1482 réponses à ce sujet

[jabajack]

Given the short time span between the end of ME2 and the Reapers arrival does TIM have enough time to work out the kinks of any tech he finds? Indoctrination and other dangers seem highly likely. So it could be that we'll get punched in the gut no matter what...though what type of punch is still our choice.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Indeed. Sheppard should have killed himself rather than destroy the core. Or call for help and hunker somewhere and wait. Anything BUT destroyingthe giant piece of evidence.
But Shepard is just that moronic.

Even if it was Cerberus that got him in that situation in the first place and pretty much forced his hand.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Indeed. Sheppard should have killed himself rather than destroy the core. Or call for help and hunker somewhere and wait. Anything BUT destroyingthe giant piece of evidence.
But Shepard is just that moronic.

Even if it was Cerberus that got him in that situation in the first place and pretty much forced his hand.

Cerberuses fauilt? Nah, it's Shepards. He is the one that destroyed the evidence.
Shepard didn't have to go to the core. Like I said - he could have called hunkered down in a defensibe position and call for aid. Or die for the greater good.


Weren't you the one who blamed Cerberus for Horizon?
Why arne't you singing "the collectors forced their hand" tune there?

I know you poeple love to bash on Cerberus, but it's funny that you cannot think of anything else the Cerberus could have done (or not done) that would result in LESS dead people.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 28 janvier 2012 - 10:46 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

jabajack wrote...

Given the short time span between the end of ME2 and the Reapers arrival does TIM have enough time to work out the kinks of any tech he finds? Indoctrination and other dangers seem highly likely. So it could be that we'll get punched in the gut no matter what...though what type of punch is still our choice.

Unknown. Note that at time we still have no idea when the reapers will come.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Cerberuses fauilt? Nah, it's Shepards. He is the one that destroyed the evidence.
Shepard didn't have to go to the core. Like I said - he could have called hunkered down in a defensibe position and call for aid. Or die for the greater good.

Or Cerberus could have found a way to safely shut down the core while they were setting up their little facility, or at least move the Reaper away from the natural hazard and then disable the core. You know, the core that was preventing the Normandy from leaving and was more than likely preventing that aid to come and help as well.

I guess common sense isn't a job requirement for Cerberus employees. That would make Shepard's work far too easy.

[Iakus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Reading into things, aren't we?
Projectio nadn personalization is quite common in the human language..we're usualyl not even aware of it. When taking about their footbal teams, people often say "we"..like they are part of it.

So no - there's nothing indication TIM wants ot RULE ZE WORLD.
If he wanted that, he would have run for president/Councilor. Not spend 20 years in the dark trying to fight the reapers.

This was more than a simple pronoun, though.  This is something TIM outright states:  "Cerberus is humanity".  TIM will do anything to advance Cerberus' agenda.  And he will kidnap, torture, kill anyone, alien or human, who gets in his way.

Becoming a president or a Councilor might have made him famous.  But that wouldn't make him powerful, because he'd still be constrained by laws and public image.   Even Spectres ultimately answer to to the Council. Fame doesn't equal power.  Power equals power.  From the shadows, the Illusive man can exert all the power he likes.  And Reaper tech would give him a lot.

Huh..this "argument" again.Cerberus isn't nearkly as inefficient as poeple claim.
And even if Cerb looses people - so what? They are Cerberus personell and you don't care about them, right?

I dunno.  I've grown kinda fond of the useful idiots/non true-believers the Normandy got stocked with. 

And we've seen Cerberus has a horrificly high body count given how small the group is supposed to be.  Maybe it's so small because of the body count. Consider

Derelict Reaper
Teltin facility
Project Overlord
Even Lazarus Station only had two survivors, because one scientist got a better offer from the Shadow Broker.
Then there's the many bases Shepard storms in ME1 and the one Corporal Toombs attacks

With safety and security protocols this pathetic, Not giving them a base full of Reaper tech becomes a no-brainer.  They're evil, or incompetant, or both.

Modifié par iakus, 28 janvier 2012 - 11:06 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Cerberuses fauilt? Nah, it's Shepards. He is the one that destroyed the evidence.
Shepard didn't have to go to the core. Like I said - he could have called hunkered down in a defensibe position and call for aid. Or die for the greater good.

Or Cerberus could have found a way to safely shut down the core while they were setting up their little facility, or at least move the Reaper away from the natural hazard and then disable the core. You know, the core that was preventing the Normandy from leaving and was more than likely preventing that aid to come and help as well.

I guess common sense isn't a job requirement for Cerberus employees. That would make Shepard's work far too easy.

What? Nothing was preventing the Normandy..The ME field was preventing Shepard.
And did it ever occur to you that the ME field that keeps the derelict from falling, also prevents it from being moved?

You expect Cerberus to waltz in and tinker wiht the core willy-nilly? That is alien tech. There are no instruction manuals - you don't just do that. I guess common sense isn't a requirement for your posts too, is it?

[Lotion Soronarr]

iakus wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Reading into things, aren't we?
Projectio nadn personalization is quite common in the human language..we're usualyl not even aware of it. When taking about their footbal teams, people often say "we"..like they are part of it.

So no - there's nothing indication TIM wants ot RULE ZE WORLD.
If he wanted that, he would have run for president/Councilor. Not spend 20 years in the dark trying to fight the reapers.

This was more than a simple pronoun, though.  This is something TIM outright states:  "Cerberus is humanity".  TIM will do anything to advance Cerberus' agenda.  And he will kidnap, torture, kill anyone, alien or human, who gets in his way.

Becoming a president or a Councilor might have made him famous.  But that wouldn't make him powerful, because he'd still be constrained by laws and public image.   Even Spectres ultimately answer to to the Council. Fame doesn't equal power.  Power equals power.  From the shadows, the Illusive man can exert all the power he likes.  And Reaper tech would give him a lot.

Again, youre reading too muhc into it. What does that sentance mean? What can it mean?Cerberus works for the benefit of humanity. In that context, it is the future of humanity. It is humanity. See how easy it is?

Also, a President or councilor he would have a LOT more power and resources than he has now. A LOT. Even with all the restriuctions in place.
If power is all he wanted, he would have gone into politics - where all power-hungry people go.

And we've seen Cerberus has a horrificly high body count given how small the group is supposed to be.  Maybe it's so small because of the body count. Consider

Or maybe the writers just fail at creating a consistent and believable world. If they claim A, but show B and tell you C.... which is it?

With safety and security protocols this pathetic,

Name one faction whos' security wasn't an epic faliure.

Citadel? Saren breached it.
Turian prison? Shep broke out?
Collector base/ship? Shep trashed it.
Sarens base? Nuked.
Alliance base onthe moon? Shadow Brokers base?
etc, etc...

It's a common problem with all action settings. In order to move hte story along, security has to be pathetic. Otherwise, you'd end up playing a Oceans 11 game. Not that I wouldn't mind long, intricate preparations and planing mind you...

[AlexXIV]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

jabajack wrote...

Given the short time span between the end of ME2 and the Reapers arrival does TIM have enough time to work out the kinks of any tech he finds? Indoctrination and other dangers seem highly likely. So it could be that we'll get punched in the gut no matter what...though what type of punch is still our choice.

Unknown. Note that at time we still have no idea when the reapers will come.

Well we know they come 'soon'.

[Iakus]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Again, youre reading too muhc into it. What does that sentance mean? What can it mean?Cerberus works for the benefit of humanity. In that context, it is the future of humanity. It is humanity. See how easy it is?

From the context it sounds like the benefit of humanity is whatever Cerberus, and by extension, The Illusive Man, says it is.  And given their actions against  human citizens of both the Systems Alliance and the Terminus, I'd say my interpretation is pretty darn valid.

Also, a President or councilor he would have a LOT more power and resources than he has now. A LOT. Even with all the restriuctions in place.
If power is all he wanted, he would have gone into politics - where all power-hungry people go.

Resources maybe.  But with the spotlight on them, they don't have the freedom to use them as much as I'm sure Jack Harper would like.  Laws, the press, political rivals all watching what he's doing.

As the Illusive Man, he answers to no one, and can do whatever he likes with his resources, which are still considerable.

And we've seen Cerberus has a horrificly high body count given how small the group is supposed to be.  Maybe it's so small because of the body count. Consider

Or maybe the writers just fail at creating a consistent and believable world. If they claim A, but show B and tell you C.... which is it?

I admit, you have a point there.  ME1 Cerberus and ME2 Cerberus are completely different animals on many levels.

Name one faction whos' security wasn't an epic faliure.

Citadel? Saren breached it.
Turian prison? Shep broke out?
Collector base/ship? Shep trashed it.
Sarens base? Nuked.
Alliance base onthe moon? Shadow Brokers base?
etc, etc...

It's a common problem with all action settings. In order to move hte story along, security has to be pathetic. Otherwise, you'd end up playing a Oceans 11 game. Not that I wouldn't mind long, intricate preparations and planing mind you...

All but one (Saren attacking the Citadel, and even there he had the Conduit and a small army of geth to work with) of your examples were performed by Shepard.  Who is, of course, the hero.  Most of the examples of Cerberus incompetance were done when Shepard was nowhere near at the time.  We only hear about it after the fact.  Not the best way to show how ruthlessly efficient your erstwhile ally is...

Modifié par iakus, 28 janvier 2012 - 11:48 .

[ParagonForLife]

Cerberus actions are evil plain and simple they sacrfice anyone to achive there goals the illusive man will kill humans to save humans? theres no logic in that humanity needs to follow its own path not one that one man thinks is best Cerberus says they do this all for humanity but will we even have anything about us to be called human we will be less then animals turning on each other and killing each other

[Dean_the_Young]

ParagonForLife wrote...

Cerberus actions are evil plain and simple they sacrfice anyone to achive there goals the illusive man will kill humans to save humans? theres no logic in that

Yes. There is. It's the same logic that explains why police officers exist. It's the same logic that dictates military deployments. It even goes into the basic tenant of investment capitalism. It even exists in agriculture by the process known as 'pruning.'


Value, however you define it whether in dollars or lives or influence, is not a static thing you never expend in order to protect it. The expansion of value often requires the expenditure of value.

You spend money to make money. You send soldiers into danger in order to create security. You use police on the the citizenry to protect the greater whole of the citizenry.

humanity needs to follow its own path not one that one man thinks is best

If a human produced by human culture with humanistic beliefs can't be considered to be pursuing a human path, this sentence has no meaning.

Cerberus says they do this all for humanity but will we even have anything about us to be called human we will be less then animals turning on each other and killing each other

Besides the hyperbole, how is that less than animal? Do you have any idea of what nature entails?

More to the point, have you watched the news to see what humanity entails?

[AlexXIV]

Cerberus ain't the police. They are 'evil' if the term exists. They just happen to fight the same enemy, which are the Reapers. Other than that they are enemy to everything that is just and or fair. They may be the lesser evil, alas we don't need them, so it is not a question of choosing the lesser evil.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 29 janvier 2012 - 02:13 .

[Dean_the_Young]

AlexXIV wrote...

Cerberus ain't the police.

No one said they were, Alex.

They are 'evil' if the term exists. They just happen to fight the same enemy, which are the Reapers.

By various standards, this would be an inherent contradiction.

Cerberus is institutionally amoral, but many standards distinguish between an amoral outlook and an utterly evil character. Some on the basis that evil can not do good: others that overall effect is the important criteria.

Other than that they are enemy to everything that is just and or fair.

They aren't.

They may be the lesser evil, alas we don't need them, so it is not a question of choosing the lesser evil.

Necessity has never been the only basis for working with a lesser evil.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 29 janvier 2012 - 02:18 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Saphra Deden wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Cerberus ain't the police. They are 'evil' if the term exists.

"Evil" is a useless term.

Well, as Alex used it. It certainly has plenty of uses in better contexts.

[JimboGee]

No I'm sorry Cerberus isn't evil. Just because a corporation does bad things does not make them evil. Humans have been put down for so long that I'm starting to be won over by Cerberus. Yeah ok they commit all these acts but no worse than say, the genophage.Personally the writing in Mass Effect 2 irks me because no matter how much you agree the game still acts like you were forced into being on their team.

[AlexXIV]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Cerberus ain't the police.

No one said they were, Alex.

They are 'evil' if the term exists. They just happen to fight the same enemy, which are the Reapers.

By various standards, this would be an inherent contradiction.

Cerberus is institutionally amoral, but many standards distinguish between an amoral outlook and an utterly evil character. Some on the basis that evil can not do good: others that overall effect is the important criteria.

Other than that they are enemy to everything that is just and or fair.

They aren't.

They may be the lesser evil, alas we don't need them, so it is not a question of choosing the lesser evil.

Necessity has never been the only basis for working with a lesser evil.

Tbh what really makes it hard for me to discuss this topic is the rather bad writing on Bioware's side. I would never have sided with Cerberus to begin with. But since we get railroaded and this serves as an excuse for our actual team (alliance/council) to distrust us we have no option but Cerberus. So we are led to believe there is no other option. But actually we just don't know an option because the game is written that way. Starting with Shep's death/ressurection and then upon our return for some reason having no choice but to work with Cerberus instead of returning to the Council/Alliance.

TIM is an opportunist for me. He will use any situation to his advantage. Even the Reaper threat. He spread rumors about 'Shep being with Cerberus' to cut Shepard off Alliance channels. Aka TIM knew the Alliance/Council would not really trust Shepard anymore. Of course Shepard could have returned to the Alliance and handed them the Normandy. But not in ME2 because the writers decided it. Instead the Council/Alliance let Shepard fly around with a Cerberus vessel with even an obvious Cerberus logo on it and an AI in it even though they are illegal. Nobody even asks if 'my' Shepard is ok with that. We get railroaded to Shep deciding to work with Cerberus under hilarious circumstances.

The point is we only get to know one side. We know next to nothing about what the Alliance/Council do while Shep was away. Not to mention that we get reset back to the start of ME1 where the Council denies the existance of Reapers even though one crashed right on their doorstep. Obviously Cerberus have a better chance to find a derelict Reaper somewhere in the galaxy than the Council/Alliance have a chance to find one if it crashes right into the Citadel Tower.

Not sure if this explains it well, but what I mean to say is that nothing makes sense. It is pointless to argue about whether we have other choices that Cerberus because Bioware were so focused on making up a scenario in which Shepard HAS TO side with Cerberus and did it so badly that I am really at the point to ignore large parts of the plot. At least before I play ME3 and see if they manage to make sense after all or ... well ... if they ruin another franchise after DA.

Seriously, the worst thing I have ever done in ME was starting to think and discuss the game on here. Because some days I just can't stop shaking my head at the way Bioware writes a plot. I don't know if it is really that hard in a video game or if it is hard to get good writers for video games. Either way I slowly start thinking that  a good story and video games just don't go along.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 29 janvier 2012 - 02:45 .

[KotorEffect3]

Saphra Deden wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Cerberus ain't the police. They are 'evil' if the term exists.

"Evil" is a useless term.

Sure try to excuse an evil act by dismissing  evil as a term.  Not calling it evil does not make it less evil.

[AlexXIV]

JimboGee wrote...

No I'm sorry Cerberus isn't evil. Just because a corporation does bad things does not make them evil. Humans have been put down for so long that I'm starting to be won over by Cerberus. Yeah ok they commit all these acts but no worse than say, the genophage.Personally the writing in Mass Effect 2 irks me because no matter how much you agree the game still acts like you were forced into being on their team.

What really bothers me is the notion that 'doing bad things' is considered ok because 'everyone is doing it'. With this line of thought we are heading right into an age of anarchy.

[Iakus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Cerberus is institutionally amoral, but many standards distinguish between an amoral outlook and an utterly evil character. Some on the basis that evil can not do good: others that overall effect is the important criteria.

Once you get to the point where you're feeding people to thresher maws and injecting survivors with thresher maw venom to see what happens, does it really matter?

[Dean_the_Young]

AlexXIV wrote...

Tbh what really makes it hard for me to discuss this topic is the rather bad writing on Bioware's side. I would never have sided with Cerberus to begin with. But since we get railroaded and this serves as an excuse for our actual team (alliance/council) to distrust us we have no option but Cerberus. So we are led to believe there is no other option. But actually we just don't know an option because the game is written that way. Starting with Shep's death/ressurection and then upon our return for some reason having no choice but to work with Cerberus instead of returning to the Council/Alliance.

That's not so much bad writing as much as it is writing you don't agree with.

Bad writing would be the manner in which Bioware did it (Shepard agreeing pretty quickly), not the point of it (that Cerberus is the only group free to do it).

TIM is an opportunist for me. He will use any situation to his advantage. Even the Reaper threat. He spread rumors about 'Shep being with Cerberus' to cut Shepard off Alliance channels. Aka TIM knew the Alliance/Council would not really trust Shepard anymore. Of course Shepard could have returned to the Alliance and handed them the Normandy. But not in ME2 because the writers decided it. Instead the Council/Alliance let Shepard fly around with a Cerberus vessel with even an obvious Cerberus logo on it and an AI in it even though they are illegal. Nobody even asks if 'my' Shepard is ok with that. We get railroaded to Shep deciding to work with Cerberus under hilarious circumstances.

You're shifting tracks. I'll just assume this was intended to be more of the 'didn't like the direction' thing.

The point is we only get to know one side. We know next to nothing about what the Alliance/Council do while Shep was away. Not to mention that we get reset back to the start of ME1 where the Council denies the existance of Reapers even though one crashed right on their doorstep. Obviously Cerberus have a better chance to find a derelict Reaper somewhere in the galaxy than the Council/Alliance have a chance to find one if it crashes right into the Citadel Tower.

Our perspective is always limited. In ME1, we only knew one side of Cerberus.

I certainly won't argue that they could have done much better. Continuing the Council-Geth War would have made an excellent basis for why the Council was too busy to focus on such a minor issue, still leaving Cerberus the only game in town (for its willingness and ability to operate in the Terminus). The Reaper denial plot was also pointless, since it could only last for one game and the Reapers are a powerful enough force that even years of frantic preparation could still turn into a near-victory.

Not sure if this explains it well, but what I mean to say is that nothing makes sense. It is pointless to argue about whether we have other choices that Cerberus because Bioware were so focused on making up a scenario in which Shepard HAS TO side with Cerberus and did it so badly that I am really at the point to ignore large parts of the plot. At least before I play ME3 and see if they manage to make sense after all or ... well ... if they ruin another franchise after DA.

Your problem is that you're rambling from point to point. The clearest you've given is that you don't like how they did it, but that seems to be blurring with that you don't like what they've done either.

Seriously, the worst thing I have ever done in ME was starting to think and discuss the game on here. Because some days I just can't stop shaking my head at the way Bioware writes a plot. I don't know if it is really that hard in a video game or if it is hard to get good writers for video games. Either way I slowly start thinking that  a good story and video games just don't go along.

They can, but you have to have measured expectations for what constitutes 'good.' What genre you're expecting. A good war story, after all, can't be measured by the standard of a good romance story that takes place in the context of a war.

The important thing to do is recognize that what you were looking for may never have been what Bioware was offering. Bioware not meeting your expectations doesn't mean what they did was bad or that it ruined the franchise: it means your expectations were different.

[Dean_the_Young]

iakus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Cerberus is institutionally amoral, but many standards distinguish between an amoral outlook and an utterly evil character. Some on the basis that evil can not do good: others that overall effect is the important criteria.

Once you get to the point where you're feeding people to thresher maws and injecting survivors with thresher maw venom to see what happens, does it really matter?

Since that's a deliberate misrepresentation of an unknown, can I ignore it as a weak question?

[AlexXIV]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
They can, but you have to have measured expectations for what constitutes 'good.' What genre you're expecting. A good war story, after all, can't be measured by the standard of a good romance story that takes place in the context of a war.

The important thing to do is recognize that what you were looking for may never have been what Bioware was offering. Bioware not meeting your expectations doesn't mean what they did was bad or that it ruined the franchise: it means your expectations were different.

Well I was expecting that things make sense. So yeah, my expectations were different.

[Dean_the_Young]

AlexXIV wrote...

Well I was expecting that things make sense. So yeah, my expectations were different.

That's vague enough as to be meaningless. You have to define better: what would you consider a sensible premise, and what wouldn't you.


You've argued against multiple things simaltaneously: the only one I particularly find non-sensical is the Council not believing in the Reapers.

The rest is flawed execution, not senseless premise. That the Council might not want to get involved in the Terminus? Plenty of reasons that could make sense. Greater priorities elsewhere. A lack of desire for a Terminus War.

That Shepard would end up having to work with Cerberus? Reasonable, depending on the circumstances. Cerberus has the ability to operate where the Alliance and Council can't, the Terminus.