657 réponses à ce sujet

[Vortex13]

No, all of the experiments range from insane to insane and stupid. The exception, again, is the Lazarus project - that's about immortality, and if it we actually a technically feasible project humanity would burn trillions seeing it to fruition.

 

But otherwise, what experiments do we see Cerberus run? The Rachni, which starts insane (let's enslave a sentient race as child soldiers!)

 

 

You know, I would; as a self proclaimed Rachni fan; have had no qualms with Cerberus-like tactics with the Rachni. Providing it was in the realm of augmenting frontline troops with advances in armor and kinetic barrier bypassing derived from Rachni genes and enzymes, or in organic drone colonization efforts and not "Mwahaha! Evil Space Bug Army!" and only if the Rachni overall proved to be feral. Obviously, the Queen being capable of communication throws any mass experimentation and dissection out the airlock, but the scientists' treatment of the Rachni as possible research subjects wouldn't have been outlandish considering all the galaxy knew about them was that they were highly aggressive species that invaded Citadel space and never once attempted communication. 

 

The real stupid move was when the scientists choose to treat the Rachni subjects like animals (intellectually) and figured that a futuristic version of a dog kennel was enough to contain a species that has been documented to be capable of reverse engineering mass effect FTL engines, and building near space age level architectural feats on their home world. Real smart move there Cerberus, if you are supposed to be the best and brightest that humanity has to offer, then our species deserves to be secondary to aliens like the Asari and Salarians. 

[Master Warder Z_]

Unfortunately, they were always implied to be evil.

Not to my eye.

Not to any conclusive degree anyway. No more so then any other faction in their strain anyway.

[Revan Reborn]

I'm surprised at you Revan... Game canon (per the Wiki) clearly indicates that events of ME1 all took place within a 1-year timespan.- 2183 CE.  By the time 2184 CE rolls around, the Wiki clearly states that Cerberus has already developed a clone of Commander Shepard and is working on reconstructing the "original" Shepard. 

 

Shepard first joins the Normandy on it's "shakedown' run and the Wiki has the following to say about Kaidan specifically:

 

"Finally Kaidan was transferred to the SSV Normandy under Captain Anderson, where he later worked alongside Commander Shepard."

 

The Wiki also clearly states the following about the Normandy SR-1: "Commissioned in 2183, the Normandy was initially commanded by an Alliance officer named Elli Zander. After Zander came into conflict with turian chief engineer Octavio Tatum over the limits of the ship's drive core, Zander was removed and David Anderson placed in command. Shortly thereafter, the Normandy was handed over to Commander Shepard when the Commander became the first human Spectre, and served as Shepard's main source of transportation and base of operations."

 

So, quite clearly the Eden Prime attack did not occur right at the beginning of 2183 CE and Shepard did not join the Normandy until sometime after Kaidan.  So, at most, it's 1 year..  Now, we have to allow at least 4 days after the wrap-up of ME1 and the destruction of the Normandy (per Pressly's statement at the beginning of ME2) and we also have to allow some time for Liara and Feron to recover Shepard's body from the Shadow Broker (not to mention whatever time it took for the Shadow Broker to obtain Shepard's corpse)... and then allow Cerberus to reconstruct in the very specific amount of time Jacob tells Shepard he's been on Cerberus' operating table... I'm sure you can now see where this is going.

 

Shepard did not have much opportunity to have known either Ashley or Kaidan as "long-time" friends prior to Virmire.  Whether or not they became "good friends" in a short time is a matter of the player's choice.  The dialogue is there to come across as barely tolerating either one of them or both...  Still, your original statement did include the implication that they had been good friends for a long time.  I'm not suggesting that the decision is or isn't a dilemma, just that the player actually controls how much of a dilemma they want to interpret it to be.  What undermines the construction of this problem comes in ME2, where the Paragon dialogue choice responds with "I had to save as many as I could."  The scenario really failed to indicate clearly that one choice over the other involved a clear difference in the overall number of people saved.  It is completely unknown how many of the Normandy crew may have been with the squadmate who armed the bomb... even though it is clearly indicated in the dialogue that there were others with him/her fending off the incoming geth.

What really concerns me is your blind faith in fan-created websites in which are no way canon and should not be treated as the word of truth. Also, it's worth noting the kind of relationship and the depth of it isn't bound by time constraints. The way ME1 presents the dialogue between Shepard and Kaidan is if they are best friends. BioWare implies strongly they have a lot in common and through this a strong bond is created. You should know as well as anyone else that friendships and relationships aren't bound by time and can actually advance quite quickly, regardless of whatever the actual timetable of the game may be.

 

It is implied Shepard already knows Kaidan before even landing on Eden Prime. We don't know to what degree they are familiar with each other. You are merely speculating based on the limited knowledge we have and where the game starts. My point is, as always, you are too quick to dispute a claim because you don't agree with it when it's quite possible BioWare intended something else. BioWare could have chosen any of your companions to be sacrificed during Virmire. Instead, they focused on Kaidan and Ash. Think about that for a moment and ask yourself why that is.

[UpUpAway95]

What really concerns me is your blind faith in fan-created websites in which are no way canon and should not be treated as the word of truth. Also, it's worth noting the kind of relationship and the depth of it isn't bound by time constraints. The way ME1 presents the dialogue between Shepard and Kaidan is if they are best friends. BioWare implies strongly they have a lot in common and through this a strong bond is created. You should know as well as anyone else that friendships and relationships aren't bound by time and can actually advance quite quickly, regardless of whatever the actual timetable of the game may be.

 

It is implied Shepard already knows Kaidan before even landing on Eden Prime. We don't know to what degree they are familiar with each other. You are merely speculating based on the limited knowledge we have and where the game starts. My point is, as always, you are too quick to dispute a claim because you don't agree with it when it's quite possible BioWare intended something else. BioWare could have chosen any of your companions to be sacrificed during Virmire. Instead, they focused on Kaidan and Ash. Think about that for a moment and ask yourself why that is.

 

Have at her, Revan... don't care.  I KNOW what I can make Shepard say to Kaidan in the game, and I know I can make it appear as though Shepard barely tolerates Kaidan using those dialogue options.  Other people can check it out for themselves if they wish.  The Wiki timeline jives with the timelines presented both in the Codex and in dialogue in the game.  People can also check that out themselves if they so wish.  You're the one that stated that they had been friends for a long-time, not me.  I said they could be "good friends" regardless... or the player has the choice to construct the relationship so that they are not such good friends.

 

Instead of focusing on why Bioware chose Kaidan and Ash, ask yourself why a Commander might find it difficult to "sacrifice" one member of his/her team over another regardless of whether or not they were friends; and how the appearances of sacrificing an adversary on the team might have repercussions for that commander in the eyes of hiis/her superiors and other members of that team... and then ask yourself why Bioware might have wanted to leave the friendship or not options open to allow the player to construct the Commander's character in different ways.

[straykat]

I never viewed Kaidan as particularly close. I think both Kaidan and Shep being on the ship is Anderson's idea. Same with Joker. They're all kind of strange, but Anderson thinks outside the box.

 

I think with being friends with Kahlee, he's got an admiration for biotics too. Probably why Kaidan got his shot. I bet he's also the "brass" that helped Jack get in at Grissom.

[Revan Reborn]

Have at her, Revan... don't care.  I KNOW that I can make Shepard say to Kaidan in the game using and I know I can make it appear as though Shepard barely tolerates Kaidan using those dialogue options.  Other people can check it out for themselves if they wish.  The Wiki timeline jives with the timelines presented both in the Codex and in dialogue in the game.  People can also check that out themselves if they so wish.  You're the one that stated that they had been friends for a long-time, not me.  I said they could be "good friends" regardless... or the player has the choice to construct the relationship so that they are not such good friends.

Considering you "don't care," you still are regularly replying to my posts. My point is "long-time friend" can be a very relative term. You may have only known someone for a few months, yet you feel as if you've known them for years. Again, using a wiki to bolster your argument is worthless and is just adding water to an already sinking ship. True, you can be a "renegade" and make the discussions not as organic as the "paragon" options, yet you are still presented with the dilemma of choosing Kaidan or Ash. This is meant to be a difficult choice and clearly BioWare was intending the player to struggle with who to choose, likely because you would have bonded with both companions substantially by now.

[Laughing_Man]

Just going to point out that friendship is not always measured in time.

 

Going with a comrade at your side into hell and back has a way of building strong connections.

[Master Warder Z_]

Just going to point out that friendship is not always measured in time.

 

Going with a comrade at your side into hell and back has a way of building strong connections.

 

Just the same I have several people from my old battalion whom I served with for years...That I wouldn't spit on if they were on fire now.

 

That works both ways, just because you serve with someone during a time of conflict, doesn't automatically make you band of brothers 2.0

[Laughing_Man]

Just the same I have several people from my old battalion whom I served with for years...That I wouldn't spit on if they were on fire now.

 

That works both ways, just because you serve with someone during a time of conflict, doesn't automatically make you band of brothers 2.0

 

True enough.

[Ibn_Shisha]

It is implied Shepard already knows Kaidan before even landing on Eden Prime. We don't know to what degree they are familiar with each other. You are merely speculating based on the limited knowledge we have and where the game starts. My point is, as always, you are too quick to dispute a claim because you don't agree with it when it's quite possible BioWare intended something else. BioWare could have chosen any of your companions to be sacrificed during Virmire. Instead, they focused on Kaidan and Ash. Think about that for a moment and ask yourself why that is.

Where is this implied?  I seem to recall your initial discussions with Kaidan being very 'getting to know you,' as well as the option to ask Dr. Chakwas what she knows about him.

[Master Warder Z_]

True enough.

 

That said, you can actually play that dynamic pretty good with the whole rogue agent/terrorists without a cause trope.

 

I mean its never done well in video games, but it has been done well, mostly because they never actually build up a relationship enough because there just isn't that much investment in actually establishing a personal connection with the antagonist.

 

That said...if you do it right, there is no greater antagonist then one that used to be a ally.

 

I mean that's why Haman Karn works as a foil to Char so well, she was once his protege but due to disagreements with politics and alike(you know how it is) the relationship soured, plus Haman was a complete psychopath and murdered his pregnant girlfriend and then preceded to try to seduce him into a relationship...which the idiot turned down and then it devolved from there and resulted in Char running the **** away like any sane man.

 

o.o Except fast forward five years later and Haman is back at head of a army.

 

And she absolutely despises him, and he absolutely despises her, and its a complete inverse of how their relationship was back in 0083.

 

 

o.o Haman so crazy, and yet she's pretty hot...

[UpUpAway95]

Considering you "don't care," you still are regularly replying to my posts. My point is "long-time friend" can be a very relative term. You may have only known someone for a few months, yet you feel as if you've known them for years. Again, using a wiki to bolster your argument is worthless and is just adding water to an already sinking ship. True, you can be a "renegade" and make the discussions not as organic as the "paragon" options, yet you are still presented with the dilemma of choosing Kaidan or Ash. This is meant to be a difficult choice and clearly BioWare was intending the player to struggle with who to choose, likely because you would have bonded with both companions substantially by now.

 

I don't care about you flinging insults at me... have at it.

[von uber]

Kaiden / Ash generally comes down to (for me) ensuring the bomb goes off - so whoever is there stays there. Nothing else matters, I don't really mind (or care) one way or the other which ones gets cremated. I certainly don't feel like I have 'bonded' with either of them.

[DaemionMoadrin]

Kaiden / Ash generally comes down to (for me) ensuring the bomb goes off - so whoever is there stays there. Nothing else matters, I don't really mind (or care) one way or the other which ones gets cremated. I certainly don't feel like I have 'bonded' with either of them.

 

Kaidan is an officer, a biotic and received special training. Losing him would be a greater loss than losing Ashely, who could be replaced by almost any random soldier. Not to mention that if you tell Kaidan to drop a subject, he obeys... while Ashley tries to argue.

[MrFob]

Kaiden / Ash generally comes down to (for me) ensuring the bomb goes off - so whoever is there stays there. Nothing else matters, I don't really mind (or care) one way or the other which ones gets cremated. I certainly don't feel like I have 'bonded' with either of them.

 

Haha, my reasoning is exactly the other way round. They do explain to Shepard earlier that once armed, the bomb is absolutely sure to go off and if Kashlay tell me that they'll make sure on top, than that's not really a worry for me any longer. If they thought there was a chance we'd loose the bomb (and thus the mission) they would have asked for help. After all, they are both experienced officers. If they tell me that they can handle it and I should go the other way, than I trust them. So ultimately for me it comes down to how many of our people I can still get of that base before it goes and that means going for whoever is with the salarians.

[Pasquale1234]

Kaidan is an officer, a biotic and received special training. Losing him would be a greater loss than losing Ashely, who could be replaced by almost any random soldier. Not to mention that if you tell Kaidan to drop a subject, he obeys... while Ashley tries to argue.

Kaidan does have specialized skills, but Ashley makes a much better tank and is competent with all weapon types. Which of them adds more to your team depends somewhat on the vocation of your Shepard and your general playstyle. I sometimes like to snipe from a distance, and Ashley's skill with a sniper rifle is very helpful there. With heavy armor, immunity, and health regen, I can send Ashley out into the fray - with an assault rifle or shotgun - to draw aggro away from squishier squaddies (Wrex also serves that role well).

Also - Shepard might be concerned about Kaidan's L2 implant and his frequent headaches. That can make him a higher risk squadmate.

[Master Warder Z_]

Kaidan is an officer, a biotic and received special training. Losing him would be a greater loss than losing Ashely, who could be replaced by almost any random soldier. Not to mention that if you tell Kaidan to drop a subject, he obeys... while Ashley tries to argue.

 

._.

 

To her degree no?

 

She'd be special forces easy if she didn't have her traitor grand dad's last name.

[UpUpAway95]

._.

 

To her degree no?

 

She'd be special forces easy if she didn't have her traitor grand dad's last name.

 

In some respects, the player also controls how competent their squadmates become.  It is possible to not level them up and leave them effectively be bumbling idiots in combat.

[Master Warder Z_]

In some respects, the player also controls how competent their squadmates become.  It is possible to not level them up and leave them effectively be bumbling idiots in combat.

 

Well she did get promoted and reassigned post ME and eventually does become a Spectre if she survives so...

[UpUpAway95]

Well she did get promoted and reassigned post ME and eventually does become a Spectre if she survives so...

 

Yes, she does get promoted... but Shepard can still disagree on whether it's a good idea or not.  All I'm saying is that there is a lot of latitude in how many different ways the player can "play around" with even this apparently very binary dilemma.  I was surprised by the amount of latitude there was written into this game... particularly into ME1, which at first seemed to boil down to a couple of "very binary" choices (at least IMO).  Even after as many playthroughs as I've done, I can still get surprised by some of the dialogue I "accidentally" unlock.

 

... and to take this back to the original question posed by this thread... Yes, I'd like more these sorts of dilemmas in ME:A.  There are, I think, a few things working against Bioware belng able to deliver as much of this sort of variety now (with increased costs of voice acting and the very high expectations of the public which wasn't as high with with ME1)... but I'm still hopeful and very much looking forward to this game regardless.

[Medhia_Nox]

I disagree. The desire for your faction to be the dominant power - whether the faction is defined by race, nation, religion, willing membership or any other kind of distinction, doesn't matter - isn't intrinsically evil. In fact, to maintain and acquire power for their faction is a legitimate duty of leaders and governments. The evil always lies in the methods. The questions are always: how far are you willing to go to get that power, and what will you do with it once you have it?

 

Disagree so much with this, but isn't that obvious at this point?

The very fact that people appeal to a poorly understood concept (power) to defend their imaginary teams (race, religion, nation, family) makes any justification of any action that infringes on the well-being of others... inherently "evil".  

 

Yes, that means I believe all governments to be intrinsically evil.  That humans require a system of control to be placed upon them does not exonerate the systems.

 

I believe Aristotle.  I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law.  

 

Was Cerberus "evil"?  I honestly don't care.  What I know is that I oppose clandestine research beholden to nobody but those fanatics interested in said research. There is nothing moral about a scientist that would suggest I would say:  "Oh, he studies science - therefore he will always work in the best interest of everyone."  

 

Why is Cerberus best suited to decide how to protect humanity?  That they do so without accountability is what brings to question their morality.  

[Laughing_Man]

Yes, that means I believe all governments to be intrinsically evil.  That humans require a system of control to be placed upon them does not exonerate the systems.

 

...

 

Why is Cerberus best suited to decide how to protect humanity?  That they do so without accountability is what brings to question their morality.  

 

So if everyone is inherently "evil" and untrustworthy, who would Cerberus be accountable to? And what's the point since they are "evil" anyway?

 

Shouldn't Cerberus be praised for ignoring the "evil" and inefficient system and doing what they think is right?

 

And if everyone and everything is "evil", what is even the meaning of the word "evil"?

 

What is the point of anything? Playing video games? Drinking tea? Posting pointless posts on a forum dominated by pointless babbling? Living?

All of those things cost resources that could have been used for whatever it is you do not consider "evil", they also potentially infringe on the well being of others.

[straykat]

Cerberus annoys me because they turn on humanity. I don't have to call them "evil" so much as just liars and traitors. It's pretty self-defeating when you start mutating your own people, in the hopes that you somehow become some "new" superior race from the research. For a group that espouses "humanity first" principles, they ultimately don't even want to be human. Being human isn't good enough for them.

 

There's that and they are yet another group that prefers scavenging to actual innovation. That's a problem with the whole setting.. the high dependency on ancient tech. There's no imagination or evolutionary challenge in simply digging up things.

[Prince Enigmatic]

Kaidan is an officer, a biotic and received special training. Losing him would be a greater loss than losing Ashely, who could be replaced by almost any random soldier. Not to mention that if you tell Kaidan to drop a subject, he obeys... while Ashley tries to argue.

 

James Vega in Mass Effect 3. 

 

Why I will always save Kaidan.   Virmire wasn't a moral dilemma for me. I thought Kaidan was great, and I loathed Ashley. No brainer. 

[UpUpAway95]

There's that and they are yet another group that prefers scavenging to actual innovation. That's a problem with the whole setting.. the high dependency on ancient tech. There's no imagination or evolutionary challenge in simply digging up things.

 

That issue can be expanded to include a huge amount of popular science fiction out there though.  The conundrum being that, otherwise, the science fiction writer is tasked with solving these huge speculative issues science has "logically..." when the reality is that human science can't solve them yet in reality... and then the scientific public slams the writers for essentially not also being the "best" quantum physicists and engineers humanity has to offer.  It's a classic "rock and a hard place" scenario really.