398 réponses à ce sujet

[Massa FX]

Punish the remaining Asari for hiding Prothean tech, the remaining Batarians for hiding Prothean tech, the Humans for ... Mars Prothean tech (for being stupid and not looking deeper after the initial discovery... or just plain hiding the archives).

But, is any punishment worth it at this point? No. Now (post Reaper invasion) is not the time for punishments. Organics need to stay united and working to rebuild, not metting out fines. There's been enough suffering already, and now that so many are dead, the criminals and crazies are going to try to seize power. Lawlessness will soon run rampant...They'll need some heroes to step up and help the weak... etc... etc...

[Steelcan]

Barquiel wrote...

And you're talking BS out of your ass, as usual. The game tells you more than once that they couldn't activate the beacon (or was Javik just being nice as well when he discusses with Shep and Liara why the beacon was activated?). And ignoring in-game dialogue (Tevos' Rannoch conversation) that disproves your point doesn't make your point any better.

The salarians have zero interest in losing the asari as a council race, so your Shepard can rant as much as he wants.

The beacon itself didnt need to be activated to get information from the archive it had in it.  It's like the Mars archives that the Asari have on Thessia.  And if the Asari never activated it, how did they possibly know it was so important?

Tevos's Rannoch conversation doesn't really do anything other than establish that there is something she wishes to discuss.

The Salarians won't be in any position to stop me.  They are already on thin ice after trying to sabotage the genophage cure.  

[Steelcan]

schebobo wrote...

Should the humans be pnished for cerburus?

Cerberus isn't a direct branch of the Systems Alliance, not anymore.  The Alliance isn't responsible for them.  Plus they didn't do anything wrong.

[Steelcan]

Barquiel wrote...

Tevos didn't knew anything about the beacon. She tells you she has just received information (existence of the
beacon) from her government when she contacts Shepard after Rannoch, and wants to discuss this on the citadel. She simply didn't know the beacon existed before the war and contacts Shepards as soon as she has received the intel.

. But so did everyone else. And you think EDI was simply lying when she says Liara would have needed Shepard's cipher to comprehend the beacon on Thessia ?

Yes she did.  She says that the beacon was known only to the highest levels of Asari government, guess what she is, a high ranking member of the Asari government.  What she says after Rannoch could easily be interpreted as her receiving permission from Thessia to tell Shepard about the beacon.  There is nothing to suggest she was unaware of its existence.

And EDI may have just been trying to make Liara feel better.

[Steelcan]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Just give them whatever the standard punishment is for concealing Prothean tech. Anything less just encourages governments to hide their wrongdoings. Anything more is probably overkill.

Well a bunch of scientists were charged with war crimes for it....

[ForThessia]

Steelcan wrote...

schebobo wrote...

Should the humans be pnished for cerburus?

Cerberus [...]   didn't do anything wrong.

:lol: LOL! Thank you for that one.

Modifié par ForThessia, 01 janvier 2013 - 05:58 .

[Steelcan]

ForThessia wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

schebobo wrote...
Should the humans be pnished for cerburus?

Cerberus [...]   didn't do anything wrong.

:lol: LOL! Thank you for that one.

They had the balls to do what was necessary to win.

[ForThessia]

Steelcan wrote...

ForThessia wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

schebobo wrote...
Should the humans be pnished for cerburus?

Cerberus [...]   didn't do anything wrong.

:lol: LOL! Thank you for that one.

They had the balls to do what was necessary to win.

and ended up getting indoctrinated. Obviously they didn't do anything wrong.

[MisterJB]

ForThessia wrote...
and ended up getting indoctrinated. Obviously they didn't do anything wrong.

Is this not an argument about morality? Now it seems you are referring to mistakes in execution.

[fiendishchicken]

I wouldn't say they should face punitive measures. They refused to open up in the war, and failed to listen to Shepard or any of the knowledge they had and it comes back and bites them in the ass.

Cerberus did do wrong Steelcan. They did a lot of wrong. It is subjective however, to interpret wether the end justifies the means. I'm a supporter of Cerberus for example, but I acknowledge the flaws in the system. TIM didn't have enough safeguards. He tasked his personnel with achieving results, and he only cared about absolute results. He wasn't a sadist by any means - There's a difference between crossing lines in the name of a goal, and making goals in the name of crossing lines (i.e. using 'research' as an excuse to blatantly torture and kill).

Some experiments came pretty close to stuff the National Socialists of Germany though, and it's undeniable that TIM had hired people who were a lot like Josef Mengele or Adolf Eichmann. TIM, let them have free reign for whatever they wanted provided there was a discernible benefit to the stated Cerberus goal. He cracked down when things got out of hand or became more sadistic than scientific (Teltin Facility), but his biggest flaw was advancing Cerberus at any cost, which eventually came into conflict as more and more of his scientists employed brute force methods meant to maximize results.

[ForThessia]

MisterJB wrote...

ForThessia wrote...
and ended up getting indoctrinated. Obviously they didn't do anything wrong.

Is this not an argument about morality? Now it seems you are referring to mistakes in execution.

Okay. I'm pretty sure Akuze was wrong. Turning colonies into Husks was wrong. Killing civilians on Benning was wrong. Attacking the Citadel and killing civilians was wrong. Sanctuary was wrong. Do I need to go on?

[Steelcan]

ForThessia wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

ForThessia wrote...
and ended up getting indoctrinated. Obviously they didn't do anything wrong.

Is this not an argument about morality? Now it seems you are referring to mistakes in execution.

Okay. I'm pretty sure Akuze was wrong. Turning colonies into Husks was wrong. Killing civilians on Benning was wrong. Attacking the Citadel and killing civilians was wrong. Sanctuary was wrong. Do I need to go on?

Sanctuary won the war.  Or it would have had we used the information there.

[Hey]

I think they should all get spankings.

seriously...

[SeptimusMagistos]

Steelcan wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Just give them whatever the standard punishment is for concealing Prothean tech. Anything less just encourages governments to hide their wrongdoings. Anything more is probably overkill.

Well a bunch of scientists were charged with war crimes for it....

Good enough, I guess? I'll leave it to the legal experts. The point is, I don't feel like the asari deserve any special punishment, but they deserve to be prosecuted to the extent of the law they themselves created.

[MisterJB]

ForThessia wrote...
I'm pretty sure Akuze was wrong.

I'm not since don't know what was gained from Akuze. It might justify what happened there.

Turning colonies into Husks was wrong.

Except they didn't before ME3 which I'll mention in a minute. The message simply states that a Cerberus envoy bought samples and left. Obviously, someone was still alive to write it and there is no reason for Cerberus to turn a human colony into husks and then just leave them around. Therefore, it is far more likely the colonists were Indocrinated by the Dragon's Teeth and placed themselves on them.

Killing civilians on Benning was wrong.

And purposeless so, I'm willing to believe that was a rogue cell.

Attacking the Citadel and killing civilians was wrong.

Had they won, they might have gained control of the Citadel Fleet which would save lives therefore justifying the attack.
They failed but their attack still lead to the Council waking to the threat of the war by realizing the Citadel is not impenetrable. This lead to them commiting much more resources to the Crucible which eventually ended the war therefore justifying the attack.

Sanctuary was wrong.

No, it wasn't. Refugees that would become a strain in our resources and thus our fighting capability suddenly become humanity's best soldiers. It's a brilliant tactic and justified due to the presence of the Reapers.

The only thing wrong was the use TIM gave those same troops but I blame that on bad writing.

Modifié par MisterJB, 01 janvier 2013 - 06:32 .

[SeptimusMagistos]

MisterJB wrote...

ForThessia wrote...
I'm pretty sure Akuze was wrong.

I'm not since don't know what was gained from Akuze. It might justify what happened there.

Turning colonies into Husks was wrong.

Except they didn't before ME3 which I'll mention in a minute. The message simply states that a Cerberus envoy bought samples and left. Obviously, someone was still alive to write it and there is no reason for Cerberus to turn a human colony into husks and then just leave them around. Therefore, it is far more likely the colonists were Indocrinated by the Dragon's Teeth and placed themselves on them.

Killing civilians on Benning was wrong.

And purposeless so, I'm willing to believe that was a rogue cell.

Attacking the Citadel and killing civilians was wrong.

Had they won, they might have gained control of the Citadel Fleet which would save lives therefore justifying the attack.
They failed but their attack still lead to the Council waking to the threat of the war by realizing the Citadel is not impenetrable. This lead to them commiting much more resources to the Crucible which eventually ended the war therefore justifying the attack.

Sanctuary was wrong.

No, it wasn't. Refugees that would become a strain in our resources and thus our fighting capability suddenly become humanity's best soldiers. It's a brilliant tactic and justified due to the presence of the Reapers.

The only thing wrong was the use TIM gave those same troops but I blame that on bad writing.

Yeah, no. The Reapers' presence justified absolutely none of those things. It barely justified teaming up with pirates, but that's about it.

Cerberus's problem has always been needlessly leaping to extreme measures that invariably lead to disaster.

[Steelcan]

No it is justified, but most people are too repulsed to see the value

[SeptimusMagistos]

Steelcan wrote...

No it is justified, but most people are too repulsed to see the value

Assuming there was a value - which there isn't, because of the thing where everything Cerberus does ends horribly for everyone involved - that still doesn't justify anything.

Sanctuary is the biggest example. Those refugees are called civilians, and keeping the maximum number of the alive is the number one war goal. Suggesting that what Cerberus did to them is okay on any level is simply ridiculous.

[Steelcan]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

No it is justified, but most people are too repulsed to see the value

Assuming there was a value - which there isn't, because of the thing where everything Cerberus does ends horribly for everyone involved - that still doesn't justify anything.

Sanctuary is the biggest example. Those refugees are called civilians, and keeping the maximum number of the alive is the number one war goal. Suggesting that what Cerberus did to them is okay on any level is simply ridiculous.

No, the number one war goal is destroying the reapers.  Civilian survival is tertiary at best.

[MisterJB]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...
Sanctuary is the biggest example. Those refugees are called civilians, and keeping the maximum number of the alive is the number one war goal. Suggesting that what Cerberus did to them is okay on any level is simply ridiculous.

In a war for the survival of your species, the number one goal is the continuation of said species.
There are eleven billion humans on Earth waiting for help. Saying that forcefully turning a few thousands/millions into super soldiers; which we have done many times in our history except for the "super" part; is not justifiable is what is ridiculous.

[SeptimusMagistos]

Steelcan wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

No it is justified, but most people are too repulsed to see the value

Assuming there was a value - which there isn't, because of the thing where everything Cerberus does ends horribly for everyone involved - that still doesn't justify anything.

Sanctuary is the biggest example. Those refugees are called civilians, and keeping the maximum number of the alive is the number one war goal. Suggesting that what Cerberus did to them is okay on any level is simply ridiculous.

No, the number one war goal is destroying the reapers.  Civilian survival is tertiary at best.

Not the way I fought it.

[fiendishchicken]

I don't see Sanctuary as quite justified. It was run by a madman more concerned with preserving his own legacy than actually facing the threat. From an objective standpoint, Sanctuary at best was a misguided attempt to find a weakness in indoctrination. It succeeded to a limited extent, but minus controlling a small army of husks, there wasn't a real chance of full success. That said, Sanctuary crossed a pretty big line there. I'm not going to say it was absolutely wrong, because positive effects were taken, but the good hardly balances against the all the bad at sanctuary. It didn't serbe the right purpose, and it was plain unnecessary.

[Steelcan]

fiendishchicken wrote...

I don't see Sanctuary as quite justified. It was run by a madman more concerned with preserving his own legacy than actually facing the threat. From an objective standpoint, Sanctuary at best was a misguided attempt to find a weakness in indoctrination. It succeeded to a limited extent, but minus controlling a small army of husks, there wasn't a real chance of full success. That said, Sanctuary crossed a pretty big line there. I'm not going to say it was absolutely wrong, because positive effects were taken, but the good hardly balances against the all the bad at sanctuary. It didn't serbe the right purpose, and it was plain unnecessary.

Only because it wasn't expanded on.  It had every potential to make Control a reality, woot the need for Glowstick

[Steelcan]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
No it is justified, but most people are too repulsed to see the value

Assuming there was a value - which there isn't, because of the thing where everything Cerberus does ends horribly for everyone involved - that still doesn't justify anything.

Sanctuary is the biggest example. Those refugees are called civilians, and keeping the maximum number of the alive is the number one war goal. Suggesting that what Cerberus did to them is okay on any level is simply ridiculous.

No, the number one war goal is destroying the reapers.  Civilian survival is tertiary at best.

Not the way I fought it.

Auto Dialogue disagrees with you

[SeptimusMagistos]

MisterJB wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...
Sanctuary is the biggest example. Those refugees are called civilians, and keeping the maximum number of the alive is the number one war goal. Suggesting that what Cerberus did to them is okay on any level is simply ridiculous.

In a war for the survival of your species, the number one goal is the continuation of said species.
There are eleven billion humans on Earth waiting for help. Saying that forcefully turning a few thousands/millions into super soldiers; which we have done many times in our history except for the "super" part; is not justifiable is what is ridiculous.

And I would maybe accept that argument if The Illusive Man called for volunteers and let them know exactly what was going to happen to them. Instead he subjected men, women and children to horrible suffering for no actual gain.

Steelcan wrote...

Auto Dialogue disagrees with you

I remember giving speeches about how we need to try to save everyone we can, how we can't afford to turn war into a numbers game and how we all need to stick together.

Modifié par SeptimusMagistos, 01 janvier 2013 - 06:55 .