168 réponses à ce sujet

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I still don't think you're grasping what I'm saying.

You're saying that something is inherently wrong, no matter the context.

I'm saying that in some cases, something that is normally seen as wrong might be necessary.

I do believe that most nearly any action is justifiable if it fits the context of the situation. You don't.

You're falling back to a manual that, while I agree with and is similar to our own TRADOC Manuals (we have multiple), has little bearing on what I'm saying.

If I have to kill a civilian to end a war, that civilian dies. I view suffering as acceptable in context. You don't.

Are we clear now?

I don't view morality the same as you. I say it's subjective, you say it's objective.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 mai 2013 - 07:10 .

[Made Nightwing]

Good Cerberus Actions: Rebuilding Shepard. Preventing batarian massacre of the Council. Rebuilding Normandy.

Bad Cerberus Actions: Kidnapping children for experimentation. (The Illusive Man doesn't broker failure). Gavin Archer's use of his own brother (which TIM does nothing to shut down when he learns about it). Testing anti-biotic drugs on asari prisoners (did those asari do anything to deserve it? No? Then it was a crime perpetuated on civillians. If yes, then why weren't they punished in a court of law, with an advocate and a jury? Or does the rule of law not apply in the future? In any case, the experiments were useless in the grand scheme of things, as they never needed the drug to fight the Reapers). They assassinated the previous leader of Terra Firma (Ash says they used to have 'noble goals', so let's assume he wasn't all that bad) and replaced him with a bigot who was easier to manipulate. They took a murderer and a confirmed bigot from an Alliance prison and used him as their own person weapon, so he could continue murdering. There was not a single thing that came out of Leng's mouth in ME3 that the Reapers needed to put there, he already believed it. They sold out multiple colonies to the Collectors (Fel Prime, Horizon, etc) in order to get a better idea of their capabilities (resulting in the death of everyone on Fel Prime for absolutely no gain, as Shepard killed the Collectors anyway). They lured a team of good soldiers to their deaths by Thresher Maw because they were getting too close to them. They murdered an Alliance Admiral who was investigating them. They murdered an entire unit of Alliance Marines and a whole colony besides on Akuze with Thresher Maws just to get data on the creatures. Then, they kept a soldier in confinement for years, constantly torturing him with Thresher Maw venom. WHY? What purpose did this serve? Did they discover a more effective way of blocking the venom? An antidote perhaps? Nope. Zip. Nada. Oh, and they converted an entire colony of colonists into husks for information on them. Genius.

Tell me, are all of these 'rogue cells' that TIM had no knowledge of? If so, the man deserves to be fired for being an absolutely terrible manager. Hell, he even had to specifically recruit people fresh out of the Alliance for Shepard's crew, because he knew there was no way that showing him the true face of Cerberus would ever sway him over to their side.

[Made Nightwing]

"If I have to kill a civilian to end a war, that civilian dies. I view suffering as acceptable in context. You don't."

If that civillian has done nothing to deserve death, then he lives. And I would defend him with my life. That is what I swore to do when I put on the uniform.

I perfectly appreciate that your morality is subjective, you've made that clear from the start. As I have made it clear that it is not. Who decides when subjectivism applies? Who decides who gets sacrificed and who doesn't? That kind of logic has never benefited humanity. It has simply been used to justify atrocity after atrocity. It is a simple concept, that the moment one innocent man's right not to be killed, not to be tortured or tormented (no matter the goal or cause) is violated, then that irrevocably damages the rights of the whole. You are saying that the rights of the indvidual can only be tolerated as long as they do not interfere with the goal of the collective. Nothing is so dangerous to a society as this. It is simply making an Orwellian society inevitable.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Made Nightwing wrote...
But you're still condoning the experimentation on innocent kids, and that is still unacceptable. I think we need to look at Cerberus further. Let's look at their actions and then reach a final decision on what they were or weren't.

I'd like you to list all the good actions that Cerberus took, and then look at all the needless, moral insanity that they perpetuated and write that down as well. Seriously, let's compare notes on this. I feel it's the only way I can actually see what kind of Cerberus you're arguing for.

What do we gain from these innocent kids? Hmm. That's a bit difficult right there. The plan is to get a stronger breed of biotics. Somewhere down the line, the people in charge went overboard and started to kill the children and keep them in sub-human conditions. I don't think TIM vouched for that. I blame that on lack of oversight. Teltin was rogue.

I view Lazarus as good. And infiltrating the Reaper. I also view the Thorian Creepers as good, and provided we got what we needed from the husk experiments, it's good too.

I don't condone Sanctuary, but if it had worked, I'd be on my knee's thanking the Illusive Man. In fact, he did find a way to control Reaper forces. I don't think he'd have extrapolated a way to control the actual Reapers though.

As for the people at Sanctuary, what were they doing for the War Effort? If it was nothing, then in the context of the Reaper war, I don't really feel too upset at their loss.

They could have been used as a resource. Build ships, train soldiers, maintain and procure resources and services.

This is a war for survival. Litterally any option is on the table for me. The alternative is annihilation. I'd find the best economic balance for the refugee's (that is, the best way I can get these people to be useful, to get the most bang for my buck with the highest number of workers).

The rest, are useless, and are a strain on resources. I'm going to use them as bait for the Reapers.

While they're harvested and killed, my forces have enough time to rebuild our strength and resources. 

How does that sound? Inhumane? It is. But I can't afford to be moral. The galaxy is on the line. It's be evil, or get annihilated. 

And I think of Cerberus as a group to guard and protect the galaxy from the unseen threats, and to provide the galaxy with a means of defending itself. If I have to use questionable or downright despicable means to achieve this end, I'll do it. The galaxy is worth more than my conscious. I'll do the things the Council and the alliance are unable or unwilling to do. Better to be a monster than be an impotent defender who watches helplessly as people are slaughtered by the Reapers.

For the most part, that's how I saw Cerberus act. They acted in humanity's interest, but I don't think I ever saw anything intrinsically anti-alien, at least, not until they were already indoctrinated.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Made Nightwing wrote...

"If I have to kill a civilian to end a war, that civilian dies. I view suffering as acceptable in context. You don't."

If that civillian has done nothing to deserve death, then he lives. And I would defend him with my life. That is what I swore to do when I put on the uniform.

I perfectly appreciate that your morality is subjective, you've made that clear from the start. As I have made it clear that it is not. Who decides when subjectivism applies? Who decides who gets sacrificed and who doesn't? That kind of logic has never benefited humanity. It has simply been used to justify atrocity after atrocity. It is a simple concept, that the moment one innocent man's right not to be killed, not to be tortured or tormented (no matter the goal or cause) is violated, then that irrevocably damages the rights of the whole. You are saying that the rights of the indvidual can only be tolerated as long as they do not interfere with the goal of the collective. Nothing is so dangerous to a society as this. It is simply making an Orwellian society inevitable.

When I put on my uniform, I swore to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States of America. When I accepted my Commission, I swore to lead and guide my Soldiers to do the same. That's what I defend.

To that end I disagree. It's a fundamental difference on our part. We're never going to see eye-to-eye on this.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 mai 2013 - 07:30 .

[David7204]

Populations are not just 'bait,' they're resources for the Reapers themselves. A billion dead is a billion more husks you get to fight.

Also, let's remember that you don't to actually make any of those decisions. Nobody does. Including Cerberus.

[Made Nightwing]

Teltin went rogue? Like thescientists on Akuze went rogue? Like the elements that killed Kahoku and his men went rogue? Like the ships that detonated their cores above population centres, and killed thousands of humans and caused untold psychological damage to millions more went rogue? No manager or leader who allowed that to happen should be trusted with a post office, let alone an organisation as big as Cerberus.

But Sanctuary didn't work. It failed on an un-imaginable scale. There were so many more ways those refugees could have helped. Soldiers could have been drafted, workers and tradesmen found. Sanctuary could have actually served the purpose they claimed in the ads for it. But they just wasted all those lives on a project that failed.

I don't give a damn about my conscience. I give a damn about the lives of those who have done nothing to deserve death. You think that it's necessary to be a monster to save the galaxy? Shepard proved that it wasn't. The turian military didn't have a Cerberus, but they held their ground against the Reapers. The krogan didn't have a Cerberus, in fact they were on the receiving end of an atrocity from the STG (I speak of the re-surgent genophage, not the original one). The asari were pro-asari, not intrinsically anti-alien, which is why they kept their beacon hidden and almost doomed the galaxy.

The actions of Cerberus and the other species show that it wasn't more atrocities that were needed, it was greater co-operation.

[Made Nightwing]

Your Constitution was written to defend the rights of your people. Rights that you are theoretically willing to violate, thus violating your oath. It seems immensely hyopcritical.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Made Nightwing wrote...

Good Cerberus Actions: Rebuilding Shepard. Preventing batarian massacre of the Council. Rebuilding Normandy.

Bad Cerberus Actions: Kidnapping children for experimentation. (The Illusive Man doesn't broker failure). Gavin Archer's use of his own brother (which TIM does nothing to shut down when he learns about it). Testing anti-biotic drugs on asari prisoners (did those asari do anything to deserve it? No? Then it was a crime perpetuated on civillians. If yes, then why weren't they punished in a court of law, with an advocate and a jury? Or does the rule of law not apply in the future? In any case, the experiments were useless in the grand scheme of things, as they never needed the drug to fight the Reapers). They assassinated the previous leader of Terra Firma (Ash says they used to have 'noble goals', so let's assume he wasn't all that bad) and replaced him with a bigot who was easier to manipulate. They took a murderer and a confirmed bigot from an Alliance prison and used him as their own person weapon, so he could continue murdering. There was not a single thing that came out of Leng's mouth in ME3 that the Reapers needed to put there, he already believed it. They sold out multiple colonies to the Collectors (Fel Prime, Horizon, etc) in order to get a better idea of their capabilities (resulting in the death of everyone on Fel Prime for absolutely no gain, as Shepard killed the Collectors anyway). They lured a team of good soldiers to their deaths by Thresher Maw because they were getting too close to them. They murdered an Alliance Admiral who was investigating them. They murdered an entire unit of Alliance Marines and a whole colony besides on Akuze with Thresher Maws just to get data on the creatures. Then, they kept a soldier in confinement for years, constantly torturing him with Thresher Maw venom. WHY? What purpose did this serve? Did they discover a more effective way of blocking the venom? An antidote perhaps? Nope. Zip. Nada. Oh, and they converted an entire colony of colonists into husks for information on them. Genius.

Tell me, are all of these 'rogue cells' that TIM had no knowledge of? If so, the man deserves to be fired for being an absolutely terrible manager. Hell, he even had to specifically recruit people fresh out of the Alliance for Shepard's crew, because he knew there was no way that showing him the true face of Cerberus would ever sway him over to their side.

Starting from the bottom, TIM never needed to sway Shepard to his side. The alliance and Council's own lack of action and policy did that for him. He accepts Cerberus for their goal and motivation, if not their method. 

As for the actions, did the research from the children harbor useful results to make stronger biotics? Yes. Were the results worth the action? No. But Teltin was rogue.

I don't approve of Gavin Archer's method, but I do believe he was on the cusp of a breakthrough. Nothing useful in the long run was gained unfortunately.

As for the Asari, did the biotic drug work? What was the purpose of the drug? No. That was a failed experiment. Hopefully, Cerberus covered their tracks. It doesn't matter if the Asari deserved it or not. That's not going to stop someone who's looking for results. 

As for the Collectors, it is useful to know what they're after. I'd like to know what they're after. I want to know why humans are being targeted. There's really no better way than to let a colony get taken and observe. They die so that others can live.

As for the Thresher Maws, I'm going to assume that it was to figure out a possible way to create controllable shock troops. The results were less than useful. But perhaps they can be lured. That is a pretty nifty trick.

And the colony on husks? Yeah, I'd say it was pretty useful. Did we learn anything useful? I don't know. If we did, then it was totally worth it.


And Kahoku. Did he deserve it? Probably not. But if I was in Cerberus' shoes, I'm not going to just let him run away with all this evidence now am I? No I'm not.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 mai 2013 - 08:05 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Made Nightwing wrote...

Your Constitution was written to defend the rights of your people. Rights that you are theoretically willing to violate, thus violating your oath. It seems immensely hyopcritical.

The right's of the people yes. Even if that means sacrificing the people for those rights. I don't see any hypocrisy at all.

And the right's of 10 people are worth more than the right's of 5 people.

I get that you don't see that. For me, it's math.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 mai 2013 - 07:58 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

You're also seeing the lives of the people as the greatest resource. Up to the point of equilibrium output, I agree.

Once you pass that, the innocent people become a liability. A drain on resources.

I'd leave them on a colony with a few nukes set to go off once the Reapers arrive.

They're more useful in death than in life. It doesn't matter if they deserve it or not. 

Put simply, they're **** Outta Luck.

Otherwise, if the war was prolonged, Sanctuary actually did me a favor. Those people would have eventually created a strain on resources. Resources that could go to fighting the Reapers.

I disagree. Finding out that controlling the Reapers was theoretically possible was rather ingenious. It failed due to scale of the size, not due to any real error on the part of the people of the experiment.

And yes, co-operation is key. I wish I could get Cerberus on my side to find a method to destroy the Reapers while the rest of the races held the line. Although throwing troops and ships at the Reapers at Palaven wasn't my idea of intelligence. 

I liked the Geth's strategy. Harass enemy targets and cause maximum chaos.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 mai 2013 - 08:04 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

Populations are not just 'bait,' they're resources for the Reapers themselves. A billion dead is a billion more husks you get to fight.

Also, let's remember that you don't to actually make any of those decisions. Nobody does. Including Cerberus.

Well, for the first part, I have the idea of rigging nukes in the cities. 

Reapers arrive, bam, dead civilians, and dead Reapers. It's an extreme tactic sure, but it prevents the Reapers from acquiring new husks, and takes out a few Reapers.

In atmosphere, a nuke is going to be much more deadly. A Reaper really has no defense against one. Kinetic Barriers are useless against thermal energy released from a nuclear device. And the core of the fireball from a nuke is burning at nearly 10 million kelvin. The closest any known material can withstand is less than a quarter of a percent of that heat.

[KiwiQuiche]

Great, I see this thread has turned into yet another "Cerberus is bad/good!" argument,

[MassivelyEffective0730]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Great, I see this thread has turned into yet another "Cerberus is bad/good!" argument,

For my part, I apologize.



Who would play who now?

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 17 mai 2013 - 08:11 .

[BronzTrooper]

Ok guys. If you're going to argue about Cerberus, then do it somewhere else. Either PM each other or find another way. Please don't argue here.

Please get back on topic. What romance would you PREFER? Not, "What romance would make the most sense?" or, "What romance do you think will be in the movie?"

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

Anything but Liara. If Liara is chosen, I will punch my Ticket to Montreal and pull off a Bioware Austin.

[TheWerdna]

Jafroboy wrote...

In that they were attempting to find the formula for Tali's sweat. Hold on, I've got one of my demotivationals from the Old ME2 Demotivational thread:

*snipped*

The Illisuve man avatar of the poster, is just so fitting, it makes it all the funnier!

To be fair, I would like to point out that the Talimancers during that... dark period... are not the same ones that currently are on the BSN. Trust us, the sweat thing is just as much of a running joke for the newer generation of Talimancers as it is to everyone else.

Modifié par TheWerdna, 17 mai 2013 - 12:39 .

[TheWerdna]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Ashley is popular amongst a lot of people who find Miranda too... perfect. That's how I've seen it. I'm not going to pretend I'm right. She seems to appeal to people who are more down to earth. I personally can't stand her for that reason.

I've always hated Ashley, but if a movie was ever made, I could almost guarantee that she'd be the LI.

Miranda... breaks too many rules of the Hollywood woman to really be considered by Hollywood as any more than a fling. And all other romances for aliens would just not have the draw as a human LI and Ashley is the only real choice. I don't agree with it, but that's sadly the case.

In the games though, I think Miranda is the most popular human LI amongst male Shepards. I remember she was third, after Tali and Liara.

Whatever happened to the Tali-mancer's anyway? The really weird ones?

They retreated to some fansite from what I have been able to tell.... though one of them seems to be sadly still within the Tali group here on the BSN. We try to just smile and nod to everything he says until he gets bored and leaves us alone.

[TheProtheans]

Liara and Miranda.

[Barquiel]

The most likely candidate would be Miranda, I guess. Ashley is not exactly a fan favorite. Liara and Tali are probably "too alien". Jack...I'd be surprised (but it would be an interesting choice ).

[David7204]

I'm curious to hear what rules of a Hollywood love interest Miranda supposedly breaks.

Modifié par David7204, 17 mai 2013 - 12:54 .

[TheProtheans]

Jafroboy wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

It's pretty amusing that these two conversations are going on at the same time.

Check the writing credits for the Transformers movies and the Star Trek reboot movies, folks.

Why? was a ME writer in them?

It must have something to do with the two guys who write everything together.

[dreamgazer]

Jafroboy wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

It's pretty amusing that these two conversations are going on at the same time.

Check the writing credits for the Transformers movies and the Star Trek reboot movies, folks.

Why? was a ME writer in them?

Mass Effect? Who's talking about Mass Effect? 

Orci and Kurtzman are responsible for both.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

I'm curious to hear what rules of a Hollywood love interest Miranda supposedly breaks.

This is something Taboo-XX is better at explaining than myself. He's the the expert on archestypes and tropes and the guy who's done a more in-depth analysis to this.

Miranda... breaks rules because she sort of has a more no non-sense attitude and she gets things done. She's much more assertive, and in more than just a professional way. She's feminine, yet she's incredibly confident and much more competent than Most of her male counterparts. Add that she has a bit of a darker attitude and more of a pragmatic belief system. She's sexualized past a point where people are comfortable. Hollywood prefers the innocent virgin type.

For Hollywood, that's not really encouraged. Men don't like it when a woman, who's feminine, can kick their ass. 

I'm probably not doing a good job of objectively explaining why she's not very relatable to audiences. As I said, this isn't my cup of tea in this field.

[spirosz]

I hope they do a romance in the "movie" so I can hear complaints about why "x" isn't the love interest or is this canon!?