338 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Speaking of assassination, I don't think we've had a publicly known Cerberus assassination yet, besides potentially exposing Kohaku's death. Even that requires multiple factors (completing Hades Dogs AND doing the paragon resolution of keeping Tombs and the scientist alive), and that only comes out years after Kohaku dies.

The Pope? The Turian War Hawks? The Alliance President (IIRC)? Official investigations determined no suspicion of foul play.


For all the logo parading, by the Lore Cerberus is hidden incredibly well, and even the existence isn't common knowledge to those who don't have the exceptional access/reason to know about it. Even when it is found, it's role can be hard to prove: Toombs alone can't get the proof of Akuze to a comission.

[didymos1120]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Speaking of assassination, I don't think we've had a publicly known Cerberus assassination yet, besides potentially exposing Kohaku's death. Even that requires multiple factors (completing Hades Dogs AND doing the paragon resolution of keeping Tombs and the scientist alive), and that only comes out years after Kohaku dies.

And of course, the news reports only say Cerberus might have been behind it (and that's only in ME2. In ME1 it's covered up), and they never take credit for it.

[mcsupersport]

Saphra Deden wrote...

mcsupersport wrote...

So yeah, I would call them terrorists.

While all criminal, none of that is terrorism. Terrorism is generally public and terrorists are happy to take credit for it. Cerberus would prefer nobody knows what they do.

On the ticy tacy end you may be techniquelly right, but they are evil or extremely self-absorbed and thus evil by most of my definitions.  Criminal is the least I would call them, and very much well into the "black" all along even if poeple didn't want to remember or see it. 

Personally it makes a good story to have bad guy, redemption then being bad again.  You may not like it, but it makes a good story.  Also it is good writing that can cause such debate among so many poeple over a fictional character/story.

[Dean_the_Young]

mcsupersport wrote...

On the ticy tacy end you may be techniquelly right, but they are evil or extremely self-absorbed and thus evil by most of my definitions.  Criminal is the least I would call them, and very much well into the "black" all along even if poeple didn't want to remember or see it. 

Well, whatever objective label you have, make sure it's an accurate one. False accusations are Serious Buisness in the realms of justice: calling a murderer a pedophile rapist doesn't make him one even if he is evil, and basing any sort of case on that second charge will only see an argument torn apart.

Cerberus has done plenty of things it can be rightly criticized for without inventing things it hasn't done or crediting the things it did (and didn't) do.

Personally it makes a good story to have bad guy, redemption then being bad again.  You may not like it, but it makes a good story.  Also it is good writing that can cause such debate among so many poeple over a fictional character/story.

True enough, but then there are a lot of ways to right a good story. Whether some are satisfactory, or done well, is up to debate of coure. (Or else there wouldn't be much point for a social forum, would there?)

[Dean_the_Young]

Saphra, chillax. Please.

[Thompson family]

Hmmm.

Perhaps I should rephrase:

We know that in ME3, Shep's going to running around the galaxy, trying to convince every species that can help to join in a counter-attack.

We know that Cerberus, for whatever reason, is trying to stop him. There are some theories that Cerberus efforts are faked, but I address that in the earlier challenge, which no one replied to.

Now, will somebody please offer a rationale whereby humans stand a better chance of beating the Reapers ALONE?

Lacking such a rationale, then it seem quite reasonable that Cerberus went Vichy after the intial blitz and is collaborating with the Reapers.

[Dean_the_Young]

Thompson family wrote...

Lacking such a rationale, then it seem quite reasonable that Cerberus went Vichy after the intial blitz and is collaborating with the Reapers.

Except that, well, Vichy France knew it wasn't going to be genocided by the Krauts, nasty as they were, if they surrendered, while the Reaper's policy towards surrendering species is well known.

[Someone With Mass]

Saphra Deden wrote...
While all criminal, none of that is terrorism. Terrorism is generally public and terrorists are happy to take credit for it. Cerberus would prefer nobody knows what they do.

Cerberus is a pretty common knowledge. The quarians knows, the STG knows, the Council knows, the Alliance knows, etc.

And I don't think the guys Al-Quaida are considering themselves as terrorists as much as freedom fighters. 

Yep. I'm comparing Cerberus to Al-Quaida again. Because they're both fighting for a delusional cause that's beyond their grasp.

[ExtremeOne]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Yes "terrorists" spend billions on reviving someone, spend billions more giving him a better ship than he had before and then allow him free reign to do decisions the head "terrorist" himself says he would have done differently.

Nuh uh..

They've been declared terrorists by the Alliance and the Council, and I've read about their "deeds" so that's what I'm going with.

    


Oh yeah the same sh*t thats been said since ME 2 was released . It sucks that Bioware created the TIM a character that was interesting and Cerberus a group that us renegade players could get behind / but oh no in 3 we are told they are evil bastards . yeah sure when in ME 2 Cerberus wnats to defate the reapers . Its called story bull sh*t . 

[Thompson family]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Thompson family wrote...

Lacking such a rationale, then it seem quite reasonable that Cerberus went Vichy after the intial blitz and is collaborating with the Reapers.

Except that, well, Vichy France knew it wasn't going to be genocided by the Krauts, nasty as they were, if they surrendered, while the Reaper's policy towards surrendering species is well known.

Not a bad argument, DtY, although I'd counter that TIM thinks he or humanity would acheive their "ultimate form" as a Reaper: Can't beat 'em, join 'em.

[ExtremeOne]

Saphra Deden wrote...

mcsupersport wrote...

Personally it makes a good story to have bad guy, redemption then being bad again.  You may not like it, but it makes a good story.  Also it is good writing that can cause such debate among so many poeple over a fictional character/story.

Oh yes, but Cerberus aren't the badguys. The  badguys are the traitors and do-gooders like Anderson and Paragon Shepard.

     


Oh yeah just keep ball washing Bioware 's sh*t because the Cerberus part of 3 is garbage and renders Mass Effect 2 completely pointless 

[Someone With Mass]

ExtremeOne wrote...
Oh yeah the same sh*t thats been said since ME 2 was released . It sucks that Bioware created the TIM a character that was interesting and Cerberus a group that us renegade players could get behind / but oh no in 3 we are told they are evil bastards . yeah sure when in ME 2 Cerberus wnats to defate the reapers . Its called story bull sh*t . 

You are aware of that Renegades can play without giving a crap about Cerberus, right?

[Quole]

Cerberus is retarded and you are kind of stupid for supporting them.

[ExtremeOne]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...
While all criminal, none of that is terrorism. Terrorism is generally public and terrorists are happy to take credit for it. Cerberus would prefer nobody knows what they do.

Cerberus is a pretty common knowledge. The quarians knows, the STG knows, the Council knows, the Alliance knows, etc.

And I don't think the guys Al-Quaida are considering themselves as terrorists as much as freedom fighters. 

Yep. I'm comparing Cerberus to Al-Quaida again. Because they're both fighting for a delusional cause that's beyond their grasp.

    



Let me some reality into this Cerberus brought Shepard back to fight the reapers and collectors . Oh but in 3 Bioware is saying screw that we need a 2nd enemy because the reapers are just tthe same ol alien invasion garbage nothing new there . So they basically take a dump all over ME 2 's story 

[didymos1120]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Cerberus is a pretty common knowledge. The quarians knows, the STG knows, the Council knows, the Alliance knows, etc.

And I don't think the guys Al-Quaida are considering themselves as terrorists as much as freedom fighters. 

Yep. I'm comparing Cerberus to Al-Quaida again. Because they're both fighting for a delusional cause that's beyond their grasp.

The difference is, Al-Qaeda deliberately sought notoriety because they believed it served their goals. They want people to know of them and of their deeds, and to feel fear as a result.  Cerberus didn't seek notoriety, and would rather not have it.

[ExtremeOne]

Quole wrote...

Cerberus is retarded and you are kind of stupid for supporting them.

   


No the ones who are retarded is Bioware for creating dumb ass reasons for their so called great story 

[Nathan Redgrave]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Oh yes, but Cerberus aren't the badguys. The  badguys are the traitors and do-gooders like Anderson and Paragon Shepard.

Yes they are, and no they aren't. In that order.

Cerberus is a detriment to the human race. That they happened to have been in the right at some point in time on one issue or another doesn't change the overall scope of the thing.

Also, not being "the" bad guys doesn't magically make them "not bad guys." The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and very rarely do the "bad guys" not believe themselves to be in the right.

Modifié par Nathan Redgrave, 07 mai 2011 - 04:00 .

[mcsupersport]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

mcsupersport wrote...

On the ticy tacy end you may be techniquelly right, but they are evil or extremely self-absorbed and thus evil by most of my definitions.  Criminal is the least I would call them, and very much well into the "black" all along even if poeple didn't want to remember or see it. 

Well, whatever objective label you have, make sure it's an accurate one. False accusations are Serious Buisness in the realms of justice: calling a murderer a pedophile rapist doesn't make him one even if he is evil, and basing any sort of case on that second charge will only see an argument torn apart.

Cerberus has done plenty of things it can be rightly criticized for without inventing things it hasn't done or crediting the things it did (and didn't) do.

Yes and no, you see if a good prosecutor will thow as many charges against them as might be aplicable.  You can make the case that Cerberus is a political entity using death, and destruction to further it's goals and while NOT seeking much propaganda it still causes terror.  And as a good prosecutor will add the charge, ALONG WITH murder, kidnapping, treason, illegal research, gross negligence resulting in injury and death, pre-meditative murder, racketeering, bribery, assault, battery, illegal wire-tapping, and anything else that might stick and make arguments that the defense must counter trying to get the maximum award against them through the courts or plea deal.  There is certainly debate on whether the Terrorist lable can be stuck on them, but it is still a debate that might be won in a court, based on their political motivations and independence from Offical Government sanctions.

As far as the pedophile goes, if his actions cause one of the children to commit suicide, then it could be argued he is a murderer as well.  It is all in the hands of how good the attourney is.

[Thompson family]

Cerberus didn't render my playthroughs of ME2 pointless. In one saved career, my Shep told Tali in the engine room "I fully expect them to betray us."

Modifié par Thompson family, 07 mai 2011 - 04:02 .

[88mphSlayer]

didymos1120 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Cerberus is a pretty common knowledge. The quarians knows, the STG knows, the Council knows, the Alliance knows, etc.

And I don't think the guys Al-Quaida are considering themselves as terrorists as much as freedom fighters. 

Yep. I'm comparing Cerberus to Al-Quaida again. Because they're both fighting for a delusional cause that's beyond their grasp.

The difference is, Al-Qaeda deliberately sought notoriety because they believed it served their goals. They want people to know of them and of their deeds, and to feel fear as a result.  Cerberus didn't seek notoriety, and would rather not have it.

Cerberus is closer to a mafia than a terrorist organization... there's a huge difference

[Thompson family]

88mphSlayer wrote...

Cerberus is closer to a mafia than a terrorist organization...

That's true..

Modifié par Thompson family, 07 mai 2011 - 04:04 .