965 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

The difference between TIM and someone like say the head of Sony is that TIM asks for progress and usually allows the teams to run rather independently to get that progress. TIM is as much hands off in regards to his employee's as the Citadel Council is with their Spectre's, but only TIM gets flak, why is that?

The only Spectre who's done anything as bad as Cerberus that we know of is Saren, who lied to the Council about what had happened on that mission anyway.

[Arijharn]

General User wrote...
That’s largely my point! TIM isn’t using all possible resources. The galaxy’s number one expert on killing Reapers is sittin’ pretty on a Cerberus frigate. And TIM is using him as a trigger man .

I think there could be limitations as to some sort endeavours their performing and their actual relevance to the Reaper threat. Say they are looking at more efficient car engines to make the next hovercar a result of human 'triumph' in an industry otherwise monopolized by the Asari... how does that benefit Shephard's mission?

They just going to throw one in the hold of the Normandy and occupy the spare shuttle port?

General User wrote...
There are figureheads, and then there are not-figureheads. How many military leaders have also served as sources of inspiration to their troops and their nations while at the same time planning and executing major campaigns?

You missed my point. Shephard is in the spotlight. Why would a secret organisation want to also be in the spotlight? I know Jacob says something about the collector mission might mean that Cerberus is remembered differently (however; looking at the responses on this forum I would imagine the answer is quite obviously to the contrary) but Jacob also isn't the head of Cerberus.

General User wrote...
As would I.  I just don't trust TIM to be able to look past his own pre-existing agenda when deciding what is and is not important.

I agree that he wont necessarily reveal everything about his operations, but because the Reapers also represent an existential threat to him and his operations, I think he will reveal pertinent information. I don't need to know, for example, if one Cerberus cell is researching ways to make the O-E compound more effective unless the Reapers started to mass deploy Biotics... in which case I will only need to know about the compound, how to use it, and where to pick up more of it. He does not need to know about the logistics or whatever. Compartmentalisation!

General User wrote...
Shepard needs to know the general status and dispositions of Cerberus operations.  Knowing what’s “in the pipeline” and where to get what kinds of support and how much of it will be available are vital pieces of information for a military officer.

He needs to know about things as they become relevant, but not beforehand. TIM needs to tell Shephard about Cerberus' activities as they pertain to the Reapers, but Shephard doesn't need to know anything else about Cerberus' activities. 
If you are a military officer responsible for the tactical planning of an assault on the Korean peninsula, do you also need to know anything about tactical planning of say the Middle East? I would imagine you wouldn't, and you'd only become aware of said planning if your higher ups thought it was relevant to your operations. Of those things you could become aware of though; I doubt it would be minutiae details however, which, unless I'm reading you wrong, seem to be what you're suggesting.

General User wrote...
But you didn’t hire anyone besides Shepard. And Shepard isn’t quite so customizable as most of us would like. There is ample precedent for forcing the player to go along with decisions they might not agree with for the sake of advancing the plot.

My point being however, is that I can not trust Shephard's full intentions as much as he can't trust mine. This is true, even if Zulu was Commander Shephard. Why? Because even in this case Zulu isn't an actual Cerberus employee. He hasn't signed the NDA, he hasn't signed the employee contract so to speak. He is an associate. I trust zulu to get the job done, and I'd pass him all the information I think is relevant... but I also have to assume that many stuff isn't relevant, and that he doesn't need to know about them.
This isn't the same thing though as thinking 'hmm, xyz, is relevant but I don't want to tell Shephard because he uploaded Rawling's data to Shephard's private data terminal on the Normandy as opposed to just forwarding it to Cerberus Command' and it doesn't presuppose that I can't change my mind either if more information comes to light.
It's the reason why you are only notified about the Derelict Reaper operation after Horizon, as opposed to beforehand, despite the fact that obviously the DR as an operation has existed for quite some time.

[Arijharn]

Xilizhra wrote...

The difference between TIM and someone like say the head of Sony is that TIM asks for progress and usually allows the teams to run rather independently to get that progress. TIM is as much hands off in regards to his employee's as the Citadel Council is with their Spectre's, but only TIM gets flak, why is that?

The only Spectre who's done anything as bad as Cerberus that we know of is Saren, who lied to the Council about what had happened on that mission anyway.

What about Tela Vasir?

[Xilizhra]

Arijharn wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The difference between TIM and someone like say the head of Sony is that TIM asks for progress and usually allows the teams to run rather independently to get that progress. TIM is as much hands off in regards to his employee's as the Citadel Council is with their Spectre's, but only TIM gets flak, why is that?

The only Spectre who's done anything as bad as Cerberus that we know of is Saren, who lied to the Council about what had happened on that mission anyway.

What about Tela Vasir?

She blew up one wing of one building, and casualties seemed to be quite light. Small time compared to some of what Cerberus has done.
It also helps that she did what she did to do what she thought was necessary to preserve galactic stability for the Council, an aim that many feel is more noble than Cerberus' human dominance.

[Zulu_DFA]

Arijharn wrote...

Be that as it may, he's at least a discerning tool keeper. He doesn't seem to want to unduly waste his 'tools.' If anything, TIM treats his staff like any CEO of a major multi-national corporation. He recognises their inherent value, but he doesn't say ring them up and ask if they want to go to the bar on friday.

That's just asking for another spin of "Cerberus is inept" blabbing. All that about how no Cerberus personnel lives long enough to collect their hefty pensions. I think we have to admit that, even though Cerberus recruitment standards are high enough to begin with, TIM has exceptionally high expectations of his agents' ability to not flinch in the face of death or any unethical stuff that may be required of them to perform. And these expectations are sometimes not met. As the story of Paul Grayson demonstrated, the results may be indeed quite disastrous to Cerberus.

Personally, it see it as TIM's own innate idealism. He thinks that his "cause" has an undeniable appeal, but, as a matter of  fact, he needs to be even more ruthless and think less of the people he employs. Namely, no matter how apt, loyal and determined they seem to be on the outside, each and every one of them may turn out weak and stupid.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 31 janvier 2011 - 02:18 .

[Arijharn]

Xilizhra wrote...
She blew up one wing of one building, and casualties seemed to be quite light. Small time compared to some of what Cerberus has done.
It also helps that she did what she did to do what she thought was necessary to preserve galactic stability for the Council, an aim that many feel is more noble than Cerberus' human dominance.

Your statements must sound so hollow to your own ears right now.
So, because Cerberus kept the child abductions 'quite light' and 'liberated' them from slavers, it's okay because hey; at least they weren't abducting colonies right?

So the ends justify the means only when the Council does it?

And people say Cerberus is morally repugnant. But hey, the Council is the law and they protect themselves with it so thus it's okay.

[Maestro975]

Read The Mote in God's Eye or the Honor Harrington novels and you'll see quite a few characters cut from TIM's cloth. The only reason why he seems so monstrous to some is because of the Pollyannish nature of pure Paragons.

Oh, and HH could kick Femshep's ass, though that's another topic.

[Plasma Prestige]

I don't think we know enough about him to judge him. We got very little dialog with him in the game. I feel that BioWare has a revelation for us about TIM which will be in the third game.

[Zulu_DFA]

Arijharn wrote...

What about Tela Vasir?

http://new.wavlist.c...0/tl-killed.wav

[Arijharn]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
Personally, it see it as TIM's own innate idealism. He thinks that his "cause" has an undeniable appeal, but, as a matter of  fact, he needs to be even more ruthless and think less of the people he employs. Namely, no matter how apt, loyal and determined they seem to be on the outside, each and every one of them may turn out weak and stupid.

I'm trying to hold that against him but I really can't... I think it's part of their job description.

[Xilizhra]

Arijharn wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
She blew up one wing of one building, and casualties seemed to be quite light. Small time compared to some of what Cerberus has done.
It also helps that she did what she did to do what she thought was necessary to preserve galactic stability for the Council, an aim that many feel is more noble than Cerberus' human dominance.

Your statements must sound so hollow to your own ears right now.
So, because Cerberus kept the child abductions 'quite light' and 'liberated' them from slavers, it's okay because hey; at least they weren't abducting colonies right?

So the ends justify the means only when the Council does it?

And people say Cerberus is morally repugnant. But hey, the Council is the law and they protect themselves with it so thus it's okay.

Your statement... isn't insane, but it's rather confusing.
For one thing, many more children were abducted than people were killed in the wing explosion; Tela's aim was to kill one dangerous person, not to kill everyone in the trade center. Morally, it's similar to and might be slightly better than Shepard helping Zaeed kill Vido and letting the factory workers burn to death. Second, the fact that slavers were involved had nothing to do with anything. Third, I'm not supporting Tela, I'm just saying why she gets less hate than Cerberus.

[Zulu_DFA]

Arijharn wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
Personally, it see it as TIM's own innate idealism. He thinks that his "cause" has an undeniable appeal, but, as a matter of  fact, he needs to be even more ruthless and think less of the people he employs. Namely, no matter how apt, loyal and determined they seem to be on the outside, each and every one of them may turn out weak and stupid.

I'm trying to hold that against him but I really can't... I think it's part of their job description.

Also, thinking less of people leads to bureaucracy and red-tape, that's exactly what Cerberus tries to avoid, so maybe it's just a rational choice. He is prepared to lose some resources to his own people's weakness and stupidity, as long as the net gain is positive. Hell, Zulu Shepard would never like to swap places with TIM!!!

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 31 janvier 2011 - 02:26 .

[Arijharn]

Xilizhra wrote...
Your statement... isn't insane, but it's rather confusing.

Kay, lemme break it down.

For one thing, many more children were abducted than people were killed in the wing explosion;

How do you know? Where does it say how many people were abducted (I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I've explored that place completely, especially considering it's such a linear level design).

Tela's aim was to kill one dangerous person, not to kill everyone in the trade center. Morally, it's similar to and might be slightly better than Shepard helping Zaeed kill Vido and letting the factory workers burn to death. 

And yet, pretty much everyone was killed in the trade centre, either by the explosion or were shot by mercs. And before you say something like: "Oh, but that wasn't Tela!" I'd like to remind you that if TIM can be held personally responsible for the actions of his staff, then so to should Tela, since she was the one ordering the shadow broker mercs around.

Second, the fact that slavers were involved had nothing to do with anything. Third, I'm not supporting Tela, I'm just saying why she gets less hate than Cerberus.

Exactly, which is why I'm pointing out it's hypocritical. The slaver statement  was just to point out a historical fact.

Remember; we've only met 3 other Spectre's in the games so far, and all of them have a ruthless streak that has been described to us or that we've seen. So far, the (implied or explicit) complicity of the Council of their actions doesn't seem to make their goal any more 'noble' than Cerberus, perhaps even less so considering they make the law but allow their agents the capacity to freely break it without repercussions.

So your mileage must vary; either Cerberus is bad because they knowingly break the law, or the Council is bad (therefore Evil?) because they make habits of breaking their own laws where it suits them.

EDIT: So basically I'm asking for consistency; either you believe that the ends justify the means for all parties or you don't. Don't skirt around the topic umming and ahhing as you make up your mind.

Modifié par Arijharn, 31 janvier 2011 - 02:32 .

[Maestro975]

Hypothetical situation: 

Apartments are built in what initially is an out of the way section of town. However, as the town expands, the area becomes a congested traffic area, so the residents of the complex have trouble getting out. A potential solution soon arises: by demolishing an abandoned building (used to be a Minimart), then a sidestreet can finally be connected to a traffic light. But the owner of the building stubbornly refuses to sell, even though he is not using it for anything. He's refused all offers from the city, either out of greed, resentment for the apts, or because of some irrational hatred for the city/government. In this situation, the best course of action would be to kill the bastard, then demolish the abandoned building. My point, sometimes progress requires ruthlessness.
 
"All life is precious" is the battle cry of pansies.

Modifié par Maestro975, 31 janvier 2011 - 02:32 .

[Xilizhra]

How do you know? Where does it say how many people were abducted (I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I've explored that place completely, especially considering it's such a linear level design).

There were like seven people killed in the explosion, if I remember correctly. The implications of Teltin are that there were many more there.

And yet, pretty much everyone was killed in the trade centre, either by the explosion or were shot by mercs. And before you say something like: "Oh, but that wasn't Tela!" I'd like to remind you that if TIM can be held personally responsible for the actions of his staff, then so to should Tela, since she was the one ordering the shadow broker mercs around.

From what I remember, it was very far from everyone. And I'm pretty sure the Shadow Broker's agents didn't kill any civilians; their mission was to kill Liara and, if necessary, Shepard; there's no logical reason they'd go after civilians, as it'd make the Broker something of a public enemy if word got out and could get Tela into trouble. And remember she's trying to save lives herself.

Remember; we've only met 3 other Spectre's in the games so far, and all of them have a ruthless streak that has been described to us or that we've seen.

Nihlus' "ruthless streak" was described by someone with a mandate to kill anyone sufficiently criminal and a stated desire to know as little about her targets' personalities as possible. We don't have nearly enough information about him to paint him with the same brush as Tela. And Saren was a maniac hiding his actions from the Council, and when they learned of all of them, they did retaliate. Tela is the only piece of solid evidence you have.

So your mileage must vary; either Cerberus is bad because they knowingly break the law, or the Council is bad (therefore Evil?) because they make habits of breaking their own laws where it suits them.

The Council is imperfect and I would enjoy reforming it if it could be done. I do, however, find the Spectres less distasteful than Cerberus because as far as we can see, the Council is a competent and basically fair body (quarian issues aside, which is one of my main proposed reforms). Cerberus... their motives are still somewhat enigmatic, but they're much too human-supremacist for me, and their actions are still worse than any sanctioned Spectre ones we know of.

EDIT: So basically I'm asking for consistency; either you believe that the ends justify the means for all parties or you don't. Don't skirt around the topic umming and ahhing as you make up your mind.

This question, however, is invalid. What ends justify which means depends on both the ends and the means. I'm not a deontologist, so I accept that this question can vary.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 31 janvier 2011 - 02:38 .

[Arijharn]

Xilizhra wrote...
There were like seven people killed in the explosion, if I remember correctly. The implications of Teltin are that there were many more there.

There was a group of 3-4 on the outside steps, there was another 3-4 in the main foyer, there's about 1-2 that I remember seeing in the area where there's the guy that gets shot by mercs that Shephard can hear speaking for about a second as he slides down the wall, there's a receptionist I think outside Sekat's room (or very close to) and there is of course; Sekat.
If you're going to use 'implications' then, perhaps it can be 'implied' that if Shadow Broker's emerge from the Ashland Energy consortium building, then there could be casualties that we don't see.

Xilizhra wrote...
From what I remember, it was very far from everyone. And I'm pretty sure the Shadow Broker's agents didn't kill any civilians; their mission was to kill Liara and, if necessary, Shepard; there's no logical reason they'd go after civilians, as it'd make the Broker something of a public enemy if word got out and could get Tela into trouble. And remember she's trying to save lives herself.

How could they not have killed 'civilians' when they bombed a building? It wasn't a military building, it wasan office complex. "Civilian Casualties not a concern" was a directive that the Shadow Broker gave, so sure, they didn't set out to kill civvies, but they sure as hell weren't mitigating their actions around them. They didn't 'check their fire' they destroyed a building full of people to take out one person... and they still missed.

Tela may try to be saving lives - by taking others, but isn't that what 'human dominance' would result in too? Saving lives (human lives) -- that doesn't arbitrarilly mean they're going to go out and slaughter Turian's by the wholesale though.

Xilizhra wrote...
Nihlus' "ruthless streak" was described by someone with a mandate to kill anyone sufficiently criminal and a stated desire to know as little about her targets' personalities as possible.

Does Samara strike you as someone who habitually lies? Nihlus 'manufactured an incident in which [Samara] had to either go after him or leave an innocent to die.' 

Xilizhra wrote...
We don't have nearly enough information about him to paint him with the same brush as Tela.

We don't have enough information about the entirety of Cerberus' actions either, but that doesn't stop people from painting them. 

Xilizhra wrote...
And Saren was a maniac hiding his actions from the Council, and when they learned of all of them, they did retaliate. Tela is the only piece of solid evidence you have.

Not as true as you'd think. Saren was known as a ruthless individual for a very long time, well before his actions on Eden Prime (what did Saren do and blame it on Anderson?). Saren was the Council's 'golden boy.'  As an aside, I'd like to recall your attention to the fact that the Citadel Council didn't promote Shephard for Saren's actions on Eden Prime anyway, it was because Saren was allied with the geth, but that isn't really relevant...

I haven't responded or debated your last points because you've made it clear it's your personal opinion, and I respect it, even if I don't agree.

[Xilizhra]

There was a group of 3-4 on the outside steps, there was another 3-4 in the main foyer, there's about 1-2 that I remember seeing in the area where there's the guy that gets shot by mercs that Shephard can hear speaking for about a second as he slides down the wall, there's a receptionist I think outside Sekat's room (or very close to) and there is of course; Sekat.

If you're going to use 'implications' then, perhaps it can be 'implied' that if Shadow Broker's emerge from the Ashland Energy consortium building, then there could be casualties that we don't see.

So my estimate wasn't too far off. And by implications, I mean the number of shipping crates and holding cells.

How could they not have killed 'civilians' when they bombed a building? It wasn't a military building, it wasan office complex. "Civilian Casualties not a concern" was a directive that the Shadow Broker gave, so sure, they didn't set out to kill civvies, but they sure as hell weren't mitigating their actions around them. They didn't 'check their fire' they destroyed a building full of people to take out one person... and they still missed.

They were trying to blow up one car, not the whole building. In any case, only one wing was destroyed.

Tela may try to be saving lives - by taking others, but isn't that what 'human dominance' would result in too? Saving lives (human lives) -- that doesn't arbitrarilly mean they're going to go out and slaughter Turian's by the wholesale though.

Tela doesn't care about what species the lives she's trying to save belong to, so I'm guessing she's referring to as many lives as possible period. Cerberus, on the other hand...

Does Samara strike you as someone who habitually lies? Nihlus 'manufactured an incident in which [Samara] had to either go after him or leave an innocent to die.'

Justicars are extremely predictable. Assuming Nihlus knew what he was doing, the hostage was in little danger. And I was referring to the allegedly innocent person he killed.

We don't have enough information about the entirety of Cerberus' actions either, but that doesn't stop people from painting them.

CDN and ME2 talk much more about Cerberus than the Spectres.

Not as true as you'd think. Saren was known as a ruthless individual for a very long time, well before his actions on Eden Prime (what did Saren do and blame it on Anderson?).

Hence the lie. I think that the Council would have done something about it had they known that Saren had blown up a factory for the lulz, as opposed to it being the only way of getting the job done.

[xedgorex]

I think he is neither evil or racist.



He's more...ruthless.



And i don't really see his actions as racist. He isn't opposed to working with aliens he just puts a priority on humanity. And think of it this way, if you were in a galactic world, you would obviously want your race to be the best, top, whatever. Saying you wouldn't is pretty much not true, and either way you'd still be on the minority point. "Hey guys, we should just be #2"



I understand why the Council races are so put off by humanity, but i also understand why Cerberus does what it does.



I think the raging argument to call TIM evil is silly. Evil is perspective. You can sure as hell bet he doesn't see himself as evil, and if someone is Evil, if Evil is a hard and fast rule, they would know they were evil.

[Mr. Man]

TIM isn't evil. Untrustworthy, dangerous, clever....but not full out "Evil"

[Arijharn]

Xilizhra wrote...
So my estimate wasn't too far off. And by implications, I mean the number of shipping crates and holding cells.

Shipping crates couldn't hold supplies then? I'm not trying to say that Pragia wasn't without blame, but you make it sound as if they were shuttling kids in around the clock.

Xilizhra wrote...
They were trying to blow up one car, not the whole building. In any case, only one wing was destroyed.

There still used military grade explosives to do it, they still caused civilian casualties... they still missed. Why couldn't they just send in one incognito assassin, strolled up to Baria Frontiers and shoot Liara right there? I mean, Tela had enough time to send intelligence that lead to teams of people to set up within the complex, lead to the infiltration and set up of a series of explosive devices (despite any protection that building may have) and pretty much all of that happened before Shephard even stepped foot in the place.

Xilizhra wrote...
Tela doesn't care about what species the lives she's trying to save belong to, so I'm guessing she's referring to as many lives as possible period. Cerberus, on the other hand...

No, she kills indescriminately all the while telling herself it is for the 'greater good.' How is Cerberus and the Council at all different? Oh wait, it's because the Council codifies itself as a position of power and legalises the murder it is responsible for, while Cerberus has to do it in the shadows.

Cerberus does perform certainly harsh actions, but at least it doesn't try to fool itself or others that what it does isn't harsh actions. I'm also not convinced that 'human dominance' means the systematic repression of other species though.

Xilizhra wrote...
Justicars are extremely predictable. Assuming Nihlus knew what he was doing, the hostage was in little danger. And I was referring to the allegedly innocent person he killed.

Yes, but Nihlus was still a Spectre regardless, and was still entrusted by the Council to do what was necessary. What makes you think the hostage was only in 'a little danger.' Define 'little danger' does that mean a fatality, or 'merely' grevious bodily harm?

Xilizhra wrote...
CDN and ME2 talk much more about Cerberus than the Spectres.

Yep, and that's a bit of a shame. Everyone knows that Cerberus does bad things, but not nearly as much attention is drawn to the Spectres or the Council's despite their crimes.

Xilizhra wrote...
Hence the lie. I think that the Council would have done something about it had they known that Saren had blown up a factory for the lulz, as opposed to it being the only way of getting the job done.

Personally I doubt it, if only because the Council doesn't want to have knowledge of their actions only as long as they have results, and as long as they have results they don't care about their actions to the point where they'll ask questions.
This is why Saren could orchestrate the bombing and blame it on Anderson, and this is why Tela was happy to blow up a trade centre and hand the responsibility over to Cerberus.

[Xilizhra]

Shipping crates couldn't hold supplies then? I'm not trying to say that Pragia wasn't without blame, but you make it sound as if they were shuttling kids in around the clock.

Holding cells still?

There still used military grade explosives to do it, they still caused civilian casualties... they still missed. Why couldn't they just send in one incognito assassin, strolled up to Baria Frontiers and shoot Liara right there? I mean, Tela had enough time to send intelligence that lead to teams of people to set up within the complex, lead to the infiltration and set up of a series of explosive devices (despite any protection that building may have) and pretty much all of that happened before Shephard even stepped foot in the place.

She tried that at Liara's apartment. It failed. And I don't think the explosives were preset; I think she brought them with her on her skycar and set them off as soon as possible.

Cerberus does perform certainly harsh actions, but at least it doesn't try to fool itself or others that what it does isn't harsh actions. I'm also not convinced that 'human dominance' means the systematic repression of other species though.

Nor does Tela. She just thinks that what she's up against is worse.

Yes, but Nihlus was still a Spectre regardless, and was still entrusted by the Council to do what was necessary. What makes you think the hostage was only in 'a little danger.' Define 'little danger' does that mean a fatality, or 'merely' grevious bodily harm?

Wounding from an accidental gunshot was theoretically possible.

Yep, and that's a bit of a shame. Everyone knows that Cerberus does bad things, but not nearly as much attention is drawn to the Spectres or the Council's despite their crimes.

Or maybe the Spectres just don't commit as many.

[Arijharn]

Xilizhra wrote...
Holding cells still?

Right, but it wasn't as if they were holding multitudes upon multitudes of people. I mean, how many staff quarters did we see?

Xilizhra wrote...
She tried that at Liara's apartment. It failed. And I don't think the explosives were preset; I think she brought them with her on her skycar and set them off as soon as possible.

I think you've got your timelines a bit mixed up.
 Vasir and Shephard learn about Liara's location only after Shephard has discovered the location of the hidden data storage device thingy that they were looking for in her apartment. 
Shephard and Vasir arrive together by her car.
Until they separate at the Trade Centre, they are together from the moment they meet (barring the fact that they could have been in separate rooms, but Vasir didn't leave Liara's apartment complex then).
They only separated after the explosives were set off.
The Shadow Broker agents are well equipped.

Xil wrote...
Nor does Tela. She just thinks that what she's up against is worse.

What is it she's up against in this case? From what I can gather, she's up against Liara, who's suddenly become more trouble to the Shadow Broker than what she's worth. However, Tela doesn't actually work for the Shadow Broker.

Xil wrote...
Or maybe the Spectres just don't commit as many.

I doubt that, it's just that Spectre's aren't 'held to account' for their actions like Cerberus is held to theirs. I honestly don't know what's worse; Cerberus that performs their actions in secret, or the Council that performs their actions in secret, but retroactively declare them perfectly legal.

[Xilizhra]

I think you've got your timelines a bit mixed up.

Vasir and Shephard learn about Liara's location only after Shephard has discovered the location of the hidden data storage device thingy that they were looking for in her apartment.

Shephard and Vasir arrive together by her car.

Until they separate at the Trade Centre, they are together from the moment they meet (barring the fact that they could have been in separate rooms, but Vasir didn't leave Liara's apartment complex then).

They only separated after the explosives were set off.

The Shadow Broker agents are well equipped.

Right, but the explosives were a backup plan. The quiet assassination of Liara alone failed.

What is it she's up against in this case? From what I can gather, she's up against Liara, who's suddenly become more trouble to the Shadow Broker than what she's worth. However, Tela doesn't actually work for the Shadow Broker.

Well, Liara is trying to kill an information source of hers who's been extremely helpful. On top of that, Liara is working with Shepard, a Cerberus agent; it may well be that Shepard and Liara are trying to kill the Shadow Broker for Cerberus.

I doubt that, it's just that Spectre's aren't 'held to account' for their actions like Cerberus is held to theirs. I honestly don't know what's worse; Cerberus that performs their actions in secret, or the Council that performs their actions in secret, but retroactively declare them perfectly legal.

So you base this on the actions of one rogue and insane Spectre, one relatively mild and isolated instance, and Tela?

[Arijharn]

Xilizhra wrote...

Right, but the explosives were a backup plan. The quiet assassination of Liara alone failed.

Yeah, but that's because of kinetic barriers in her home location. If someone (or two) just went into her meeting with Sekat and unloaded a full submachine gun burst from point blank range into her stomach and chest, her house is not going to protect her...

Xilizhra wrote...
Well, Liara is trying to kill an information source of hers who's been extremely helpful. On top of that, Liara is working with Shepard, a Cerberus agent; it may well be that Shepard and Liara are trying to kill the Shadow Broker for Cerberus.

Why would Vasir assume that Liara is trying to kill Sekat? Additionally why would Liara try to kill Sekat (especially because, as youv'e said, he's been extremely helpful). In case you typed 'Liara' but actually meant Tela, then I'll concede that the knowledge he has was just as dangerous as Liara's intent, and that he would also need to die, but presumably whomever could assassinate Liara could also assassinate him as well at the same time.

Xilizhra wrote...
So you base this on the actions of one rogue and insane Spectre, one relatively mild and isolated instance, and Tela?

Why not? They're the 3 Spectre's we've met. I'm sure that there are some good Spectre's out there, but considering that they've been given operational leave to break society's laws, then honestly I'm guessing that the majority of them probably do. Why? Because they're free to do so.

If people can start saying the Illusive man is evil because of the things we've heard him say, then why is it not okay to paint the Citadel Council with the exact same brush? In the interest of fairness if nothing else.

[Moiaussi]

Arijharn wrote...
Remember; we've only met 3 other Spectre's in the games so far, and all of them have a ruthless streak that has been described to us or that we've seen. So far, the (implied or explicit) complicity of the Council of their actions doesn't seem to make their goal any more 'noble' than Cerberus, perhaps even less so considering they make the law but allow their agents the capacity to freely break it without repercussions.

So your mileage must vary; either Cerberus is bad because they knowingly break the law, or the Council is bad (therefore Evil?) because they make habits of breaking their own laws where it suits them.

EDIT: So basically I'm asking for consistency; either you believe that the ends justify the means for all parties or you don't. Don't skirt around the topic umming and ahhing as you make up your mind.

What has this got to do with anything? If you want to discuss whether the Council is evil, start a separate thread for it. Whether the Council is good or evil is completely irrelevant to whether TIM is.

That said, Spectres don't break council law. Council law gives them extraordinary leaway. Furthermore, they are still answerable to the Council. Saren was definately neither operating on the Council's wishes,  nor best interests, and when the fact he had gone rogue was revealed, his license was revoked.

Supporting the Shadow Broker to the extent of blowing up a residential area of a major city, even one not in Council space is likely outside a Spectre's mandate too, if for no other reason than she gave orders for Shepard to be taken down too, even if he was likewise a Spectre. I am pretty sure that unsanctioned hits on fellow agents is something the Council would consider 'rogue activity.'

The Council are definately guilty of a lack of oversight, but they weren't ordering that kind of activity.

TIM does.