188 réponses à ce sujet

[FaargAnNorgnal]

Wulfram wrote...

To seek to force human dominance is a very different thing.

It is impossible to "force" dominance. Either we are dominant or we are not. However if we don't push for it we certainly never will be.

[niravital]

Thompson family wrote...

I don't buy it. If the Reapers wanted TIM to have the Collector base, they would have just given it to him. The Collectors are "more like husks than slaves," anyway. No fight from them.

The Reapers need the Collectors as working hands to build the human Reaper. For some reason, they want Shepard, so maybe TIM job was to give Shepard to them. I actually started to suspect that TIM was indoctrinated even before Evolution, and I'm only about 3-4 pages into the second issue, so I'm speculating.

It adds up with sending Shepard to the Collector ship as a trap, not counting with Shepard surviving the suicide mission, the eyes, Cerberus previous indoctrinating experiments from ME1 (Tech given by the Reapers with promise to advance humanity?). Not so much with fighting over him with the Collectors to begin with and assembling such a talented team, and a few other stuff I'm probably missing.

I thought having TIM work for the Reapers was a great twist, but maybe there's a DOUBLE-TWIST with TIM being exposed to Reaper indoctrinating attempt and resisting it, therefore the special interest of the Reapers in humanity (first species to resist indoctrination?), and TIM dominance for he was exposed to Reaper Technology.

[Sajuro]

FaargAnNorgnal wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

To seek to force human dominance is a very different thing.

It is impossible to "force" dominance. Either we are dominant or we are not. However if we don't push for it we certainly never will be.

I fail to see the problem with that

[FaargAnNorgnal]

Sajuro wrote...

I fail to see the problem with that

It is pretty academic. Without a way to project dominance we will always be forced to acquiece some of our needs to our rivals. This means the prosperity of the human species, you know, those people who are your neighbors, friends, and relatives, will be harmed.

The elcor found a world perfectly suited to colonization for them if only they could terra-form it. Sadly they have been unable to do this because they, "lack the political capital with the Citadel Council." If humanity is the dominant force in the galaxy it will not have this problem.

Why do you see dominance as a bad thing? Are you falling back on the shrill cry that it means persecution of aliens? Do you feel the same way about the old Council? They were dominant too, much to our expense. Need I remind you of the events of Mass Effect 1, or the backstory? The Council encouraged humanity to settle unstable regions, putting humans in harms way for the Council's benefit. When pirates attacked did the Council help? No. When geth attacked, did the Council help? No. When Collectors attacked, did the Council help? No.

This is the danger in being in a weaker position. We care bound by Citadel laws but are not guaranteed the trade-off in support and aid that should come with voluntarily restricting our self-defense (the Farixen Treaty). If however we dominate the Council this is not a concern. We will have the influence and naval power to defend ourselves (our people and interests) without needing permission from anyone else.

Which would you rather have, Sajuro.

1.) You are an adult and can go pretty much wherever you want and spend your money on whatever you want

Or

2.) I am your legal guardian and I will tell you where you can go and what you can spend your money on (and how much)

[Xilizhra]

Yes, it'd be good for us, but it wouldn't be good for anyone else. The shift in the balance of power would greatly anger the three most populous and otherwise powerful species in Citadel space, and I doubt many of the non-Council members would enjoy the shift much either. Humans would be dominant, but it wouldn't be morally superior and a change that abrupt has far too much potential for damage. It's best for the galaxy overall if humans don't try to achieve sole dominance.

[FaargAnNorgnal]

Xilizhra wrote...

Yes, it'd be good for us, but it wouldn't be good for anyone else.

Maybe, maybe not. Dean_the_Young pointed out some ways it might actually wind up helping the rest of the galaxy. In summary, even if we dominate the Council we will be weaker than the old Council. Thus we will have to negotiate with the lesser powers far more than the old Council did. That is a win for them and for us. Everyone wins, isn't that nice?

In any case, I don't care too much whether or not what is good for us is good for anyone else. My concern is humanity and humanity alone. To relegate the needs of my own people as secondary would be a betrayal of the trust they placed in me. It is not my job to be objective, it is my job to look out for my people above all. In the end this is balanced by a similar mindset amongst the alien powers. We are all looking out for own own interests and thus we all run into each other. That forces everybody to come to the negotiating table to find work arounds and mutual interests.

Xilizhra wrote...

The shift in the balance of power would greatly anger the three most populous and otherwise powerful species in Citadel space, and I doubt many of the non-Council members would enjoy the shift much either. Humans would be dominant, but it wouldn't be morally superior and a change that abrupt has far too much potential for damage. It's best for the galaxy overall if humans don't try to achieve sole dominance.

You are right, wrong, and then wrong again. We already know from ME2 that the old Council races are unhappy. However they are unable to do anything about it except grumble. Let them complain all they want. Complaining is not very constructive in this case. The asari have all but given up and the turians are posturing. For the most part the salarians have remained silent, only contesting with us our claim on Ilos. For the "lesser races" as your beloved Council called them, nothing has changed at all. They are still out of the loop. Though perhaps seeing the old order torn down will give them hope that the new order will more inclusive. I can't say if it will or not but in my above paragraph I pointed out an argument which claims it will.

Whether our dominance is "morally superior" or not doesn't matter. Power is power, it does not matter where it comes from. I understand this is a shocking and perhaps revolting notion to consider, but you don't have to like it. You do however have to accept it. I must ask, was the old Council morally superior? If so, how? How is humantiy not morally superior for doing the same thing they did? The Council races didn't work together out of a sense of fair play, they did it because they had to. Joining together gave them the freedom to disregard everyone else.

The old Council practiced genocide, they meddled in the affairs of non-affiliated races (krogan), they were apathetic to the destruction of allied species (quarians, batarians, and humans), and they employed secret police with the legal right to murder and torture with no real checks or balances. If the old Council was morally superior then I would be loath to meet one that isn't. The human Council has done none of these things so far. Perhaps only because it hasn't been in power long enough. At the very least though they have reigned in the Spectres, something which indicates a greater desire in protecting the rights of the public.

Modifié par FaargAnNorgnal, 22 février 2011 - 02:27 .

[Xilizhra]

Maybe, maybe not. Dean_the_Young pointed out some ways it might actually wind up helping the rest of the galaxy. In summary, even if we dominate the Council we will be weaker than the old Council. Thus we will have to negotiate with the lesser powers far more than the old Council did. That is a win for them and for us. Everyone wins, isn't that nice?

It's possible, in theory. I don't want to count on it; it could equally be that humanity goes draconian to keep itself in power and winds up starting a major war.

In any case, I don't care too much whether or not what is good for us is good for anyone else. My concern is humanity and humanity alone. To relegate the needs of my own people as secondary would be a betrayal of the trust they placed in me. It is not my job to be objective, it is my job to look out for my people above all. In the end this is balanced by a similar mindset amongst the alien powers. We are all looking out for own own interests and thus we all run into each other. That forces everybody to come to the negotiating table to find work arounds and mutual interests.

I feel the same way. Except that I believe that my being raised to the position of Spectre means that I do need to be objective, and that it'd be a betrayal of the Council's trust in me to favor humanity. I was an Alliance marine; now I'm a Citadel Spectre, and that's what I'll be acting as.

Whether or dominance is "morally superior" or not doesn't matter. Power is power, it does not matter where it comes from. I understand this is a shocking and perhaps revolting notion to consider, but you don't have to like it. You do however have to accept it. I must ask, was the old Council morally superior? If so, how? How is humantiy not morally superior for doing the same thing they did? The Council races didn't work together out of a sense of fair play, they did it because they had to. Joining together gave them the freedom to disregard everyone else.

Neither form of dominance is morally superior, but I believe that my duty is to help everyone as much as I can, and not try to propel one species into dominance.

The old Council practiced genocide, they meddled in the affairs of non-affiliated races (krogan), they were apathetic to the destruction of allied species (quarians, batarians, and humans), and they employed secret police with the legal right to murder and torture with no real checks or balances.

The United States and most other governments have done the same. Do their entire political systems deserve to be thrown out?

[TuringPoint]

I think some of us are overestimating the significance - good or bad - of the council shift, if humanity takes over or if they don't. I don't get the impression the so-called human-led council was anything more than a council where humanity had slightly more sway. Turians still hold the significant military dominance, and the biggest gun of all the races which would stand against the Reapers - the Ascension - is gone.



In any case, if you form a cooperative government, you can't really be dominant over them, can you? Maybe your interests have a slightly better chance at being addressed, but it's still the same system. This is made clear by the new council's treatment of Shepard. They could just as well be worse, more conservative and cautious, and inexperienced on top of everything else.



Violent upheaval never has predictable results.

[FaargAnNorgnal]

Xilizhra wrote...

It's possible, in theory. I don't want to count on it; it could equally be that humanity goes draconian to keep itself in power and winds up starting a major war.

If you're going to pull that card then I'm going to sugges that if humanity remains in everyone's shadow that we might be the victim of an invasion by hostile alien forces and be unable to defend ourselves while our "allies" watch from a distance. Come to think of it, I think this might have already happened. Three times in fact. First batarian pirates, then geth, and then Collectors. In each case the Council did nothing (the alien one anyway). I won't risk what happened to the quarians happening to us.

I think war is unlikely unless we instigate it. A war for the ( former) Council races, even if they win, would be costly. Nobody wants a costly war because there are too many losers, even among the winning side. What has been pointed out remains true: the Alliance doesn't need to guarantee it will win a war, only that it will make victory too painful for the victor. That ensures that war is in nobody's interests and thus that it will not happen.

In the mean time humanity is unrestricted and can take decisive action against any parties which threaten or harm it.

Xilizhra wrote...

I feel the same way. Except that I believe that my being raised to the position of Spectre means that I do need to be objective, and that it'd be a betrayal of the Council's trust in me to favor humanity. I was an Alliance marine; now I'm a Citadel Spectre, and that's what I'll be acting as.

That's an honorable position to hold, but also a naive one. You clearly believed all the Council's rehtoric about protecting the galaxy. I can understand why; it is an appealing notion. That's why they say it, after all. However the truth becomes evident when you read between the lines and you study the history. The Council never existed to serve the galaxy, it was there to serve the interests of the three Council races. There never was any objectivity. To them you are a tool and your noble outlook will be used to undermine Council enemies, not to bring the galaxy equal justice.

Xilizhra wrote...

The United States and most other governments have done the same. Do their entire political systems deserve to be thrown out?

That's a baited question if I ever heard one. Let me just say this: the Council's system was not thrown out. All that happened is the leaders were changed. It's throwing out the President and the senators, not tearing down the whole system.

[Xilizhra]

If you're going to pull that card then I'm going to sugges that if humanity remains in everyone's shadow that we might be the victim of an invasion by hostile alien forces and be unable to defend ourselves while our "allies" watch from a distance. Come to think of it, I think this might have already happened. Three times in fact. First batarian pirates, then geth, and then Collectors. In each case the Council did nothing (the alien one anyway). I won't risk what happened to the quarians happening to us.

We might be. So might anyone, and if humans were in charge, we'd ignore them. As a matter of fact, the Council has never intervened in anything unless it's systematic and blatant; the krogan took over several asari colonies before the Council told them to quit it.

That's an honorable position to hold, but also a naive one. You clearly believed all the Council's rehtoric about protecting the galaxy. I can understand why; it is an appealing notion. That's why they say it, after all. However the truth becomes evident when you read between the lines and you study the history. The Council never existed to serve the galaxy, it was there to serve the interests of the three Council races. There never was any objectivity. To them you are a tool and your noble outlook will be used to undermine Council enemies, not to bring the galaxy equal justice.

I really don't care if their rhetoric is true or not; I'm going to serve and protect the galaxy. Luckily, the Council's never asked me to do anything that gets in the way of that.

That's a baited question if I ever heard one. Let me just say this: the Council's system was not thrown out. All that happened is the leaders were changed. It's throwing out the President and the senators, not tearing down the whole system.

Then that makes the actions of the "old Council" irrelevant. The worst the current one has done is not help the quarians.

[Sajuro]

FaargAnNorgnal wrote...

Sajuro wrote...

I fail to see the problem with that

-snip-
Why do you see dominance as a bad thing? Are you falling back on the shrill cry that it means persecution of aliens? Do you feel the same way about the old Council? They were dominant too, much to our expense. Need I remind you of the events of Mass Effect 1, or the backstory? The Council encouraged humanity to settle unstable regions, putting humans in harms way for the Council's benefit. When pirates attacked did the Council help? No. When geth attacked, did the Council help? No. When Collectors attacked, did the Council help? No.

This is the danger in being in a weaker position. We care bound by Citadel laws but are not guaranteed the trade-off in support and aid that should come with voluntarily restricting our self-defense (the Farixen Treaty). If however we dominate the Council this is not a concern. We will have the influence and naval power to defend ourselves (our people and interests) without needing permission from anyone else.

Which would you rather have, Sajuro.

1.) You are an adult and can go pretty much wherever you want and spend your money on whatever you want

Or

2.) I am your legal guardian and I will tell you where you can go and what you can spend your money on (and how much)

I see human dominance as a bad thing because the people who would probably wind up being in charge would comprimise Alien interests and probably would lead to oppression, because humans who seek power tend to be the kind who like to abuse it. I do not know why people keep blaming the council for not acting on the Collector attacks when the humans who did settle out there did so because they did not want any 'big government' interference (Remember how mad the mechanic was at the Alliance for having the gaul to send them a weapon system, though I must admit they stuck to their convictions) and I don't know how much a human council would help if they had found the beacon on a volus colony and the geth had attacked it, I know you can say that they would have helped until the shifty looking cows come home but that doesn't change the fact that the humans probably wouldn't want to get involved. Also pirate attacks are common on the edge of citadel space, just because they don't nurse every human colony it doesn't mean they aren't trying to stop the problem.

I would prefer if we were in a mutually interdependent position (you know, something that won't happen with TIMMY 'fighting for humanity', and I don't know why MY would stand for) with the council species. That would help our bargaining power and make us more valuable than the spunky upstart species. The Farixen trearty is to make sure that an arms race would explode+ maintaining the balance of power which doesn't matter anymore if you decided to let the council die (since the Turians step up production), and for it I have admiration for the Asari who do their damndest to prevent wars after the last few hundreds of years (probably has to do with life span). We don't exist in a vaccuum, which is why we need to work with the council species and other species of the galaxy.

I would rather be #1, but that situation isn't possible without becoming another space north korea in Mass Effect. Every action we take has an effect on the other races, if the Alliance says "Hey lets build X number of dreadnoughts and if the Turians don't like it, Ef them!" the Turians will feel threatened by it and in turn build more weapons to counter our increased force. Heck, even as adults we aren't independent to do whatever we want, not when you look at the bigger picture.

But when someone tells me the council doesn't care about humans, I want to remind them that the Turian Heirarchy didn't glass earth because a certain council decided to give a d@^^n

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...
I feel the same way. Except that I believe that my being raised to the position of Spectre means that I do need to be objective, and that it'd be a betrayal of the Council's trust in me to favor humanity. I was an Alliance marine; now I'm a Citadel Spectre, and that's what I'll be acting as.

Well, there's the words of someone who'se never spent much time with a Marine.

[Xilizhra]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I feel the same way. Except that I believe that my being raised to the position of Spectre means that I do need to be objective, and that it'd be a betrayal of the Council's trust in me to favor humanity. I was an Alliance marine; now I'm a Citadel Spectre, and that's what I'll be acting as.

Well, there's the words of someone who'se never spent much time with a Marine.

How many IRL Marines have gotten the chance that Shepard did?

And mine was always the "to see space" type.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I feel the same way. Except that I believe that my being raised to the position of Spectre means that I do need to be objective, and that it'd be a betrayal of the Council's trust in me to favor humanity. I was an Alliance marine; now I'm a Citadel Spectre, and that's what I'll be acting as.

Well, there's the words of someone who'se never spent much time with a Marine.

How many IRL Marines have gotten the chance that Shepard did?

How many marines have been hand picked at the behest of their government to serve on a special task force with expanded privaleges and fewer restrictions and oversight? Or otherwise gone on to other, higher, offices?

Quite a few, actually. Hence special forces, and other sorts of service. And the axiom 'once a marine, always a marine' still holds true.

And mine was always the "to see space" type.

Like I said: spoken like someone who hasn't known the Marines.

[FaargAnNorgnal]

Xilizhra wrote...

We might be. So might anyone, and if humans were in charge, we'd ignore them. As a matter of fact, the Council has never intervened in anything unless it's systematic and blatant; the krogan took over several asari colonies before the Council told them to quit it.

So then why are you willing to risk this fate for humanity? How would you explain this to your fellow human beings? Would you ask them to take one for the team? You should ensure that humanity is safe before caring about anyone else.

You aren't serving the galaxy as a protector, you are serving as a en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot on behalf of the Council races. If you try to be objective that means you will have to undermine them at some point. They won't allow that.

Edit: For clarification, I'm not calling YOU an idiot, Xilizhra. I'm just pointing you to the term and what it means given your position. You are a tool to the Council, nothing more.

Remember that as a Spectre you have only ever carried out one mission for them over the course of a few months. I guarantee that if you work for them for years and years you will eventually realize they aren't allowing you to be objective. To curb your desire for objectivity they'll probably just start assinging you more specific missions, preventing you from acting on your own. You exist to serve them, not the galaxy.

Modifié par FaargAnNorgnal, 22 février 2011 - 03:15 .

[Xilizhra]

Quite a few, actually. Hence special forces, and other sorts of service. And the axiom 'once a marine, always a marine' still holds true.

Fine, I'll clarify. I'm still a Marine in that I have the skills/character development of one, but my primary service is no longer to the Alliance.

So then why are you willing to risk this fate for humanity? How would you explain this to your fellow human beings? Would you ask them to take one for the team? You should ensure that humanity is safe before caring about anyone else.

I did when I saved the Destiny Ascension, and while I remember the lives lost, I don't regret a thing. Regardless, all of my missions as a Spectre have been about protecting humanity, even after Cerberus brought me back. There's never been a conflict of interest.

You aren't serving the galaxy as a protector, you are serving as a en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot on behalf of the Council races. If you try to be objective that means you will have to undermine them at some point. They won't allow that.

When it comes to the Reaper war, I might have to undermine them. If I do so, for the good of the galaxy, I will.

Remember that as a Spectre you have only ever carried out one mission for them over the course of a few months. I guarantee that if you work for them for years and years you will eventually realize they aren't allowing you to be objective. To curb your desire for objectivity they'll probably just start assinging you more specific missions, preventing you from acting on your own. You exist to serve them, not the galaxy.

I think I'll worry about that after the Reaper war; the galaxy might change a heck of a lot from that.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 22 février 2011 - 03:18 .

[Sajuro]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I feel the same way. Except that I believe that my being raised to the position of Spectre means that I do need to be objective, and that it'd be a betrayal of the Council's trust in me to favor humanity. I was an Alliance marine; now I'm a Citadel Spectre, and that's what I'll be acting as.

Well, there's the words of someone who'se never spent much time with a Marine.

How many IRL Marines have gotten the chance that Shepard did?

How many marines have been hand picked at the behest of their government to serve on a special task force with expanded privaleges and fewer restrictions and oversight? Or otherwise gone on to other, higher, offices?

Quite a few, actually. Hence special forces, and other sorts of service. And the axiom 'once a marine, always a marine' still holds true.

I always thought that was more mentality than alliegence, if a Marine was picked for a special forces under the command of the UN (closest thing to Spectre) then having loyalty to their country before loyalty to the international community would be problematic.

Modifié par Sajuro, 22 février 2011 - 03:23 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

Quite a few, actually. Hence special forces, and other sorts of service. And the axiom 'once a marine, always a marine' still holds true.

Fine, I'll clarify. I'm still a Marine in that I have the skills/character development of one, but my primary service is no longer to the Alliance.

And yet again...

Spoken like a person not familiar with the Marines.

(Also like someone less familiar with how governments select people to represent them in such national endeavors, but hey.)

[Xilizhra]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Quite a few, actually. Hence special forces, and other sorts of service. And the axiom 'once a marine, always a marine' still holds true.

Fine, I'll clarify. I'm still a Marine in that I have the skills/character development of one, but my primary service is no longer to the Alliance.

And yet again...

Spoken like a person not familiar with the Marines.

(Also like someone less familiar with how governments select people to represent them in such national endeavors, but hey.)

So, retired Marines are still in active service to the country?
Also, don't think her thoughts about balancing her twin duties were easy. But she thought that acting as the best Spectre she could would ultimately help the Alliance, especially considering that her entire mission was based around helping humanity...

[FaargAnNorgnal]

Sajuro wrote...

 I do not know why people keep blaming the council for not acting on the Collector attacks when the humans who did settle out there did so because they did not want any 'big government' interference...

Whether the Terminus colonists want protection or not is irrelevant. At the very least the Council should be concerned that entire populations are VANISHING WITHOUT A TRACE. A phenomena like this warrants investigation, most especially if it is being directed against a single species. That is rather odd, don't you think?

As for your other statements, of-course the Council was trying to stop the pirate problem. They were doing that by encouraging humans to settle in unstable regions. They were unwilling to do this themselves. Their tactics thus put humans in danger for their benefit. It is inexcusable for anyone who claims to have human interests in mind to accept this.

Sajuro wrote...

That would help our bargaining power and make us more valuable than the spunky upstart species.

No, it would bog us down in politics and once again exclude the 'lesser races'.

Sajuro wrote...

The Farixen trearty is to make sure that an arms race would explode+ maintaining the balance of power...

The bolded part is the only reason it exists. It is there to prevent, by law, any non Council race from challenging the military supremacy of the Council races. It's like the United Nations (which is ultimately controlled by the most powerful nations of Earth) attempting to block upstart nations from acquiring nuclear technology. It's self-interested politics and nothing more.

Sajuro wrote...

But when someone tells me the council doesn't care about humans, I want to remind them that the Turian Heirarchy didn't glass earth because a certain council decided to give a d@^^n

I would argue that the Council only stopped the war because they didn't know what they were up against and didn't want to provoke more hostile action incase these "humans" were the next krogan or rachni.

Modifié par FaargAnNorgnal, 22 février 2011 - 03:24 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Sajuro wrote...

I always thought that was more mentality than alliegence, if a Marine was picked for a special forces under the command of the UN (closest thing to Spectre) then having loyalty to their country before loyalty to the international community would be problematic.

US forces assigned to NATO/UN Command remain US forces working for NATO/UN. Loyalty to the Country remains, and it's simply that the country is in the alliance in its own right. I wouldn't follow a French General's orders because I'm loyal to NATO: I'd follow a French General's orders because I'm loyal to the United States and the United States is telling me do whatever the French General says. His authority over US troops stems from the US authority, not from NATO. This applies vice versa as well.




Marines are notorious (and infamous) for their esprite de corps across time and jobs. That's literal bootcamp indoctrination there: the people who don't apply it, who would actively resist it, actually tend to get kicked out, for a number of reasons. 'Not maintaining an attitude appropriate for the service' is actually a fatal offense in bootcamp (along with other things such as not learning how to keep your uniform right, drill and ceremony, etc. etc.).

Boot camp is designed to break your personal identity and make you identify as a Marine. People who would resist it, don't ascend.

[Xilizhra]

Boot camp is designed to break your personal identity and make you identify as a Marine. People who would resist it, don't ascend.

No iteration of Shepard that I know of acts like this, given how important personal identity is, so possibly the problem is that ME1 was just made unrealistically. Either that, or Shepard's will is strong enough that she was able to reassert herself when outside of the Marine chain of command relatively easily.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

So, retired Marines are still in active service to the country?

Active Service doesn't mean what I think you think it means.

You ask a retired Marine if he's a Marine, and he's liable to tell you he's a Marine. If you ask an active duty marine if a veteran Marine is still a Marine, he's liable to tell you that the man is still a Marine.

It's a form of community, not at all unique to the Marines, that crosses bariers. In the same sense that nationalism is a pan-class identity movement, being a Marine is not simply something you 'stop' being.

Also, don't think her thoughts about balancing her twin duties were easy. But she thought that acting as the best Spectre she could would ultimately help the Alliance, especially considering that her entire mission was based around helping humanity...

Sadly, I really don't buy that from you.

[FaargAnNorgnal]

Or the Alliance Marine Corps isn't anything like the United States one.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

Boot camp is designed to break your personal identity and make you identify as a Marine. People who would resist it, don't ascend.

No iteration of Shepard that I know of acts like this, given how important personal identity is, so possibly the problem is that ME1 was just made unrealistically. Either that, or Shepard's will is strong enough that she was able to reassert herself when outside of the Marine chain of command relatively easily.

Or, more likely, you've not experienced or seen any such aspect of that sort of conditioning, and so it doesn't reflect in your characters.

It's not a flaw in the game, really, since the game never states your position of outright placing the Council above the Alliance.

Heck, to date the game's never provided a 'side with the Council instead of the Alliance' path.