179 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkDragon777]

Someone With Mass wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Implying Cerberus isn't improtant?  That was an ignorant statement.

Compared to the Reapers and post-ME2? 

No. They're not important. They're vermin at best.

No, they aren't as important as the Reapers themselves, but they are crucial to the series. If they truly are the Reapers pawns, they have more direct influence on other species than the Reapers themselves. The Reapers are only capable of total destruction. They will need some kind of major power to help them weaken the races, and that is Cerberus, making them very worthy of Shepard's attention.

Modifié par DarkDragon777, 06 août 2011 - 11:19 .

[KotorEffect3]

Someone With Mass wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Implying Cerberus isn't improtant?  That was an ignorant statement.

Compared to the Reapers and post-ME2? 

No. They're not important. They're vermin at best.

Well there is no question the reapers are the main event but we will see what role cerberus specificaly plays in ME 3 when it actualy comes out,  For now all we know is that they are working for the reapers and that is about it.

[CuseGirl]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

I'd rather focus on matters that are actually important, like...stopping the ancient machine race from enslaving and harvesting all civilizations, instead of Cerberus.

On that note if you start with ME2(like me) you really don't get a scope for the reaper threat except that "they are bad guys."

But on the other hand you get TIM and his star throwing money and bodies at whatever they see fit,and it gives you an idea of how bad they are.

I realize there's a minority within this online video gamer minority that we are apart of. To be honest, I could care less about the "lore" of the ME universe and how Cerberus vs Reaper effects the storytelling. Just tell me whose trying to blow up Earth and I'm gonna stop it.

[Dean_the_Young]

Sisterofshane wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

If we are going to claim that there are no Cerberus successes, you should have payed more attention.

1) Akuze: While hardly something that is ethical, everything did, nominally, go 'according to plan'. Results unknown. Likelihood of catastrophe negligible.

2) The Cerberus base where we found Kohoku: Experiments on Thorian Creepers and Rachni appear to have been operating within parameters until the site suffered a 'Shepard Caused Disaster'.

3) The Alliance's Ascension project benefited greatly from the Teltin facility's research and from direct aid from Cerberus operatives. Loss of one subject and 3 operatives acceptable losses. Research continues to yield results.

4) Several assassinations that helped ease humanity's diplomatic relations. Examples include the elimination of Pope Clement XVI in order to allow more intimate diplomatic relationship with the Salarians and Turians.

5) EDI and Normandy SR-2

Some of the above may have resulted with a few positives, but if you were to look back on the operation as a whole then I wouldn't say that the operations were clean-cut.

Example one, Akuze.  The plan was to continue to study the effects, until Toombs went all crazy and started killing all of the associated scientists.  Bet they wish, in hindsight, that they had killed Toombs as well.  Especially since he is the reason that their "covert op" is revealed to Shep, and possibly one of the scientists responsible for Akuze was turned into the Alliance to face charges.  Major espionage fail.

2.The base associated with Kohoku's death.  Why were they discovered in the first place?  Kohoku certainly found them easily enough.  And, it is possible for any information found relating to Cerberus to be handed over to the Shadow Broker.  Ends disasterously (whether caused by Shep or not), with no real results.  Again, a major espionage fail.

3. Tetlin.  Bad idea to begin with.  What was the official outcome?  One powerful biotic.  And no reason to believe that the results could ever be reproduced.  Ends with officers/scientists going rogue, then being killed, and subject Zero escaping (and wreaking havoc everywhere she goes).  May have benefited the Acsension project, but most likely only nominally, and on a whole developed our understaning of biotics only minimally.

4. Assasinations.  Very useful in the short term, and really they were just "allowed" by cerberus, not really carried out by them.  Kind of like how Cerberus is successful in stopping the Collectors, but really only because they let somebody who truly is competent perform the task.

5.Normandy and EDI remain under Shepards' control.  I don't think that TIM will take to kindly to that.  Again, you don't have a project "go rogue" and consider it as a whole to be a success.


I'm not saying that these were EPIC fails here, but still I wouldn't consider any of them complete successes either.

These are the funniest standards of 'major fail' I've come across in some time. But then again, calling anything short of perfection a major fail and then labeling those as the standard is pretty crazy as well, especially when coupled with the old 'and if nothing beneficial was explicitly credited from them, we must assume nothing could have or did.'

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 06 août 2011 - 11:26 .

[Someone With Mass]

DarkDragon777 wrote...
No, they aren't as important as the Reapers themselves, but they are crucial to the series. If they truly are the Reapers pawns, they have more direct influence on other species than the Reapers themselves. The Reapers are only capable of total destruction. They will need some kind of major power to help them weaken the races, and that is Cerberus, making them very worthy of Shepard's attention.

That's why I don't like it, because I wanted the Cerberus BS to be over after ME2. I'm sick of them. I want to see something new.

[Someone With Mass]

SandTrout wrote...
Then why bother with trolling this thread?

Oh, so expressing my opinion on the matter is trolling now?

Cool story, bro.

[Dean_the_Young]

So, no new realizations or developments from Cerberus, because they aren't new.

Likewise, got to cut out those stale, old Reapers...


I know! ME3 could be about the Terminus! (Because, hey, we never really saw them in ME2.)

[Saaziel]

LPPrince wrote...

Honestly, I wish Cerberus wasn't so integral into the franchise.

I mean, goddang.

Books, Comics, Two of the main games heavily featuring them. They are EVERYWHERE.

Cerberus Overkill.

Couldn't agree more.

Funny with everything they get , the Ceb fan Boys still get all worked up about not getting in game emails and cameos.

I would have much preferred that the Mass effect series present a different "antagonist" with every instalment; Saren/rogue spectre for ME1 , Cerberus/Colectors ME2 , then a different one for ME3.

As for Cerberus being a villain; I wouldn't categorise them as such, however they are a threat in the same way that giving a loaded assault riffle to someone with developmental dyspraxia is threatening. They're more like buffoons than anything else .

Edit ; Typos

Modifié par Saaziel, 06 août 2011 - 11:38 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

SandTrout wrote...
Then why bother with trolling this thread?

Oh, so expressing my opinion on the matter is trolling now?

Cool story, bro.

It can be, depending on the manner it's expressed.

Now, I don't know what your opinion was, or how it was expressed... but 'could well be' is the only honest answer to a question like that.

[DarkDragon777]

Someone With Mass wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...
No, they aren't as important as the Reapers themselves, but they are crucial to the series. If they truly are the Reapers pawns, they have more direct influence on other species than the Reapers themselves. The Reapers are only capable of total destruction. They will need some kind of major power to help them weaken the races, and that is Cerberus, making them very worthy of Shepard's attention.

That's why I don't like it, because I wanted the Cerberus BS to be over after ME2. I'm sick of them. I want to see something new.

What were you expecting? Eclipse? Blood Pack? The Blue Suns?
Cerberus is the obvious choice for the 'third variable" sort of thing.


ME1: Meet Cerberus -->  ME2: Work With Cerberus --->  ME3: Clash with Cerberus


They were alluded to. Then they were met......Then you worked for them


Something so important to the series isn't just let go in the final chapter.

Modifié par DarkDragon777, 06 août 2011 - 11:37 .

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Saaziel wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Honestly, I wish Cerberus wasn't so integral into the franchise.

I mean, goddang.

Books, Comics, Two of the main games heavily featuring them. They are EVERYWHERE.

Cerberus Overkill.

Couldn't agree more.

Funny with everything they get , the Ceb fan Boys still get all worked up about not getting in game emails and cameos.

I would have much preferred that the Mass effect series present a different "antagonist" with every instalment; Saren/rogue spectre for ME1 , Cerberus/Colectors ME2 , then a different one for ME3.

As for Cerberus being a villain; I wouldn't categories them as such, however they are a threat in the same way that giving a loaded assault riffle a someone with developmental dyspraxia is threatening. They're more like buffoons than anything else .

Thats why I draw paralells with TIM and Lex Luthor,they aren't "evil" they just want to achieve their goals,damned be the consequences or cost,and by any means neccesary.

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 06 août 2011 - 11:34 .

[Saaziel]

My bad.

Modifié par Saaziel, 06 août 2011 - 11:36 .

[Someone With Mass]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

So, no new realizations or developments from Cerberus, because they aren't new.

Likewise, got to cut out those stale, old Reapers...


I know! ME3 could be about the Terminus! (Because, hey, we never really saw them in ME2.)

Cerberus is mentioned/focused on more than the Reapers in the Mass Effect media.

That's the problem.

We know who TIM is. We know Cerberus' goals. We know how they work most of the time. I think that's enough. More than enough.

While we know virtually nothing about the Reapers, beyond some of the reasons why they're doing what they're doing.

[Sebby]

The Reapers are among the least interesting things about the Mass Effect universe. I enjoyed playing space gestapo and space punisher in ME1's side missions and in ME2's recruitment/loyalty missions more than anything involving the Reapers.

[Kaiser Shepard]

LPPrince wrote...

Honestly, I wish Cerberus wasn't so integral into the franchise.

I mean, goddang.

Books, Comics, Two of the main games heavily featuring them. They are EVERYWHERE.

I'm not usually one for these, but I just had to. I'm sorry.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Yeah,thanks Kaiser,I spilled my drink.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

HomelessGal wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...
While we know virtually nothing about the Reapers, beyond some of the reasons why they're doing what they're doing.

Completely ignoring Cerberus for a moment, is that really a bad thing? I think that, as antagonists, the Reapers are intimidating because we know next to nothing about them. I don't think the "space cthulhu" comparison is that far off; as we learn more about the Reapers, the magic is lost.

The enigmatic super-villian and the seemingly incompotent paramilitary branch of Ferrari.

[Someone With Mass]

HomelessGal wrote...
Completely ignoring Cerberus for a moment, is that really a bad thing? I think that, as antagonists, the Reapers are intimidating because we know next to nothing about them. I don't think the "space cthulhu" comparison is that far off; as we learn more about the Reapers, the magic is lost.

To some extent, I agree, but fighting and destroying the Reapers while never really knowing their true agenda seems a little annoying. Especially if they persist the way they've done so far.

Not knowing about their abilities is something that can remain unknown, because I like surprises like that.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 07 août 2011 - 12:14 .

[Sisterofshane]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

If we are going to claim that there are no Cerberus successes, you should have payed more attention.

1) Akuze: While hardly something that is ethical, everything did, nominally, go 'according to plan'. Results unknown. Likelihood of catastrophe negligible.

2) The Cerberus base where we found Kohoku: Experiments on Thorian Creepers and Rachni appear to have been operating within parameters until the site suffered a 'Shepard Caused Disaster'.

3) The Alliance's Ascension project benefited greatly from the Teltin facility's research and from direct aid from Cerberus operatives. Loss of one subject and 3 operatives acceptable losses. Research continues to yield results.

4) Several assassinations that helped ease humanity's diplomatic relations. Examples include the elimination of Pope Clement XVI in order to allow more intimate diplomatic relationship with the Salarians and Turians.

5) EDI and Normandy SR-2

Some of the above may have resulted with a few positives, but if you were to look back on the operation as a whole then I wouldn't say that the operations were clean-cut.

Example one, Akuze.  The plan was to continue to study the effects, until Toombs went all crazy and started killing all of the associated scientists.  Bet they wish, in hindsight, that they had killed Toombs as well.  Especially since he is the reason that their "covert op" is revealed to Shep, and possibly one of the scientists responsible for Akuze was turned into the Alliance to face charges.  Major espionage fail.

2.The base associated with Kohoku's death.  Why were they discovered in the first place?  Kohoku certainly found them easily enough.  And, it is possible for any information found relating to Cerberus to be handed over to the Shadow Broker.  Ends disasterously (whether caused by Shep or not), with no real results.  Again, a major espionage fail.

3. Tetlin.  Bad idea to begin with.  What was the official outcome?  One powerful biotic.  And no reason to believe that the results could ever be reproduced.  Ends with officers/scientists going rogue, then being killed, and subject Zero escaping (and wreaking havoc everywhere she goes).  May have benefited the Acsension project, but most likely only nominally, and on a whole developed our understaning of biotics only minimally.

4. Assasinations.  Very useful in the short term, and really they were just "allowed" by cerberus, not really carried out by them.  Kind of like how Cerberus is successful in stopping the Collectors, but really only because they let somebody who truly is competent perform the task.

5.Normandy and EDI remain under Shepards' control.  I don't think that TIM will take to kindly to that.  Again, you don't have a project "go rogue" and consider it as a whole to be a success.


I'm not saying that these were EPIC fails here, but still I wouldn't consider any of them complete successes either.

These are the funniest standards of 'major fail' I've come across in some time. But then again, calling anything short of perfection a major fail and then labeling those as the standard is pretty crazy as well, especially when coupled with the old 'and if nothing beneficial was explicitly credited from them, we must assume nothing could have or did.'

Didn't call them all "major" fails (as in that they were complete failures).  Only two in which I said there were major "espionage" fails (meaning they failed in the "covert" part of "covert ops").  And I never said we gained "nothing" beneficial.  Just that, on the whole, if I were TIM, I wouldn't celebrate any of these as complete successes.
Refusing to learn from one's mistakes is the biggest mistake one can make.  If Cerberus can't "fix" any of these seemingly insignificant mistakes, then they are truly incompetent.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

So, no new realizations or developments from Cerberus, because they aren't new.

Likewise, got to cut out those stale, old Reapers...


I know! ME3 could be about the Terminus! (Because, hey, we never really saw them in ME2.)

Cerberus is mentioned/focused on more than the Reapers in the Mass Effect media.

That's the problem.

We know who TIM is. We know Cerberus' goals. We know how they work most of the time. I think that's enough. More than enough.

While we know virtually nothing about the Reapers, beyond some of the reasons why they're doing what they're doing.

All Mass Effect media has occured before the Reapers have actually, you know, come to this side of the galaxy. The Reapers have never been the primary immediate focus, because they aren't here.

Cerberus only outweighs the importance of the Reapers in the side-media, and even then primarily by default for the lack of any Reaper relevance in the plot of the tale. In the games, however, Cerberus hasn't outweighed the importance of the Reapers by any practical matter, nor does it stand to. Mass Effect 3 isn't 'the mystery of Cerberus, with Reapers thrown in': it stands to be 'the Reapers are here, and so every plot line, including Cerberus, will be addressed.'

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 07 août 2011 - 02:12 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Sisterofshane wrote...


Didn't call them all "major" fails (as in that they were complete failures).  Only two in which I said there were major "espionage" fails (meaning they failed in the "covert" part of "covert ops").  And I never said we gained "nothing" beneficial.  Just that, on the whole, if I were TIM, I wouldn't celebrate any of these as complete successes.
Refusing to learn from one's mistakes is the biggest mistake one can make.  If Cerberus can't "fix" any of these seemingly insignificant mistakes, then they are truly incompetent.

I'd complement you on the skill of missing the points by going an entire different path into different ballparks entirely, but I have a feeling it wasn't intentional on your part.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 07 août 2011 - 02:13 .

[Sisterofshane]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...


Didn't call them all "major" fails (as in that they were complete failures).  Only two in which I said there were major "espionage" fails (meaning they failed in the "covert" part of "covert ops").  And I never said we gained "nothing" beneficial.  Just that, on the whole, if I were TIM, I wouldn't celebrate any of these as complete successes.
Refusing to learn from one's mistakes is the biggest mistake one can make.  If Cerberus can't "fix" any of these seemingly insignificant mistakes, then they are truly incompetent.

I'd complement you on the skill of missing the points by going an entire different path into different ballparks entirely, but I have a feeling it wasn't intentional on your part.

Okay, not sure I'm following exactly what point you were originally trying to make then.

You claimed that I used the above as examples of "major fails", and I rightly pointed out to you that I had not said such, that I was just not about to call any of those examples "successes" and great examples of Cerberus' competence.

Now you claim that I am arguing "another path", but not intentionally.

What, exactly, was your point Dean?

[Dean_the_Young]

What I said: that your standards of significant failure or lack of successes are laughable. That you fixated on the 'major fail' adjective is that other path.

It's not hard.

[GreenDragon37]

I despise Cerberus, but I like that they are the "third variable". Hated working for them in ME2, wanted to beat TIM to a pulp, not work for him. However, they are good antagonists. They represent how far Humanity is willing to go to achieve dominance, and damn everyone else, even other Humans. Now I do think they take up a little too much media space (who am I kidding, they're EVERYWHERE!!!).

I bet you'll have the chance to save Cerberus and leave it as it is, save it but reform it, or destroy it completely. Personally, I'd save it... but reform the hell out of it and put myself as leader if I could. Shepard gets stuff done, and everyone would fear Shep more than TIM because Shep isn't afraid to come down himself and kick some ass. No going "rogue".

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 07 août 2011 - 02:35 .