1127 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

It's called propaganda. Do I need to link the explaination to you? Do you believe everything you get told in an TV ad just because it is on tv and other people fall for it? It doesn't matter what anyone else thinks about Cerberus and TIM. What is imporant is what Shepard (and you) think about them. What other people think about Cerberus may influence you but doesn't have to. Miranda and Jakob both side with Shepard, not TIM. Also the rest of the cerberus crew. Do you really think they are all idiots? In your scenario Shepard is the only one who trusts in TIM.

No one trusts TIM as a person. I don't trust TIM as a person.

However, I DO trust that TIM will take the effort to stop the reapers and I DO trust that TIM will try to use the base against the reapers, not Shepard. After all, the reapers are the biggest threat here, not Shepard. I mean, if Shepard was a threat to Cerberus, then why would they have revived him in the first place?

I mean sure, you can worry about TIM. You can mistrust him all you like. But shouldn't you worry more about the reapers. TIM does. In fact, he's the only person in ME2 that is actually trying to do something against the reapers. The Council still prefers to stick their head into the sand and the Alliance to too focussed on Cerberus that they forget to see the real problem. Like it or not, but TIM is the only one actually doing something about the reaper threat and without him, you wouldn't even be here. If it wasn't for TIM, Shepard would be DEAD right now.

As much as I hate to go in world war 2 all the time I always get reminded of it. Did you know that the western world thought that Hitler is a minor threat comared the communists? Did you know they wanted to ally with Hitler against Stalin? If Hitler never betrayed Stalin they would have been allies against the western forces. Point is that the western allies were lucky that Hitler was a megalomaniac who thought he can conquer russia and fight them at the same time. Also point is that the western allies were stupid underestimating Hitler at first.

Whether the Reapers are the greater threat doesn't change the chance of TIM being dangerous enough to help the Reapers more than Shepard, voluntarily or accidently doesn't matter to the result. Just because you have a 'greater threat' it would still be foolish to ignore the smaller threats. Because any small threat may become a critical weakness. If you ever lose the big picture because you focus on only one enemy even though you have many, you invite everyone of those other enemies to catch you off guard.

[InvincibleHero]

AlexXIV wrote...

So what is your theory about your computer? That because you turned it on 1000 times it will always start working when you turn it on? I can tell you already it won't be the case. One day it won't work anymore. I am not even saying that the base is turning out to be a mistake for sure. I am saying the risk is just as high as the risk that I lose imporantant information that will make it impossible to win the war against the Reapers. Which is what base-keepers claim. That it will be impossible to win the war without the base. I can see how Shepard could fear that, but I cannot see how Shepard can be sure of it.

You said one fail invalidates theory which is patently incorrect. My theory on the computer is it works as it was designed to do. That it will someday fail to operate is not in question. You said the one failure invalidates that it worked at all. The one failure could be many things that do not invalidate the supposition.

Yeah I don't think losing the base will invalidate the paragon gameplay. Nor would I ever wish that to happen. There should be some definite benefit to keeping it while blowing it up probably doesn't have any positive other than denied tech to Cerberus or at least delayed them so R&D turned out less reaper tech since they can still comb the wreckage for stuff.

Both sides have good enough reasons to go their own way. Though I dislike how BW worded the paragon justification.  I go with what ironically should have been renegade justification the danger of the tech/keeping base intact outweighs possible benefit. It can be recaptured or it can be abused by Cerberus/Council/Alliance etc. TGhe alliance is unlikely to share its new toys either unless they trade for tech which will further their position. The council will use it to enrich their races only. Cerberus was actually the smallest consideration in my para plays. They are too weak to be a major player though obviously I was wrong about that.

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

BellaStrega wrote...

Dunning. Kruger. Effect.

Well, that's odd: This link was stripped out of my post:

http://en.wikipedia....g–Kruger_effect

That wiki article sounds like an accurate description of Alex and you indeed.

Wow, great comeback! *claps*

What's next, we shouting 'NO U!' at each other?

Sadly, my "great comeback" is pretty accurate and correct. I wish it weren't so, but it is.

And now we are psychologists, are we? Thanks for the heads up doc.

[Someone With Mass]

Luc0s wrote...

Ow please, talking about far-fetched. Get real man.

Not really. It is a common theme that someone from the project is defecting and causes big trouble for everyone becuse they felt remorse about their actions or that someone else was paying them better or that they think they could do better on their own.

I'd want to put a stop to that too.

Besides, we were never given a context to the dialogue "They're indoctrinated, they're capable of anything"

For all we know, the troopers could be brainwashed clones.

[billy the squid]

Luc0s wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

It's called propaganda. Do I need to link the explaination to you? Do you believe everything you get told in an TV ad just because it is on tv and other people fall for it? It doesn't matter what anyone else thinks about Cerberus and TIM. What is imporant is what Shepard (and you) think about them. What other people think about Cerberus may influence you but doesn't have to. Miranda and Jakob both side with Shepard, not TIM. Also the rest of the cerberus crew. Do you really think they are all idiots? In your scenario Shepard is the only one who trusts in TIM.

No one trusts TIM as a person. I don't trust TIM as a person.

However, I DO trust that TIM will take the effort to stop the reapers and I DO trust that TIM will try to use the base against the reapers, not Shepard. After all, the reapers are the biggest threat here, not Shepard. I mean, if Shepard was a threat to Cerberus, then why would they have revived him in the first place?

I mean sure, you can worry about TIM. You can mistrust him all you like. But shouldn't you worry more about the reapers. TIM does. In fact, he's the only person in ME2 that is actually trying to do something against the reapers. The Council still prefers to stick their head into the sand and the Alliance to too focussed on Cerberus that they forget to see the real problem. Like it or not, but TIM is the only one actually doing something about the reaper threat and without him, you wouldn't even be here. If it wasn't for TIM, Shepard would be DEAD right now.

TIM being what he is, I would have imagined that Shepard was a tool, to be used and disposed of when necessary. His resurrection was expedient due to his success against the Reapers and the contacts which he possessed allowing him a chance of success. TIM seems more interested in survival than that of stopping the Reapers, if it can be achieved by stoping the Reapers, then so be it, if not then I'd imagine he would consider other contingency plans, hence the plan for the collector base.

True it contains technology the Reapers don't want this cycle to possess, the same as the Thanix cannon, but they remain cheap copies of the original technology generated on a vast scale and may magnitudes more powerful. I think TIM has realised going toe to toe with The Reapers, given their superiority is not a certain outcome and has a contingency plan in place.

[AlexXIV]

InvincibleHero wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

So what is your theory about your computer? That because you turned it on 1000 times it will always start working when you turn it on? I can tell you already it won't be the case. One day it won't work anymore. I am not even saying that the base is turning out to be a mistake for sure. I am saying the risk is just as high as the risk that I lose imporantant information that will make it impossible to win the war against the Reapers. Which is what base-keepers claim. That it will be impossible to win the war without the base. I can see how Shepard could fear that, but I cannot see how Shepard can be sure of it.

You said one fail invalidates theory which is patently incorrect. My theory on the computer is it works as it was designed to do. That it will someday fail to operate is not in question. You said the one failure invalidates that it worked at all. The one failure could be many things that do not invalidate the supposition.

Yeah I don't think losing the base will invalidate the paragon gameplay. Nor would I ever wish that to happen. There should be some definite benefit to keeping it while blowing it up probably doesn't have any positive other than denied tech to Cerberus or at least delayed them so R&D turned out less reaper tech since they can still comb the wreckage for stuff.

Both sides have good enough reasons to go their own way. Though I dislike how BW worded the paragon justification.  I go with what ironically should have been renegade justification the danger of the tech/keeping base intact outweighs possible benefit. It can be recaptured or it can be abused by Cerberus/Council/Alliance etc. TGhe alliance is unlikely to share its new toys either unless they trade for tech which will further their position. The council will use it to enrich their races only. Cerberus was actually the smallest consideration in my para plays. They are too weak to be a major player though obviously I was wrong about that.

Well it depends what exactly your theory is. If your theory is that researching the base will help the war effort against the reapers and it doesn't, it is disproven. If you say the butter toast will always land on the butter side and then it doesn't it is disproven. If your theory is only vague of course then it will not be disproven by one fail of course. If you say that you get a letter almost everyday it will of course not be disproven just because you didn't get one today. Though if you said you get one every day and you didn't get one today, well, then your theory was disproven, no?

[Bleachrude]

re: TIM

I actually agree with Smudboy's review of the Lair of the SB (especially when you compare it to ME2). I much rather work for the SB than TIM. The SB actually seems more competent...

[BellaStrega]

AlexXIV wrote...

My main point is that I am not even saying that keeping the base is a bad decision. I am saying it can turn out bad. I am also admitting that destroying the base can turn out bad. What I am argueing for is that my decision to destroy it is also valid. Something you deny me. I am not the one telling other people how to play. I am not the one telling other people they are stupid or illogical if they don't play the game my way.

It really is this simple.

No matter which choice I make with the base, I feel uneasy about it. Giving it to TIM? Oh, he'll probably get his organization indoctrinated. Blow it up? Damn, what if there really was something in there to win the war?

There shouldn't be any certainty that one choice is right. I think that makes for better storytelling in this medium (video games). If you're 100% assured you made the right choice, then either the game failed, or you're missing something.

[BellaStrega]

Luc0s wrote...

Sadly, my "great comeback" is pretty accurate and correct. I wish it weren't so, but it is.

Actually, if anything, I have a tendency to underestimate myself.

http://en.wikipedia....postor_syndrome

Anyway, I'm not making astounding claims about how supersmartlogicalrational I am here. I've actually been pretty reasonable, but the responses are downright weird and rude.

Plus, I can still tell the difference between a microchip and a neuron, which I have to admit, must count for something.

Edit: Okay, I haven't been playing as nice as I could have.

Modifié par BellaStrega, 21 décembre 2011 - 12:22 .

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

As much as I hate to go in world war 2 all the time I always get reminded of it. Did you know that the western world thought that Hitler is a minor threat comared the communists? Did you know they wanted to ally with Hitler against Stalin? If Hitler never betrayed Stalin they would have been allies against the western forces. Point is that the western allies were lucky that Hitler was a megalomaniac who thought he can conquer russia and fight them at the same time. Also point is that the western allies were stupid underestimating Hitler at first.

You can't compare the reapers and Cerberus with Hitler and Stalin.

But if you do want to compare Cerberus + the Reapers with Hitler + Stalin, it would be more accurate to say that Cerberus = Stalin and Hitler = The Reapers.

The Alliance think the Collectors are a minor threat compared to Cerberus. Turns out that it's the other way around.

The Council thinks Cerberus is a threat and deny the reaper threat. Turns out the reapers are the real threat and Cerberus is actually trying to do something about it, just like WW2, where Hitler turns out to be the real threat and Stalin is actually trying to do something about it.

AlexXIV wrote...

Whether the Reapers are the greater threat doesn't change the chance of TIM being dangerous enough to help the Reapers more than Shepard, voluntarily or accidently doesn't matter to the result. Just because you have a 'greater threat' it would still be foolish to ignore the smaller threats. Because any small threat may become a critical weakness. If you ever lose the big picture because you focus on only one enemy even though you have many, you invite everyone of those other enemies to catch you off guard.

Now your just exaggerating. I agree that Cerberus can be incompentent from time to time, but to say Cerberus is helping the reapers more than Shepard is simply insane and not true. If you true think that, than you are more delusional and biased than I even thought. 

You're so scared of Cerberus that it's YOU who is caught off guard. YOU are willing to sacrifice potential intel on the reapers (the Collector base) just because you're scared as hell. "I won't let fear compromise who I am." Yeah right. Fear is the only reason you blow up that base in the first place. Though I play Paragon 90% of the time, I really hate Shepard when he blows up the Collector base and dares to say "I won't let fear compromise who I am". What a GOD-DAMN HYPOCRITE he is! That's why I never pick the 'destroy the base' option in any of my "realistic playthroughs".

I am giving historic examples of someone disregarding a small threat in favor of a supposedly bigger threat. I don't compare cerberus to **** germany per se even though there are some things they have in common.

I am exaggerating if I say Cerberus may harm us more with the base than it uses us? And saying that we lose the war without the base is ... what ... being factual? Where do you base these opinions on? Hope and fear can lead to both decisions. Whether you blow it up or keep it I can assume in both cases that you are acting out of fear and hope. Which doesn't make either choice a rational one.

[BellaStrega]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Yeah I don't think losing the base will invalidate the paragon gameplay. Nor would I ever wish that to happen. There should be some definite benefit to keeping it while blowing it up probably doesn't have any positive other than denied tech to Cerberus or at least delayed them so R&D turned out less reaper tech since they can still comb the wreckage for stuff.

Both sides have good enough reasons to go their own way. Though I dislike how BW worded the paragon justification.  I go with what ironically should have been renegade justification the danger of the tech/keeping base intact outweighs possible benefit. It can be recaptured or it can be abused by Cerberus/Council/Alliance etc. TGhe alliance is unlikely to share its new toys either unless they trade for tech which will further their position. The council will use it to enrich their races only. Cerberus was actually the smallest consideration in my para plays. They are too weak to be a major player though obviously I was wrong about that.

^^^^^

I like this argument. It makes sense, and actually makes me think about the possibilities.

[Lotion Soronarr]

AlexXIV wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
No one trusts TIM as a person. I don't trust TIM as a person.

However, I DO trust that TIM will take the effort to stop the reapers and I DO trust that TIM will try to use the base against the reapers, not Shepard. After all, the reapers are the biggest threat here, not Shepard. I mean, if Shepard was a threat to Cerberus, then why would they have revived him in the first place?

I mean sure, you can worry about TIM. You can mistrust him all you like. But shouldn't you worry more about the reapers. TIM does. In fact, he's the only person in ME2 that is actually trying to do something against the reapers. The Council still prefers to stick their head into the sand and the Alliance to too focussed on Cerberus that they forget to see the real problem. Like it or not, but TIM is the only one actually doing something about the reaper threat and without him, you wouldn't even be here. If it wasn't for TIM, Shepard would be DEAD right now.

As much as I hate to go in world war 2 all the time I always get reminded of it. Did you know that the western world thought that Hitler is a minor threat comared the communists? Did you know they wanted to ally with Hitler against Stalin? If Hitler never betrayed Stalin they would have been allies against the western forces. Point is that the western allies were lucky that Hitler was a megalomaniac who thought he can conquer russia and fight them at the same time. Also point is that the western allies were stupid underestimating Hitler at first.

Did the western world face a threat stronger than all of them together several times over? Nope.
Also, the western allies allied wiht Stalin (who wasn't any better then Hitler)

So your point - if you had any - was moot.

Whether the Reapers are the greater threat doesn't change the chance of TIM being dangerous enough to help the Reapers more than Shepard, voluntarily or accidently doesn't matter to the result. Just because you have a 'greater threat' it would still be foolish to ignore the smaller threats. Because any small threat may become a critical weakness. If you ever lose the big picture because you focus on only one enemy even though you have many, you invite everyone of those other enemies to catch you off guard.

What is foolish is being so focused on the POSSIBILTIY of a smaller threat, that you're hurting your changes against a CERTAIN greater threat.

And if Cerberus is a "small" threat, how big of a threat are other factions? Are Krogan not Dangerous? Are Geth not far more dangerous?

Why do you insist of looking at this in a 2 group way - Cerberus and Everyone Else. And threat Everyone Else as some singualr entity?

[BellaStrega]

Luc0s wrote...

Everyone with 2 brain cells feels this way. I know I did. But THINK long and hard! Is blowing up the Collector base with potential valuable tech really justified with "TIM probably get his organization indoctrinated"?

THINK what will happen whent he reapers actually arrive. People are going to get indoctrinated no matter what. We're going to lose TONS of people to huskification and indoctrination. 

So is "TIM probably gets his organization indoctrinated" really a good counter-argument against keeping the base. Does this potential risk really weight up against the potential reward?


I think, no, I KNOW that the potential rewards for keeping the base outweights the potential risks of indoctrination. When the reapers arrive, we're going to get indoctrinated anyway, so... yeah...

it's good to have absolute faith in your choices, avoids sleepless nights second-guessing yourself before those Cerberus husks trash your SR-2 stateroom.

(actually, I have no idea who does the trashing)

Anyway, yes, TIM getting Cerberus indoctrinated is a good counter-argument, At best it will neutralize Cerberus. At worst, it will add Cerberus forces to the Reaper's war machine.

People will still be huskified and indoctrinated, but I was unaware that adding more to the pile was a good plan.

[AlexXIV]

Luc0s wrote...
I think, no, I KNOW

You almost had it right. You don't know, you think you know.

[Lotion Soronarr]

AlexXIV wrote...

I am not telling you that only my opinion is what matters. I am telling you that my opinion is as good as yours. Something you dispute all day on this forum. I don't even attack your reasoning or logic unless you claim it is better than everyone else's.

No, it's not (in this case at the least).
You oppinion goes agaisnt the codex and the game. Just because oy have an oppinion, doesn't mean its valuable or good.

As to why you don't attack my reasoning and logic- because i's solid.

[Arcadian Legend]

I like this OP. He/She understands.

[Dean_the_Young]

AlexXIV wrote...

I am giving historic examples of someone disregarding a small threat in favor of a supposedly bigger threat. I don't compare cerberus to **** germany per se even though there are some things they have in common.

Human.

Led by male.

Snazzy uniforms.



That's pretty much it. Cerberus is not, and never has been portrayed as, Na Germany. All the things that made the Third Reich exceptional (ideology, the nature and degree of racism, the genocidal practices as a end to themselves, the unprovoked invasions sparking off a world war, the public cult of personality, the economy, the scientific bonkers, the all-intrusive police state, the paternalist male-dominated society) have no equivalent with Cerberus or the Illusive Man in the Mass Effect universe.

The only time Cerberus makes any meaningful approach towards having things in common is when they're indoctrinated and working with the Reapers.

[InvincibleHero]

AlexXIV wrote...

Well it depends what exactly your theory is. If your theory is that researching the base will help the war effort against the reapers and it doesn't, it is disproven. If you say the butter toast will always land on the butter side and then it doesn't it is disproven. If your theory is only vague of course then it will not be disproven by one fail of course. If you say that you get a letter almost everyday it will of course not be disproven just because you didn't get one today. Though if you said you get one every day and you didn't get one today, well, then your theory was disproven, no?

I have to ironically agree with Lotion that reaper tech always has benefits. Superior tech always leads to things which can be utilized. You are going about it the wrong way. The cost can sometimes be too high so that the benefits are not quite so shiny and may not be worth it. That is what must be weighed and neither can prove conclusively which it will be. Only BW has the answer to that. Being we know it is a game so both sides are perfectly playable so really it doesn't matter what is chosen.

Yes maybe there won't be enough time to benefit from the research, but the player aka Shepard will never know that. Your decision takes place before you find out ah ha ha your effort is futile we are almost there at the end.

BTW I would never claim I get a letter everyday, because I have experienced non-letter days. If you pull the trigger on a gun you expect it will work. When it doesn't it isn't because the gun didn't work as designed. You will always get some benefit from reaper tech is true.  Your analogy was flawed or misworded not a big deal though continuing to try and finesse it is a mistake.  No one is going to make those operational theories because they can be disproven within a few tries.