437 réponses à ce sujet

[lovgreno]

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...
where as the zombies you're fighting were the very cerberus people studying the acquired
technology. 

But wouldn't it be stupid of TIM to do the same misstake twice? Oh yeah, he did make that misstake again and again and again....

[STG]

I still don't understand why you couldn't simply keep the base and hand it over to the council. Pretty nice plot hole right there...

As a sole survivor I would rather blast the whole thing into fine mist than give it to Cerberus. And Miranda, who justifies Thorian Creepers, Rachni experiments and Husks actually doesn't agree with handing the base to TIM. That was actually a shock to me.

Did anyone speak to EDI later on in the game? Just before the IFF mission you can ask her about "Your Job" and it seems that some parts of Sovereign are actually in Normandy to help EDI perform "Anti-Reaper" cyberwarfare. I am calling either EDI or the crew being indoctrinated.

[FuturePasTimeCE]

lovgreno wrote...

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...
where as the zombies you're fighting were the very cerberus people studying the acquired
technology. 

But wouldn't it be stupid of TIM to do the same misstake twice? Oh yeah, he did make that misstake again and again and again....

Hmmm... judging from the game... opening scene (attacked), cerberus lazarus project space station (attacked), reaper IFF (attacked), collector's vessel (attacked), and horizon (attacked)... is this guy actually making mistakes, and isn't going to allow for something to occur twice?

Modifié par FuturePasTimeCE, 28 mai 2010 - 03:23 .

[FuturePasTimeCE]

AwesomeEffect2 wrote...

^^ That was a reaper, not a collector base. And even if the same could happen, Cerberus just has to send some good robots instead of people. I'm sure they could do that.

but the collectors were working for the reapers, and was building a new reaper within the base... ? ? ?

[lovgreno]

FuturePasTimeCE wrote... Hmmm... judging from the game... opening scene (attacked), cerberus lazarus project space station (attacked), reaper IFF (attacked), collector's vessel (attacked), and horizon (attacked)... is this guy actually making mistakes, and isn't going to allow for something to occur twice?

It is a trend that indicates that Cerberus projects are usualy going fubar, that's for sure.

[lovgreno]

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...

AwesomeEffect2 wrote...

^^ That was a reaper, not a collector base. And even if the same could happen, Cerberus just has to send some good robots instead of people. I'm sure they could do that.

but the collectors were working for the reapers, and was building a new reaper within the base... ? ? ?

And indoctrinating machines should be easier than indoctrinating the more complex organics. Especialy as the reapers are also machines.

[Ieldra]

Nightwriter wrote...
Yes yes, the Reaper threat is more important than Cerberus, blah blah blah.

So you keep the base. ME3 commences. TIM tells you he has produced valuable technology using the base. You say excellent. The Reaper battle arrives, you cry, "Release the technology!"

... and Cerberus trots out the asari Reaper, the volus Reaper, the turian Reaper, and more, each one of which cost the lives of 50% of their prospective races. Your alien allies in the battle realize they have been betrayed and turn on you. The battle dissolves into chaos. TIM is babbling in your communicator about how this is the vision of the future and there will be a time when the strength of a nation is dictated by how many Reapers you have at your command, this is what real power is!

You kill everybody, even the Reapers. Hooray. Then the new alien Reapers you have created turn on you as one and tell you humanity will be enslaved and that all organic life must be purged. TIM sits in front of his sun with his teacup, "Oh, bother, gone wrong again!"

Thank God it was all worth it.

I have to say the part about the Reapers made of the nonhuman species does sound horribly plausible.

Even so, I could construct an equally bad scenario on the decision to destroy the base, only it would be simpler: the Reapers destroy all intelligent life in the galaxy without significant opposition. All the more dissatisfying that we can't even attempt to give the base to the Council or the Alliance.

The problem with this is we have meta-reasoning that the latter scenario won't happen, but our Shepards don't know that. The in-world arguments for keeping the base remain intact.

[FuturePasTimeCE]

lovgreno wrote...

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...

AwesomeEffect2 wrote...

^^ That was a reaper, not a collector base. And even if the same could happen, Cerberus just has to send some good robots instead of people. I'm sure they could do that.

but the collectors were working for the reapers, and was building a new reaper within the base... ? ? ?

And indoctrinating machines should be easier than indoctrinating the more complex organics. Especialy as the reapers are also machines.

Okaaaaaay. The reapers are the ones who created indoctrination. how the hell can you indoctrinate something that created it?

Modifié par FuturePasTimeCE, 28 mai 2010 - 03:31 .

[lovgreno]

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...
 Okaaaaaay. The reapers are the ones who created indoctrination. how the hell can you indoctrinate something that created it?

What I meant was that those robots Awesomeffect2 wanted to send to the base might be even easier to indoctrinate. Sorry if I was unclear.

Modifié par lovgreno, 28 mai 2010 - 03:42 .

[Nightwriter]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I have to say the part about the Reapers made of the nonhuman species does sound horribly plausible.

Even so, I could construct an equally bad scenario on the decision to destroy the base, only it would be simpler: the Reapers destroy all intelligent life in the galaxy without significant opposition. All the more dissatisfying that we can't even attempt to give the base to the Council or the Alliance.

The problem with this is we have meta-reasoning that the latter scenario won't happen, but our Shepards don't know that. The in-world arguments for keeping the base remain intact.

Exactly. Too much of the decision is left up to metagaming. Since the thoughtful gamer knows you will probably be able to save the galaxy regardless the decision to keep the base because the survival of the galaxy is more important becomes moot.

We do have the Reaper datapad - it is not as if we came out of the mission with no information.

And I beileve we cannot give the base to the Council because there is no opportunity (like Cerberus is just going to let that happen when they're right there) and because the Omega 4 Relay is in the Terminus Systems, how could Council ships go there?

Also Future, what does this mean exactly?

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...

right. keeping a BASE might have not likely ended up as to being like the whole Reaper IFF research mission. where as the zombies you're fighting were the very cerberus people studying the acquired technology. 

I don't quite understand.

[scorptatious]

I destroyed the base personally. For one, the galaxy wouldn't know how to use such advanced technology. Even if we did figure it out, Cerberus would probably just use it to gain power in the galaxy, which is a very bad thing considering what they have done and are capable of.

[Ieldra]

Nightwriter wrote...
Too much of the decision is left up to metagaming. Since the thoughtful gamer knows you will probably be able to save the galaxy regardless the decision to keep the base because the survival of the galaxy is more important becomes moot.

It does not if you think within the fictional world, which I always do. If the decision bites me in the ass, then so be it. I only wish that occasionally a Paragon decision would do that....

And I beileve we cannot give the base to the Council because there is no opportunity (like Cerberus is just going to let that happen when they're right there) and because the Omega 4 Relay is in the Terminus Systems, how could Council ships go there?

That also sounds plausible.

[Pacifien]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Since nearly all objections to the Collector Base on grounds of danger are invented by objectors with no support in-game that the Base is an active risk, why would they punish us for things they gave no suggestion or implication they would punish us for.

I doubt the developers would punish those who chose to save the Collector Base. Just as they wouldn't punish those who chose to destroy it. It's a roleplay decision, probably bearing no more consequence than the final decision to save the Destiny Ascension/concentrate on Sovereign affected ME2.

The only way a gamer would be "punished" for their decision is if they didn't like how the developers altered the environment to reflect their decision. Just as some have voiced displeasure at the cold welcome they received on the Citadel just because they chose to go after Sovereign full force rather than divert to the Ascension.

Those who choose to point out fallacy in destroying the base with reasons on how important the technology is to investigate and research are no more correct than those who choose to point out the fallacy in keeping the base and with reasons on how investigating and researching the base can blow up in their faces. Very likely you can "win" ME3 regardless.

Lame that such epic choices don't lead to massive changes in gameplay and epic game overs down the line? Possibly. But the game is entertainment. It takes balls to develop a game that gives a player that much choice only to rub it in the player's face that their choice was wrong. Bioware doesn't have the quad for it.

[Nightwriter]

When it comes to the inherent risk the base poses - just in and of itself - we really don't know. You can't assume it's safe any more than you can assume it's dangerous.

People have said the base poses an indoctrination threat, and I see others have argued against this. However I should say that there is a Reaper being made there. We know Reapers indoctrinate even when inactive. It is not unreasonable to consider the possibility that the danger of indoctrination is present.

But the real risk the base poses lies, not in indoctrination, but in how badly TIM could misuse the powerful technology there.

[nhsk]

Destroyed it. Cerberus can't handle the tech and as Legion so politely reminded me, my sig. Moreover he said that it does matter which route you take to reach a certain goal.

Now going to translate it, basing our technology on Reaper tech, especially some computers, mean that the Reapers will better know how to combat us and perhaps even take easier control of our systems than if we have a system that they know nothing about.

Yeah destroying the base will save lives.

[Ieldra]

Pacifien wrote...
Those who choose to point out fallacy in destroying the base with reasons on how important the technology is to investigate and research are no more correct than those who choose to point out the fallacy in keeping the base and with reasons on how investigating and researching the base can blow up in their faces. Very likely you can "win" ME3 regardless.

No, the decision itself is not fallacious. There are real arguments in that direction, even though I consider them weaker than those for keeping the base, even if they are about the risk that TIM will starting building Reapers from the nonhuman species. But the assumption underlying many of the arguments that "nothing good can come of it", that is fallacious because it's based on the completely irrational belief that reality has to follow human morality.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 28 mai 2010 - 06:59 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Nightwriter wrote...

Yes yes, the Reaper threat is more important than Cerberus, blah blah blah.

So you keep the base. ME3 commences. TIM tells you he has produced valuable technology using the base. You say excellent. The Reaper battle arrives, you cry, "Release the technology!"

... and Cerberus trots out the asari Reaper, the volus Reaper, the turian Reaper, and more, each one of which cost the lives of 50% of their prospective races. Your alien allies in the battle realize they have been betrayed and turn on you. The battle dissolves into chaos. TIM is babbling in your communicator about how this is the vision of the future and there will be a time when the strength of a nation is dictated by how many Reapers you have at your command, this is what real power is!

You kill everybody, even the Reapers. Hooray. Then the new alien Reapers you have created turn on you as one and tell you humanity will be enslaved and that all organic life must be purged. TIM sits in front of his sun with his teacup, "Oh, bother, gone wrong again!"

Thank God it was all worth it.

Do kindly explain how Cerberus, a group with under two hundred agents according to EDI, is going to pull off the Collector operation against the Council species who, yes, will defend themselves?

Or even why it would want to. For all the hassle, mess, and time, just for a handful of copycat Reapers against hundreds, when learning and miniaturizing the technology for, you know, ships and troopers can be done with a fraction of the cost and attention.


You aren't even making an argument. You're indulging in stupid-evil baseless cliches that aren't even supported in-universe. (Like, you know, the TIMian inclination to genocide.)

[Dean_the_Young]

lovgreno wrote...

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...

AwesomeEffect2 wrote...

^^ That was a reaper, not a collector base. And even if the same could happen, Cerberus just has to send some good robots instead of people. I'm sure they could do that.

but the collectors were working for the reapers, and was building a new reaper within the base... ? ? ?

And indoctrinating machines should be easier than indoctrinating the more complex organics. Especialy as the reapers are also machines.

Indoctrination is strictly a biological effect. It is a field that only effects organics.

Cyberwarfare viruses are a possiblity, but one that EDI has proven that Cerberus can more or less easily overcome at this point.

[Nightwriter]

You do realize that was a joke, Dean...? That was not me trying to make a serious argument intended to get a serious response, I assure you. I like to start arguments I can win. We have no indication that either the paragon or renegade choices will result in any specific scenario that can be predicted.

I am merely illustrating my mind's involuntarily imaginings (which tend toward hyperbole) in regards to the ways in which TIM might misuse the base as foreshadowed at the end of ME2 if you keep it.

[Dean_the_Young]

Nightwriter wrote...

When it comes to the inherent risk the base poses - just in and of itself - we really don't know. You can't assume it's safe any more than you can assume it's dangerous.

You have reason to assume it's safe because you've conquered it's defenses, and EDI would have free run of the systems after keeping it.

If it's dangerous to explore, these dangers are dangers you'll have to overcome when the Reapers come through anyway.

But the real risk the base poses lies, not in indoctrination, but in how badly TIM could misuse the powerful technology there.

Are the consequences of TIM playing the galact fiddle as he pleases worse than the lives saved in the battle against the Reapers, assuming you even live through?

Moreover, are the consequences of the technology gain he'll have (Reaper tech) significant when you consider that all other species will continue to study the Reapers and adapt their tech once the Reapers arrive and are destroyed? IE, is a human head-start on Reaper technology horrible when you consider that everyone is going to study and exercise Reaper tech during and after the Reapers regardless of your choice now?

[Dean_the_Young]

Nightwriter wrote...

You do realize that was a joke, Dean...? That was not me trying to make a serious argument intended to get a serious response, I assure you. I like to start arguments I can win. We have no indication that either the paragon or renegade choices will result in any specific scenario that can be predicted.

I am merely illustrating my mind's involuntarily imaginings (which tend toward hyperbole) in regards to the ways in which TIM might misuse the base as foreshadowed at the end of ME2 if you keep it.

Alas, no I didn't. Too many people have made that argument in all seriousness. Consider me fooled.

Feel free to ignore the other response as well, if you were joking about that.

[lovgreno]

"Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our

technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we

desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic life. You exist because

we allow it, and you will end because we demand it"



That sounds like the reapers wants us to use their technology so they can more easily controll us. As we see in the game reaper tech is used for just that purpose. EDI have been hacked before and can be so again. Familiar reaper tech could make hacking easier for a reaper. So perhaps we should do as the geth do and find an alternative.



But can Cerberus use it? We only have TIMs word for that. He cannot be trusted and have failed many times before.

[Pacifien]

Ieldra2 wrote...
But the assumption underlying many of the arguments that "nothing good can come of it", that is fallacious because it's based on the completely irrational belief that reality has to follow human morality.

Since the base goes to the Illusive Man whether you want it to or not, it's not a completely irrational belieft that nothing good can come of it. It's based on how you feel about Cerberus. No matter what results Cerberus manages, there is an underlying feeling that they are never to be trusted completely. They could use the technology found on the base to help against the Reaper threat, but after that threat is over, then they still have the technology and a goal of human dominance on the galactic sphere. This could potentially pit them against people's various versions of Shepard, and it was your decision that gave them the upperhand.

But if that were the case, then we're talking about a completely different war that occurs after the Reaper threat. And to some people, defeating the Reaper threat at all cost should be the primary goal to ensure there are even other wars for humans to even have in the future. Then keeping the base is your necessary evil. (Unless you're a Cerberus supporter, then just take out the word "evil.) However, keeping the base isn't going to ensure success just as destroying the base isn't going to ensure failure. Decisions and consequences do not follow a straight line. Doing A does not guarantee that B will follow. All the best planning in the universe, all the rational, clear-heading, pragmatic, pratical thinking isn't going to guarantee the plan works. Sometimes the irrational works, even if everything tells you that it only worked by accident.

[Nightwriter]

Actually no, the second one was serious.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

You have reason to assume it's safe because you've conquered it's defenses, and EDI would have free run of the systems after keeping it.

If it's dangerous to explore, these dangers are dangers you'll have to overcome when the Reapers come through anyway.

I do not believe we have any reason to assume an utterly alien base we know nothing about is safe.

This is not me saying it is therefore unacceptable to keep the base, understand - just that we most certainly can't assume it's safe. There is signficant possibibility of risk here and it should be acknowledged.

I don't think that just because you have conquered what you consider to be its defenses it means the threat has been neutralized. The Cerberus crew aboard the dead Reaper made that mistake. You can't be complacent.

Also I don't believe we'll necessarily be exploring Reapers when they invade - I imagine we'll be blowing them up from space.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Are the consequences of TIM playing the galact fiddle as he pleases worse than the lives saved in the battle against the Reapers, assuming you even live through?

I don't know what TIM will do with this base. All I know is I can't trust him - he might actually do something that costs us the galaxy. This is a complete unknown we're working with here, and TIM doesn't have a shiny track record. Cerberus has a history of doing more damage than it prevents.

I have the Reaper datapad, it is not as if I came away with nothing. I am confident that with this informaiton and the forces I hope to have amassed - geth, rachni, krogan, quarians - I am not throwing my only chance away.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Moreover, are the consequences of the technology gain he'll have (Reaper tech) significant when you consider that all other species will continue to study the Reapers and adapt their tech once the Reapers arrive and are destroyed? IE, is a human head-start on Reaper technology horrible when you consider that everyone is going to study and exercise Reaper tech during and after the Reapers regardless of your choice now?

A good point, but I feel that the whole galaxy studying the same technology equally (I assume strong laws will be passed in this regard very quickly to regulate the studies) is better than only TIM studying it.

Also it isn't necessarily that Reaper technology will lead to harmful things no matter what, just that TIM will use it for harmful things.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 28 mai 2010 - 07:46 .