71 respuestas en este tema

[congokong]

Just to chime in, I'm not going to argue that Cerberus does many questionable practices before becoming outright terrorist monsters in ME3. But I don't like the Alliance = good, Cerberus = bad mentality many characters (including Shepard often) seem to have.

 

I remember that negotiation with "Lord" Darius in ME1. The Alliance gave this loony and his crime syndicate stockpiles of weaponry. That makes the Alliance indirectly responsible for all the innocent bloodshed Darius' people commit with those weapons. This act likely has caused more damage than anything Cerberus did (again, before ME3). Yes, the Alliance had reasons for it, but so does Cerberus. Reasons alone aren't justification.

 

It also bothers me how Shepard is forced to turn on Cerberus between ME2/ME3; regardless of any rapport earned previously. Ex: I didn't like how Shepard gave the SR2 to the Alliance, the group that did nothing while Cerberus built that ship to stop the Collectors. Yes, it was made partially with stolen plans, but at least Cerberus saved those human colonies with it; regardless of any secondary ambitions TIM had.

 

It felt like a, "Thanks for giving me everything I needed to save the galaxy. Now screw you."

[straykat]

Just to chime in, I'm not going to argue that Cerberus does many questionable practices before becoming outright terrorist monsters in ME3. But I don't like the Alliance = good, Cerberus = bad mentality many characters (including Shepard often) seem to have.

 

I remember that negotiation with "Lord" Darius in ME1. The Alliance gave this loony and his crime syndicate stockpiles of weaponry. That makes the Alliance indirectly responsible for all the innocent bloodshed Darius' people commit with those weapons. This act likely has caused more damage than anything Cerberus did (again, before ME3). Yes, the Alliance had reasons for it, but so does Cerberus. Reasons alone aren't justification.

 

It also bothers me how Shepard is forced to turn on Cerberus between ME2/ME3; regardless of any rapport earned previously. Ex: I didn't like how Shepard gave the SR2 to the Alliance, the group that did nothing while Cerberus built that ship to stop the Collectors. Yes, it was made partially with stolen plans, but at least Cerberus saved those human colonies with it; regardless of any secondary ambitions TIM had.

 

It felt like a, "Thanks for giving me everything I needed to save the galaxy. Now screw you."

 

They're both signs of what humans think they need to do just to survive in the traverse. And this kind of shows how lacking in power the humans are too. They're scraping by. They aren't the Mary Sue race some say they are.

 

But anyways.. Cerberus turns on it's own people.. it's self-defeating. They're supposed to be colonial defense, but they think turning colonists into labrats is a good thing. Not the way to go for me. No matter what the promised results may be. The Alliance doesn't do that afaik.

[congokong]

They're both signs of what humans think they need to do just to survive in the traverse. And this kind of shows how lacking in power the humans are too. They're scraping by. They aren't the Mary Sue race some say they are.

But anyways.. Cerberus turns on it's own people.. it's self-defeating. They're supposed to be colonial defense, but they think turning colonists into labrats is a good thing. Not the way to go for me. No matter what the promised results may be. The Alliance doesn't do that afaik.

I fail to see the relevance. Failure to harm humans for the greater good just because they are human can be interpreted as racist. Do you really believe the Alliance and other human government organizations never turn on their own? I have fond memories of Hackett using Shepard as a political scapegoat to appease the batarians after stopping the reaper invasion in Arrival...

[Sifr]

Just to chime in, I'm not going to argue that Cerberus does many questionable practices before becoming outright terrorist monsters in ME3. But I don't like the Alliance = good, Cerberus = bad mentality many characters (including Shepard often) seem to have.

 

I remember that negotiation with "Lord" Darius in ME1. The Alliance gave this loony and his crime syndicate stockpiles of weaponry. That makes the Alliance indirectly responsible for all the innocent bloodshed Darius' people commit with those weapons. This act likely has caused more damage than anything Cerberus did (again, before ME3). Yes, the Alliance had reasons for it, but so does Cerberus. Reasons alone aren't justification.

 

The Alliance also uses Shepard even in ME1 to cover up some of the extremely questionable things they've done.

 

Like when Shepard is sent after one of the rediscovered probes with nuclear payloads that were sent out during the First Contact War, as the Alliance would be raked over the coals by the Council if another species were to find it first.

 

It's part of what makes me think Cerberus might have been better to keep as a rogue Alliance Black Ops group like it was in ME1, to be the ME equivalent of Section 31 from Star Trek, who consider themselves to be the necessary evil that protects the Federation? We've seen that the Alliance has the capacity to be extremely underhanded at times, so having Cerberus have been formed as a means to keep things off the books made a lot of sense and ties into why they have a lot of covert support from some in the Alliance brass.

 

It's not that having Cerberus be a NGO isn't a bad retcon, but it did make the lines too clearly drawn between who were supposed to be the good guys and bad guys from ME2 onwards. Having Cerberus remain as the Bad Good Guys (or Good Bad Guys) of the Alliance actually might have been a better route to take, leading to their Heel Turn into full villain mode by ME3.

[themikefest]

I fail to see the relevance. Failure to harm humans for the greater good just because they are human can be interpreted as racist. Do you really believe the Alliance and other human government organizations never turn on their own? I have fond memories of Hackett using Shepard as a political scapegoat to appease the batarians after stopping the reaper invasion in Arrival...

Don't forget that the Hackett clown failed to inform Shepard that he/she may encounter Cerberus on Mars. He never cared about Shepard. Too bad my Shepard couldn't give him the bird instead of saluting him throughout the game.

[straykat]

I fail to see the relevance. Failure to harm humans for the greater good just because they are human can be interpreted as racist. Do you really believe the Alliance and other human government organizations never turn on their own? I have fond memories of Hackett using Shepard as a political scapegoat to appease the batarians after stopping the reaper invasion in Arrival...

 

Yes, yes.. I'm racist. Such a bad, bad man I am. /slit wrists 

 

I'll be here when we tone it down a bit. I know you have some points, but I'd rather discuss without the demagoguery. 

 

Needless to say, the Alliance and Cerberus job is colonial defense. Nothing more, nothing less. How you jumped to racism, because their directive is to protect these specific people, I don't know.

[Arkhne]

Shepard should've just blown up the Collector Base and gone rogue with EDI/SR2 at the end of ME2. It's clear throughout the trilogy that Shepard has better judgement and/or morals than the Alliance OR Cerberus (though, for some reason, the writters thought Shepard should feel obligated to do stupid things like surrender to the Alliance prior to ME3).

After the initial Reaper attacks, the Council could easily have contacted Shepard to reinstate them as a Spectre to solve the crisis that Shepard foresaw in ME1. ME3 could've played out almost identically, nixing all the Alliance/Cerberus BS.

 

If it wasn't clean, I have no love for either organization, both have been wrong far too often for me to place any trust in either of them.

[Sifr]

Don't forget that the Hackett clown failed to inform Shepard that he/she may encounter Cerberus on Mars. He never cared about Shepard. Too bad my Shepard couldn't give him the bird instead of saluting him throughout the game.

 

In Hackett's defense, they didn't know that Cerberus would be on Mars or go after the Archive, the communications were choppy enough that any conversation had to be brief and between the evacuation of Earth and the entire armada of Reapers to deal with, Hackett hasn't got the time to Skype or hold Shep's hand. If he did know Cerberus were on Mars, he probably figured that Shepard could handle it.

[straykat]

Shepard should've just blown up the Collector Base and gone rogue with EDI/SR2 at the end of ME2. 

 

That's what I was hoping. That whole ending scene with your favorite squaddies giving you the nod and you staring out the window. It just gave the feeling that you were finally ready to just focus on the Reapers and your team started with the people with you there.

 

But nope! Someone over at Bioware had to do the Boyscout thing. We already went through that. And then they ruin the ending with a tacky DLC like Arrival. 

[Arkhne]

That's what I was hoping. That whole ending scene with your favorite squaddies giving you the nod and you staring out the window. It just gave the feeling that you were finally ready to just focus on the Reapers and your team started with the people with you there.

 

This could easily have led to an ME3 that I would have hailed as the best game in my lifetime. Instead, I hate ME3. It's not just certain stupid story elements like the SR2 handover (or the entirety of that abomination called "Citadel DLC"), it's the way it plays. The focus is on menial tasks, listening to everybody's problems, regardless of how insignificant they are (ie: pair of random humans on the pressidium talking about being volunteers), the whole game structure is an insult to Shepard. Your best asset (Amazing commander, with an elite squad) is not a damned errand boy/girl, but apparently, that's more than Bioware can handle.

 

ME3 should have been an epic guerilla war against the Reapers, instead, it's a mockery of Shepard and everything s/he has accomplished.

[straykat]

This could easily have led to an ME3 that I would have hailed as the best game in my lifetime. Instead, I hate ME3. It's not just certain stupid story elements like the SR2 handover (or the entirety of that abomination called "Citadel DLC"), it's the way it plays. The focus is on menial tasks, listening to everybody's problems, regardless of how insignificant they are (ie: pair of random humans on the pressidium talking about being volunteers), the whole game structure is an insult to Shepard. Your best asset (Amazing commander, with an elite squad) is not a damned errand boy/girl, but apparently, that's more than Bioware can handle.

 

ME3 should have been an epic guerilla war against the Reapers, instead, it's a mockery of Shepard and everything s/he has accomplished.

 

There's a part of me that's with you. But I guess I just accept it and try to like it on it's own terms.

 

ME2 is my favorite of the bunch though and all my complaints about ME3 revolve around it not being like ME2.

[Arkhne]

There's a part of me that's with you. But I guess I just accept it and try to like it on it's own terms.

 

ME2 is my favorite of the bunch though and all my complaints about ME3 revolve around it not being like ME2.

 

I keep trying. My most progressed game is just after Rannoch I think. MP is about the only thing of ME3 I can honestly say I like, and that is a buggy mess that is often more frustrating than fun.

 

I totally agree with ME2 being the best/favourite. I really enjoy playing it, and unlike some other systems (DA2's Friendship/Rivalry comes to mind), I don't feel particularly constrained by the Paragon/Renegade system, there is usually an alternative solution to most problems that do not require reputation checks. One of my main problems with replaying games is that I find some systems restrictive, like I have to play characters certain ways if I don't want to be punished by having things locked out by it.

 

ME2 doesn't really do this, I feel free to play it however I like, I don't feel like there are any real punishment for not adhering to a specific Paragon/Renegade Playthrough Archetype. I can, say, play Zaeed's Loyalty mission as a Renegade, and then Overlord as a Paragon, all whilst being understanding and supportive of my crew, whilst being a smartarse to NPCs (Especially Aria, I get the feeling she likes/respects Shepard more when Shepard challenges her preconceptions on how the goal should be achieved, whilst still getting the same results, a la Patriach in ME2 and the merc bands in ME3).

 

I guess I feel free to play my way in ME2, whilst ME3 makes me feel like I have to be everybody's errand boy, solving their unimportant problems, whilst the galaxy is going to hell during the reaper invasion. ME3's behaviour for Shepard is more like what you would expect some time between ME1 and ME3, solving problems and building alliances IN PREPARATION for the Reapers, not after the fact.

[themikefest]

In Hackett's defense, they didn't know that Cerberus would be on Mars or go after the Archive, the communications were choppy enough that any conversation had to be brief and between the evacuation of Earth and the entire armada of Reapers to deal with, Hackett hasn't got the time to Skype or hold Shep's hand. If he did know Cerberus were on Mars, he probably figured that Shepard could handle it.

There is no Hackett defense. After  Mars, he says he thought Cerberus would try something. He failed as a leader to inform Shepard of a possible threat he/she may encounter. Instead of crying like a baby that we can't defeat the reapers conventionally, why couldn't he say be on the lookout for any Cerberus presence?

[congokong]

Yes, yes.. I'm racist. Such a bad, bad man I am. /slit wrists

I'll be here when we tone it down a bit. I know you have some points, but I'd rather discuss without the demagoguery.

Needless to say, the Alliance and Cerberus job is colonial defense. Nothing more, nothing less. How you jumped to racism, because their directive is to protect these specific people, I don't know.

I never said you were racist. I was inferring that some might see the Alliance that way if their stance was not to sacrifice certain individuals if they were human. But Cerberus is about humanity in general, not just their colonies.

[congokong]

Don't forget that the Hackett clown failed to inform Shepard that he/she may encounter Cerberus on Mars. He never cared about Shepard. Too bad my Shepard couldn't give him the bird instead of saluting him throughout the game.

That is what I am always saying. Hackett sees Shepard as a tool, nothing more, and has done his share screwing over Shepard when he is not using them.

[Aimi]

There is no Hackett defense. After  Mars, he says he thought Cerberus would try something. He failed as a leader to inform Shepard of a possible threat he/she may encounter. Instead of crying like a baby that we can't defeat the reapers conventionally, why couldn't he say be on the lookout for any Cerberus presence?

never assign to character malice what can be adequately explained by writer derps

also the near-total lack of anything approaching a briefing in any of the games

[congokong]

never assign to character malice what can be adequately explained by writer derps

also the near-total lack of anything approaching a briefing in any of the games

...Maybe the writers are implying Hackett is just stupid. lol

 

Ex: Sending Shepard to rescue Kenson alone because backup, or using a companion for the mission instead, would jeopardize the mission and/or tip the batarians off about Alliance involvement ...despite Shepard's extensive history with the Alliance. Apparently, Hackett never heard of infiltration or how sending someone like Thane in would be far less likely to implicate the Alliance than Shepard. Sending in Legion would almost certainly just make it look like a geth attack.

[Jukaga]

Shepard should've just blown up the Collector Base and gone rogue with EDI/SR2 at the end of ME2. It's clear throughout the trilogy that Shepard has better judgement and/or morals than the Alliance OR Cerberus (though, for some reason, the writters thought Shepard should feel obligated to do stupid things like surrender to the Alliance prior to ME3).

After the initial Reaper attacks, the Council could easily have contacted Shepard to reinstate them as a Spectre to solve the crisis that Shepard foresaw in ME1. ME3 could've played out almost identically, nixing all the Alliance/Cerberus BS.

 

If it wasn't clean, I have no love for either organization, both have been wrong far too often for me to place any trust in either of them.

 

Yep, Shep & co should have been independent operators in ME3 with the Alliance and Cerberus vying for Shepard's attention. Each major mission would have two versions and each faction would have a few dozen discrete side missions each. Dreamin'

[Aimi]

...Maybe the writers are implying Hackett is just stupid. lol
 
Ex: Sending Shepard to rescue Kenson alone because backup, or using a companion for the mission instead, would jeopardize the mission and/or tip the batarians off about Alliance involvement ...despite Shepard's extensive history with the Alliance. Apparently, Hackett never heard of infiltration or how sending someone like Thane in would be far less likely to implicate the Alliance than Shepard. Sending in Legion would almost certainly just make it look like a geth attack.

well yeah

also using the Normandy to bombard things would have trivialized a solid fifty percent of missions over the course of the games

[DeathScepter]

...Maybe the writers are implying Hackett is just stupid. lol

 

Ex: Sending Shepard to rescue Kenson alone because backup, or using a companion for the mission instead, would jeopardize the mission and/or tip the batarians off about Alliance involvement ...despite Shepard's extensive history with the Alliance. Apparently, Hackett never heard of infiltration or how sending someone like Thane in would be far less likely to implicate the Alliance than Shepard. Sending in Legion would almost certainly just make it look like a geth attack.

 

 

Don't Forget that Shepard works for Cerberus, I am sure that even if Legion, Kasumi and Thane left, I am sure that T.I.M would have interest in what the Batarians are doing and might send Kai Leng or a Prototype Cerberus Phantom or at least useful Infiliration gear to get any extra information on the Batarians as well

[straykat]

I never said you were racist. I was inferring that some might see the Alliance that way if their stance was not to sacrifice certain individuals if they were human. But Cerberus is about humanity in general, not just their colonies.

 

I gathered that, but since I was advocating one side, I'll associate with it. It's pretty strong language. It's not their job to worry about everyone else.

 

And I never meant anything about being actively antagonistic to others. I just meant that the Alliance lives up to it's motto of colonial defense better than Cerberus does. Cerberus thinks they're still "defending" people by turning them into monsters... because that will somehow lead to powerful humans in the longrun. Sometimes it's hard to argue with their results, but it's a betrayal. 

[Arkhne]

That is what I am always saying. Hackett sees Shepard as a tool, nothing more, and has done his share screwing over Shepard when he is not using them.

 

And this is just one of many reasons why I see Hackett and TIM the same. As well as the Alliance and Cerberus by extension.

With the exception of Anderson, who seems a pretty good guy, the leadership of both seems to care little for Shepard as a person, often witholding or just glossing over missing information. Yes, they "trust" Shepard to get the job done as efficiently as humanly possible. Yes, they "believe" in Shepard's ability. However, that is as far as it goes. Technically, as a Spectre, Shepard outranks them, a little information, if not respect, would go a long way. Shepard needs to start pulling said Spectre rank and pre-facing every mission with "I'm not going in blind, what aren't you telling me?"