1667 réponses à ce sujet

[Bad King]

It hardly matters what happens to the base as no doubt both choices will have an almost identical outcome in ME3. I still think keeping the base is the best option though, even if it will have almost no effect in ME3.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Calling the base a blender is like calling a carrier  - a carriage.

The base is so much more than just the slurpie machine.

That doesn't take away the fact that it's used to melt people down and create Reaper minds out of the goo.

That alone is reason enough for me to not give the base to TIM. If I knew that there were dangers like the Adjutants? I'd be even less willing to give it to him.

[Pride Demon]

Well, I personally have Sheps that kept the Base and others who destroyed it...
But seeing so many threads discussing over which decision is best got me thinking, I realized in the end there is no inherently better or worse decision, however recently I realized something else...

The thing the OP mentions isn't the worst possibility, there's another potential problem that strangely enough no one (even in the game) considers...
Follow my reasoning: Mordin tells us how the Collectors are basically little more then organic robots with a lot of tech implanted in them to compensate for their failing abilities (due to indoctrination)...
We also know they are not born, they are created through cloning, as a Collector dies off or grows to old to be efficacious a new one is created to replace it...

We don't know where this cloning takes place, but for efficiency reasons it's safe to assume it happens in the Collector Base and since manual clonation is inefficient and risky it's quite possible said process is automated...

So, given all this, if the pulse that allows us to keep the base keeps the machinery intact, what's stopping the Collector Base from simply creating more Collectors?
It's not like Cerberus knows where to look to deactivate the cloning process... :/

Modifié par Pride Demon, 01 décembre 2011 - 01:36 .

[Demon Velsper]

*shrug* The way the script is written it won't matter one lick if you gave them the base or blew it up. If you gave them the base they'll probably build something to use against you and if you blew it up they build the same thing from scavenged Collector parts.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Calling the base a blender is like calling a carrier  - a carriage.

The base is so much more than just the slurpie machine.

That doesn't take away the fact that it's used to melt people down and create Reaper minds out of the goo.

That alone is reason enough for me to not give the base to TIM. If I knew that there were dangers like the Adjutants? I'd be even less willing to give it to him.

And it's used to house the collectors. Mantain their ship and weapons. Build a reaper.
A source of knowledge. A usefull - critical - tool.

It's not my problem if you're too squicked because people died in it.
By your logic, any knowledge gain from unethical experiments should never be used....and if you follow that reasoning, millions of people who are alive today should die. Probably you too..

Cause..ya know - modern medicine arose from all kinds of "unethical" research.

But go ahead - ignore the need for that data. Ignore the lives of everyone in the galaxy. Ignore the lives of all those who dies at the hands of the collectors, and let nothing usefull come out of their deaths.

Just don't go and claim it's smart and logical and moral - because it's not. Neither of the three.
It the opposite.

[Darth Death]

Someone With Mass wrote...

In before Cerberus defenders.

The individuals that defend cerberus are those without morality. 

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
And it's used to house the collectors. Mantain their ship and weapons. Build a reaper.
A source of knowledge. A usefull - critical - tool.

It's not my problem if you're too squicked because people died in it.
By your logic, any knowledge gain from unethical experiments should never be used....and if you follow that reasoning, millions of people who are alive today should die. Probably you too..

Cause..ya know - modern medicine arose from all kinds of "unethical" research.

But go ahead - ignore the need for that data. Ignore the lives of everyone in the galaxy. Ignore the lives of all those who dies at the hands of the collectors, and let nothing usefull come out of their deaths.

Just don't go and claim it's smart and logical and moral - because it's not. Neither of the three.
It the opposite.

First: Get off your high horse.

Second: I am completely able of imagining the advantages of that base (but of course, the second I don't acknowledge a fact like that in every post I make, some idiot jumps up and claims otherwise, despite having no f**king clue about how I think or what I'm thinking about) I am just not willing to give it to Cerbeurs, because I know that they value the life of the average colonist/working man about as much as I value the lint in my dryer.

Not to mention that they're writting everything off as acceptable/necessary losses, which doesn't make their case any stronger at all. It just shows that they don't think that there's a limit to sacrifices, and while I admire personal sacrifices (when they're actually made for a good reason and not just because they can be made) I simply believe that Cerberus doesn't know when or how to stop.

That's the prime reason why I'm not giving them the base.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 01 décembre 2011 - 02:25 .

[Ieldra]

C9316 wrote...
What's with the bitterness bro?

Why the hell include a Renegade path that occasionally has very reasonable pragmatic decisions (yes, I agree that others are incredibly dickish, but I'm not talking about these) if it's just a setup for failure? My issues:

(1) The "moral" message that being pragmatic makes you fail is so much full of bullsh*t you can't find a container big enough to dispose of it in the whole galaxy.

(2) Making one side a setup for failure is a broken promise on the developer's part. They don't even have the decency to acknowledge that decisions the likes of the Paragon ones often have a cost. No, not only will the Renegades have to live with the (acknowledged and unavoidable) ethical fallout of their decisions, no, the universe kicks them in the face for good measure by never letting the results the decision was made for materialize. Every single goddamn time. Paragon Shepard is the biggest Marty Stu in gaming.

(3) Why the hell did we even bother thinking about the decisions? Well, because we thought that the consequences or our decisions would be somewhat realistic. Some gambles pay off, some fail. Well, not in the ME universe, no. Not if Paragon Shepard is involved. Then the universe magically changes circumstances to let him win, and magically warps reality so that the Renegade loses. Because hey, Renegades actually having a point, we can't have that, right?

BTW, most of my Shepards are more Paragon than Renegade. That makes this contrivedly one-sided setup even more annoying for the few big Renegade decisions I take.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Darth Death wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

In before Cerberus defenders.

The individuals that defend cerberus are those without morality.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes, Darth.

[Dean_the_Young]

Darth Death wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

In before Cerberus defenders.

The individuals that defend cerberus are those without morality. 

There is a realm of morality so far beyond your own that it is beyond your comprehension.

[/Sovereign joke]


More seriously, there are different types of defenses that, well, are morally required.

I frequently 'defend' Cerberus by arguing against faulty, exagerated, and/or inacurate charges. By any morality system that values honest and integrity even when dealing with the morally vilainous, this is a moral obligation. Accuracy and correctness is most important when dealing with those we hate, and fabrications serve no benefit.

Arguments against results-oriented morality in general also have a moral basis for objecting to. Utilitarian ethos are both widespread and accepted throughout today's cultures, and aren't something to be ashamed of. While the extent of Cerberus actions is fully open for condemnation, the principals behind them (the many before the few) are by no means immoral for billions of humans alive today.

[Chewin]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

In before Cerberus defenders.

The individuals that defend cerberus are those without morality.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes, Darth.

Isn't that an absolute?

[Dean_the_Young]

So Kaiser is a Sith. We already knew that.

Couldn't you tell by the weird eyes?

[Kaiser Shepard]

Chewin3 wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

In before Cerberus defenders.

The individuals that defend cerberus are those without morality.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes, Darth.

Isn't that an absolute?

It is, in fact. 

Dean_the_Young wrote...

So Kaiser is a Sith. We already knew that.

Couldn't you tell by the weird eyes?

But that's TIM...

Well, he is basically reduced to a standard "FOR TEH EVULZ" Sith Lord in ME3, so I suppose that's quite the accurate comparison.

[CrutchCricket]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...
Well, he is basically reduced to a standard "FOR TEH EVULZ" Sith Lord in ME3, so I suppose that's quite the accurate comparison.

Sad, if true because there are some non-standard, non-"for teh evulz" Sith Lords as well... And they are awesome.

[Someone With Mass]

I think Cerberus could've done just fine without the Delusive Man.

Without a guy who's twirling his mustache at me and tells me that they're "good" people.

Then I might have even bothered considering giving them the base.

[CrutchCricket]

Twirling his moustache you say??

[Aeowyn]

Someone With Mass wrote...

I think Cerberus could've done just fine without the Delusive Man.

Without a guy who's twirling his mustache at me and tells me that they're "good" people.

Then I might have even bothered considering giving them the base.

Um...right. So the only reason you hate Cerberus is because of TIM? And as far as I'm aware he has never said that they are good people.

[Dave of Canada]

Reading most of this thread has me facepalm. Please, for the love of god, tell me half of your arguments aren't simply trolling.

(Except for SwM, I know he's metagaming)

[Someone With Mass]

Aeowyn wrote...

Um...right. So the only reason you hate Cerberus is because of TIM? And as far as I'm aware he has never said that they are good people.

Considering that TIM gave the okay for all those projects that I find revolting and sadistic? Yes.

And he's trying to justify every thing he's doing, while not even attempting to show any kind of remorse for those people that died just because he can have whatever.

Cerberus would've done just fine without having to introduce that idiot.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Aeowyn wrote...

Um...right. So the only reason you hate Cerberus is because of TIM? And as far as I'm aware he has never said that they are good people.

Considering that TIM gave the okay for all those projects that I find revolting and sadistic? Yes.

What projects you find "revolting and sadistic"?

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 01 décembre 2011 - 03:27 .

[Dave of Canada]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

What projects you find "revolting and sadistic"?

You should know by now he hates everything Cerberus.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 01 décembre 2011 - 03:27 .

[DiebytheSword]

My main problem with saving the base isn't saving something that may be useful against the reapers, it is literally handing it to someone I don't trust to use that information well.

From results orientated morality, if I were to save it, I would expect saving it to have a benefit for all mankind. I do not believe that to be the case. It will benefit TIM, it may benefit Cerberus, but it won't be used to save billions.

The patterns are there, buried in the data. TIM abuses any power he gets.