gains: technology
potential risks: galactic unity is at risk of being destroyed, cerberus red shirts become indoctrinated

[Sviken]

Flamewielder wrote...

The only reason to blow up the base instead of keeping it is the possibility of other Collector vessels returning and winning it back from Cerberus before TIM or the Alliance could fortify it. The risk of wasting a scientific investigation opportunity is less than the risk of allowing the Collectors to resume their Reaper construction process and reprogramming the IFF, locking us out of the Omega-4 relay permanently.

If that happened, our only possible response would be to destroy the relay, cutting off the base from its supply of raw material, in which case we'd lose the base anyway.

That is highly unlikely. However, giving the base to TIM isn't very good idea either. Who knows what he might do with it.

[Aramintai]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Let's see...

No Base = assured destruction.
Base & Cerberus fail = assured destruction.

So what's the point of blowing it up?

Ah, yes, Shepard will find some way to stop the Reapers... I think I've heard that one before.

What's  the point? The latter fail will be done by your own choice and not by an outside force. No need for the Reapers to come by and wreak havoc when we can do it ourselves just fine - just give Cerberus a new toy to play with.

[Dean_the_Young]

Flamewielder wrote...

The only reason to blow up the base instead of keeping it is the possibility of other Collector vessels returning and winning it back from Cerberus before TIM or the Alliance could fortify it. The risk of wasting a scientific investigation opportunity is less than the risk of allowing the Collectors to resume their Reaper construction process and reprogramming the IFF, locking us out of the Omega-4 relay permanently.

What other Collector cruiser?

If that happened, our only possible response would be to destroy the relay, cutting off the base from its supply of raw material, in which case we'd lose the base anyway.

Or we could go back and blow up the Collector vessel.

The Collectors primary form of defense was not being reachable. Once that defense was surpassed, aka once the Reaper IFF was recovered and replicated, it became a matter of when, not if, the Collector Base would fall.

[Dean_the_Young]

Barquiel wrote...

mosor wrote...

lovgreno wrote...

Ah, yes, Shepard will find some way to stop the Reapers... I think I've heard that one before.
That is just what you assume. Nothing is assured at the moment, the only things we have are potential risks and potential gains.

Alright. List the potential risks, the potential gains and the ultimate consequences for each decision.

potential gains: technology

Give proper scale.

Tens and hundreds of years of advanced technology.

potential risks: galactic unity is at risk of being destroyed,

Why is galactic unity destroyed because a shadowy extremist group has the base? Under what form of mass stupidity do the Asari refuse to work with the Turians refuse to work with the Alliance refuse to work with the Salarians because none of them have the base?

Explain this. Reasonably. Where in the game is it even implied?

cerberus red shirts become indoctrinated

Due to the nature and limits of indoctrination, that doesn't have much of a cost tied with it. Except to Cerberus, which is willing to take the risks.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 11 octobre 2010 - 04:15 .

[Purge the heathens]

cerberus red shirts become indoctrinated

Aren't redshirts expendable by their very nature?

The whole paranoia about the base can easily be dismantled. Leave someone there, see if they get indoctrinated and work with the results. You can blow the base up if there's indeed an indoctrination field, either by sending a team to plant a bomb or even by remote detonation because you already rigged it beforehand. Or you can rotate people in and out; once the first crew achieves a certain indoctrination level, they get switched out. Not the most efficient solution, but it might work. If there's any chance of losing control over the base, destroying it should be easy as pie.

Modifié par Purge the heathens, 11 octobre 2010 - 04:24 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Aramintai wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Let's see...

No Base = assured destruction.
Base & Cerberus fail = assured destruction.

So what's the point of blowing it up?

Ah, yes, Shepard will find some way to stop the Reapers... I think I've heard that one before.

What's  the point? The latter fail will be done by your own choice and not by an outside force. No need for the Reapers to come by and wreak havoc when we can do it ourselves just fine - just give Cerberus a new toy to play with.

Strange, how in decades of existing Cerberus has only had one galactic-risk incident... which could have been solved by anyone, including themselves, with orbital bombardment. While the Salarians unleashed the Rachni and then both neutered and nearly lost control of the genophage, the Turians's best agent nearly ends all existence, and the Asari not only had a powerful political figure help in that, they can't go a lifetime without a galaxy-devestating war (or three).

It's like those are the exception or something.

[DPSSOC]

Ok playing a bit of catch up here.

Aramintai wrote...
3. Experiments on Thorian creepers to make shock trooper army - failure. Outcome - creepers on the loose, dealt with by Shepard.

If I recall correctly the Creepers Cerberus were studying were well contained until Shepard showed up.  If you're referring to the events on Nodacrux (think that was the planet could be wrong) that was an Exogeni project.  Most likely Cerberus was aware of it, jumped on the idea, and acquired samples for themselves to study on Binthu.  This is only a failure because of Shepard's interference, for all we know the Cerberus scientists, if left alone, could well have developed a way to control the Creepers.

Aramintai wrote...
5. Project Overlord - failure. Outcome - no useful tech to control geth, test subject proved too unstable, situation dealt with by Shepard.

Except useful tech was developed, they had a way to control the Geth.  The project is only a failure if you take David away otherwise the project rolls on and the incidents of the DLC are nothing more than a set back.  Cerberus knew something was wrong, they sent some of their people (you) to investigate and secure the situation.  Their people (you) were successful and, provided you leave David, the project can continue.  What you're claiming is that if I'm trying to make gunpowder and my first batch has a bit too much bang and singes my eybrows off then the enter project is a complete failure.

Aramintai wrote...
6. Derelict Reaper project - failure. Outcome - no useful tech to use against the Reapers, whole project crew turned into husks, test subject/base destroyed. Getting IFF from there by Shepard was not part of that project, but rather a part of Lazarus project.

Are you suggesting anyone else could have done any better?  However while no useful tech was discovered or developed we now have a better understanding of just how powerful Reaper indoctrination is (surviving the death of the Reaper in question).

Aramintai wrote...
7. Subject Zero project - failure. Test subject escaped, facility closed, no new data on biotics for similar projects.

And you know this how?  We are not made privy to what the Teltin facility forwarded to Cerberus before Jack went nuts.  For all we know many of the technologies and techniques developed there were refined and used in the Ascension program.  Furthermore the fact that the project failed because of Jack's actions shows the success of their work.  They set out to build a super-biotic and they succeeded, their notes were most likely forwarded to Cerberus (result summaries of tech/treatments applied to Jack), and the loss of containment just meant they could make no further progress.  The inability to move forward with research does not devalue the progress already made.

[Zulu_DFA]

tallinn wrote...

With english not being my mother-tongue I do not understand the "no border between "sentience" and "non-sentience"". The border is clear and easy to realize.

It means that, as soon as you say human being are primarily driven by emotions, you may as well say that human beings are living automatons, in no quality distinct from other such things as animals. And if you use some argument about the level of thought process, that distinguishes the humans from (other) animals, then it may be immediately used to distinguish between various individuals and/or groups of humans, giving way to the nastiest of race theories and so on. That's why I say that you'd better drop this "emotions rule" argument and leave it to specialists such as psychiatrists and bio-chemicists. Oh, unless, of course, you want to advocate one of such theories (which many egg-heads are actually fond off).

Not to go off-topic, I'll remind you that all this "emotions" thing was brought up as a "valid argument" to advocate the destruction of the C-Base. It is not such.

The task to prove to the Reapers that we have more REASON (i.e. an argument acknowledgeable by any rational thinking life form) to live the way we want then they want us to change is an impossible one for the same reason we cannot convince the black widow spider to stop eating her husband. The Reapers do not respect our wish to live as we want. Period, End of story. Their wish is a different one and it is in conflict with our one. In an unresolvable way by peaceful means.

But we can stop the Black Widow. The same way we can stop the Reapers. An this way is the ultimate reason. PUN INTENDED.

[Dean_the_Young]

We actually do know of Teltin successes. The biotic upgrade we get (representative of the data remaining, and that data is advanced even twenty years later), and the Shadow Broker dossiers about collaborating with Trapdoor's biotic-suppression drugs (Jack and Cerberus humans are immune).