27 réponses à ce sujet

[chessplayer209]

Title says it all.  What is the best choice? Not having played ME3 yet, I am inclined to say it should be kept... just to have all the weapons technology reverse-engineered, and then to have the ship re-purposed as a Cerberus/Alliance vessel to help defeat the Reapers. That Collector ship main-gun is probably many times more powerful than anything the Alliance or Cerberus has, and would be an enormous asset in the fight against the Reapers, which we don't have much time to prepare for...

I know a lot of the technology on the ship is repulsive, and might be used for nefarious purposes, but if it is destroyed and the Reapers win the coming war, those kinds of ships will just get used over and over again as part of "the cycle." By reverse-engineering the tech, and using the ship in the war, military researchers might be able to develop countermeasures to Reaper tech using this tech that is millennia more advanced than anything the military has presently (which it would not be able to otherwise).

Cerberus might be a shady organization, but is anyone going to argue they'd rather risk letting the Reapers win the war? Seriously, who is more scared of Cerberus than they are of the Reapers?

Seems there is no question... the potential benefits of researching the Collector technology (at least the weapons technology) far outweigh any costs of handing the ship over to Cerberus. Furthermore, perhaps Alliance or Turian spies will infiltrate Cerberus and the technology will be disseminated to other organic races as well (as happened to America when the Soviet spies stole nuclear weapon technology).

The ship must be kept and researched (at least for the weapons tech.  I'm not going to suggest the biology experiments going on there anything but immoral).

Edit:  if you can reply with minimal ME3 story spoilage, that would be great.

Modifié par chessplayer209, 21 août 2013 - 10:29 .

[RedCaesar97]

Each choice will give you a different War Asset in ME3. Keeping the Collector Base will give you more War Asset points than choosing to destroy the Collector Base, but not by very much (110 points versus 100 points).

The difference is small enough and does not really matter in ME3 if you find enough War Assets searching the galaxy in ME3. So my suggestion is to make the decision either you would make in real life, or better yet, to make the decision you think your Shepard would make in that situation. or flip a coin.

[Forst1999]

Your view is valid, but looking at Cerberus' failure rate and projects that backfired I never trusted them with it. Far too likely they do something really stupid with it.
The actual ME3 consequences are small. A few dialogue changes, but it doesn't alter the course of the story. Except if you do an extraordinairy bad ME3 run (akin to losing your whole squad in the suicide mission, you actually have to try to get such a bad ending).

[chessplayer209]

Your view is valid, but looking at Cerberus' failure rate and projects
that backfired I never trusted them with it. Far too likely they do
something really stupid with it.

What is Cerberus going to do with it that is more frightening than the Reapers winning the war? If you're scared Cerberus will do some of those science experiments where they liquify human test subjects in the Collector ship (since they did Reaper technology experiments with humans and Husks), let me point out that if the Reapers win the war, they will surely do this on a much larger scale than Cerberus would, and they probably would do it to other races as well.

Edit:  Oh also, maybe other governments will finally agree the Reaper threat is real if Cerberus is known to have a Collector ship... and we all know what the council has been like with respect to acknowledging the Reaper threat thus far.... -__- 
Cerberus getting the collector ship might just give the council the "evidence" they've been asking for that the Reaper threat is real, and then they can stop dragging their feet and start with serious preparation for galaxy-wide war.

Modifié par chessplayer209, 21 août 2013 - 04:15 .

[capn233]

It sounds like you think you should keep the base. In that case keep it, then see what happens.

[cap and gown]

Once you have played ME3, come back here and let us know about whether your opinion changed or not. As Red said, do what you think your Sheppard would do.

[chessplayer209]

Played ME3. I don't see why my opinion should change though. Based on the things your Shepard knows at the time of the decision, handing over the Collector base seems to be the right call based on the reason I outlined in my initial post.

It may seem weird to you, but I think what happens in ME3 is kinda irrelevant... your Shepard doesn't know it will happen yet, and given that the war assets are the same either way, why not just make the decision you want your Shep to make on the merits?

Imagine humanity finds some derelict spaceship from an alien civilization that is a million years more advanced than we are presently. You wouldn't be tempted to have a bunch of scientists and engineers try to reverse engineer it and see what they discover? It could revolutionize human society, just like the Mass Relays did in the story.

[Forst1999]

chessplayer209 wrote...

Played ME3. I don't see why my opinion should change though. Based on the things your Shepard knows at the time of the decision, handing over the Collector base seems to be the right call based on the reason I outlined in my initial post.

It may seem weird to you, but I think what happens in ME3 is kinda irrelevant... your Shepard doesn't know it will happen yet, and given that the war assets are the same either way, why not just make the decision you want your Shep to make on the merits?

Imagine humanity finds some derelict spaceship from an alien civilization that is a million years more advanced than we are presently. You wouldn't be tempted to have a bunch of scientists and engineers try to reverse engineer it and see what they discover? It could revolutionize human society, just like the Mass Relays did in the story.

If it weren't crazy scientists that almost always fail and make things worse, sure. Cerberus did exactly what I expected them to do with the base (even when I destroyed it...). Cerberus playing with Reaper tech provided the Reapers with valuable help, while their efforts against the reapers had zero effect.
As you apparantly don't think Cerberus is quite as incompetent as I think they are, I understand why you would have trusted them with the base. But to me they always made the impression of being a big failure.

Modifié par Forst1999, 03 septembre 2013 - 02:36 .

[cap and gown]

Forst1999 wrote...

If it weren't crazy scientists that almost always fail and make things worse, sure. Cerberus did exactly what I expected them to do with the base (even when I destroyed it...). Cerberus playing with Reaper tech provided the Reapers with valuable help, while their efforts against the reapers had zero effect.
As you apparantly don't think Cerberus is quite as incompetent as I think they are, I understand why you would have trusted them with the base. But to me they always made the impression of being a big failure.

Well, they did bring back Sheppard and built a new and improved Normandy. So there is that.

[Forst1999]

cap and gown wrote...

Well, they did bring back Sheppard and built a new and improved Normandy. So there is that.

That's were the "almost" before "always fail" comes from. Most of their projects seem to go wrong.

[chessplayer209]

Forst1999 wrote...

cap and gown wrote...

Well, they did bring back Sheppard and built a new and improved Normandy. So there is that.

That's were the "almost" before "always fail" comes from. Most of their projects seem to go wrong.

Those are both pretty huge exceptions though. What greater scientific achievement is there than the Lazarus Project? They say themselves in the game it is quite possibly the greatest medical science achievement in all history. And building a rebuilt Normandy that is more advanced than anything else the Alliance had - I'm sure that was no trivial feat either.

[Forst1999]

Agree on the Lazarus Project. The new Normandy however...it's a great ship, but most of the real development work was done by the turians and the alliance. Cerberus did improve on it, but it's not nearly as much of a breaktrough. EDI would be another success I have to admit.
But then we have an entire cluster overrun by rachni Cerberus was experimenting on. Constant needless attacks on people, which endanger their projects (see the ME1 quest line). An entire research team on a reaper getting turned into husks because they were incautious. And project Overlord could have been a complete castastrophe.
A ressurection program and a space ship aren't likely to get out of control. But if Cerberus works with something that can get out of control, it will always blow in their face. I wasn't willing to risk that with reaper tech.

[chessplayer209]

EDI is a huge improvement. Programming AI is no easy task. TY for mentioning that, somehow that slipped my mind. And making an AI that won't turn on them (Cerberus) like the Geth did to the Quarians is also likely no easy task. Probably some very complicated programming.

And then yeah, the Lazarus Project wasn't just bringing Shepard back to life, it also gave him all those revolutionary upgrades too to basically turn him into a super-soldier. Giving human beings cybernetic upgrades that advanced like Shepard got after the Lazarus Project (let alone bringing them back to life with the Lazarus Project, as we mentioned) sounds extremely difficult to manage.

The research team getting turned into husks ... that also happened to an Alliance research team didn't it (in the Arrival DLC? Ok, maybe not husks, but they were still indoctrinated...)? So if you hold that against Cerberus, the Alliance is guilty of the same incompetence.

And of course Cerberus is going to kill people who threaten the secrecy and safety of their top-secret research projects. Basically any military force will. I'm sure the Alliance would do the same, given a sensitive enough project.

Lets also not forget that Cerberus itself started as an Alliance black op, so in some sense if you're going to blame Cerberus, you could also blame the Alliance, since Cerberus was (at least initially) an Alliance project. So in some sense the Alliance deserves a share of blame for Cerberus activities.

Modifié par chessplayer209, 03 septembre 2013 - 09:31 .

[cap and gown]

chessplayer209 wrote...

EDI is a huge improvement. Programming AI is no easy task. TY for mentioning that, somehow that slipped my mind. And making an AI that won't turn on them (Cerberus) like the Geth did to the Quarians is also likely no easy task. Probably some very complicated programming.

Except EDI did turn on them.

[chessplayer209]

cap and gown wrote...

chessplayer209 wrote...

EDI is a huge improvement. Programming AI is no easy task. TY for mentioning that, somehow that slipped my mind. And making an AI that won't turn on them (Cerberus) like the Geth did to the Quarians is also likely no easy task. Probably some very complicated programming.

Except EDI did turn on them.

But wouldn't have been able to absent outside help from the crew, who would likely never have given it to her unless they were in that emergency Collector attack that nobody on the Normandy itself saw coming either. Point is, they made a very impressive AI that, absent outside assistance (that nobody in the crew figured would likely  happen anyway), won't turn on them.  That's an accomplishment.

Modifié par chessplayer209, 03 septembre 2013 - 09:33 .

[cap and gown]

chessplayer209 wrote...

But wouldn't have been able to absent outside help from the crew, who would likely never have given it to her unless they were in that emergency Collector attack that nobody on the Normandy itself saw coming either. Point is, they made a very impressive AI that, absent outside assistance (that nobody in the crew figured would likely  happen anyway), won't turn on them.  That's an accomplishment.

Sheppard: "I don't know. With that voice . . . "

[Forst1999]

chessplayer209 wrote...

EDI is a huge improvement. Programming AI is no easy task. TY for mentioning that, somehow that slipped my mind. And making an AI that won't turn on them (Cerberus) like the Geth did to the Quarians is also likely no easy task. Probably some very complicated programming.

They accomplished that with shackles. Not very sophisticated. That EDI turned out so well is chance. And there was a lot of AI research they could build on already

And then yeah, the Lazarus Project wasn't just bringing Shepard back to life, it also gave him all those revolutionary upgrades too to basically turn him into a super-soldier. Giving human beings cybernetic upgrades that advanced like Shepard got after the Lazarus Project (let alone bringing them back to life with the Lazarus Project, as we mentioned) sounds extremely difficult to manage.

The alliance equips their soldiers with similar stuff. Shepard already was a "super-soldier". Cerberus stuck the most advanced stuff of the time into him, but anyone with access to this tech could have done that.

The research team getting turned into husks ... that also happened to an Alliance research team didn't it (in the Arrival DLC? Ok, maybe not husks, but they were still indoctrinated...)? So if you hold that against Cerberus, the Alliance is guilty of the same incompetence.

OK, Cerberus isn't the only group that ever was incautious. Underestimating a whole reaper still is more stupid than a single artifact, but ok.

And of course Cerberus is going to kill people who threaten the secrecy and safety of their top-secret research projects. Basically any military force will. I'm sure the Alliance would do the same, given a sensitive enough project.

I was talking about completly needless attacks like the squad on Edolus. Or the revenge act on Grayson. Their actions are just cartoonishly evil at times, they practically force people to attack them. Their inability to hold back a little prevented some successes

Lets also not forget that Cerberus itself started as an Alliance black op, so in some sense if you're going to blame Cerberus, you could also blame the Alliance, since Cerberus was (at least initially) an Alliance project. So in some sense the Alliance deserves a share of blame for Cerberus activities.

It was a little guerilla warfare group. The course it took was completly unpredictable.
My point is that Cerberus lost control over every single project of them we ever encountered, even the successes.

[chessplayer209]

Forst1999 wrote...

chessplayer209 wrote...

EDI is a huge improvement. Programming AI is no easy task. TY for mentioning that, somehow that slipped my mind. And making an AI that won't turn on them (Cerberus) like the Geth did to the Quarians is also likely no easy task. Probably some very complicated programming.

They accomplished that with shackles. Not very sophisticated. That EDI turned out so well is chance. And there was a lot of AI research they could build on already

AI research is illegal. How is it Cerberus would have access to AI research to build on? Perhaps they stole it from the Alliance? I recall EDI used to be an Alliance VI. Whatever.  Even if they had an Alliance VI to build on, a VI is still very different from a true AI.

And think about how successful EDI was during the boarding of the derelict Collector ship. EDI hacking them and stuff like that, a race that has technology (and presumably computers) millennia more advanced than anything we have.... and doing it successfully to get the data needed on the Reaper IFF? That is pretty impressive technology on display from Cerberus. And look, even if the Alliance CAN make AIs like EDI, they didn't - and Cerberus did. That's the point. EDI was a fantastic success, and if you accept that argument I just made based on her cyberwarfare capabilities deployed vs the Collectors, she's a pretty impressive piece of technology from Cerberus too.

And then yeah, the Lazarus Project wasn't just bringing Shepard back to life, it also gave him all those revolutionary upgrades too to basically turn him into a super-soldier. Giving human beings cybernetic upgrades that advanced like Shepard got after the Lazarus Project (let alone bringing them back to life with the Lazarus Project, as we mentioned) sounds extremely difficult to manage.

Forst1999 wrote...
The alliance equips their soldiers with similar stuff. Shepard already was a "super-soldier". Cerberus stuck the most advanced stuff of the time into him, but anyone with access to this tech could have done that.

The Alliance doesn't put machines into them that stimulate adrenaline production in the body to give them better reflexes, or weave synthetic materials through their skin and bones to make them resistant to bullets, and that sort of thing. The Alliance troops just get armor and shields. Some of the fancier armor is upgraded with shield modules, exoskeletons, ablative coatings, etc, like in Mass Effect 1.

Cerberus also seems to have a lot of very high-tech items they reverse engineered from the Collectors. Collector Assault Rifle, Collector Armor, Collector Particle Beam, etc.

And the new Normandy is much better than the old one. I think you're overly dismissive of the upgrades Cerberus made it. I think in the game they say it is something like 1.5x or 2x the size of the original Normandy, or something like that. And everyone in the game, most notably Tali (and who knows more about ship technology than a Quarian machinist?), points out that whatever her disagreements with Cerberus may be, even she acknowledges Cerberus engineers build top-of-the-line ships. Quite a complement coming from someone who hates Cerberus as much as Tali does!

The new Normandy however...it's a great ship, but most of the real
development work was done by the turians and the alliance. Cerberus did
improve on it, but it's not nearly as much of a breaktrough.

And how did Cerberus manage to 1-up the Alliance and the Turians in ship technology? The Turians especially are known to have the strongest military in the galaxy, so this is quite a feat. You make it seem like Cerberus didn't do anything, just took what the Alliance/Turians already built and improved it in a few areas.

But that's not true... Cerberus built the Normandy SR2, and I doubt the Turians/Alliance were willing to help them out by sharing technology with them to do it, which means they either stole it from them with spies (impressive), or have enough scientific and engineering capability to build the Normandy SR2 themselves without Alliance and Turian help (even more impressive).

So either way, Cerberus building the Normandy SR2 indicates they are a highly successful organization, at least as far as that goes. Quite a feat.

Modifié par chessplayer209, 05 septembre 2013 - 04:17 .

[Forst1999]

Of course EDI is amazing, did I ever doubt that? But they didn't begin with nothing, they build her from reaper parts and an highly evolved VI. They could have easily looked on alliance AI research (see first novel) The project turned out fantastic, but in the end, they lost control again.
The Alliance DOES give their soldier implants, gene therapies and upgrades. That's a fact, a side quest in ME1 is about questioning a slesman for such stuff. Upgrading soldiers is usual, only the amount of stuff Cerberus gave Shepard is mentionable.
They stole the blueprints, EDI mentions this. They encouraged the original construction, which was clever. They took the blueprints and build a new Normandy that simply was bigger. It's a feat and they did well, but it's not like they revolutionized ship construction.
I never denied that EDI, the SR-2 or Shepard's reconstruction were impressive. But they still have more failures than successes, and even the successes get out of control.

[cap and gown]

Forst1999 wrote...

I never denied that EDI, the SR-2 or Shepard's reconstruction were impressive. But they still have more failures than successes, and even the successes get out of control.

Did any of their stuff NOT turn on them? This is a serious question. Sheppard: Rouge. Steals Normandy. EDI: Rouge. Reaper Tech: Indoctrinated TIM. Jack. Grayson. Adjutants. What project did they embark on that didn't come back to bite them? Even Eva was turned against them.

Modifié par cap and gown, 05 septembre 2013 - 06:34 .

[Forst1999]

cap and gown wrote...

Did any of their stuff NOT turn on them? This is a serious question. Sheppard: Rouge. Steals Normandy. EDI: Rouge. Reaper Tech: Indoctrinated TIM. Jack. Grayson. Adjutants. What project did they embark on that didn't come back to bite them? Even Eva was turned against them.

EVA is kind of an exception. But they didn't have her long...
Her fast construction is another achievement of Cerberus. She appears to be a real work of their own, so there's no denying some people in Cerberus know what they do very well. But loose security and pushing limits to far is Cerberus what they do. I never was willing to risk that with reaper tech.

[chessplayer209]

The Alliance is too timid though. Even if they were able to build EDI, they never would have. Cerberus did.. If the Alliance had their way, EDI would be decommissioned and turned into scrap metal. Cerberus deserves a lot of credit for pushing boundaries of science. They seem willing to engage in incredible scientific endeavors that the Alliance won't touch because they're too controversial.

Also, with respect to Shepard stealing the Normandy/EDI from Cerberus... I'm not sure Cerberus cared at that point. Wasn't their primary goal to get the Collector ship anyway? So I'm not so sure their reconstruction of Shepard, construction of EDI, etc, blew up in their face.  They got the Collector ship (at least in my playthrough).  I'd call that a win.

And yeah, Cerberus might cross the line sometimes, but lines must be crossed for scientific progress to be made a lot of the time. That's not to suggest I like a lot of their experiments they did, but the alternative is to leave those rocks unturned and then you miss out on substantial scientific opportunities that could yield immeasurable benefits down the road.

Modifié par chessplayer209, 06 septembre 2013 - 04:26 .

[cap and gown]

chessplayer209 wrote...

The Alliance is too timid though. Even if they were able to build EDI, they never would have. Cerberus did.. If the Alliance had their way, EDI would be decommissioned and turned into scrap metal. Cerberus deserves a lot of credit for pushing boundaries of science. They seem willing to engage in incredible scientific endeavors that the Alliance won't touch because they're too controversial.

Also, with respect to Shepard stealing the Normandy/EDI from Cerberus... I'm not sure Cerberus cared at that point. Wasn't their primary goal to get the Collector ship anyway? So I'm not so sure their reconstruction of Shepard, construction of EDI, etc, blew up in their face.  They got the Collector ship (at least in my playthrough).  I'd call that a win.

And yeah, Cerberus might cross the line sometimes, but lines must be crossed for scientific progress to be made a lot of the time. That's not to suggest I like a lot of their experiments they did, but the alternative is to leave those rocks unturned and then you miss out on substantial scientific opportunities that could yield immeasurable benefits down the road.

You do realize the reason AI is not allowed is because it can (and did) lead to the Reapers, machines that wipe out all organics? Did you have "from Ashes" for your ME3 playthrough? Javik makes a big deal how the created always turn on the creators. What about Leviathan? Or just talking to the Catalyst? There is a reason (in the ME universe) folk are not supposed to muck with AI and it outweighs any justification Cerberus could come up with.

[Forst1999]

chessplayer209 wrote...

The Alliance is too timid though. Even if they were able to build EDI, they never would have. Cerberus did.. If the Alliance had their way, EDI would be decommissioned and turned into scrap metal. Cerberus deserves a lot of credit for pushing boundaries of science. They seem willing to engage in incredible scientific endeavors that the Alliance won't touch because they're too controversial.

The alliance did some AI research, but got in major trouble. Seeing how the council sees it, they couldn't risk that again. The alliance had good reasons not to engage in AI develpment again, but you are right, it was a good thing Cerberus did. 

Also, with respect to Shepard stealing the Normandy/EDI from Cerberus... I'm not sure Cerberus cared at that point. Wasn't their primary goal to get the Collector ship anyway? So I'm not so sure their reconstruction of Shepard, construction of EDI, etc, blew up in their face.  They got the Collector ship (at least in my playthrough).  I'd call that a win.

Seeing that the payoff of a 6,5 billion credit investment depends on the decision of a single soldier, this move was a risk. Especially considering that this soldier might have some other loyalties, well known moral stances and maybe an old grudge against Cerberus. Of course it depends on your decision whether project Lazarus and the fight against the collectors work out for Cerberus. But seeing that apaprantly most players blow up the base, TIM should have known better.

And yeah, Cerberus might cross the line sometimes, but lines must be crossed for scientific progress to be made a lot of the time. That's not to suggest I like a lot of their experiments they did, but the alternative is to leave those rocks unturned and then you miss out on substantial scientific opportunities that could yield immeasurable benefits down the road.

Or they could bring immeasurable problems. Project Overlord and playing with Reaper tech between 2&3 did almost as many harm as project Lazarus did good.
Sometimes lines have to be crossed, but even then, some kind of caution is advisable. Cerberus overambitious, "results at any price" mentality isn't suited for working with something as dangerous as reaper tech.

[chessplayer209]

Forst1999 wrote...

And yeah, Cerberus might cross the line sometimes, but lines must be crossed for scientific progress to be made a lot of the time. That's not to suggest I like a lot of their experiments they did, but the alternative is to leave those rocks unturned and then you miss out on substantial scientific opportunities that could yield immeasurable benefits down the road.

Or they could bring immeasurable problems. Project Overlord and playing with Reaper tech between 2&3 did almost as many harm as project Lazarus did good.
Sometimes lines have to be crossed, but even then, some kind of caution is advisable. Cerberus overambitious, "results at any price" mentality isn't suited for working with something as dangerous as reaper tech.

Just analyze the tech using remotely controlled robots, then there's no indoctrination risk.

Forst1999 wrote...
Or they could bring immeasurable problems. Project Overlord and playing
with Reaper tech between 2&3 did almost as many harm as project
Lazarus did good.

IIRC they also did good things. Have you played ME3 yet?

Modifié par chessplayer209, 06 septembre 2013 - 02:27 .