Aller au contenu

Photo

Cerberus is more evil than most people realise.


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
1342 réponses à ce sujet

#326
KnightofPhoenix

KnightofPhoenix
  • Members
  • 21 527 messages

Dean_the_Young wrote...
When they did think they had a potential avenue, they were about to report it once they confirmed they had something to report.


Well except Dr. Archer didn't try to report anything until all hell broke loose. Despite the fact that Gavin was somewhat of a success before he got crazy. Had an agent been there, he would have told him that Dr. Archer found potential, but that he may need an extension. When was he planning to report it?

You're missing the extension that simply having spies doesn't mean you get time-sensitive information. He can have a spy AND not know in a time relevant manner.



Communication happen instantly. Since you're fixating on regular updates, of course that spy won't be able to report anything when needed.

It's pretty simple. Dr. Archrer is nearing the deadline, but he gets a great idea with David. A simple five minute report to TIM telling him exactly what is happening, could have avoided disaster as he either shuts the project down regardless, or gives Archer an extension.

Cell-organization requirements. A large part of cell-structure is the necessity for detached organization. You can give regular-irregular reports at best, but you still need time-gaps


You don't with the irregular ones. It's not like they are going to keep updating 24/7. Just when something big is happening, or an alteration of course, or when a deadline is not beng met to see if those cells don't go crazy to meet the deadline like Archer did.

Regular updates can happen as normal. Irregular updates with those informants can happen whenever there is a need to do so, so tha TIM knows exactly what each cell is doing, unlike in Pragia where apparently he had no idea what is happening because a Cell was not telling him (unless he is lying).

And, again, the idea that we can have a plan for this sort of research is rather laughable. It would be entirely arbitrary timelines for entirely unknowable avenues of research on an otherwise entirely unknown species.


The idea was never to have David merged with a VI. Archer gets that idea? A simple five minute report to TIM would have alerted him to it and he would decide what to do next. It's a simple status update to see if the cell is doing what it's supposed to do and that it's not getting out of hand.

Or, the deadline is nearing its end. Pressure to provide results is affecting the team. TIM threatens to shut the project down. Dr. Archer found a promising idea and is experimenting on it? Status update to TIM. It's really simple and plausible, since those irregular updates are by no means designed to replace the regular ones.



What parameters are you seeing as being outside of? Remember, Cerberus: no red tape. Nor was the experiment that questionable: it was supposed to be a test, and something that could be shut down at the first sign of danger, with even the power grid taken off line if necessary. In what particular sense was the project rushed?

We were never given an indication that Archer had an immediate deadline he had to show a functional result, as opposed to reporting the new path of promising research.


Talking about Pragia vis a vis the paramaters and questionale experiments.   Not saying I am against them, but TIM apparently did not even know what is happening. That is a flaw if the one who is supposed to supervise all cells can't even know what is happening in one of them. He didn't know about David at all either. 

Dr. Archer said TIM wanted to shut the project down because it's not providing results. That means he is not meeting the dealine unless you want to go back and say that TIM can shut a project down whenever he wants. Which prompted him to experiment on David. Which probably had him rushing through it to meet the deadline that is seemingly very close otherwise TIM would not say he wants to shut the project down, unless now you're saying he can threaten to do it any time he wants.


Overlord's ability to do that wasn't expected or predicted to be able to do that, however. They didn't think they had an all-tech-controlling product, only a Geth-influencing one.


Overlord is a Human-VI. A virus could spread to all VIs, indeed we have seen it with the security mechs, which ends up infecting a space station VI. I very much doubt dr. archer in all his intelligence was oblivious to the possibility and if he was, it's probably because he was trying to rush to meet the deadline.

With this big idea and potential, and with those kinds of risks, TIM should have known about it the moment the experiments started. It doesn't take a genius agent to figure out this is something worth reporting.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 27 avril 2011 - 03:20 .


#327
Almostfaceman

Almostfaceman
  • Members
  • 5 463 messages
Jack Harper is a strange, evil dude. Looks like in ME3 he's going to have to pay for his crimes.

#328
DaBigDragon

DaBigDragon
  • Members
  • 835 messages
No matter who's side you are on, whether it be pro-Cerberus/anti-Alliance or pro-Alliance/anti-Cerberus, the fact remains that Cerberus is now your enemy in ME3.

So,

HA

HA

HA

to all the people who were talking down to Cerberus haters.

#329
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 683 messages
If Cerberus is justified... we're still right.

And if you were talked down to because you were making a poor argument... you still made a poor argument.

Hehehaha?

#330
KnightofPhoenix

KnightofPhoenix
  • Members
  • 21 527 messages

DaBigDragon wrote...

No matter who's side you are on, whether it be pro-Cerberus/anti-Alliance or pro-Alliance/anti-Cerberus, the fact remains that Cerberus is now your enemy in ME3.


Which does not mean that the organization itself, or the concept of it, is not justified or necessary. Nor does it mean that TIM is necessarily wrong, unless Shepard is supposed to be the new standard for what is right or wrong.

We still do not know what is happening. And even if TIM went crazy, turned out to be a massive idiot and he has to be killed, I'd kill him and make another Cerberus. Which really ends up vindicating his ideas.

#331
Almostfaceman

Almostfaceman
  • Members
  • 5 463 messages

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If Cerberus is justified... we're still right.

And if you were talked down to because you were making a poor argument... you still made a poor argument.

Hehehaha?


Actually in point 2 of the site rules you've agreed not to talk down to anyone.  Thus your argument for "when it's appropriate to talk down to someone" is in violation of your agreement with Bioware in regards to posting here.

#332
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 683 messages

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If Cerberus is justified... we're still right.

And if you were talked down to because you were making a poor argument... you still made a poor argument.

Hehehaha?


Actually in point 2 of the site rules you've agreed not to talk down to anyone.  Thus your argument for "when it's appropriate to talk down to someone" is in violation of your agreement with Bioware in regards to posting here.

Talking down a person is a violation. Talking down a poor argument, however, is not.

#333
Guest_michaelrsa_*

Guest_michaelrsa_*
  • Guests

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Which does not mean that the organization itself, or the concept of it, is not justified or necessary. Nor does it mean that TIM is necessarily wrong, unless Shepard is supposed to be the new standard for what is right or wrong.

We still do not know what is happening. And even if TIM went crazy, turned out to be a massive idiot and he has to be killed, I'd kill him and make another Cerberus. Which really ends up vindicating his ideas.


I'd do the same thing but reincorporate it into the Alliance to ensure it is accountable to them and also try and make it less extreme. I still view it as being to damn xenophobic for my tastes as well, experimenting on Asari, assassinating turian politicians? That's not exactly the way I'd treat current allies, cold as they may be, even it they don't find out.

#334
Almostfaceman

Almostfaceman
  • Members
  • 5 463 messages

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If Cerberus is justified... we're still right.

And if you were talked down to because you were making a poor argument... you still made a poor argument.

Hehehaha?


Actually in point 2 of the site rules you've agreed not to talk down to anyone.  Thus your argument for "when it's appropriate to talk down to someone" is in violation of your agreement with Bioware in regards to posting here.

Talking down a person is a violation. Talking down a poor argument, however, is not.


Incorrect, disagreement is ok with someone, talking down to them is not.  If you disagree with someone and belittle them by belittling their position you've violated the site rules.  There's no rule exception to be rude to someone because you disagree with their argument.

#335
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 683 messages

michaelrsa wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Which does not mean that the organization itself, or the concept of it, is not justified or necessary. Nor does it mean that TIM is necessarily wrong, unless Shepard is supposed to be the new standard for what is right or wrong.

We still do not know what is happening. And even if TIM went crazy, turned out to be a massive idiot and he has to be killed, I'd kill him and make another Cerberus. Which really ends up vindicating his ideas.


I'd do the same thing but reincorporate it into the Alliance to ensure it is accountable to them and also try and make it less extreme. I still view it as being to damn xenophobic for my tastes as well, experimenting on Asari, assassinating turian politicians? That's not exactly the way I'd treat current allies, cold as they may be, even it they don't find out.

Cerberus was being used to assassinate troublesome people for the Alliance during the time it was under Alliance 'moderation'. In fact, Cerberus's most horrific atrocities were while it was an Alliance organ.

There seems this bizaar nostalgia from some people about a time when government ownership made Cerberus a more responsible actor.

#336
Guest_michaelrsa_*

Guest_michaelrsa_*
  • Guests

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Cerberus was being used to assassinate troublesome people for the Alliance during the time it was under Alliance 'moderation'. In fact, Cerberus's most horrific atrocities were while it was an Alliance organ.

There seems this bizaar nostalgia from some people about a time when government ownership made Cerberus a more responsible actor.

Fine, I'll completely erradicate Cerberus and start an entirely new organization to forward human interests but without the xenophobia, lack of accountability and extremist.

Humanity needs as organization that works toward it's own interests. If I can't correct Cerberus then I will start from scratch.

Modifié par michaelrsa, 27 avril 2011 - 03:36 .


#337
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 683 messages

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If Cerberus is justified... we're still right.

And if you were talked down to because you were making a poor argument... you still made a poor argument.

Hehehaha?


Actually in point 2 of the site rules you've agreed not to talk down to anyone.  Thus your argument for "when it's appropriate to talk down to someone" is in violation of your agreement with Bioware in regards to posting here.

Talking down a person is a violation. Talking down a poor argument, however, is not.


Incorrect, disagreement is ok with someone, talking down to them is not.  If you disagree with someone and belittle them by belittling their position you've violated the site rules.  There's no rule exception to be rude to someone because you disagree with their argument.

If one belittle their argument, and they believe it as belittling them, it remains belittling their argument. Being called out on a weak argument and having it belittled is not a personal attack.

#338
KnightofPhoenix

KnightofPhoenix
  • Members
  • 21 527 messages

michaelrsa wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Which does not mean that the organization itself, or the concept of it, is not justified or necessary. Nor does it mean that TIM is necessarily wrong, unless Shepard is supposed to be the new standard for what is right or wrong.

We still do not know what is happening. And even if TIM went crazy, turned out to be a massive idiot and he has to be killed, I'd kill him and make another Cerberus. Which really ends up vindicating his ideas.


I'd do the same thing but reincorporate it into the Alliance to ensure it is accountable to them and also try and make it less extreme. I still view it as being to damn xenophobic for my tastes as well, experimenting on Asari, assassinating turian politicians? That's not exactly the way I'd treat current allies, cold as they may be, even it they don't find out.


I wouldn't. Politicians and corporate interests are a necessity, but I would not want them to compromise Cerberus and start using it to fuel private interest.

What I'd prefer is a link between the Alliance and Cerberus, which already exists. But other than that, I like it the way it is. Just a few tiny tweaks in the internal structure.

#339
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 683 messages

michaelrsa wrote...

Fine, I'll completely erradicate Cerberus and start an entirely new organization to forward human interests but without the xenophobia, lack of accountability and extremist.

Any pro-human interest organization is going to get called xenophobic. The desired level of accountability, of course, can be argued for decades, but extremism is really a relative matter and in the context of the galaxy as it is, Cerberus isn't even that extreme.

This is a galactic setting, after all, which has sanctioned and glorified the Spectres who can legally do everything Cerberus has ever done, the corporate-worlds setup in which the Council can have it's legal cake and eat it, and both the genophage and the Quarian treatment following the Geth. Compared to what Shepard alone can see and do, even as a Paragon, in ME1, Cerberus is a small player, and one who's worst crimes would be totally legal if they were a corporation who filed the right paperwork beforehand.

Humanity needs as organization that works toward it's own interests. If I can't correct Cerberus then I will start from scratch.

And what will you do about the Alliance?

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 27 avril 2011 - 03:45 .


#340
Guest_michaelrsa_*

Guest_michaelrsa_*
  • Guests

Dean_the_Young wrote...
And what will you do about the Alliance?

What do you mean by that?

#341
Almostfaceman

Almostfaceman
  • Members
  • 5 463 messages

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If one belittle their argument, and they believe it as belittling them, it remains belittling their argument. Being called out on a weak argument and having it belittled is not a personal attack.


That of course is incorrect, since there is a polite way to disagree with an argument without belittling it.  A person's opinion is their opinion, and if you belittle it, you break the forum rules.  This disctinction you are making does not exist.

#342
Barquiel

Barquiel
  • Members
  • 5 848 messages

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And what will you do about the Alliance?


I would arrest everyone who supported/covered up Cerberus' crimes.

#343
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 683 messages

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If one belittle their argument, and they believe it as belittling them, it remains belittling their argument. Being called out on a weak argument and having it belittled is not a personal attack.


That of course is incorrect, since there is a polite way to disagree with an argument without belittling it.  A person's opinion is their opinion, and if you belittle it, you break the forum rules.  This disctinction you are making does not exist.

While the irony of debating the nature of politeness and respectful arguments with you is not beyond me, we're so far in semantics and mis-construing points that we've long since passed any relevant point.

#344
didymos1120

didymos1120
  • Members
  • 14 580 messages

Almostfaceman wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

If one belittle their argument, and they believe it as belittling them, it remains belittling their argument. Being called out on a weak argument and having it belittled is not a personal attack.


That of course is incorrect, since there is a polite way to disagree with an argument without belittling it.  A person's opinion is their opinion, and if you belittle it, you break the forum rules.  This disctinction you are making does not exist.


Actually, whether belittling crosses the line is something left to the discretion of the mods:

"Insults, language, belittling of others or anything else deemed offense [sic] will be deleted without warning if considered unacceptable by an official Moderator or member of BioWare/Electronic Arts staff."

Modifié par didymos1120, 27 avril 2011 - 03:49 .


#345
KnightofPhoenix

KnightofPhoenix
  • Members
  • 21 527 messages

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And what will you do about the Alliance?


I would arrest everyone who supported/covered up Cerberus' crimes.


Even the major corporations?

Does Humanity really need a worsened economic blow after the death of billions on Earth?

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 27 avril 2011 - 03:50 .


#346
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 683 messages

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And what will you do about the Alliance?


I would arrest everyone who supported/covered up Cerberus' crimes.

Why would you arrest Shepard, Garrus, Tali, Thane, Samara, Legion, and potentially even the Council and Anderson?

#347
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20 683 messages

michaelrsa wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
And what will you do about the Alliance?

What do you mean by that?

Let's start by the fact that the Alliance was the breeding ground and actual creator of Cerberus, and move on to the fact that the Alliance is a political entity entirely dedicated to defending humans from aliens.

#348
Guest_michaelrsa_*

Guest_michaelrsa_*
  • Guests

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Even the major corporations?

Does Humanity really need a worsened economic blow after the death of billions on Earth?

I have to agree on this one. As much as I dislike Cerberus taking out their corporate backers is really going to make things worse. 

I'd go directly for Cerberus itself, shutdown their operations but leave corporations funding them intact.

#349
KnightofPhoenix

KnightofPhoenix
  • Members
  • 21 527 messages
The risk of course is that those xenophobic extremists, who were kept in check by Cerberus, start resorting to other more destructive means to vent their frustration.

#350
Guest_michaelrsa_*

Guest_michaelrsa_*
  • Guests

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Let's start by the fact that the Alliance was the breeding ground and actual creator of Cerberus, and move on to the fact that the Alliance is a political entity entirely dedicated to defending humans from aliens.

The Alliance defends humanity from aliens just as much as the U.S. government defends Americans from the rest of the world. 

The Alliance is not that petty where they think that every other species is out to get them.