93 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Vaenier wrote...
The good Geth. As portrayed in game, not your crazy tinfoil conspiracy Geth.

Uh, I mentioned nothing about the Geth, nor do the geth factor into what I said.

Moreover, I think you firmly misunderstand my views of the geth in general, but that's a matter for another thread, or PM. I have never stated the Geth are a conspiracy, only that from their presentation that they very well could be and so suspicious Shepards can have reason to harbor doubts.

They have fleets capable of taking out the entire galaxy and have been preparing for the fight since Sovergein first showed up and the Heretics joined him.

Besides the arguable premise of the first ten words (since Mass Efffect has never followed its own supplementary numbers over theme), what about that?

The question is 'why will utilizing Cerberus make us do worse, not better, in a war of mutual survival?' Not 'who would do the best?'

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Wow. That's a mature attitude in the face of a galactic extinction event.

Tell me when Cerberus finds the the deus ex machina of ME3. Then I'll give a damn.

I know that there's a word for people who don't give a damn about the survival of potentially billions of people, but for the life of me I can't figure out what it is.

Racist?

Sociopathy?

Misanthropy?

None of them are quite right.

[Vaenier]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Vaenier wrote...
The good Geth. As portrayed in game, not your crazy tinfoil conspiracy Geth.

Uh, I mentioned nothing about the Geth, nor do the geth factor into what I said.

Moreover, I think you firmly misunderstand my views of the geth in general, but that's a matter for another thread, or PM. I have never stated the Geth are a conspiracy, only that from their presentation that they very well could be and so suspicious Shepards can have reason to harbor doubts.

They have fleets capable of taking out the entire galaxy and have been preparing for the fight since Sovergein first showed up and the Heretics joined him.

Besides the arguable premise of the first ten words (since Mass Efffect has never followed its own supplementary numbers over theme), what about that?

The question is 'why will utilizing Cerberus make us do worse, not better, in a war of mutual survival?' Not 'who would do the best?'

Especially since Cerberus is pretty much the only organization with a
known dedicated Reaper Research effort until after Retribution (at which
point the Alliance studies a corpose).

I like Cerberus too. Just pointing stuff out.

[Someone With Mass]

If anyone thinks that Cerberus can justify the death camps, sadistic experiments and the constant disruptions to me in any way, you're so wrong.



When they can show that they can handle power in a good manner without risking the lives of thousands, if not millions, I'll trust them. For now? No.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

Generally, I think people want to stop the Reapers and Cerberus both, not let the Reapers kill them.

If you're focused on dealing with Cerberus, who is aligning themselves against the Reapers, before the Reapers are dealt with, you are actively weakening your chances against the Reapers and furthering their success with your in-fighting.

[Someone With Mass]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

I know that there's a word for people who don't give a damn about the survival of potentially billions of people, but for the life of me I can't figure out what it is.

Racist?

Sociopathy?

Misanthropy?

None of them are quite right.

Okay, tell me. What is it that Cerberus have that's pretty much the fate of the galaxy?

[Xilizhra]

I know that there's a word for people who don't give a damn about the survival of potentially billions of people, but for the life of me I can't figure out what it is.

I think it's "person who doesn't think Cerberus will save the galaxy."

If you're focused on dealing with Cerberus, who is aligning themselves against the Reapers, before the Reapers are dealt with, you are actively weakening your chances against the Reapers and furthering their success with your in-fighting.

Assuming that they are aligning themselves against the Reapers. And are causing no problems with the rest of those who are.

[lovgreno]

jbblue05 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Why?

Are the Council Species suddenly going to refuse to fight or coordinate because they're asked to deal with a group they don't like or who doesn't like it?

Will the Batarian Hegemony refuse to work with the galaxy simply because the Migrant Fleet rallied first?

Is the Rachni Queen going to defect to the Reapers because Cerberus got recruited?

This.

That kiind of argument from Cerberus haters makes no sense.at all.
Why would people rather have the Reapers kill them than work with Cerberus to stop them?

Because Cerberus has lies, assasinations and manipulations as their prefered methods when communicating with people both outside and inside their organisation perhaps? Why should they belive them now when there have never been any good reason to do so before? Many are already sceptical to Shepards claims of "reapers", and for rather fair reasons. The fact that Shepard had to work for a organisation that have managed to make themselves enemies with everyone will hardly make it easier to convince anyone about the real threat that is the reapers.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

If anyone thinks that Cerberus can justify the death camps, sadistic experiments and the constant disruptions to me in any way, you're so wrong.

The only reason you could make such a decree is an absolute belief that the few outweigh the masses. Which, when you put it in about any other context, becomes monstrous in its own right.

Cerberus has delivered far more good in one mission of ME2 alone (Horizon) than it ever has deliverered harm. Cerberus certainly deserves to be brought to heel, but it has been a net force for good and survival against the greater threats, and it should be used again.

When they can show that they can handle power in a good manner without risking the lives of thousands, if not millions, I'll trust them. For now? No.

When they saved many more? Yes.

[Xilizhra]

The only reason you could make such a decree is an absolute belief that the few outweigh the masses. Which, when you put it in about any other context, becomes monstrous in its own right.

Actually, all it takes is the realization that none of Cerberus' most monstrous actions were necessary, or even useful, for the good it did against the Collectors. Anyone with lots of money, intelligence connections and the technology for the Lazarus Project could have done it.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Okay, tell me. What is it that Cerberus have that's pretty much the fate of the galaxy?

Resources, knowledge, research, and a will to both recognize the problem and deal with it as best they can.

These are the exactly the things we need to deal with the Reapers, and we have no moral right to refuse and even oppose capable aid that can help many, many more. Except in the most meta-gaming positions of 'we will win regardless,' we have no basis to presume we have enough to beat the Reapers as is, let alone the leeway to throw away significant assets for personal dislike.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

The only reason you could make such a decree is an absolute belief that the few outweigh the masses. Which, when you put it in about any other context, becomes monstrous in its own right.

Actually, all it takes is the realization that none of Cerberus' most monstrous actions were necessary, or even useful, for the good it did against the Collectors. Anyone with lots of money, intelligence connections and the technology for the Lazarus Project could have done it.

Xil, who else has the money, intelligence, technology, and will?

[Xilizhra]

That's not quite my point. By unlucky coincidence, Cerberus was the organization to do what was necessary; if, however, it had never done any of its nastier experiments, assassinations, etc, it wouldn't have changed a thing about its preparedness for the Collectors, so far as we know.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

I know that there's a word for people who don't give a damn about the survival of potentially billions of people, but for the life of me I can't figure out what it is.

I think it's "person who doesn't think Cerberus will save the galaxy."

I'm pretty sure that isn't it.

If you're focused on dealing with Cerberus, who is aligning themselves against the Reapers, before the Reapers are dealt with, you are actively weakening your chances against the Reapers and furthering their success with your in-fighting.

Assuming that they are aligning themselves against the Reapers.

The entire scope of our cooperation with them, as well as a significant amount of side material, has been them doing just that.

And are causing no problems with the rest of those who are.

More than that: that they cause more problems than they help.

Of course, we need to ask who has Cerberus prevented from preparing against the Reapers?

[Xilizhra]

I'm pretty sure that isn't it.

They just don't think Cerberus will be the one responsible for saving those billions anymore.

The entire scope of our cooperation with them, as well as a significant amount of side material, has been them doing just that.

They were aligned against Shepard until ME2.

More than that: that they cause more problems than they help.

This was more or less why I destroyed the Collector base, to keep that from happening. Perhaps I've saved Cerberus from the necessity of being destroyed.

[Someone With Mass]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
]Resources, knowledge, research, and a will to both recognize the problem and deal with it as best they can.

These are the exactly the things we need to deal with the Reapers, and we have no moral right to refuse and even oppose capable aid that can help many, many more. Except in the most meta-gaming positions of 'we will win regardless,' we have no basis to presume we have enough to beat the Reapers as is, let alone the leeway to throw away significant assets for personal dislike.

You know, just the geth can rival Cerberus in all those areas. They've had longer contact with the Reapers, they're expendable as long as the backup realy node is within range and they have more numbers.

[JamieCOTC]

If Cerberus had the only tech in town to bring down the Reapers, then yes my Shep would take their resources, but not their orders and TIM would still go down. His arrogance and ambition may serve Shepard well during war time, but they are a liability otherwise. Mr. "Cerberus IS Humanity" has shown himself not to be a team player within the galactic community, even more so than the Council. In fact I felt much more constrained by TIM and Cerberus than I did the Council, despite the fact of the opposite being reinforced in several conversations. So, yeah, I would take their resources, but not their orders. If they don't like it my Shep will just sit on her butt and wait for the Reapers. TIM would have no choice but to blink first.

Modifié par JamieCOTC, 23 janvier 2011 - 07:30 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

That's not quite my point.

But it is inescapable none the less. Cerberus is what it is, but no one else is like it.

By unlucky coincidence, Cerberus was the organization to do what was necessary; if, however, it had never done any of its nastier experiments, assassinations, etc, it wouldn't have changed a thing about its preparedness for the Collectors, so far as we know.

If it had not done any of those things, or been the people willing to do the things, it also wouldn't have been the type of organization which could and would go against the Collectors immediately.

Cerberus is a mad dog with more money than caution, but it's because it's a mad dog that it's willing to trade an army for a single symbollic soldier (Shepard), trust in a AI built with Reaper components (EDI), focus on the completely unlikely but potentially catastrophic threats (otherwise innocuous colony abductions in the Terminus), and address those threats in the quickest, most brutally effective manner necessary to stop it (orchistrating the Horizon trap, the Derilect Reaper crash-study).

These aren't things anyone else was both capable and willing to do. Some people might have been willing, but were incapable. Others might have been capable, but unwilling. Cerberus, for better and for worse, is both capable and willing to do what other people won't (even if we wish they wouldn't do some or even many of the things they do). This is irreplacable in our lead-up to the Reapers.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
]Resources, knowledge, research, and a will to both recognize the problem and deal with it as best they can.

These are the exactly the things we need to deal with the Reapers, and we have no moral right to refuse and even oppose capable aid that can help many, many more. Except in the most meta-gaming positions of 'we will win regardless,' we have no basis to presume we have enough to beat the Reapers as is, let alone the leeway to throw away significant assets for personal dislike.

You know, just the geth can rival Cerberus in all those areas.

They don't.

The Geth have specialized technology in a specific area, but don't have the broad technology that Cerberus has accumulated. They also lack the information network and political connections to understand the Quarians, let alone play a galactic game of power influence.


What the geth bring to the table and what Cerberus bring to the table are different things, neither of which is duplicated or can't be added with eachother.

[Sajuro]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

I think siding with the Reapers over Cerberus would be a lack of self-awareness.

Or at least perspectives and morals.

You know what Dean, you're right -sound of world ending outside- I have thought and I have a plan for Cerberus to help.
1) Get their front companies to construct  as many battleready ships as they can
2) give those to the Quarians and give the migrant fleet (after I negotiate peace between the Quarians and the Geth so non combatents are on the colonies) to Cerberus.
3) After outfitting the Migrant Fleet with better weapons (Thanix Cannons on any ship that can handle them), send them to the front lines, telling them that the Allied Fleets will be there shortly.
4)With the Reapers focusing on Cerberus, jump the allied fleets in behind the Reapers.
5) Give the Turian councilor the cue to give the signal "Ah yes, 'Reapers'" to commence the full assault and owning.

If it all works out, I will personally arrange an interview face to face between TIM and Corporal Toombs.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm pretty sure that isn't it.

They just don't think Cerberus will be the one responsible for saving those billions anymore.

No, I'm pretty sure the name for people who don't care if billions are more likely to die is 'people who don't think Cerberus is necessary for salvation.'

They were aligned against Shepard until ME2.

No they weren't. Shepard's only involvement with them in ME1 was fights (s)he pursued and picked.

Once Cerberus found out the higher threat, they rather promptly turned around, bent over, and made the mother of all olive branches to focus on the real threat.

This was more or less why I destroyed the Collector base, to keep that from happening. Perhaps I've saved Cerberus from the necessity of being destroyed.

Or perhaps you doomed millions of humans and aliens to unnecessary death by handicapping the potential closing of the tech-gap between us and them.

In fact, I'm sure Cerberus would prefer itself to be destroyed than for the war to go worse for humanity.

[Xilizhra]

If it had not done any of those things, or been the people willing to do the things, it also wouldn't have been the type of organization which could and would go against the Collectors immediately.

Risk and atrocity aren't the same thing, and none of the risks that led to Shepard's success against the Collectors were built upon atrocity. If it was willing to take great risks but not commit atrocities, I can't see why it would have stopped their being useful.

[Xilizhra]

No, I'm pretty sure the name for people who don't care if billions are more likely to die is 'people who don't think Cerberus is necessary for salvation.'

Undoubtedly, but your conversational sparring partner isn't the former.

Or perhaps you doomed millions of humans and aliens to unnecessary death by handicapping the potential closing of the tech-gap between us and them.

Perhaps. We shall, of course, see. I doubt it, personally.

In fact, I'm sure Cerberus would prefer itself to be destroyed than for the war to go worse for humanity.

According to TIM, the two would be simultaneous. "Cerberus is humanity."

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

In fact, I'm sure Cerberus would prefer itself to be destroyed than for the war to go worse for humanity.

According to TIM, the two would be simultaneous. "Cerberus is humanity."

I thought you were more up to speed with metaphors than that, Xil.

[Sajuro]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
No, I'm pretty sure the name for people who don't care if billions are more likely to die is 'people who don't think Cerberus is necessary for salvation.'

Is it? Does the ME universe now operate on the principle of the spunky terrorists are the only ones who could save the day? Wouldn't it be worse not to side with the Council?