864 réponses à ce sujet

[jamesp81]

Pwener2313 wrote...

It has to be something else. Probably nothing at all. Im totally loyal to Cerberus, kept the base, made friendly with everyone. I don't want my ass kissing to go to waste!

Get used to it.  As paragons, our ass kissing to the council in ME1 resulted in (airquotes) Ahh, yes, Reapers (/airquotes) in ME2.

[Bad King]

I thought that keeping the Collector Base was a renegade decission in that you were handing powerful technology to a morally questionable organisation in order to gain every possible advantage against the reapers. I wasn't expecting Cerberus to be like "Hey guys, I know we spent lots on ressurecting him, but lets try and kill Shepard 4 the lulz". Hopefully Bioware will give us a decent reason for this Cerberus aggression against Shepard because at the moment I really can't see any legitimate reason why TIM who has spent billions on combating the reapers would resort to this sort of pettiness in the face of humanity's imminent annihilation.

Modifié par Bad King, 08 avril 2011 - 03:21 .

[jamesp81]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Seboist wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Seboist wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Pwener2313 wrote...

Sajuukcor76 wrote...

Collector Base leads to a good route for Indoctrination since none of the tech was destroyed. During the IFF the people there say that "A dead god still dreams", and since there is a Reaper, while dead, in the base it's an extreme risk to keep it. Hence it's a bad move.

Dead Reaper: Unfinished

Collector Base: Not really Reaper tech like Object Rho (not capable of indoctrination)

This is an assumption, I just thought I'd point this out. No one knows what was on that base but, based on EDI's reveal of its location and the conversation that followed, it is possible that the Reapers created it.

However, it is never stated anywhere whether the base does or does not contain devices that can cause indoctrination. 

I doubt the base has any indoctrination devices. The Collectors were controlled via their cybernetic implants and other lifeforms were never intended to be "hanging out" in the base.

This video of the MST3K/Rifftrax guys doing a song at w00stock represents my views on Reaper tech (and Reaper tech accessories) perfectly.

Thanix Cannon,Collector Particle Beam, EDI,Citadel and Mass Relays must be "indoctrinating devices" too.

Ok. Well two of those things are things we made after blowing a thing up and studying the pieces... which is what I assumed happened with the collector's base.

And Sovereign has explicitly established the Citadel and Mass Relays as... well... a Trap. They exist so they can find us easy, and kill us. Records of where colonies are located will usually be found on the citadel, and colonies will be found near Mass Relays. Plus, they may be able to turn relays on and off as they need 'em.

So yes. One of those things is an in-tact piece of tech that is not a trap. Sorry! Ok.

That video represents my opinion on 80% of Reaper Tech.

The rest of it we can be wary of, or blow up and study the pieces. And I'm not saying I'm correct. I'm just really, really paranoid about indoctrination. Better safe than sorry.

True.  EDI and Thanix cannons were devloped from destroyed Reaper parts.  I'm fine with that method.  Everytime intact Reaper tech has been studied it turned into a complete ****storm.  Kill it first and study the wreckage.  Hell, Thanix cannons might be one of the weapons that helps us in ME3 win the war....

[Darc_Requiem]

Keeping the base was always bad idea since the only option you had was either destroy it or give it to TIM. It there was third option, say letting Mordin form a team to research the base I would have been all over it. At least Mordin seems to be able to have successful research projects.

[MisterJB]

Saphra Deden wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

And again, we disagree. The continued existence of our species is important, yes. However, I feel that there's no point in saving humanity if we lose our humanity in the process and become worse than the Reapers.

Ah, yes, you see, I think that is... hmm. How do I put this without Pacifien jumping on my back?

That is an extremely misguided view to take, MisterJB.

It is also an extremely arrogant one. You are judging an entire species.

Indeed it is, that is exactly what I'm doing, I do not deny it. However, it is simply how I feel about the situation and I did the only thing I could have to prevent it, I removed the chance for humanity to even do such a thing.
I like to pretend that humanity would not do it, that there would be people who would prefer to die, perhaps that is one of the reasons why I destroyed that abomination. However, you speak to me of future generations and how they would condemn what their forefathers did and I call them hypocrites. Because if they are able to complain, it's because they are at peace and are not faced with such a choice. If one generation chose to become monstrosities instead of dying, then chances are the next generation would have done the exact same thing.
And if Humanity, as a race, is willing to feed their own flesh and blood to the Reapers, to offer human sacrifices, then perhaps we really are a bligth on Galactic Purity and we should dissapear.
My Shepard wouldn't actively works towards the destruction of Humanity, of course, but he also wouldn't lift a finger to help them. He woud find a nice hole to hide until the Reapers dissapear or he dies from old age. And possibly, he would try to leave a warning for the civilization to come. Perhaps they are worthy of putting an end to the Reapers.

Is it the rigth choice? No, but it's just the way I am. Just like I am unable to kill a stupid teenager Asari because of a corrupt Volus.

Modifié par MisterJB, 08 avril 2011 - 03:24 .

[jamesp81]

MisterJB wrote...

Pwener2313 wrote...

hawat333 wrote...

It was a bad idea in the first place.

Depends in your ultimate goal. I want humans to be on top. Paragons, the naive bunch they are, hope to make friendly with all aliens. The latter seems like the smart move to me, it's what the Turians would have done as well.

So, instead of attempting to earn the trust and regard of other races, it 's smarter to put them in a position that will eventually lead them to rebel? No empire lasts forever.
I will refer to Grunt's recruitment and say that my Paragon Shepard's mentality is "Offer one hand but arm the other" not "Let's all be friends".
But the Reaper tec is simply too dangerous, anyone who tries to play with it, ends up burned. I don't trust Cerberus with it, I don't trust the Alliance with it and I don't even trust myself with it.

I'm with Grunt.  I'll offer one hand and arm the other.  If they take the proffered hand, excellent.  If not, I've always got that OTHER hand....

[jamesp81]

Golden Owl wrote...

BlackEssence wrote...

My question is, what is so bad about being holier than thou? Why is being holier than thou made out to be a bad way to be? Heck, I am holier than thou and I still have a sharp edge is being a total BAD**** when I need to be.  I don't recall being that COMPLETELY holier than thou even though I, myself, have played as a paragon. You all have to keep in mind that a person has personal preferences that come into play when playing games as complex as ME. We tend to formulate opinions and try to pass them off as facts when we clearly didn't develop the game. We are just basing it off the information that was given to us which could have very well been designed to make us think one way when later we will be doing the exact opposite of what we expected.

Black Essence, as staunch paragon player myself and as a reflection of my personal views in the real world, I find the Holier-than-Thou comments aimed at paragon players quite insulting really....I certainly don't see myself as Holier-than-Thou ,that I give a real damn about how others feel and how my words and actions reflect on others (won't go into the choices we make about how we choose our own reactions, etc...this is not a philosophy forum)...doesn't give special credit or some ridiculous heightened position, etc...We all just trundle along with our own perceptions, doing the best that each of us can...though that said, what I would really like to see is a bit of respect for each individuals perception....if that happens then we would see some very intriguing and intersting dialogue form.

Amen.  I also give a damn about how others feel.  Unless they're causing me problems, in which case I screw their world up.  But what happens to people matters to me.  I don't like being crude to people who didn't do anything to me, nor do I see any reason to.

Modifié par jamesp81, 08 avril 2011 - 03:25 .

[Labrev]

I'm not a base keeper, but I think that Bioware should have let players become Cerberus allies if they saw fit. Why TIM would make you an enemy if you proved to be a valuable asset to their team makes 0 sense.

[Almostfaceman]

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

I'm not a base keeper, but I think that Bioware should have let players become Cerberus allies if they saw fit. Why TIM would make you an enemy if you proved to be a valuable asset to their team makes 0 sense.

I'm not sure how Renegade players can end their relationship with TiM - the one Renegade ending that I saw on youtube it wasn't entirely amicable - but fer sure with a Paragon it makes sense - TiM simply has to be in control.  If you're not following his orders you're useless to him.

[jamesp81]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Keeping the base and giving it to TIM is better than just destroying it. When you destroy it all you do is rob yourself of a potential asset.

Study the wreckage.  There will be plenty of it.  This is how EDI and the Thanix cannon were developed.

[Gabey5]

you are not keeping the base, TIM is

Modifié par Gabey5, 08 avril 2011 - 03:42 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

MisterJB wrote...

And again, we disagree. The continued existence of our species is important, yes. However, I feel that there's no point in saving humanity if we lose our humanity in the process and become worse than the Reapers.

This... does not even make sense. It is nothing beyond blind idealism at best and just illogical otherwise. We would only "lose our humanity" - one of the worst statements in the game - if we utilized the base for nefarious purposes. Turn off the squishy device and we have technology to study in face of a galaxy threat capable of complete annihilation to all organic life. Unless ME3 provides a plausible scenario for TIM to become our antagonist. This is merely a retcon or the base will have little to no importance in a similar capacity to the Council.

The choice was awful because it was a false dichotomy but blowing the base up on the off chance we discover an alternative method is just... idiocy. I suppose the logic; loose as it may be, is TIM would be it for evil. In spite of this, we can destroy it later were that the case.

[MisterJB]

Saphra Deden wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Indeed it is, that is exactly what I'm doing, I do not deny it.

That's fine then. If you admit it I think we're done discussing it. Though I do find it heinous.

Have a nice day.

Alrigth then. Allow me to just say one last thing in my defense. My actions, as heinous as they migh be, would only be a direct consequence of humanity's crime. If this situation were to happen, it would not be Shepard who condemned Humanity to extinction, Humanity did it to itself.

[Bad King]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

And again, we disagree. The continued existence of our species is important, yes. However, I feel that there's no point in saving humanity if we lose our humanity in the process and become worse than the Reapers.

This... does not even make sense. It is nothing beyond blind idealism at best and just illogical otherwise. We would only "lose our humanity" - one of the worst statements in the game - if we utilized the base for nefarious purposes. Turn off the squishy device and we have technology to study in face of a galaxy threat capable of complete annihilation to all organic life. Unless ME3 provides a plausible scenario for TIM to become our antagonist. This is merely a retcon or the base will have little to no importance in a similar capacity to the Council.

The choice was awful because it was a false dichotomy but blowing the base up on the off chance we discover an alternative method is just... idiocy. I suppose the logic; loose as it may be, is TIM would be it for evil. In spite of this, we can destroy it later were that the case.

Also there is a lot more at stake than 'losing our humanity'. Stopping the Reapers would save every present and future galactic civilisation be they human or non-human. We aren't just fighting for humanity.

Modifié par Bad King, 08 avril 2011 - 03:54 .

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

Keeping the base was a good idea, it was a non-choice. the real dilemma of the situation was whether trusting cerberus was the right thing to do.


it'd be crazy if that decision has such an impact that cerberus may NOT be against you if you left them the base....


I wonder what will happen with miranda, jacob, and kelly?

[MisterJB]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

And again, we disagree. The continued existence of our species is important, yes. However, I feel that there's no point in saving humanity if we lose our humanity in the process and become worse than the Reapers.

This... does not even make sense. It is nothing beyond blind idealism at best and just illogical otherwise. We would only "lose our humanity" - one of the worst statements in the game - if we utilized the base for nefarious purposes. Turn off the squishy device and we have technology to study in face of a galaxy threat capable of complete annihilation to all organic life. Unless ME3 provides a plausible scenario for TIM to become our antagonist. This is merely a retcon or the base will have little to no importance in a similar capacity to the Council.

The choice was awful because it was a false dichotomy but blowing the base up on the off chance we discover an alternative method is just... idiocy. I suppose the logic; loose as it may be, is TIM would be it for evil. In spite of this, we can destroy it later were that the case.

Try to put that into context. When I spoke against humanity becoming worse than the Reapers, I was talking about a possible future where Humanity chose to create its own Reapers by sacrificing millions of humans.

The reasons I destroyed the base were not just because I did not find TIM trusthworthy. Personally, I chose to destroy the Collector Base because I would no trust anyone in the Galaxy with that kind of power, even if we knew it is secure (we do not). Not Cerberus, not the Alliance, not even myself.
Had there been a third choice: "Keep the base for Shepard", I would still have destroyed it, working with raper tec  just has too many inherent risks.

Modifié par MisterJB, 08 avril 2011 - 04:00 .

[Almostfaceman]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

And again, we disagree. The continued existence of our species is important, yes. However, I feel that there's no point in saving humanity if we lose our humanity in the process and become worse than the Reapers.

This... does not even make sense. It is nothing beyond blind idealism at best and just illogical otherwise. We would only "lose our humanity" - one of the worst statements in the game - if we utilized the base for nefarious purposes. Turn off the squishy device and we have technology to study in face of a galaxy threat capable of complete annihilation to all organic life. Unless ME3 provides a plausible scenario for TIM to become our antagonist. This is merely a retcon or the base will have little to no importance in a similar capacity to the Council.

The choice was awful because it was a false dichotomy but blowing the base up on the off chance we discover an alternative method is just... idiocy. I suppose the logic; loose as it may be, is TIM would be it for evil. In spite of this, we can destroy it later were that the case.

Look, if you disagree with MisterJB - guess what - you can keep the base and never say the whole "lose our humanity in the process" line. Problem solved.  You don't have to agree with us who hold that line.

And easy with the "idiocy" remark.  I don't consider it stupid - there's a whole butt-load of Reaper tech out there to study *looks squarely at the Citadel* - handing over the Collector base to an Unknown (TiM the mysterious & control freak) doesn't make any sense to me at all.  I'm going to have my hands full with the Reapers the last thing I need to worry about is cleaning up another Cerberus mad scientist project headed by TiM the Incompetent.

Modifié par Almostfaceman, 08 avril 2011 - 04:05 .

[Nathan Redgrave]

I would like to state that giving Cerberus the Collector Base could still have a positive outcome for the Reaper situation despite a potential betrayal by the Illusive Man. Cerberus turning on Shepard does not prevent Cerberus from acting to defeat the Reapers using the tech they salvaged from the Collector Base. There's too much we don't know about their motives at this point to even say that the two issues are even connected.

[Stinkface27]

MisterJB wrote...

Keeping the base was always a BAD idea, IMO.

Yep.

Seriously, did anybody even watch what happened after you handed it over to TIM?

Tim: Yessssss! *steeples fingers* Eeeexcellent! All according to plan...
*Backdrop goes all scary*

Also, in what instances have you seen somebody handling reaper tech where they HAVEN'T gone insane?

[MisterJB]

Bad King wrote...
Also there is a lot more at stake than 'losing our humanity'. Stopping the Reapers would save every present and future galactic civilisation be they human or non-human. We aren't just fighting for humanity.

True but if to stop a serial killer, I have to place nukes on the hands of children, you better believe I'll try to find another way. They migth destroy the serial killer but nothing good can come out of it.

[Labrev]

Almostfaceman wrote...

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

I'm not a base keeper, but I think that Bioware should have let players become Cerberus allies if they saw fit. Why TIM would make you an enemy if you proved to be a valuable asset to their team makes 0 sense.

I'm not sure how Renegade players can end their relationship with TiM - the one Renegade ending that I saw on youtube it wasn't entirely amicable - but fer sure with a Paragon it makes sense - TiM simply has to be in control.  If you're not following his orders you're useless to him.

I've seen that. Shepard's response is pretty much: just use it on the Reapers -- or -- just use it on the Reapers. What if the player actually wanted Cerberus dominance?

[Raphael diSanto]

This would be why I have six Shepards and can take all the choices offered to me by BioWare