411 réponses à ce sujet

[alperez]

hhh89 wrote...


More or less He clearly stated that he was against Reapers even in the prologue. I'd say helping Liara retrieving Shepard's body and opposing the SB that worked for the Collectors is something to consider. Plus, as I already said, he found Cerberus to protect humanity from the Reapers (and for rise humanity). I know that something could have changed him when he was exposed to the artifact, but I hope that if Bioware is going on the indoctrination line the indoctrination starts in ME3, or at least after ME2. Though if they have found a better explanation for this alliance I'll be more happy. The thing I want most is that Cerberus didn't work for them in ME and ME2. But again, that only my opinion.

Ok then, Btw is this thread and the are we being fooled thread basically a lot of the same people having the same argument in a slightly different manner lol.

Firstly don't get me wrong despite my posts i hate the indoctrination angle, its just that a lot of time it seems to be the goto excuse why someone is suddenly changed.

I've said this already but perhaps TIM's been indoctrinated ever since he first came into contact with that artifact but the indoctrination hasn't worked out yet and doesn't actually kick in until the reapers arrive, so basically he's been a sleeper all along.

What i mean by this is we know he has some connection with the reapers, that he knows things he shouldn't hears things etc. from the books, so maybe instead of being indoctrinated he's been using that info to stop the reapers thereby in essence saving himself from being indoctrinated at all.

So up until me3, what TIM's been hearing in his head has been the reapers attempts to indoctrinate him but its not worked because they are too far away for the indoctrination to take place and rather than have an indoctrinated TIM do their bidding its having the reverse effect of giving TIM info that could stop them.

TIM uses that info, does the experiments, brings back Shepard etc. because he isn't fully indoctrinated and stopping the reapers would also stop the indoctrination, all the tech etc. that he so eagerly collects serves 2 purposes.

It stops his own indoctrination progressing and it could help to defeat the reapers (would explain why he is so pissed if you destroy the base) but once the reapers arrive he's screwed, the indoctrination takes over and he does what the reapers want, go after Shepard.

[Dean_the_Young]

hhh89 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

alperez wrote...

Someone With Mass

Yeah i read that as well, some people just don't learn from their mistakes.

I can't feel sorry for them. I really can't. They deserve every ounce of punishment and torment coming their way.

Unless Shepard is involved, messing around with Reaper tech will always end in disaster. At least for Cerberus.

Do you mean every people who work for Cerberus? I have to say that the people on the Normandy seemed ony eager to fight the Collectors/Reapers to protect humanity.
Edit: and as someone said, EDI isn't a disaster.

Nor were the Collector Weapon DLC. Or the Thannix utilization.

You're right about the Collector Weapon. Though the Thanix was created by the Turians.

It's still Reaper technology they were working with.

We can also look to what actually went wrong in Retribution... and in that, the problem wasn't the Reaper technology itself, but a Turian attacking force. Bad planning? Sure, quality of writing not withstanding. Inherent Reaper technology problem? No.

[KevShep]

hhh89 wrote...

alperez wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Maybe you misunderstood me. I didn't say I cant' accept that TIM  choose on his own to join the Reapers (though I don't like the idea) I said that I don't understand that TIM is working for the Reapers since ME.
And really, I don't see the reason to make that decision. If they wants that Cerberus work with the Reapers, they can find a good and reasonable explanation to make this alliance begin a little bit prior to ME3. There's no reason to make TIM working with them before ME, in my opinion.

No maybe, definetely lol.

So let me see if i have this right now, its pretty much from the events of me2 that you don't get how TIM could have been indoctrinated before then?

More or less. He clearly stated that he was against Reapers even in the prologue. I'd say helping Liara retrieving Shepard's body and opposing the SB that worked for the Collectors is something to consider. Plus, as I already said, he found Cerberus to protect humanity from the Reapers (and for rise humanity). I know that something could have changed him when he was exposed to the artifact, but I hope that if Bioware is going on the indoctrination line the indoctrination starts in ME3, or at least after ME2. Though if they have found a better explanation for this alliance I'll be more happy. The thing I want most is that Cerberus didn't work for them in ME and ME2. But again, that only my opinion.

Cerberus for reasons we dont know yet(spoiler into why cerberus is working for the reapers) may have been useing the Collector base incident (ME2 plot) as nothing more then an elaborate plan concocted by cerberus and the reapers together.There might have been a problem at the collector base that we did not see or know of that caused them to get shepard involved through an elaborate plan. If the collectors(or reapers) wanted Shepard alive then why did they kill him at the start of ME2?

BTW TIM is...NOT...indoctrinated!!!!!!!!!!!! If TIM is indoctrinated then Bioware would not say in the first place that cerberus is working for the reaper! That....would ....be...to...odvious!!!!!!!!

Modifié par KevShep, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:33 .

[Dean_the_Young]

An easy answer would be 'they'd prefer him alive, but were willing to kill him and try for the dead body.'

But really, 'ME2 was a Reaper plot' is the dumbest **** on this site. And I'm not one to use cussing lightly.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

There's no way in the world that the Reapers planned the events of Mass Effect 2, that would make no sense whatsoever... considering Harbinger's reaction to the events and efforts against the contrary (when Shepard wasn't looking... or was too dead to look).

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 15 juillet 2011 - 12:51 .

[KevShep]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

There's no way in the world that the Reapers planned the events of Mass Effect 2, that would make no sense whatsoever... considering Harbinger's reaction to the events and efforts against the contrary (when Shepard wasn't looking... or was too dead to look).

Iike I said it was somthing that was not known at the time and it was not just a plot for shepard, like maybe the collectors are not entirely under the control of the reapers since in Mass Effect wiki it says that the collector general (when released by Harbringer) shows a level of intelligence while not under its control. The collectors then may have screwed up there plan that the reapers need an outside source. Harbringer can not control every collector all the time...it take resources to do that. Notice when the collector ship is "disabled" there were collectors being experimented on...why? Could the collectors a long time ago have tampered with themselves while the reapers were "asleep" in order to maintin a level of intelligence so they can foil the reapers plan like they did with the citedal?

Modifié par KevShep, 15 juillet 2011 - 01:06 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Did you not listen to EDI answer that question directly?

[KevShep]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Did you not listen to EDI answer that question directly?

She only guesses, she is not going off of logical data because she has no data on that. I doubt that a character in a video game would have a luck guess that just turned out to be right. Thats my guess though.

Modifié par KevShep, 15 juillet 2011 - 01:14 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Then you haven't played many Bioware video games.

[KevShep]

BTW... about the ploy by cerberus and the reapers in ME2, there is somthing I just thought of. When EDI installs the reaper IFF the collectors seem to have gotten there almost immediately almost as if they were expacting it.

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

Paula Deen wrote...
 It seems like Bioware needed generic soldiers for Shepard to fight, to have actual gunplay in ME3...but they failed to realize that having anyone outside of a few indoctrinees or Collector-esque enemies, wouldn't make any sense.

This is exactly why they made cerberus soldiers the enemy... they wanted some random cannon fodder for the player to kill and thought, "hey... most people hate cerberus... let's use them!" 

If there doesn't turn out to be some hidden motive behind what cerberus is doing, or that they are actually trying to help in some odd way.... (maybe Shepard is indoctrinated and is actually helping the reapers whilst thinking he isn't? lmao) ... I'm gonna be pretty pissed.

Simple indoctrination has become a cop-out in this series. =/

[KevShep]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Then you haven't played many Bioware video games.

 some of my favorate games are bioware. This game is a web of truths and half truths and anything that has not been astablished as a fact in that pressent moment in the game then that means that there is more to it thats why the writers of the game will throw out an anwser based on nothing more then a guess in order to solve the question later with the real answer. 

[squee365]

KevShep wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Then you haven't played many Bioware video games.

 some of my favorate games are bioware. This game is a web of truths and half truths and anything that has not been astablished as a fact in that pressent moment in the game then that means that there is more to it thats why the writers of the game will throw out an anwser based on nothing more then a guess in order to solve the question later with the real answer. 

I just find it funny you claim to know what are "truths" and "half-truths" in ME3 when you haven't even played it yet. 

Modifié par squee365, 15 juillet 2011 - 01:28 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

KevShep wrote...
Iike I said it was somthing that was not known at the time and it was not just a plot for shepard, like maybe the collectors are not entirely under the control of the reapers since in Mass Effect wiki it says that the collector general (when released by Harbringer) shows a level of intelligence while not under its control. The collectors then may have screwed up there plan that the reapers need an outside source. Harbringer can not control every collector all the time...it take resources to do that. Notice when the collector ship is "disabled" there were collectors being experimented on...why? Could the collectors a long time ago have tampered with themselves while the reapers were "asleep" in order to maintin a level of intelligence so they can foil the reapers plan like they did with the citedal?

While I doubt that direction, I always wondered why Harbinger told the Collector General that he failed.... when Harbinger was the one in control.... hmmm...

[ODST 5723]

Phaedon wrote...

ODST 5723 wrote...
We're obviously not on the same page.  You're talking about Cerberus, while I'm point to your Sirta Foundation example and saying that it's not that far-fetched and in many ways could have made sense.

The Reapers wouldn't necessarily need to go after one of the big dogs directly in order to achieve their goals.  They could use significantly more subtle means, the kind which evolve over centuries or decades so that they became so ingrained into society that the influence becomes undetectible, rather than focusing directly on the important factions and exposing the mission to risk.

They don't have to be formiddable opponent to make them a perfect agent.  They just need to have sufficient access to further a goal while remaining undetected. 

The less attention they draw, the better.  What you're looking at here is a means of using subtle inluence to create signfiicant influence.  if you go after the big dogs directly, you run a greater risk of exposure.  Sometimes the indirect route is the more efficient and more effective.

Cerberus wants to kill Shepard. This has nothing to do with subtle influence.

Plus, the fact that they're viewed for their contributions to health and humanity for all of their defensive tech and medical breakthroughs gives them a perfect cover to do all sorts of biological research, and hide Reaper plans by giving the galaxy medi-gel, or disease-shattering vaccines.

All sorts of biological research? Like what? It's still illegal to well, illegal research. You don't need a great cover, just a cover.

Your point was, why indoctrinate a small group that's not a formiddable threat?  My point is, how do you define a formidable threat?  Subtle actions don't draw the kind of attention that Cerberus does and they lead to the threat you don't see coming.  Some of the more formidable threats are the ones you didn't anticipate.

First of all, I must recognize the antagonist of the group as a formidable opponent.
Secondly, the time of subtle influence is gone. The Reapers are reaping everyone. They don't need a subtle influence, just some commandos to go after Shepard.

Again, you're completely missing the point because you're so focused on Cerberus that you can't see anything else.  You point to major antagonist, but a major antagonist doesn't have to be a major antagonist throughout the entire game or series (Halo example: Thel Vadam, Bioware example: Teryn Loghain Mac Tyr) and can switch sides.

A major antagonist can also be set up as a red herring.

Hell, Legion was revealed in an Enemies of Mass Effect 2 video.

If another group like the Sirta Foundation has been indoctrinated for a significant amount of time then they could have spread reaper tech throughout the galaxy unnoticed.  They could have gained government contracts to infiltrate the Alliance.  You say that they can't have indoctrinated the entire Alliance.  That's what you say.  They may have found an in-road we don't know about and have control and influence over several high ranking Alliance members. And a group like Sitra Foundation could also have been performing experiments for the Reapers, like Saren and Binary Helix in ME1 or The Collectors in ME2.

You're so focused on Cerberus that you might be overlooking non-obvious antagonists.

The point here is, that Casey Hudson says that Cerberus is a major antagonist and that someone else said that they make up 40% of the enemies doesn't mean that they're necessarily going to be the enemy that you think they will be.  The story is still open, and if Bioware's doing what they've said they're doing, they will be throwing curves our way becasue what you think is the way to stop the Reapers is going to change as we play through the game.

Cerberus being a main adversary doesn't mean that they actually work for the Reapers.  TIM could be using his own form of Indoctrination on his own troopers and they may not be under Reaper control at all.  He may be tryin to play the Reapers.  These things are possible.

The game is still too far off to put all of your attention on the obvious enemy, who might be an enemy but not necessarily for the "obvious" reasons.

There's more than one path that can be taken here, and if BIoware reveals Chekhov's Guns that work for the Reapers in addition to some that work against, then you may see a much more intricate web develop.

You don't even know why Cerberus wants to kill Shepard.  Don't just infer that it's because they're working with the Reapers.  Not yet anyway.  Keep your mind open to possibility.

[Dean_the_Young]

KevShep wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Then you haven't played many Bioware video games.

 some of my favorate games are bioware. This game is a web of truths and half truths and anything that has not been astablished as a fact in that pressent moment in the game then that means that there is more to it thats why the writers of the game will throw out an anwser based on nothing more then a guess in order to solve the question later with the real answer. 

No, the Mass Effect series is painfully blunt and honest. The only lies in the game are those that are directly and openly contradicted later on as a matter of plot. The series has a pathological hatred of direct lies: even lies of omission are nearly always directly addressed shortly after they are made. Mystery and deception come from a lack of information and allowing players to draw their own unsupported conclusions, not erronious information.

This has been a defining aspect of the series since its start. When the nigh-omniscient authoritivative plot exposition device tells you the likely basis of something... that's what happened. If you'd played more Bioware games, you'd have noticed that.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 15 juillet 2011 - 01:33 .

[KevShep]

squee365 wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Then you haven't played many Bioware video games.

 some of my favorate games are bioware. This game is a web of truths and half truths and anything that has not been astablished as a fact in that pressent moment in the game then that means that there is more to it thats why the writers of the game will throw out an anwser based on nothing more then a guess in order to solve the question later with the real answer. 

I just find it funny you claim to know what are "truths" in ME3 when you haven't even played it yet. 

I have not said that I know the truths of ME3 any where nor have I suggested it. All Iam saying is games like this will are carefull not to make a stupid mistake of having a character make a lucky guess off of no data at all in a serise based off of logic....it is not just a fantasy game where nothing makes sence.

Modifié par KevShep, 15 juillet 2011 - 01:34 .

[KevShep]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Then you haven't played many Bioware video games.

 some of my favorate games are bioware. This game is a web of truths and half truths and anything that has not been astablished as a fact in that pressent moment in the game then that means that there is more to it thats why the writers of the game will throw out an anwser based on nothing more then a guess in order to solve the question later with the real answer. 

No, the Mass Effect series is painfully blunt and honest. The only lies in the game are those that are directly and openly contradicted later on as a matter of plot. The series has a pathological hatred of direct lies: even lies of omission are nearly always directly addressed shortly after they are made. Mystery and deception come from a lack of information and allowing players to draw their own unsupported conclusions, not erronious information.

This has been a defining aspect of the series since its start. When the nigh-omniscient authoritivative plot exposition device tells you the likely basis of something... that's what happened. If you'd played more Bioware games, you'd have noticed that.

I bet you that all the things that she guesses about in the collectot base/collector ship are false...just because there...is... more to the story of ME2 that is not resolved untill ME3 mainly about cerberus and the reapers connection. Notice that she guesses on EVERYTHING in the base and at the end of her guessing she tells you that...... she really dont not know for sure! This means that it is a half truth or there is more going on then she is aware of making her guess a fales one. If there is a connection between cerberus and the reapers then her guesses would have to do with the ME3 spoiler so the writers are only going to let her guess .

Modifié par KevShep, 15 juillet 2011 - 01:46 .

[alperez]

KevShep wrote...


I bet you that all the things that she guesses about in the collectot base/collector ship are false...just because there...is... more to the story of ME2 that is not resolved untill ME3 mainly about cerberus and the reapers connection. Notice that she guesses on EVERYTHING in the base and at the end of her guessing she tells you that...... she really dont not know for sure! This means that it is a half truth or there is more going on then she is aware of making her guess a fales one. If there is a connection between cerberus and the reapers then her guesses would have to do with the ME3 spoiler so the writers are only going to let her guess .

Or they are simply saying, this is the info we have given this super intelligent computer info that is incomplete, for that super intelligent computer to then take that info and say anything other than what EDI says would seem completely stupid and turn EDI into Holly from Red Dwarf.

Its a simple case of EDI unlike Legion not waiting to build a consensus and instead giving you the most probable outcome based on the info she has, info that once complete will more than likely concur with EDI's original guess.

Considering Bioware have supposedly being planning this whole thing out for as long as they have do you really think they get to the point where EDI says what she does and are winging it?

If EDi is completely wrong then what was the point of getting her to say what she does in the first place, is it so we can go back to her in me3, point and laugh and go not as intelligent as you thought you were are you.

[Zatwu]

I think its pretty easy to see whats going on. Basically even if the Collector base is destroyed, TIM wants to get every piece of Reaper tech he can and so Cerberus digs heavily into the area. However the Reaper's show up and huskify/indoctrinate everyone meaning that while some of Cerberus is still opposed to the Reapers, a large portion of it is now on their side.

[marshalleck]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KevShep wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Then you haven't played many Bioware video games.

 some of my favorate games are bioware. This game is a web of truths and half truths and anything that has not been astablished as a fact in that pressent moment in the game then that means that there is more to it thats why the writers of the game will throw out an anwser based on nothing more then a guess in order to solve the question later with the real answer. 

No, the Mass Effect series is painfully blunt and honest. The only lies in the game are those that are directly and openly contradicted later on as a matter of plot. The series has a pathological hatred of direct lies: even lies of omission are nearly always directly addressed shortly after they are made. Mystery and deception come from a lack of information and allowing players to draw their own unsupported conclusions, not erronious information.

This has been a defining aspect of the series since its start. When the nigh-omniscient authoritivative plot exposition device tells you the likely basis of something... that's what happened. If you'd played more Bioware games, you'd have noticed that.

This guy has played many Bioware games. The guy he's talking to has not.

[ThePwener]

MOSt of Cerberus? Since when do we know how many personell each Cell has? Minuteman station holded a few hundred people, and that WASNT a Cell, just a spacestation. Who's to say it's only one cell that's defected (out of known 13) and TIM isn't involved? There is a lot of speculation in this thread and I don't like it.

[alperez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

alperez wrote...

Considering Bioware have supposedly being planning this whole thing out for as long as they have do you really think they get to the point where EDI says what she does and are winging it?

LMAO, Bioware hasn't planned ****. It is painfully obvious that they're making up most of this as they go along.

A lot isn't planned definetely but you seriously believe they have from day one no idea where they were going and only how they got there may have changed?

Or is this more of the what's been done with cerberus couldn't have been planned because it was not what i wanted stuff you usually post?

[Yakko77]

Every mission involving Cerberus in both games involved an experiment gone awry and lots and lots of dead people because things went too far. Even bringing Shep back (seemingly the justification and pardon for every past Cerberus crime to some on this forum) meant the death of all but two others on an entire space station involved in that effort. And still people are surprised that maybe Cerberus will be an enemy in ME3?

*facedesk*