1476 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...

I understand what you’re saying, but let’s face it, Shepard is the one who has the explaining to do. It’s been two years. Where has Shepard been that whole time? I’m sorry, but if somebody tried to feed me a death-and-resurrection story, I’d laugh in their face. I think the VS showed admirable restraint on that score.

I'm not denying that.  Shepard's lack of explanation is every bit as fail as the VS's  assumptions.  There is no innocent party in that scene.  Shepard's lack of explanation does not abslve the VS from trying to get those answers.  Actually the fact that the VS is investigating Cerberus would suggest that more questions should have been asked.

And for the record, my Shepard at least, said that he'd "spent two years in some kind of coma" :innocent:

Shepard and the VS were Alliance Marines together, the VS is understandably upset that this person that they looked up to is sleeping with the enemy, for whatever reason. The VS does give Shepard an opportunity to say her piece, and she seems to downplay Cerberus or seemingly support Cerberus. That’s not okay. That’s a betrayal, that’s a shift in loyalty. But Shepard  is somehow supposed to be given a free pass for defecting to a criminal organization, and yet the VS is a huge jerk for saying “working for a criminal organization is a betrayal of everything we stood for” and “I know where my loyalties lie”. That seems disproportionate to me.

Questions the VS actually asked:  

"Why didn't you try to contact me? Why didn't you let me know you were alive?"

"What if they're behind it? What if they're working with the Collectors?"

The VS never asks Shepard what the relationship is with Cerberus, what those creatures were that attacked the colony, doesn't even try to convince SHepard to split from Cerberus.  Heck, Shepard has to volunteer the information that Cerberus rebuilt him, the VS doesn't even ask how Shep could be alive in the first place

What the VS did was run off to find a divorce attorney before finding out if Shep was 'sleeping with the enemy" at all.  It's the stuff of screwball romantic comedies.  Only not funny.  Or romantic.

Shepard shouldn't get a "free pass" for providing the answer to working for Cerberus.  But the VS didn't even ask the question!  Nobody was interested in giving or receiving answers  The entire scene was terribly written.  Everybody and nobody is at fault.  

And regardless of whatever is going through the VS mind (and I’m sure many of your points had to occur to him/her) it’s clear that this person standing before the VS is not the Commander Shepard the VS once knew. That Shepard would never be so sanguine about ditching the Alliance and the Council. That Shepard would have turned to Cerberus only after exhausting every other avenue of support.

The same Commander Shepard who stole the Normandy, committing mutiny, treason, etc?

"We had to do this, you know that!  There was no other way!" -Commander Shepard
Oh, wait, that was Ashley 

Now I do wish Shepard was able to approach Anderson and the Council before agreeing to work with Cerberus, it would have been far more logical.  But either way Cerberus was the only avenue of support.  Shepard didn't (necessarilly) ditch them, they withheld their support.

[ubermensch007]

Siansonea II wrote...
My only real issue in THIS situation is that Shepard expects the VS to just shrug his/her shoulders when he/she learns that Shepard is working with Cerberus. That the VS should just “trust” Shepard, because of all
this stuff she did two years ago. I think it’s unreasonable of Shepard or anyone else to expect the VS to fall in line so easily, given all that we know about what Cerberus has done in the past.

This has nothing to do with the VS refusal to as you put it "fall in line" though Shepard ask the VS (on Horizon) to help him now as they once did with Saren the Geth and Soveriegn then.At No Point when Shep is talking to Liara'T Soni on thier date after the Lair of the Shadow Broker Mission is over; does he say,"I CAN'T BELIVE THE VS DIDN"T JOIN MY TEAM." In fact what he says and does, is throw his hands up in the air and say (something like) "I'm tired of my friends not trusting me!" Now what does he mean by "trust" ? As I said in one of my other post in this thread.This may have to do with the fact that he is a CO.And they (the VS) not only questions his judgement but insults his intelligence as well.I like what you said in your (entire post) here Sian.At the very least you speak of what you were thinking and feeling while this was all going on.And I'm glad that I now have a better idea of where you are coming from with this.Thanks for that.

But to "Speak for myself" Heh... I didn't give a flying f-uck, that the VS didn't join my team.(For the most part) I rarley ever used the b!tch in my shore party on battles in Mass Effect 1.What I like about Ash is her look and personality.She's funny, charming and I like talking to her.Plus she and my canon Shepard are both Combat Specialist so it would have been the empitamy of "SUPERFLUOUS" to use her in battle.It would have been like having Superman and Captain Marvel on the same team.Completley  unnecessary and retarded... My primary Mass Effect 1 team was comprised of Tali, Liara and Shepard.I rarely ever used Kaidan either.Why have someone who is tech and bioic.When I can just have someone who is all tech and someone else who is all biotic?!

Major Motoko Kusanagi may have looked down on "OVERSPECIALIZATION" ,“If we all reacted the same way, we’d be predictable, and there’s always more than one way to view the situation. What’s true for the
group is also true for the individual. It’s simple, overspecialize and you breed weakness. It’s slow death.”

But my team of Tali, Shepard and Liara in my eyes.Are a Holy Trinity.Together they are complete, whole and perfect.Full Combat - Full Tech - Full Biotic... Like the Three Deathly Hallows combined... But i digress.

But to speak for myself -- Part 2...

I'm not all that upset that the VS didn't join my Band of Brothers and Sisters in ME 2.(I mean I am, but that's not what vexes me the most) What I am upset about is what they said to me! Now in the Virmire Survivors defense.I can understand there side...Haven't we all done what they have done.I know I have.What I'm speaking about is this.Ashley and Kaidan both.Think the worst of someone they love, instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt.This seems to sort of just be human nature.I cannot tell you how many times I have felt this way or thought like that.But the difference is.Even though none of us can control or decide what we feel.We do however have the power and choice to determine what we say and do.Just b/c I feel like someone has done me wrong doesn't mean that I'm going to lash out at them.I tend to just investigate, what I think happened and like Luke Skywalker said to his father in Return of the Jedi;
I find this to be true of myself, from time to time,"Your thoughts  (and feelings) have betrayed you."

I was in the wrong, but thankfully; no damage was done to my closest relationships.Because I diidn't make an ASS out of myself, (like the VS does) just b/c I felt like someone I trust and care about dearly; did me wrong.If Commander Shepard were a Klingon, the VS would be dead right now for all the sh!t they said to him on Horizon.I can still remember an episode of Star Trek: TNG, when Warf was about ready to knock Captain Picard on his ass, for saying something very careless to whom he was addressing.

Sian, there was nothing "mild" about the VS  (so-called) "rebuke" of Shepard on Horizon ...If it is as you and others say "Most logical" for the VS and others to believe that Shepard "Faked his Own Death" two years ago, in order to defect from service to the Citadel Council and Alliance.Than it is only natural to infer from this assessement that they think that Shepard orchestrated the destruction of the Normandy SR-1 and murdered those under his command. They are essentially accussing Shepard of doing what Jon Voight's character does in the first (and best) Mission Impossible movie.The only thing that I can compare what they are implying that Shepard has done; with there belief that Shepard has been alive for the last two years and didn't contact them or anyone else.Is if someone said to you (if you have children that you love and are more precious to your than your own life) that they think that you have done the most horrible and vile things imaginable to your children! <_< Sian you keep saying that "Its not like any guns were drawn or anything."If someone said some sh!t like that to you -- something so heinous as that.You would probably leave them within an inch of their goddamn life.I know I would... As far as I'm concerned the VS is lucky they left Horizon in one piece.

And its not just what they said, but the self-righteousness attached to it."I know where "MY" loyalties lie." Translation: I'm better than you -- Shepard.The student has surpassed the teacher. I don't see how anyone who played ME 1 and 2's eyebrows were not raised when Kaidan and Ashley say this.I was like -- Well...

And when Kaidan says,"You betrayed everything we stood for!" Okay that's like having Batman say to Superman,"You betrayed everything you stood for!" WHAT!? Now we all know what Superman stands for, Truth Justice and the American Way." (If you leave out what he says in Action Comics #900, that is) And we should all know by now what Commander Shepard stands for.What Commander Shepard is fighting for. "We Will Fight For The Lost!"

Shepard: We have to give everything.Even if that means our lives.We will stop at nothing -- We will FIGHT FOR THE LOST!"

THIS -- is who Commander Shepard is.This incredible person is who the VS talks to and treats like there a "nobody" . UNBELIEVABLE...

Siansonea II wrote... I haven't forgotten any of that. It's just that situation doesn't add up, if you're on the outside looking in. Cerberus showing up on Horizon is exactly what the VS was told to expect. Then the attack happens, the VS is frozen in stasis by the seeker swarms, and comes out of stasis only after the attack is over. Obviously they see the Collector ship taking off, but what else did they see before they arrive at the
clearing where Shepard is talking with Delan? The VS sees a very suspicious situation, and Shepard's right smack in the middle of it. Yet people seem to think that the VS is supposed to believe everything
Shepard says even though Shepard has been out of contact for two years. Two years is a long time. Shepard's body was never recovered over Alchera, at least, not by the Alliance. The VS doesn't know where
Shepard has been for the last two years, only that Shepard hasn't communicated with the VS. The VS would naturally be skeptical of any "Cerberus rebuilt me while I was in a coma" story, because it sounds
like a bad soap opera plotline. And the VS is so mild in his/her rebuke of Shepard it's not even funny, yet people are acting like the VS is some kind of jerk. Shepard SHOULD be called out on working with
Cerberus. Shepard DID "betray what they stood for" and appears to have forgotten where her loyalties should lie. That's the way the situation looks if you don't know what Shepard knows. And Shepard could have
explained all that. But she doesn't. She just makes the situation worse by adding insult to injury. She's expecting too much from the VS, and I can't figure out why she would. Does she really think everyone's just
supposed to believe everything she says, even when it sounds impossible?Does she expect people to overlook something as egregious as working with Cerberus just because she says "you can trust me"? Who does she
think she is?  That "Hero of the Citadel" business was really epic—two years ago. You're
not a god, Shepard, you're just a woman, and you need to explain yourself. Not just dismiss legitimate questions like "what if Cerberus is manipulating you?"

On the "outside looking in" Isn't that exactly the perspective that Shepard and Co. had of Cerberus in ME 1? But in ME 2 things change.Shepard now has a new perspective of Cerberus.But inspite of this, Anderson and the VS talk to Shepard about Cerberus as if they were more knowledable about the organization than he is.Shepard could be viewed as a 'Deep-Undercover Operative' in ME 2.And as a spy Shepard get's the opportunity to go deeper into Cerberus operations and philosophy than anyone else before.For crying out loud.He meets the Founder of Cerberus.Most people don't even know that an Illusive Man even exist.Let alone what he looks like.This is another reason why I said in another post of mine in this thread that "The way Anderson and the VS speak to Shepard about Cerberus in ME 2.Is like someone talking down to Tiger Woods about Golf!" I'm not saying this just b/c Shep is such a Bad-Ass.No -- It's b/c he has more expierence with that organization than anyone else.

Who does she
think she is?  That "Hero of the Citadel" business was really epic—two years ago. You're
not a god, Shepard, you're just a woman, and you need to explain yourself.

You know -- I started reading this thread at Page 15.I actually only came here b/c knightnblu gave a shout-out to a really good post of yours, that fanfic of Shepard sending an email to the Asari Councilor.I agree, that what you wrote there was quite good.(In response to what 'some dude' asked you.)Sense Pg 15 I couldn't help but notice that this has to be like the fourth or fifth time that you have said, "Shepard is not a god." (In one way or another) Funny how Operations Chief Ashley Williams would have to disagree with you.

Ashely: "Commander Shepard.Captain of the Normandy.The first human Spectre.Savior of the Citadel. Your in the presence of a god.
DeLann.Back from the dead."

And so do I.Commander Shepard is so akin to the Titan God Prometheus.It is down right  uncanny... (But I don't find it unsettling)

Prometheus name means "Foresight" After the Battle of the Citadel, when everyone is all feeling good about there victory.Shepard is the only one.Who is already thinking about what is to come, that is inevitable.

The Turian Councilor:  "The battle with Soverign destroyed our illusions of peace and security.Now the galaxy
will look to us -- the Council -- to defend them."

Shepard: "Sovereign alone nearly wiped you out.You won't stand a chance if the whole Reaper fleet shows up. Not unless I find some way to stop them."

Prometheus uplifted humanity.Commander John Shepard does more for the human race by his actions during ME 1 and  Post Battle of the Citadel, than anyone before him.I will never forget, how AWESTRUCK I was at the ending of Mass Effect 1.I really didn't see that coming.It was so Anti-Status Quo.

Prometheus was also known as a "Friend of Humanity" Shepard cares so much about his kinfolk.That as you put it in so many words Sian: He risk everything-- His career -- His reputation and His Freedom by deciding to work with Cerberus in order to help human colonist.

I do not believe that it is a coincidence that BioWare decide to name the major Pro-Humanity Group Cerberus.In greek mythology Cerberus is of course the Guard Dog of the Underworld -- The Land of the Dead and Kingdom of Lord Hades.The God of death...

The number 7 is on Shepard's chest.The N& Logo is his trademark.Next to everyone knows that the number seven is seen by many over the centuries and millenia as a 'sacred number' It is the number of God (to Jews and Christians).It is ubiquitous through art and architecture and so many other aspects of our lives.The 7 days of the week -- The  Seven Wonders of the World and so forth and so on.

Make no mistake... Commander Shepard is a god.No mere mortal (or cyborg or superhero for that matter) could have acheived all that he has.He is nothingless, than  Prometheus Reborn...

Modifié par ubermensch007, 03 août 2011 - 08:17 .

[MyOpinionSucks]

ubermensch007 wrote...
*snip*
Make no mistake... Commander Shepard is a god.No mere mortal (or cyborg or superhero for that matter) could have acheived all that he has.He is nothingless, than  Prometheus Reborn...

What the hell have you been smoking?

[paul165]

>>"The Turian Councilor's agenda is "go away, Shepard".

The VS agenda is "what's going on, Shepard".

So as you can see, less faith is required for the Turian Councilor.<<

Actually it's more like 'go away Shepard and take a combination of get out of jail free card and access all areas pass' for an already weakened organisation like the Council the amount of trust demonstrating by restoring Spectre status is incredible. The VS can't even be bothered to ask what is going on as soon as they hear about Cerberus they go off on their little self righteous rant.

So while totally different levels of trust are required the VS does not come across well in the comparison and frankly in ME3 that is going to be (or at least should be) a problem that Shepard and the VS will have to resolve - along with, yes, working for Cerberus.

>>Which is why I think Shepard must have some kind of control chip. The Paragon Shepard I remember from the first game wouldn’t just jump on the Cerberus train unless she had exhausted every other option.<<

The meta answer is that Shepard has a control chip called the plot. The more helpful answer is that Shepard had exhausted all other options - the Council is unwilling to operate in the Terminus systems and the Alliance is in denial about the Reapers and is stretched too thin anyway as a virtue of having to replace the significant amounts of the Council fleet destroyed during the Battle of the Citadel. Who else would you prefer Shepard ask before gritting your teeth and working with Cerberus - the Geth?

>>According to who? Cerberus?

So actually, Cerberus IS responsible for what happened to the colonists on Horizon.<<

Whilst I am hardly Cerberus' greatest fan the levels of paranoia you demonstrate in those two comments approach VS levels.  Where possible information received from Cerberus is rechecked by Shepard and generally it does check out - colonies are disappearing the Council and the Alliance are doing nothing about it and yes the Collectors are working for the Reapers. Even on direct appeal both organisations continue to do nothing leaving you with the options of do nothing or hold your nose and work with Cerberus.

I fail to see what even the most Purity Sue of paragons would have/ could have done differently at this point. For that matter even paragon Shepard works with several organisations with worse reputations and significantly more power to enact their 'evil plots' (Rachni, Krogan, Geth).

As for Horizon TIM's argument is actually quite reasonable and it is as easy to blame the Alliance for Horizon because, let's not kid ourselves, they were playing games as well otherwise the VS would not have been there. It is equally possible to blame the VS for failing to get the defense towers online and failing to complete the mission. Frankly given the performance demostrated on Horizon it is something of a miracle that Ashley managed another  promotion let alone Spectre status.

[darthnick427]

i'm gonna shoot Kaidan in the foot for that bullsh*t then I'll get over it. In my Ashley play through she will get a firm scolding about that crap she pulled and if she says one racist thing i'm pointing her towards the airlock or strapping her to the next nuke I use. As long as they understand that..welcome back with open arms

[ubermensch007]

MyOpinionSucks wrote...

ubermensch007 wrote...
*snip*
Make no mistake... Commander Shepard is a god.No mere mortal (or cyborg or superhero for that matter) could have acheived all that he has.He is nothingless, than  Prometheus Reborn...

What the hell have you been smoking?

I was going to reply to your post in more detail, but then i read your "Username". And I think that it speaks for itself.

[MyOpinionSucks]

ubermensch007 wrote...


I was going to reply to your post in more detail, but then i read your "Username". And I think that it speaks for itself.

Touché, overman.

[Siansonea]

MyOpinionSucks wrote...


I don't think it's fair to dismiss Shepard's reasons out of hand. You could argue that the Alliance betrayed Shepard first, after all. Did a 180 on the Reaper issue, spent two years calling him delusional and then left the Terminus colonies largely to their fate despite Shepard's vocal and insistant warnings about the Collectors (they did build those defence towers, but not only were they inoperable, but I get the feeling they were only given to Horizon as a cover story for the VS' investigation. I don't remember any on Freedom's Progress, after all).

Shepard's warnings only come after she's taken over the Normandy 2 and goes to the Citadel, she's already with Cerberus at that point. And all she knows about what the Alliance did or didn't do up to that point comes from Cerberus. Sure, I would probably trust Joker's and Dr. Chakwas' word about that, but they still joined Cerberus knowing full well what Cerberus had done and what they're capable of. I would give the Alliance a chance to explain their side before I signed on with Cerberus, I think I would owe them that much. That's just me. I just wish Shepard had the opportunity to really take a hard line against Cerberus and openly defy the Illusive Man before the end of the Suicide Mission.


But people are being too hard on the Alliance for another reason. The Alliance doesn't have jurisdiction out in the Terminus Systems, the Alliance only has legal authority in Alliance space. The Alliance doesn't represent all of humanity. The colony on Horizon deliberately cut ties with the Alliance. So what is the Alliance supposed to do when people say "we don't want your help?"

Even if by a literal definition Shepard's alliance of convenience with Cerberus is a betrayal (which I'm not sure about, considering he actually died so I think it's fair to say his service ended from a legal perspective), the circumstances of his cooperation more than alleviate any negative connotations of the word. He was given no option, and he did nothing immoral himself. Didn't murder any alliance admirals, or lure any marines into Thresher Maw nests. He didn't twirl his evil little moustache and cackle while stealing nuclear warheads and holding the world to ransom. He just used their resources to combat a very real threat to the galaxy. He just did his job. It's not his fault Cerberus was the only group that let him do it.


To be honest I think it's mostly the VS' gut reaction rather than any level-headed observation. The council offers to reinstate Spectre status to 'show support of [Shepard] personally', despite acknowledging that Cerberus is 'an avowed enemy of the council'. Anderson trusts Shepard enough that he promises to keep the Alliance off his back, and then there's Hackett's 'I don't like Cerberus or the way they do things. But they brought you back to life, and they're actually doing something about the state of the galaxy.'

Anderson and Hackett have a much more "big picture" point of view, they're embroiled in Alliance and Council politics up to their eyebrows. They can afford to weigh the unpleasant reality of Shepard working with Cerberus against a number of other factors, including Shepard's amazing effectiveness as a strategist and tactician. They never served under Shepard's command. They have a completely different take on Shepard. But the VS was in the trenches with Shepard for months chasing Saren, the VS had formed a bond of camaraderie with Shepard, and the VS thought he/she knew Shepard really well. The person that the VS thought he/she knew would never join Cerberus. The VS sees Shepard's allegiance to Cerberus as a betrayal. So do I.

In my case it was Ashley as opposed to Kaidan, and her exact words were 'You betrayed the Alliance, Anderson... you betrayed me.' That's not somebody pointing out the legal technicalities of a situation, but rather a... pretty vitriolic admonition of Shepard himself. And that, at the very least, is unjustified. It's completely understandable given the VS' ignorance of all the salient facts, but it's an incorrect and totally subjective assesment of the situation.

Was Ashley your LI in the first game? Romanced Ashley and Kaidan are much harsher with that line than their non-romanced counterparts. They are more emotional, because they had/have a more personal emotional tie to Shepard. I think that's understandable.

Frankly I think given everything Shepard knows the real betrayal would have been to go back to the Alliance and let the Collectors do what they want just because they're not bothering anyone in the Alliance's jurisdiction. A Spectre's job is to protect the galaxy at any cost. Sometimes you have to get your hands dirty to do that. Which is exactly what Shepard did. A necessary evil.

I agree that working with Cerberus is a necessary evil, I've never disputed that. But a truly Paragon Shepard wouldn't fall in line with the Illusive Man as easily as Shepard does in the game. A truly Paragon Shepard would not be nearly as cooperative with the Illusive Man as she is in the game. She would make it clear in no uncertain terms that it's a temporary alliance at best, and that as soon as she discovers a hint of shenanigans, she's out the door and taking the Normandy 2 with her. There would be no glossing over the fact that it was the Illusive Man who lured the Collectors to Horizon, there would be no forgiveness for that brutal gamble that cost Lilith and all those other colonists their lives. If I were Shepard, especially an Engineer Shepard, I would have the Normandy 2 completely examined by a trusted crew of engineers and mechanics, and every Cerberus listening device would be removed. EDI would have a few new protocols added to her suite, she would report to me, not the Illusive Man. I would snip all the strings that the Illusive Man thinks he's pulling, and I would task my good friend the Shadow Broker with finding his secret base. Once I've got him by the short hairs, once I have access to his information network, then I can stop the Collectors on my own terms, not just by following his bread crumbs.


But you're wrong about one thing. A Spectre's job is to be a Council operative, their job is to protect the COUNCIL at all costs. They're not saviors of the galaxy, they're the Council's thugs, pure and simple. They make a big deal about it in the first game, but being a Spectre is just a job. Shepard's personal mission is to stop the Reapers. But that mandate wasn't handed to her by the Council, so she's acting on her own. Technically, Shepard is a rogue Spectre, because she's not reporting to the Council or taking orders from them. They're looking the other way because she saved their lives and helped stop a geth invasion of the Citadel. 


The only thing I really have a problem with in all of this is the fact that people think the VS is being singularly unreasonable. The VS' censure of Shepard is mild at best, yet people act like the VS called Shepard the worst names imaginable. Shepard did betray the Alliance by working with Cerberus. She did show that her loyalty was not to the Alliance. The VS had the audacity to disagree with the player character, so people hate the VS. I think that's a very immature attitude. If you can't take a little criticism, you might want to find a new line of work, Shepard.

[Siansonea]

ubermensch007 wrote...
*massive snip*

Just for the record, I did read your post, but it's too long and convoluted to address point-by-point, so I'll just summarize.

Clearly you and I don't agree on who Shepard is. We have a fundamental disconnect regarding Shepard's role and responsibilities in the events of the game. You seem to think Shepard should be given carte blanche, because of some godlike superpowers bestowed upon her by, well, I don't know what imbues her with this divine power since I don't agree that she's a divine being. So I'm not going to try to dissuade you from your stance that the VS is the worst person imaginable. You believe that everyone should bend their knee to Shepard. I don't. I think Shepard should be held to the same standard as any other person.

I will say that raking the VS over the coals for what is "implied" is emotionally immature. Shepard's a big girl, she can answer a few pointed questions, and she can bloody well explain herself. People shouldn't just automatically trust your judgment, Shepard, and if you were truly wise you wouldn't assume yourself to be infallible either. A wise person sees the value of criticism, and doesn't automatically respond with anger. A wise person listens to a trusted friend when he or she calls them out. A wise persons asks herself "what if I am not completely in the right here?" And a wise person definitely understands another person's point of view.

I would have approached the VS much differently. I have Ashley and Kaidan savegames, but my approach to each of them would be similar. I would mention the mutiny that everyone is holding up as a parallel to this situation (though it's not an exact parallel, the VS knew the situation very well back then). I would go into detail about what happened on Freedom's Progress. I would call Joker and Dr. Chakwas down from the ship and we'd all sit down with the VS and discuss everything. I'd give the VS every shred of information I had on the Collectors and Cerberus. The VS is a valuable resource. The VS might be able to mobilize the Alliance to help in the effort, who knows? Between Councilor Anderson, Admiral Hackett and the VS, that's three people in the Alliance to plant seeds. I would stress the Reaper connection to Anderson and the VS. I would do everything I could to make the VS see that I did not come to the decision of working with Cerberus lightly, or on a whim. I would not get mad at the VS "betrayal" comment, because I understand why he/she said it. I would show them that while it might look like a betrayal from their point of view, in my heart I am serving the best interests of humanity, the Alliance and the Council the only way I know how, and Cerberus is a means to an end, and not one that I would utilize if there were any other clear choices. I would give the VS every bit of new dirt I had found out about Cerberus including the full dossiers of Jack, Zaeed, Kasumi, Okeer/Grunt, Archangel/Garrus and Mordin Solus, as well as mission briefs of those recruitment missions. I would give the VS the information Jack found about Cerberus' dirty dealings. I would share my doubts about Cerberus and the Lazarus Project, and I would ask the VS to independently verify as much of the information I've given as possible. I would show the VS that I know where my loyalties lie. I wouldn't just expect the VS to take it on faith just because I'm Shepard and I'm awesome and I did some cool stuff two years ago. 

Modifié par Siansonea II, 03 août 2011 - 03:53 .

[Ghost Warrior]

Made Nightwing wrote...


For Ashley:

Ambassador Udina (over holo-imager): Shepard, you need to get the Normandy to the Citadel to help the fleet.
Shepard: We can't hold on to the Citadel, we need to evacuate and fortify a holdable position. Get the fleet out of there.
Udina: I'm giving you an order Shepard.
Shepard: I'm sorry sir, I can't follow that order. I'll bring help as fast as I can, but I won't ride in alone. Goodbye.
Udina: Shepard, don't you...(is cut off)
Ashley: Commander, as an official Council Spectre, I must formally protest your illegal seizure of Alliance property and mutiny against a direct order.
Shepard: Duly noted.
Ashley: Good. Now that that's over with, what's the plan?

For Kaidan (particularly after the arguments about him pulling rank on Shepard)"

Kaidan: Hmm, my orders are to keep you under close surveillance and take the Normandy to Arcturus.
Shepard: Really?
Vega: Sorry ma'am, but Commander Alenko has to follow orders just like the rest of us.
Shepard: Yeah, I gues you're....
Kaidan: But, in all the confusion, it seems I've misplaced my omni-tool, so I can't access those orders. I guess I'll have to act on my own initiative and follow the recommendations given to me by my former commander.
Vega: Ah...boss? What about your orders?
Kaidan: What orders Lieutenant?
Vega: The orders you........what orders? I haven't heard any orders. Guess we'll just have to go with Shepard's recommendation.

I know that's an old post,but wow,it really sounds like something these characters would say.

[Siansonea]

paul165 wrote...


>>"The Turian Councilor's agenda is "go away, Shepard".


The VS agenda is "what's going on, Shepard".


So as you can see, less faith is required for the Turian Councilor.<<


Actually it's more like 'go away Shepard and take a combination of get out of jail free card and access all areas pass' for an already weakened organisation like the Council the amount of trust demonstrating by restoring Spectre status is incredible. The VS can't even be bothered to ask what is going on as soon as they hear about Cerberus they go off on their little self righteous rant.


So while totally different levels of trust are required the VS does not come across well in the comparison and frankly in ME3 that is going to be (or at least should be) a problem that Shepard and the VS will have to resolve - along with, yes, working for Cerberus.

I disagree. I think the VS stance is righteous, but not self-righteous. What IS self-righteous is the idea that Shepard is somehow immune from having to answer for questionable decisions.

>>Which is why I think Shepard must have some kind of control chip. The Paragon Shepard I remember from the first game wouldn’t just jump on the Cerberus train unless she had exhausted every other option.<<


The meta answer is that Shepard has a control chip called the plot. The more helpful answer is that Shepard had exhausted all other options - the Council is unwilling to operate in the Terminus systems and the Alliance is in denial about the Reapers and is stretched too thin anyway as a virtue of having to replace the significant amounts of the Council fleet destroyed during the Battle of the Citadel. Who else would you prefer Shepard ask before gritting your teeth and working with Cerberus - the Geth?


>>According to who? Cerberus?


So actually, Cerberus IS responsible for what happened to the colonists on Horizon.<<


Whilst I am hardly Cerberus' greatest fan the levels of paranoia you demonstrate in those two comments approach VS levels.  Where possible information received from Cerberus is rechecked by Shepard and generally it does check out - colonies are disappearing the Council and the Alliance are doing nothing about it and yes the Collectors are working for the Reapers. Even on direct appeal both organisations continue to do nothing leaving you with the options of do nothing or hold your nose and work with Cerberus.

It's not paranoia if they're really out to get you, or so they say. Come on, this is Cerberus we're talking about, to take anything they say or do at face value is a one-way ticket to Hell. And TIM flat out tells Shepard that he leaked the info that the VS was on Horizon, just to see if it would lure the Collectors there. That's how TIM operates. He could have done that AFTER telling Shepard that was the plan, AFTER going to Horizon and briefing the VS, and AFTER getting the gun turrets up and running, and AFTER getting the colonists to safety. But he thought THAT was 'too risky' and instead decided to let the chips fall where they may. That's who Cerberus is. So as soon as Shepard becomes a liability, you can believe the Illusive Man will cast her aside just as easily as he cast aside the lives of the Horizon colonists. 

I fail to see what even the most Purity Sue of paragons would have/ could have done differently at this point. For that matter even paragon Shepard works with several organisations with worse reputations and significantly more power to enact their 'evil plots' (Rachni, Krogan, Geth).


As for Horizon TIM's argument is actually quite reasonable and it is as easy to blame the Alliance for Horizon because, let's not kid ourselves, they were playing games as well otherwise the VS would not have been there. It is equally possible to blame the VS for failing to get the defense towers online and failing to complete the mission. Frankly given the performance demostrated on Horizon it is something of a miracle that Ashley managed another  promotion let alone Spectre status.

Now you're just bashing the VS. We don't know the whole situation. And the VS didn't have an experimental AI to help with the programming. 

[paul165]

>>I disagree. I think the VS stance is righteous, but not self-righteous.
What IS self-righteous is the idea that Shepard is somehow immune from
having to answer for questionable decisions.<<

I expect Shepard to have to answer for their questionable decisions - the e-mail from Toombs I felt showed this very well and I was constantly expecting to be ambushed by him at some point. For that matter I expect to have to answer for some of Shepard's more morally flexible decisions during the trial and look forward to having to do so. The VS was described as self righteous because of the varients of ' I know where my loyalties lie' comments the VS makes which comes as across as incredibly holier than thou - especially after you've just saved their life yet again.

>>It's not paranoia if they're really out to get you, or so they say. Come
on, this is Cerberus we're talking about, to take anything they say or
do at face value is a one-way ticket to Hell. And TIM flat out tells
Shepard that he leaked the info that the VS was on Horizon, just to see
if it would lure the Collectors there. That's how TIM operates. He could
have done that AFTER telling Shepard that was the plan, AFTER going to
Horizon and briefing the VS, and AFTER getting the gun turrets up and
running, and AFTER getting the colonists to safety. But he thought THAT
was 'too risky' and instead decided to let the chips fall where they
may. That's who Cerberus is. So as soon as Shepard becomes a liability,
you can believe the Illusive Man will cast her aside just as easily as
he cast aside the lives of the Horizon colonists.<<

Whilst it was conceivable that TIM would warn Shepard although it would be highly out of character to breach operational security to prevent hurt feeliings. The other suggested courses of action would simply not be possible without alerting the Collectors - evacuate the colonists? immediately obvious from orbit and would make the news brief the VS? given their feelings about Cerberus that would in an absolute best scenario result in a whole load of communications with the Alliance which would alert the Collectors and repairing the guns would alert the VS to Cerberus interest in the colony and then see above...

I tend to view what happened to Horizon in the same light as the argument that Churchill knew of the Coventry Blitz after all it serves Cerberus interests not at all for human colonies to be destroyed and luring the Collectors to Horizon in order to set up an ambush was the best chance possible to stop the Collectors. It is also worth noting that the strategy worked no colonies were hit after Horizon.

>>Now you're just bashing the VS. We don't know the whole situation. And
the VS didn't have an experimental AI to help with the programming. <<

Actually I'm not, at least not intentionally, I was attempting to point that the blame for Horizon belongs to many people - TIM for leaking the rumours, the Alliance for responding in such a predictable way, the VS for failing to protect the colony, Shepard for not responding fast enough - even the colonists' distain for the Alliance all contribute to the problem. But ultimately the main cause of blame has to be the Collectors themselves.

[Siansonea]

paul165 wrote...

>>I disagree. I think the VS stance is righteous, but not self-righteous.
What IS self-righteous is the idea that Shepard is somehow immune from
having to answer for questionable decisions.<<

I expect Shepard to have to answer for their questionable decisions - the e-mail from Toombs I felt showed this very well and I was constantly expecting to be ambushed by him at some point. For that matter I expect to have to answer for some of Shepard's more morally flexible decisions during the trial and look forward to having to do so. The VS was described as self righteous because of the varients of ' I know where my loyalties lie' comments the VS makes which comes as across as incredibly holier than thou - especially after you've just saved their life yet again.

I guess it all comes down to perception. I never felt like the VS was "holier than thou" at all. I just think the VS catches a LOT of flak for two lines of dialogue, while Shepard gets to do whatever she wants and is never held accountable in the eyes of players.

>>It's not paranoia if they're really out to get you, or so they say. Come
on, this is Cerberus we're talking about, to take anything they say or
do at face value is a one-way ticket to Hell. And TIM flat out tells
Shepard that he leaked the info that the VS was on Horizon, just to see
if it would lure the Collectors there. That's how TIM operates. He could
have done that AFTER telling Shepard that was the plan, AFTER going to
Horizon and briefing the VS, and AFTER getting the gun turrets up and
running, and AFTER getting the colonists to safety. But he thought THAT
was 'too risky' and instead decided to let the chips fall where they
may. That's who Cerberus is. So as soon as Shepard becomes a liability,
you can believe the Illusive Man will cast her aside just as easily as
he cast aside the lives of the Horizon colonists.<<

Whilst it was conceivable that TIM would warn Shepard although it would be highly out of character to breach operational security to prevent hurt feeliings. The other suggested courses of action would simply not be possible without alerting the Collectors - evacuate the colonists? immediately obvious from orbit and would make the news brief the VS? given their feelings about Cerberus that would in an absolute best scenario result in a whole load of communications with the Alliance which would alert the Collectors and repairing the guns would alert the VS to Cerberus interest in the colony and then see above...

I tend to view what happened to Horizon in the same light as the argument that Churchill knew of the Coventry Blitz after all it serves Cerberus interests not at all for human colonies to be destroyed and luring the Collectors to Horizon in order to set up an ambush was the best chance possible to stop the Collectors. It is also worth noting that the strategy worked no colonies were hit after Horizon.

That's a good point, but I still think there were other options that would have saved more colonists. 

>>Now you're just bashing the VS. We don't know the whole situation. And
the VS didn't have an experimental AI to help with the programming. <<

Actually I'm not, at least not intentionally, I was attempting to point that the blame for Horizon belongs to many people - TIM for leaking the rumours, the Alliance for responding in such a predictable way, the VS for failing to protect the colony, Shepard for not responding fast enough - even the colonists' distain for the Alliance all contribute to the problem. But ultimately the main cause of blame has to be the Collectors themselves.

That I agree with.

[paul165]

In no particular order

>>I would give the VS every bit of new dirt I had found out about Cerberus
including the full dossiers of Jack, Zaeed, Kasumi, Okeer/Grunt,
Archangel/Garrus and Mordin Solus, as well as mission briefs of those
recruitment missions<<

I absolutely agree with you right up to this point! I would give the VS anything they want on Cerberus or the specification of the ship but I am not willing to betray 6 members of my crew to appease the Alliance - maybe your Shepard would be or maybe your Shepard wouldn't consider it a betrayal but for me handing over all the information you have on a collection of wanted criminals to a law enforcement agency after they agreed to sign on with you seems a little...tacky.

>>But people are being too hard on the Alliance for another reason. The
Alliance doesn't have jurisdiction out in the Terminus Systems, the
Alliance only has legal authority in Alliance space. The Alliance
doesn't represent all of humanity. The colony on Horizon deliberately
cut ties with the Alliance. So what is the Alliance supposed to do when
people say "we don't want your help?"<<

Well the Alliance put up defense towers and assigned an operative to 'assist' so it can hardly be claimed the Alliance was terribly concerned about jurisdiction issues. They just didn't manage, or if you want to be cynical bother, to do much for the colonies hit before Horizon.

>>They have a completely different take on Shepard. But the VS was in the trenches with Shepard for months chasing Saren, the VS had formed a bond of camaraderie with Shepard, and the VS thought he/she knew Shepard really well.<<

So your argument is that the VS is coming from not rational consideration but a purely emotional response? That frankly would be even more disturbing to my Shepard than anything else as making emotional decisions on battlefields gets you killed.

>>I guess it all comes down to perception. I never felt like the VS was
"holier than thou" at all. I just think the VS catches a LOT of flak for
two lines of dialogue, while Shepard gets to do whatever she wants and
is never held accountable in the eyes of players.<<

Fair enough this one is very much player perception and not something that Shepard ever expresses an opinion on (as far as I know). I do agree that the VS catches a lot of flak for those 2 lines compared to say Anderson.

Modifié par paul165, 03 août 2011 - 05:28 .

[Siansonea]

paul165 wrote...


In no particular order


>>I would give the VS every bit of new dirt I had found out about Cerberus
including the full dossiers of Jack, Zaeed, Kasumi, Okeer/Grunt, 
Archangel/Garrus and Mordin Solus, as well as mission briefs of those 
recruitment missions<<


I absolutely agree with you right up to this point! I would give the VS anything they want on Cerberus or the specification of the ship but I am not willing to betray 6 members of my crew to appease the Alliance - maybe your Shepard would be or maybe your Shepard wouldn't consider it a betrayal but for me handing over all the information you have on a collection of wanted criminals to a law enforcement agency after they agreed to sign on with you seems a little...tacky.

I don't know them from Adam, except for Garrus. I do know and trust the VS though, and I know that they will use that information properly. Regardless, you never know when information will be useful, and if any of those six ever does try to put a knife in my back, the VS will have the info on them. After all, Zaeed and Kasumi are "paycheck squadmates", their loyalty is a tenuous thing at best. And Jack's birth family might want to know their daughter is alive, the VS might be able to track them down. As for Garrus, he's not a criminal or wanted by anyone. He left C-Sec and struck out on his own. Nobody on Omega even knows he's Archangel.

>>But people are being too hard on the Alliance for another reason. The 
Alliance doesn't have jurisdiction out in the Terminus Systems, the 
Alliance only has legal authority in Alliance space. The Alliance 
doesn't represent all of humanity. The colony on Horizon deliberately 
cut ties with the Alliance. So what is the Alliance supposed to do when 
people say "we don't want your help?"<<


Well the Alliance put up defense towers and assigned an operative to 'assist' so it can hardly be claimed the Alliance was terribly concerned about jurisdiction issues. They just didn't manage, or if you want to be cynical bother, to do much for the colonies hit before Horizon.

I think the Alliance could have done more, certainly, but the colonies didn't want their help. They probably thought sending a single representative was at least an olive branch to the colonies. Who knows what the Alliance brass really wanted out of the situation, we do know that they think Cerberus is behind the abductions (and they know Shepard is with Cerberus) so we can only really make guesses about what they're doing on Horizon. I don't think the VS has any agenda other than to help the colonists though.

>>They have a completely different take on Shepard. But the VS was in the trenches with Shepard for months chasing Saren, the VS had formed a bond of camaraderie with Shepard, and the VS thought he/she knew Shepard really well.<<


So your argument is that the VS is coming from not rational consideration but a purely emotional response? That frankly would be even more disturbing to my Shepard than anything else as making emotional decisions on battlefields gets you killed.

I don't know how you got that out of what I said. When you work with someone for a long time, you get to know them, you form an idea about their character. When they do something wildly out of character, it makes you question whether your original assessment of that person was accurate. One could say all of these things are "emotional", but we are not robots. Emotions do come into play. But this wasn't a battlefield situation, this was a post-battle discussion. I don't know how others think the VS was supposed to respond to Shepard in this situation. I think they could have asked more questions, but I don't have a problem with anything they said to Shepard. Honestly, if people are this mad over a couple of "implied" aspersions to Shepard's character, then those people are offended WAY too easily. If Kaidan said to *me* "You betrayed everything we stood for", I would not start snapping my fingers and saying "oh, no you di'in't", I would calmly ask him why he thinks that, and address his concerns. If he said to *me* "I know where my loyalties lie. I'm an Alliance soldier. Always will be." I would respond with something along the lines of "and that's why I trust you implicitly, I hope you will soon come to recognize that regardless of how things look, my loyalties are not misplaced either." I would calmly wish him well and go about my business.

>>I guess it all comes down to perception. I never felt like the VS was 
"holier than thou" at all. I just think the VS catches a LOT of flak for
two lines of dialogue, while Shepard gets to do whatever she wants and 
is never held accountable in the eyes of players.<<


Fair enough this one is very much player perception and not something that Shepard ever expresses an opinion on (as far as I know). I do agree that the VS catches a lot of flak for those 2 lines compared to say Anderson.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 03 août 2011 - 05:47 .

[paul165]

>>I do know and trust the VS though, and I know that they will use that information properly<<

The problem with trusting the VS with this kind of information is that aren't just trusting them - you're trusting everyone they trust (Anderson, the Council, Alliance Intelligence) as well as everyone who doesn't trust them and are monitoring their communications or the communications of the people they trust including off the top of my head Cerberus, the Shadowbroker, the Hegemony as well as all the lesser players who will inevitablt find out.  And if Jack or Zaeed finds out you've done that the conversation could be short but highly exciting. For a non loyal Kasumi who prides herself on stealth the concept that you've blown her cover to all the major players is almost certainly enough to justify a knife in the back let alone abandoning you on Ilium.

>>I don't think the VS has any agenda other than to help the colonists though.<<

Correct me if I'm wrong but if you pick the correct dialogue options doesn't the VS admit that they are there to investigate links between you, Cerberus and the Collectors - it has been a while since I played Horizon but the wiki certainly suggests that.

>>I don't know how you got that out of what I said. When you work with
someone for a long time, you get to know them, you form an idea about
their character. When they do something wildly out of character, it
makes you question whether your original assessment of that person was
accurate. One could say all of these things are "emotional", but we are
not robots. Emotions do come into play. But this wasn't a battlefield
situation, this was a post-battle discussion. I don't know how others
think the VS was supposed to respond to Shepard in this situation. I
think they could have asked more questions, but I don't have a problem
with anything they said to Shepard. Honestly, if people are this mad
over a couple of "implied" aspersions to Shepard's character, then those
people are offended WAY too easily. If Kaidan said to *me* "You
betrayed everything we stood for", I would not start snapping my fingers
and saying "oh, no you di'in't", I would calmly ask him why he thinks
that, and address his concerns. If he said to *me* "I know where my
loyalties lie. I'm an Alliance soldier. Always will be." I would respond
with something along the lines of "and that's why I trust you
implicitly, I hope you will soon come to recognize that regardless of
how things look, my loyalties are not misplaced either." I would calmly
wish him well and go about my business.<<

I got that from the point you made that Anderson and Hackett were making a big picture decision between Shepard's possible treachery and their utility. You argued that the VS wasn't capable of making that call because they had served together in the hunt for Saren - to me that came across as arguing that the VS was making an emotional response as opposed to the 'big picture' rational call. YMMV

The problem I have is not really that they are accusing you of being a traitor, as you pointed out that is an arguable inference to make, although I can't help but wish they could have looked at the collector vessel fleeing under ground fire and the battle field filled with decomposing Collector corpses before coming out with that argument.

The problem is that whilst the VS is arguing that the Collectors are working with Cerberus and are responsible for the colony abductions and that you are working for Cerberus. All of this is a possible, if dubious, interpretation of what has happened. The point where the VS' emotional response becomes a serious problem for my Shepard is that the VS says all that whilst standing near 3 heavily armed 'Cerberus operatives' with no gun drawn at which point my Shepard could only draw 3 possible conclusions either:

a) The VS does not truly believe Shepard is with Cerberus and therefore they are in no danger and they are taking the opportunity to rant at being left out of the loop.
The VS does genuinely believe what they are saying but either believes Shepard will make an emotional rather than rational response and choose not to kill them or Cerberus has completely changed their MO and have started leaving witnesses with military training kicking around or
c) The VS hasn't thought it through and is responding emotionally rather than rationally.

None of the above exactly inspire confidence in the judgement of the VS in the opinion of my Shepard

Modifié par paul165, 03 août 2011 - 07:41 .

[Siansonea]

paul165 wrote...


>>I do know and trust the VS though, and I know that they will use that information properly<<


The problem with trusting the VS with this kind of information is that aren't just trusting them - you're trusting everyone they trust (Anderson, the Council, Alliance Intelligence) as well as everyone who doesn't trust them and are monitoring their communications or the communications of the people they trust including off the top of my head Cerberus, the Shadowbroker, the Hegemony as well as all the lesser players who will inevitablt find out.  And if Jack or Zaeed finds out you've done that the conversation could be short but highly exciting. For a non loyal Kasumi who prides herself on stealth the concept that you've blown her cover to all the major players is almost certainly enough to justify a knife in the back let alone abandoning you on Ilium.

Speaking as Shepard, I'll take my chances being loyal to the Alliance. I've spent most of my adult life in the Alliance military, if I didn't have faith in them, I wouldn't have joined them in the first place, or I wouldn't have stayed. The Alliance helped me stop Sovereign, I couldn't have done it without the Fifth Fleet. So yeah, Cerberus can go to Hell, I'm not keeping their secrets or protecting their people. If Jack, Zaeed or Kasumi want to settle things in a confrontational way, I invite them to try. Their loyalty has never been mine.


And if the Alliance can't keep sensitive information under wraps, well, then I guess it's out there for others to find. Seems like the Alliance did a pretty good job of keeping the VS's activities on the down low, at least if you believe the Illusive Man. In any case, Cerberus will at least get the message that I'm Not Working For You, the Shadow Broker at this point is not a concern (only after talking to Liara does his name come up, and that's after Horizon) and the Hegemony? *shrug*

>>I don't think the VS has any agenda other than to help the colonists though.<<


Correct me if I'm wrong but if you pick the correct dialogue options doesn't the VS admit that they are there to investigate links between you, Cerberus and the Collectors - it has been a while since I played Horizon but the wiki certainly suggests that.

None of that is harmful to the colonists, ultimately it is to their benefit.

>>I don't know how you got that out of what I said. When you work with 
someone for a long time, you get to know them, you form an idea about 
their character. When they do something wildly out of character, it 
makes you question whether your original assessment of that person was 
accurate. One could say all of these things are "emotional", but we are 
not robots. Emotions do come into play. But this wasn't a battlefield 
situation, this was a post-battle discussion. I don't know how others 
think the VS was supposed to respond to Shepard in this situation. I 
think they could have asked more questions, but I don't have a problem 
with anything they said to Shepard. Honestly, if people are this mad 
over a couple of "implied" aspersions to Shepard's character, then those
people are offended WAY too easily. If Kaidan said to *me* "You 
betrayed everything we stood for", I would not start snapping my fingers
and saying "oh, no you di'in't", I would calmly ask him why he thinks 
that, and address his concerns. If he said to *me* "I know where my 
loyalties lie. I'm an Alliance soldier. Always will be." I would respond
with something along the lines of "and that's why I trust you 
implicitly, I hope you will soon come to recognize that regardless of 
how things look, my loyalties are not misplaced either." I would calmly 
wish him well and go about my business.<<


I got that from the point you made that Anderson and Hackett were making a big picture decision between Shepard's possible treachery and their utility. You argued that the VS wasn't capable of making that call because they had served together in the hunt for Saren - to me that came across as arguing that the VS was making an emotional response as opposed to the 'big picture' rational call. YMMV


The problem I have is not really that they are accusing you of being a traitor, as you pointed out that is an arguable inference to make, although I can't help but wish they could have looked at the collector vessel fleeing under ground fire and the battle field filled with decomposing Collector corpses before coming out with that argument.


The problem is that whilst the VS is arguing that the Collectors are working with Cerberus and are responsible for the colony abductions and that you are working for Cerberus. All of this is a possible, if dubious, interpretation of what has happened.

The VS doesn't say that IS what happening, only that Shepard can't know for certain the extent of Cerberus' role.

The point where the VS' emotional response becomes a serious problem for my Shepard is that the VS says all that whilst standing near 3 heavily armed 'Cerberus operatives' with no gun drawn at which point my Shepard could only draw 3 possible conclusions either:


a) The VS does not truly believe Shepard is with Cerberus and therefore they are in no danger and they are taking the opportunity to rant at being left out of the loop.
The VS does genuinely believe what they are saying but either believes Shepard will make an emotional rather than rational response and choose not to kill them or Cerberus has completely changed their MO and have started leaving witnesses with military training kicking around or
c) The VS hasn't thought it through and is responding emotionally rather than rationally.


None of the above exactly inspire confidence in the judgement of the VS in the opinion of my Shepard

I think there are a number of other potential scenarios other than those you listed. And I don't see why the lack of an armed confrontation is an indicator of anything other than the VS not perceiving an immediate threat of bodily harm from Shepard and her squad. I think the VS believes that he/she is talking with Shepard, not a clone or a doppelganger. I think the VS believes Shepard thinks she is doing the right thing, but questions her methods. I think the VS is more skeptical than emotional, because there are a lot of factors that are not immediately evident. I really don't understand where you came up with your Point B, though. I don't think the VS is trying to appeal to Shepard's emotions at all, if anything the VS is trying to get Shepard to think rationally. Because no matter what else is happening, taking anything Cerberus tells you at face value is a Very Bad Idea. Not with all the water under that bridge. It's insane to trust Cerberus, to believe anything they tell you is the whole truth. Whatever Shepard thinks she knows about what's going on, she's a fool to think she knows half as much as the Illusive Man does, and an even bigger fool to think that the Illusive Man's agenda is completely congruent with her own.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 03 août 2011 - 08:14 .

[Ultai]

ISpeakTheTruth wrote...

ME3 better have at least one or two talking scenes with the VS where we have a chance to talk about what happened on Horizon and they had better back down and say they were wrong... if they don't than I hope Ashley likes sitting on the Normandy watching me save the galaxy... then again she did that in ME1.

Hm, I'd rather see the vs knock Shep down a peg or two, so players stop thinking of Shep as some do no wrong god.  In fact I hope to see more of that come from different angles in ME3

[paul165]

>>. And I don't see why the lack of an armed confrontation is an indicator
of anything other than the VS not perceiving an immediate threat of
bodily harm from Shepard and her squad.<<

But if Shepard is what the VS is suggesting the logical response from a Cerberus operative is the Saren option and there is no evidence the VS even considers it a risk. If the VS was dealing with someone they believed to be a traitor and worse a traitor working for an organisation practicing mass murder on an horrific scale, given the abductions, they should be somewhere between twitchy and 'shoot first ask questions later'. That they do not indicates to me that they believe on some level Shepard is not working for Cerberus.

>>If Jack, Zaeed or Kasumi want to settle things in a confrontational way,
I invite them to try. Their loyalty has never been mine.<<

That strikes me as incredibly risky not to mention wasteful leaking that information would lose you those three, Miranda and Jacob. At some point I would seriously consider whether one marine, no matter their skill or pre existing personal connections, is worth burning that many bridges not to mention annoying that many highly dangerous people. Also whilst their loyalty is not yours a manipulative expert of Shepard's calibre could be fairly confident of acquiring the loyalty of at least two of them. After all Jack is so incredibly damaged it would be almost trivial to turn her whilst Kasumi has spent much of her life living as a ghost apart from her, recently dead, lover.

>>The VS doesn't say that IS what happening, only that Shepard can't know for certain the extent of Cerberus' role.<<

Shepard would however have a far better assessment of Cerberus from inside than the VS can possibly have from the outside. Namely that Cerberus, whilst their intelligence gathering is amazing, is in terms of direct power projection something of a paper tiger.  After all Lazurus exhausted vast amounts of their resources and that is one frigate - now compare that to something the size and power of the Collector Cruiser.

I got:
' The VS does genuinely believe what they are saying but either believes Shepard
will make an emotional rather than rational response and choose not to
kill them or Cerberus has completely changed their MO and have started
leaving witnesses with military training kicking around' 

from the idea that if Shepard is Cerberus then the VS has either not considered that leaving witnesses is hardly a hallmark of Cerberus operations or they are relying on Shepard not shooting them due to pre existing fellow feelings from their hunt for Saren.

>> It's insane to trust Cerberus, to believe anything they tell you is the
whole truth. Whatever Shepard thinks she knows about what's going on,
she's a fool to think she knows half as much as the Illusive Man does,
and an even bigger fool to think that the Illusive Man's agenda is
completely congruent with her own.<<

Of course it's insane to place unconditional trust in Cerberus but neither I nor my Shepards would advocate that. I trust Cerberus to play ball right until the completion of the mission at which my Shepard fully expects old grudges to suddenly become relevant again. The problem as we both agree is that Cerberus is the only game in town so to a certain extent whether we can trust then is irrelevant. A more entertaining question is whether we can trust the Alliance given the events of Arrival and what we know of the beginning of ME3 but that I fear is a conversation for another thread.

>>I think there are a number of other potential scenarios other than those you listed<<

I would look forward to seeing your ideas - after all come up with something good and it could change my whole opinion of what the VS is actually trying to accomplish here:bandit:

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...


I disagree. I think the VS stance is righteous, but not self-righteous. What IS self-righteous is the idea that Shepard is somehow immune from having to answer for questionable decisions.

Righteous would have been more along the lines of:

"I'm sorry Shepard, but I can't go along with this.  I'm still an Alliance soldier and have my duty.  That doesn't include working with Cerberus.  You may think you're doing the right thing here, but you're on a slippery slope.  Be careful out there.  I'll pass the word on to Anderson, maybe he can get something done.

Acknowledging that Shepard may be heading down the wrong path, or is being misled.  But not accusing him/her of being a willing traitor to the Alliance for not following them in lockstep, like people are accusing the VS of not doing for Shepard.  That's self-righteous: "I'm right and if you're not 100% in agreement you're pure evil"

[Made Nightwing]

http://social.biowar...83/polls/22928/

Relevant poll for the VS.

[lady constance]

iakus wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...


I disagree. I think the VS stance is righteous, but not self-righteous. What IS self-righteous is the idea that Shepard is somehow immune from having to answer for questionable decisions.

Righteous would have been more along the lines of:

"I'm sorry Shepard, but I can't go along with this.  I'm still an Alliance soldier and have my duty.  That doesn't include working with Cerberus.  You may think you're doing the right thing here, but you're on a slippery slope.  Be careful out there.  I'll pass the word on to Anderson, maybe he can get something done.

Acknowledging that Shepard may be heading down the wrong path, or is being misled.  But not accusing him/her of being a willing traitor to the Alliance for not following them in lockstep, like people are accusing the VS of not doing for Shepard.  That's self-righteous: "I'm right and if you're not 100% in agreement you're pure evil"

I'm pretty sure the VS is just in shock from seeing Shepard alive and didn't handle it very well. If I recall correctly, they even send you a very civil message saying so. Or is that only if you romance them? Either way, I don't blame the VS for the way they acted. I can't believe I'm working with Cerberus either.

[Iakus]

lady constance wrote...

I'm pretty sure the VS is just in shock from seeing Shepard alive and didn't handle it very well. If I recall correctly, they even send you a very civil message saying so. Or is that only if you romance them? Either way, I don't blame the VS for the way they acted. I can't believe I'm working with Cerberus either.

Only if they're the LI.  If you were just friends with them, you're outta luck.

And the way they "didn't handle it well" felt incredibly phony and artificial.  They're out there investigating Cerberus.  Cerberus shows up, and they don't ask any questions?  Their former friend and CO, who's loss felt "like losing a limb" is back from the dead, and they don't want to know how this is possible?  Half a colony gets abducted by bug-eyed aliens and they don't feel the need to investigate?  This is beyond not handling it well, this is just plain not written well.

Where's that post of the hypothetical conversation between Ash and Anderson, post Horizon?  I need to read that again...

[lady constance]

iakus wrote...

lady constance wrote...

I'm pretty sure the VS is just in shock from seeing Shepard alive and didn't handle it very well. If I recall correctly, they even send you a very civil message saying so. Or is that only if you romance them? Either way, I don't blame the VS for the way they acted. I can't believe I'm working with Cerberus either.

Only if they're the LI.  If you were just friends with them, you're outta luck.

And the way they "didn't handle it well" felt incredibly phony and artificial.  They're out there investigating Cerberus.  Cerberus shows up, and they don't ask any questions?  Their former friend and CO, who's loss felt "like losing a limb" is back from the dead, and they don't want to know how this is possible?  Half a colony gets abducted by bug-eyed aliens and they don't feel the need to investigate?  This is beyond not handling it well, this is just plain not written well.

Where's that post of the hypothetical conversation between Ash and Anderson, post Horizon?  I need to read that again...

Very true, but I felt that way with every reunion I had with my former team member. Each of them had lackluster responses to Shepard's return. As for their lack of interest in the colonist abductions, I don't blame the VS for that - it's not his/her decision. I suppose they could leave their service in the Alliance, but they're Alliance soldiers through and through. [edit] Regardless, I was only referring to the anger they felt, that I understood it.

Modifié par lady constance, 04 août 2011 - 05:18 .

[Siansonea]

iakus wrote...

lady constance wrote...

I'm pretty sure the VS is just in shock from seeing Shepard alive and didn't handle it very well. If I recall correctly, they even send you a very civil message saying so. Or is that only if you romance them? Either way, I don't blame the VS for the way they acted. I can't believe I'm working with Cerberus either.

Only if they're the LI.  If you were just friends with them, you're outta luck.

And the way they "didn't handle it well" felt incredibly phony and artificial.  They're out there investigating Cerberus.  Cerberus shows up, and they don't ask any questions?  Their former friend and CO, who's loss felt "like losing a limb" is back from the dead, and they don't want to know how this is possible?  Half a colony gets abducted by bug-eyed aliens and they don't feel the need to investigate?  This is beyond not handling it well, this is just plain not written well.

Where's that post of the hypothetical conversation between Ash and Anderson, post Horizon?  I need to read that again...

It's not written perfectly, that's for sure. But truth be told, we could dissect any conversation in the game and come up with some glaring problems. But yeah, the VS needed to ask Shepard a lot more questions, and Shepard needed to volunteer a lot more information. I think BioWare didn't put a lot of thought into the scene, it was their cameo for the VS, just to acknowledge their place in the first game and give a reason for them to be "out of the picture" for the second game and save them for the third game. I strongly suspect that a whole lot more was originally written for that scene, but it was probably cut for length.