160 réponses à ce sujet

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

@Yakko, don't get me wrong and whilst I can't speak for Dean, but from what he has said it is obvious he knows that yes Cerberus HAS done bad things in the past and yes TIM might end up turning on us (though there had better be a proper explanation for it other than "muahaha I am evil", which I doubt Bioware would do but you never know).



It just doesn't change the fact that they did save Shep and did believe the whole reaper threat when the council is doing their best to dismiss it.



I would seriously doubt their is any of the organisations/groups/races that could truly say they haven't done things which are wrong. I find it silly all the talk of people saying Cerberus needs completely removing. If TIM is bad, all that needs doing is him removing and someone better putting in charge because it is obvious that not everyone in Cerberus is 'evil' as some narrowminded people seem to think ,not saying you do Yakko, but there are some on the forum that do.



@Xilizhra Regarding point 2. Yeah it would have been nice, but to some extent, I think the fact it is Cerberus adds a whole lot more to the story than had it been STG or some other group.

[Xilizhra]

@Xilizhra Regarding point 2. Yeah it would have been nice, but to some extent, I think the fact it is Cerberus adds a whole lot more to the story than had it been STG or some other group.

I would rather that it have been the Shadow Broker, and that Cerberus was truer to its ME1 characterization (and that they were eventually revealed to be a fifth column for the Reapers, optionally).

[DTKT]

Kill em all!



!

[aksoileau]

Cerberus actually gets decimated in the latest ME novel which takes place after ME2. It talks about how it will take years to recover.

[JockBuster]

DTKT wrote...

Kill em all! !

YES! Save Jack, then turn her loose against TIM etc. Save Zaeed and let him help her. Reunite with Kaidan and have him help Shepard and Grunt (your favorite squadmate here) finish them off.

[Yakko77]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...

@Yakko, don't get me wrong and whilst I can't speak for Dean, but from what he has said it is obvious he knows that yes Cerberus HAS done bad things in the past and yes TIM might end up turning on us (though there had better be a proper explanation for it other than "muahaha I am evil", which I doubt Bioware would do but you never know).

It just doesn't change the fact that they did save Shep and did believe the whole reaper threat when the council is doing their best to dismiss it.

I would seriously doubt their is any of the organisations/groups/races that could truly say they haven't done things which are wrong. I find it silly all the talk of people saying Cerberus needs completely removing. If TIM is bad, all that needs doing is him removing and someone better putting in charge because it is obvious that not everyone in Cerberus is 'evil' as some narrowminded people seem to think ,not saying you do Yakko, but there are some on the forum that do.

So working with Cerberus is sort of an, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of thing?  That's kind of the mindset I have at least as I travel around the galaxy with a Cerberus crew and ship.  Also, given that much of the Cerberus crew of SR2 is there mainly to fight the Reapers and had nothing to do with their past crimes does at least make it possible Cerberus can be redeemed though I still think that would require the removal of TIM one way or another in order for that redemption to be genuine.

[Dean_the_Young]

Yakko77 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yakko77 wrote...

Peuhkis wrote...

Encarmine wrote...
Cerberus on behalf of the Alliance has already saved the galaxy, your all just too slow to relise it. yet.

This.

Yeah, and they'll KILL you if it suits their purpose in some experiement to make that happen.

And does that changes what you quoted in any way?

Salvation comes with a cost. In the case of the Collectors and their threat, that cost is Cerberus. All things considered, there have been far greater costs for far less meaningful gains than Cerberus and the sum total of all their crimes.

So it's OK for Cerberus to save humanity when their actions clearly show they have no humanity?

There was no way for Cerberus to gain useful intelligence and other advances without committing acts of atrocity?  Cerberus had NO CHOICE but to experiment with (costing countless innocent lives in the process) with Rachni, Thorian Creepers, Thresher Maws, Overlord, Husks, murdering an Alliance Admiral, etc etc etc.

Did I say, support, imply, or defend any such thing in the above... three sentences?

Because if not, it really sounds like you're responding to a whole lot of positions I did not make.

You're saying all that and likely more is morally justifiable?

It depends. Does your morality both consider all lives equal and also place life above all else?

If so, Cerberus is morally justified because, because for all the harm they've been responsible for, it's far, far, far outnumbered and outweighed by the lives they've saved. We can take all of Cerberus's past actions and consequences, wildly inflate the body toll past all reasonable expectations, let's say for the sake of hyperbolic number exageration that Cerberus is responsible for fifty thousand deaths. In one Cerberus operation alone, Horizon, Cerberus saved ten times that hyperbolic number, half a million people.

Horizon alone, mind you: the opportunity costs (benefits) of the number of other colonies not attacked, because Cerberus brought Shepard back and worked hand in hand with him to stop the Collectors from not only attacking more colonies but also Earth itself, a planet with a population in the tens of billions. The rest of the Human Terminus Colonies, Earth, and any other places aren't being considered. Cerberus is responsible for, at the most diminished ratio, saving a magnitude more people than they ever killed. Just from one known act of good, mind you.

On a morality that considers life the most important thing, above everything else? Above politics? Above lesser ethics? Yes, Cerberus isunquestionably  morally justified.

If that is not your moral stance, than of course the answer is charged. Their are other moralities in which Cerberus is justified. There are moralities in which it is not.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 20 décembre 2010 - 07:17 .

[Yakko77]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
*snip*

You mention that the actions of Cerberus have saved far more lives than they cost regarding the Collector/Reaper threat yet many if not most of those past crimes were carried out BEFORE they began their effort to fight  the Reapers.  Those crimes were carried out to achieve some other end, not to save the humanity or even the galaxy from the Repaers.

It's like some sicko saying he tortured and did cruel experiements on animals but then had a change of heart, became a verternarian and that somehow justifies all those past acts given that he is now a veternarian.  That's a broad generalization to be sure but the best I  could come up with on the spot.

[Xilizhra]

I think what he's saying is that, overall, Cerberus has done more good than harm; not that it doesn't deserve to be held accountable for its darker actions.

[Yakko77]

Xilizhra wrote...

I think what he's saying is that, overall, Cerberus has done more good than harm; not that it doesn't deserve to be held accountable for its darker actions.

Yeah, the mere act of even fighting the Reapers let alone bringing back Shepard gives them a LOT of points but it just seems a lot are trying to dismiss or justify their past acts as for the greater good of this fight when they weren't carried out for this fight.

I  guess I'm arguing semantics in that regard but it is important given Sheps past history fighting Cerberus.

[Xilizhra]

Rest assured, I'll end Cerberus as soon as possible, assuming that doing so doesn't lead to the Reapers destroying everything.

[klossen4]

if there is a reaper virus in me3 i will burn the world

[Dean_the_Young]

Yakko77 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
*snip*

You mention that the actions of Cerberus have saved far more lives than they cost regarding the Collector/Reaper threat yet many if not most of those past crimes were carried out BEFORE they began their effort to fight  the Reapers.  Those crimes were carried out to achieve some other end, not to save the humanity or even the galaxy from the Repaers.

No, there weren't carried out with the Reapers in mind. They were carried out with other threats and potential catastrophes in mind. Cerberus exists to prepare for 'worst case' contingencies. They aren't baseless concerns either.

It's like some sicko saying he tortured and did cruel experiements on animals but then had a change of heart, became a verternarian and that somehow justifies all those past acts given that he is now a veternarian.  That's a broad generalization to be sure but the best I  could come up with on the spot.

It says nothing of the sort. Where on earth do you get that those past actions are automatically justified from that?


This is all aside from the debatable justification of individual Cerberus projects, mind you.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

I think what he's saying is that, overall, Cerberus has done more good than harm; not that it doesn't deserve to be held accountable for its darker actions.

Huzah!

Xil, I love you. At times. In a totally platonic way. But this is totally one of those times.

[Zulu_DFA]

Xilizhra wrote...
I would rather that it have been the Shadow Broker, and that Cerberus was truer to its ME1 characterization (and that they were eventually revealed to be a fifth column for the Reapers, optionally).

Lol at how things turned agaist what you'd rather have:

Cerberus = saviors of the Galaxy (if only for their ulterior humanist motives)
Shadow Broker = fifth column of the Reapers.

Note: persoanlly, I could see both coming ever since my first ME1playthrough.

But what is that "ME1 characterisation" ME2 Cerberus isn't true enough too? That they are an Alliance Black Ops cabal? Check out the you-know-which thread, there are tons of facts now in the OP, that make it truer than ever!

Xilizhra wrote...

Rest assured, I'll end Cerberus as soon
as possible, assuming that doing so doesn't lead to the Reapers
destroying everything.

And you will know that how? I mean, you repeat a lot how you'd like to get rid of Cerberus before the final showdown with the Reapers. I understand that you're a little afraid that ME3 will end with the Reaper battle, aren't you?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 20 décembre 2010 - 08:45 .

[Xilizhra]

I actually agree with you in Cerberus still working for the Alliance, though in my case, instead of supporting Cerberus, it made me lose faith in the Alliance.



And yes, it is irritating. Cerberus was a bunch of straight-up villains in ME1, while the Shadow Broker was an intriguing, neutral figure that would have been quite interesting to work for... they seem to have switched in ME2.

[Yakko77]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yakko77 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
*snip*

You mention that the actions of Cerberus have saved far more lives than they cost regarding the Collector/Reaper threat yet many if not most of those past crimes were carried out BEFORE they began their effort to fight  the Reapers.  Those crimes were carried out to achieve some other end, not to save the humanity or even the galaxy from the Repaers.

No, there weren't carried out with the Reapers in mind. They were carried out with other threats and potential catastrophes in mind. Cerberus exists to prepare for 'worst case' contingencies. They aren't baseless concerns either.

It's like some sicko saying he tortured and did cruel experiements on animals but then had a change of heart, became a verternarian and that somehow justifies all those past acts given that he is now a veternarian.  That's a broad generalization to be sure but the best I  could come up with on the spot.

It says nothing of the sort. Where on earth do you get that those past actions are automatically justified from that?


This is all aside from the debatable justification of individual Cerberus projects, mind you.

"Cerberus is morally justified because for all the harm they've been responsible for, it's
far, far, far outnumbered and outweighed by the lives they've saved. " 

Your words, now let's examine them.

Cerberus has saved only one person, Shepard, and s/he's the one who saved all those people, not Cerberus.   The only thing Cerberus/TIM has right is that they're not in denial about the Reaper threat like the Alliance/Council is. Cerberus saved Shepard for their own ends ultimately though Shepard saving the galaxy so they can attain those ends is a nice benefit for them to be sure.  Again, Cerberus is not saving the galaxy for the sake of the galaxy.  They're saving it for THEMSELVES, or at least TIM is.  The man is a megalomaniac of the highest order and there's nothing about the guy which is noble or morally justafiable.  Sorry, but when you use the words, "morally justified" and "Cerberus" in the same sentence, I'm going to question that.

In what way did any of those horrific experiements which cost all those lives contribute to saving Horizon or bringing Shepard back? 

Did Cerberus experiments on Rachni save Horizon or bring back Shepard?  No, it merely cost countless people their lives.
Thorian Creepers?  Same answer.
Thresher Maws?  Same answer.
Husks?  Same answer.
How about murdering an Allance Admiral investigating the murder of his unit?  Did that save Horizon or help bring Shepard back?  Nope.
How about the experiement at Overlord?  How many lives saved there playing God?  Any?  Nope, just more dead people and one tortured autistic kid.

It'd be one thing if all those things somehow contributed to helping the galaxy from the Reaper threat but overwhelmingly they're just abuses of power and playing God which blows up in the face of Cerberus and Shepard, not Cerberus themselves, is the one who has the clean up the mess.

No more messes.  Once the Reapers are taken care of, Cerberus is next.


As usual I'm probably just misreading things and hopefully the calm reason of Xilizhra will come in and clarify things!

[Dean_the_Young]

Cerberus didn't have enough characterization to be villains. We knew just about three things: They were rogue (but not why), they did some bad things (but not why), and some of the things they did do turned out bad (but, again, not why they did).

[Zulu_DFA]

Xilizhra wrote...

I actually agree with you in Cerberus still working for the Alliance, though in my case, instead of supporting Cerberus, it made me lose faith in the Alliance.

Yeah, yeah, we know, you think that Aliens > Humans.

Xilizhra wrote...
And yes, it is irritating. Cerberus was a bunch of straight-up villains in ME1, while the Shadow Broker was an intriguing, neutral figure that would have been quite interesting to work for... they seem to have switched in ME2.

That was the catch. They switched nothing. I knew from the first conversation with Barla Von that the Shadow Broker was bad (or, in your terminlogy, "evil"). Because making the Galaxy stagnate is bad. Later in the game (when I finally believed in the Reparers' existence myself) I realised that it's what they want -- make the Galaxy stagnate. Cerberus, on the other hand, was clearly rocking the boat with it's Human super-soldier program.

[luakel]

Xilizhra wrote...
And yes, it is irritating. Cerberus was a bunch of straight-up villains in ME1, while the Shadow Broker was an intriguing, neutral figure that would have been quite interesting to work for... they seem to have switched in ME2.

They're still pretty bad in the books, so the change either didn't carry across all aspects of ME or it wasn't meant to. I think they look better in ME2 because a) TIM's being nice to Shepard to make sure s/he doesn't go running back to the Alliance/Council, and  TIM loaded the Normandy up with ex-Alliance personnel, non-xenophobes, the crewman who's family is "conveniently" rescued by Cerberus just in time. In effect, TIM made sure that Cerberus gets a lot of Pet The Dog moments in Shepard's (and thus, the player's) eyes. Doesn't mean the same nastiness isn't going on behind scenes.

Why not just have a DLC for those who want Cerberus gone so badly? That way they can have the satisfaction in putting a bullet in TIM's head, and the DLC can be set to only trigger once Cerberus has no more role to play in ME3's plot. And if you like Cerberus, don't buy the DLC.

[Lord Phoebus]

The way I see Cerberus is as the CIA, Mossad, KGB, MI6 ... of Humanity. Just as those organizations have done a lot of evil and sometimes downright stupid things in the name of defending the interests of their nations, as long as other nations have similar organizations they might be a necessary evil. Yeah, it's really hard to find a positive result from the operations of any of these organizations, but we need them for the counterintelligence atleast.



Do you think the salarians don't use the STG to perform operations for the betterment of the salarians at the expense of other races? Heck, you hear Moridin tell you that the rest of the universe sees humans as excellent test subjects due to their genetic variation. He says he never used humans that way, but you know his assistant did and who knows how many other alien scientists have? You meet supremascists from a few of the races over the first two MEs. It seems that Cerberus is a neccessary balance against hostile operations from these races. That doesn't mean that they don't need checks and balances and to be called out on some of the things they've done, but to get rid of them would be to ignore the realpolitik.

[Dean_the_Young]

Yakko77 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Yakko77 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
*snip*

You mention that the actions of Cerberus have saved far more lives than they cost regarding the Collector/Reaper threat yet many if not most of those past crimes were carried out BEFORE they began their effort to fight  the Reapers.  Those crimes were carried out to achieve some other end, not to save the humanity or even the galaxy from the Repaers.

No, there weren't carried out with the Reapers in mind. They were carried out with other threats and potential catastrophes in mind. Cerberus exists to prepare for 'worst case' contingencies. They aren't baseless concerns either.

It's like some sicko saying he tortured and did cruel experiements on animals but then had a change of heart, became a verternarian and that somehow justifies all those past acts given that he is now a veternarian.  That's a broad generalization to be sure but the best I  could come up with on the spot.

It says nothing of the sort. Where on earth do you get that those past actions are automatically justified from that?


This is all aside from the debatable justification of individual Cerberus projects, mind you.

"Cerberus is morally justified because for all the harm they've been responsible for, it's
far, far, far outnumbered and outweighed by the lives they've saved. " 

Your words, now let's examine them.

Cerberus has saved only one person, Shepard, and s/he's the one who saved all those people, not Cerberus.   The only thing Cerberus/TIM has right is that they're not in denial about the Reaper threat like the Alliance/Council is. Cerberus saved Shepard for their own ends ultimately though Shepard saving the galaxy so they can attain those ends is a nice benefit for them to be sure.  Again, Cerberus is not saving the galaxy for the sake of the galaxy.  They're saving it for THEMSELVES, or at least TIM is.  The man is a megalomaniac of the highest order and there's nothing about the guy which is noble or morally justafiable.  Sorry, but when you use the words, "morally justified" and "Cerberus" in the same sentence, I'm going to question that.

In what way did any of those horrific experiements which cost all those lives contribute to saving Horizon or bringing Shepard back? 

Did Cerberus experiments on Rachni save Horizon or bring back Shepard?  No, it merely cost countless people their lives.
Thorian Creepers?  Same answer.
Thresher Maws?  Same answer.
Husks?  Same answer.
How about murdering an Allance Admiral investigating the murder of his unit?  Did that save Horizon or help bring Shepard back?  Nope.
How about the experiement at Overlord?  How many lives saved there playing God?  Any?  Nope, just more dead people and one tortured autistic kid.

It'd be one thing if all those things somehow contributed to helping the galaxy from the Reaper threat but overwhelmingly they're just abuses of power and playing God which blows up in the face of Cerberus and Shepard, not Cerberus themselves, is the one who has the clean up the mess.

No more messes.  Once the Reapers are taken care of, Cerberus is next.


As usual I'm probably just misreading things and hopefully the calm reason of Xilizhra will come in and clarify things!

Indeed you are. It starts in the first sentence you quoted, actually, and generally continues throughout your entire post. Cerberus, the organization, can be morally justified without morally justifying every one of their actions. (Not that your arguments about their actions were very sound either, mind you but that's neither here or now.)

There is no inherent link between the justification of a group and its actions. An unjustified group can do justifiable actions. A justified group can do unjustifiable actions. There is no inherency in that unjusitifed actions make a group unjustifiable, or that a justified group can only do justified actions.

[Xilizhra]

As usual I'm probably just misreading things and hopefully the calm reason of Xilizhra will come in and clarify things!

Always. But I think I'll just reiterate my earlier point.

1. Cerberus is evil. What they've done is easily enough to justify the destruction of their organization and the arrest of its leaders and many members.

2. Despite this, the net amount of good they have done, by resurrecting Shepard that one time, is technically more than the amount of evil that they've done. This changes nothing in the first point.

[Yakko77]

Xilizhra wrote...

I actually agree with you in Cerberus still working for the Alliance, though in my case, instead of supporting Cerberus, it made me lose faith in the Alliance.

And yes, it is irritating. Cerberus was a bunch of straight-up villains in ME1, while the Shadow Broker was an intriguing, neutral figure that would have been quite interesting to work for... they seem to have switched in ME2.

If Cerberus is still with the Alliance then why is Cerberus gearing up for a fight with the Reapers and not the Alliance?

Or maybe the Alliance secretly is given the snipet of info on Kasumi's Greybox and Cerberus is simply their covert recon force to look into it.

[Yakko77]

Xilizhra wrote...

As usual I'm probably just misreading things and hopefully the calm reason of Xilizhra will come in and clarify things!

Always. But I think I'll just reiterate my earlier point.
1. Cerberus is evil. What they've done is easily enough to justify the destruction of their organization and the arrest of its leaders and many members.
2. Despite this, the net amount of good they have done, by resurrecting Shepard that one time, is technically more than the amount of evil that they've done. This changes nothing in the first point.

Agreed.  I think I started debating myself more than anything!  LOL!!!!

It's just so darn interesting to speculate about!