385 réponses à ce sujet

[DJBare]

Captian Cornhole wrote...
I'll cut directly to the point, sure TIM has done bad stuff (no concentration camps mind you) but it was all to counter act the serious threat of the Reapers.

Ahh, you must have missed Sanctury.

[Farbautisonn]

Hunter of Legends wrote...
I certainly hope not. His resource management is horrendous.

-So is alot of the bureaucracy we claim is "essential" today. Government is made up of a series of bureaucratic nuts and bolts that are supposed to support and enhance... but there are inter-office and inter-bureau squabbles, powerfights, resource wars etc in every government and legislative system.

Besides... in ME we usually only hear about the fiascos and atrocities of TIM and Cerberus. We rarely hear of the successes. And successes he must have had to garner such widespread support and such results. They must have been rather significant. However due to lazy storytelling those are never touched upon as it is significant to the narrative that we percieve TIM and Cerberus as "evil" and "antagonists". Bioware do not trust us to see a wider picture. And honestly, from this thread alone, I really cant blame them.

Incorrect.
There are in fact whites and blacks. Not everything is grey and to lable is such is just as ignorant and immature as saying there is only black and white.

-If there are indeed such blacks and whites they are insignificant in "mass" (no pun intended) compared to gray. There are rarely events or things that are so bad that they arent good for someone. If youre a bit of a cynic that is.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Sbri wrote...
I agree with the first point whole heartedly.  There is no need to maim and murder each other in order to "advance" humanity.  I've yet to see evidence that something vital to our future has been withheld due to ethical issues.  Do you have an example?

Do you need one?
I said so far there has been no such need..at least not on a large scope. On a smaller scope, unethical things have been done againd and againd and again..

Like for example, shooting down a highjacked passenger plane (that will be used as a bomb).

I'm not so sure as to the cimcumstances argument.

But circumstances always change things. Always.

Take for example the "killing is evil" ethical code. In self-defense? Justified (or is it?). taht's a circumstance that changes what is acceptable and what is not.

Of course, I COULD argue that killing in self-defense is evil, since all life is equal and in killing the the other guy you are placing your life above his (him trying to do the same is irreelvant, since he is evil and we're trying to be better than him).

But there you go. Circumstances can change what is acceptable and what isn't. It's only logical.

Based solely on the information we have from the game, the only helpful things Cerberus did were to a) Resurrect Shepard  Rebuild the Normandy and c) Ensure they could destroy the Collector base.

There's more ...like saving the Council (Taylor&Miranda), research and advancements that futhrered humanity, etc...

In ME3, far from helping humanity, they hindered every effort of Shepard to stop the invasion in order to forward their own adgenda. If Cerbeus had helped with the Crucible rather then do their upmost to stop it, I MIGHT have been willing to let their motives stand with regard to Sanctuary as a misguided attempt at a fall back plan.  Instead, they actively helped the Reapers.  You can claim indoctrination all you want, but at that point there is no excuse of "humanity's best interest" as, by it's very nature indoctrination causes you to work for the Reaper's best interests.  What you tell yourself is irrelevant.

Nope. You are wrong. Taking risks to save humantiy IS in humanities best interest. TIM didn't perform experimetns for s***'s and giggles. He did it to find a way to control the reapers.
And the plan would have actually worked! The game proves TIM was right. Unfortunately, he got indoctrinated and turned into Saren 2.0. Disspointing ending to say teh least.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Evrathiel wrote...

As to the 300k dead Batarians, I'd have to agree it does make Shepard quite a villain. It was either instant death or getting harvested by the Reapers. One could argue being instantly vaporized is preferred to being turned into a monstrous slaves. It's not like Shepard has a choice though, not the way BW made it play out.

sometimes life doens't give you choices you want.
Insted fo crying how BW ruined Shepard, maybe you should take it like a man and realsie that that was he ONLY sensible course of action.
There was no other way.
The idea that there ALWAYS should be and the BioWare should provide it is the most horrible idea I ever heard. 

[Arkitekt]

The thing that stroke me as out of synch with the whole story .... well at least regarding TIM, was why did he warn the reapers of the Citadel being used as a catalyst? If he wanted to control the reapers, what the heck was he doing by releasing this information to the reapers themselves?

Was that a crazy Batman gambit?

[Evrathiel]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Evrathiel wrote...

As to the 300k dead Batarians, I'd have to agree it does make Shepard quite a villain. It was either instant death or getting harvested by the Reapers. One could argue being instantly vaporized is preferred to being turned into a monstrous slaves. It's not like Shepard has a choice though, not the way BW made it play out.

sometimes life doens't give you choices you want.
Insted fo crying how BW ruined Shepard, maybe you should take it like a man and realsie that that was he ONLY sensible course of action.
There was no other way.
The idea that there ALWAYS should be and the BioWare should provide it is the most horrible idea I ever heard. 

How is what I wrote crying? I just stated the fact that Shepard had no choice, not complain about it. I know there was no other way and if I were him I would have done the same thing.

I also haven't said that there always should be a choice. Nor that BW ruined Shep as you accuse me of.

Read carefully before you jump to conclusions please.

Modifié par Evrathiel, 30 mars 2012 - 10:43 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Besides... in ME we usually only hear about the fiascos and atrocities of TIM and Cerberus. We rarely hear of the successes. And successes he must have had to garner such widespread support and such results. They must have been rather significant. However due to lazy storytelling those are never touched upon as it is significant to the narrative that we percieve TIM and Cerberus as "evil" and "antagonists". Bioware do not trust us to see a wider picture. And honestly, from this thread alone, I really cant blame them.

Declaring the -positive- achievements may soften majority of players in their crusade against Cerberus! Villainizing them was much easier, doesn't put players in hard situation to choose sides.

[Arkitekt]

Ironically you *do* have a choice in Arrival. Of course that if you go ahead and press the buttons on the console, then you will turn on the engines of the asteroid against the mass relay. The dramatic choice in Arrival is if whether you attempt to warn the Batarians or not. However, the much more influencial choice of actually choosing to ram the asteroid or not is indeed present in Arrival.

You just have to sit down and wait two hours. The alternative "ending" does occur. It does not bode well though.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Arkitekt wrote...

Ironically you *do* have a choice in Arrival. Of course that if you go ahead and press the buttons on the console, then you will turn on the engines of the asteroid against the mass relay. The dramatic choice in Arrival is if whether you attempt to warn the Batarians or not. However, the much more influencial choice of actually choosing to ram the asteroid or not is indeed present in Arrival.

You just have to sit down and wait two hours. The alternative "ending" does occur. It does not bode well though.

The Irony is no Batarian gave a damn after my warning. At the end, it didn't matter.

[Arkitekt]

Some choices are just like that. Deal with it.

[Hunter of Legends]

Farbautisonn wrote...

-If there are indeed such blacks and whites they are insignificant in "mass" (no pun intended) compared to gray. There are rarely events or things that are so bad that they arent good for someone. If youre a bit of a cynic that is.

Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot wasn't black?

I'd love to hear the justification for their actions. Ghandi and MLK were easily whites.

Remember, I'm the guy who laughs at both cynics and wide eyed idealists. You're both fools in my books.

Modifié par Hunter of Legends, 30 mars 2012 - 04:32 .

[Oldbones2]

Captian Cornhole wrote...

I think alot of us here are too quick to judge the Illusive Man's character and portray him as one of those "black and white" villains that are evil for the sake of being evil.

However, in my personal opinion this couldn't be further from the truth. The Illusive Man's goal was to "always put humanity first", now alot of the time it looked like his only motives were to gain power for himself. Which often did happen as a result from his actions, but I think of it more as a side effect from his true motives, which is humanity first. I think alot of us view TIM as a liar cause we don't see how he is improving humanity through his actions, so we instinctively go to the default assertion that TIM is just a power hungry chain smoker. After all he is the guy who wanted to control the Reapers right?

The bottom line is that The Illusive Man isn't that much different then Shepard. They both want to save humanity, bu any means possible. All the Illusive Man's actions; Overlord, Lazarus, the Pragia Facility, attacking Grissom, turning his soilders into husks, processing civilians into husks and all the other nasty **** he has done has in most cases led to some breakthough that can better humanity. Even Commander Shepard's decisions have backfired on him/her, (look at the Rachni or roles you can place squadmembers in the suicide mission) TIM and Shepard are just doing what they think is right.

Obviously the TIM is cruel and ruthless, but also can the same be said for Commander Shepard? I would say so. After all  don't ends justify the means, do they not? What is the loss of a few million people if you can save the galaxy from the Reapers? Yeah, it's tragic. But it would have worked, TIM would have controlled the Reapers if he wouldn't have gotten himself indoctrinated first. He was right all along, even Shepard has the option to control the Reapers.

In the end, The Illusive Man can be much more of a jerk then Commander Shepard, but they are nearly the same in regaurds to their goals for stopping Harbinger and his pals.

I'm pretty sure the central conflict of that character is the question, 'can the ends justify the means?"

No one is saying TIM isn't trying to do good things.  He wants to advance Humanity and stop the Reapers.

The problem is, his methods range from completely acceptable, to (in ME 2) questionable to downright mostrous (ME 3). 

It's an interesting point to note that he fails and was always going to fail. 

If he had succeeded and controlled the Reapers, saved the Galaxy and ushered in a new Golden Age for the galaxy then perhaps his horrific tactics would have been forgiven.  At the very least it would have been (probably) tolerated. 

[Volus Warlord]

TIM.. the guy we owe everything.. and hate. Lol.

[InvincibleHero]

His goal is commendable but his choices sometimes are defintiely evil. Though there is adifferent moral fiber to such strength of character. He doesn't waver from his goals though sometimes takes the quicker way instead of alternatives. Assassinating people is evil no matter what even for a good end. It can be the best solution though depending on circumstances.

[Farbautisonn]

Hunter of Legends wrote...

Farbautisonn wrote...

-If there are indeed such blacks and whites they are insignificant in "mass" (no pun intended) compared to gray. There are rarely events or things that are so bad that they arent good for someone. If youre a bit of a cynic that is.

Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot wasn't black?

I'd love to hear the justification for their actions.


Ghandi and MLK were deffinate whites.

-Not in their own perception and compared to some of the people they employed, they were more gray than black. Ruthless, hell yes. Hatefull, definately, but the deepest shade of black... not really. Even Hitler didnt send kids ****ed up on drugs into the field to open up pregnant women for ****e and giggles. And thats not even the worst that happens in africa or the far east.

Please do not think that I am not defending Hitler or any of the people you mentioned... but there have been people in history that made Hitler look like an amateur and that would have done much, much worse, if the means that Hitler had available to him had been available. 720 years before the jews were forced to wear a star of david in Germany, they were forced to do so in England. History is full of pursecution of Hate.

Some of the things that happened in the americas to the locals rival or exceed what Hitler did... and what his henchmen did. Some of the people who performed these things were pios men of the cloth and men of renown.

Ghandi and MLK... great men of history to be true. But... I dont really consider them "absolutely white". Because whilst they did great deeds indeed, they did it under an umbrella of protection, their fame, their status provided them with some kind of immunity.

For a better "white" in my book, I'd look to people like Oskar Schindler. And even he wasnt completely white.

[Hunter of Legends]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

Farbautisonn wrote...

-If there are indeed such blacks and whites they are insignificant in "mass" (no pun intended) compared to gray. There are rarely events or things that are so bad that they arent good for someone. If youre a bit of a cynic that is.

Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot wasn't black?

I'd love to hear the justification for their actions.


Ghandi and MLK were deffinate whites.

-Not in their own perception and compared to some of the people they employed, they were more gray than black. Ruthless, hell yes. Hatefull, definately, but the deepest shade of black... not really. Even Hitler didnt send kids ****ed up on drugs into the field to open up pregnant women for ****e and giggles. And thats not even the worst that happens in africa or the far east.

Please do not think that I am not defending Hitler or any of the people you mentioned... but there have been people in history that made Hitler look like an amateur and that would have done much, much worse, if the means that Hitler had available to him had been available. 720 years before the jews were forced to wear a star of david in Germany, they were forced to do so in England. History is full of pursecution of Hate.

Some of the things that happened in the americas to the locals rival or exceed what Hitler did... and what his henchmen did. Some of the people who performed these things were pios men of the cloth and men of renown.

Ghandi and MLK... great men of history to be true. But... I dont really consider them "absolutely white". Because whilst they did great deeds indeed, they did it under an umbrella of protection, their fame, their status provided them with some kind of immunity.

For a better "white" in my book, I'd look to people like Oskar Schindler. And even he wasnt completely white.

Yes, but see here is the problem with the whole "no black or white" argument. You use fantasy logic in a realistic world. Of course there are no 100% pure blacks or whites. That doesn't make them grey; Hitler may have employed people far worse than himself but he himself remains very black at heart. He KNEW what he was doing was wrong and so did Stalin.

Throwing around words like "crazy", "misguided" and "religious" does you no favors with me. Only idiots and fools follow blindly relgious fervor and into attrocities such as the Crusades.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

I categorize two different and major bright (white) groups of people.
1) True Monks (who dislike material world)
2) Honest Rulers (who advance their countries without sacking their people or others)

Sadly both groups are rare. At least people can try to be like them and get more whiteness. become light gray.

T.I.M is a dark grey, he was supposed to be necessary in great war against the reapers in ME2 ... forced to ruin his career and became villain in ME3. Indoctrination makes you morally irresponsible, but T.I.M is a screwed up *angry face*

Modifié par Jedi Sentinel Arian, 30 mars 2012 - 05:26 .

[Farbautisonn]

Hunter of Legends wrote...

Yes, but see here is the problem with the whole "no black or white" argument. You use fantasy logic in a realistic world. Of course there are no 100% pure blacks or whites. That doesn't make them grey;

-I dont use fantasy logic. I use the logic that I picked up in university and in life . There are leaders of state today in the west that rub shoulder with despots and dictators that have commited crap as individuals that boggles the mind. But they still do it.

Hitler may have employed people far worse than himself but he himself remains very black at heart. He KNEW what he was doing was wrong and so did Stalin.

-Did they now? I dont think so. I think they thought they were doing their nations and indeed the world a great favour doing what they were doing. But if you can prove otherwise, Ill happily retract my words.

Throwing around words like "crazy", "misguided" and "religious" does you no favors with me.

-Great. Because I didnt. So please stop attributing words to me that I did not employ, ok? Because I do not like to be misrepresented.

Only idiots and fools follow blindly relgious fervor and into attrocities such as the Crusades.

-Then there are likely more idiots than we like to think in the world.

Modifié par Farbautisonn, 30 mars 2012 - 05:28 .

[Yeti1069]

Uh, yeah, TIM is pretty damn evil, or being compelled to perform evil acts.  ****SPOILERS*****






There is a line between reasonable experimentation and vile abuse of human beings. Taking volunteers is one thing, but Cerberus doesn't do that. They kidnap, trick and enslave people. They torture children, slaughter thousands upon thousands of refugees under the guise of a safe haven. How is that not evil? "Come here and be sheltered from the dangers of the universe...we're just going to do some experiements on you that result in your mental degradation and death without telling you." There's stuff in the news all the time about companies or individuals performing harmful experiments on people without permission, and most of those are along the order of: "sometime over the next 40-60 years, you may develop cancer." TIM is killing people in droves now, not increasing the likelihood of their becoming sick later in life.

Let's look at what else he does, or has done.

• Tries to assassinate the galactic counsel in order to put humanity (read: Cerberus) in charge. What reason is there for this? That it will move galactic politcs along better? Last I checked, we tend to revile most of the people that have seized control of their governments for themselves throughout human history, though not all. We certainly don't look very kindly on those that have done so through subterfuge and murder.
• Experimented on children, resulting in the deaths of many.
• Actively worked against the galactic effort to meet the Reaper threat. Whatever his ideals may have been, his justifications, the fact remains that he was sabotaging the war effort. Even if he felt that controlling the Reapers was better than destroying them, losing the war with them entirely is worse than either possibility! He gambled on being able to control the Reapers successfully, and if he was wrong, everyone would be screwed, if he had his way, because the actions of Cerberus would have undermined the ability of the galaxy to mount a defense. He decided that his view was the correct one, and that the views of everyone else were wrong, or irrelevant.

Honestly, how can you possibly view any of that as reasonable, or good?

[Farbautisonn]

Yeti1069 wrote...
There is a line between reasonable experimentation and vile abuse of human beings.

-Sure there is. But even vile abuse can yield more or less indespensable results, to the point where "good people" grant them immunity for having performed them.

I believe that the ME2 Paragon path in Mordins personal quest is a nod in that direction.

Modifié par Farbautisonn, 30 mars 2012 - 05:47 .

[survivor_686]

Don't forget, he openly engages Alliance personnel in combat and attacks the installations that house their research into the Catalyst. During the middle of a war, he attack the Systems Alliance as its fighting to protect humanity, targets Grissom Academy and tried to kidnap its charges. Don't forget he clearly has military resources (cruisers, fighters, Kai Leng) and for most of the time use them to target non-reapers (Asari, Turian and Humans)

While some might argue he was indoctrinated, one must note that the Reapers have always idoctrinated individuals whom have sought power over their fellow beings (Saren, Matriach Benezia and TIM of course).

So while he may have straddled the grey line in ME2, in ME3 he jump with both feet into the evil zone.

[Hunter of Legends]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

Yes, but see here is the problem with the whole "no black or white" argument. You use fantasy logic in a realistic world. Of course there are no 100% pure blacks or whites. That doesn't make them grey;

-I dont use fantasy logic. I use the logic that I picked up in university and in life . There are leaders of state today in the west that rub shoulder with despots and dictators that have commited crap as individuals that boggles the mind. But they still do it.

Hitler may have employed people far worse than himself but he himself remains very black at heart. He KNEW what he was doing was wrong and so did Stalin.

-Did they now? I dont think so. I think they thought they were doing their nations and indeed the world a great favour doing what they were doing. But if you can prove otherwise, Ill happily retract my words.

Throwing around words like "crazy", "misguided" and "religious" does you no favors with me.

-Great. Because I didnt. So please stop attributing words to me that I did not employ, ok? Because I do not like to be misrepresented.

Only idiots and fools follow blindly relgious fervor and into attrocities such as the Crusades.

-Then there are likely more idiots than we like to think in the world.

I would never misrepresent you; I was merely saying that those who attribute the "grey" to religion/racism is a poor justification.

There are indeed white and black in our world. To not see so is a great injustice to objectivity and reality. There are indeed a large amount of idiots in the world.



I'll see about giving you that evidence. Right now the only evidence I have is in a book and I have no idea how to get that to you^_^

Modifié par Hunter of Legends, 30 mars 2012 - 05:47 .

[Farbautisonn]

Hunter of Legends wrote...
I would never misrepresent you; I was merely saying that those who attribute the "grey" to religion/racism is a poor justification.

-I agree. However you included that... "saying"... in an answer directed to me. I have to assume you are addressing me unless otherwise stated.

There are indeed white and black in our world. To not see so is a great injustice to objectivity and reality. There are indeed a large amount of idiots in the world.

-There is. But the black and white are not absolutes and there is a plethora of colours or shades of gray in between.

I'll see about giving you that evidence. Right now the only evidence I have is in a book and I have no idea how to get that to you^_^

-Use Wiki. Unless there are no sources for the article I tend to put more stock in that than mere assurances.  

[Hunter of Legends]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...
I would never misrepresent you; I was merely saying that those who attribute the "grey" to religion/racism is a poor justification.

-I agree. However you included that... "saying"... in an answer directed to me. I have to assume you are addressing me unless otherwise stated.

There are indeed white and black in our world. To not see so is a great injustice to objectivity and reality. There are indeed a large amount of idiots in the world.

-There is. But the black and white are not absolutes and there is a plethora of colours or shades of gray in between.

I'll see about giving you that evidence. Right now the only evidence I have is in a book and I have no idea how to get that to you^_^

-Use Wiki. Unless there are no sources for the article I tend to put more stock in that than mere assurances.  

I will try.

In regards to this whole "black or white" argument lets have a bit of a "ruthless calculus" argument.

You would agree that there are indeed actions that are purely "white" or "black"? For instance, killing a young child for no reason is black and helping an old lady across the street is white?

Right?

[Farbautisonn]

Hunter of Legends wrote...
In regards to this whole "black or white" argument lets have a bit of a "ruthless calculus" argument.

You would agree that there are indeed actions that are purely "white" or "black"? For instance, killing a young child for no reason is black and helping an old lady across the street is white?

Right?

-Killing a child for no reason, sure, if done by a legally sane person, would be black. Not pitch black, because there are fates that are considerably worse, even if a vic survives.

Helping an old woman across the street white? Not really. I think that falls under "common curtesy" or light gray akin to letting an elderly, disabled, pregnant or injured person have your seat in the bus. White would be the man or woman who takes a child that is not his/her own, adopts it and cares for it as if it had been her own.  "Whiter" at least.

I know Im nitpicking a bit, but Ive written whitepapers on torture in sub-sahara once. The only things in man I know to be limitless are ambition and hate.