214 réponses à ce sujet

[Ausstig]

 According to new info from the Xbox World Magazine, Cerberus will be your enemy no matter how you finish ME2.
So what the hell was the point of having them as your boss in ME2, I used to think that you get to choose, between them and the Alliance, but it appears that is no the case. Also this will according to

Casey: but it doesn't punish renegades, it just means some end-scenarious may be different or harder to get. 

So yeah not punishing eh?

Any way I just wanted to know what people think Bioware was thinking when they decided to make Cerberus our allies in ME2, instead of say the Shadow Broker, I know Dean wrote something based around this, who I think the character of TIM could have been very easily. 

Finally PLEASE PLEASE don't turn this into just another pro v anti Cerberus debate. Thanks 

Modifié par Ausstig, 11 mai 2011 - 03:13 .

[AlphaDormante]

With the caveat that TIM is going to be a major player in ME3, his presence as our boss-o in ME2 served as a pretty good introduction to the character. We got a decent feel for his personality, goals, moral horizons, and various other quirks that took place over an entire game. Much better than tossing him as a new character into ME3.

There's also potential significance story-wise. The fact that Shepard does have history with them is probably going to be wired into ME3's plot, and why shouldn't it? Cerberus is widely regarded as a humanitarian terrorist organization, and for someone trying to rally all species of the galaxy, having a past with that sort of group is bound to cause conflict. Conflict makes story.

[spoilers]


I also imagine there will be consequences on whether or not you kept the base, and since that decision is made while Shepard is still with Cerberus, it means that s/he directly impacted its status in ME3 and whatever fallout follows.

[Someone With Mass]

I really like how this turn comes as a shock to almost everyone, when Cerberus have plenty of similar moments in the pasts.

[Leonia]

It would only make sense if they were working for the Reapers all along or if Zulu's theory is right: They have learned something dangerous about Shepard and need to take Shepard out of the equation if they want to stop the Reapers. But really, we have so little information to go on now regarding Cerberus' motives in ME3.

[Someone With Mass]

Cerberus whole career is built on deceit and backstabs.

Going from assassinations and random attacks in the novels to the "trap" on the Collector ship.

[lolwut666]

I don't see why is it so hard to believe that ressurecting Shepard was just a gamble.

Lots of great villains in fiction do something extremely outlandish with little to no immediate benefit to themselves, only for it to be relvealed later on as part of their grand scheme.

It could also be said that, while the Illusive Man can earn the trust of a few Shepards, the Illusive Man himself never gets to fully trust Shepard.

[Zulu_DFA]

leonia42 wrote...

It would only make sense if they were working for the Reapers all along or if Zulu's theory is right: They have learned something dangerous about Shepard and need to take Shepard out of the equation if they want to stop the Reapers. But really, we have so little information to go on now regarding Cerberus' motives in ME3.

I also have other theories:

My "official" standing (in line with the "Cerberus isn't rogue" theory) one is that TIM simply honors the deniability thingy, knowing too well (and making sure) that his mooks won't seriously impede Shepard, but only provide him with more clout when it comes to securing aliens' assistance.

Alternatively, TIM may have learnt (bonus points if you gave him the Base) a way to easily defeat the Reapers, but wants to hold back until they screw up the Galaxy (and the aliens), then come out on top with his super-humans. Kinda like Mao Zedong used to say: "Let a nuclear war begin! It'll only destroy the capitalists and clear the way for the Chinese people to bring communism to the farhest sides of the world!" (or something to that effect).

With Deception's synopsis, I'd bet my money on the last one (if I had to). But really, with so many possibilities,  we shall have to wait and see.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 11 mai 2011 - 09:09 .

[Gabey5]

Well i think the reapers are gonna be a little more subtle in their invasion preparations.. rather then just jumping out of hyperspace and blasting planets.. they will indoctrinate the higher-ups of many species... including Jack Harper

[Halo Quea]

I think the entire thing stems all the way from the beginning of ME2. Killing Shepard and then having Cerberus bring him back to life was a colossal error in story telling if the only option now is for Renegades to have to fight TIM and his entire organization. Not that there should be much of Cerberus left after the events of Retribution.

What it must have cost to track down Shepard's body, the huge expense to bring one single human being back to life, the enormous costs of rebuilding the Normandy, hiring a crew, and then the dangerous expeditions of assembling an elite band of mercenaries and specialists.

It doesn't make sense that TIM would hunt Shepard now does it? But then again the suicide mission doesn't make sense either. At best it was always just a dark horse run into unknown territory. That the collectors were there building a baby reaper out of human koolaid was as completely unknown factor. In fact, if there was no baby reaper to destroy then the suicide run becomes meaningless. Keep the base, blow it up...............it makes no difference now. The only reason Shepard had to go through the Omega 4 relay was to save his abducted crew members. That's it because he sure didn't accomplish anything else. The Arrival now PROVES that.

It's very clear now that Shepard should have not been killed in ME2 and Cerberus given such a HUGE role in his resurrection. I'm forced to finally agree with TIM/Cerberus fans that gamers should have been given the option of whether they wanted to join Cerberus or stay with the Alliance.

Considering all of the covert missions that Shepard does for Hackett and the Alliance, s/he should have been able to convince Hackett or Anderson to give him the resources (under the table) to track down the Collectors independently of Cerberus' help.

This would have involved Shepard reassembling his old crew with a few new additions and doing the job the Paragon way, or having the option to join Cerberus if the Citadel Council took a hard stand with him/her operating in the Terminus. Such a plot would have worked if say TIM had hired his own team leader (a REAL antagonist) to track down the Collectors, a fight between both teams ensues over the IFF or maybe they both manage to make it to the Collector base and Shepard finally chooses to either blow it up for the Alliance to keep it out of TIM's hands or turn it over to Cerberus. Problem Solved.

This of course would have meant a much bigger story, more voice acting, more development time..............more cost to EA/Bioware. But it would have been better than turning TIM into a simple card carrying villain and stepping over the previous story that invested a great deal of plot mechanisms that turned Cerberus into an ally. Albeit a shady ally, but an ally still.

[Madman123456]

about the collector base: if you kept it, i bet TIM will then say something like: "the whole thing was boobytrapped and you knew it! We lost many People and i will avenge these People! TIM SMASH!"

[Leonia]

Zulu_DFA wrote..

Alternatively, TIM may have learnt (bonus points if you gave him the Base) a way to easily defeat the Reapers, but wants to hold back until they screw up the Galaxy (and the aliens), then come out on top with his super-humans. Kinda like Mao Zedong used to say: "Let a nuclear war begin! It'll only destroy the capitalists and clear the way for the Chinese people to bring communism to the farhest sides of the world!" (or something to that effect).

With Deception's synopsis, I'd bet my money on the last one (if I had to). But really, with so many possibilities,  we shall have to wait and see.

It would totally fit with what we know of TIM from the comics/novels (and to a lesser extrent, in-game). He's just waiting for the right moment to send the calvary in. That's assuming he has a way to beat the Reapers that he is absolutely confident in. Maybe he hasn't quite secured his secret weapon yet and Shepard will learn what it is and he must prevent Shepard from using it first? I suppose we'll see but TIM definitely hasn't shown all his cards yet.

[88mphSlayer]

the point of working for Cerberus in ME2 was that the devs really love black gold

[Someone With Mass]

Saphra Deden wrote...
There were no "random" attacks and in any case none of that stuff indicative of Cerberus suddenly abandoning their goals and beliefs.

And there's nothing that directly proves they have in ME3 either.

[M-Sinistrari]

Considering in ME1, all we saw was the end result of failed experiments, I felt ME2 showed Cerberus in the different perspective as manipulators. Still the same 'evil' organization, just seeing a different face they also use to get results. Going from how many are of the insistence that playing a renegade Shep somehow must mean being pro-Cerberus or that Shep's with Cerberus just shows how well the manipulation can be done.

[Someone With Mass]

Arcian wrote...
You know, I can't believe I am actually saying this, but I agree with you. This is what I have thought all along after hearing they "teamed up" with the Reapers.

That really wouldn't surprise me, seeing how they're working more for their own profits.

[Icinix]

I too was hoping that in ME2 your pro-cerberus / anti-cerberus leanings would dictate which side you were with in ME3.

But since I hate cerberus, I don't have an issue

I imagine it would have been too difficult to cover all those bases, and since I also imagine the number of people who were paragon, anti-cerberus far FAR out numbers the pro-cerberus players, it made sense to run with a cerberus is the enemy story.

Thats metrics for you though.

[88mphSlayer]

Icinix wrote...

I too was hoping that in ME2 your pro-cerberus / anti-cerberus leanings would dictate which side you were with in ME3.

But since I hate cerberus, I don't have an issue

I imagine it would have been too difficult to cover all those bases, and since I also imagine the number of people who were paragon, anti-cerberus far FAR out numbers the pro-cerberus players, it made sense to run with a cerberus is the enemy story.

Thats metrics for you though.

metrics would also say ME3 should only have 1 class - soldier

[88mphSlayer]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

That really wouldn't surprise me, seeing how they're working more for their own profits.

Except, you know, they aren't. You just want to believe that because it makes it easier for you to justify your hatred of them. Rather unnecessary, I say. Well adjusted (but misguided) people have plenty of reasons to dislike Cerberus without inventing lies about them.

88mphSlayer wrote...

metrics would also say ME3 should only have 1 class - soldier [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]

...and in ME3 all the classes have drifted closer to Soldier.

are they going to butch up femshep too?