1394 réponses à ce sujet

[Kabooooom]

Well, you ignore what you want... and I'll ignore what I want. We are discussing something here that has been put forth as "not making sense" after all. Personally, I don't see anything in the corridor run that precludes it from leading from the Presidium to the Wards and I see the elevators as not being meaningless but rather as being somewhat similar to the elevators we took from C-Sec (Academy) to the Director's office. The "architecture" of the Citadel never really made much sense overall even in ME1, changed dramatically in ME2, and then morphed again in ME3. I don't think Bioware ever really drew up a real floor plan.

We never go to C-Sec Academy (which is in the Wards) in ME3. We went to C-Sec Headquarters (which is in the Presidium, tucked away in the access corridors behind the walls). So, you are mixed up a little. It's not confusing after all because the locations aren't even the same in the first place..

That said, you are correct that there is a direct way to get to the Wards from the Presidium via shuttle or skycar. Below the Presidium, there are massive vertical skycar channels that you can see in ME1. They have windows on one side for much of their length, facing out towards the Wards. If travelling straight up, presumably they are somehow continuous with the skycar channels seen behind the main walls of the Presidium in ME3. Further evidence of this is that you can rapid transport by skycar between all of these locations easily enough.

So as far as things that dont make sense, I think all of this actually does make sense. And for that matter, the Presidium architecture in ME1 actually makes a ton of sense. It's clear they put a lot of thought into how things would be arranged in a Stanford Torus style space station. What did you think didnt make sense about it?

The architecture of the Citadel didnt change at all between ME1 and 2. You just go to different areas. Similarly, in 3, you just are in a different part of the Presidium.

[Undead Han]

Honestly, maybe things would be different if the Catalyst assume the image of the sunflower girl. 

 

 

or a little girl for BroShep and a little boy for FemShep.... ah, Bioware, such a missed chance.

 

I think the whole idea of the Catalyst was flawed from the start, but if they were going to stick with that word baby, it might have been better if the Catalyst continually shifted forms in conversation similar to the Leviathan. The child could just be one form, another the Virmire casualty, Thane, Anderson, Wrex or Mordin (determined by genophage outcome), Miranda if she was killed by Kai Leng, whomever died on Rannoch, ect. Rather than having a child voice actor, it also should have been voiced by this guy except with the Reaper voice effect filter applied.

[Fixers0]

The architecture of the Citadel didnt change at all between ME1 and 2. You just go to different areas. Similarly, in 3, you just are in a different part of the Presidium.

 

Obviously the Visual style of the Presidium in ME3 is very different different from the previous game. You don't tell me there isn't a noticeable difference between this:

 

 

And:

 

[MrFob]

Obviously the Visual style of the Presidium in ME3 is very different different from the previous game. You don't tell me there isn't a noticeable difference between this:

 

 

And:

 

 

 

It actually looks remarkably similar to me in these two pictures, given that there are so many graphical upgrades to the engine.

Between the reconstruction of the presidium after Saren's attack and the fact that we might be on the other side of the ring as in ME1 (as Kaboooooom said), I don't have a problem with that at all.

The only issue I can see is that in 3, the open space in the middle of the ring seems to be a little bit broader but not sure if that's not just the color filter. Anyway, I think it's reconstructed pretty well over all.

[Kabooooom]

I agree, aside from the graphical overhaul which obviously changes things a bit, the architecture isnt that different. It's still a Stanford Torus with tall walls lined by offices, a central "lake" lined by terraces or small hills, bridged by pedestrian-type walkways overhead, some of which contain important locations like Huerta memorial.

Its overall basically the same, we just visit different parts. Almost all of the "Presidium" locations in ME3s hub are located on the high "walls" on one side, with the exception of the Commons. Which is still higher than the ground floor area explored in ME1, which of course could be (and probably is) a completely different region of the torus.

[iM3GTR]

I've realised that using nukes basically renders most of the plot points obsolete.
Mass Effect 1: Feros- Why didn't the geth nuke Zhu's hope, go to the lower levels, then nuke the Thorian?
Mass Effect 2: Collector Ship- Take one of those drive core nukes like on Virmire and detonate it inside the Collector Ship. Then they don't have the means to abduct anymore colonists.
Mass Effect 3: Reaper War- The Reapers could use highly advanced supernukes to wipe out all the military people on the planet? For example, Menae.

On another note: Why didn't the Tuchanka reaper just fly up to dodge Kalros and use red beams of death to kill it? Then Mordin couldn't deploy the cure.

On yet another note: How could the Quarian fleet suddenly be more powerful than the rest of the galaxy's fleets so quickly? Yes, you're probably thinking
"Ah-ha! The game states that they just fitted weapons on the liveships. So you, my dear friend are mistaken."
But how? Where did the weapons come from? The other two games say the Quarians had next to no resources, so where did they get the raw materials to build all those mass accelerator canons and other stuff.

I bet lots of people are going to reply debunking all this rambling but here it is, anyway.

[Natureguy85]

Obviously the Visual style of the Presidium in ME3 is very different different from the previous game. You don't tell me there isn't a noticeable difference between this:

 

 

And:

 

 

I hope you're being sarcastic because I think this might be the thing that most survived from ME1 in the entire next two games. The main difference is the wider skybar and river in the second picture.

[Fixers0]

I agree, aside from the graphical overhaul which obviously changes things a bit, the architecture isnt that different. It's still a Stanford Torus with tall walls lined by offices, a central "lake" lined by terraces or small hills, bridged by pedestrian-type walkways overhead, some of which contain important locations like Huerta memorial.

Its overall basically the same, we just visit different parts. Almost all of the "Presidium" locations in ME3s hub are located on the high "walls" on one side, with the exception of the Commons. Which is still higher than the ground floor area explored in ME1, which of course could be (and probably is) a completely different region of the torus.

 

The overall aesthetics have remaind the same, sure. But some key specifics have changed, as somebody pointed out earlier, the embassies are now a completly different location. The bridges have been severly remodeled, and so is the ground level. 

 

Overall it captures the essence of the Presidum just fine, but as somebody with experience with game design it is abundantly clear that reconstructed the entire presidum for Mass Effect 3, likewise the Council chamber is just a  generated backgroud imagine from the first game.

[Quarian Master Race]

I think the better question is, why is Shepard allowed into the presidium and the council chambers with armor and weapons in ME1/2?

IIRC, in ME1, you can even draw your weapon in the council chambers and just randomly shoot at the walls. It's only the game restrictions that prevent you from just shooting some diplomats because you think it's funny.

Why isn't this a high security zone?

Indeed, ME1 (and 2) Council space seems to have some extreme form of open carry allowed. It's not just official Council military either, you can have random krogan bounty hunters, quarian pilgrims, archeologists and everyone else wandering around with all manner of rifles, shotguns, knives etc. strapped to them in plain view. Hell, Wrex's and Tali's recruitment quests are contingent upon the fact that literally anyone seems to be able to run around the wards (or anywhere) strapped with a full arsenal of guns and grenades, just in case they need them for a dirty nightclub owner or some pesky assassins in an alleyway.

 

I'm guessing N7 Alliance/Poster boy/Gary Sue privileges. Though you're barred from the Council Chambers in ME2 and don't meet the council in the flesh. Holy Crap, something that makes sense in universe in ME2. 

 

But it's completely retarded how Shepard is walking around practically naked and alone in a overcrowded station that has deep cover agents, terrorists, organized criminals, pissed off Krogan warlords, and rogue mercenaries. 

As mentioned, it's not just Gary Sue, literally all your squadmates can do the same. As you point out, it's also pretty retarded that this practice stops right when the war actually comes to the Citadel (ME3) and it could conceivably become a useful policy.

Another strange thing is that you can actually argue to arm the citizenry in one of the little arguments between a salarian and turian at one of the weapon shops, but even if you choose to arm the citizenry, you can't carry yourself (also reduces your war assets because biower is pro-gun control I guess?)
 

On yet another note: How could the Quarian fleet suddenly be more powerful than the rest of the galaxy's fleets so quickly? Yes, you're probably thinking
"Ah-ha! The game states that they just fitted weapons on the liveships. So you, my dear friend are mistaken."
But how? Where did the weapons come from? The other two games say the Quarians had next to no resources, so where did they get the raw materials to build all those mass accelerator canons and other stuff.

Quarians attacked Korlus between ME2 and 3 to acquire the materials

http://blog.bioware....liancenewsnet3/

That said, the Migrant Fleet's high war asset score probably isn't just to do with guns, as despite the huge number of armed ships, they only have 3 that are Dreadnought scale. Hackett initially sends you to get their help for logistical reasons (resupply, troop movements etc.), which though more boring sounding are just as if not more important considerations (especially given the krogan situation). The fact is that the quarians simply have a huge number of ships that are highly useful for a lot of things, and the quarians are portrayed in universe as being highly skilled in utilizing them, tactically and strategically.

[Natureguy85]

That said, the Migrant Fleet's high war asset score probably isn't just to do with guns, as despite the huge number of armed ships, they only have 3 that are Dreadnought scale. Hackett initially sends you to get their help for logistical reasons (resupply, troop movements etc.), which though more boring sounding are just as if not more important considerations (especially given the krogan situation). The fact is that the quarians simply have a huge number of ships that are highly useful for a lot of things, and the quarians are portrayed in universe as being highly skilled in utilizing them, tactically and strategically.

 

 

Don't put any thought into the values. Bioware clearly didn't. The values for some things are ridiculous, with some people being worth half a fleet.

[Quarian Master Race]

Don't put any thought into the values. Bioware clearly didn't. The values for some things are ridiculous, with some people being worth half a fleet.

I think this sort of criticism would be applied to any system that attempts to assign absolute military values to things as disparate as individuals, weapon systems like fleets(taking into account things like training, experience and morale), and even strategic resources like food or fuel in a highly interdependent war effort. That constraint taken into effect, I don't think that assigning relative importance to such things is really all that ridiculous. Was J, Robert Oppenheimer and the Manhattan project less important to the US war effort than the USS Yorktown  and Task Force 17? What about comparing Erwin Rommel to the Bismarck, then comparing both to the oil fields in the Causcases or the breadbasket of Ukraine? 

 

Comparing fleet vs fleet is simple by comparison. In short, they can shoot things or move things, so all of their military value is quantifiable in that manner. Sheer advantages in tonnage would be enough to reasonably conclude that one is superior to another given relative technological parity and crew competence. 

 

I think by far the far most egregious values are to things like the krogan (or the emphasis on infantry in general in ME universe warfare). Primitive savages who headbutt things should have next to no utility in an age of orbital ship mounted railguns that can precisely hit targets only a few meters across from literally several AU away, and have enough power to destroy entire planetary biospheres with relatively limited bombardment. However, ultimately the numbers are what they are and can't be dismissed out of hand as an illegitimate lore source.

[Natureguy85]

I think this sort of criticism would be applied to any system that attempts to assign absolute military values to things as disparate as individuals, weapon systems like fleets(taking into account things like training, experience and morale), and even strategic resources like food or fuel in a highly interdependent war effort. That constraint taken into effect, I don't think that assigning relative importance to such things is really all that ridiculous. Was J, Robert Oppenheimer and the Manhattan project less important to the US war effort than the USS Yorktown  and Task Force 17? What about comparing Erwin Rommel to the Bismarck, then comparing both to the oil fields in the Causcases or the breadbasket of Ukraine? 

 

Comparing fleet vs fleet is simple by comparison. In short, they can shoot things or move things, so all of their military value is quantifiable in that manner. Sheer advantages in tonnage would be enough to reasonably conclude that one is superior to another given relative technological parity and crew competence. 

 

I think by far the far most egregious values are to things like the krogan (or the emphasis on infantry in general in ME universe warfare). Primitive savages who headbutt things should have next to no utility in an age of orbital ship mounted railguns that can precisely hit targets only a few meters across from literally several AU away, and have enough power to destroy entire planetary biospheres with relatively limited bombardment. However, ultimately the numbers are what they are and can't be dismissed out of hand as an illegitimate lore source.

 

You have a great point for wars here on Earth. Naval battles are different from air battles, and leaders do matter. Here, it's about the enemy we're facing. If the ground war were important, something like the Krogan would be more important. However, no matter how many husks you kill, you're still being attacked by 2km tall spaceships. The game does give an example of "Leaders matter" with Quarian Admiral Korus since his life or death affects the value of the Quarian War Asset. However this war is mostly dependent on you having ships with guns and blowing up the enemy.  In this fight, the enemy ships are the enemy as opposed to being the enemy's supplies.

[Kabooooom]

The overall aesthetics have remaind the same, sure. But some key specifics have changed, as somebody pointed out earlier, the embassies are now a completly different location. The bridges have been severly remodeled, and so is the ground level.

Overall it captures the essence of the Presidum just fine, but as somebody with experience with game design it is abundantly clear that reconstructed the entire presidum for Mass Effect 3, likewise the Council chamber is just a generated backgroud imagine from the first game.

Well, with regard to the embassies, this was actually explained in the game - the Geth attack literally destroyed the embassies in ME1. This is in the codex, and (I think) in game dialogue as well. With regards to the commons, this wasn't the ground floor in ME3, it was a terrace level and it was clearly intended to represent a different region of the Presidium ring (the Citadel tower isnt visible), and not the same region as that explored in ME1. I don't think this was ambiguous either - even Barla Von moved shop, presumably because his **** got fubared by the Geth.

[Fixers0]

Well, with regard to the embassies, this was actually explained in the game - the Geth attack literally destroyed the embassies in ME1. This is in the codex, and (I think) in game dialogue as well. With regards to the commons, this wasn't the ground floor in ME3, it was a terrace level and it was clearly intended to represent a different region of the Presidium ring (the Citadel tower isnt visible), and not the same region as that explored in ME1. I don't think this was ambiguous either - even Barla Von moved shop, presumably because his **** got fubared by the Geth.

 

But then why do the embassies and the rest of the visable Presidum in ME2 look exactly the same like they looked in ME1, safe for some furniture. Anderson and Bailley both state that the Presidum got rebuiled quickly. I also don't see the council moving the enire embassy district to a differnt location on a whim, given their conservative tendacies.

[BloodyMares]

But then why do the embassies and the rest of the visable Presidum in ME2 look exactly the same like they looked in ME1, safe for some furniture. Anderson and Bailley both state that the Presidum got rebuiled quickly. I also don't see the council moving the enire embassy district to a differnt location on a whim, given their conservative tendacies.

Yes, and what's more, in ME3 the Citadel Tower is seen completely rebuilt and it was wrecked in ME1. If they could rebuild the Tower, I'm sure it was easier to rebuild the embassies.

[Kabooooom]

But then why do the embassies and the rest of the visable Presidum in ME2 look exactly the same like they looked in ME1, safe for some furniture. Anderson and Bailley both state that the Presidum got rebuiled quickly. I also don't see the council moving the enire embassy district to a differnt location on a whim, given their conservative tendacies.

This is a good point, and like many things in the trilogy, it was probably a combination of oversight / forgetting their own lore. Sort of like how Cerberus was always an Alliance Black Ops group (and feasibly that could have still been their back story in ME2), but then they made those horrible comics that completely changed it and TIMs back-story...either because they forgot what (I'm guessing Drew) wrote, or because they were infatuated with Cerberus, or both.

[BloodyMares]

This is a good point, and like many things in the trilogy, it was probably a combination of oversight / forgetting their own lore. Sort of like how Cerberus was always an Alliance Black Ops group (and feasibly that could have still been their back story in ME2), but then they made those horrible comics that completely changed it and TIMs back-story...either because they forgot what (I'm guessing Drew) wrote, or because they were infatuated with Cerberus, or both.

Oh don't even start with Cerberus. There are so many things that are wrong with Cerberus since ME2.

[Kabooooom]

Oh don't even start with Cerberus. There are so many things that are wrong with Cerberus since ME2.

Some of the Cerberus stuff I dont mind at all. Like how they suddenly have a huge fleet. TIM owns Cord-Hislop Aerospace, one of the largest starship designers in Alliance space. It's the main front company of Cerberus, and like the 22nd century equivalent of Boeing in that they secure secret government aerospace contracts (which is how they built the SR1 and SR2, that's a little lore fact most people missed). And, to boot, TIM has known about the Reapers for 30 years, thanks to his idiotic back story. So, in light of all that, I have no problem believing that he had the means and motive to secretly build a fleet over the past few decades in anticipation of the Reaper invasion.

But some of the other stuff with Cerberus...just, goddamn man...who possibly thought some of that was a good idea? Were there no rational dissenters among the writers??

I am stoked for Andromeda, but there is literally only ONE thing that would give me pause on buying it..

And that is Cerberus.

[MrFob]

Some of the Cerberus stuff I dont mind at all. Like how they suddenly have a huge fleet. TIM owns Cord-Hislop Aerospace, one of the largest starship designers in Alliance space. It's the main front company of Cerberus, and like the 22nd century equivalent of Boeing in that they secure secret government aerospace contracts (which is how they built the SR1 and SR2, that's a little lore fact most people missed). And, to boot, TIM has known about the Reapers for 30 years, thanks to his idiotic back story. So, in light of all that, I have no problem believing that he had the means and motive to secretly build a fleet over the past few decades in anticipation of the Reaper invasion.
 

 

Relevant article. (the second comment underneath and the responses there are also relevant.)

 

Also, have you read Retribution? In the novel (which is referenced in the game), Anderson and Kahlee Sanders together the turian military land a major coup against Cerberus, almost crippling the organization. They do this using file, provided by Paul Grayson who used to be an under cover operative posing as high ranking executive at Cord-Hislop. So you can bet they took CH apart in that little anti-Cerberus extravaganza.

 

All this happens after ME2 ends, so less than 6 months before ME3 starts.

No my friend, Cerberus is and remains just wacky.

[Kabooooom]

Relevant article. (the second comment underneath and the responses there are also relevant.)

Also, have you read Retribution? In the novel (which is referenced in the game), Anderson and Kahlee Sanders together the turian military land a major coup against Cerberus, almost crippling the organization. They do this using file, provided by Paul Grayson who used to be an under cover operative posing as high ranking executive at Cord-Hislop. So you can bet they took CH apart in that little anti-Cerberus extravaganza.

All this happens after ME2 ends, so less than 6 months before ME3 starts.
No my friend, Cerberus is and remains just wacky.

Yes, I've read every single book, comic, or associated Mass Effect material in the extended lore with one exception - Deception. I figured it wasn't worth my time. I may be mistaken, but I think in Retribution, that's where a lot of the lore I cited in my post was laid out.

I agree, dealing such a "crushing blow" to Cerberus only months before ME3 is somewhat problematic for their omnipresence, but I dont think it is problematic for their fleet, specifically. As I said in my post, the ONLY way to build a fleet that massive would be over years. And TIM had thirty (ish). I dont think the Retribution events necessarily trump that.

But they do trump the size of his slave army. Presumably, he had been recruiting and kidnapping and implanting soldiers with Reaper tech like crazy after the Grayson fiasco. But that's the thing - unlike building a fleet, this would have to have been done in the few months between Retribution and ME3.

That is a far bigger problem for Cerberus. It's almost like they initially intended to write them out as a minor force in ME3, and then someone (cough cough) decided to make them your opponents for 70% of the game.

[Mistic]

That is a far bigger problem for Cerberus. It's almost like they initially intended to write them out as a minor force in ME3, and then someone (cough cough) decided to make them your opponents for 70% of the game.

 

The numbers can make sense if Shepard is present in each and every mission by Cerberus in ME3 (so the enemies Shepard meets are more or less the actual forces of the organization). But I fear it may not be the case.

[MrFob]

@Mistic: Shepard does not see all Cerberus forces directly. Here are a few that he definitely doesn't see:

- The soldiers on Benning that killed Balaal (might be the same ones we fight but the ones that are there when we get there seem to just have arrived, otherwise all civilians would already have been shot or kidnapped).

- The Cerberus forces that occupy (!!!) Eden Prime

- The Cerberus forces that act as a distraction on Sur'Kesh

- Hackett also frequently alludes to other Cerberus operations that we are not even remotely aware of in his Holo-Comm updates.

 

Also, if we accept the premise of ME3's MP (which I'd be happy to dismiss because a lot about MP doesn't make any sense), then Cerberus is opening more and more theaters of war all over the galaxy and continuously sends troops there.

 

 

Oh, but on a different note, I am sure this was already mentioned in this thread somewhere (maybe even by me) but I just thought abou this while discussing the protheans and the keepers in another thread:

So the protheans from Illos went to the Citadel after the reaper invasion was over to sabotage the keeper signal and help the next cycle. By the time they did this the reapers were already back in dark space. Also, those protheans studied the whole reaper invasion problem years before going to the Citadel. Why the heck didn't they create a computer record (similar to Liara's time capsule) and leave it on the Citadel for the Asari to find as soon as they get on the station.

St first I thought the keepers might have removed any such thing but they don't seem to have a problem with prothean stuff still lying around on the station. After all, they leave the conduit receiver alone. In my cycle we build time capsules you prothean primitives.

[Quarian Master Race]

You have a great point for wars here on Earth. Naval battles are different from air battles, and leaders do matter. Here, it's about the enemy we're facing. If the ground war were important, something like the Krogan would be more important. However, no matter how many husks you kill, you're still being attacked by 2km tall spaceships. The game does give an example of "Leaders matter" with Quarian Admiral Korus since his life or death affects the value of the Quarian War Asset. However this war is mostly dependent on you having ships with guns and blowing up the enemy.  In this fight, the enemy ships are the enemy as opposed to being the enemy's supplies.

Koris is actually one of the best examples of having war assets tied to exceptional individuals in a "show, don't tell" sort of manner. Getting him killed doesn't just lose his own points, the lack of his leaderships gravely affects the Civilian Fleet as well. Xen's also a pretty good example, given that she has an additional 45 assets tied to using salvaged geth tech to write a VI for the Crucible (assuming you support her over Tali in the on ship argument between them) in addition to the 25 she gets simply by being around already.

I agree with your assessment of how pointless it seems, but for some reason the ground warfare is important in the Reaper war. My interpretation of this was always that the forces that we are building are simply a delaying action for the Crucible. There's not much point in trying to acquire fleets to actually destroy the Reapers in ship to ship combat, because that's an entirely unwinnable battle given their huge advantages both qualitative and quantitatively (and the narrative beats us over the head with this over and over). Ground forces (and orbital fire support as well as logistical support for them) help slow their genocide and give us time to build the Crucible. 

Of course, this is all contingent upon the Reapers being so stupid that they actually bother with such, rather than the Bratboy just shutting down the relay network to isolate everyone (or the Reapers simply flying to the Citadel and doing it themselves first if it is incapable of such), harvesting what they need for building their Reapers and then exterminating everyone else via planetary bombardment. That they still don't shut down the relays even when they bother to take the Citadel (allowing us to attack Earth and even deploy the Crucible in the first place) is even more stupid.

The thing you say about supplies are another example of something that doesn't make sense. One of the conversations between the two door guards on the Normandy has one of them alluding to the supposed fact that Reapers don't have supply lines. However, if you get both quarian and geth support for the war then ask Hackett about how they are helping, he states "the quarians are providing evac and fire support, while the geth attack Reaper supply lines". I would assume they do have at least some sort of nutritional requirements given that the organic components of their Husk creatures aren't simply going to maintain themselves. Hell, the Cannibal's "eat" each other and fallen allies/enemies. The ones that use weapons would also presumably have other logistical requirements (replacement parts/ weapons/ ammunition in the form of both blocks and clips), though then again they could just use magic tech like the Reapers, I suppose.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

ME3's Cerberus is able to do all of this stuff and never really spread themselves too thin. I guess they stole the Star Forge from KotOR.

[Fixers0]

Some of the Cerberus stuff I dont mind at all. Like how they suddenly have a huge fleet. TIM owns Cord-Hislop Aerospace, one of the largest starship designers in Alliance space. It's the main front company of Cerberus, and like the 22nd century equivalent of Boeing in that they secure secret government aerospace contracts (which is how they built the SR1 and SR2, that's a little lore fact most people missed). And, to boot, TIM has known about the Reapers for 30 years, thanks to his idiotic back story. So, in light of all that, I have no problem believing that he had the means and motive to secretly build a fleet over the past few decades in anticipation of the Reaper invasion.

That still is contrived as heck. You don't just stomp several dozen interstellar mega-corporation out of the ground in thirty years, I need not remind you that humanity is one the weakest power economicallyin Mass Effect.

 

Furthermore, Jack Harper was nothing but a disillusioned and disgruntled gun-for-hire at the end of the First contact war.  How such a man could aquire the initial money, resources, technology, intellect and manpower needed to start his conspiracy  that rivals the current establishement without ever being noticed. Especially when you come from a society which is still so relatively isolated from the rest of interstellar society. Mind you, Cerberus was doing grand operation some twenty years before ME1, only about five years af First contact War, Timewise it makes not sense at all.

 

The best way I can call it is disproportionate, realisticaly there wouldn't be any Human enterprises operating on a galactic scale, the Turian wouldn't construct a Stealth ship a species that only appeared on the galactic theatre twenty terran years ago (which is nothing by council standards) and there would be no Human splinter group that rivals not only the entire goverment, (and by that, all governments of earth) but the near united galaxy as well.

 

Shamus Young wrote some excellent pieces on Cerberus in his Mass Effect recap series, just explaining how the dumb the whole ordeal is:

 

http://www.shamusyou...dtale/?p=30943