Aller au contenu

Photo

Cerberus Loyalist vs. Anderson in ME3


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
502 réponses à ce sujet

#351
DPSSOC

DPSSOC
  • Members
  • 3 033 messages

Casuist wrote...
A lie of omission, as Mordin exemplifies most admirably, is encountered when the recipient is misled by omission of pertinent facts (e.g. simply studying the genophage vs. altering it). Anderson does not lead Shepard into any false understanding of the VS' activity. There is no lie...

...now, if Anderson had said "he/she is on non-combat duty performing some colonial outreach" - that's a lie of omission... the pertinent information being:

1) mission is in the Terminus
2) mission has to do with the abductions


But aren't those pieces of information still pertinent?  He says, "VS is on a classified mission.  I can't tell you more, not while your with Cerberus."  He is misleading you into believing it's something he doesn't want Cerberus to find out (which is true), while omitting that it's something he doesn't want you to find out either.  That the VS is investigating Cerberus, and you by proxy, is relevant information he's witholding.

#352
jbblue05

jbblue05
  • Members
  • 1 480 messages
If Nyseris would've killed Liara she would've destoryed Liara's threat to the SB

But the SB knew Liara was working with someone more esteemed and dangerous (Cerberus)

This is why Nyseris didn't kill Liara because Nyseris is suppose to gather intel on Liara's work with Cerberus.

#353
Casuist

Casuist
  • Members
  • 388 messages

But aren't those pieces of information still pertinent? He says, "VS is on a classified mission. I can't tell you more, not while your with Cerberus." He is misleading you into believing it's something he doesn't want Cerberus to find out (which is true), while omitting that it's something he doesn't want you to find out either. That the VS is investigating Cerberus, and you by proxy, is relevant information he's witholding.




You're suggesting it's misleading to finger Cerberus as a reason... I'd say it's not, because Cerberus is, in fact, the reason, but you have a fair point. It's not particularly miselading to say "there are things I am not telling you," however. Shepard had better come out of that meeting with the knowledge that there's more information to be had.

#354
Casuist

Casuist
  • Members
  • 388 messages

I certainly would have found the investigation into Cerberus, and me, relevant, especially after just having a high-level discussion with Anderson and the Council about those exact concerns.




Anderson never claims nor implies that such an investigation is NOT taking place.



Sure they did: for monthes until Lair of the Shadow Broker, players were insulted and furious that Liara's goals had shifted from 'helping Shepard' to 'REVENGE', and decried the character change and shift in priorities. Certainly Liara's life and goals shifted significantly between ME1 and ME2.




...except for those of us who actually dug through the dialog tree to find Liara's motivations.



Correction: a fact Liara and Shepard were not aware. And we aren't even aware Liara isn't aware until we discover her true views and do the quest:.



Cerberus, with its own agents and sources, might have known. We can't say they didn't.




...and we can't say they did. In fact, if you're going to claim there's a possibility the universe was touched by the noodly appendage of the flying spaghetti monster, there is NO POINT in discussing in-universe events. We discuss what is evident, and when you go off onto what is not evident you waste our time.

#355
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 676 messages

Casuist wrote...

I certainly would have found the investigation into Cerberus, and me, relevant, especially after just having a high-level discussion with Anderson and the Council about those exact concerns.


Anderson never claims nor implies that such an investigation is NOT taking place.

And that makes it any less of an omission... how? You've already established a standard that makes not mentioning something pertinant a lie, but you aren't establishing how Anderson's actions aren't such a thing.

We can just as well say that TIM never claims or implies he DOESN"T have other information on Liara. However, that's exactly what you're criticizing him as a liar for.

...except for those of us who actually dug through the dialog tree to find Liara's motivations.

Uncovering something later after extra work and/or favors doesn't make an omission not an omission. It simply marks a time limit to the omission.

...and we can't say they did. In fact, if you're going to claim there's a possibility the universe was touched by the noodly appendage of the flying spaghetti monster, there is NO POINT in discussing in-universe events. We discuss what is evident, and when you go off onto what is not evident you waste our time.

Indeed. And what is not evident in Mass Effect 2 is that TIM is knowingly lying to or deceiving you about his source on Liara. It is something assumed by the viewer, not a deception revealed as such.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 17 février 2011 - 07:16 .


#356
DPSSOC

DPSSOC
  • Members
  • 3 033 messages

Casuist wrote...

But aren't those pieces of information still pertinent? He says, "VS is on a classified mission. I can't tell you more, not while your with Cerberus." He is misleading you into believing it's something he doesn't want Cerberus to find out (which is true), while omitting that it's something he doesn't want you to find out either. That the VS is investigating Cerberus, and you by proxy, is relevant information he's witholding.


You're suggesting it's misleading to finger Cerberus as a reason... I'd say it's not, because Cerberus is, in fact, the reason, but you have a fair point. It's not particularly miselading to say "there are things I am not telling you," however. Shepard had better come out of that meeting with the knowledge that there's more information to be had.


It's not misleading to finger Cerberus as a reason, it's misleading to finger them as the reason.  Keeping the info of where the VS is and what they're doing from Cerberus is a legitimate reason not to tell you, but what he omits is that you, Commander Shepard, aren't trusted anymore.  This is revealed in the, "even if I could have, I wouldn't have told you." line when/if you confront him after Horizon.

Modifié par DPSSOC, 17 février 2011 - 07:17 .


#357
Casuist

Casuist
  • Members
  • 388 messages

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And that makes it any less of an omission... how? You've already established a standard that makes not mentioning something pertinant a lie, but you aren't establishing how Anderson's actions aren't such a thing.


The standard established by our native tongue is that the lie occurs where omission of facts misleads.

Uncovering something later after extra work and/or favors doesn't make an omission not an omission. It simply marks a time limit to the omission.


You are mixing up different aspects of the argument. You're using a fan forum overreaction and misinterpretation of Liara's character to argue she could have changed sides...

Indeed. And what is not evident in Mass Effect 2 is that TIM is knowingly lying to or deceiving you about his source on Liara. It is something assumed by the viewer, not a deception revealed as such.


What is evident is that he gave the impression that Liara was working for the shadow broker.
What is evident is he knew and withheld contravening facts.

What is NOT evident is that he had any valid reason for doing so, and yet this is the case you are making.

#358
Casuist

Casuist
  • Members
  • 388 messages

DPSSOC wrote...

It's not misleading to finger Cerberus as a reason, it's misleading to finger them as the reason.  Keeping the info of where the VS is and what they're doing from Cerberus is a legitimate reason not to tell you, but what he omits is that you, Commander Shepard, aren't trusted anymore.  This is revealed in the, "even if I could have, I wouldn't have told you." line when/if you confront him after Horizon.


.... Cerberus is the reason.

#359
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 676 messages

Casuist wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And that makes it any less of an omission... how? You've already established a standard that makes not mentioning something pertinant a lie, but you aren't establishing how Anderson's actions aren't such a thing.


The standard established by our native tongue is that the lie occurs where omission of facts misleads.

Misleading is inherent in the face of imperfect communication of intent, but regardless you're ignoring the question.

How did Anderson not mislead you? Was he honest about that he, and the Alliance and the Council, wouldn't tell Shepard because they also don't trust Shepard?

You are mixing up different aspects of the argument. You're using a fan forum overreaction and misinterpretation of Liara's character to argue she could have changed sides...

And until you could resolve the confusion, she might as well. Regardless of whether you resolve the confusion, she can still have been said to changed sides: she's on her own side, now, and consistently demonstrates an independence of Shepard she didn't show before in ME1. The extent of the changes are not inherently clear prior to Shepard's arrival, nor is the reason to assume it should be obvious or known to everyone.

What is evident is that he gave the impression that Liara was working for the shadow broker.
What is evident is he knew and withheld contravening facts.

That Liara earlier opposed the Shadow Broker is not a contravening fact to what she may or may not be doing now. They are not mutually incompatible, anymore than the examples of prior conflict/present alliances that I mentioned earlier.

What is NOT evident is that he had any valid reason for doing so, and yet this is the case you are making.

The evidence is his source, which warns him,

We get that sort of basis quite a lot in Mass Effect: we don't get to question or verify most people's sources, but at the same time when we are taken advantage we are nearly uniformly notified of it.

#360
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 676 messages

Casuist wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...

It's not misleading to finger Cerberus as a reason, it's misleading to finger them as the reason.  Keeping the info of where the VS is and what they're doing from Cerberus is a legitimate reason not to tell you, but what he omits is that you, Commander Shepard, aren't trusted anymore.  This is revealed in the, "even if I could have, I wouldn't have told you." line when/if you confront him after Horizon.


.... Cerberus is the reason.

I'm fairly sure DPSSOC was the referring to Cerberus being the reason behind the Colony abductions.

#361
Bailyn242

Bailyn242
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Monochrome Wench wrote...

She was working for the Shadow Broker! She was one of his agents on Illium. She just also happened to be attempting to track him down and kill him. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Working for the person you want to kill does make sense if you can't find them any other way.

Same could be said of Shepards who want to kill TIM.


She was an independent information broker, not working for the Shadow Broker. Obtuse much? If you want to claim she was in any way working for the being that she was hunting I'll need a citation.

Blatant cover up and justification of your choice to back TIM.

#362
Zulu_DFA

Zulu_DFA
  • Members
  • 8 217 messages
Actually, when Kahlee first approaches Anderson, the reasonable thought that Commander Shepard should be contacted skims through his head... But Shepard is not available, so Anderson stops being reasonable and betrays the Alliance in a blink of an eye.

But let's be hypothetical for a moment: what would have happened, if Anderson could indeed contact Commander Shepard, and Shepard (Cerberus Loyalist in this case, or even the Neutral Get-the-Job-Done type) advised him, that attacking Cerberus was not a good idea, and Anderson&Kahlee more or less should leave Grayson to his fate, and turn his files over to the Alliance to stay out of trouble?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 17 février 2011 - 08:00 .


#363
DPSSOC

DPSSOC
  • Members
  • 3 033 messages

Casuist wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...

It's not misleading to finger Cerberus as a reason, it's misleading to finger them as the reason.  Keeping the info of where the VS is and what they're doing from Cerberus is a legitimate reason not to tell you, but what he omits is that you, Commander Shepard, aren't trusted anymore.  This is revealed in the, "even if I could have, I wouldn't have told you." line when/if you confront him after Horizon.


.... Cerberus is the reason.


No, keeping the info from Cerberus is a reason not to tell you about the VS mission, and a damn good one, but Anderson's admission he wouldn't have told you if he could shows the other reason was to keep the information from you personally.  If he'd said something to the effect of, "I would have told you, but we couldn't let Cerberus know we were investigating their involvement in the abductions." then Cerberus would have been the reason not to tell you pre-horizon (post-horizon doesn't matter).  Instead he tells you, point-blank, that he wouldn't have told you anyway.  I don't have any hard feelings that he doesn't trust me, he has good reason, but he mislead you when he told you it was mistrust of Cerberus, rather than you, keeping him from sharing where the VS was.

Modifié par DPSSOC, 17 février 2011 - 07:59 .


#364
Bailyn242

Bailyn242
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Maestro975 wrote...

Ramus Quaritch wrote...

they nearly perfectly fit the profile of the Ku Klux Klan, which for me makes them an evil organization.  And they have done some very illegal things that I talked about in my previous post.  Oh, I forgot to add that they assassinated a political candidate.  


Get a haircut, hippie. They're not out to exterminate other races. Their goal of human dominance may be somewhat arrogant, but no more arrogant than the GOP agenda of American dominance. And sometimes assassination is neccesary. If you're trying to prevent a en economy-crippling strike, secure a land permit that will enable you to build more houses (or roads that provide better access to said houses), or pass legislation that will create new jobs, and someone is standing in your way for asinine reaons, sometimes the best course of action is to just whack the MF.

Only Mary Sue Goody two-shoe types see Cerberus and Section 31 as "abominations that need to be taken down."

You gotta operate in the gray, the only people who fail to realize this are fools, who are either too sensitive for their own damn good, or foolishly clinging to antiquated religions, mores and folkways.


I have repeatedly said put a leash on that dog. Not put it down. TIM needs checks and balances since he has proven repeatedly that he cannot stop himself from making potentially destructive mistakes. In Retribution he attempts to check himself but we have seen that he only manages to do this after the fact. Once a mission has gone off the rails then he goes back and figures out what went wrong, he needs someone to catch those decisions before they go wrong.

The guy is very good at what he does but the lack of accountability makes him a threat. His mistakes cost too much. Once he is on a leash he would be a very useful tool for humanity and the galactic community at large.

As I've gotten deeper in this thread I've seen some pretty goofy excuses for TIM's lie about Liara, simply put Nyxeris is working for Liara because the SB knows that she is hunting him. Please don't even try to peddle the line that Nyxeris is there because Liara is/was working for the SB. That's just ludicrous and even TIM would pull a Gibbs (from NCIS) and smack you upside the head.

Claiming she works for Cerberus is even more hysterical. Really, then why wasn't she the first Dossier TIM gives you? If you trot out that TIM wanted her hunting the SB then we're right back to why he lied about her in the first place. She recovered Shep's body and gave it to the only people who would even try to bring him/her back, then went hunting the Shadow Broker.

The difference between the Council/Anderson is readily apparent. With the Council/Anderson there are no lies, of omission or otherwise. They give you the information and let you decide what to do with it all through ME1. The only time they impeded you in the first game is when they ground the Normandy. In ME2 they tell you exactly what they are doing and why. There is no lie there. When you question Anderson about the VS he tells you that he can't tell you while you're working with Cerberus. There is no lie by omission from Anderson, not even that you aren't trusted because you are working with/for Cerberus. He tells you that he can't because of that relationship. The lack of trust is apparent and it is not a lack of trust in Shepard. It is a lack of trust that on a ship filled with Cerberus personnel that the information might be discovered and passed on to TIM.

With TIM on the other hand he tells half truths and lies to force Shepard into the actions he requires. He doesn't trust Shepard to do what is needed or even to be capable of making these decisions. Pretty funny when you consider that he wouldn't even know about the threat if Shepard hadn't taken scraps of information, put them together and taken action all by his lonesome.

People who were up in arms over Liara's changes just needed to dig deeper. I got honked off only for as long as it took to find the reason. After that I understood perfectly why she would be doing what she was. She learned that kind of loyalty (Feron debt) from Shepard after all. The part about this particular argument is that Dean is implying that Shepard would believe that she had changed sides on the strength of TIMs rumors and a single conversation. Keep in mind that you can't even go to Illium until after the Horizon debacle, by which time TIM has already revealed to Shepard his duplicitous nature. Anyone past the age of puberty would dig deeper than a single conversation to find out the truth of what was going on there and, funny thing, it is the second conversation that reveals what is happening.

@Dean, telling you that he can't tell you is not a lie in any form. Semantics won't escape the fact that Anderson tells you why he cannot give you any information. You are working with Cerberus.

Also your thing about how TIM was claiming his source was claiming is ludicrous in the extreme. "Information is my weapon" is TIMs claim. Repeating information that he knows if false is a lie, no amount of my source told me can excuse the fact that he knows that the source is false if there was a source at all.

#365
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 676 messages

Bailyn242 wrote...

@Dean, telling you that he can't tell you is not a lie in any form. Semantics won't escape the fact that Anderson tells you why he cannot give you any information. You are working with Cerberus.

Not telling you why else he won't tell you, however, is. Especially when it changes the context and implication.

Also your thing about how TIM was claiming his source was claiming is ludicrous in the extreme. "Information is my weapon" is TIMs claim. Repeating information that he knows if false is a lie, no amount of my source told me can excuse the fact that he knows that the source is false if there was a source at all.

And you have yet to demonstrate he knows the data is false at the time. Simply because Liara opposed the Shadow Broker once does not mean she would never work with him, or that Liara's true objective (to kill the Broker) is readily known.

#366
Bailyn242

Bailyn242
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Actually, when Kahlee first approaches Anderson, the reasonable thought that Commander Shepard should be contacted skims through his head... But Shepard is not available, so Anderson stops being reasonable and betrays the Alliance in a blink of an eye.

But let's be hypothetical for a moment: what would have happened, if Anderson could indeed contact Commander Shepard, and Shepard (Cerberus Loyalist in this case, or even the Neutral Get-the-Job-Done type) advised him, that attacking Cerberus was not a good idea, and Anderson&Kahlee more or less should leave Grayson to his fate, and turn his files over to the Alliance to stay out of trouble?


Actually only the Cerberus loyalist would leave Grayson to his fate and not even all of them. It would be more like, give me the info and I'll find him. Even Cerberus backers know that they have made far too many mistakes and tortured people. We know that there are some within Cerberus who disagree with these types of actions.

#367
Bailyn242

Bailyn242
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Bailyn242 wrote...

@Dean, telling you that he can't tell you is not a lie in any form. Semantics won't escape the fact that Anderson tells you why he cannot give you any information. You are working with Cerberus.

Not telling you why else he won't tell you, however, is. Especially when it changes the context and implication.

Also your thing about how TIM was claiming his source was claiming is ludicrous in the extreme. "Information is my weapon" is TIMs claim. Repeating information that he knows if false is a lie, no amount of my source told me can excuse the fact that he knows that the source is false if there was a source at all.

And you have yet to demonstrate he knows the data is false at the time. Simply because Liara opposed the Shadow Broker once does not mean she would never work with him, or that Liara's true objective (to kill the Broker) is readily known.


Come on Dean, that whitewash is really getting thin, it's running down the walls already and any rain will wash it completely away. LotSB dispels your claims in a single message from TIM.

"We are aware..."

Modifié par Bailyn242, 17 février 2011 - 08:57 .


#368
Zurcior

Zurcior
  • Members
  • 273 messages

Maestro975 wrote...

Get a haircut, hippie. They're not out to exterminate other races. Their goal of human dominance may be somewhat arrogant, but no more arrogant than the GOP agenda of American dominance. And sometimes assassination is neccesary. If you're trying to prevent a en economy-crippling strike, secure a land permit that will enable you to build more houses (or roads that provide better access to said houses), or pass legislation that will create new jobs, and someone is standing in your way for asinine reaons, sometimes the best course of action is to just whack the MF.

Only Mary Sue Goody two-shoe types see Cerberus and Section 31 as "abominations that need to be taken down."

You gotta operate in the gray, the only people who fail to realize this are fools, who are either too sensitive for their own damn good, or foolishly clinging to antiquated religions, mores and folkways.


What a load of cow manure. If you want to do all that stuff, how about using your brain. Is it really that hard to prove the beneifts of such proposals without resorting to violence if you actually try? Is it really that hard to prove that your opponent is full of it, and that his ideals are FUBAR?

Don't even get me started on the naive stance that operating in the gray is a neccesity.Image IPB

#369
Zurcior

Zurcior
  • Members
  • 273 messages

Bailyn242 wrote...

I have repeatedly said put a leash on that dog. Not put it down. TIM needs checks and balances since he has proven repeatedly that he cannot stop himself from making potentially destructive mistakes. In Retribution he attempts to check himself but we have seen that he only manages to do this after the fact. Once a mission has gone off the rails then he goes back and figures out what went wrong, he needs someone to catch those decisions before they go wrong.

The guy is very good at what he does but the lack of accountability makes him a threat. His mistakes cost too much. Once he is on a leash he would be a very useful tool for humanity and the galactic community at large.

As I've gotten deeper in this thread I've seen some pretty goofy excuses for TIM's lie about Liara, simply put Nyxeris is working for Liara because the SB knows that she is hunting him. Please don't even try to peddle the line that Nyxeris is there because Liara is/was working for the SB. That's just ludicrous and even TIM would pull a Gibbs (from NCIS) and smack you upside the head.

Claiming she works for Cerberus is even more hysterical. Really, then why wasn't she the first Dossier TIM gives you? If you trot out that TIM wanted her hunting the SB then we're right back to why he lied about her in the first place. She recovered Shep's body and gave it to the only people who would even try to bring him/her back, then went hunting the Shadow Broker.

The difference between the Council/Anderson is readily apparent. With the Council/Anderson there are no lies, of omission or otherwise. They give you the information and let you decide what to do with it all through ME1. The only time they impeded you in the first game is when they ground the Normandy. In ME2 they tell you exactly what they are doing and why. There is no lie there. When you question Anderson about the VS he tells you that he can't tell you while you're working with Cerberus. There is no lie by omission from Anderson, not even that you aren't trusted because you are working with/for Cerberus. He tells you that he can't because of that relationship. The lack of trust is apparent and it is not a lack of trust in Shepard. It is a lack of trust that on a ship filled with Cerberus personnel that the information might be discovered and passed on to TIM.

With TIM on the other hand he tells half truths and lies to force Shepard into the actions he requires. He doesn't trust Shepard to do what is needed or even to be capable of making these decisions. Pretty funny when you consider that he wouldn't even know about the threat if Shepard hadn't taken scraps of information, put them together and taken action all by his lonesome.

People who were up in arms over Liara's changes just needed to dig deeper. I got honked off only for as long as it took to find the reason. After that I understood perfectly why she would be doing what she was. She learned that kind of loyalty (Feron debt) from Shepard after all. The part about this particular argument is that Dean is implying that Shepard would believe that she had changed sides on the strength of TIMs rumors and a single conversation. Keep in mind that you can't even go to Illium until after the Horizon debacle, by which time TIM has already revealed to Shepard his duplicitous nature. Anyone past the age of puberty would dig deeper than a single conversation to find out the truth of what was going on there and, funny thing, it is the second conversation that reveals what is happening.

@Dean, telling you that he can't tell you is not a lie in any form. Semantics won't escape the fact that Anderson tells you why he cannot give you any information. You are working with Cerberus.

Also your thing about how TIM was claiming his source was claiming is ludicrous in the extreme. "Information is my weapon" is TIMs claim. Repeating information that he knows if false is a lie, no amount of my source told me can excuse the fact that he knows that the source is false if there was a source at all.


I agree.

#370
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 676 messages

Bailyn242 wrote...

Come on Dean, that whitewash is really getting thin, it's running down the walls already and any rain will wash it completely away. LotSB dispels your claims in a single message from TIM.

"We are aware..."

Which comes at an indeterminate time well into ME2, and not at the start. The Lair of the Shadow Broker was written and released as a 'bridging DLC': a point after which Shepard already has the opportunity to talk to Liara (and, if played as Bridging DLC as designed, would actually be 'received' after being required to talk to Liara).

#371
Bailyn242

Bailyn242
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Bailyn242 wrote...

Come on Dean, that whitewash is really getting thin, it's running down the walls already and any rain will wash it completely away. LotSB dispels your claims in a single message from TIM.

"We are aware..."

Which comes at an indeterminate time well into ME2, and not at the start. The Lair of the Shadow Broker was written and released as a 'bridging DLC': a point after which Shepard already has the opportunity to talk to Liara (and, if played as Bridging DLC as designed, would actually be 'received' after being required to talk to Liara).


The point is that they are aware and have been aware for quite some time. TIM builds a house of cards with half truths and lies, at some point it has to come down. That is just the way something like that is. Now you can hope that someone has similar morals to yours and would understand your motivations but that doesn't mean that they'll trust you. If they have TIM's morals then they will never trust anyway and if they don't share your value system then the collapse of that house of cards will destroy whatever goodwill you had built up to that point.

#372
Zulu_DFA

Zulu_DFA
  • Members
  • 8 217 messages

Bailyn242 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Actually, when Kahlee first approaches Anderson, the reasonable thought that Commander Shepard should be contacted skims through his head... But Shepard is not available, so Anderson stops being reasonable and betrays the Alliance in a blink of an eye.

But let's be hypothetical for a moment: what would have happened, if Anderson could indeed contact Commander Shepard, and Shepard (Cerberus Loyalist in this case, or even the Neutral Get-the-Job-Done type) advised him, that attacking Cerberus was not a good idea, and Anderson&Kahlee more or less should leave Grayson to his fate, and turn his files over to the Alliance to stay out of trouble?

Actually only the Cerberus loyalist would leave Grayson to his fate and not even all of them. It would be more like, give me the info and I'll find him. Even Cerberus backers know that they have made far too many mistakes and tortured people. We know that there are some within Cerberus who disagree with these types of actions.

The question was not what your Shepard would do, if Anderson contacted him. The question was what Anderson would do, if my Shepard refused to participate in his insanity.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 17 février 2011 - 09:42 .


#373
Zurcior

Zurcior
  • Members
  • 273 messages

Zulu_DFA wrote...
 so Anderson stops being reasonable and betrays the Alliance in a blink of an eye.


 Since when did Anderson betray the Alliance?

#374
darknoon5

darknoon5
  • Members
  • 1 596 messages

Zurcior wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
 so Anderson stops being reasonable and betrays the Alliance in a blink of an eye.


 Since when did Anderson betray the Alliance?

Suppoedly when he went to the turians for help, even though that's ridiculous. He couldn't go to the alliance because of the cerberus insiders. Anderson did what he did to help the Alliance in the long run, something Zulu seems to miss.

#375
DPSSOC

DPSSOC
  • Members
  • 3 033 messages

darknoon5 wrote...

Zurcior wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
 so Anderson stops being reasonable and betrays the Alliance in a blink of an eye.


 Since when did Anderson betray the Alliance?

Suppoedly when he went to the turians for help, even though that's ridiculous. He couldn't go to the alliance because of the cerberus insiders. Anderson did what he did to help the Alliance in the long run, something Zulu seems to miss.


I don't think he misses it, if I'm not mistaken Zulu believes Cerberus is still an active part of the Alliance rather than a rogue group (I believe he has a thread dedicated to this theory).  With that in mind any action taken against Cerberus would constitute a betrayal of the Alliance.  Furthermore an argument can be made that Anderson's actions will actually hurt humanity, a lot.