1939 réponses à ce sujet

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Wow, a lot of text flying around here. Why is this topic so controversial? Can't there be a general consensus by now?

No, that would require the base destroyers to admit they are being unreasonable and illogical.

So BW is unreasonable and illogical for giving "base destroyers" the choice?
Isn't it unreasonable and illogical to try and influence the way people wish to influence only their own game.
Unreasonable and illogical to assume what the consequences (good or bad) willl be in a game that wont be out til next year?

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 25 juillet 2011 - 12:11 .

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

So BW is unreasonable and illogical for giving "base destroyers" the choice?

No. They do a good job of making Shepard look like the fool he is if he blows it up.

The're hypocritical though for not letting you make another stupid choice in Arrival (to refuse to blow up the relay).

That's different...Shepards goal is to win,he is keeping the reapers at bay,not destroying a reaper resource is to concede defeat.It has been said a million different ways in this topic,there is absolutely no way to tell whether or not the collector base will make a significant difference or not, it could be the key,it could be pandoras box,it could just contain info we already have,so the only logical conclusion is.....I'll play the game however I want Yeah I know Mind=Blown.

[Subferro]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

So BW is unreasonable and illogical for giving "base destroyers" the choice?

No. They do a good job of making Shepard look like the fool he is if he blows it up.

The're hypocritical though for not letting you make another stupid choice in Arrival (to refuse to blow up the relay).

Actually you can make a stupid choice in Arrival:



Now it seems to me if detroying the base was on the same level of stupid, then you should get a Critical Mission Failure screen (like you do in Arrival), yet that doesn't happen. Guess it wasn't such a big mistake after all...

Modifié par Subferro, 25 juillet 2011 - 12:25 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

CuseGirl wrote...

lollll....why can't you fathom that the Collector ship would probably lead to more strife? Strife brought on by ANOTHER Cerberus screwup or rogue operation?

Possible... But the danger of that possiblity is irrelevant compared to the galactic extinction by the reapers.
Even if there was only a 0.1% chance something usefull might turn up, it's worth taking.

Once the reapers come, things can't possibly get worse.

and strife = military buildup. Which is only good when the reapers come.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Wow, a lot of text flying around here. Why is this topic so controversial? Can't there be a general consensus by now?

No, that would require the base destroyers to admit they are being unreasonable and illogical.

So BW is unreasonable and illogical for giving "base destroyers" the choice?

Eh? By what logic. Choice is just that ...choice. One cna choose to do great things..and stupid things..and silly things...etc..
Having choice is not stupid. Making a stupid choice is stupid.

[Subferro]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Subferro wrote...

Now it seems to me if detroying the base was on the same level of stupid, then you should get a Critical Mission Failure screen (like you do in Arrival), yet that doesn't happen. Guess it wasn't such a big mistake after all...

No, it's still a stupid choice, but if it doesn't grant you a game over screen then you're just very lucky. You still made a poor decision with poor rationale.

I thought results are what matters? Isn't that everyone's rationale for things like Cerberus' derelict Reaper team turning into husks?

If I still manage to defeat the Reapers, then was it a bad choice?

[Seboist]

Subferro wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Subferro wrote...

Now it seems to me if detroying the base was on the same level of stupid, then you should get a Critical Mission Failure screen (like you do in Arrival), yet that doesn't happen. Guess it wasn't such a big mistake after all...

No, it's still a stupid choice, but if it doesn't grant you a game over screen then you're just very lucky. You still made a poor decision with poor rationale.

If I still manage to defeat the Reapers, then was it a bad choice?

If it's an extra cost.... yes.

[jedierick]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The reaper at the collector base is far from completely destroyed... It's "dead" but ther'es more then enough remains. It wasn't hit with capital-grade mass accelerators..Shep shot him in the head.

And again - how do you know what we would or would not get? What one gets depends on which parts are damaged and which are salagable, and hte "baby-reaper"  was left in a better shape than the other two. Not to mention it's a brand new reaper.

The baby repaer is made of human goo AND mechanical parts. This much is obvious.
Your assumptions are so far-fetched they border on fairy tales! And I see you avoid answering my other questions.

If you don't kow how much is in the base - why destroy it?
Save what little dignity you have left and capitulate.

Do you know what happend to the reaper after shep destroyed it? Nope didnt think so.

And again, you do not know what we woudl or would not get, as I keep saying, any decsions after the fact is made on assumptions.  You kep avoiding this all together, you have no idea for sure what if anything woudl come of the base, you dont period, becasue you assume that it would doesnt mean it will. 

What other questions have I avoided.

Again, you go to the fairy tale thing, this whole thing is a work of fiction, you treat it like it is real, the ideas I have presented are far fetched, but so are those presented int he game, so I think I am safe, my ideas being fairy tales, fit right in with the open possibilities of a fictional story. Go on keep saying the fairy tale thing, but dont forget this game is fiction. 

Without making assumptions you cannot say that the base wouldl provide anything  worth while at all, just like I cant  say it wont. Anything we both say is based off of an assumption. Thats a fact. You can say there are spare parts or plans, and I coudl say there is not. Outside of what the game prevents, there is assumptions. 

Move on with your life and accept the fact that ideasof what could or could not come from the base are all assumptions. Guess what, no matter what you say, I blow up the base, I think it is the right decsion, I dont trust the illusive man to get the job done, I dont think the base ir worth saving no matter what you say, youll never convince me. Keep trying, but I will always blow up the base. My opinion, based off of my character, based off of my assumptions of what the base does or does not have, I am happy with my decision. I can live with it, I can live with you blowing up the base as well. Oh and my Shepard has always found a way to get the job done, so I feel confident he will find a way without the base.

[Subferro]

wiggles89 wrote...

If I still manage to defeat the Reapers, then was it a bad choice?

If I correctly pick the winner of a horse race on the basis of a ghost telling me it would win, does that mean it was a good choice to bet on the race?

Would you rather have not won the money?

[alperez]

Saphra Deden wrote...


Your reasons for making the choice are what determine if it was good or bad.

Your reasons for keeping the base are that there could be some info or tech that cerberus may find that could help you to defeat the reapers, that in your mind any potential risk is outweighed by any potential reward.

My reasons for destroying it began in me1 when i saw first hand what kind of things cerberus did, it carried forward to my meeting with sovereign and his telling me that using their technology allows us to develop on the paths they desire, it further developed in me2 when i was forced to work with Cerberus and got to see up close just what kind of a person TIM was.

Fighting my way off the collector ship and realising that i'd been set up only further reinforced my opinion that Cerbeurs and Tim were people i really couldn't trust, then seeing just what sort of things happened on the base and what purpose it could be used for made me question whether something like this should be allowed to exist.

Lastly it was hearing what Legion said which parellels what Vigil had told me way back in me1, that convinced me.

So i was faced with a situation where whatever potential reward there may have been in keeping the base i still would have to trust that the people who took it could be trusted (which i didn't) and that the risks were outweighed by the potential reward.

Its not a good or bad choice imo, its a choice you make depending on what your perception is of the events and whether or not your prepared to take a risk on something that may or may not be worth taking a risk on.

[Subferro]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Subferro wrote...

If I still manage to defeat the Reapers, then was it a bad choice?

Your reasons for making the choice are what determine if it was good or bad.

So making the wrong decision based on the right reasons makes it the right choice? To use the horse racing analogy given above, if I have every reason to believe I'm betting on a fixed race and pick the horse that should win, it's the right choice even if I was wrong about the fix and lose all my money?

[ODST 5723]

Giving the base to Cerberus is only an option for my Renegade.

For all other Shepards, given the choice between handing it to him intact and making it easy or him to gain tech from it or blowing it up and making him have to spend more resources, time and money to do whatever it is he plans on doing with it... well, I go with blowing it up.

I know he'll get the tech eventually, I just don't see why I have to go out of my way to make it easy for him.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Aw, crap. I'm starting to notice how prolonged exposure to this here thread is making me doubt my previous decisions. And not just the Collector Base one; I'm starting to have second thoughts about Overlord as well...

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 25 juillet 2011 - 01:30 .

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Iono I think Shepard in a nutshell saying "I'm a badass and I don't need your little juicer to win." was a good enough reason,(s)he says "There is always another way." blind idealism or not,that's what Shepard believes(paragon anyway) right or wrong,stupid or not, emotion doesn't always leave room for logic or reason.

[Seboist]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Aw, crap. I'm starting to notice how prolonged exposure to this here thread is making me doubt my previous decisions. And not just the Collector Base one; I'm starting to have second thoughts about Overlord as well...

in what way?

[Subferro]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Subferro wrote...

So making the wrong decision based on the right reasons makes it the right choice?

Yes.

If I assume a suspect is guilty just because he's a quarian and later evidence proves he is indeed guilty was I justified for presuming his guilt, even though I was right in the end?

What's the alternative? Let him go so you don't hurt his feelings, then find out you've turned a criminal loose? Yeah that's a much better outcome.

[Kaiser Shepard]

alperez wrote...

it carried forward to my meeting with sovereign and his telling me that using their technology allows us to develop on the paths they desire

You do realize that they never intended for us to use the tech found in that base, right?