748 réponses à ce sujet

[Dreadwing 67]

I suspect the Illusive man found out that the Reapers need other species to form a reaper, and now he wants to ascend human beings. Also Cerberus is Bioware's baby, you allowed yourself to believe that they were on our side. The theme you hear throughout ME2 is "Don't trust the Illusive man".

"Martin Sheen, would you trust the Illusive Man."

Martin Sheen, "No I wouldn't, he's an evil man."

[pmac_tk421]

Oh god not this **** again.

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

Lollololl Cerberus fanboy

[LGTX]

Alanosborn1991 wrote...

LGTX wrote...

I think we've misidentified the high horse rider here.

High horse: Arrogantly believing oneself superior to others, often by putting down large groups of people.

I am not claiming to be superior to anyone I am just forwarding an idea I had.

Bioware would be the ones on the High Horse because they believe the Alliance is better than Cerberus. Then having us the player mindlessly put down and kill all of Cerberus in ME3

...you are considering yourself above Bioware, a large group of people who own the property you're claiming to understand better. Without even knowing the reasons for Bioware's side on handling given issue. You (and we) have no idea what Cerberus' motivations are, and yet you see this extremely generalized description of them being the main enemies in ME3 and start building argument mountains against them. Sorry, this just doesn't click with me.

[naledgeborn]

Dreadwing 67 wrote...

"Martin Sheen, would you trust the Illusive Man."

Martin Sheen, "No I wouldn't, he's an evil man."

That's just weak. Come up with a better argument from ME2's POV on why not to trust TIM? Anything you'll say will be swiftly countered. We've seen this thread happen hundreds of times already. Anti-Cerbies only "win" the argument because of Mass Effect 3.

Modifié par naledgeborn, 21 janvier 2012 - 07:56 .

[Candidate 88766]

OP, if you don't know why Cerberus is after you then why don't you wait until the game comes out before complaining about it?

Without context, the knowledge that Cerberus is any enemy is meaningless.

And also, Bioware are the guys who wrote Cerberus and TIM. They know far better than you what their motivations are and whether they are good or evil. They have backstory that we may never see.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 21 janvier 2012 - 07:58 .

[BatmanPWNS]

Shepard could agree with Cerberus in ME2 but not once did I hear Shepard say "I support Cerberus and everything they've done" in ME2.

[naledgeborn]

^ ^Backstory? LOL, They've admitted to winging the story. They use the MEwiki for ****'s sake.

Modifié par naledgeborn, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:00 .

[RideshLive]

The BioWare's fault was to make The Illusive Man such a charismatic character that now people just can't accept the fact that he always had an agenda.

Modifié par RideshLive, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:00 .

[Aimi]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

"Welcome to the evening news. Today, Canadian company 'BioWare' released Mass Effect 3, a computer 'role playing game' that allows children to play as a card carrying member of a racist, fascist, criminal organization named after a Greek god of death. The game rewards behaviors such as paying alien prostitutes to dance, exterminating pregnant princesses, and taking over enormous ancient death machines in order to assure the supremacy of their race and promote galactic purity. Also in the news tonight, we cover a puppy parade."

Not actually a god of death, but an underworld guard dog, usually depicted with three heads (but sometimes only with two).

Of course, most news outlets would probably get that wrong too.

[Ryzaki]

Cerberus was always gonna bite you in the ass.

Believing otherwise is naive.

Shepard is trying to stop the Reapers and save the galaxy full stop. Not secure human dominance (wait...no I mean Cerberus dominance no matter how much they pretend they are not all of humanity) across the galaxy.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:05 .

[Bad King]

Ryzaki wrote...

Cerberus was always gonna bite you in the ass.

Believing otherwise is naive.

Shepard is trying to stop the Reapers and save the galaxy full stop. Not secure human dominance (wait...no I mean Cerberus dominance no matter how much they pretend they are not all of humanity) across the galaxy.

Not necessarily- this was something BioWare decided between ME2 and ME3. They portrayed Cerberus as ambiguous in ME2- there was nothing to hint that they would turn on you in ME3. It's likely that Cerberus were made into antagonists in order to make gameplay more fun since we would otherwise be fighting mainly husks.

[NPH11]

 
Nothing you actually said had anything to do with Cerberus not being evil, so I'm a little confused as to why Bioware needs to get off a "Cerberus is evil" high horse. They're evil. They are willing to let over half the galaxy fry if it will put humanity on top and they have no qualms about servicing many (including humans) for the "greater good". Such lines of thinking are usually seen as evil. 
 

Alanosborn1991 wrote... 
 
-Keep Collector Base (Make own Reapers, learn how to control Reapers?) 

 
Making creatures that have the power to eliminate entire races and that we actually know nothing about (except that any attempted experimentation has ended in failure) would be considered an evil (not to mention stupid) ideal. As would attempting to control those same creatures. Especially when that control is held by a terrorist organization. 
 

Alanosborn1991 wrote... 
 
-Give Legion to Cerberus (Probably to learn more about how to control the Geth) 

 
Same as above, basically. Experimenting with Geth tends to end poorly and putting a terrorist organization with little morals in control is generally an evil ideal. 
 

Alanosborn1991 wrote... 
 
-Keep David in Atlas Station for study on how to control the Geth 

 
Now we're putting someone through a living hell to achieve the above. Again, evil. And this time we get to see Cerberus' "greater good" mentality show through. 
 

Alanosborn1991 wrote... 
 
-Support Illusive Man but never officially (Heaven forbid Shephard actually makes decisons on who to side with, less it confuse the 10 yr old Gears of War, COD gamer) 
-Others I forgot 
 
But now it seems the Illusive Man just wants to throw Shephard out the window, saying he doesnt need him/her anymore. 
 
Yet the Illsuive Man brought Shephard back, gave him/her the Normandy back and agrees that if they lose Shephard humanity will follow. 
 
So why does he throw Shephard away? Why cant we contact the Illusive Man and work with him? Take Mass Effect 3 in a different direction? 
 
Being a Renegade means stopping the Reapers at any cost. Shephard even says this but I guess working with Cerberus again even though he was in all of ME2 is too high of a cost?  

 
Why does he do all of these things? Possibly because Shepard is an active threat to his control of Cerberus? Possibly for other reasons that will be revealed when the game actually comes out? Possibly because he runs a terrorist organization and isn't exactly known for being trustworthy? 
 

Alanosborn1991 wrote... 
 
After Shep leaves Earth a Shep who has supported TIM in the past should be contacted by TIM in the Table room place. 
 
TIM says how they found the Prothean Artifact on Mars that will help stop the Reapers. Unfortunatly going along with this will mean instead of Cerberus hounding Shephard it will be the Alliance! 
 
Liara, VS, Anderson, Hackett and all Alliance forces will be enemys from now on. Instead of Liara we get Kai Leng as a squadmate and your job for the rest of ME3 is to gather everyone around Cerberus's plan. 

 
Raises the questions of how Cerberus found this Prothean Mystery Device (PMD) and why anybody would chose to trust the shady, xenophobic terrorist organization over the Alliance Military. What Cerberus Plan? Who would chose to gather around them? 
 
It still astounds me that people side with Cerberus. They are bad people! They have few moral values! They are willing to sacrifice many innocent people to further their own goals! They are a terrorist organization! They have never proven to be trustworthy in any way! 
 
I mean, I love Martin Sheen's voice as much as the next guy, but I would never give any sort of power to the Illusive Man. He ultimately doesn't care about anybody other than himself and possibly a small group of elites. It is completely believable that he would betray Shepard if he felt he could gain from it.

naledgeborn wrote...

Dreadwing 67 wrote...

"Martin Sheen, would you trust the Illusive Man."

Martin Sheen, "No I wouldn't, he's an evil man."

That's just weak. Come up with a better argument from ME2's POV on why not to trust TIM? Anything you'll say will be swiftly countered. We've seen this thread happen hundreds of times already. Anti-Cerbies only "win" the argument because of Mass Effect 3.

If you're restricting the scope to ME2 it is obviously harder to come up with support for not trusting TIM. He's spending the whole game trying to get Shepard on his side. Allowing Shepard to walk into a trap on the Collector's Ship doesn't exactly convince me of his good intentions. Attempting to aquire the Collector Base is arguably a bad idea, considering how meddling in Reaper tech seems to consistently fail.

If you want to widen that scope a bit (but you won't because it will just ruin your argument), his past actions dictate things quite nicely. Detonating ships carrying Eezo over human colonies could be seen as an evil act for sure. Authorizing experimentation on children is an evil act. act.

It's fairly easy to say that the man only cares to further his own goals, that's where the "greater good" mentality comes in. But many people would consider that sort of mentality a generally bad mentality to have.

Modifié par NPH11, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:09 .

[Ryzaki]

Bad King wrote..
Not necessarily- this was something BioWare decided between ME2 and ME3. They portrayed Cerberus as ambiguous in ME2- there was nothing to hint that they would turn on you in ME3. It's likely that Cerberus were made into antagonists in order to make gameplay more fun since we would otherwise be fighting mainly husks.

Cerberus have been antagonists since ME1. (Remeber all those nice side missions where Shep was fighting them and wiping out their bases?) This isn't something that was suddenly decided. They weren't even that ambigious in ME2 either. (Overlord, Jack, them spreading rumors about Shep). In ME2 it becomes  a "working with the devil." situation.

Not seeing that at all. ME2 even ends on a very hostile note (that isn't avoidable no matter what kind of Shep you're playing) with Cerberus.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:12 .

[Labrev]

Alanosborn1991 wrote...

To me this series is about choice. Am I mistaken?

In Mass Effect 2 you could support Cerberus is several ways

-Keep Collector Base (Make own Reapers, learn how to control Reapers?)
-Give Legion to Cerberus (Probably to learn more about how to control the Geth)
-Keep David in Atlas Station for study on how to control the Geth
-Support Illusive Man but never officially (Heaven forbid Shephard actually makes decisons on who to side with, less it confuse the 10 yr old Gears of War, COD gamer)
-Others I forgot

But now it seems the Illusive Man just wants to throw Shephard out the window, saying he doesnt need him/her anymore.

All of those things can be done in spite of Cerberus, so it does not prove loyalty.

-- Collector Base: too important not to use against Reapers, even if Shep hates Cerberus.
-- Legion to Cerberus: Shepard hates geth based on his history with them, decides he'd rather have someone study it than take a chance with keeping (aside from the fact that TIM might not think you'd even consider activating it yourself to add to the squad, so thereby handing it to him just seems like the obvious side effect of merely finding it).
-- David to Cerberus: again, nothing more than Shepard deciding the project is to important to stop, not a personal endorsement of Cerberus. Again, his history would play a role as well.
-- Sensitive data: you're working for him, he asked you to get it back, you give him back what's rightfully his (and get some funding from his end for doing it). How's he to know you'd consider keeping it or uploading it to the Alliance?

Reasons TIM would still not trust Shepard:

-- Shepard never joined voluntarily.
-- Shepard's history working with aliens puts him at odds with the personalities TIM actually trusts (like Kai Leng).
-- Shepard's only goal in life is destroying the Reapers. Come ME3, that's in direct conflict with Cerberus's goals, as the devs/writers have said themselves.
-- A cunning Shepard could pretend to agree to work for him, only to opportunely stab him in the back. TIM would not take that risk even if Shepard were possibly genuine.

TIM brought Shepard back for one thing only: to lead a small team successfully to/from the O4 relay, defeat the Collectors. You proved you could do it as a Spectre - small team vs. impossible odds - but otherwise have no appeal of long-term cooperation.

Sorry, you can only work for an employer if they want you. You can't go back to the council in ME2, you can't go back to Cerberus in ME3. End of story.

[AlexXIV]

Bad King wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Cerberus was always gonna bite you in the ass.

Believing otherwise is naive.

Shepard is trying to stop the Reapers and save the galaxy full stop. Not secure human dominance (wait...no I mean Cerberus dominance no matter how much they pretend they are not all of humanity) across the galaxy.

Not necessarily- this was something BioWare decided between ME2 and ME3. They portrayed Cerberus as ambiguous in ME2- there was nothing to hint that they would turn on you in ME3. It's likely that Cerberus were made into antagonists in order to make gameplay more fun since we would otherwise be fighting mainly husks.

Well ambigious is not very trustworthy in my book. They have done questionable things. If I was Shepard and had to work with them I would at least make sure first that they do what I say, when I say it. As in securing their loyality. As things went to the end of ME2 there was no such loyality between Shep and Cerberus, or Shep and TIM. With the exception of Seboist, who's femShep became TIM's boytoy.

[Someone With Mass]

So...they're evil now, when they're against Shepard? Okay.

Then again, with TIM being the ultimate control freak, I'm surprised the "declaration of war" against Shepard didn't happen sooner, since he/she made it pretty clear early on that they're going to destroy the Reapers instead of controlling them.

[Phaedon]

"High horse"

Oh, goodie. The "You are playing the hollier than thou, card!" card.

No really. What's good about the motivation of getting one of the biggest political players even higher? At best, it's not moral or immoral. Though I'd certainly call the tactics that the US and the USSR used during the Cold War quite immoral.

When they screw even that up, with despicable methods, you pretty much lose any redeeming qualities you ever had.

Modifié par Phaedon, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:18 .

[Phaedon]

Luc0s wrote...
Here we go again, with the "Cerberus = evil lolololol" bullcrap. ;


Cerberus is not evil. "Evil" is only a matter of perspective. What is evil in the eyes of person X might not be evil in the eyes of person Y.

"X does never equal Y, because from the eyes of a different observer, X may potentially not be Y."

Dreadwing 67 wrote...

I suspect the Illusive man found out that the Reapers need other species to form a reaper, and now he wants to ascend human beings. Also Cerberus is Bioware's baby, you allowed yourself to believe that they were on our side. The theme you hear throughout ME2 is "Don't trust the Illusive man". 

"Martin Sheen, would you trust the Illusive Man."

Martin Sheen, "No I wouldn't, he's an evil man."

It's actually a bit funny that Martin got to star as TIM, as they have diametrically opposing beliefs, both in politics and ethics.

Modifié par Phaedon, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:21 .

[AtreiyaN7]

I'm pretty sure that nothing like this will even remotely happen - otherwise the people complaining about Cerberus/TIM in the leaked script probably wouldn't be complaining about it. That aside, BioWare isn't on a high horse in my opinion. Seriously, are you saying they're on a high horse because the terrorist organization that they created/designed (Cerberus) is NOT suddenly portrayed as good guys/heroes and a viable option over the Alliance military? I still remember with zero fondness the multiple Cerberus experiments gone wrong, the murder of Admiral Kahoku, etc. I don't think we're mindlessly putting down/killing Cerberus thanks to past experiences. If people want to ignore those past experiences and pretend Cerberus is heroic/noble, uh, yeah, suuuuure - go ahead.

[Gorosaur]

naledgeborn wrote...

^ ^Backstory? LOL, They've admitted to winging the story. They use the MEwiki for ****'s sake.

This statement has always annoyed the hell out of me.

The use of MEWiki was brought up by a quote from Mac Walters praising the article and saying that sometimes he even uses it. For some reason, people assume that because Mac is the head writer that he must know every minute detail about the series he's writing. This is not a scenario like Game of Thrones or Harry Potter where you have a singular writer working on a project that must know the entire details of their universe. A writing team is used, somewhere around ten people, when working on the game. Different areas of the universe, different characters, levels, etc. are delegated to different members of the team and therefore not everyone will always be on the same page all the time about what's going on with different aspects of the world. The same thing happens with television shows etc. 

Now entertain this idea for a second. Mac is rather writing a rough draft for a level or is reviewing a plot point written by another writer. An idea comes up that may contradict something that he remembers about Mass Effect canon. He tries to contact the writer, but they are unavailible and decides that for the moment he may as well find an alternative source to back check on. Luckily, there is a free online database that contains a ton of information on the universe that he can double check on. Then later on he checks it with other writers once he refreshes his memory.

Also keep in mind that Mac never specifically stated that the MEwiki is used in the process of writing the game. For all we know he could have checked out in his spair time out of curiosity. I know if I had a wikia page dedicated to one of my creative works I would check it out just for fun.

[OmegaBlue0231]

Simple, Shep wants to destroy the reapers and T.I.M probably does not.

And don't kid yourself, they are not good. The only people who were good in the organization, the Normandy's crew, were never told about the things they've done in the past and still do (like kidnapping, murder, implating Reaper tech into people, threatening to blow up a space station).

Modifié par OmegaBlue0231, 21 janvier 2012 - 08:42 .

[KotorEffect3]

These threads are always fun.

[Bad King]

AlexXIV wrote...

Bad King wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Cerberus was always gonna bite you in the ass.

Believing otherwise is naive.

Shepard is trying to stop the Reapers and save the galaxy full stop. Not secure human dominance (wait...no I mean Cerberus dominance no matter how much they pretend they are not all of humanity) across the galaxy.

Not necessarily- this was something BioWare decided between ME2 and ME3. They portrayed Cerberus as ambiguous in ME2- there was nothing to hint that they would turn on you in ME3. It's likely that Cerberus were made into antagonists in order to make gameplay more fun since we would otherwise be fighting mainly husks.

Well ambigious is not very trustworthy in my book. They have done questionable things. If I was Shepard and had to work with them I would at least make sure first that they do what I say, when I say it. As in securing their loyality. As things went to the end of ME2 there was no such loyality between Shep and Cerberus, or Shep and TIM. With the exception of Seboist, who's femShep became TIM's boytoy.

But all the way through ME2, it was strongly implied that TIM wanted to take the fight to the reapers as much as Shepard- he supports curing the genophage and peace between the quarians and geth. The ambiguity was
mainly based around his methods- how much involvement did TIM have in the Teltin project? It was left up to the player to decide whether the unethical actions at Teltin was supported by TIM or whether he was against it.

TIM however seems to have backslid- instead of trying to save the genophage cure, he's trying to sabotage it, and instead of putting Cerberus resources into directly fighting the reapers, he seems to be ignoring them and hindering the allies. Cerberus's transformation into an antagonist is not very consistent with their role as an ambiguous, untrustworthy ally in ME2. It doesn't necessarily mean a retcon, but to claim "lol it was obvious all along" is false if you look at the context of ME2.

Modifié par Bad King, 21 janvier 2012 - 09:03 .