82210 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

jlb524 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
On the other hand, if she wanted to imply that TIM will use the base the same way and that was not worth it, why did she not say so? The problem is that taken by itself, the CB fails a moral dilemma. Keeping it would pose absolutely no problem at all without TIM in the equation, and I can't believe Miranda would not see that. Yet the complete Paragon exchange seems to be based on exactly that. 

I don't agree with this.

Or maybe I misunderstand your point.

If she believes the Reapers need to be stopped and the technology is too dangerous to pursue for study then I don't see the issue with her wanting to sabatoge it.

I was talking about moral dilemmas. My point was the Collector base presents no *moral* problem if you take TIM out of the equation. That it may present a technical problem is a different matter. On the other hand, neither is "It is too dangerous to study" a statement I would associate with Miranda. She wouldn't accept using it to turn humans into living weapons, but she'd very much want to study it.

[ThomGau]

@Swaggacide: I'll PM you about it .
@GreyWarden36 : She is not romancable in ME3, though you can continue the ME2 romance if she was you LI . BTW the romance is carried over well, with a more emotional writing .

Modifié par ThomGau, 16 janvier 2012 - 11:41 .

[Ieldra]

Swaggacide wrote...
Does anyone have ideas on how we will be introduced to Miranda in ME3?

Highlight the next line to see the spoiler. If the leaked script is correct....
...our first meeting with her will be on the Citadel where she has gone to speak with some people. Shepard, among others.

GreyWarden36 wrote...
Is Miranda still a romance option in ME3?

Yes. But not for new players. You can continue the romance from ME2.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 16 janvier 2012 - 11:18 .

[CptData]

Afaik the only "old" romances you can start in ME3 are VS, Liara and most likely Team Dextro. Jack, Miranda, Jacob and Thane can't be romanced in ME3 unless you import a romance with any of them.

I like the idea romances get far more emotional and deeper in ME3 than in ME1 and ME2. Especially ME2 romances felt as if necessary build up process was missing. I hope romances will develop over the course of the entire game if possible. In case of Miranda I wonder if e-mails will also develop that romance further.

[wright1978]

I'm holding off judgement on handling of the romances. Could either come off well or come off like ME2 romances are 2nd class citizens.

[schemata]

how do most people plan on playing there first playthrough, to me the first always has the biggest impact for obvious reasons. will people have a walkthrough up online, or a guide on hand? Or do you plan on winging it?

[schemata]

oh, and this

[Ieldra]

schemata wrote...

This is exactly what I have always contested when I argued that Miranda's "betrayal" line is out of character because it compromises her operative side so much that it might never have existed. There is no buildup for this change, not even on the SM itself, it comes totally out of the blue.

Also, "the ends justify the means" needs elaboration. You generally need to qualify which ends exactly justify which means exactly, or the statement is meaningless since "any little good justifies the most brutal means" is not something that could be seriously discussed. Back to Miranda, I agree that using humans in the way they were used at the CB would go beyond the means Miranda is willing to accept, but not retroactively. What has been done, and been done by non-Cerberus agents, would have no weight in Miranda's reasoning about why the base should be kept or not.

 Ah but now enter paragon sheps influence! I always felt that sheps influence could subtlely be seen in all those around him.  I almost feel that he's generally the driving force for change with all of sheps allies growth of character. I think the moral dividing line your using is pre-paragon-shep. I also believe the CB is what is needed for her to adopt proactive values; values she is true too regardless of circumstances. shaking your head no? haha.  Alright we won't be agreeing here, but Im idealistic>cynic

Are you telling me that Paragon Shepard blames the tool (the CB) for the actions of its creators (the Reapers), and makes Miranda do the same? Things like that are exactly why I absolutely despise the extreme Paragon Shepard. He makes decisions from moral passion without tempering them by moral reasoning, the typical sentimental feel-good morality. Exactly that is what I think is completely out of character for Miranda.

(It is also the reason why I don't play Paragon Shepard. It has less to do with being a cynic or an idealist and more with my belief that a morality not guided by reason is undesirable and liable to turn into evil. Note that I am not saying Paragon players make mostly sentimental decisions, only that in-game Paragon Shepard justifies some of his/her actions that way, even where most players would not, based on the arguments put forward in the relevant threads). 

Please tell me: what moral significance has destroying the base as such, not taking into account that TIM wants to use it to turn more humans into living weapons? Why should what was done there influence the morality of keeping or destroying it? No harm, no disloyalty and no unfairness would result from keeping the base if you could keep TIM and his plans out of it. Evil is not contagious, and there is no subtle taint that transfers itself to anyone who would study the base because of what was done there. Miranda would laugh at the suggestion. To say she'd make a decision based on that kind of morality is preposterous.

Plus it'll be better for her this way, theres basically a ton of foreshadowing that keeping the base will have bad consequences. Which I try to take consequences into effect so Im not butthurt come ME the third. I think theres a decision you gotta make. Rp, where you try to stay as true to a nuancsed character as possible, or accept the avenues your given and make the best of it. but I gotten say, going willy nilly with paragon, neutral, and renegade options still wont really give shep a personality. But thats a topic for another day.

I roleplay and try to take the decisions that my Shepards would find reasonable based on their personal beliefs. My main Shepard, of course, shares some of my personal beliefs. I usually don't let narrative structure and tropes influence my decisions.
As for consequences, there has been so much criticism of Paragon favoritism that things will be a little more balanced in ME3. I hope that also applies to the CB decision.

This is a hard moral arguement to make. I can see why you think it goes against miris character.  however imo at this point in time I think the SM mission, if youve taken the paragon path; changes her... values to an extent. That its no longer a logical choice but one from the heart.

Tell me: how is keeping the base heartless, again, without taking TIM's plans into account? I agree that Miranda might have more empathy from this point onwards - but I think it would only influence her morality as far as it could help prevent future "wrongs". Her empathy would not lead her to falsely blame a tool for the actions of its creators. Recall that his argument started with my denying the moral significance of what was done with the base for future actions regarding it, as opposed to the (mostly uncontested) moral significance of what TIM might do with it.

Not that this will ever become a problem in my games, since I never destroy the base.

That be dangerous territory yo.  someone might die because of that choice.  If one thing me1 and 2 do, is lean into every foreshadowed event, and make every phrophecy true.  I probably couldnt list all the times the game has told you that using reaper tech stunts your development and is bad. But thats not are arguement here at all and Im going off on a tangeant.

I do not buy into that reasoning and I'm not at all sure that's what the writers wanted to imply. Let's leave it at that.

The end goal would be the same for your miri and mine, and that would be a human STG, probably have N7 under their roof as well. In the end your ideas are tighter, but sounds like your path was a little more fuzzy as far as your shep. But your ideas for miri and her very immediate future are tighter.  My path was much more para and tighter, with a fuzzier immediate future. You win. fine.

Oh, Cyrus Shepard is rather defined. Among other things, he is a techno-progressivist transhumanist, mostly consequentialist in ethics, moderately pro-human but not xenophobic (actually interested in non-human culture and biology), non-religious, an anti-traditionalist radical who refuses to accept any taboos in technological development, appreciative of formal courtesy and somewhat aristocratic in manner (as opposed to the mask he shows the world as Commander Shepard), mostly diplomatic but tends to lose patience with political bullsh*t. And with a background in military intelligence. He has significant empathy but refuses to let it get in the way of important decisions. Among other things. Which in game terms, makes him neutral to Renegon on the karma meter.

Is that un-fuzzy enough for you

Modifié par Ieldra2, 16 janvier 2012 - 12:44 .

[schemata]

[quote]Ieldra2 wrote...

[quote]schemata wrote...
[quote]
This is exactly what I have always contested when I argued that Miranda's "betrayal" line is out of character because it compromises her operative side so much that it might never have existed. There is no buildup for this change, not even on the SM itself, it comes totally out of the blue.

Also, "the ends justify the means" needs elaboration. You generally need to qualify which ends exactly justify which means exactly, or the statement is meaningless since "any little good justifies the most brutal means" is not something that could be seriously discussed. Back to Miranda, I agree that using humans in the way they were used at the CB would go beyond the means Miranda is willing to accept, but not retroactively. What has been done, and been done by non-Cerberus agents, would have no weight in Miranda's reasoning about why the base should be kept or not.[/quote]
 Ah but now enter paragon sheps influence! I always felt that sheps influence could subtlely be seen in all those around him.  I almost feel that he's generally the driving force for change with all of sheps allies growth of character. I think the moral dividing line your using is pre-paragon-shep. I also believe the CB is what is needed for her to adopt proactive values; values she is true too regardless of circumstances. shaking your head no? haha.  Alright we won't be agreeing here, but Im idealistic>cynic[/quote]
Are you telling me that Paragon Shepard blames the tool (the CB) for the actions of its creators (the Reapers), and makes Miranda do the same? Things like that are exactly why I absolutely despise the extreme Paragon Shepard. He makes decisions from moral passion without tempering them by moral reasoning, the typical sentimental feel-good morality. Exactly that is what I think is completely out of character for Miranda.

(It is also the reason why I don't play Paragon Shepard. It has less to do with being a cynic or an idealist and more with my belief that a morality not guided by reason is undesirable and liable to turn into evil. Note that I am not saying Paragon players make mostly sentimental decisions, only that in-game Paragon Shepard justifies some of his/her actions that way, even where most players would not, based on the arguments put forward in the relevant threads). 

Please tell me: what moral significance has destroying the base as such, not taking into account that TIM wants to use it to turn more humans into living weapons? Why should what was done there influence the morality of keeping or destroying it? No harm, no disloyalty and no unfairness would result from keeping the base if you could keep TIM and his plans out of it. Evil is not contagious, and there is no subtle taint that transfers itself to anyone who would study the base because of what was done there. Miranda would laugh at the suggestion. To say she'd make a decision based on that kind of morality is preposterous.

[quote]Plus it'll be better for her this way, theres basically a ton of foreshadowing that keeping the base will have bad consequences. Which I try to take consequences into effect so Im not butthurt come ME the third. I think theres a decision you gotta make. Rp, where you try to stay as true to a nuancsed character as possible, or accept the avenues your given and make the best of it. but I gotten say, going willy nilly with paragon, neutral, and renegade options still wont really give shep a personality. But thats a topic for another day.[quote]
I roleplay and try to take the decisions that my Shepards would find reasonable based on their personal beliefs. My main Shepard, of course, shares some of my personal beliefs. I usually don't let narrative structure and tropes influence my decisions.
As for consequences, there has been so much criticism of Paragon favoritism that things will be a little more balanced in ME3. I hope that also applies to the CB decision.


[quote]This is a hard moral arguement to make. I can see why you think it goes against miris character.  however imo at this point in time I think the SM mission, if youve taken the paragon path; changes her... values to an extent. That its no longer a logical choice but one from the heart. [/quote]
Tell me: how is keeping the base heartless, again, without taking TIM's plans into account? I agree that Miranda might have more empathy from this point onwards - but I think it would only influence her morality as far as it could help prevent future "wrongs". Her empathy would not lead her to falsely blame a tool for the actions of its creators. Recall that his argument started with my denying the moral significance of what was done with the base for future actions regarding it, as opposed to the (mostly uncontested) moral significance of what TIM might do with it.


[quote]Not that this will ever become a problem in my games, since I never destroy the base.[/quote]
That be dangerous territory yo.  someone might die because of that choice.  If one thing me1 and 2 do, is lean into every foreshadowed event, and make every phrophecy true.  I probably couldnt list all the times the game has told you that using reaper tech stunts your development and is bad. But thats not are arguement here at all and Im going off on a tangeant.[/quote]
I do not buy into that reasoning and I'm not at all sure that's what the writers wanted to imply. Let's leave it at that.

[quote]
The end goal would be the same for your miri and mine, and that would be a human STG, probably have N7 under their roof as well. In the end your ideas are tighter, but sounds like your path was a little more fuzzy as far as your shep. But your ideas for miri and her very immediate future are tighter.  My path was much more para and tighter, with a fuzzier immediate future. You win. fine.[/quote]
Oh, Cyrus Shepard is rather defined. Among other things, he is a techno-progressivist transhumanist, mostly consequentialist in ethics, moderately pro-human but not xenophobic (actually interested in non-human culture and biology), non-religious, an anti-traditionalist radical who refuses to accept any taboos in technological development, appreciative of formal courtesy and somewhat aristocratic in manner (as opposed to the mask he shows the world as Commander Shepard), mostly diplomatic but tends to lose patience with political bullsh*t. And with a background in military intelligence. He has significant empathy but refuses to let it get in the way of important decisions. Among other things. Which in game terms, makes him neutral to Renegon on the karma meter.

Is that un-fuzzy enough for you

[/quote]
 ..............................................................you

[Ieldra]

schemata, your main Shepard is significantly more Paragon than mine. That would account for the differences. If we get different Mirandas in our ME3 games, that would be very interesting.

[JosephDucreux]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

Then again, my distaste for Miranda way back when was also partly due to peer pressure. My friend kept on telling me... Well... Things that I may be banned for if I said them.

We aren't friends anymore.

Who is this 'friend' you speak of? I need to have a few words with him.

[flemm]

schemata wrote...

how do most people plan on playing there first playthrough, to me the first always has the biggest impact for obvious reasons. will people have a walkthrough up online, or a guide on hand? Or do you plan on winging it?

Not sure I will wing it, exactly, but I don't think I'll try to plan too much.

Oddly enough, given where I stand on certain long-standing discussions around here, I think I may import a save where I keep the base (and don't encourage Miranda to talk to Oriana) as first order of business. But, beyond that, I don't expect to plan too much.

[Ieldra]

schemata wrote...
how do most people plan on playing there first playthrough, to me the first always has the biggest impact for obvious reasons. will people have a walkthrough up online, or a guide on hand? Or do you plan on winging it?

I won't use a walkthrough for my first game. It's enough that I know the leaked script, I want some surprises to be left. If it turns out that my actions don't result in the after-the-war scenario I want, I'll replay. Even from ME1 if necessary. I have a suspicion that my preferred scenario will be more likely with a dead Wrex, a dead Council and a Miranda who didn't speak to her sister in ME2. So far I have taken one of those with my main Shepard.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 16 janvier 2012 - 01:33 .

[schemata]

Tell me: how is keeping the base heartless, again, without taking TIM's plans into account? I agree that Miranda might have more empathy from this point onwards - but I think it would only influence her morality as far as it could help prevent future "wrongs". Her empathy would not lead her to falsely blame a tool for the actions of its creators. Recall that his argument started with my denying the moral significance of what was done with the base for future actions regarding it, as opposed to the (mostly uncontested) moral significance of what TIM might do with it.

I cant quite get on this without you explaining the bolded part to me. I have yet see the script and have dodged several spoilers.  however with no future knowledge in my head- Im reading into his character. And how can you make a choice about the CB, without considering TIM's motives and character?

Well I guess it was heading into this direction wasnt it. Why keeping the collector base was not moral. To solve the great mystery. how can you attach morality to an object, a tool! How can this be done? I think you have to consume the identiry of the collector base in the past, present and future. Its entire, entity to give it its morality.

A side tangeant.  Is this arguement reduced really about whether morality is subject or objective? Thinking on my own question and Im gonna say no. but it was fun to think about.

Still I think destroying the base is based on your sheps values, not his morals. another tangeant

hmm. trying to find a way to attack this damn arguement.

Ok so I cant really tell you why. But its there, and its real. Kind of like when you know something. Its tied to your values as well.  By adopting reaper technology your saying the atrocities done to the human race can be overlooked, by some future pay off.  But if you value human life highly, there will be no future pay off thatd be worth the cost of human lifes.  The value of life is what ties shep and miri together. Thats why if your para, she'll roll with you and cut off TIM as well as resign on the spot.  Because to TIM Power is the end, however to shep and miri its life, well all life to para shep, but most likely human life to miri. (however working with aliens may have changed her opinion on a need for human centric agendas... yet another tangeant)

When your agenda is life, the means do not justify the ends.And yes, say the baby reaper cost 5 million lifes, but with the CB, you save additional 10 million lifes down the road...it's still morally wrong. Because it hasnt, or cant save those lives now.  It basically boils down to you shouldnt suspend your beliefs for the sake of, well anything.

Thats para sheps arguement, that the process, and tech were tainted. That it didnt value life, and samara, that sexy **** says it best. You haven't really defeated the enemy if you adopt their methods. 

But you can say well TIM and cerberus werent willing to make a human reaper, and Id reply how do you really know?

I do not buy into that reasoning and I'm not at all sure that's what the writers wanted to imply. Let's leave it at that.

I highly highly suggest going back and destroying the base. If there is going to be a person to die over the CB, bet money it will be miri.  I cant stress how many times its pushed on you, that developing anyway but via your own path is doom.  Sovereign said it in ME1. Samara has said it. Legions said it. Theres probably some prophecy in your codex that says it.  Its probably some ritual of the hanar.. well the point is they really push this meme. And whatever they foreshadow is probably going to be truth. They telegraph there story like crazy, so people know how to make decisions regarding their "path"

Oh, Cyrus Shepard is rather defined. Among other things, he is a techno-progressivist transhumanist, mostly consequentialist in ethics, moderately pro-human but not xenophobic (actually interested in non-human culture and biology), non-religious, an anti-traditionalist radical who refuses to accept any taboos in technological development, appreciative of formal courtesy and somewhat aristocratic in manner (as opposed to the mask he shows the world as Commander Shepard), mostly diplomatic but tends to lose patience with political bullsh*t. And with a background in military intelligence. He has significant empathy but refuses to let it get in the way of important decisions. Among other things. Which in game terms, makes him neutral to Renegon on the karma meter.

Is that un-fuzzy enough for you

So what ... your saying you play the inflitrator class? j/k  lol. you def have his backstory fleshed out. So how would Cyrus view sovereigns speech about using their tech manipulating civilizations to expand on path they desire? Whats his feelings on the heretic geth, and the geth? How about the quarians? How the hell does a consequentialist follow the damn renegade path anyway? Or keep the CB base!  Thinking of future pay off huh? always deal with the here and now thats whats real.

Modifié par schemata, 16 janvier 2012 - 01:41 .

[schemata]

ieldra2- missed some of your post somehow, finishing up on the points i missed.


and this

[schemata]

Are you telling me that Paragon Shepard blames the tool (the CB) for the actions of its creators (the Reapers), and makes Miranda do the same? Things like that are exactly why I absolutely despise the extreme Paragon Shepard. He makes decisions from moral passion without tempering them by moral reasoning, the typical sentimental feel-good morality. Exactly that is what I think is completely out of character for Miranda.

(It is also the reason why I don't play Paragon Shepard. It has less to do with being a cynic or an idealist and more with my belief that a morality not guided by reason is undesirable and liable to turn into evil. Note that I am not saying Paragon players make mostly sentimental decisions, only that in-game Paragon Shepard justifies some of his/her actions that way, even where most players would not, based on the arguments put forward in the relevant threads). 

Please tell me: what moral significance has destroying the base as such, not taking into account that TIM wants to use it to turn more humans into living weapons? Why should what was done there influence the morality of keeping or destroying it? No harm, no disloyalty and no unfairness would result from keeping the base if you could keep TIM and his plans out of it. Evil is not contagious, and there is no subtle taint that transfers itself to anyone who would study the base because of what was done there. Miranda would laugh at the suggestion. To say she'd make a decision based on that kind of morality is preposterous.

I roleplay and try to take the decisions that my Shepards would find reasonable based on their personal beliefs. My main Shepard, of course, shares some of my personal beliefs. I usually don't let narrative structure and tropes influence my decisions.
As for consequences, there has been so much criticism of Paragon favoritism that things will be a little more balanced in ME3. I hope that also applies to the CB decision.

sounds like we do have a similiar beef, with the paragon renegade system.  But you twisted the sheet out of it to make it work; I submitted early and ran with it for the most part. Reason is a beast!  but nothing can top passion man. Oh yes.

As far as TIM and CB, theres no gaurantee that he will keep out of it, and no way to tell what he'd do with it. 

But thats not the reason to destroy it. Its because one human life isnt worth defiling their tradegy for any quantifiable gains. Even if those gains are staring you in the face. Balls and passion! money

Yeah I like that.  You've got the entire galaxy at stake, and defending it by means of technology that has crushed human lifes in the past isn't worth looking past the loss of life it caused. Para Shep knows it carries a price tag, but he'll man up when the time comes and pay whats due.

I sadly let the narrative highly guide my path. I just dont wanna be gimped in the end.  I dont think their entire system will be redone however. Itd be quite the scooby-do if all this time they pigeon hold us into para, then go for some intense ambiguity in the finale.  Id probably like it, but I doubt it will go as far as you want it to. They do have to appease the masses, so I cant imagine theyll go to far with it. 

Man we could only hope tbh. but I have my reservations.

eh i lost my train of thought. thats probably a good thing.

[Berg]

schemata wrote...

By adopting reaper technology your saying the atrocities done to the human race can be overlooked, by some future pay off.  But if you value human life highly, there will be no future pay off thatd be worth the cost of human lifes.

When your agenda is life, the means do not justify the ends.And yes, say the baby reaper cost 5 million lifes, but with the CB, you save additional 10 million lifes down the road...it's still morally wrong. Because it hasnt, or cant save those lives now.  It basically boils down to you shouldnt suspend your beliefs for the sake of, well anything.

I don't see it like this at all. I kept the collector base because it seemed the sensible thing to do with the information available to Shepard at the time. I never consider it morally wrong - the only doubt was about TIM. But since all adavnced life in the galaxy is at stake he is the lesser of two evils. I certainly don't view it as not valuing human life.

If people say they don't want to give the base to cerberus, I understand. If they say that keeping the base is of itself immoral they have lost me.

[Ieldra]

[quote]schemata wrote...
[quote]
Tell me: how is keeping the base heartless, again, without taking TIM's plans into account? I agree that Miranda might have more empathy from this point onwards - but I think it would only influence her morality as far as it could help prevent future "wrongs". Her empathy would not lead her to falsely blame a tool for the actions of its creators. Recall that his argument started with my denying the moral significance of what was done with the base for future actions regarding it, as opposed to the (mostly uncontested) moral significance of what TIM might do with it.
[/quote]
I cant quite get on this without you explaining the bolded part to me. I have yet see the script and have dodged several spoilers.  however with no future knowledge in my head- Im reading into his character. And how can you make a choice about the CB, without considering TIM's motives and character?[/quote]
You cannot. But in-game Paragon Shepard appears to do so. He justifies destroying the base with what was done there, not with what TIM would do with it. That's why I find Paragon Shepard in the exchange with TIM stupid. And Miranda also does with her line "Using anything from this base seems like a betrayal", which is why I think it's out of character.

[quote]Well I guess it was heading into this direction wasnt it. Why keeping the collector base was not moral. To solve the great mystery. how can you attach morality to an object, a tool! How can this be done? I think you have to consume the identiry of the collector base in the past, present and future. Its entire, entity to give it its morality.

A side tangeant.  Is this arguement reduced really about whether morality is subject or objective? Thinking on my own question and Im gonna say no. but it was fun to think about.

Still I think destroying the base is based on your sheps values, not his morals. another tangeant

hmm. trying to find a way to attack this damn arguement.[/quote]
You cannot. Not successfully and stay within the boundaries of reason anyway. I'm very well aware that a great many people *feel* that keeping the base is not moral regardless of TIM's motivations, but rather than accept that there is no rational basis to turn this into an argument most people would rather go "I know it's wrong. I don't know why but I know." I say if you don't know why, you do not "know" at all. A descriptive account of human morality shows that it is not always rational. That does not necessarily devalue it functionally, but it devalues it as an argument. You will not be able to say why "keeping the Collector base is immoral". I challenge you to follow the rational consequence and discard that stance.

[quote]Ok so I cant really tell you why.[/quote]
Didn't I just say so?

[quote]But its there, and its real. Kind of like when you know something.[/quote] 
Did I not just anticipate that *sigh*. You do *not* know. You just believe. Just as I do not know that my path is "right". I choose to follow it based on my values. But neither do I know that those are "right". There are boundaries of morality beyond which it becomes possible to say that a moral statement is not appropriate for a human, based on anthropological observations. But more "truth" you will never be able to find, and even these boundaries are fuzzy.
And because we both cannot know that our moral statements are intrinsically true, we need to justify them in terms of values and consequences. That's why morality has to be guided by reason.

[quote]Its tied to your values as well.  By adopting reaper technology your saying the atrocities done to the human race can be overlooked, by some future pay off.  But if you value human life highly, there will be no future pay off thatd be worth the cost of human lifes.  The value of life is what ties shep and miri together. Thats why if your para, she'll roll with you and cut off TIM as well as resign on the spot.  Because to TIM Power is the end, however to shep and miri its life, well all life to para shep, but most likely human life to miri. (however working with aliens may have changed her opinion on a need for human centric agendas... yet another tangeant)[/quote]
Yes, to TIM power is the end. But his arguments nonetheless have merit, namely that it's quite possible you could save more lives by keeping the base and use the knowledge contained therein to fight the Reapers. Which means that if you value human lives highly, then you might want to keep the base! In fact, I would always take that decision with no qualms whatsoever if I didn't already suspect that TIM values human lives much less.

BTW, another important thing to note is that Reaper technology wasn't morally responsible for the atrocities done to humans. The Collectors were. Also, some people appear to implicitly assume that studying Reaper technology necessarily leads to more atrocities. There is no rational basis for such a belief. These people are ignorant of the nature of technology and assume that because the base was built for one purpose using humans as "fuel", nothing could be gained from studying it that would not include doing the same.  

[quote]When your agenda is life, the means do not justify the ends.And yes, say the baby reaper cost 5 million lifes, but with the CB, you save additional 10 million lifes down the road...it's still morally wrong. Because it hasnt, or cant save those lives now.  It basically boils down to you shouldnt suspend your beliefs for the sake of, well anything.[/quote]
Why is it still morally wrong? You were not responsible for killing those five million and could have done nothing to save them, thus by keeping it and saving 10 million others, you have done *nothing* wrong and quite a bit of good.

About beliefs, I do not believe in faith. Belief itself is indicative of absolutely nothing. If I may give you one of my favorite quotes: "Faith is the truth of passion. Since no passion is more true than another, faith is the truth of nothing." (from "The Darkness That Comes Before" by R Scott Bakker). Belief should always be discarded for knowledge. And if you can't have knowledge, you should be aware, all the time, that belief has no necessary basis in reality.

[quote]Thats para sheps arguement, that the process, and tech were tainted. That it didnt value life, and samara, that sexy **** says it best. You haven't really defeated the enemy if you adopt their methods.[/quote]
There are two different arguments in here. One: it might be Paragon Shepard's reasoning that the tech is tainted, but I believe I have thoroughly thrashed that assumption as a conceit. As heavily based as it may be in humans' passions, it's still false. I dislike Paragon Shepard for succumbing to such a delusional conceit. 
Two: the argument about adopting the enemy's methods is based on an assumption I do not buy into, namely that the fight is more about the enemy's methods than the enemy itself. It isn't. It's a war for survival. If you survive, you are still free to develop in different directions, good or bad. If you don't, there will be no future for you. For Paragon Shepard it might be acceptable to sacrifice the future of life in the galaxy for the sake of a principle, but that's why I don't like Paragon Shepard much. 
.
[quote][quote]
I do not buy into that reasoning and I'm not at all sure that's what the writers wanted to imply. Let's leave it at that.
[/quote]
I highly highly suggest going back and destroying the base. If there is going to be a person to die over the CB, bet money it will be miri.  I cant stress how many times its pushed on you, that developing anyway but via your own path is doom.  Sovereign said it in ME1. Samara has said it. Legions said it. Theres probably some prophecy in your codex that says it.  Its probably some ritual of the hanar.. well the point is they really push this meme. And whatever they foreshadow is probably going to be truth. They telegraph there story like crazy, so people know how to make decisions regarding their "path"[/quote]
They appear to push this meme, but I still don't buy it. And if they make "Reaper technology is intrinsically evil" true, then I'll berate them forever for their writing. But I don't think they will. In fact, I have some evidence they won't. Anything more would be a spoiler. Tell me if you want to be spoiled and I'll PM you what I've learned from the leak.


[quote]
So what ... your saying you play the inflitrator class? j/k  lol. you def have his backstory fleshed out. So how would Cyrus view sovereigns speech about using their tech manipulating civilizations to expand on path they desire? Whats his feelings on the heretic geth, and the geth? How about the quarians? How the hell does a consequentialist follow the damn renegade path anyway? Or keep the CB base!  Thinking of future pay off huh? always deal with the here and now thats whats real.[/quote]
Cyrus Shepard will destroy the Heretic faction, but also work to reconcile the geth and the quarians and he has kept the Rachni queen alive. He'll keep the base because after the derelict Reaper is destroyed, there is no other place where so much about the Reapers can be learned. And knowledge is the key to victory, as ME3 will bring home rather forcefully I believe, even though the knowledge contained in the base might not be part of it. 

I'll answer you later about Sovereign. I have things to do....

Modifié par Ieldra2, 16 janvier 2012 - 02:51 .

[schemata]

oh brother wrote...

schemata wrote...

By adopting reaper technology your saying the atrocities done to the human race can be overlooked, by some future pay off.  But if you value human life highly, there will be no future pay off thatd be worth the cost of human lifes.

When your agenda is life, the means do not justify the ends.And yes, say the baby reaper cost 5 million lifes, but with the CB, you save additional 10 million lifes down the road...it's still morally wrong. Because it hasnt, or cant save those lives now.  It basically boils down to you shouldnt suspend your beliefs for the sake of, well anything.

I don't see it like this at all. I kept the collector base because it seemed the sensible thing to do with the information available to Shepard at the time. I never consider it morally wrong - the only doubt was about TIM. But since all adavnced life in the galaxy is at stake he is the lesser of two evils. I certainly don't view it as not valuing human life.

If people say they don't want to give the base to cerberus, I understand. If they say that keeping the base is of itself immoral they have lost me.

again its about the processes involved with CB, and the massive life lost there.  I mean only in the last few minutes do you find out whats going on, and it never really lets it sink in or hit the player the tragedy thats happened there. And if you value human life, and miri and shep both do, your compromising yourself, and her values for the greedy imaginations of what you mind find in that place.  People, a lot of people died there, that place needs to go. It involves feelings like what you value, pride and dignity and is not just a rational calculation to be made. As para shep saids, he'll find another way, and the base is tainted.

[jtav]

I'd go so far as to say that I'd keep the base even if the price were Miranda's life--which it won't be. I believe keeping the base per se is the right thing to do, and I don't love Miranda enough to abandon my principles. Bioware hitting me over the head would just make me dig in my heels more.

[CrutchCricket]

Oh look, this argument again... Well at least it's nice to get some new perspectives on it. It's being argued somewhat differently than what I was doing. Still these arguments on morality don't really interest me. Personally I'll always blow the base, if only to spite TIM. I think I can rationalize Shepard's motivations well enough from a role play perspective.

Ieldra, I don't think I've ever heard your stance on the Heretics. You say you destroyed them. Why?

Otherwise I regret missing the discussion on Shep's background. So even though I'm over 10 pages late here's my take on it:
You can do any combo of background and profile and have it fit without needing to add any major circumstances. Colonist/Sole Survivor is the most obvious pairing, but I'm not a fan of it. I made my female Shep that because I wanted to do something different. My main Shep on the other hand is Spacer/Ruthless. Like another user on here I found earthborn too plain and close to real life but I went a step further and lumped colonist under the same umbrella. Being born on a planet is so overdone, even in sci-fi I'm not aware of many characters born elsewhere. Of course in real life you'd be bombarded with all sorts of radiation and live a short sad mutated life. But hey it's fiction so it works (a mass effect field did it). I also find space fascinating and would wish to see as many different things in it as I could. Again the product of fiction, real space is mostly the same dotted blackness, but in sci-fi space is technicolor so my Shep is fascinated by it as I would be.

I also saw some concern that a spacer would not have the necessary harsh conditions and conflicts that would beget a ruthless demeanor but I disagree. Apart from the military shuffle isolation already mentioned I think spending your whole life in space, seeing first hand how small and insignificant we are in the scale of it all might lead one to conclude nothing we do really matters objectively on the cosmic scale and any importance is only assigned by ourselves. Thus Spacer Shep can easily assign all importance to getting the job done at all costs and none to morality  or what have you. It is not necessarily so, but it can easily be condusive to it. Hell I don't live in space and I see things this way.

Modifié par CrutchCricket, 16 janvier 2012 - 03:28 .

[flemm]

CptData wrote...

Something like that. I still believe - although I saw guys denying this - Miranda-fans are -also- Ashley-fans and vice versa.

I certainly think there is a lot to like about both characters. Of course, these characters are designed with a certain amount of tension between them in mind (like Jack/Miranda), so it's unsurprising that there would be a current of animosity between their respective fans.

However, just like Miranda/Jack, if you take a step back from that, it is easy to appreciate both.

[jtav]

It would be interesting to see what correlations there are. For myself, my favorites are Mordin, Legion, Kaidan, and Liara. Thane and Tali as well. I absolutely loathe Garrus and dislike Grunt. Ash I'm indifferent to.

[schemata]

I put my responses in italics as the post is hard to navigate. I want to hear your sovergein response as well.[

quote]Ieldra2 wrote...

[quote]schemata wrote...
[quote]
Tell me: how is keeping the base heartless, again, without taking TIM's plans into account? I agree that Miranda might have more empathy from this point onwards - but I think it would only influence her morality as far as it could help prevent future "wrongs". Her empathy would not lead her to falsely blame a tool for the actions of its creators. Recall that his argument started with my denying the moral significance of what was done with the base for future actions regarding it, as opposed to the (mostly uncontested) moral significance of what TIM might do with it.
[/quote]
I cant quite get on this without you explaining the bolded part to me. I have yet see the script and have dodged several spoilers.  however with no future knowledge in my head- Im reading into his character. And how can you make a choice about the CB, without considering TIM's motives and character?[/quote]
You cannot. But in-game Paragon Shepard appears to do so. He justifies destroying the base with what was done there, not with what TIM would do with it. That's why I find Paragon Shepard in the exchange with TIM stupid. And Miranda also does with her line "Using anything from this base seems like a betrayal", which is why I think it's out of character.

No no noooo! Thats undercutting my entire arguement by stating it isn't rational, when the choice for a paragon isn't meant to be.  Para shep isn't some tactical strategist or something. The bolded is my main point, and your like- that just doesnt make sense lol. It Isnt about what TIM would do with it, thats a rational arguement logical folk could understand.  By saying " I value the life of a human being" you have "set" your belief to a standard.  By keeping the base your forgoing what had occured there, therefore nullifying your belief, or at the least compromising it. Thats not what paragon shep is about, and by extension, paragon miri. not at this point in the game anyway. Miri soldifies that keeping the base would be a betrayal, basically strengthing my argument that both shep and miri would have to compromise their values to keep the base. Neither of them are about to do some sheet like that. So Shep says hell to you and this base, and so does miri. Because its basically saying the forest matters but not a tree. But if you keep that rational mindframe youll end up with no trees left, and no forrest and youll be the very thing you were trying to prevent. Hence the arguement: Adopting your enemies methods isnt defeating the enemy. Or bringing about a kind of self fufilling prophecy by making what sovergein said true from ME1

[quote]Well I guess it was heading into this direction wasnt it. Why keeping the collector base was not moral. To solve the great mystery. how can you attach morality to an object, a tool! How can this be done? I think you have to consume the identiry of the collector base in the past, present and future. Its entire, entity to give it its morality.

A side tangeant.  Is this arguement reduced really about whether morality is subject or objective? Thinking on my own question and Im gonna say no. but it was fun to think about.

Still I think destroying the base is based on your sheps values, not his morals. another tangeant

hmm. trying to find a way to attack this damn arguement.[/quote]
You cannot. Not successfully and stay within the boundaries of reason anyway. I'm very well aware that a great many people *feel* that keeping the base is not moral regardless of TIM's motivations, but rather than accept that there is no rational basis to turn this into an argument most people would rather go "I know it's wrong. I don't know why but I know." I say if you don't know why, you do not "know" at all. A descriptive account of human morality shows that it is not always rational. That does not necessarily devalue it functionally, but it devalues it as an argument. You will not be able to say why "keeping the Collector base is immoral". I challenge you to follow the rational consequence and discard that stance.

Just because you arent able to articulate your reasons doesnt make you wrong, this isnt true and something logical/rational people fall into way too often.  have you ever been in a situation where something just didnt feel right? You might be able to articulate or rationalize your thoughts but still the feeling persists, that its "wrong."  You said your a fan of biology yeah?  Well are proccess to articulate thoughts, rationalize things is in our frontal cortex. however the brains staging area for emotions are centered more from the middle from your brain, where there isnt the capability to form rational thought. so that area is always kind of fuzzy, but facts and graphs and studies are easliy accessible. but im positive youve been in a position where you could explain everything about it, while it still felt "wrong." and youd be right.  Reason isnt the only thing that guides us, we need emotions too.  So I can make the arguement and stay within the boundries of emotion, maybe not reason but their both equal beasts that we need. Not making my arguement any less. You need to give reign to both rational thought and emotion to be complete. however sometimes one can trump the other, and in the CB case, paragon is def right. Like I said early, if your willing to sacrifice a tree for the forrest, you continue on that path and you are the thing you were trying to prevent. So. I challenge you to follow the emotional consquences of keeping the base, and encapsulate how it makes both shep and miri "less" and discard your rational stance.



[quote]Ok so I cant really tell you why.[/quote]
Didn't I just say so?

all that rational thought and logically thinking, im sure you have nostradomus moments, I know your type


[quote]But its there, and its real. Kind of like when you know something.[/quote] 
Did I not just anticipate that *sigh*. You do *not* know. You just believe. Just as I do not know that my path is "right". I choose to follow it based on my values. But neither do I know that those are "right". There are boundaries of morality beyond which it becomes possible to say that a moral statement is not appropriate for a human, based on anthropological observations. But more "truth" you will never be able to find, and even these boundaries are fuzzy.
And because we both cannot know that our moral statements are intrinsically true, we need to justify them in terms of values and consequences. That's why morality has to be guided by reason.

so true, til the very end. I say guided by emotion, its what defines us and gives us spirit and empathy.



[quote]Its tied to your values as well.  By adopting reaper technology your saying the atrocities done to the human race can be overlooked, by some future pay off.  But if you value human life highly, there will be no future pay off thatd be worth the cost of human lifes.  The value of life is what ties shep and miri together. Thats why if your para, she'll roll with you and cut off TIM as well as resign on the spot.  Because to TIM Power is the end, however to shep and miri its life, well all life to para shep, but most likely human life to miri. (however working with aliens may have changed her opinion on a need for human centric agendas... yet another tangeant)[/quote]
Yes, to TIM power is the end. But his arguments nonetheless have merit, namely that it's quite possible you could save more lives by keeping the base and use the knowledge contained therein to fight the Reapers. Which means that if you value human lives highly, then you might want to keep the base! In fact, I would always take that decision with no qualms whatsoever if I didn't already suspect that TIM values human lives much less.

When your feeling your most sturdy is when you should be weary the most. Ah see, you SHOULD have qualms. Because the CB isnt a rational choice to be made. As I said earlier things can be right or wrong and have nothing to do with our ability to rationalize it.  If you value just a single human life your compromising yourself by keeping the base, because of the tradegy thats befallen it and the loss of human lifes. And your sacrificing your beliefs by letting this place to continue to exist. Its a BETRAYAL, believe in miri. Girl knows her stuff man. And your betraying it for the hope, that youll find something worthwhile there. Thats suspending your beliefs just for the possiblity that you might find something worthwhile.  When you should focus on surviving by creating your own path.  Now what if there is reaper tech that could help win the war? What happens when you continually follow their line of thought?  Whatever their purpose is, you may find yourself believing in that purpose as well.  Like I said you start sacrifcing trees to save the forrest, and before you know it, youll have nothing left of who you were. Cause you sold yourself out.

BTW, another important thing to note is that Reaper technology wasn't morally responsible for the atrocities done to humans. The Collectors were. Also, some people appear to implicitly assume that studying Reaper technology necessarily leads to more atrocities. There is no rational basis for such a belief. These people are ignorant of the nature of technology and assume that because the base was built for one purpose using humans as "fuel", nothing could be gained from studying it that would not include doing the same.  

Your logical and rational thought is impressive. Ill give you that. But its not about that. Its not that X, could lead to Y. Its about what has already passed, what the CB is now, at the moment you decide its fate, not on some candyland you imagine it might be. Its about being true to your values, and the value of human life and respecting that and staying true to that, hence, destroying the base. Its not about the future, its about the right here and now and staying true to what you believe and not compromsing it for some tech trinkets.



[quote]When your agenda is life, the means do not justify the ends.And yes, say the baby reaper cost 5 million lifes, but with the CB, you save additional 10 million lifes down the road...it's still morally wrong. Because it hasnt, or cant save those lives now.  It basically boils down to you shouldnt suspend your beliefs for the sake of, well anything.[/quote]
Why is it still morally wrong? You were not responsible for killing those five million and could have done nothing to save them, thus by keeping it and saving 10 million others, you have done *nothing* wrong and quite a bit of good.

About beliefs, I do not believe in faith. Belief itself is indicative of absolutely nothing. If I may give you one of my favorite quotes: "Faith is the truth of passion. Since no passion is more true than another, faith is the truth of nothing." (from "The Darkness That Comes Before" by R Scott Bakker). Belief should always be discarded for knowledge. And if you can't have knowledge, you should be aware, all the time, that belief has no necessary basis in reality.

If it were a ledger, and black and white, but its not. Its a world of color and emotion and people and living things. Its about not sacrifcing who you are for some quantifiable gain in the futurue.



[quote]Thats para sheps arguement, that the process, and tech were tainted. That it didnt value life, and samara, that sexy **** says it best. You haven't really defeated the enemy if you adopt their methods.[/quote]
There are two different arguments in here. One: it might be Paragon Shepard's reasoning that the tech is tainted, but I believe I have thoroughly thrashed that assumption as a conceit. As heavily based as it may be in humans' passions, it's still false. I dislike Paragon Shepard for succumbing to such a delusional conceit.

I believe it is tainted. And you sacrifice or suspend your beliefs to reap the tech advantage. Who you and miri are, is not worth that.
 
Two: the argument about adopting the enemy's methods is based on an assumption I do not buy into, namely that the fight is more about the enemy's methods than the enemy itself. It isn't. It's a war for survival. If you survive, you are still free to develop in different directions, good or bad. If you don't, there will be no future for you. For Paragon Shepard it might be acceptable to sacrifice the future of life in the galaxy for the sake of a principle, but that's why I don't like Paragon Shepard much. 
.
Mass effect will be a story much larger than survival. Itll be about awareness. Perspective, and what you believe.  how can you not love someone whos willing to not sacrifice who they are in the face of adversity? That takes heart and balls and a brain. The trifecta that is shep.  Money.

[quote][quote]
I do not buy into that reasoning and I'm not at all sure that's what the writers wanted to imply. Let's leave it at that.
[/quote]
I highly highly suggest going back and destroying the base. If there is going to be a person to die over the CB, bet money it will be miri.  I cant stress how many times its pushed on you, that developing anyway but via your own path is doom.  Sovereign said it in ME1. Samara has said it. Legions said it. Theres probably some prophecy in your codex that says it.  Its probably some ritual of the hanar.. well the point is they really push this meme. And whatever they foreshadow is probably going to be truth. They telegraph there story like crazy, so people know how to make decisions regarding their "path"[/quote]
They appear to push this meme, but I still don't buy it. And if they make "Reaper technology is intrinsically evil" true, then I'll berate them forever for their writing. But I don't think they will. In fact, I have some evidence they won't. Anything more would be a spoiler. Tell me if you want to be spoiled and I'll PM you what I've learned from the leak.

NOOO!  The reaper is my prize. There story. its what Ive been waiting for forever. I love the side quests and characers and races and universe and LI, but the reaper mystery is what has me really wrapped and I want it to be a suprise. Intrinsically evil would be equally as bad as solely reproduction process. And i will hate bioware. and be butthurt, not gonna lie.

I do totally buy into this meme. Hands down.  Like following their tech will open up new avenues of perspective and awareness and thought pattern.  Its iwild how much your perspective can change when your introduced to key pieces of information.  Now the certain pieces of reaper tech add up and the only logical choice would be that reapers are the good guys for some unkown reason to us.  However you add emotion to the mix, and realize a reaper would not be the same thing as a galaxy of our people. emotions and spirit for the win. James madison is a personal hero of mine, but eff the enlightement and rational thought har har har

[quote]
So what ... your saying you play the inflitrator class? j/k  lol. you def have his backstory fleshed out. So how would Cyrus view sovereigns speech about using their tech manipulating civilizations to expand on path they desire? Whats his feelings on the heretic geth, and the geth? How about the quarians? How the hell does a consequentialist follow the damn renegade path anyway? Or keep the CB base!  Thinking of future pay off huh? always deal with the here and now thats whats real.[/quote]
Cyrus Shepard will destroy the Heretic faction, but also work to reconcile the geth and the quarians and he has kept the Rachni queen alive. He'll keep the base because after the derelict Reaper is destroyed, there is no other place where so much about the Reapers can be learned. And knowledge is the key to victory, as ME3 will bring home rather forcefully I believe, even though the knowledge contained in the base might not be part of it. 

I'll answer you later about Sovereign. I have things to do....

[/quote]

Whoa, that doesnt seem to jive, Why would he destroy the heretics, being pro-tech non-traditionalist, anti taboo consequentialist??? Keeping the base would be sacrifcing what you believe in, abanonding who you are for the end means of survival. If you survive with no spirit left, why shouldnt you allow the reapers to cull who were are as we'll be nothing but shells of our former selves, theyll have their next generation of husks ready to go.

Modifié par schemata, 16 janvier 2012 - 04:20 .