Ce sujet est fermé
Normally I would destroy the base, but Shepard isn't dealing with an organic threat that can be defeated with cunning and tactics alone - he is dealing with millennia old machines who have been thoroughly harvesting all intelligent life in the galaxy since the beginning of recorded time.
At the end of the day, giving the base to a smug bastard (who is, at least to Shepard's knowledge, is an ally actively assisting against the reaper threat) is indefinitely more preferable than throwing away a valuable resource that may potentially turn the tide of battle against an omnipotent threat such as the reapers.
I'll Be the First to Complain: What was the point in destroying the Collector Base?
Débuté par
Dean_the_Young
, juil. 15 2011 12:59
Retour en haut
#1277
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:37
The Flame Knight
-
- Members
- 63 messages
I look at this situation with two major downfalls to leaving the base intact. First, Cerberus is NOT likely to use the base simply to help in the coming battle. Cerberus has enough resources that if they gain this base as well, the galaxy would have to worry about Cerberus launching a major assault with superior tech right after the rest of the galaxy is weakened by the Reapers' onslaught. Second, leaving the base intact invites the Reapers to simply send in flunkies to kill the Cerberus researchers and retake the station, putting us back at square one.
On a side note, you did see the smile on the Illusive Man's face if he gets the station, right? That didn't look like a, "With this, we have a chance," smile. To me, it looked more like a, "Mwahahahahahahaaaa!!!" smile.
~__~ Just saying...
On a side note, you did see the smile on the Illusive Man's face if he gets the station, right? That didn't look like a, "With this, we have a chance," smile. To me, it looked more like a, "Mwahahahahahahaaaa!!!" smile.
~__~ Just saying...
#1278
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:38
Golden Owl
-
- Members
- 4 064 messages
Saphra Deden wrote...
Subferro wrote...
I don't need it.
How do you know?
Though for all you know, giving the Base to Cerberus could just result in you digging a bigger hole for yourself...ie. Cerberus abusing the the tech and their use of it creating a lot greater problem than help.
#1279
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:42
Aimi
-
- Members
- 4 616 messages
Maybe he'd just been to see another matriarch. Dude's got needs.The Flame Knight wrote...
On a side note, you did see the smile on the Illusive Man's face if he gets the station, right? That didn't look like a, "With this, we have a chance," smile. To me, it looked more like a, "Mwahahahahahahaaaa!!!" smile.
~__~ Just saying...
#1280
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:44
The Flame Knight
-
- Members
- 63 messages
Random matriarch: Did I ever tell you that I've got a thing for glowing blue eyes?daqs wrote...
Maybe he'd just been to see another matriarch. Dude's got needs.The Flame Knight wrote...
On a side note, you did see the smile on the Illusive Man's face if he gets the station, right? That didn't look like a, "With this, we have a chance," smile. To me, it looked more like a, "Mwahahahahahahaaaa!!!" smile.
~__~ Just saying...
TIM: Awww yeeaah. -__^
Modifié par The Flame Knight, 22 juillet 2011 - 02:45 .
#1281
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:48
Aimi
-
- Members
- 4 616 messages
I think Matriarch Trellani is his go-to
#1282
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:58
sympathy4saren
-
- Members
- 1 890 messages
-Skorpious- wrote...
Normally I would destroy the base, but Shepard isn't dealing with an organic threat that can be defeated with cunning and tactics alone - he is dealing with millennia old machines who have been thoroughly harvesting all intelligent life in the galaxy since the beginning of recorded time.
At the end of the day, giving the base to a smug bastard (who is, at least to Shepard's knowledge, is an ally actively assisting against the reaper threat) is indefinitely more preferable than throwing away a valuable resource that may potentially turn the tide of battle against an omnipotent threat such as the reapers.
When I came to this decision, I put my controller down (have pc and 360, play ME on 360) and lit a cig. I game to this exact same conclusion and couldn't have worded it better. Precisely.
#1283
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 03:06
Seboist
-
- Members
- 11 989 messages
sympathy4saren wrote...
-Skorpious- wrote...
Normally I would destroy the base, but Shepard isn't dealing with an organic threat that can be defeated with cunning and tactics alone - he is dealing with millennia old machines who have been thoroughly harvesting all intelligent life in the galaxy since the beginning of recorded time.
At the end of the day, giving the base to a smug bastard (who is, at least to Shepard's knowledge, is an ally actively assisting against the reaper threat) is indefinitely more preferable than throwing away a valuable resource that may potentially turn the tide of battle against an omnipotent threat such as the reapers.
When I came to this decision, I put my controller down (have pc and 360, play ME on 360) and lit a cig. I game to this exact same conclusion and couldn't have worded it better. Precisely.
That's precisely why I kept it in my first ME2 playthrough. I wasn't even pro-Cerberus at the time and human dominance was only a secondary reason for my pro-human Shepard.
#1284
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 03:13
Aimi
-
- Members
- 4 616 messages
I agree that it's certainly a valid reason for keeping the base, but I don't see it as such an overpoweringly good reason that it makes destroying the base a bad choice. I went into this thread expecting to see somebody actually come up with some ironclad reason that taking an action was a Bad Idea or a Good Idea, and the thread has not delivered.Seboist wrote...
That's precisely why I kept it in my first ME2 playthrough. I wasn't even pro-Cerberus at the time and human dominance was only a secondary reason for my pro-human Shepard.
#1285
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 03:23
Subferro
-
- Members
- 41 messages
Inverness Moon wrote...
Shepard's ego alone will crush the reapers. He doesn't need no stinkin' collector base.Saphra Deden wrote...
Subferro wrote...
I don't need it.
How do you know?
Pretty much this. My Shepard is just that badass that he can beat the Reapers without using the Collector Base, and he knows he can beat them without the base.
If your Shepard can't play ball like that well...
#1286
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 11:19
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
jedierick wrote...
Keeping the base presents the player with the unknown, just like destroying it. Nobody knows what the collectors base would have revealed, or if it would reveal more than what EDI found while connected to the collectors ship. Keeping it presented more of a risk than destroying it for me.
Bollocks. I cna't believe the stupidity of this argument.
The base was used to BUILD A REAPER. The things one can pull from it are homongous for that very reason. The thing you cna pull out of a computer in a few minutes are insignificant compared to that.
The base is, in essence, a friggin shipyard. To get ones hand on the materials and machienery, and all the lovely reaper tech can very well tip the balance of the conflict.
And no matter how bad Cerberus MIGHT screw it up, nothing can be worse than total anihilation by the reapers.
So yes, blowing the base up = stupid.
#1287
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 11:34
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
Let's try to summarize this here.. No metagaming...jsut what Shep knows and posssible/likely outcomes. Simpel cost/benefit analysis.
KEEP THE BASE
- cerberus does good
you get a bunch of high-tech and knowledge about the reapers. The base was used to build a repaer, so it should supply one with in-depth knowledge about their construction, thus not only increasing the potency of the galaxy races starships, but also exposing any potential reaper weaknesses.
Chances of saving the galaxy go way up. Negatives? Cerberus might mis-use (in what way?) the tech later. But at least there will be a later. Note that Cerberus goal is human dominance, nto extermination of other species.
- cerberus f*** up
Gets indoctrinated, unleashes a husk invasion or somesuch. Compared to reapers, it's a pitifully small threat.
And if you're the one who belives that Cerberus f*** up constantly, then this is nothing new. The Galaxy survived plenty of Cerberus failed experiments, so as a threat, it's not really high.
- reapers re-take hte collector base
That would mean they're already here. And if that happens, the base is non-instrumental. For one it doesn't move or have any weapons, so the base itself, even if in reaper hands, presents no imminent danger. And since you'll have a whole fleet of repaers to deal with, it's hardly even worth considering.
Best-case scenario: huge boost in fighting the reapers
Worst-case scenario: Cerberus f**** up and you have to clean up the mess.
DESTROY THE BASE
- prevent Cerberus to get the tech.
Best case scenario: No cerberus f***-up
Worst case scenario: Galaxy is doomed.
KEEP THE BASE
- cerberus does good
you get a bunch of high-tech and knowledge about the reapers. The base was used to build a repaer, so it should supply one with in-depth knowledge about their construction, thus not only increasing the potency of the galaxy races starships, but also exposing any potential reaper weaknesses.
Chances of saving the galaxy go way up. Negatives? Cerberus might mis-use (in what way?) the tech later. But at least there will be a later. Note that Cerberus goal is human dominance, nto extermination of other species.
- cerberus f*** up
Gets indoctrinated, unleashes a husk invasion or somesuch. Compared to reapers, it's a pitifully small threat.
And if you're the one who belives that Cerberus f*** up constantly, then this is nothing new. The Galaxy survived plenty of Cerberus failed experiments, so as a threat, it's not really high.
- reapers re-take hte collector base
That would mean they're already here. And if that happens, the base is non-instrumental. For one it doesn't move or have any weapons, so the base itself, even if in reaper hands, presents no imminent danger. And since you'll have a whole fleet of repaers to deal with, it's hardly even worth considering.
Best-case scenario: huge boost in fighting the reapers
Worst-case scenario: Cerberus f**** up and you have to clean up the mess.
DESTROY THE BASE
- prevent Cerberus to get the tech.
Best case scenario: No cerberus f***-up
Worst case scenario: Galaxy is doomed.
#1288
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 11:39
Asari_Party
-
- Members
- 303 messages
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Worst-case scenario: Cerberus f**** up and you have to clean up the mess.
Cerberus uses reaper technology against the council races - galaxy is doomed
#1289
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 12:43
magicman9194
-
- Members
- 2 messages
Well , probably should just save before engaging the suicide mission, and play out two alternative endings. Judging by TIM's definitely evil grin at the end of ME2 , and the fact that we know Cerberus are now for some reason going after Shepherd , its probably safe to assume that Cerberus wouldn't just stop at the reapers , if the technology on the prothean, by the way, base proved to be useful.
Regardless of this, the amount of time Cerberus would have to work with the ship prior to the reaper invasion (which looks pretty imminent judging by the final cutscene), renders their efforts probably useless, so TIM's claim to using this technology to thwart the reapers is no doubt bull****; plus the ship itself is like a giant reaper "reproductive facility" , and I fail to see how creating another reaper would be in anyway beneficial to any sentient being in the galaxy. The only advantage to keeping the ship I can think of would be that it may reveal crucial hints at the reapers design, possible weakpoints etc, but based on what we saw throughout the ship, I'd say it was used solely for harvesting whatever species the Reapers saw fit.
While TIM doesn't strike me as that much of a megalomaniac to not put the technology to immediate use against the Reapers, why would Bioware make destroying the ship a paragon choice if anything bad was going to come out of it. Lets face it, every other paragon choice I've made throughout both games has benefited me in some way; occasionally they involve me compromising, e.g. on Zaeed's loyalty mission where you can choose to save hundreds of people from frying alive , or chase Zaeed's mate....I chose Zaeed's option in that case but ultimately I got renegade points from that. In the first game I saved the Rachni and Wrex, and both these choices will help me out in ME3 (based on the asari who relays the rachni queens message about "singing with" shepherd, and the fact that Wrex is trying to unify the Krogan clans, all pointing to more allies for me in ME3). I guess the same could be said for rewriting the Geth and gaining the trust of the Quarians in ME2. Ethically I was confused as to how basically brainwashing the Geth ( who according to Legion have freedom of choice) proved to be the better moral decision.
What bugs me the most is the decision to keep the ship itself. I was obviously a bit wary of choosing the option as every other renegade decision before has not really helped me out too much...but I can't believe that (if the choice to keep the ship backfires and puts millions of people in danger from Cerberus) Bioware would give you the option to shoot yourself in the foot so badly. Maybe its a double headed coin ; keeping the ship may help destroy the reapers, but then we might have to deal with Cerberus and the ship as an after-shock, or it may just result in destroying the reapers with less of a loss, but Cerberus and TIM do something equally as bad.
Anyway, I'll just stick with the trusty Paragon route, see what Bioware do in ME3, and then try a playthrough keeping the ship.
Regardless of this, the amount of time Cerberus would have to work with the ship prior to the reaper invasion (which looks pretty imminent judging by the final cutscene), renders their efforts probably useless, so TIM's claim to using this technology to thwart the reapers is no doubt bull****; plus the ship itself is like a giant reaper "reproductive facility" , and I fail to see how creating another reaper would be in anyway beneficial to any sentient being in the galaxy. The only advantage to keeping the ship I can think of would be that it may reveal crucial hints at the reapers design, possible weakpoints etc, but based on what we saw throughout the ship, I'd say it was used solely for harvesting whatever species the Reapers saw fit.
While TIM doesn't strike me as that much of a megalomaniac to not put the technology to immediate use against the Reapers, why would Bioware make destroying the ship a paragon choice if anything bad was going to come out of it. Lets face it, every other paragon choice I've made throughout both games has benefited me in some way; occasionally they involve me compromising, e.g. on Zaeed's loyalty mission where you can choose to save hundreds of people from frying alive , or chase Zaeed's mate....I chose Zaeed's option in that case but ultimately I got renegade points from that. In the first game I saved the Rachni and Wrex, and both these choices will help me out in ME3 (based on the asari who relays the rachni queens message about "singing with" shepherd, and the fact that Wrex is trying to unify the Krogan clans, all pointing to more allies for me in ME3). I guess the same could be said for rewriting the Geth and gaining the trust of the Quarians in ME2. Ethically I was confused as to how basically brainwashing the Geth ( who according to Legion have freedom of choice) proved to be the better moral decision.
What bugs me the most is the decision to keep the ship itself. I was obviously a bit wary of choosing the option as every other renegade decision before has not really helped me out too much...but I can't believe that (if the choice to keep the ship backfires and puts millions of people in danger from Cerberus) Bioware would give you the option to shoot yourself in the foot so badly. Maybe its a double headed coin ; keeping the ship may help destroy the reapers, but then we might have to deal with Cerberus and the ship as an after-shock, or it may just result in destroying the reapers with less of a loss, but Cerberus and TIM do something equally as bad.
Anyway, I'll just stick with the trusty Paragon route, see what Bioware do in ME3, and then try a playthrough keeping the ship.
#1290
Guest_laecraft_*
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 01:38
Guest_laecraft_*
Guest_laecraft_*
-
- Guests
I think the problem with the base decision is that many players are stuck in god-mode mindset. They're unwilling to roleplay. We, the players, know that there will be the third game, that it will be self-sufficient, and that, no matter what decisions we made before, we will be able to win.
Now, try to see it from Shepard's POV. A single Reaper nearly destroyed the entire united Council fleet, who was warned, armed, and prepared for the attack. A fleet of Reapers is going to be unleashed on completely unsuspecting galaxy. Is it possible to win? The only reasonable answer is NO, it's impossible to win. The way things are, at the moment Shepard is faced with the base decision, the galaxy is doomed.
Unless something changes.
The matter is, you can't make things worse. They're already at their worst. What's the worst case scenario? The Reapers win. Right now, we're already facing that scenario. You can only make things better. The only thing you can do at the moment is to toss a bit of chaos into the smooth picture of the galaxy's doom, and hope that it would be enough to upset the balance so that you can take advantage of it.
Nobody can predict what exactly comes out of the decision to keep the base. The consequences are too complex and far-reaching to calculate. Too many variables. But whatever those consequences are, and whatever comes because of the change, it's all better than the completely predictable and clear future of total annihilation that the galaxy is facing right now.
If you choose to destroy the base, you choose to change nothing. It's a very weird position to take, for someone as pro-active as Shepard. Hero is not supposed to be passive and hoping that something happens to solve his problems. He's supposed to fight, make decisions, combat the inevitable.
Of course, it doesn't matter what you choose to do, since we get the tech anyway. Why is it so? The answer to this question is very unpleasant for those to chose to destroy the base. Because you chose wrong. It is clear that if we don't get the tech, the galaxy is doomed.
The writers simply cannot allow that to happen. That's why we get the tech no matter what. They're doing it to prevent the game from being broken and to save the base-destroyers the rage and the frustration when they discover that they cannot win. And if you believe otherwise, you're deluding yourself.
Now, try to see it from Shepard's POV. A single Reaper nearly destroyed the entire united Council fleet, who was warned, armed, and prepared for the attack. A fleet of Reapers is going to be unleashed on completely unsuspecting galaxy. Is it possible to win? The only reasonable answer is NO, it's impossible to win. The way things are, at the moment Shepard is faced with the base decision, the galaxy is doomed.
Unless something changes.
The matter is, you can't make things worse. They're already at their worst. What's the worst case scenario? The Reapers win. Right now, we're already facing that scenario. You can only make things better. The only thing you can do at the moment is to toss a bit of chaos into the smooth picture of the galaxy's doom, and hope that it would be enough to upset the balance so that you can take advantage of it.
Nobody can predict what exactly comes out of the decision to keep the base. The consequences are too complex and far-reaching to calculate. Too many variables. But whatever those consequences are, and whatever comes because of the change, it's all better than the completely predictable and clear future of total annihilation that the galaxy is facing right now.
If you choose to destroy the base, you choose to change nothing. It's a very weird position to take, for someone as pro-active as Shepard. Hero is not supposed to be passive and hoping that something happens to solve his problems. He's supposed to fight, make decisions, combat the inevitable.
Of course, it doesn't matter what you choose to do, since we get the tech anyway. Why is it so? The answer to this question is very unpleasant for those to chose to destroy the base. Because you chose wrong. It is clear that if we don't get the tech, the galaxy is doomed.
The writers simply cannot allow that to happen. That's why we get the tech no matter what. They're doing it to prevent the game from being broken and to save the base-destroyers the rage and the frustration when they discover that they cannot win. And if you believe otherwise, you're deluding yourself.
Modifié par laecraft, 22 juillet 2011 - 01:41 .
#1291
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 01:53
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
Roxy12 wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Worst-case scenario: Cerberus f**** up and you have to clean up the mess.
Cerberus uses reaper technology against the council races - galaxy is doomed
Hardly. Cerberus is a small roganization and really doesn't have the number for a head-on fight, even agaisnt only the Alliance military.
Secondly, Cerberus isn't anti-alien, it's pro-human. TIM doesn't want to destroy other races. If anything, I'd imagine he'd feed the new tech to the Alliance only, thus making humanity stronger.
Thirdly, even if Cerberus were to start an all out war for dominiton, the galaxy is not doomed. Cerberus ending up controling the Galaxy (by some miracle - not gonna happen even with reaper tech) is still nothing compared to Reapers exterminating all sentient life.
#1292
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:14
Asari_Party
-
- Members
- 303 messages
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Hardly. Cerberus is a small roganization and really doesn't have the number for a head-on fight, even agaisnt only the Alliance military.
The collectors had one cruiser and they harvested whole colonies. Do you really think Cerberus is unable to acquire one cruiser?
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Secondly, Cerberus isn't anti-alien, it's pro-human. TIM doesn't want to destroy other races. If anything, I'd imagine he'd feed the new tech to the Alliance only, thus making humanity stronger.
Yeah, and Wilhelm II or Hitler were just pro-german.
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Thirdly, even if Cerberus were to start an all out war for dominiton, the galaxy is not doomed. Cerberus ending up controling the Galaxy (by some miracle - not gonna happen even with reaper tech) is still nothing compared to Reapers exterminating all sentient life.
I disagree. A galaxy where Cerberus can harvest aliens at will is definitely not worth saving.
#1293
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:21
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
-
- Guests
Golden Owl wrote...
Though for all you know, giving the Base to Cerberus could just result in you digging a bigger hole for yourself...ie. Cerberus abusing the the tech and their use of it creating a lot greater problem than help.
For all I know ginger bread men will emerge from a golden gate and bring peace and justice to the galaxy.
Let's not play the "For all you know" game.
My point is precisely that we don't know. That is why I save the base. The base promises knowledge and knowledge is what we need if we are going to survive.
#1294
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:23
Goneaviking
-
- Members
- 899 messages
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
jedierick wrote...
Keeping the base presents the player with the unknown, just like destroying it. Nobody knows what the collectors base would have revealed, or if it would reveal more than what EDI found while connected to the collectors ship. Keeping it presented more of a risk than destroying it for me.
Bollocks. I cna't believe the stupidity of this argument.
The base was used to BUILD A REAPER. The things one can pull from it are homongous for that very reason. The thing you cna pull out of a computer in a few minutes are insignificant compared to that.
The base is, in essence, a friggin shipyard. To get ones hand on the materials and machienery, and all the lovely reaper tech can very well tip the balance of the conflict.
And no matter how bad Cerberus MIGHT screw it up, nothing can be worse than total anihilation by the reapers.
So yes, blowing the base up = stupid.
"Happy birthday The Illusive Man, I got you a present I think you're gonna love. Can you guess what it is? That's right, it's a do it yourself indoctrination factory. Because I just don't have enough enemies to keep me interested."
#1295
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:31
survivor_686
-
- Members
- 1 543 messages
For me it was a matter of competence really. If one were to look at the Overlord and Firewalker projects, both of them failed due to competence. Combined with other projects that were encountered in Mass Effect 1, and one begins to see a pattern of failure, while commiting to ethically unsound projects with regards to Cerberus.
Basically if I gave the base to TIM, the odds are for the project mutating and coming back to bite me in the ass.
Basically if I gave the base to TIM, the odds are for the project mutating and coming back to bite me in the ass.
#1296
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:52
CuseGirl
-
- Members
- 1 613 messages
laecraft wrote...
The writers simply cannot allow that to happen. That's why we get the tech no matter what. They're doing it to prevent the game from being broken and to save the base-destroyers the rage and the frustration when they discover that they cannot win. And if you believe otherwise, you're deluding yourself.
There's no way ME-3 is designed in such a way that anyone who destroyed the base has no shot of winning in the end game. For all we know, the base decision will have nothing to do with the actual fight on the ground, it'll be more about how the public views Shepard.
And as some have mentioned, it seems the Paragon decisions have benefitted people more often than not. And the Renegade options just give skarky dialogue. Keeping the base and letting Cerberus have another shot at screwing up makes no sense. Every large scale project they have goes to sh*t, now we give them a Reaper factory? Nonsense.
#1297
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 02:59
Goneaviking
-
- Members
- 899 messages
CuseGirl wrote...
laecraft wrote...
The writers simply cannot allow that to happen. That's why we get the tech no matter what. They're doing it to prevent the game from being broken and to save the base-destroyers the rage and the frustration when they discover that they cannot win. And if you believe otherwise, you're deluding yourself.
There's no way ME-3 is designed in such a way that anyone who destroyed the base has no shot of winning in the end game. For all we know, the base decision will have nothing to do with the actual fight on the ground, it'll be more about how the public views Shepard.
And as some have mentioned, it seems the Paragon decisions have benefitted people more often than not. And the Renegade options just give skarky dialogue. Keeping the base and letting Cerberus have another shot at screwing up makes no sense. Every large scale project they have goes to sh*t, now we give them a Reaper factory? Nonsense.
My expectation is that keeping the base should make Cereberus enemies more dangerous, but make it easier to destroy the reapers once they're dealt with, and that destroying the base would have the opposite impact.
The discussion is more interesting if we look at it in character rather than OOC. There are pros and cons for either decision without invoking the age-old question of which is better Paragon or Renegade.
#1298
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 03:25
Medhia Nox
-
- Members
- 5 066 messages
If I were an ancient race determined to wipe out all organic life - I'd have a means of self-destructing the vessel where my slave race of space 7 Eleven workers are spending their days making the first human slushie.
You know - because I'm vastly intelligent and have been at this for millions of years. One tends to pick up on some things.
Unless - I wanted the organics to steal my giant juicer for some reason.
I certainly would rather they spend their resources trying to figure out how to turn on the blender - and have a fleet protecting a giant bee hive in space - than doing something important, like protecting homeworlds.
===
And - I certainly wouldn't have "tech that could destroy me" on the ship where I have my slave-race of robot Protheans... and my giant juicer.
You know - because I'm vastly intelligent and have been at this for millions of years. One tends to pick up on some things.
Unless - I wanted the organics to steal my giant juicer for some reason.
I certainly would rather they spend their resources trying to figure out how to turn on the blender - and have a fleet protecting a giant bee hive in space - than doing something important, like protecting homeworlds.
===
And - I certainly wouldn't have "tech that could destroy me" on the ship where I have my slave-race of robot Protheans... and my giant juicer.
#1299
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 03:39
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
-
- Guests
Medhia Nox wrote...
If I were an ancient race determined to wipe out all organic life - I'd have a means of self-destructing the vessel where my slave race of space 7 Eleven workers are spending their days making the first human slushie.
So why didn't they fire it off before the enemy captured their assets?
#1300
Posté 22 juillet 2011 - 03:46
Medhia Nox
-
- Members
- 5 066 messages
You missed the - 'Unless - I wanted the organics to steal my giant juicer for some reason.'
===
Honestly - this game isn't about consequences - it's about how bad-ass Shepard (and by extension you, the player, is)
I seriously doubt saving or destroying the base is going to lead to any genuine "punishment" proving - once and for all - that one side or the other in this debate was "so smart it hurt".
Destroying it will lead one path - and prove how smart you were for doing so.
Keeping it will lead another path - and prove how smart you were for doing so.
===
I decided that I wasn't dealing with some imbecile like TIM... I was, presumably dealing with a vastly alien and unknowable intelligence.
If I could come up with "could be a Trojan Horse" - then so could the Reapers.
Honestly - we've sat down after the fact over a cup of tea... we had a good laugh.
Harbinger: Oh, man - I was so sure you'd go for it.
My Shepard: No man, it was obviously a Trojan Horse.
Harbinger: I didn't expect you to be learned in your races classical literature.
My Shepard: There's a lot you don't know about me Harby...
*My Shepard pulls out pistol and shoot Harby under the table*
My Shepard: Like that, for example.
Harbinger: ARGH! You have only delayed the inevitable!!
===
Honestly - this game isn't about consequences - it's about how bad-ass Shepard (and by extension you, the player, is)
I seriously doubt saving or destroying the base is going to lead to any genuine "punishment" proving - once and for all - that one side or the other in this debate was "so smart it hurt".
Destroying it will lead one path - and prove how smart you were for doing so.
Keeping it will lead another path - and prove how smart you were for doing so.
===
I decided that I wasn't dealing with some imbecile like TIM... I was, presumably dealing with a vastly alien and unknowable intelligence.
If I could come up with "could be a Trojan Horse" - then so could the Reapers.
Honestly - we've sat down after the fact over a cup of tea... we had a good laugh.
Harbinger: Oh, man - I was so sure you'd go for it.
My Shepard: No man, it was obviously a Trojan Horse.
Harbinger: I didn't expect you to be learned in your races classical literature.
My Shepard: There's a lot you don't know about me Harby...
*My Shepard pulls out pistol and shoot Harby under the table*
My Shepard: Like that, for example.
Harbinger: ARGH! You have only delayed the inevitable!!
