1939 réponses à ce sujet

[Subferro]

Inverness Moon wrote...

I agree.

Refuting the same points over and over again is quite exhausting. Someone should just create a master document of rebuttals for all arguments against keeping the collector base that we can just quote.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. I don't trust Cerberus enough to hand over the base, you do trust them. 

What is there to refute? A difference of opinion?

[Fixers0]

''What was the point in destroying the Collector base?''

Well, uh, you know, denying a terrorist organisation assets and weaponry of unknown proportions is always a good thing do.

But did you seriously need to ask that quesion here?

Modifié par Fixers0, 21 juillet 2011 - 09:12 .

[Subferro]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Subferro wrote...


What is there to refute? A difference of opinion?

The disagreement is your irrational fear of Cerberus. That is something which can be refuted by listing the errors in your thought process.

Our irrational fear of Cerberus is no different than your blind faith. 

Again, I fail to see what there is to refute. More importantly, I fail to see why everyone has their panties in such a wad over this decision...

[jedierick]

My thinking in blowing up the collector base is that TIM already screwed up with the derelict reaper, allowing his people to get indoctrinated, and he knew what the reaper was. So I dont think he would do anything different with the collector base. The collector base is an unknown, could it help in the long run, yes it could, but the possibility for it to be damaging is more evident than anything. Who knows what the reapers did to that place, what if there is other reapers sitting around the place? Nobody knows, I would rather play it safe and blow the place up, than risk the damage it could do.

[Inverness Moon]

Subferro wrote...

Seems pretty straightforward to me. I don't trust Cerberus enough to hand over the base, you do trust them. 

What is there to refute? A difference of opinion?

I trust the Illusive Man to do whatever it takes to defeat the reapers, nothing more, nothing less. Saying I trust Cerberus isn't accurate.

Either way, the decision about the base should have little to do with Cerberus and a lot to do with the reapers. In other words, your decision should be based on which path gives you a better chance of destroying the reapers. If it isn't, then your priorities are wrong.

So what is it for you?

[John Renegade]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Subferro wrote...

Our irrational fear of Cerberus is no different than your blind faith.

I do not have blind faith. My reasons for trusting them are sound and are based on my experiences with them and understanding of their broader goals.

What Saphra is trying to say is that if she learns that 3+4=7 applies to one case in this reality, she then comes to conclusion that it should apply to another case as well. You (subferro), on the other hand, think that even though Cerberus acts in certain way the whole time, the Collector Base decision won't be for some reason the same. Saphra, after she points out that Cerberus was very succesful in the past (creation of EDI, SR-2, extraction of Reaper IFF, discovering a derelict Reaper,...) asks you, why you think the same pattern won't happen again and you say it's just your opinion.

If you are afraid (and you probably are), that Cerberus will use the technology against the aliens in the future, I ask you: Can you point me out a better alternative of how to defeat the Reapers, thus making it a possibility for at least someone in the future to survive? That alternative must obviously be available to you when you make the decision regarding the base. If you don't have an alternative at that moment, it would be like jumping head first from 1 km high vertical slope without a parachute thinking that an alternative solution on how to survive will demonstrate itself on the way.



P.S.: That a lot of Cerberus operatives get killed/indoctrinated during their missions is utterly irrelevant (Cerberus haters ...well... hate them either way). The only thing, which is relevant are the data and technology gained. Point me someone out one Cerberus project, about which you know that it hasn't gained any positive results.

Modifié par John Renegade, 21 juillet 2011 - 09:58 .

[CaptREDKangaroo]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Anyway, this is the closest I have to a universal refutation file. Someone feel free to add to it.

To have any hope of victory in the Reaper war you need to understand your enemy. That means learning about them. The Collector base can teach you everything you need to know. It was being used to build a Reaper. That means all the secrets of Reaper shields, engines, weapons, armor, indoctrination, and even how they think is in that base.

Recall the benefits that came from reverse engineering Sovereign or the mass relays. We gained EDI, a piece of technology that proved invaluable multiple times in our quest to stop the Collectors. Without her we'd have never been able to data-mine the Collector ship much less escape from it. The Normandy would also have been captured with the Collectors ambushed us after we turned on the IFF. Without the Thanix canon we had to put ourselves at greater risk assaulting the base, losing one of our squad in the process. If it hadn't been for the Conduit the Reapers would have won thousands of years ago without anyone being the wiser. In the case of Sovereign these benefits were take from mere scraps, imagine what could be learned from working machinery?

Is the base an 'abomination'? Yes, but destroying it won't help any. The Illusive Man is not your friend, but he is an ally. If you are of no more use to him he'll ignore you, but if you become an obstacle he will tear you down. It is a certainty that the advantages humanity will gain from the Collector base will be used against humanity's rivals to increase its political power. Even if you think this is a bad thing it is less of a bad thing than losing the war with the Reapers which will result in the total annihilation of every sentient species alive now and any which evolve in the future. The cycle of extinction will repeat again and again over the eons.

This is our best and only chance.

Even if saving the base allows Cerberus to threaten tomorrow... at least there will BE a tomorrow.

This is all still supposition and opinion. Thus - the CHOICE. If it was cut and dry and absolute there wouldnt be 50+ pages of debate here... no one can say how TIM would really use the base or if he could based on past reaper/indoctrination. There are flaws in both choices, BOTH choices require a leap of faith, more so for the destroying the base, sure, keeping it is not without taking a risk either. Certainly it's not a wholly Renegade action to keep the base imo, for reasons listed. But destroying it is what was going to happen anyways, it doesn't ensure defeat at all.

Modifié par CaptREDKangaroo, 21 juillet 2011 - 09:55 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Subferro wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

I agree.

Refuting the same points over and over again is quite exhausting. Someone should just create a master document of rebuttals for all arguments against keeping the collector base that we can just quote.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. I don't trust Cerberus enough to hand over the base, you do trust them. 

What is there to refute? A difference of opinion?

Trust doesn't even factor in it for me.

How utterly self-absorbed must a person be, to gamble the entire galaxy on his gut feeling?

Does Shep really consider his oppinions and impressions so important, that the entire galaxy is worth his ego?

Regardless of trust, the collector base is the best bet of closing the technological gap between us and the reapers.

[Inverness Moon]

CaptREDKangaroo wrote...

This is all still supposition and opinion. Thus - the CHOICE. If it was cut and dry and absolute there wouldnt be 50+ pages of debate here... no one can say how TIM would really use the base or if he could based on past reaper/indoctrination. There are flaws in both choices, BOTH choices require a leap of faith, more so for the destroying the base, sure, keeping it is not without taking a risk either. 

I think it is pretty cut and dry, imho. Unfortunately some people simply can't justify their choices or argue them intelligently.

[CaptREDKangaroo]

Inverness Moon wrote...

CaptREDKangaroo wrote...

This is all still supposition and opinion. Thus - the CHOICE. If it was cut and dry and absolute there wouldnt be 50+ pages of debate here... no one can say how TIM would really use the base or if he could based on past reaper/indoctrination. There are flaws in both choices, BOTH choices require a leap of faith, more so for the destroying the base, sure, keeping it is not without taking a risk either. 

I think it is pretty cut and dry, imho. Unfortunately some people simply can't justify their choices or argue them intelligently.

The problem is it's really not, it's still a lot of supposition either way for both sides, certainly less so for keeping the base. But - imo - it's not quite cut and dry, but feeling that way just means you strongly feel one way and are decisive about it, and either way I like a Shepard that's decisive =D

[Lotion Soronarr]

CaptREDKangaroo wrote...

This is all still supposition and opinion. Thus - the CHOICE. If it was cut and dry and absolute there wouldnt be 50+ pages of debate here...

:lol::lol:

You don't know humanity very well, now do you?
do things like the moon landing, age of earth, and so forth ring a bell?

[Subferro]

You look at those examples and say 3+4=7, I look at Akuze, what's left of the team on the derelict reaper, and the brilliant use of rachni and say 4+4=8. Here's the catch, both of us are reaching these conclusions because of opinion, not just me. No one is actually in TIM's head and knows exactly what he's going to do.

In the words of Shepard at the end of ME2, "We'll fight and win without it".

When I can't win ME3 because I torched that place, I'll come back and say you were right, until then we're both just making up arguments to back up our own opinions.

Modifié par Subferro, 21 juillet 2011 - 10:06 .

[John Renegade]

Subferro wrote...

You look at those examples and say 3+4=7, I look at Akuze, what's left of the team on the derelict reaper, and the brilliant use of rachni and say 4+4=8. Here's the catch, both of us are reaching these conclusions because of opinion, not just me. No one is actually in TIM's head and knows exactly what he's going to do.

In the words of Shepard at the end of ME2, "We'll fight and win without it".

When I can't win ME3 because I torched that place, I'll come back and say you were right, until then we're both just making up arguments to back up our own opinions.

You can't flatout say, that Akuze was a failure, because we don't know much about it, and once again I ask why the hell even matters that the derelict reaper team is dead? Why should potential death of the Collector Base team matter? The results matter. The Reaper IFF matters. The survival of the galaxy matters.

[jedierick]

Saphra Deden wrote...

What does Akuze have to do with anything? What do the losses on the Reaper derelict have to do with anything? The mission was accomplished on the derelict Reaper and that is all that matters.

The derelict reaper was an example of how he let something get out of control, if it happend with the derelict reaper, I am betting it woudl happen with the collector base, and since I dont know what potential the collectore base has, for good or evil, I will blow it up, better safe than sorry.

If he coudlnt handle the derelict reaper, nothing is going to convince me he is going to be able to hanbdle a collector base.

[Seboist]

The sacrifice of the derelict reaper team lead to victory over the collectors. They're heroes like all good cerberus personnel.

[TF141-Archer]

I don't think I can read through 50 pages and not hate myself at the end of it. I'm just going to stae my reasons and back out.

1 Not going to lie sticking it to TIM, he was a user and handing him the Collector Base felt like giving him exactly what he wanted out of it.

2 Knowing what I know about TIM and what Shepard doesn't know about TIM doesn't help. Even though Shepard had no clue I knew his means from outside sources, the books were a big part of it. The things he did to Gillian Grayson were unacceptable to me and I knew that with the Collector Base he would do far worse things.

3 I felt morally obligated to, I spent 50+ hours between the first two games making Shepard a good person. To throw it all away by giving TIM a base of operations that was a potential threat seemed like a poor idea.

And lastly 4 there is no guarantee that anything on the Collector Base could be used as a weapon against the Reapers, in simpler terms the Reapers taught the Collectors everything they know but not everything the Reapers know.

I'll admit that Garrus put up a good argument and that I thought it over for several minutes but when I came to my decision I was steadfast in it. In my Adept playthrough, that is morally balanced, I plan on destroying the Collector Base again. On my Vanguard playthrough, Renegade, I'll spare the Base just to see what comes of the choice in the third game. But any career I make which is either Paragon or balanced Shepard will destroy the base.

Modifié par TF141-Archer, 21 juillet 2011 - 10:38 .

[Subferro]

John Renegade wrote...

You can't flatout say, that Akuze was a failure, because we don't know much about it, and once again I ask why the hell even matters that the derelict reaper team is dead? Why should potential death of the Collector Base team matter? The results matter. The Reaper IFF matters. The survival of the galaxy matters.

What makes you think I don't care about the survival of the galaxy? Did you skip the last half of my post? 

"We'll fight and win without it" ie. the galaxy will survive without the Collector Base.

If we don't then I'll admit that I was wrong.

[Medhia Nox]

@Saphra Deden - I bet you think religious people who say "My way or hell." are closed minded, eh?