281 réponses à ce sujet

[Gibb_Shepard]

Its all about morals. I dislike the paragon line because it assumes i'm destroying the base because of some kind of moral high ground, which i'm not, it's more about distrust and the things that could happen if all were to go to hell.



I'm guessing the renegade line is the same. Keeping the base with all those million liquified humans is morally screwed in the game.

[adam_grif]

So, a book is only a book, a movie is a only a movie and study is only study?

You can't actually learn something from them?

We are talking about a game, OK, but the question OP did is a rather good one.



I understand what you are saying, because ME2 is shallow, nothing we do affects Shepard directly and this is very frustrating.

Of course we can find better examples for discussing the subject - Star Trek series has better philosophical and ethical discussions than the two ME games - but this not invalidate the question.

I have NFI what you are talking about. All I'm saying is that the consequences of your actions in game will not matter in the long run because the game must be winnable as "The good guys". Every Bioware game in history has been, and giving Paragon players the finger by making them unable to win the game in ME3 would be alienating more than 50% of their fanbase because most players are Paragon players.



I said nothing about the aesthetic, cultural or philosophical value of the game.

[Lumikki]

Yeah, the problem is that TIM can't be trusted, because Cerberus doesn't have any moral codes in they behavior. Only think what Cerberus pursued is they own (human) goals as survive. It's like end goal will justify any means as necessary. It's in build ideology it's okey to be "monster" as long you self survive.

So, paragon way is more like you can't sacrifice your moral humanity just to survive, because what's the point of surviving, if you become like they who you are fighting agaist.

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 octobre 2010 - 07:23 .

[Eyesofjon]

Maybe because using technology that's directly linked to the Reapers often ends with indoctrination. That seems like a good enough reason to blow the base for me

[Ieldra]

Ryzaki wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...

I think both the paragon and renegade lines in this decision were ridiculous and poorly written.

This. 

The whole "soul of our species" line made me facepalm. 

Really Paragon Shep? It can't be the risk of indoctrination, the risk of what TIM might do with it, the probability of backfiring? Nope. The "soul" of our species. >_> 

QFT.
That stupid line broke my roleplaying. It's something I'd never, ever put into the mouth of any of my Shepards. The worst thing is that you get it even if you keep the base (!!!). IIRC, you avoid it only if you tell TIM to shut up. On both paths.

[Ieldra]

Lumikki wrote...
It's in build ideology it's okey to be "monster" as long you self survive. So, paragon way is more like you can't sacrifice your moral humanity just to survive, because what's the point of surviving, if you become like they who you are fighting agaist.

The point of survival is

(1) that all life wants to survive, and if we tell ourselves there are things more important than survival and act on that we'll have proven that the human species is not viable by making itself extinct through its own decision. Survival - of the species, not the individual - is what all other values are contingent on.

(2) that you'll survive to a time where you don't need to be a monster anymore. There is an underlying assumption "once a monster, always a monster" at work here which simply isn't true.

[Katamariguy]

iakus wrote...
 It's the best I can think of since even I, a firm paragon, can't believe Cerberus would make their own Reapers, unless it turned out to be way easier than it seems.

Read Retribution. Ironically, that's exactly what happens.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...

I think both the paragon and renegade lines in this decision were ridiculous and poorly written.

This. 

The whole "soul of our species" line made me facepalm. 

Really Paragon Shep? It can't be the risk of indoctrination, the risk of what TIM might do with it, the probability of backfiring? Nope. The "soul" of our species. >_> 

QFT.
That stupid line broke my roleplaying. It's something I'd never, ever put into the mouth of any of my Shepards. The worst thing is that you get it even if you keep the base (!!!). IIRC, you avoid it only if you tell TIM to shut up. On both paths.

The main thing that confused me with the Paragon answer is "I won't let fear compromise who I am"... which is exactly what he ended up doing... fear of TIM compromised who he usually was (which was using every tech and teaming up with the most dangerous, (oft-times unstable-but-skilled) group he could find to stop the Reaper threat...with the Collector Mission being a counter-offensive).

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 21 octobre 2010 - 08:45 .

[Ryzaki]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...

I think both the paragon and renegade lines in this decision were ridiculous and poorly written.

This. 

The whole "soul of our species" line made me facepalm. 

Really Paragon Shep? It can't be the risk of indoctrination, the risk of what TIM might do with it, the probability of backfiring? Nope. The "soul" of our species. >_> 

QFT.
That stupid line broke my roleplaying. It's something I'd never, ever put into the mouth of any of my Shepards. The worst thing is that you get it even if you keep the base (!!!). IIRC, you avoid it only if you tell TIM to shut up. On both paths.

The main thing that confused me with the Paragon answer is "I won't let fear compromise who I am"... which is exactly what he ended up doing... fear of TIM compromised who he usually was (which was using every tech and teaming up with the most dangerous, (oft-times unstable-but-skilled) group he could find to stop the Reaper threat...with the Collector Mission being a counter-offensive).

How does worry about indoctrination and TIM abusing reaper tech = fear? 

In that case the Renegade path is based off fear that you can't defeat the reapers without said tech. 

[AresXX7]

Katamariguy wrote...

iakus wrote...
 It's the best I can think of since even I, a firm paragon, can't believe Cerberus would make their own Reapers, unless it turned out to be way easier than it seems.

Read Retribution. Ironically, that's exactly what happens.

I wonder if it was to quell the assumptions that it will happen in the game. (just have it be done & over with before ME3 comes out)

I can't help, but feel, that the ending of that book is going to be used as a 'loophole' for the CB decision. If you kept the base, you'll get a certain amount of tech info from it. If you destroyed the base, an equal amount of info will come from Grayson's body. (since they ambiguously said the Reaper tech, used on Grayson, came from the CB)

Which is how they might try to keep both sides, of the base decision, on equal footing against the Reapers in ME3.

Just a thought.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ryzaki wrote...

How does worry about indoctrination and TIM abusing reaper tech = fear? 

In that case the Renegade path is based off fear that you can't defeat the reapers without said tech. 

If indoctrination is the worry, the Reapers will be bringing it... If you choose not to study it, you will be an ignorant victim of it.  Destroying the base and missing an opportunity to study and counteract it goes hand in hand .  Because it should be remembered that there's really nothing about the Reapers currently available for study that hasn't already been sucked dry.

The thought of TIM doing something abusive with the tech compromised the fact that there is ABSOLUTELY NO ANSWER currently for stopping the Reapers and their primary weapon of Indoctrination.   Realizing this is not fear, just common knowledge.

The fear is not trusting TIM.  It's a fact that we're not ready yet to face the Reapers... and a galaxy united won't hold in the face of massive Indoctrination.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 21 octobre 2010 - 09:07 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Katamariguy wrote...

iakus wrote...
 It's the best I can think of since even I, a firm paragon, can't believe Cerberus would make their own Reapers, unless it turned out to be way easier than it seems.

Read Retribution. Ironically, that's exactly what happens.

That's not what happens, Grayson was not a Reaper, he was an indoctrinated human being.

[Lumikki]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
It's in build ideology it's okey to be "monster" as long you self survive. So, paragon way is more like you can't sacrifice your moral humanity just to survive, because what's the point of surviving, if you become like they who you are fighting agaist.

(1) that all life wants to survive, and if we tell ourselves there are things more important than survival and act on that we'll have proven that the human species is not viable by making itself extinct through its own decision. Survival - of the species, not the individual - is what all other values are contingent on.

Yes, of course most lifeorms would want to live, but intelligent species can also sacrifice them self to behave of others. Meaning they can value something else more than they own life. Also is it about one species or multible species. Example TIM is about one species (humans), but paragon is about multible species.

(2) that you'll survive to a time where you don't need to be a monster anymore. There is an underlying assumption "once a monster, always a monster" at work here which simply isn't true.

You can change your self, but you can't erase you past. Past has allways consequences in you future, if you think other ways, you are living in dream world. Example do you think killers past has no affect the future even how the person has change.

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 octobre 2010 - 09:06 .

[Ryzaki]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

My Shepard is going to find another way. There

Ryzaki wrote...

How does worry about indoctrination and TIM abusing reaper tech = fear? 

In that case the Renegade path is based off fear that you can't defeat the reapers without said tech. 

If indoctrination is the worry, the Reapers will be bringing it... If you choose not to study it, you will be an ignorant victim of it.  Destroying the base and missing an opportunity to study and counteract it goes hand in hand .  Because it should be remembered that there's really nothing about the Reapers currently available for study that hasn't already been sucked dry.

The thought of TIM doing something abusive with the tech compromised the fact that there is ABSOLUTELY NO ANSWER currently for stopping the Reapers and their primary weapon of Indoctrination.   Realizing this is not fear, just common knowledge.

The fear is not trusting TIM.  It's a fact that we're not ready yet to face the Reapers... and a galaxy united won't hold in the face of massive Indoctrination.

Right thanks for telling me how to roleplay. 

Because there's absolutely no way for both our views to be valid of course. <_<

And your fear is that you can't find another way. After all the only decision either Shep makes is based off "fear" after all. 

The weapons you have to get into the collector base didn't come from it. They were based off the reaper technology we already have. So we have weapons at the current moment that can hurt them. The concern of indoctrination and TIM are perfectly valid concerns. One makes the base practically useless and the other places it in the hands of a man who will do anything to come out on top. 

But Paragon's and Renegades are taking chances. This whole "my chance is better than yours" is self preference. 

Edit: Since when did the Reapers cast Indoctrination waves indiscriminately? Everytime I saw it used it was on people in close contact with them or certain technologies. 

Did I miss something? 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 21 octobre 2010 - 09:12 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ryzaki wrote...
Right thanks for telling me how to roleplay. 

Because there's absolutely no way for both our views to be valid of course. <_<

And your fear is that you can't find another way. After all the only decision either Shep makes is based off "fear" after all. 

lol I wasn't implying how to roleplay (sorry if that's what you got from it), was only going off of the events of the game.  Against the Collectors, we studied them and adapted their technologies so we could safeguard against them and attack their homeworld.  TIM also did not abuse this information.

And I never said your opinion to destroy the base wasn't a valid choice... I just said the line "I won't let fear compromise who I am" excuse is a contradiction.

You never give the line "I won't let fear compromise who I am" if you keep the base.

[Ryzaki]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

lol I wasn't implying how to roleplay (sorry if that's what you got from it), was only going off of the events of the game.  Against the Collectors, we studied them and adapted their technologies so we could safeguard against them and attack their homeworld.  TIM also did not abuse this information.

And I never said your opinion to destroy the base wasn't a valid choice... I just said the line "I won't let fear compromise who I am" excuse is a contradiction.

You never give the line "I won't let fear compromise who I am" if you keep the base.

I hated that line. If I had a choice my Shep wouldn't have said it. Where the heck is the neutral option when you need it! 

Shep: "I won't let fear compromise who I am!" 

Me: WTF does that have to do with anything? /facepalm

It was almost as bad as the "soul of our species" line. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 21 octobre 2010 - 09:19 .

[Ieldra]

Lumikki wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
It's in build ideology it's okey to be "monster" as long you self survive. So, paragon way is more like you can't sacrifice your moral humanity just to survive, because what's the point of surviving, if you become like they who you are fighting agaist.

(1) that all life wants to survive, and if we tell ourselves there are things more important than survival and act on that we'll have proven that the human species is not viable by making itself extinct through its own decision. Survival - of the species, not the individual - is what all other values are contingent on.

Yes, of course most lifeorms would want to live, but intelligent species can also sacrifice them self to behave of others. Meaning they can value something else more than they own life. Also is it about one species or multible species. Example TIM is about one species (humans), but paragon is about multible species.

Yes, but that sacrifice means nothing if *nobody* survives as the result. To sacrifice yourself for the greater good is admirable, but to endanger all life for a moral principle is evil.

(2) that you'll survive to a time where you don't need to be a monster anymore. There is an underlying assumption "once a monster, always a monster" at work here which simply isn't true.

You can change your self, but you can't erase you past. Past has allways consequences in you future, if you think other ways, you are living in dream world. Example do you think killers past has no affect the future even how the person has change.

If I had to live with remorse for what I had to do for the rest of my life, but saved life in the galaxy in the process, I would consider it a fair deal and would continue to live, if not exactly happy, at least content. If sacrificing a moral principle is what it takes to survive, then someone must do it. Moral principles held by an individual are not worth more than survival of all life in the galaxy.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 21 octobre 2010 - 09:22 .

[Lumikki]

Ryzaki wrote...

Shep: "I won't let fear compromise who I am!"

I did not have any problem with that line. Basicly it means that fear of our species to be killed, should not be excuse to do something, what can change hole species to something else. Like TIM is trying to geneticly improve humans so that they can survive better. It's about sacrificing moral consepts, because fear of dead.

[Ryzaki]

Lumikki wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Shep: "I won't let fear compromise who I am!"

I did not have any problem with that line. Basicly it means that fear of our species to be killed, should not be excuse to do something, what can change hole species to something else. Like TIM is trying to geneticly improve humans so that they can survive better. It's about sacrificing moral consepts, because fear of dead.

I just wish they had left a more neutral. "Uh...no. The last time we did something similar to this it did not go well. I'm not cleaning up another mess." 

I mean honestly. Was that too much to ask? 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 21 octobre 2010 - 09:29 .

[Lumikki]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Yes, but that sacrifice means nothing if *nobody* survives as the result. To sacrifice yourself for the greater good is admirable, but to endanger all life for a moral principle is evil.

It means you "died with boots on". It's about dying with dignity as not sacrificing what you are.

If I had to live with remorse for what I had to do for the rest of my life, but saved life in the galaxy in the process, I would consider it a fair deal and would continue to live, if not exactly happy, at least content. If sacrificing a moral principle is what it takes to survive, then someone must do it. Moral principles held by an individual are not worth more than survival of all life in the galaxy.

You assume people who live in that galaxy is same as before. Meaning did you actually save them or cause them to become travesty image of what the speciecies use to be. Did you become what you where fighting in first place. Meaning did you also count what you lost or just thinking that been alive is only valuable what's required to be saved. Sometimes cost can be too high.

Also who sayes the other choise leads in dead at all.

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 octobre 2010 - 09:43 .

[Lumikki]

Ryzaki wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Shep: "I won't let fear compromise who I am!"

I did not have any problem with that line. Basicly it means that fear of our species to be killed, should not be excuse to do something, what can change hole species to something else. Like TIM is trying to geneticly improve humans so that they can survive better. It's about sacrificing moral consepts, because fear of dead.

I just wish they had left a more neutral. "Uh...no. The last time we did something similar to this it did not go well. I'm not cleaning up another mess." 

I mean honestly. Was that too much to ask? 

Biowares choises often miss other options what player could do, meaning they are little too much, this or that ways, without enough other possibilities. So, it wasn't too much to ask...

[frozngecko]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

1) How did getting the Reaper IFF do more harm to our ability to fight the Collectors than good? Since that is the baseline you are using.

2) The Reaper intention was for us to get to the Citadel, be at a certain tech point (not even path, considering the galactic variation between cycles, but point), and then die. The Reaper paths had an end point in mind.

None of which matters to the question of what rule?

The rule I'm talking about is his morals and beliefs. Shepard was willing to throw away his mistrust for Cerberus and the Illusive Man with the Collector Tech. The bigger threat is the incoming Reapers. Keeping the base intact means giving more power to Cerberus, an avowed enemy of the Citadel. Let's just say the Reaper threat dies out. What would happen if Cerberus tries to take power using the Collector Tech? The Renegade option is renegade because it gives Cerberus, a terrorist organization under Citadel and Alliance politics, more power. The Paragon option keeps Cerberus as a power player in universal politics (Citadel/Alliance politics) but not as an powerful back-stabbing force of nature.

however, my reasoning (the two points) is what I believe explains the Paragon Shepard's thinking on blowing up the ship.

1) It's not about the IFF, it's about how you find out about where to get it. The way Cerberus knew about an inactive Reaper was through the fact that a research team was put on the Reaper and they disappeared, only for Shepard to discover that the team was indoctrinated. Since Reapers are created by the DNA-metal hybrid of the species they "represent," they somehow have this ability to eventually indoctrinate people over time. The Collector ship and Collectors look about as organic as this hybrid fluid and I believe that the organic look of the ship could present consequences similar to or worse than indoctrination for a research team trying to extract the tech.

2) The reliance on tech that you mention is hitting it dead on, however, there needs more explanation. The Reapers wanted us to rely on any of their tech so that it will be easier to control and harvest us. This thinking is due in part to the fact that if we did not have this tech, we would be relying on coming up with technology on our own which has the possibility to surpass Reaper Tech (Legion and the "real" geth believe in this kind of thinking). Think about Saren, for example. His reliance on Reaper tech to further his goal to defeat the human race eventually turned him into essentially a Collector. It's not just the relays that the Reapers want us to use; they want us to use any kind of tech from them.

[GuardianAngel470]

The morality of the decision was never a factor for me so I agree, the paragon line is indeed foolish.



I have never kept the base simply because I don't trust Cerberus with it. It isn't a moral question but one of practicality. I am having trouble finding a single Cerberus operation that didn't go horribly wrong. The Rachni, husks, thorian creepers, Jack, Lazarus (face it, all but three of the people on that station died), EDI (totally betrayed TIM in favor of Paragade Shep), and even the Normandy (You are replacing my ship with an identically protected ship even though the last one was vaporized? Lack of forethought?).



I simply haven't heard the line in question so I can't say whether it makes any sense.

[tallinn]

Lumikki wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Shep: "I won't let fear compromise who I am!"

I did not have any problem with that line. Basicly it means that fear of our species to be killed, should not be excuse to do something, what can change hole species to something else. Like TIM is trying to geneticly improve humans so that they can survive better. It's about sacrificing moral consepts, because fear of dead.

You may as well say "should be no excuse to change your species into something worth to be killed." A variant of committing suicide in fear of death. Nowadays we are doing that every time we restrict our freedom for the purpose of protecting it.

However, in the given situation it does not work well, as just keeping the base is not such a bad thing on its own. Let even base destroyers assume for a moment that TIM is not "close to the devil" but a trustworthy, honorable man (actually he isn't anything of that). No problem to hand the base over to such a guy. Auschwitz, still being the place where you can loose both your belief in God and in humanity, if you are not careful, wasn't destroyed either, but remains to teach us something.