37 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

No it doesn't. Saving the base doesn't necessarily mean Shepard prefers or agrees with Cerberus. And Destroying it doesn't necessarily mean Shepard prefers or agrees with the Alliance.

[Mr.House]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 H's idea:

Destroy the base = geth/EDI die in Red.
Keep the base = geth/EDI survive Red.

HAHAHA Paragons!

Can I give the base to the council or Alliance? Because the choice as it was in ME2 was horrible.

[Mr.House]

David7204 wrote...

No it doesn't. Saving the base doesn't necessarily mean Shepard prefers or agrees with Cerberus. And Destroying it doesn't necessarily mean Shepard prefers or agrees with the Alliance.

Thanks to Shepards really derpy stupid speech if you destroy it(even if you didn't destroy it for that reason) does in fact paint Shepard who blows the base up as totalty against Cerberus because HUMANITYS SOUL!

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

No it doesn't. Saving the base doesn't necessarily mean Shepard prefers or agrees with Cerberus. And Destroying it doesn't necessarily mean Shepard prefers or agrees with the Alliance.

And I never said they did

But that doesn't mean Shepard couldn't work with Cerberus if Shep saved the base

Funny enough, the Collector base choice basically did turn into Pro-Cerberus or Anti-Cerberus. The dialogue after the mission is when you can change that

Modifié par AresKeith, 28 décembre 2013 - 05:27 .

[themikefest]

David7204 wrote...
No. That would be utterly god-awful.

Having Shepard work for Cerberus if the base was saved would likewise be awful.

I have only saved the base once. And that was to see what  different dialogue there was.

If the opportunity presented itself where I was able to join Cerberus in ME3 I would have regardless if the base was destroyed or saved. 

[Mr.House]

themikefest wrote...

David7204 wrote...
No. That would be utterly god-awful.

Having Shepard work for Cerberus if the base was saved would likewise be awful.

I have only saved the base once. And that was to see what  different dialogue there was.

If the opportunity presented itself where I was able to join Cerberus in ME3 I would have regardless if the base was destroyed or saved. 

Sam would bet he final boss in that pt

[themikefest]

Mr.House wrote...

themikefest wrote...

David7204 wrote...
No. That would be utterly god-awful.

Having Shepard work for Cerberus if the base was saved would likewise be awful.

I have only saved the base once. And that was to see what  different dialogue there was.

If the opportunity presented itself where I was able to join Cerberus in ME3 I would have regardless if the base was destroyed or saved. 

Sam would bet he final boss in that pt

That would be interesting. You have to beat her at her own game, chess.

[Straw Nihilist]

David7204 wrote...

No it doesn't. Saving the base doesn't necessarily mean Shepard prefers or agrees with Cerberus. And Destroying it doesn't necessarily mean Shepard prefers or agrees with the Alliance.

Yup, giving cerberus  the big ass base because he doesn't prefer/agree with them sounds totally right yeah. 

Modifié par Billie Bones, 28 décembre 2013 - 05:36 .

[Steelcan]

I'd sooner hand Wreav the genophage cure, launch codes to all the WMD's of the Citadel races, the keys to a fancy new fleet of dreadnoughts before I destroyed the Collector Base

[Mr.House]

Steelcan wrote...

I'd sooner hand Wreav the genophage cure, launch codes to all the WMD's of the Citadel races, the keys to a fancy new fleet of dreadnoughts before I destroyed the Collector Base

If Bioware showed me that Cerberus was comptent with this stuff I might not have had issues, sadly that did not happen and apprently I can't contact the council or Anderson or really anyone because the plot says so.

[TheGranthamStyle]

I personally saved the base only in the hopes TIM and Cerberus could salvage something that could be used to destroy the Reapers, not because I "did what he wanted".

I'd hate to see options restricted based on choices, when the decisions behind those choices could be vastly different. I have a "destroy" mindset, but I was willing to give Cerberus a chance after all the good they did in ME2. I like seeing choices matter, like someone mentioned earlier, perhaps make things more difficult because of choices, but not off limits unless its a final choice such as Virmire.

[KevShep]

How the hell could your choice in ME2 of either destorying the base or saving it effect how the crucible is made in ME3 based on the choices of either destroy or control being available when the organics dont even know what the crucible is other then the fact that it "MIGHT" stop the reapers?

In order for Destory to be the only option on the crucible after you destroyed the collector base in ME2 would mean that the orgainics "KNOW" exactly what they are building and to modify it...This can not happen as per Admrial Hackett saying that he does not even know what the thing(crucible) will do or what it is even for so how can your choice in ME2 effect which option is available in ME3?....It does not make any sense!

The crucible is not designed or created by your choices...It was designed and created by other races of long ago so your choices SHOULD NOT MATTER IN ME2 in regards to the crucible. 

Modifié par KevShep, 30 décembre 2013 - 10:22 .

[Axdinosaurx]

I blow that s**t up every single time. I never trusted TIM and always felt like he was just playing me in ME2. After the crap from ME1 + Overlord I just equate Cerberus with "failed stupid experiment". Giving them the base seemed like a really stupid idea.