327 réponses à ce sujet

[Inverness Moon]

punchbag wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

That just seems like a roundabout way to make saving the collector base out to be the bad choice to me. I'm not going to get into all the other flaws with that.

That was the point: a ridiculous ramble to take take the 'base savers' on an irrational guilt trip.

You know the "base savers" happen to be the more rational of the two groups.  That isn't going to work very well. 

[Inverness Moon]

Luc0s wrote...

How are the "base savers" more rational? I mean I'm not AGAINST saving the Collector base but in my own "canon playthrough" I destroyed the base because I thought that was the most rational thing to do. The whole idea of giving TIM control over such a base gave me the creeps and I agreed 100% with what Paragon Shepard said: "You're completely ruthless. The next thing I know you might want to grow your own reaper." That's exactly what I thought. Cerberus has a bad reputation of screwing up big time with technology that they don't understand and I still haven't forgotten about their research bases in ME1 and of course Project Overlord.

Whatever threat Cerberus poses is dwarfed by the reapers. Your first priority should be figuring out how to defeat the reapers. If your decision with the collector base wasn't centered on the Reapers then you either don't understand the situation or you're metagaming.

Cerberus wanting to grow its own reaper makes no sense for obvious reasons. The first and most obvious is that making even one reaper wouldn't be worth it considering there are most likely hundreds on their way here. For Cerberus to make one, the way the others were made, would mean going around and abducting human colonies, killing thousands, etc., all just to make one ship that will probably get destroyed pretty fast as soon as it met more than one other reaper. Of course, that is assuming Cerberus is even capable of going around and abducting colonies, which I don't believe. Those facts make it entirely counterproductive for Cerberus to even try since it would just ****** a bunch of people off and distract people from focusing on the real threat.

Next to that, I also haven't forgotten how each and every single reaper artifact so far has indoctrinated people. The delerict reaper, object Rho, the artifact that TIM found in the past, etc. Who says that the Collector base doesn't do the same?

If you think those are "each and every single" Reaper artifact then you're surely exaggerating. First off, the Reaper IFF did not show any signs of trying to indoctrinate anyone, and the crew was near that longer than anything. That easily disproves the "each and every single" bit.

Next, we know about Sovereign's main gun that the Turian Hierarchy salvaged to create the Thannix Cannon. That obviously showed the value of mastering the technology instead of avoiding it like so many want to do.

The derelict Reaper was not an "artifact", it should be obvious why Reapers themselves indoctrinate.

I never played arrival so I can't guess on Object Rho's purpose, I only know that it exists. That instance isn't proof of anything other than that SOME reaper artifacts indoctrinate, which we already know.

The artifact that TIM found in the past was specifically designed to huskify organics and make them docile, etc. That too isn't proof of anything other than that the Reapers design some things other than themselves to indoctrinate.

It's a classic logical fallacy if you think "some X are Y" is the same as "all X are Y".

As for the collector base indoctrination, it's logical to say that it doesn't indoctrinate. First, there is no need. The collectors were engineered as they are, there is no need to indoctrinate them. Secondly, the base was supposed to be entirely inaccessible. It's highly doubtful there were plans to use it to indoctrinate people like the Reapers use themselves. Thirdly, it's illogical to assume that everything the reapers have a hand in making indoctrinates. That is easily supported by looking at the mass relays or the Citadel, neither of which indoctrinate. That also dashes your "each and every single" assertion.

So yeah, with my Renegade "get the job done at any costs" Shepard I saved the base, but with my "canon Shep" (who is mostly Paragon) I thought it just wasn't worth the risk, so I blew the damn base up.

So basically your "canon Shep" is out to save the galaxy from genocide, but decided not to "get the job done at any costs?" Why would you do that?

Paragons often say by their actions that they'll do what it takes to save the galaxy, but only if it agrees with their morals and ethics, which is absurd to me.

Edit: I'm sure if people were given the option at the end of ME1 about whether to destroy Sovereign completely somehow or leave pieces of it around for people to salvage, many would have destroyed it completely to make it unsalvageable because they think it's "too dangerous" or "not worth the risk" no matter how sensible it is to acquire intelligence on your enemies. Naturally, those people would have been without the Thannix Cannon in ME2, leading to the death of at least one person. But more importantly, they wouldn't have had EDI, or if they did, they would have one much less capable when it comes to combating the Reapers, which probably would have resulted in Shepard's mission ending at the collector ship.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 13 juillet 2011 - 04:47 .

[AesirMan]

Paragons often say by their actions that they'll do what it takes to save the galaxy, but only if it agrees with their morals and ethics, which is absurd to me.


Inverness Moon, You have just won the ultimate kudo's that points to what I believe SHOULD bite people in the ****. If one made certain paragon decisions or certain renegade decisions... They should have some sort of negative. The weakness of a Paragon is that they won't take morals and ethics out of the equation when a solution that is the best requires one to comprimise their morals. Or when the renegade is just too thuggish to realize talking is better and making friends.

Modifié par AesirMan, 13 juillet 2011 - 05:19 .

[Subferro]

 Posted this in the "10 things you need to know thread" but I'll throw it in here too:

TIM never really makes an effort to stop Reaper plans, he just tries to wipe out the Collectors. He sees them as a threat to humans, and, more importantly, as the left arm of the Reapers. My thinking is that his form of indoctrination isn't the normal "Durr, This looks like a good idea [when really the Reapers put that thought there]", and more of a twisted, "I'm obsessed with the Reapers, I must know more about them, I must become closer to them". Thus he's trying to wipe the Collectors out as a means to leave a gap the Reapers need filled, and one he wants to fill with humanity.

Of course there might be back story of him actually fighting the Reapers, which would throw this off, but as far as I'm concerned I'm not convinced of what he's trying to do here.

Handing over the base to Cerberus never really implied, to me, that I would benefit from the technology in there. The only person to benefit is TIM, and his motives are no more clear than Harbingers. Therefore I fail to see hwo blowing it to dust hinders my fight against the Reapers. Plus, at the end cutscene someone hands Shep a datapad with pictures of Harbinger and a lot of text, who knows what data EDI did extract from the base before you blew it up.

Just my .02.  Take what you want, leave the rest.

[Inverness Moon]

Subferro wrote...

 Posted this in the "10 things you need to know thread" but I'll throw it in here too:

TIM never really makes an effort to stop Reaper plans, he just tries to wipe out the Collectors.

I nearly stopped reading right here. The Collectors were created by the Reapers and effectively an extension of them, or at least Harbinger, to do their bidding in the galaxy without revealing themselves. To suggest that the Collector plans aren't also the Reaper plans goes against everything we've learned in ME2.

He sees them as a threat to humans, and, more importantly, as the left arm of the Reapers. My thinking is that his form of indoctrination isn't the normal "Durr, This looks like a good idea [when really the Reapers put that thought there]", and more of a twisted, "I'm obsessed with the Reapers, I must know more about them, I must become closer to them". Thus he's trying to wipe the Collectors out as a means to leave a gap the Reapers need filled, and one he wants to fill with humanity.

That is silly.

TIM sees them as a threat to humans because they are, they've been abducting humans by the thousands. Your words imply that that is merely how TIM interprets it.

Your suggestion that he wants to replace the Collectors with humanity is also completely nonsensical. It seems to me like you're just grasping at straws so you can see TIM in a bad (or worse) light.

TIM is no more obsessed with the reapers than Shepard is.

Of course there might be back story of him actually fighting the Reapers, which would throw this off, but as far as I'm concerned I'm not convinced of what he's trying to do here.

If it's not obvious that he has been dedicated to combating the reapers since Evolution then you're simply biased. You don't have to like his methods, but his intentions when it comes to the reapers aren't hard to decipher.

Handing over the base to Cerberus never really implied, to me, that I would benefit from the technology in there. The only person to benefit is TIM, and his motives are no more clear than Harbingers. Therefore I fail to see hwo blowing it to dust hinders my fight against the Reapers.

Like I said, TIM's motives are quite clear if you're looking at things sensibly.

And it's pretty obvious that the Alliance, and by extension humanty, benefits from Cerberus's clandestine operations. Cerberus lacks the manpower to do these things on its own, so it distributes technology using fronts to allow humanity to benefit. That is what will most likely happen with technology yielded from the collector base.

If, for example, the collector base yielded technology that could quadruple the defensive and offensive power of any ship, I'd say there is a 99% chance these upgrades will be suddenly invented by the Alliance or something and it will start upgrading its fleets.

That is how your Shepard could benefit from it.

Also, don't imply that is just your fight against the Reapers, because its everyone's fight. You can't just go around making decisions just based on yourself, which is another reason many paragons irritate me.

When playing Shepard they put their morals and ethics above everyone else quite often, but don't seem to realize that not everyone shares those same ideas. BioWare did a terrible job of expressing that though with your squad's bipolar reactions to what you do with the base. When you're on the base and about to make your decision, their opinions are believable and some thing you should destroy it, others thing you should save it. But when you get back to the ship, they all agree if you destroy it and have reservations if you save it, which is one more absurdity.

Plus, at the end cutscene someone hands Shep a datapad with pictures of Harbinger and a lot of text, who knows what data EDI did extract from the base before you blew it up.

That datapad is proof of nothing. The only thing we know about it is the picture on it. For all we know, EDI could have only learned about what the reapers look like or how many there are, and not what their capabilities are. Since we don't know anything about that pad, it is evidence of nothing other than that the got something.

[AesirMan]

When the reapers come in do you think the collectors are going to sit there are do nothing or are they going to assist their masters?

Taking out the Collectors and their homeworld was a blow to the reapers as you said removing their left arm. The reason why TIM never really makes an effort to stop Reaper plans is that well What Reapers are out there to stop???? If there are no reapers out there the best way to deal with them is through reverse engineering and studying their tech. Evolving/Advancing your own and finally removing their operations through their minions.

[Subferro]

Inverness Moon wrote...
Snip

[Citation needed]

Honestly, if you can back any of that up with evidence, I'll take you seriously. Until then, your theories are just as "silly" as mine... (and I know mine are far fetched, but to say its wrong because you think it's "stupid" doesn't really help you make a point).

TIM sees them as a threat to humans because they are, they've been abducting humans by the thousands. Your words imply that that is merely how TIM interprets it.

Your suggestion that he wants to replace the Collectors with humanity is also completely nonsensical. It seems to me like you're just grasping at straws so you can see TIM in a bad (or worse) light.

I never disagreed that the Collectors were a threat to humanity, that's why I spent the whole game trying to wipe them out. To say that TIM can't possible have ulterior motives that aren't clear to us is to pull the wool over your eyes.

Like I said, TIM's motives are quite clear if you're looking at things sensibly.

 

Are they? Sure we assume that we have the Cerberus manifesto, but that's all it is, an assumption that what he says and what he means are the same thing. Harbinger claimed to be our salvation, guess that makes him the good guy, right?

If, for example, the collector base yielded technology that could quadruple the defensive and offensive power of any ship, I'd say there is a 99% chance these upgrades will be suddenly invented by the Alliance or something and it will start upgrading its fleets.

That is how your Shepard could benefit from it.

Also, don't imply that is just your fight against the Reapers, because its everyone's fight. You can't just go around making decisions just based on yourself, which is another reason many paragons irritate me.

When I say my fight, I mean the fight of everyone who's with me against the Reapers, and last time I checked, Cerberus was against me, so I don't see how giving them Reaper tech is a good idea. Yes, lets make them all powerful, let them stop Shepard in the hopes that they will then use whatever resources they wasted to stop me, to accomplish the same goal I was going for of stopping the Reapers...

That datapad is proof of nothing [...] Since we don't know anything about that pad, it is evidence of nothing other than that the got something.

So you start by saying that its proof of nothing, then turn around and say it's evidence that we got something... well since that's pretty much what I was trying to say, I'll just let this one stand.

Modifié par Subferro, 13 juillet 2011 - 07:30 .

[Inverness Moon]

Subferro wrote...

Honestly, if you can back any of that up with evidence, I'll take you seriously. Until then, your theories are just as "silly" as mine... (and I know mine are far fetched, but to say its wrong because you think it's "stupid" doesn't really help you make a point).

If you want citations you need to be more specific.

I never disagreed that the Collectors were a threat to humanity, that's why I spent the whole game trying to wipe them out. To say that TIM can't possible have ulterior motives that aren't clear to us is to pull the wool over your eyes.

I never claimed that TIM did not have ulterior motives, however I assert that claiming he does have ulterior motives is unfounded. We have no evidence that his motives are anything beyond what he has said himself.

Many people assume he must have some hidden agenda simply because he is a cliche villain in their eyes. Do you?

Are they? Sure we assume that we have the Cerberus manifesto, but that's all it is, an assumption that what he says and what he means are the same thing. Harbinger claimed to be our salvation, guess that makes him the good guy, right?

We also have TIM's motivation for forming Cerberus in the first place, which was his experience with the Arca Monolith and foreknowledge of the reapers. What reason do you have to believe that is not all there is to it?

Also, this has nothing to do with whether someone can be considered a "good guy" or a "bad guy".

When I say my fight, I mean the fight of everyone who's with me against the Reapers, and last time I checked, Cerberus was against me, so I don't see how giving them Reaper tech is a good idea.

Last you checked? Just because someone doesn't agree with everything Shepard says and does doesn't mean they're against them. That is far too black and white a view.

No matter what you do with the collector base, that doesn't preclude future cooperation between Shepard and Cerberus when dealing with the reapers. TIM says as much in Retribution.

If Cerberus is against you its because you decided on that, not them.

Also, obviously we don't know enough about ME3 to even bring that into the conversation.

Yes, lets make them all powerful, let them stop Shepard in the hopes that they will then use whatever resources they wasted to stop me, to accomplish the same goal I was going for of stopping the Reapers...

Why are you assuming the collector base is a magic button to becoming "all powerful"?

They also have no reason to try to stop Shepard so long as Shepard isn't working with the reapers.

So you start by saying that its proof of nothing, then turn around and say it's evidence that we got something... well since that's pretty much what I was trying to say, I'll just let this one stand.

You were implying that whatever was on the datapad was going to benefit your fight against the Reapers somehow and excuse the fact that you destroyed the collector base. You can't use that as a justification or excuse since for all we know the datapad might only specify the exact positions of all Reaper-coffee machines located within Harbinger.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 13 juillet 2011 - 10:10 .

[Klijpope]

It's just so obviously daft to ever use Reaper tech. Everyone who has done so has gone wrong, in a biiig way. Even though the whole civilisation is based on Reaper tech (or is it?), the mass relays.

But that matriarch bartender on Ilium was already suggesting "we build our own mass relays", and I think Legion gave good advice when he talked about the geth uplifting themselves.

Having said, it's just as likely that we're going to have to become the reaper in order to destroy them...

[DaringMoosejaw]

I don't care so much about real-world logic when it comes to the base. I tend to agree with the Paragon choice because the decision to destroy the base comes most persuasively to me from FILM logic. TIM's been screwing with Reaper tech, achieving ends at 'whatever the cost' and they have a history of screwing people over. Especially that smirk he gives after you give him the base. That is all I need to know that saving the Collector base (Giving it to Cerberus at least) is exactly as genius a move as splitting up in a haunted mansion.

[Subferro]

Inverness Moon wrote...

I never claimed that TIM did not have ulterior motives, however I assert that claiming he does have ulterior motives is unfounded. We have no evidence that his motives are anything beyond what he has said himself.

Many people assume he must have some hidden agenda simply because he is a cliche villain in their eyes. Do you?

Yeah I assume he does, which is no more unfounded than assuming he's an honest, stand up citizen. You and I disagree on this, both assumptions are equally valid given our interaction with TIM. What, exactly, makes mine "stupid"?

We also have TIM's motivation for forming Cerberus in the first place, which was his experience with the Arca Monolith and foreknowledge of the reapers. What reason do you have to believe that is not all there is to it?

Also, this has nothing to do with whether someone can be considered a "good guy" or a "bad guy".

Yeah but we don't know that his encounter led him to want to destroy the Reapers, we just know that he's been in close contact with them. Usually, that doesn't go well for people.

Last you checked? Just because someone doesn't agree with everything Shepard says and does doesn't mean they're against them. That is far too black and white a view.

No matter what you do with the collector base, that doesn't preclude future cooperation between Shepard and Cerberus when dealing with the reapers. TIM says as much in Retribution.

If Cerberus is against you its because you decided on that, not them.

I'm pretty sure no matter what I decide they're trying to kill me in ME3. Obviously I didn't know this when I played ME2 the first time, I just had a bad feeling about them, turns out my hunch might have been right.

Why are you assuming the collector base is a magic button to becoming "all powerful"?

They also have no reason to try to stop Shepard so long as Shepard isn't working with the reapers.

Except for some reason they do try to stop him, we've seen the trailers... 

You were implying that whatever was on the datapad was going to benefit your fight against the Reapers somehow and excuse the fact that you destroyed the collector base. You can't use that as a justification or excuse since for all we know the datapad might only specify the exact positions of all Reaper-coffee machines located within Harbinger.

Exactly, we have no clue what the consequences of keeping/destroying the base are yet, we just have theories, mine is an alternate to yours. Shocking as it may seem, it is, in fact, possible to look at the same set of circumstances and come to a different conclusion.

Modifié par Subferro, 13 juillet 2011 - 11:44 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

And we know from Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, that when the dude makes a fist in the critical scene he's automatically the ultimate bad guy. "Join me, and together (make grasping fist) as father and son we'll rule the galaxy!" vs. "A timed radiation pulse would kill the Collectors and leave the (make grasping fist) machinery and technology intact." -- I know someone was just dying to use that gesture.

So from FILM logic, keeping the Collector base was the wrong choice.

From a tech research viewpoint destroying it was the wrong choice -- especially if a Reaper invasion is imminent. No time to make a massive tech leap without taking it from something else.

Unless (Admiral?) Tali Norah vas (Neema?) has some invention up her sleeve from her father's research on the Geth. You don't think she wasn't analyzing that on the Normandy.

[Inverness Moon]

[quote]Luc0s wrote...

[quote]Inverness Moon wrote...

Whatever threat Cerberus poses is dwarfed by the reapers. Your first priority should be figuring out how to defeat the reapers. If your decision with the collector base wasn't centered on the Reapers then you either don't understand the situation or you're metagaming.
[/quote]

Nope, no meta gaming. I DO focus on the reapers. Thats why i know that I do NOT want a potental 2nd threat bothering me while I try to stop the reapers. We all know Cerberus can't be trusted with stuff they do not understand, such as reaper tech.
[/quote]Potential 2nd threat? You're implying that Cerberus is even comparable to a race of machines with a history of genocide going back tens of millions of years at the least.

The Council is much more of a threat in my eyes because of their tendency to ignore reality. I wouldn't be surprised if their inaction does more damage than Cerberus ever will.

Also you say Cerberus doesn't understand reaper tech, that is pretty vague. "Reaper tech" shouldn't be generalized like that. Apparently they understood enough to create EDI. And apparently the Turians understood enough to create the Thannix Cannon. Cerberus learned in Retribution that the Reapers use quantum entaglement to control bodies from long distances.

I take issue with people who claim that reaper tech is beyond our comprehension. I'm not accusing you of that, but I think it's foolish to say that trying to understand should be avoided.

And if you simply disagree because its Cerberus doing the experiment, I'll say that's better than nothing at this point.

[quote]
When I first played ME2, I already knew that giving the reaper base to TIM could make things only worse. It seems, after seeing the ME3 demo, that I could be right. While Shepard tries to save the galaxy, Cerberus tries to f*ck him over. I don't need that.
[/quote]

We don't know nearly enough about ME3 to make judgements on that. Don't even bring it into the discussion. I'll just say I don't believe BioWare would just **** all over significant choices like that. Renegade and paragon are supposed to be two means to the same save-the-galaxy end.
[quote]
Now I know that the indoctrinated Cerberus agents might not be related to the Collector base at all, but the possibility is there. Anyway, giving such an advanced and in-tact base to a terrorist organisation that is famous for it's ruthless experiments does not seem like a particularly good idea.
[/quote]
It's a good idea when the alternative is doing nothing.

I'd prefer TIM do what he did in Retribution then sit around and twiddle his thumbs like Shepard until we're up the creek without a paddle in ME3 because we don't like any of the methods available for gathering intelligence about the Reapers.

[quote]
Still, I know TIM is in for some crazy sh*t. Maybe he cannot grow his own reaper, but I know he's capable of comming up with some crazy experiments with this dangerous technology.
[/quote]
If you've read Retribution, I wouldn't call that crazy. But I'll pass final judgement on that after I see what data TIM salvaged from the project.
[quote]

I know there are more reaper artifacts. I was just giving a few examples.

Second, you clearly don't know what an IFF is. An IFF is not an artifact. An IFF is nothing physical. It's not a thing, it's merely a code, a program.
[/quote]
The reaper IFF was something physical picked up from the derelict Reaper. If you're saying that is just a storage device and not a self-contained system, that is different and I'm not going to argue about that.
[quote]
So yeah, OBVIOUSLY the IFF does not indoctrinate the crew, because it's only a code.
[/quote]
Oh good, so it should be safe to keep the collector base around so we can send in AIs to datamine it and such.
[quote]
So no, nothing has been disproven. My argument still stands.
[/quote]
Not really, it's not sensible in the first place to say that anything physical made by the reapers indoctrinates without exception. The Citadel and Mass Relays are the obvious proof of that if not common sense.

But there is also the matter of Collector weaponry used by Shepard. That Collector particle beam rifle was picked up by Shepard as-is, it didn't indoctrinate him. It's obviously an "artifact." And you apparently don't seperate Collector technology from Reaper technology.

[quote]

The only example I can think of that possibly didn't indoctrinate was Soverigns salvaged parts. This hints that possibly only in-tact reaper artifacts indoctrinate, while completely broken reaper artifacts do not indoctrinate.
[/quote]
That only hints at that if you believe that theory which I pointed out the flaws to above.

In-tact is also too vague. You assert that large things like the Reapers or even much smaller artifacts that you can hold in your hand can indoctrinate. Are you suggesting that the pieces of Sovereign can't indoctrinate just because they're not all connected? What do you base that on? You don't know how indoctrination is induced or what kind of components are required.

[quote]
You don't know if the Collector base has indoctrination or not. The reapers themselves have indoctrination. The reaper artifact from TIM has indoctrination. Object Rho has indoctrination. The stuff that TIM placed in Paul Grayson indoctrinated him.[/quote]
The Reapers indoctrinate because they're designed to transport their minions like Sovereign did with Saren and his crew. The reaper artifact that TIM encountered was design to huskify species and make them docile. From what I read of Object Rho on the wiki, it was some sort of observation device that the reapers use to monitor the galaxy. The stuff TIM placed in Paul Grayson was designed to alter the host and forge a connection to the Reapers.

You're trying to convince me that everything, including their coffee machines, can indoctrinate.
[quote]
Besides, the reapers are not stupid. If they're actually smart, they made sure that nobody can use the Collector base except for the Collectors. So that means the Collector base might have indoctrination as a save-guard.
[/quote]
They did do that with the IFF that only the Collectors and the Reapers have, and they even boobytrapped the one found on the derelict reaper.

[quote]
The Mass Relays where probably already created before the reapers where actual reapers.
[/quote]
Bull****. If you're going to pull stuff like that out of your ass then we're done arguing. You have zero proof of that.

So first you try to convince me that everything the reapers make indoctrinates. Then when I point out something that doesn't, you claim it wasn't made by the reapers. Get real.
[quote]
Also, it would be completely stupid if the Mass Relays indoctrinated people because that way each and every single species would get indoctrinated and eventually turn into mindless husks, which is not what the reapers want.
[/quote]
I agree, but that isn't relevant since I was simply using that as an example to disprove your claim.

[quote]
For the same reason why my "canon Shep" saved the rachni queen, saved the genophage cure and shutted down Project Overlord. It's no use to fight for humanity if you're going to lose your humanity in the process.
[/quote]So does your Shepard only fight for humanity then? I thought that was TIM's job. 

Your Shepard should know that not everything in the galaxy shares the same morals and ethics as humanity. My Shepard is fully prepared to sacrifice what is necessary including her "humanity" if it can help save everyone.
[quote]
Commiting genocide is immoral, so my Shep didn't do it.
[/quote]
So you're not going to destroy all of the Reapers then?
[quote]
Using your brother as an object, a lab rat, is immoral, so my Shep saved David from the project.
[/quote]
That might be immoral to you. But if removing David from the project were to cost millions of lives when the Reapers arrive had Legion not been conveniently able to remove the threat, that would have been worse in my eyes.
[quote]
Using a base that was used to blend people alive to create that damn abomination is immoral and not worth it.
[/quote]
We're getting deeper into the territory where I most have issues with Paragons.

What the base was used for in the past is entirely irrelevant. As Legion says, destroying the base will not bring back those that died, but saving it may save others. What is important is what you do with it in the future. You're not in any way responsible for what the Collectors did with thit, and using the base against them instead is not immortal at all. I don't even see how you would come to that conclusion.
[quote]
All my Shepards have some moral values and moral standards. Obviously my Paragon "canon Shep" has higher moral standards than my Renegade "results at all costs Shep". My Renegade Shep doesn't give a crap about morality, but my Paragon Shep does.
[/quote]
And this just highlights my issues with paragons. The desired result in this case is to save the galaxy from the Reapers, but your paragon Shepard has things, like his/her morals, that are more important than that.
[quote]
...
[/quote]
Wow, and you even brought up Hitler.

I'm not even going to respond to that.
[quote]

At the end of ME1 we did not know anything about indoctrination except for the fact that it came from an energy field from Sovereign. So in ME1 we had no reason to believe that salvaging parts from a reaper could be potentially dangerous. In ME2 we learned that even delerict reapers can indoctrinate people.[/quote]Except that derelict reaper is still a reaper, and obviously wasn't entirely destroyed. I don't see how that disproves anything that we learned in ME1 except that reapers can take quite a beating before they loose the ability to indoctrinate.

[quote]
I understand that salvaging and studying reaper tech can lead to new and better technology, as the Thanix Cannon obviously proves, but you have to admit that it comes with a huge risk.

So the question is: Are you willing to take that risk?

Some people might answer yes, other people might answer no. I think both answers are valid. I can see the logical reason behind both answers.
So in the end it's up to your own OPINION whether you think we should take the risk or not. It's a bit of a gamble. Salvaging tech could turn into useful new innovations, but it could also be a waste of time and in the worst case, it could indoctrinate us or turn us into husks.

So it's a gamble really and in gambling, there never is a "wrong" or "right" answer. All you can do is place your bet and hope you made the right bet.

Period. End of discussion.
[/quote]
It's definitely worth the risk. The Reapers have been perpetuating a cycle of extinction for tens of millions of years. And if Shepard and the galaxy fail, it could continue on for countless more. I'm not going to let my morals by responsible for allowing that cycle to continue.

[Inverness Moon]

Luc0s wrote...

@Inverness Moon:

I understand your views and arguments and they are all reasonable. I still do not agree with you on most things, but you're not unreasonable either.

That's all I have to say. I'm not in the mood for a discussion that takes up half a page per post. So lets just agree to disagree and wait for ME3.

I agree. 

Oh, wait.