504 réponses à ce sujet

[Collider]

Why I don't save the Collector Base:

1. Shepard has already demonstrated that the Reaper's plans are flawed.



2. Reaper technology has the ability to indoctrinate, even when appearing to be dormant. Case in point: the derelict reaper that had indoctrinated Cerberus personnel. High chance of backfiring. And, I don't trust Cerberus or TIM with technology that can mind control, something which they've attempted in the past. Not to mention, technology capable of creating new reapers. I don't think anyone should have that much power, let alone Cerberus.



3. Cerberus' hilariously bad track record.

[SmokeyPSD]

and how would the probe send information back?



I've watched the cutescene plenty of times thanks. It's not obvious at all. It's a massive and tremendous ship. do you have high resolution images covering every nook and cranny of the ship? do u even know what's inside the bay? The Normandy's weapons ARE upgraded even if you don't have the new technology onboard or not. They aren't the original Normandy weapons.



I don't even know why I come on here. It seems the forums are ruled on by negativity and outright bitterness to ME2 that permeates everywhere.

[Oblarg]

SmokeyPSD wrote...

and how would the probe send information back?

I've watched the cutescene plenty of times thanks. It's not obvious at all. It's a massive and tremendous ship. do you have high resolution images covering every nook and cranny of the ship? do u even know what's inside the bay? The Normandy's weapons ARE upgraded even if you don't have the new technology onboard or not. They aren't the original Normandy weapons.

I don't even know why I come on here. It seems the forums are ruled on by negativity and outright bitterness to ME2 that permeates everywhere.

It would go back through the relay, how else?  It has the IFF, after all.

Anything would be better than the utterly moronic course of action taken in the game.

The Normandy's unupgraded weapons represent what would be available to any modern fleet.  And even the upgraded gun is described as "cruiser-class" firepower, so the Normandy certainly isn't any more capable of destroying collector ships than the alliance fleet would be.

I'm going to ignore your last statement.

[SmokeyPSD]

Let me get this straight. You find the whole situation at the end of ME2 utterly unimmersive and laughable, so you want them to send a little probe into the relay. Gather information, then come back... Unharmed.



I have no words...

[Spazmodian]

SmokeyPSD wrote...

and how would the probe send information back?

 

Perhaps, going out on a crazy limb here, the same way Shep and TIM have a real-time two-way conversation?

[SmokeyPSD]

Like the engine core, it's not really technology I see effectively being able to be integrated onto a Probe. due to weight, size constraints.

[Spazmodian]

SmokeyPSD wrote...

Like the engine core, it's not really technology I see effectively being able to be integrated onto a Probe. due to weight, size constraints.

Yup the FTL capable shuttle that has the same comm capability is friggin huge.

[SmokeyPSD]

um, it doesn't have the same capability. your talking about 2 different things. Short range shuttle to frigate communication and realtime communication across vast distance of space.

[Spazmodian]

SmokeyPSD wrote...

um, it doesn't have the same capability. your talking about 2 different things. Short range shuttle to frigate communication and realtime communication across vast distance of space.

The short range shuttle that can travel FTL and through the mass relays to the other side of the galaxy somehow receives a transmission from the Normandy while it is currently traveling FTL?  That short range shuttle?  The one you take by istelf multiple times across the galaxy?  That shuttle?  The one you use no less than 3 times before even knowing that the SR-2 exists?  The same one that Shep and up to 12 others jump inside of to go to another star system in the galaxy and leave the SR-2 behind?  The same one that would have to be able to communicate with the SR-2 through the same comm bouys that the SR-2 has to have access to in order to have real-time communications?

Since you seem to know so much about it....please enlighten us as to the exact specifics for this magical comm system that the SR-1/2 have installed which is too large to possible fit on the shuttle.  We do need exact dimensions too, which shouldn't be a problem for you to provide given your intmate knowledge.  It would be nice, for posterity of course, if you could provide the source material such as a technical manual for the system.


Barring that you could possibly admit that plot holes do in fact exist in ME2.

[SmokeyPSD]

**** this. I'm out, not talking to people with this tone. Not worth it, I'm fine enjoying ME2 by myself. IT was a ballsy, risky sequel, instead of bigger better.



I've stated my reasons for keeping the base. That's good enough

[TcheQ]

If you think the Kodiak has a FTL drive, mass-relay compatible hardware and ultra-long distance space navigation equipment on-board, you should have notified the Illusive man that the warning "no ship has ever returned from the Omega-4 relay" was just superstition.

I'm not sure why this thread went offtopic so fast, but a 6 hour review of the codex is in order I think. For both games.

Human, you've [learned] nothing.

[Oblarg]

There's absolutely no reason for running your best man through the relay, alone, the moment you get the IFF. That's an utterly laughable course of action.

[Jabarai]

Oblarg wrote...

SmokeyPSD wrote...

... and how would the probe send information back?

It would go back through the relay, how else?  It has the IFF, after all.

Anything would be better than the utterly moronic course of action taken in the game.

You mean anything that would give away the element of surprise? I can't agree.

I'm going to ignore your last statement.

About his notion of general negativity and bitterness? I thought it was rather a sensible thing to say. One has to question the motives of people who come here to showcase their brilliance by complaining how bad some parts of the game are. Specifically, I'm referring to those who only poke holes to the story and don't give a squat about helping others enjoy the game, however flawed some portions of it may be. While we might come across as a bit naive every now and then, it's really a part of the game. :innocent:

[tallon1982]

To me neither choice is right or wrong. I always just did whatever I felt like with the base. The first run I did I chose to keep it because it did seem valid considering the technology that the base has that could give more insight to the Reapers. The second run I destroyed it because I just wanted to see the outcome. I found that destroying it also is valid as the technology from the base could be more harmful than it seems. What I found interesting though is what the Shadow Broker says about just salvaging the tech from the remains of the base if you destroyed it. I always wondered if the Illusive Man had the same idea.

[Oblarg]

Jabarai wrote...

Oblarg wrote...

SmokeyPSD wrote...

... and how would the probe send information back?

It would go back through the relay, how else?  It has the IFF, after all.

Anything would be better than the utterly moronic course of action taken in the game.

You mean anything that would give away the element of surprise? I can't agree.

I'm going to ignore your last statement.

About his notion of general negativity and bitterness? I thought it was rather a sensible thing to say. One has to question the motives of people who come here to showcase their brilliance by complaining how bad some parts of the game are. Specifically, I'm referring to those who only poke holes to the story and don't give a squat about helping others enjoy the game, however flawed some portions of it may be. While we might come across as a bit naive every now and then, it's really a part of the game. :innocent:

The element of surprise?  When did I mention that?  No, throwing your best guy blindly through the relay at the enemy without attempting to gather intel first is idiotic.

The point of these forums is to discuss the game, not to "help others enjoy it."  I found the plot of ME2 to be supremely disappointing, why should I not be able to voice that?

[Oblarg]

TcheQ wrote...

Oblarg wrote...

Their plan B was based on creating a human reaper with the collectors, except the collectors have a grand total of one cruiser and would have no way of accomplishing this goal in the first place.  You can't dispute that this was their plan B, because Harbinger very clearly says in an angry voice "WE WILL FIND ANOTHER WAY!" at the end of the game, implying that the collectors were theit main hope for getting in through the citadel.

In addition to this, the logic of even making another Reaper is questionable - what makes the Reapers think a human reaper would fare any better than Sovereign and his Geth fleet?  Even if the Council ignores the Reaper threat, they're certainly going to build their fleets back up.  In addition, this time the reaper wouldn't have the advantage of having a pawn in the control room to open the citadel arms for it.  It makes absolutely no sense at all.

They left one of their own dead floating around in the galaxy just waiting to be discovered, and never bothered to give their collector base adequate defenses in the event that some future organic civilization would perhaps find a way to attack it.

Sovereign expressed utter disdain for organics in the first game, yet it turns out that Reapers are actually modeled after organics.  This might not make them look like idiots, per se, but it certainly doesn't make them seem as imposing as the game would like us to believe.

At present we don't know why they were even making another reaper.  One logical conclusion is that the only way to re-activate the Citadel is if a Reaper does it.  Why have they failed three times?  They underestimated organics (the collectors, then the humans).  If the reapers could foresee every eventuality, then there would be no game to play.  Their achilles heel is underestimation (in fact, you will probably see this plot device in every "stop the baddie" scenario).  If they were perfect (which they aren't they are simply created to believe they are the pinnacle of evolution).

To argue it further is a bit like saying "i don't enjoy mass effect because the physics are wrong".  Sure they are wrong, but does that make the game less fun?

There could be explanations for this.  Maybe the Mnemosyne reaper FTL communication system was destroyed when it was impacted.  We don't even know if TIM's sotry about finding the Reaper is legitimate (for all we know, he could be working under the shroud of  a creature that feeds off reapers or something O_O).
 
We know they are killable in other ways, like whatever doomsday weapon had been created to destroy that particular reaper.  Even if it is not explained in such detail in Mass Effect 3 I am willing to overlook the positioning of Mnemosyne Reaper for this reason, and because it was cool to get a throwback to MAss Effect  (you drive on a moon that revolves around a planet that has a scar cause by a Mass Effect weapon)

The last thing I would do is type out a knee-jerk reaction that every detail of ME hasn't been explained.  FTL isn't explained, and Mass Effect Relays aren't explained.  Biotic field barriers aren't explained.  We know what they do, but we don't need to know how they work (no amount of sci-fi writing will convince me)

One thing I am not entirely sure of is where the notion of "more reapers are coming'.  Where did that information come from?  HOw did they get the statistics on Harbinger?  There are a lot of questions I have, but I won't accuse the writers of being substandard if the details explained in ME3 don't meet my own standards of plot continuity.  For me, I've only ever taken on one at a time, more than one Nazara and everyone would be toast - it killed over eight thousand in mere minutes.  My view of the Reapers is still that of Vigils warning.  They are monnstrous in battle, but this doesn't mean they are of infinite intellect.  Until ME3 has been completed, we could run around in circles for days on end guessing what the Reaper's true intentions are, and until the final line of script has been published, I'm not going to judge whether the story has plotholes till then.

I think it simply boils down to a difference of opinion. You're willing to accept that the Reapers aren't nearly as formidable as was hinted at in the first game.  That's fine, and it makes the plot a good bit more coherent.  I, however, still think that the plot looses a lot of its value if that's the case.

[Haventh]

 I, and my Shepards believe the best course of action is to destroy the base. Since it is heavily collector technology, there is a huge chance, that they have a counter for it, just look at the mass relays, and how they turn that against them.

Wasting time understanding technology that is very likely to be uselss is stupid, it is far better to use resources into developing own technology, even though almost everything is based upon collector technology ,the understandings of how it works is the gateway to creating more advance, or technology that is on par with it.

Just look on the turians, they made a weapon from Sovereigns weapon, might be that they just duplicated it, but even with duplicating comes understanding.  

And look at the Normandy, with all upgrades, it tore through a collector ship like it was nothing (and collectors, must be very close to Reapers in technology, since they are servants of the Reapers). 

People are putting Reapers higher than they are, and so are the reapers, they have been "dormant" in dark space for a long time, i do in fact believe that the current organic races in the Mass Effect universe is not far from gettinng past the reapers in technology. 

And even though the Reapers are many, so are the organics... and there is Shepard, who is a symbol of hope, who inspires the galaxy to fight.

My, and my Shepard's second reason is that TIM is insane, a power munger, and his idea of human advancement goes on cost of other races, which is damaging to the fight against the reapers, giving the base to him is  imo an extremely bad idea. 

Modifié par Haventh, 31 octobre 2010 - 11:56 .

[chris025657]

Haventh wrote...

 I, and my Shepards believe the best course of action is to destroy the base. Since it is heavily collector technology, there is a huge chance, that they have a counter for it, just look at the mass relays, and how they turn that against them.

Wasting time understanding technology that is very likely to be uselss is stupid, it is far better to use resources into developing own technology, even though almost everything is based upon collector technology ,the understandings of how it works is the gateway to creating more advance, or technology that is on par with it.

Just look on the turians, they made a weapon from Sovereigns weapon, might be that they just duplicated it, but even with duplicating comes understanding.  

And look at the Normandy, with all upgrades, it tore through a collector ship like it was nothing (and collectors, must be very close to Reapers in technology, since they are servants of the Reapers). 

People are putting Reapers higher than they are, and so are the reapers, they have been "dormant" in dark space for a long time, i do in fact believe that the current organic races in the Mass Effect universe is not far from gettinng past the reapers in technology. 

And even though the Reapers are many, so are the organics... and there is Shepard, who is a symbol of hope, who inspires the galaxy to fight.

My, and my Shepard's second reason is that TIM is insane, a power munger, and his idea of human advancement goes on cost of other races, which is damaging to the fight against the reapers, giving the base to him is  imo an extremely bad idea. 

I don't think there is any underestimation of the Reapers. It took an entire Alliance fleet to destroy one Reaper with heavy casualties. Their weapons, shields, and engineering is significantly more advanced than anything any other species currently possesses. The multiple guns of Sovereign could tear through cruisers like tissue paper and the ship's structure is strong enough to blow through ships, conduct rapid turns, and land on planets. Not to mention designing and forging the mass relays as well as building the Citadel. No other species has come close to doing these things on their own. 

Your first few points seem to be self-contradictory. You recognize the usefulness of the studying Reaper technology such as the development of the Thanix cannon but you also say it is useless to study their technology. 

[Haventh]

The Thanix cannon study is completely different than an operational collector base (i stated that studying an operational base was too dangerous, it is completely different than studying small parts), for all we know, the collector base , as the reapers might also very likely have an indoctrination effect.



And as the Reaper technology, it is true that at the Battle of the Citadel, it tore trough the fleets, but just see how far Cerberus came by the end of Mass Effect 2, and for all we know, the Turians, Salarians and Asari might have gotten far as well (or the Hanar ++).



There are many unknown factors on the side of the organics, plus, there is also the Geth, who have technology that is different than the organics..



All though i appreciate your insight, my opinion still stands.

[chris025657]

Collider wrote...

Why I don't save the Collector Base:
1. Shepard has already demonstrated that the Reaper's plans are flawed.

What about this? This is just a premise without an argument attached. It is demonstrated several times that the Reaper's are not omniscient and their plans are fallible. One could make arguments for and against keeping the base from that premise.

2. Reaper technology has the ability to indoctrinate, even when appearing to be dormant. Case in point: the derelict reaper that had indoctrinated Cerberus personnel. High chance of backfiring. And, I don't trust Cerberus or TIM with technology that can mind control, something which they've attempted in the past. Not to mention, technology capable of creating new reapers. I don't think anyone should have that much power, let alone Cerberus.

I wouldn't peg this down as a Cerberus failure. For starters, they achieved far more than the Alliance team that only recognized a canyon that was created from a mass accelerator gun. The Cerberus team located the weapon, the derelict Reaper, and isolated its IFF. I don't think it was unreasonable to believe that a Reaper that was apparently killed millions of years ago would not still be capable of indoctrination.

After it's over however, Cerberus has now learned that lesson and is now aware of that threat. 

Besides, wouldn't it be useful to study indoctrination? Even though the Reapers successfully ambushed the Protheans, they still apparently chose to take their time isolating and infiltrating Prothean worlds with the indoctrinated. It could be useful to have a greater understanding of indoctrination for the upcoming Reaper war.

3. Cerberus' hilariously bad track record.

What about when Cerberus succeeds though? Like say, the medical miracle of bringing Shepard back from the dead, rebuilding and improving the most advanced ship in the galaxy, and funding and significantly supporting a successful mission against the Collectors.

[Jabarai]

Oblarg wrote...
The element of surprise?  When did I mention that?  No, throwing your best guy blindly through the relay at the enemy without attempting to gather intel first is idiotic.

You didn't, but I did. Should you send in recon probes beforehand, you'd probably lose the element of surprise and risk facing a well-prepared enemy. I'm not sure if that would've been the best option.

TIM knew they had the whole team and the best ship available for the suicide mission, so I can't see what's wrong with going in for a decisive strike.

The point of these forums is to discuss the game, not to "help others enjoy it."  I found the plot of ME2 to be supremely disappointing, why should I not be able to voice that?

You should be able to, that goes without saying, but you should at least try to assess the reasons for doing so. Constructive criticism is all good, but I somehow failed to see the constructive part in your posts. Maybe I didn't look close enough?

[guacamayus]

To me it comes down to what kind of playthrough Im currently playing, paragon = destroys the base, renegade = keeps it. Its actually very obvious; that kind of technology requieres harvesting an entire species, gather its genetic material to create some sort of construct, wich is pretty terryfying.

Playing as a renegade the choice becomes harder; keeping it sounds logical since there's almost nothing Shep. would do to stop the reaper threat but its also clear to me that TIB has a secret agenda and is using Shepard to achieve his own personal goals. It would be an intelligent move to destroy the base simply to prevent TIB from doing something incredibly crazy later xD

[SmokeyPSD]

... Why do people just assume using the base automatically means continuing on with the "harvesting". It doesn't make sense to me at all.

[wookieeassassin]

Smokey, I don't know either. There is nothing to indicate that in order to get anything out of the tech you'd have to start harvesting people.

I don't understand why there wasn't an option to have the Alliance and/or the Council come check it out. It makes it a ridiculously binary decision to either destroy it or just give it to Cerberus. This is kind of like how Shepard didn't try to ask the Alliance or the Council for help at all before starting to work with Cerberus.

Why hasn't Shepard just strapped a video recording device to his armor for all the missions he goes on so he has proof of all this **** he goes through? I guess people could still argue that the video was created by advanced video creation software and isn't real, but still.

Modifié par wookieeassassin, 19 novembre 2010 - 11:14 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Video isn't indisputable evidence. It's neither immune from forgery and tampering (and blatant creation), nor does it verify that what is shown is in fact accurate and true.