1476 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...


Funny, the VS didn't use the word "traitor" at all. The phrase Kaidan used is "You betrayed everything we stood for". Which Shepard did. "Traitor" has a very specific connotation, generally of a political kind. But there are betrayals, great and small, that don't necessarily brand one a "traitor". But nice try at paraphrasing. You're kind of bad at it, by the way.


And anyway, grow some skin. If you decide to work with a group like Cerberus, being called a "traitor" is among the least of the wounds you can expect. Suck it up, cowgirl.

trai·tor   /ˈtreɪtər/  1. A person  who betrays another, a cause, or any trust. 2. a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.

Origin:
1175–1225; Middle English < Old French < Latin trāditōr-, stem of trāditor betrayer.

Ergo:  "You betrayed everything we stood for"="traitor".  Not a mild rebuke.

Note:  Not trying to be insulting or condescending, but trying to explain why people are reacting strongly to this rebuke.  It is not without cause, nor due to "thin skin"  This is a term that really means something to people. Betrayal has powerful connotations.

Personally
I don't "have to admit" any such thing. Just because the game railroaded my Shepard into happily signing on with Cerberus doesn't mean I'm drinking the Cerberus Kool-Aid. If I wasn't limited by the game's ridiculously circumscribed options, I know Shepard could have found a way to get what she wanted out of Cerberus without being the Illusive Man's pet Spectre.

I'm not advocating drinking the Koolaid either.  I'm advocating that ther VS should acknowledge that Shepard is acting oddly out of character in working for Cerberus.  That he would not do so willingly, that something else is going on.  The VS (both of them) are pretty sharp, and the lack of thresher maw nests should be an indication that whatever Shepard's up to, it's not a standard Cerberus operation:lol:

[Siansonea]

Ryzaki wrote...

spiros9110 wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
I don't "have to admit" any such thing. Just because the game railroaded my Shepard into happily signing on with Cerberus doesn't mean I'm drinking the Cerberus Kool-Aid. If I wasn't limited by the game's ridiculously circumscribed options, I know Shepard could have found a way to get what she wanted out of Cerberus without being the Illusive Man's pet Spectre.

I agree with most of your points on the whole VS topic, but I'm just curious as to how you would of found anything without Cerberus's help.

Shep wouldn't have. 

Even if he/she miraclously managed to get the data from FP and Veetor before Jacob/Miranda did (highly unlikely) he/she would've been doomed during the CS mission either he/she wouldn't have gone on board and realized he/she needed the IFF or he/she would've gone on board and then been screwed. 

...That's assuming of course he/she got the seeker swarm data ahead of time which...wouldn't have happened without Cerberus help. 

...and Ashley and Kaidan were supposed to know this on Horizon HOW exactly? Maybe Ash and Kaidan hadn't finished playing Mass Effect 2 yet when Shepard showed up on Horizon. You can't use any of this to justify the reaction of the VS on Horizon. Who's to say what would/could/should happen if Shepard had told Cerberus to eff off, at least for a little while. I haven't been debating that working with Cerberus is the wrong call for Shepard, only that Shepard cannot legitimately expect everyone she meets to overlook that decision, no matter what she thinks of the decision herself.

[Siansonea]

iakus wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
*snip*

You're right. For a paragon, Cerberus is certainly not Plan A. Or even Plan B for that matter. In fact, they're just above "lie down and die" For paragon Shep to join Cerberus, they'd have to be literally the only game in town that can stop the Collectors. And they were, even if the game screwed up the order in which that should be discovered.

Now:
1) We've established that Cerberus is a "court of last resort"
2) Shepard is down to "last resort" resources
3) The VS would presumably know how paragon Shepard would react to the idea of working with Cerberus, what with working closely with Shepard for some time and seeing demonstrations of where his/her loyalties are.
4) VS sees paragon Shepard working alongside Cerberus
5) Therefore, Shepard ...

...has forgotten where his/her loyalties are???

How can the VS assume that Shepard is with Cerberus as a last resort?
How can the VS assume anything about Shepard's circumstances?
How can the VS be expected to get anything meaningful out of Shepard given the fact that she's standing there with Cerberus?

And how is the VS being disloyal to the Alliance? After all, THAT is where the VS loyalty SHOULD lie, not with Shepard. Everyone acts like the VS is just automatically supposed to bend knee to Shepard. Why? What makes her immune to having to answer for working with terrorists? If she wants to work with terrorists, no one's stopping her. But expecting everyone she knows to just act like nothing's going on? Ridiculous.

*snip*

Given where the VS was when stung, they were right by where the ship landed (it's one reason why people question why the VS wasn't the first to be taken) and is clearly right out in the open. He or she would have a pretty good view of bug-eyed aliens leaving the ship and coming back with pods, presumably full of people.

They might or might not have seen Shepard fighting the colonies, but would have a pretty clear view of the GARDIAN tower coming online and driving off the cruiser. The only people active who could have done that was Shepard and his crew or Delann. I'm pretty sure Delann can be eliminated as a suspect

Cerberus setup? Not a very good one, if Shepard says "I don't answer to Cerberus" Kinda defeats the purpose of making Cerberus look good...

That's not the point. The point is there are all sorts of reasons Cerberus could be there. And not all of them end with "it's okay, because it's Shepard!!!!"

iakus wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
*snip*

trai·tor  1. A person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust. 2. a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.

Origin:
1175–1225; Middle English &lt; Old French &lt; Latin trāditōr-, stem of trāditor betrayer.

Ergo: "You betrayed everything we stood for"="traitor". Not a mild rebuke.

Note: Not trying to be insulting or condescending, but trying to explain why people are reacting strongly to this rebuke. It is not without cause, nor due to "thin skin" This is a term that really means something to people. Betrayal has powerful connotations.

in·suf·fer·a·ble 1. Too extreme to bear; intolerable; 2. Having or showing unbearable arrogance or conceit.

Origin:
2011, BioWare Social Network

Ergo: Using dictionary definitions to "make a point" is condescending, patronizing, and insufferable. If you want to look like a total douche, using dictionary definitions is an excellent way to do it. Pro tip: insinuating that you're audience doesn't properly understand your terminology is usually a bad debate tactic.

And good job giving that DENOTATION. I was speaking of CONNOTATIONS. And people who hew to the dictionary should not dodge the fact that the VS didn't explicitly use the word "traitor". And even if they had, Shepard is pretty much a traitor, so it's a moot point.

*snip*


I'm not advocating drinking the Koolaid either. I'm advocating that ther VS should acknowledge that Shepard is acting oddly out of character in working for Cerberus. That he would not do so willingly, that something else is going on. The VS (both of them) are pretty sharp, and the lack of thresher maw nests should be an indication that whatever Shepard's up to, it's not a standard Cerberus operation

"The VS should have done this and the VS should have done that." Yet Shepard is just supposed to stand there passively and answer questions? Or just stand there and "be Shepard"? Sorry, but this sounds like the pretty standard "it's okay because it's Shepard!!!" party line. Shepard's not a damn god, she's a woman, and I wouldn't automatically assume that she's on the up-and-up. She might be indoctrinated, she might be duped, or she might be a Cerberus sympathizer, who knows? In any case, she's not the center of the universe. If she can't articulate why she's with Cerberus, it's not anybody's job to drag the reasoning out of her. And it's certainly not anybody's duty to assume that she has good reasons and put the matter asided without comment. Please. What have you done for me lately, Shepard? How about not standing there and acting like Cerberus hasn't been actively undermining the Alliance for the last few decades?

Modifié par Siansonea II, 08 août 2011 - 09:43 .

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...

iakus wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
*snip*

You're right. For a paragon, Cerberus is certainly not Plan A. Or even Plan B for that matter. In fact, they're just above "lie down and die" For paragon Shep to join Cerberus, they'd have to be literally the only game in town that can stop the Collectors. And they were, even if the game screwed up the order in which that should be discovered.

Now:
1) We've established that Cerberus is a "court of last resort"
2) Shepard is down to "last resort" resources
3) The VS would presumably know how paragon Shepard would react to the idea of working with Cerberus, what with working closely with Shepard for some time and seeing demonstrations of where his/her loyalties are.
4) VS sees paragon Shepard working alongside Cerberus
5) Therefore, Shepard ...

...has forgotten where his/her loyalties are???

How can the VS assume that Shepard is with Cerberus as a last resort?
How can the VS assume anything about Shepard's circumstances?
How can the VS be expected to get anything meaningful out of Shepard given the fact that she's standing there with Cerberus?

1) Because the VS traveled extensively with Shepard for some time and probably got to know Shepard's personality a bit, particularly with trashing Cerberus bases, the Kahoku incident, the Toombs incident, and so on

2) By knowing Shepard, and what it might take to get Shepard to do something as extreme as work with Cerberus

3) That's Bioware's fault, One illogical aspect fo the game doesn't justify another one.  That's my whole point.  Two wrongs don't make a right

And how is the VS being disloyal to the Alliance? After all, THAT is where the VS loyalty SHOULD lie, not with Shepard. Everyone acts like the VS is just automatically supposed to bend knee to Shepard. Why? What makes her immune to having to answer for working with terrorists? If she wants to work with terrorists, no one's stopping her. But expecting everyone she knows to just act like nothing's going on? Ridiculous.

Huh?  I never said the VS is being disloyal to the Alliance.  I never said teh VS should join up with Shepard.  I never even said they should approve of Shepard working for Cerberus!  I'm saying Shepard isn't necessarilly disloyal.

BTW, this whole "bended knee" thing is getting old.  I've never advocated any of that, either.  Just sayin.

That's not the point. The point is there are all sorts of reasons Cerberus could be there. And not all of them end with "it's okay, because it's Shepard!!!!"

Of course, and not all of them end with "Shep's gone Dark Side!" either.  That's why we investigate things.

Siansonea II wrote...

in·suf·fer·a·ble 1. Too extreme to bear; intolerable; 2. Having or showing unbearable arrogance or conceit.

Origin:
2011, BioWare Social Network

Ergo: Using dictionary definitions to "make a point" is condescending, patronizing, and insufferable. If you want to look like a total douche, using dictionary definitions is an excellent way to do it. Pro tip: insinuating that you're audience doesn't properly understand your terminology is usually a bad debate tactic.

We've been going back and forth for a while now, and I'd like to think we've kept things pretty civil.  So I'll just say I found that uncalled for and leave it at that.  I specifically said I was not trying to be insulting, that it doesn't matter if the word "traitor" was used, because what the VS says to Shepard was in fact the very definition of the word.   If you chose to take that as an insult, well, I guess I'm not the only one with thin skin.

Argue if Shep's a traitor or not, but the fact remains, the VS called him one, even if the actual word wasn't used.  

*snip*

"The VS should have done this and the VS should have done that." Yet Shepard is just supposed to stand there passively and answer questions? Or just stand there and "be Shepard"? Sorry, but this sounds like the pretty standard "it's okay because it's Shepard!!!" party line. Shepard's not a damn god, she's a woman, and I wouldn't automatically assume that she's on the up-and-up. She might be indoctrinated, she might be duped, or she might be a Cerberus sympathizer, who knows? In any case, she's not the center of the universe. If she can't articulate why she's with Cerberus, it's not anybody's job to drag the reasoning out of her. And it's certainly not anybody's duty to assume that she has good reasons and put the matter asided without comment. Please. What have you done for me lately, Shepard? How about not standing there and acting like Cerberus hasn't been actively undermining the Alliance for the last few decades?

You do realize I have little sympathy for Shepard in all this, right?  Yes, Shepard should have been more forthcoming with answers.  But again, two wrongs don't make a right!  Bad writing for Shepard doesn't excuse bad writing for the VS!

Shep might be duped?  An excellent question!  Too bad we get only one frakking line raising that possibility.

Shep might be indoctrinated?  Brillliant!  Oh, wit, that never somes up.

Shep might be a Cerberus sympathizer?  Maybe for a renegade Shep.  Not so likely on the paragon side.  Unfortunately the whole scene seems to have been written assuming the baby-eating renegade non-import choices. ( And people say paragons don't get punished:()

Shepard is not the center of the universe, but Shep is a former commanding officer, friend, and possibly loved one back from the dead.  It's not a matter of duty to assume good intentions, it's a matter of knowing Shepard, and what he/she was like before the Normandy was destroyed.  Shep can't articulate?  Press.  Don't let it pass without comment, drag it kicking and screaming into the light.  

As Hawke says to Aveline:  "Sometimes friends push"

Modifié par iakus, 08 août 2011 - 11:15 .

[Siansonea]

iakus wrote...
*snip*
You do realize I have little sympathy for Shepard in all this, right?  Yes, Shepard should have been more forthcoming with answers.  But again, two wrongs don't make a right!  Bad writing for Shepard doesn't excuse bad writing for the VS!

Shep might be duped?  An excellent question!  Too bad we get only one frakking line raising that possibility.

Shep might be indoctrinated?  Brillliant!  Oh, wit, that never somes up.

Shep might be a Cerberus sympathizer?  Maybe for a renegade Shep.  Not so likely on the paragon side.  Unfortunately the whole scene seems to have been written assuming the baby-eating renegade non-import choices. ( And people say paragons don't get punished:()

Shepard is not the center of the universe, but Shep is a former commanding officer, friend, and possibly loved one back from the dead.  It's not a matter of duty to assume good intentions, it's a matter of knowing Shepard, and what he/she was like before the Normandy was destroyed.  Shep can't articulate?  Press.  Don't let it pass without comment, drag it kicking and screaming into the light.  

As Hawke says to Aveline:  "Sometimes friends push"

There's no shortage of "sympathy for Shepard" around here. What's in short supply is a rational appraisal of the situation from an external point of view. Everyone expects the VS to shoulder the entire burden for the Horizon conversation. People blast the VS for not asking questions, but don't blast Shepard for not volunteering the information. Shepard is supposed to passively wait for the VS to ask those questions, and can't be blamed if "they never asked". People blast the VS for saying "you betrayed everything we stood for" when Shepard shows up with Cerberus, while pooh-poohing the notion that Shepard IS betraying everything they stood for by showing up with Cerberus. Shepard gets a pass because we "know" she's "doing the right thing for the right reasons", even though the VS would be foolishly naive to accept such a situation without question. The VS is maligned as "irrational" for having a healthy distrust of Cerberus—a group who has murdered Alliance personnel on a number of occasions—a distrust that appears to supercede the VS' trust of Shepard. In the final analysis, people think the VS should just fall in line, to some degree or other, just because of who Shepard is. And that's BULLSH|T. Shepard isn't special. Yeah, they were comrades in arms a few years ago, but the VS is entitled to be extremely p¡ssed when he/she sees this onetime ally in the company of such awful people. The VS cannot be blamed for everything here, or even MOST of the communication failure. Shepard stands there like a zombie and appears to be singing the praises of Cerberus—wholly out of character for the Shepard the VS once knew. To expect the VS to make all sort of assumptions to excuse Shepard's weird behavior, while excusing Shepard's epic stupidity, is a Shepard-centric point of view at best. Give the VS a break, Shepard has a lot to answer for, all the VS can be accused of is having a healthy dose of skepticism.

I'm sure a certain turian Spectre (Nihlus Kriyik) wishes he could take back some of the blind trust he placed in another turian Spectre (Saren Arterius) he considered a trusted ally. Taking too much for granted in the ME universe is a good way to get a bullet in the back.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 09 août 2011 - 12:05 .

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...

There's no shortage of "sympathy for Shepard" around here. What's in short supply is a rational appraisal of the situation from an external point of view. Everyone expects the VS to shoulder the entire burden for the Horizon conversation. People blast the VS for not asking questions, but don't blast Shepard for not volunteering the information. Shepard is supposed to passively wait for the VS to ask those questions, and can't be blamed if "they never asked". People blast the VS for saying "you betrayed everything we stood for" when Shepard shows up with Cerberus, while pooh-poohing the notion that Shepard IS betraying everything they stood for by showing up with Cerberus. Shepard gets a pass because we "know" she's "doing the right thing for the right reasons", even though the VS would be foolishly naive to accept such a situation without question. The VS is maligned as "irrational" for having a healthy distrust of Cerberus—a group who has murdered Alliance personnel on a number of occasions—a distrust that appears to supercede the VS' trust of Shepard. In the final analysis, people think the VS should just fall in line, to some degree or other, just because of who Shepard is. And that's BULLSH|T. Shepard isn't special. Yeah, they were comrades in arms a few years ago, but the VS is entitled to be extremely p¡ssed when he/she sees this onetime ally in the company of such awful people. The VS cannot be blamed for everything here, or even MOST of the communication failure. Shepard stands there like a zombie and appears to be singing the praises of Cerberus—wholly out of character for the Shepard the VS once knew. To expect the VS to make all sort of assumptions to excuse Shepard's weird behavior, while excusing Shepard's epic stupidity, is a Shepard-centric point of view at best. Give the VS a break, Shepard has a lot to answer for, all the VS can be accused of is having a healthy dose of skepticism.

Bolded for emphasis.

Exactly!  Without question!  Where's the questions?  I hear no questions here! I hear accusations, I hear recriminations, I hear implications, I hear a lot of "-tions", but not the one starting with "q-" 

You think the VS shouldn't shoulder the entire burden of the conversation?  I agree.  What say we split the difference; 50/50!

[Siansonea]

iakus wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

There's no shortage of "sympathy for Shepard" around here. What's in short supply is a rational appraisal of the situation from an external point of view. Everyone expects the VS to shoulder the entire burden for the Horizon conversation. People blast the VS for not asking questions, but don't blast Shepard for not volunteering the information. Shepard is supposed to passively wait for the VS to ask those questions, and can't be blamed if "they never asked". People blast the VS for saying "you betrayed everything we stood for" when Shepard shows up with Cerberus, while pooh-poohing the notion that Shepard IS betraying everything they stood for by showing up with Cerberus. Shepard gets a pass because we "know" she's "doing the right thing for the right reasons", even though the VS would be foolishly naive to accept such a situation without question. The VS is maligned as "irrational" for having a healthy distrust of Cerberus—a group who has murdered Alliance personnel on a number of occasions—a distrust that appears to supercede the VS' trust of Shepard. In the final analysis, people think the VS should just fall in line, to some degree or other, just because of who Shepard is. And that's BULLSH|T. Shepard isn't special. Yeah, they were comrades in arms a few years ago, but the VS is entitled to be extremely p¡ssed when he/she sees this onetime ally in the company of such awful people. The VS cannot be blamed for everything here, or even MOST of the communication failure. Shepard stands there like a zombie and appears to be singing the praises of Cerberus—wholly out of character for the Shepard the VS once knew. To expect the VS to make all sort of assumptions to excuse Shepard's weird behavior, while excusing Shepard's epic stupidity, is a Shepard-centric point of view at best. Give the VS a break, Shepard has a lot to answer for, all the VS can be accused of is having a healthy dose of skepticism.

Bolded for emphasis.

Exactly!  Without question!  Where's the questions?  I hear no questions here! I hear accusations, I hear recriminations, I hear implications, I hear a lot of "-tions", but not the one starting with "q-" 

You think the VS shouldn't shoulder the entire burden of the conversation?  I agree.  What say we split the difference; 50/50!

More like 70/30. After all, Shepard is the one in the company of a criminal organization, after a mysterious two-year absence. The VS is there on official Alliance business.

Who do you think an Alliance court is going to favor? The operative they sent, or the rogue agent who switched sides? Yeah, I'd say it's in Shepard's best interest to explain herself, rather than wait around for the VS to "ask the right questions". She's not a doll waiting for her string to be pulled. She can volunteer whatever info she thinks might help the situation.

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...

More like 70/30. After all, Shepard is the one in the company of a criminal organization, after a mysterious two-year absence. The VS is there on official Alliance business.

Who do you think an Alliance court is going to favor? The operative they sent, or the rogue agent who switched sides? Yeah, I'd say it's in Shepard's best interest to explain herself, rather than wait around for the VS to "ask the right questions". She's not a doll waiting for her string to be pulled. She can volunteer whatever info she thinks might help the situation.

Maybe 70/30 for a renegade Shep, whom working for Cerberus might ot be outside teh realm of possibility.  But a paragon?  Remember, this isn't some no-name redshirt marine who's barely heard of Shep (actually in that case 70/30 might be a pretty good division too).  This is the VS, who's been with Shep since Eden Prime.  Who knows about the beacon, the truth about Saren, Sovereign, the rachni, the thorian, and what really happened at the Citadel.  He or she knows Shepard at least as well as Anderson.  Maybe better.  For a paragon, the VS should know that Something Is Very Wrong is Shepard has to stoop to working with Cerberus.

As to an Alliance court, as far as the VS's trust is concerned, does it matter?  The lawyers and judges don't know Shep personally.  The VS does.  This isn't about being a disinterested third party.  This is about knowing someone's past.  In a way, this is about ME 1 actually mattering.

[Siansonea]

iakus wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

More like 70/30. After all, Shepard is the one in the company of a criminal organization, after a mysterious two-year absence. The VS is there on official Alliance business.

Who do you think an Alliance court is going to favor? The operative they sent, or the rogue agent who switched sides? Yeah, I'd say it's in Shepard's best interest to explain herself, rather than wait around for the VS to "ask the right questions". She's not a doll waiting for her string to be pulled. She can volunteer whatever info she thinks might help the situation.

Maybe 70/30 for a renegade Shep, whom working for Cerberus might ot be outside teh realm of possibility.  But a paragon?  Remember, this isn't some no-name redshirt marine who's barely heard of Shep (actually in that case 70/30 might be a pretty good division too).  This is the VS, who's been with Shep since Eden Prime.  Who knows about the beacon, the truth about Saren, Sovereign, the rachni, the thorian, and what really happened at the Citadel.  He or she knows Shepard at least as well as Anderson.  Maybe better.  For a paragon, the VS should know that Something Is Very Wrong is Shepard has to stoop to working with Cerberus.

As to an Alliance court, as far as the VS's trust is concerned, does it matter?  The lawyers and judges don't know Shep personally.  The VS does.  This isn't about being a disinterested third party.  This is about knowing someone's past.  In a way, this is about ME 1 actually mattering.

Well if all of those things on the "pro" side of the column count, then so do the "cons", and Cerberus rap sheet is horrific and lengthy. Whatever goodwill Shepard may have earned in the first game, it's unreasonable to expect it to have a two-year shelf-life. Not when it's Cerberus. You want to talk about ME1 "mattering", well there's a lot of ME1 Cerberus activity that should matter a whole hell of a lot.

The VS took a LOT on trust in the first game. After all, he or she didn't have the Prothean vision, Shepard did. The VS didn't have the mindmelds with Shiala and Liara, Shepard did. The VS may have heard Sovereign's blustery attempted b¡tchslap on Virmire, but maybe he/she didn't. The VS may have heard Vigil's final words, but maybe he/she didn't. The VS may have gone through the Conduit and battled geth and krogan to retake the Citadel Tower, but maybe he/she didn't. For all we know, after Shepard recruits Garrus or Wrex, the VS doesn't leave the ship again, ever. So how can this glorified passenger be expected to embrace Shepard as if they are BFFs? It's shame the game doesn't track how Shepard interacted with the VS in the first game, something like a Friendship/Rivalry system would have gone a long way toward giving the Horizon encounter some variability. Unfortunately the VS always "likes" Shepard and always upbraids Shepard. In a perfect world, there would be a number of different scenarios, with the existing scene probably being the most "friendly" version.

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...


Well if all of those things on the "pro" side of the column count, then so do the "cons", and Cerberus rap sheet is horrific and lengthy. Whatever goodwill Shepard may have earned in the first game, it's unreasonable to expect it to have a two-year shelf-life. Not when it's Cerberus. You want to talk about ME1 "mattering", well there's a lot of ME1 Cerberus activity that should matter a whole hell of a lot.

Indeed.  And if you lay Cerberus and a paragon Shepard's track records side by side, it becomes a very curious thing that they should work together

The VS took a LOT on trust in the first game. After all, he or she didn't have the Prothean vision, Shepard did. The VS didn't have the mindmelds with Shiala and Liara, Shepard did. The VS may have heard Sovereign's blustery attempted b¡tchslap on Virmire, but maybe he/she didn't. The VS may have heard Vigil's final words, but maybe he/she didn't. The VS may have gone through the Conduit and battled geth and krogan to retake the Citadel Tower, but maybe he/she didn't. For all we know, after Shepard recruits Garrus or Wrex, the VS doesn't leave the ship again, ever. So how can this glorified passenger be expected to embrace Shepard as if they are BFFs? It's shame the game doesn't track how Shepard interacted with the VS in the first game, something like a Friendship/Rivalry system would have gone a long way toward giving the Horizon encounter some variability. Unfortunately the VS always "likes" Shepard and always upbraids Shepard. In a perfect world, there would be a number of different scenarios, with the existing scene probably being the most "friendly" version.

It did take a lot of trust.  And it paid off, Shepard was right.  About Saren, about the Reapers, about Ilos.  

It is a shame that Shep's interactions with the VS aren't kept track of (so much for choices mattering, what were those hundreds of deecisions keeping track of, anyway?  Turian insignias?) But given the whole "like losing a limb" thing, I'm assuming the game's assuming that Shep and the VS were friends, at least.

At any rate, the VS trusted Shepard in ME1, to the point of helping to steal the Normandy and agreeing it had to be done.  And Shep was right.  Now Shepard's doing something which, on the surface appears to be against Alliance interests, claiming it's to stop the Reapers, again.  Now granted, the VS doesn't know what's going on this time.  But Shepard has done stuff like this before and has been right before.  Maybe Shepard is being duped this time.  Cerberus can be tricky.  But what if he's not?

Isn't that worth another 20%?  

[Sepewrath]

paul165 wrote...
Whilst an interesting theory if they were
preparing for the Reapers there should be signs of a massive military
build up possibly even introducing conscription let alone increasing
recruitment. These things are difficult to hide and there is - as far as
I'm aware no sign this is occuring.

Not necessarily,
look at what Cerberus has done off the radar, including building the SR2
and several large bases. Look at the Shadow Broker,
preparation and amassing of forces could very well be done in secret.
Especially if done deep in their individual territories.

1136342t54 wrote...
Don't agree to much. Shepard isn't as vocal as you think he is. In ME1 he told the Council, Anderson and Udina mainly about the Reapers. ME2 the Council and maybe a few others about the Reapers. He was never that vocal about it. The Council could keep shep out the loop but then you would have the problem of leaving out someone who has the most experience dealing with the Reapers and possibly alienating a Spectre to the side of people like Cerberus.

And? It doesn't matter if Shepard is working for Cerberus, as long as Shepard is fighting the Reapers, they are pursuing a goal beneficial to the Council and the galaxy in general. Whose uniform you wear, doesn't really make a difference. And Shepard is vocal enough, this is something that is definitely on a need to know basis, Shepard is out there talking to Quarians, Krogans, Geth, all these random people on his sqaud, who would of couse need to know, but are beyond the Councils control. Word can get around that the Council is amassing forces for an unstoppable assualt.

[1136342t54_]

Sepewrath wrote...
And? It doesn't matter if Shepard is working for Cerberus, as long as Shepard is fighting the Reapers, they are pursuing a goal beneficial to the Council and the galaxy in general. Whose uniform you wear, doesn't really make a difference. And Shepard is vocal enough, this is something that is definitely on a need to know basis, Shepard is out there talking to Quarians, Krogans, Geth, all these random people on his sqaud, who would of couse need to know, but are beyond the Councils control. Word can get around that the Council is amassing forces for an unstoppable assualt. 

It does matter actually. Council has more resources then Cerberus. Its not just a difference in uniforms. Hell the Alliance is perfectly willing to throw Shepard under the bus likely for both working with Cerberus and killing 300,000 Batarians. The only reasons for them letting shepard work for Cerberus is because Cerberus actually created a new and improve Normandy and even have some contacts with personnel shepard need for the mission. Now that's iffy that the Council even have knowledge of all of that. 

Shepard only informs the leaders of groups when necessary. Telling the Krogan (Krogan who already knew about Reapers and Collectors) to prepare for the Reapers isn't being unnecessarily vocal. The Geth already know about the Reapers and the telling the Quarians or at least the Admiralty board about the Reapers is smart simply because the threat of the Reapers will possibly push them towards focusing on a threat other than the geth.

Even the Council supporting shepard isn't really compromising galactic safety. Keeping it classified for themsleves but assuring Shepard that they will support him will do enough. Hell they could just tell shepard straight up that they are going to publicly deny the Reaper threat while in reality they are taking it very seriously. Shepard being vocal about the Reapers (while he is supposedly dead) does nothing to the Council's credibilty. CDN insinuated that the Admiral Hackett a believer in the Reaper theory was supporting the Turian military growth even though that growth was in response to the SAs dominance.

Its likely they don't fully believe it but are taking some precautions just not enough.

[Sepewrath]

First off your short selling Cerberus, they have a ton of resources, hell the brought a person back to life and gave them one of it, it not the most advanced vessel in the galaxy. That kind of trumps the average day to day of the Council. On top of that, Cerberus is not bound by any laws or political situations, they can move around and operate within the Terminus, something the Council cant do. Sure they can send Spectres, but Spectres have no power there.

And like I said, these people Shepard tells, do need to know, but if your in a position of power, that is tasked with keeping the merry go round going, you don't want things happening, information being passed around, that you have no control over. And they can tell Shepard that they will deny any leaked info, but come on what would that actually accomplish? Look at the current situation among the masses and the media, people don't bother to fact check and their society is a lot more delicate than this one.

Its unlikely they don't know what's happening, you cant gather up something that is at least 50k years old and say "Well I guess the Geth made it" If that didn't convince them, then not even a full on Reaper invasion would convince them.

[paul165]

>>even though the VS would be foolishly naive to accept such a situation without question.<<

bolded for emphasis - iakus already covered this but I feel it needs repeating. The VS asked one question one! After which Cerberus, Cerberus, Cerberus - no questioning, no interrogation just a rant whilst being, somehow, safe in the knowledge that Shepard cannot possibly be a true blue beleiver because otherwise they would have shot the VS to prevent them reporting to the Council.

If Shepard is a true Cerberus believer and everything they say is a lie that means (s)he faked their own death resulting in the death of ~20 people under their command. Then what's one more?

But there is no evidence the VS ever considers they are in danger so either they accept Shepard died and they should have questions about the walking around and breathing -clone? android? plastic surgery?......Or they trust Shepard wouldn't kill them despite 'betraying everything they stood for'. Bare in mind this is Commander 'kill everything in my way' Shepard.

And also
>>Aw, Shepard died. How sad for her. But she got better. And I'm supposed to believe that? 

It
cracks me up that everyone expects the VS to be a dyed-in-the-wool
Shepard fanboy/girl, who trusts Shepard wholly and unconditionally, and
believes everything Shepard says. <<

What? How is that response relevent to what I said. My post was that Shepard claimed they had died - that is so unutterably stupid that the VS should investigate it especially Ashley as that has to offend her religion.

I do not require the VS beleived anything, I require that they show at least a little interest in someone who claims to have broken physical laws. That has to be more important than the day to day murder, torture, betrayal of living in the ME Galaxy.

After all either Shepard is tellling the truth (very unlikely), their ability to lie has degenerated to that of a three year old (very unlikely), or Shepard is due for the rubber room squad (less unlikely but then why are people following them into combat?)

If Shepard had flipped or suffered brain damage that is extremely important information and if Shepard is telling the truth then....

[Siansonea]

iakus wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
*snip*

Indeed.  And if you lay Cerberus and a paragon Shepard's track records side by side, it becomes a very curious thing that they should work together

*snip*

It did take a lot of trust.  And it paid off, Shepard was right.  About Saren, about the Reapers, about Ilos.  

It is a shame that Shep's interactions with the VS aren't kept track of (so much for choices mattering, what were those hundreds of deecisions keeping track of, anyway?  Turian insignias?) But given the whole "like losing a limb" thing, I'm assuming the game's assuming that Shep and the VS were friends, at least.

At any rate, the VS trusted Shepard in ME1, to the point of helping to steal the Normandy and agreeing it had to be done.  And Shep was right.  Now Shepard's doing something which, on the surface appears to be against Alliance interests, claiming it's to stop the Reapers, again.  Now granted, the VS doesn't know what's going on this time.  But Shepard has done stuff like this before and has been right before.  Maybe Shepard is being duped this time.  Cerberus can be tricky.  But what if he's not?

Isn't that worth another 20%?  

Perhaps, with a Paragon Shepard who carted the VS around through most of the game. But for a Renedouche Shepard who went with "team bro" (Garrus and Wrex) or "team babe" (Liara and Tali) for the whole of ME1, not so much. And that whole consideration should come after the fact, not in the moment on Horizon. It's just too much of a charged atmosphere. The VS has been frozen in stasis, comes out of it to find their long-lost commander in the company of terrorists. After an attack on the colony by seldom-seen aliens. After half the colonists were taken by said aliens, including the woman the VS was JUST talking to and trying to protect. The VS is already feeling like their own mission to help protect the colony has become total fubar. The VS hadn't been able to get the AA guns working before the attack. And in swoops Shepard, who does what she does best (shoot things), gets the AA guns online lickety-split, and acts all chummy with her Cerberus pals. Acts like seeing the VS after two years of being presumed dead is no big deal. The VS has a lot to process in a very short time, while Shepard knows exactly what's going on. So Shepard naturally should take the lead in this situation, and help the VS see things from her point of view. Instead, she completely derps out. The VS could have been less harsh, especially with a Paragon Shepard the VS accompanied frequently in the first game. But even with that Shepard the VS wasn't TOO harsh. 

So, restoring trust with the VS ought to be a two-way street in ME3. Not an "airlock" scenario, like the Revenge Fantasy crowd clamor for. And not a extended "apology" from the VS to Shepard either. If the VS turns into a sycophantic obsequious twit in the next game as a response to the fan rage over Horizon, then I'll be the one leaving the character on the ship. 

[Siansonea]

paul165 wrote...


>>even though the VS would be foolishly naive to accept such a situation without question.<<


bolded for emphasis - iakus already covered this but I feel it needs repeating. The VS asked one question one! After which Cerberus, Cerberus, Cerberus - no questioning, no interrogation just a rant whilst being, somehow, safe in the knowledge that Shepard cannot possibly be a true blue beleiver because otherwise they would have shot the VS to prevent them reporting to the Council.


If Shepard is a true Cerberus believer and everything they say is a lie that means (s)he faked their own death resulting in the death of ~20 people under their command. Then what's one more?


But there is no evidence the VS ever considers they are in danger so either they accept Shepard died and they should have questions about the walking around and breathing -clone? android? plastic surgery?......Or they trust Shepard wouldn't kill them despite 'betraying everything they stood for'. Bare in mind this is Commander 'kill everything in my way' Shepard.


And also

Aw, Shepard died. How sad for her. But she got better. And I'm supposed to believe that?


It cracks me up that everyone expects the VS to be a dyed-in-the-wool Shepard fanboy/girl, who trusts Shepard wholly and unconditionally, and believes everything Shepard says.

What? How is that response relevent to what I said. My post was that Shepard claimed they had died - that is so unutterably stupid that the VS should investigate it especially Ashley as that has to offend her religion.


I do not require the VS beleived anything, I require that they show at least a little interest in someone who claims to have broken physical laws. That has to be more important than the day to day murder, torture, betrayal of living in the ME Galaxy.


After all either Shepard is tellling the truth (very unlikely), their ability to lie has degenerated to that of a three year old (very unlikely), or Shepard is due for the rubber room squad (less unlikely but then why are people following them into combat?)


If Shepard had flipped or suffered brain damage that is extremely important information and if Shepard is telling the truth then....

So basically your argument is the VS sucks because they didn't ask enough questions? Maybe Shepard should have pointed to the pull-string on the back of her neck, since she apparently can't say anything on her own. How about throwing some blame Shepard's way? Why was she waiting around for the VS to ask the right questions? Why doesn't she actually TELL the VS what's going on WITHOUT being asked? Is she trying to be polite? Demure? Coquettish? Really, what IS her deal? You want to beat up the VS for having an understandably negative reaction to Kahoku Killin' Cerberus, that's fine, but you need to throw a few punches at Shepard too for being so tight-lipped and weird in her responses.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 09 août 2011 - 03:50 .

[Goneaviking]

How well does the VS actually know Shepard before Shepard's temporary demise in the prologue of ME2?

The way I read it the entirety of the first game took place in a few weeks, a couple of months at most. Garus mentions the different pacing of the two games in the second one, commenting that when they were chasing around Saren they didn't actually have much time to sit around and think about what they were doing.

After that they were put back out to chase down geth (an absolutely sensible thing to do given the situation at the end of ME1 no matter what Miranda and TIM have to say about it) and shortly thereafter is killed by a Collector ambush.

Doesn't really give VS, even if they're a love interest, much time to get to know the real Shepard and it does give Shepard plenty of leeway to hide unsavory attitudes like sympathy for terrorists, mad scientists and puppy kickers.

The mere fact VS shared a few intense weeks/months with a war hero doesn't mean she's familiar enough with Shepard's internal workings and the inexplicable two year absence only highlights that fact.

[paul165]

>>So basically your argument is the VS sucks because they didn't ask enough questions?<<

Whilst I wouldn't describe it as 'the VS sucks' roughly...yes. Not only did they not ask enough questions they didn't ask the right questions. Whilst I concede (and always have conceded) that Shepard's initial responses were terrible (personally I think Shepard took a few too many rounds to the head during the tower fight) once the VS had started they were on a roll and no act of diplomacy or volunteered information was going to stop them.

As proof I offer the information Shepard did provide - the Collectors are working with the Reapers was not met with 'OMG what do we do?' or 'Oh yeah, prove it' but Cerberus, Cerberus, Cerberus at which point any continuing dialogue is frankly irrelevant because the VS is obviously not listening.

And shouldn't 'I died' be a bit of game changer in a conversation?

>>How well does the VS actually know Shepard before Shepard's temporary demise in the prologue of ME2?<<

I also read ME1 as occuring over a relatively short period say 6-12 weeks of highly intense combat punctuated with brief periods of WTH. How long Alenko knew Shepard before Eden Prime isn't specified AFAIK but what is specified is that has been at least 3 months between the battle of the Citadel and the destruction of the SR1 of which I figure 2 - 4 weeks of repairs, meetings and debriefs before they get sick of Shepard screaming 'Reapers' and reassign them.

[Iakus]

Siansonea II wrote...

Perhaps, with a Paragon Shepard who carted the VS around through most of the game. But for a Renedouche Shepard who went with "team bro" (Garrus and Wrex) or "team babe" (Liara and Tali) for the whole of ME1, not so much. And that whole consideration should come after the fact, not in the moment on Horizon. It's just too much of a charged atmosphere. The VS has been frozen in stasis, comes out of it to find their long-lost commander in the company of terrorists. After an attack on the colony by seldom-seen aliens. After half the colonists were taken by said aliens, including the woman the VS was JUST talking to and trying to protect. The VS is already feeling like their own mission to help protect the colony has become total fubar. The VS hadn't been able to get the AA guns working before the attack. And in swoops Shepard, who does what she does best (shoot things), gets the AA guns online lickety-split, and acts all chummy with her Cerberus pals. Acts like seeing the VS after two years of being presumed dead is no big deal. The VS has a lot to process in a very short time, while Shepard knows exactly what's going on. So Shepard naturally should take the lead in this situation, and help the VS see things from her point of view. Instead, she completely derps out. The VS could have been less harsh, especially with a Paragon Shepard the VS accompanied frequently in the first game. But even with that Shepard the VS wasn't TOO harsh.

And this is why I'm wondering what exactly got recorded for the import.  We got a"one size fits all" scene on Horizon that barely recognizes a romance, let alone being nice to them.  All the other squaddies assume you were bestest buddies with them.  teh VS seems to assume some kind of codependency issues between them and Shep.  The scene just seems to assume a renegade background.

 This colony makes five that my Shepard saved, after :

Elysium (War Hero background, which the VS is aware of and talks to you about in ME1)
Eden Prime (both Ash and Kaidan were present)
Feros (Not necessarilly present, but they are there for the post mission meeting and you can talk to them about it)
Terra Nova

Let's face it, paragon Shep has a pattern of swooping in and saving colonies, be they from batarians, pirates, geth, or sentient plants.  Showing up with Cerberus in tow is of course a big minus.  But the VS is on Horizon investigating Cerberus. The VS should have been more forceful, in demanding answers. And Shepard should have been more forthcoming, but working with Cerberus demands a good answer.

So, restoring trust with the VS ought to be a two-way street in ME3. Not an "airlock" scenario, like the Revenge Fantasy crowd clamor for. And not a extended "apology" from the VS to Shepard either. If the VS turns into a sycophantic obsequious twit in the next game as a response to the fan rage over Horizon, then I'll be the one leaving the character on the ship. 

Indeed, but it the street should be one lane in each direction.

And no airlocks.  Those that advocate that I don't think I'd trust around pets or small children.

I certainly don't want Ash becoming a sycophant.  That's totally not in her character.  I just want her to remember the Shepard from ME1.  The one who destroyed all those bases with Kahoku's information.  Who brought Toombs in alive, refused to sell Alliance secrets to the Shadow Broker, wouldn't endorse the Terra Firma party, and stole the Alliance's most advanced warship from the Citadel when the fate of the galaxy was on the line.

 In short, I want an Ash who remembers ME1 and realize that Shepard joining Cerberus doesn't add up. 

Modifié par iakus, 09 août 2011 - 08:32 .

[Ryzaki]

Siansonea II wrote...
...and Ashley and Kaidan were supposed to know this on Horizon HOW exactly? Maybe Ash and Kaidan hadn't finished playing Mass Effect 2 yet when Shepard showed up on Horizon. You can't use any of this to justify the reaction of the VS on Horizon. Who's to say what would/could/should happen if Shepard had told Cerberus to eff off, at least for a little while. I haven't been debating that working with Cerberus is the wrong call for Shepard, only that Shepard cannot legitimately expect everyone she meets to overlook that decision, no matter what she thinks of the decision herself.

Yeah wasn't taking to you. 

Or about whatever your tangent is going on about. 

[Iakus]

Goneaviking wrote...

How well does the VS actually know Shepard before Shepard's temporary demise in the prologue of ME2?

The way I read it the entirety of the first game took place in a few weeks, a couple of months at most. Garus mentions the different pacing of the two games in the second one, commenting that when they were chasing around Saren they didn't actually have much time to sit around and think about what they were doing.

After that they were put back out to chase down geth (an absolutely sensible thing to do given the situation at the end of ME1 no matter what Miranda and TIM have to say about it) and shortly thereafter is killed by a Collector ambush.

Doesn't really give VS, even if they're a love interest, much time to get to know the real Shepard and it does give Shepard plenty of leeway to hide unsavory attitudes like sympathy for terrorists, mad scientists and puppy kickers.

The mere fact VS shared a few intense weeks/months with a war hero doesn't mean she's familiar enough with Shepard's internal workings and the inexplicable two year absence only highlights that fact.

There doesn't seem to be a specific amount of time the events of ME1 are assumed to take place in, just that it was all in the year 2183, so less than one full year.

I'm persoanlly taking a page from Dragon Age:  Origins, which has a similar "Star Map" outline, which in canon takes place over a period of not quite one year..  Given how many planets Shepard can visit over the course of the game, several months is not an unreasonable guesstimate.

Also, given how small the Normandy is, and the size of the crew, it's not unlikely that the whole crew got to know each other pretty well.  I mean, they're spending days, weeks at a time out on the frontier packed into a tiny frigate.  Not a whole lot of people to talk to.  

[1136342t54_]

[quote]Sepewrath wrote...

First off your short selling Cerberus, they have a ton of resources, hell the brought a person back to life and gave them one of it, it not the most advanced vessel in the galaxy. That kind of trumps the average day to day of the Council. On top of that, Cerberus is not bound by any laws or political situations, they can move around and operate within the Terminus, something the Council cant do. Sure they can send Spectres, but Spectres have no power there.
[/Quote]
I'm not really. Cerberus is powerful and has a lot of resources but for some reason Lazarus project and the Normandy SR2 was a significant drain on their resources (Even though they've supposedly spent a few trillion credits on their organization over the years). You can say they are better than the Council for that but they are simply operating on information that the Reapers are real and they need to make a ship and AI able to deal with the threat. The Council nor the entirety of the Alliance supposedly don't believe the Reaper threat so why would they create illegal AI based on enemy AI and make a more advanced version of the Normandy that costs billions of credits.

Sending multiple Spectres is better than sending one. The Reaper threat in ME1 wasn't taken seriously so they sent one Spectre. Even the Collector threat wasn't taken seriously so they allowed Shepard to deal with it just in case the threat existed. Sure he did the mission pretty well with some casualties but sending more Spectres to confirm and eliminate the threat more quickly will allow the Council to gain proof of the Reaper. Some of their technology and force them into secretly building their own forces. Spectres may not have power in the Terminus but when has that ever restrained Spectres? These are the same people during the Krogan rebelliions who destroyed an entire planet's power grid, use space stations as kinetic weapons and use anit matter refinerys as weapons. Spectres get the job done one way or another.


[Quote]
And like I said, these people Shepard tells, do need to know, but if your in a position of power, that is tasked with keeping the merry go round going, you don't want things happening, information being passed around, that you have no control over. And they can tell Shepard that they will deny any leaked info, but come on what would that actually accomplish? Look at the current situation among the masses and the media, people don't bother to fact check and their society is a lot more delicate than this one.
[/Quote]
What it would accomplish is confirming that the Council will take the Reapers seriously and secretly build up. It will also make it more likely Shepard will stay loyal to the Council and Alliance. Citadel society I wouldn't say is necessarily more delicate than ours. They've already been through wars against seemingly unstoppable threats. Sure they were devastated by it but they survived. I'm not saying that they should tell everyone in the Galaxy that the Reapers are coming. Shepard has been doing that and he's been getting mixed opinions from others on that possibility. The Council unofficially supporting won't necessarily harm anyone.

[Qipte]
Its unlikely they don't know what's happening, you cant gather up something that is at least 50k years old and say "Well I guess the Geth made it" If that didn't convince them, then not even a full on Reaper invasion would convince them. [/quote]

Remember what Captain Anderson said. They couldn't even find most of Sovereign. Scavengers and Cerberus likely taken most of the good bits. They just simply don't have enough info on the Reapers to be entirely sure that its a threat. Mordin did hint at the STG being knowledgeable about the Reapers since he knew a lot about the effects of indoctrination from the STG and the Turians were looking for an indoctrination device on Shanxi. At the end of ME1 they probably didn't believe shepard without enough info but by the end of ME2 and more information gathered on the Relays they probably started to believe that the Reapers possibly exist. I just don't entirely agree with the opinions that they knew about the Reapers by the beginning of ME2.

[Siansonea]

Ryzaki wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
...and Ashley and Kaidan were supposed to know this on Horizon HOW exactly? Maybe Ash and Kaidan hadn't finished playing Mass Effect 2 yet when Shepard showed up on Horizon. You can't use any of this to justify the reaction of the VS on Horizon. Who's to say what would/could/should happen if Shepard had told Cerberus to eff off, at least for a little while. I haven't been debating that working with Cerberus is the wrong call for Shepard, only that Shepard cannot legitimately expect everyone she meets to overlook that decision, no matter what she thinks of the decision herself.

Yeah wasn't taking to you. 

Or about whatever your tangent is going on about. 

It's an open forum, Sunshine. If you want to have a dialog with a specific person, that's what PMs are for. But whatever, it's easier for you to simply dismiss my points as "tangents" than to actually think about what I'm saying (which is directly related to the Horizon exchange). You've got your mad on, and you've stopped doing anything but react. Have fun with that.

[Goneaviking]

iakus wrote...

There doesn't seem to be a specific amount of time the events of ME1 are assumed to take place in, just that it was all in the year 2183, so less than one full year.

I'm persoanlly taking a page from Dragon Age:  Origins, which has a similar "Star Map" outline, which in canon takes place over a period of not quite one year..  Given how many planets Shepard can visit over the course of the game, several months is not an unreasonable guesstimate.

Also, given how small the Normandy is, and the size of the crew, it's not unlikely that the whole crew got to know each other pretty well.  I mean, they're spending days, weeks at a time out on the frontier packed into a tiny frigate.  Not a whole lot of people to talk to.  

Yes, a period of months is plenty of time to become attached to someone and gain a lot of trust in them. But I don't think that's enough time to establish a nuanced understanding of someone, particularly if during that time you're focused on one specific goal above all others.

When you look at the sort of things that Cerberus gets up to, then abducting colonists for experimentations is right up their alley. If you look at what Shepards doing it does seem to have some potential area for him to develop an appreciation for their objective given that they're established in ME1 as having the objective of creating a supersoldier. That's just the kind of thing that might drive someone with such a desperate objective as Shepard to get in bed with a pretty nasty organisation so I think it's understandable that people including the VS might come to believe that Shepard would be willing to defect for Cerberus if given the opportunity.

It's reasonable to assume, as others have, that the VS saw enough to know that Shepard and friends fought the Collectors off on Horizon. I'm not certain that they did but I'm willing to go along with the assumption, but given Cerberus reputation and the VS experiences with them, it's not unreasonable to suspect they're involved in some (but potentially not all) of the disappearances in the Terminus System. It's also entirely possible that Cerberus just happened to be in the area on completely unrelated business and happened to get caught up in the Collectors' plot, after all it's not as though they'd just allow themselves to be abducted by aliens.

But after years of knowledge of Cerberus vicious unpredictability then a few hours on Horizon isn't going to about-face an entrenched belief about the organisation immediately, and given that Shepard's desperation is well known to the VS I don't think their assessment is unreasonable.

[Siansonea]

paul165 wrote...

>>So basically your argument is the VS sucks because they didn't ask enough questions?<<

Whilst I wouldn't describe it as 'the VS sucks' roughly...yes. Not only did they not ask enough questions they didn't ask the right questions. Whilst I concede (and always have conceded) that Shepard's initial responses were terrible (personally I think Shepard took a few too many rounds to the head during the tower fight) once the VS had started they were on a roll and no act of diplomacy or volunteered information was going to stop them.

As proof I offer the information Shepard did provide - the Collectors are working with the Reapers was not met with 'OMG what do we do?' or 'Oh yeah, prove it' but Cerberus, Cerberus, Cerberus at which point any continuing dialogue is frankly irrelevant because the VS is obviously not listening.

And shouldn't 'I died' be a bit of game changer in a conversation?

>>How well does the VS actually know Shepard before Shepard's temporary demise in the prologue of ME2?<<

I also read ME1 as occuring over a relatively short period say 6-12 weeks of highly intense combat punctuated with brief periods of WTH. How long Alenko knew Shepard before Eden Prime isn't specified AFAIK but what is specified is that has been at least 3 months between the battle of the Citadel and the destruction of the SR1 of which I figure 2 - 4 weeks of repairs, meetings and debriefs before they get sick of Shepard screaming 'Reapers' and reassign them.

Blah blah blah, it's all the VS' fault. Yeah, like Shepard tried so hard to explain the situation. She's the victim! <_< Like brushing off the Cerberus issue was EVER the appropriate way to handle that. Once again, it all boils down to the fact that you guys think that working with Cerberus is "not that bad". Word of advice: Don't ever join the military, because when you change allegiance on a whim, the military organization will probably not take too kindly to that. Especially if your new pals have a history of killing your old pals. Just some friendly advice.

Shepard's lucky it was the VS on Horizon and not me. If you all think that "you betrayed everything we stood for" was harsh, you all would faint dead away when I gave MY schpiel to Shepard. It would be something along the lines of "You traitorous b¡tch, how could you ever stoop to working with Cerberus after all they've done? After Admiral Kahoku, after Akuze, after Edolus, after Binthu, after Nepheron, after hearing Corporal Toombs story? I don't know you at all Shepard, but I do know one thing, there will be HELL to pay, and I'm already preparing the invoice. I'm sure you've got some excuse that sounds really good in your head, you've never been really good at introspection. But I'm not buying it. You go have fun with your new friends, try not to kill too many Alliance Marines in your spare time. And if you ever find yourself in Council space, look me up. Maybe we can catch up on all the fun vivisection experiments your Cerberus buddies have going on. You can show me all your lampshades made from human skin. But if I don't see you before then, I'm sure, I'll see you in court, traitor."

Call me inflexible, but if someone murders a member of my family, I don't invite them to dinner. And if I'm an Alliance soldier, then the Alliance is my family. I protect them, and they protect me. I honor those who died in the line of duty. I do not give comfort or aid to those who kill and torture my brothers and sisters. But hey, if you all want to sugar coat that to make it an easier pill to swallow, you can all go right ahead. But I know where my loyalty lies. And it's not with Cerberus.