442 réponses à ce sujet

[ShadowWolf_Kell]

OfTheFaintSmile wrote...

I think it will be like someone said, if you blew up the base then you will co-operate and co-exist with the other alien races in an egalitarian fashion while renegades would be responsible for setting up a human dominated empire. If so, I'm happy being renegade

They might likely add something at the beginning to confirm major choices.  Much like the shuttle ride to meet TIM and Miranda and Jacob's little quiz.

I can definitely live with that.

[OfTheFaintSmile]

Lord_Metal666 wrote...

ShadowWolf_Kell wrote...

OfTheFaintSmile wrote...

You guys are assuming way too much with giving the base to TIM being a bad choice, we'll see in ME3 won't we?

Well since Paragon will have united the Krogan, Geth, Quarians, Rachni, yada yada to assist against the Reapers, it only makes sense they toss Renegades a bone with the Collector base.

That said, it'll offer nothing to the plot that something else doesn't for the Paragon side.  Inevitably, the outcome(s) will be similar through differing means.

Well I'm full renegade, and I saved the Rachni, united the Geth, yada yada, killed the council, put humans in control, and saved the collector base. Looks like I have alot of bones to play with.

On thing I intend to do though is to wipe out the Quarians don't really like them due to what they did to the geth. Will sacrifice them to the reapers the first chance I get..

Ah great renegade minds think alike, I too will annhilate the quarians first chance I get for their cowardly delusions of grandeur in creating the geth and trying to genocide them afterwards, this shall be fun. But I destroyed both the rachni and the geth heretic base

[Nezahoo]

Because of his "shady" personality , I think its hard to discuss him, intil The Prequal novel Mass Effect: Retribution is out.

[sirisaacx]

Cerberus is just plain Evil. For instance: Take Jack's research facility. TIM denies knowing about the project, but one of the video logs mentions restarting the experiments with the ascension project. In the second book, TIM is extremely involved in this project, and is experimenting on one of the children. He also HAPPENS to have people on the inside. Regardless of whether or not he knew about the project, he certainly approved of the experiments, as he allowed them to continue in the books, ordering the invasion and destruction of a Quarian Flotilla Ship just to get the kid back once she escaped. People who played just ME2 might not think Cerberus is so bad, but if you played ME1 and read the books, the evidence is irrefutable.

[Turin_4]

His actions maybe extremest but his intentions are good.

Insofar as his goals are protecting humanity, his intentions are good.  Where he goes off the reservation is taking that goal into 'dominate the galaxy and all other sapient species in it' territory.  That's not a good intention.  It's not a good intention to put your boot on someone's throat of that person might someday threaten you in the unknown future.  The galaxy isn't full of turians, after all-and the biggest and the baddest the galaxy has to offer, we've whipped their asses already.  Remember?

If anything he understands the galaxy's predicament, he knew the reapers were the largest threat period.

He only knew that at some point after the attack on the Citadel was thwarted.  People keep suggesting he's not so bad because of the Reapers, but some of the worst stuff Cerberus has done was done years or even decades before the Reapers were even a rumor in Shepard's reports back to the Council.

Second i doubt he wants power, if he did he'd be more secretive and
have a larger organization not stop at around 150 or so men. Also he
wouldn't mark everything so everyone recognized them.

He doesn't want personal power, he wants organizational and species power.  He's made no bones about that at all.  He's not doing this job while sorting mail, after all.  He's doing the job at a super-cool hologram-equipped base sipping the good stuff and smoking a cigarette.

Look this arguments gonna go on forever, so my last thing is.
The Illusive Man/Cerberus is the hand while the alliance and Shepherd
or the glove

Given that the intent of Cerberus is, unabashedly, human dominance over the galaxy, Cerberus is the fist holding a weapon, not just the 'hand'.

I agreed with him and saved the base for futher research to fight
the Reapers, even if the cost is cerberus dominace or whatever people
can speculate his motives into.

My personal motivation was the give him the base and keep a very close, watchful eye on what he does with it and where he takes what he learns from it.  I hope ME3 will offer that possibility, because frankly even a hardcore Renegade wouldn't simply trust the Illusive Man to do things right-much less my hardcore (mostly) Paragon Shepard.

...human dominated empire. If so, I'm happy with my renegade path choice.

  Except for the part about what must be done to maintain any empire.  Even the United States, which I think everyone can agree is the nicest major world power the world has seen in its history, has had to do plenty of awful things to maintain that status.

On thing I intend to do though is to wipe out the Quarians don't
really like them due to what they did to the geth. Will sacrifice them
to the reapers the first chance I get..

Yikes!  The quarians who did that to the Geth are centuries since dead, and some of the quarians around today want to co-exist and feel regret for what was done.  Furthermore, the geth that are around today don't themselves want to exteriminate the quarians.

People who played just ME2 might not think Cerberus is so bad, but if
you played ME1 and read the books, the evidence is irrefutable.

It's not irrefutable, but the Illusive Man's only defense against a charge of being pure dag-nasty evil - negligence - is really, really paper thin at this point.  There's much more reason to distrust that excuse than believe it, but it's faintly possible was honestly negligent...though given what sorts of things he was doing, negligence is plenty awful on its own.

[Arijharn]

[quote]Turin_4 wrote...

Three problems here.  One, it was very possible to foresee the threat posed by religious fundamentalism to the USA in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s-and in fact, many did.  We just weren't sufficiently aware and proactive.  Two, under this reasoning anything that might bear fruit is permissible at any time, because after all, you never know.  And finally, you're completely setting aside the very real threat posed by the kind of ends justify the means science and politics-they're not just (sometimes) effective, they're also frequently very dangerous.
[/quote]
Evidentally it wasn't possible to properly forsee the threat posed by religious fundamentalism if you, by your own admission, aren't sufficiently aware nor proactive. As for two; that is exactly my point, 'you willfully ignoring something because it doesn't fill into your notions of 'good or evil' is by default 'willful indifference' which to my opinion at least, is properly 'evil.'

While I certainly don't condone it (the costs were afterall; way to great even by my thinking and from its portrayal, was merely experimenting for the sake of it) medical science and international community has obviously (and rightfully) labelled Hitler's medical experimentation upon the jews and other 'undesirables' as nothing short of heinous, precipitating various laws to enforce ethical treatment of patients in medicine, but guess what: You're deluding yourself if you think that medical science didn't take from it the knowledge gained from it (for example, how long a naked person of average weight and height can withstand freezing cold water). This is, believe it or not, valuable knowledge to have.

In my mind, BioWare's inclusion of Cerberus was designed specifically in relation to these events irl, and to question that while it may (and is in regards to **** experiments) be unethical, should we completely dismiss them for it's origins rather than the import. You can't just selectively take out bits of the facts about Cerberus which are good as you understand it and ignore it for the total picture of whether Cerberus is 'good' or 'evil' (I'll explain later in the Normandy point).

[quote]
That would require giving Cerberus the benefit of the doubt.  Your argument only works if we already give Cerberus that benefit, and they haven't earned that consideration being mixed up in scummy ineffective evil as often as not.
[/quote]
No, you're the one who refuses to give Cerberus the benefit of the doubt. I'm the one who is willing to give them a chance. This is why our argument is entirely academic. Personally though, I don't think you have given a rebuttal to my opinion (and now that I type this, I guess it doesn't really matter) - but it would seem to fit if Cerberus is as advanced along in reverse-engineering Reaper tech as implied with the new novel/comic? that Drew is about to publish.

[quote]
Except, again, Project Lazarus was in response to the Reaper threat-something which did not exist for the overwhelming majority of Cerberus's lifespan.  They were doing these awful things when the worst conceivable threat was batarians and the council.
[/quote]
The timeline of the game, and thus Cerberus, has progressed therefore why can you not take aboard new information about the state of Cerberus? Are we talking about Cerberus in 2183, Cerberus in 2185 or 'Cerberus'? While at the moment Project Lazarus was solely dedicated to resurrecting our Shephard, do you truly think that Cerberus would just 'destroy' all records of the medical breakthrough's performed? Really? Even limited applications of the science involved could have massive profits in it for any one of Cerberus' more 'legit' operations, although I admit this is purely speculation. Having said that, I would strongly consider it if I was the Illusive Man, so if Bioware is half as talented as we all believe, I think it's reasonable to assume that they have considered it.

As a final point though, evil characters for the sake of solely being evil (thus one-dimensional) is rather boring (...unless it was Kefka from FF)

[quote]
Also bear in mind that it was Cerberus' 'mad science' that pushed
the Alliance military-industrial complex to give the go-ahead on the
SR1 Normandy construction in the first place, and that has already
proven its value or will prove itself if Shepherd's talk to
Rear-Admiral Malko-something is to go by.[/quote]

Shipbuilding is one thing.  That's not what we're talking about here, and I think that's pretty clear.  We're talking about the kidnapping and torture aspects of Cerberus, not the military-industrial espionage aspects.
[/quote]

Really? I thought we were talking about Cerberus as a whole, which while does involve it's kidnapping and torture aspects also involves other things. Otherwise, you've already predestined Cerberus for failure irregardless of what BioWare will/may teach you because you're solely considering Cerberus in a vacuum.

Miranda herself argues that Cerberus has made mistakes (and while you may dismiss that because 'she so readily dismisses it') and that to me, implies, oversight based on at least 'some moral compass.' Injecting Corporal Toombs full of Thresher Maw acid does indeed seem heineous, but I'm sure even you can see that we weren't really told the full story (i.e., Cerberus' reasons) and surely you can't just make pure judgement calls just because of who screams the loudest. Wow, even that reads cold to me, basically what I'm saying is this: You can't judge a book by its cover, and I am not so convinced it was so totally cut and dry.

Cerberus no doubt does have its share of sadistic personalities though, but it appears that there are just as many idealists who think otherwise.

[quote]

If you use charm it was voluntary by any definition of the word: through no threat or coercion, the guy was persuaded to see reason.  That's voluntary.  It's not semantics just because you don't like the outcome:).  Had he refused, that would've been involuntary.
[/quote]
You enforced your own moralistic view on him, even if you used honeyed words. I convinced him, but it's not as if it was his original choice (remember, he wanted his wife back).

[quote]
That's not what Cerberus was aiming for, though.  They made it very clear it was a one-off project, and still this falls under the purview of the Reaper threat.  More is permissible facing galactic sapient extinction than otherwise.
[/quote]

It was a one off project true, that doesn't mean that records of the project weren't kept (even if the station was destroyed) nor samples nor notes. It also doesn't mean that the project could not be re-started. Sure Reapers are the threat, doesn't mean that it'd be the only threat that will ever occur to the Citadel Council/Member species.

If Cerberus decided not to keep that information about Project Lazarus then there is a word that describes them and it isn't 'evil.' It's 'stupid.'

[quote]
It's easy to be big-picture when you're not in the big picture.
[/quote]
This is the only point you have that I'd be willing to concede. But this goes both ways no?

[Arijharn]

Sorry about the two posts together, I like to sort of 'bulletpoint rebuttal'

Turin_4 wrote...
It's not the same at all for the reason you described later on in this post, so I have to wonder why you brought it up at all: that sacrifice is consensual, and the people making the decision are elected officials by the people.  Two layers of consent, really.  Who elected Cerberus, and exactly when did their kidnap and torture victims consent to participate in their experiments? 

My point is this, it was driven by someone elses decision. Armed forces professionals go to war because they are professionals and because they have given their word, even if they may disagree with why they're going to war. Sure it's consensual, but it doesn't necessarily mean that everything is agreed upon.

My argument basically was that Cerberus would not be elected because sometimes progress,  is just to 'political.' Case in point; stem-cell research. That would/could have enormous beneficial results for people with degenerative diseases etc, etc, but it is outlawed or limited due to religious/political reasons.

If you're closing off an option because it's so nasty it makes you queasy, that's not arbitrary at all.  Just because you don't agree doesn't make it arbitrary.

Of course, let me rephrase: Stem-Cell Research, see above.

I agree that with the Reaper threat, Cerberus's dag-nasty evil activities can be permissible due to outright necessity.  That threat didn't exist for the overwhelming majority of its lifespan, though.

So it's only permissable when a threat is pregnant, but isn't permissable when the threat isn't so obvious? As an extreme example (but still relevant) how would you consider fighting the salarians, considering they don't like to 'broadcast' their intentions beforehand? Or is it only permissable when someone has such a clear and decisive technological edge that victory seems so very remote?

[Turin_4]

[quote]
Evidentally it wasn't possible to properly forsee the threat posed by religious fundamentalism if you, by your own admission, aren't sufficiently aware
nor proactive. As for two; that is exactly my point, 'you willfully
ignoring something because it doesn't fill into your notions of 'good
or evil' is by default 'willful indifference' which to my opinion at
least, is properly 'evil.'[/quote]

Um, yes, it's not possible to forsee something if someone doesn't make sure they're properly informed and proactive.  Things are 'impossible' if we don't do what's necessary to accomplish them, I suppose.  As for evil, then, you would support those sorts of experiments today, in the real world?  Because after all, you never know.  Your ideas here permit anything at any time simply by virtue of their possible (however unlikely) necessity.

That's not 'willfully ignoring' something, that's recognizing that it's responsible to tailor responses to reality as opposed to something-might-happen.

[quote]You're deluding yourself if you think that medical science didn't take
from it the knowledge gained from it (for example, how long a naked
person of average weight and height can withstand freezing cold water).
This is, believe it or not, valuable knowledge to have.[/quote]

Didn't say they didn't, so I don't see why you're posting this to me.  And, hey, again, if you want to do work like that, find volunteers.  You don't get to kidnap, torture, and murder unwilling participants just because it might be necessary.  If it might be necessary, convince someone it might be necessary, and have them do it.

[quote]You can't just selectively take out bits of the facts about Cerberus
which are good as you understand it and ignore it for the total picture
of whether Cerberus is 'good' or 'evil' (I'll explain later in the
Normandy point).[/quote]

I don't.  You're the one being selective.

[quote]No, you're the one who refuses to give Cerberus the benefit of the doubt. I'm the one who is willing to give them a chance.[/quote]

Actually, you're willing to give them unlimited chances whereas I, and others, looked at the offered excuse, "These were rogue agents," and, "The Illusive Man can't multi-task effectively beyond a strictly limited number of projects," as pretty lame bull crap excuses.  Is the Illusive Man stupid?  Didn't he know that if you say, "Get me results whatever it takes," and then simply didn't keep a close eye on things, situations like Jack's childhood would emerge?  He's not stupid.  He did know.  He just didn't care enough not to do it.

[quote]Personally though, I don't think you have given a rebuttal to my
opinion (and now that I type this, I guess it doesn't really matter) -
but it would seem to fit if Cerberus is as advanced along in
reverse-engineering Reaper tech as implied with the new
novel/comic? that Drew is about to publish.[/quote]

First off, Cerberus every time it has attempted to reverse engineer Reaper tech, it has failed.  Dramatically.  The only actual being who has effectively done so was EDI.  EDI was built by Cerberus, it's true, but as an artificial intelligence the credit goes to 'her', not to Cerberus.  Might as well give Albert Einstein's parents the credit for discovering the theory of relativity.  Second, I don't know what point of yours I haven't rebutted.

[quote]
The timeline of the game, and thus Cerberus, has progressed
therefore why can you not take aboard new information about the state
of Cerberus?[/quote]

I do make new judgements about Cerberus: I judge that in light of the Reaper threat, they're necessary, no matter how evil they are.  What I don't do is say, "Oh, because of this threat that was impossible for anyone to predict twenty years ago, what Cerberus was doing twenty years ago is acceptable."  Cerberus wasn't doing its work to protect against Reapers until very recently, they were doing their work to protect against aliens.  And to dominate them.

[quote]While at the moment Project Lazarus was solely dedicated to
resurrecting our Shephard, do you truly think that Cerberus would just
'destroy' all records of the medical breakthrough's performed? Really?
Even limited applications of the science involved could have massive
profits in it for any one of Cerberus' more 'legit' operations,
although I admit this is purely speculation.[/quote]

I've never said the Lazarus Project was a bad thing.  If that had been the only thing they'd done, things would be peachy.  But tell that to one of the children Cerberus kidnapped, tortured, and murdered.

[quote]
Really? I thought we were talking about Cerberus as a whole, which
while does involve it's kidnapping and torture aspects also involves
other things. Otherwise, you've already predestined Cerberus for
failure irregardless of what BioWare will/may teach you because you're
solely considering Cerberus in a vacuum.[/quote]

Look, a drug cartel leader can give hundreds of thousands to charities and orphanages, but that doesn't make him any less evil for all the lives he's killed and ruined in his trade.  Your point is apparently that the good Cerberus does 'makes up' for the evil.  It doesn't.  I haven't 'predestined' Cerberus for anything, I just discard that particular ethical idea as incorrect.

[quote]Injecting Corporal Toombs full of Thresher Maw acid does indeed seem
heineous, but I'm sure even you can see that we weren't really told the
full story (i.e., Cerberus' reasons) and surely you can't just make
pure judgement calls just because of who screams the loudest. Wow, even
that reads cold to me, basically what I'm saying is this: You can't
judge a book by its cover, and I am not so convinced it was so totally
cut and dry.[/quote]

Didn't the scientist there at the time admit to it?  Now you're just reaching.  And, of course, Cerberus didn't train and pay well one of its own soldiers to undergo such horribly painful experiments.  They kidnapped an Alliance soldier for years and did it to him.

[quote]
You enforced your own moralistic
view on him, even if you used honeyed words. I convinced him, but it's
not as if it was his original choice (remember, he wanted his wife
back).[/quote]

'Enforced'?  How exactly do you 'enforce' something only with honeyed words?  That's persuasion, not enforcement.  You're just reaching in your push to equate Shepard with Cerberus, and even if this example was valid, it pales in comparison to Cerberus's history of kidnap, torture, and murder.

[quote]This is the only point you have that I'd be willing to concede. But this goes both ways no?[/quote]

Sure, except my way doesn't involve handwaving away crimes against humanity or in this case sapient life.  Yours does.  The burden is thus on you to make your case that much more unassailable.  So far you've completely failed to do so.

[atheelogos]

I just had to post in here so this thread wouldn't disappear. Way to much good content in here. : )

[Bron Avery]

Cerberus, not the baddest group group around, they get things done. Now if only if they didn't commit mass murder and hated aliens. Derp.

[Vaenier]

For all the bad they have done, they did resurrect Shep, saving him from the Collectors. If not for TIM's actions, hundreds of thousands of lives would be lost to the human Reaper. So in my book, Cerberus is even.

If TIM cleans up his act, we could be good buds. If he goes back to more experiments and evilness, I will be forced to bring him down.

[Remaix]

Vaenier wrote...

For all the bad they have done, they did resurrect Shep, saving him from the Collectors. If not for TIM's actions, hundreds of thousands of lives would be lost to the human Reaper. So in my book, Cerberus is even.
If TIM cleans up his act, we could be good buds. If he goes back to more experiments and evilness, I will be forced to bring him down.

The world doesn't work like that. Good acts don't cover up horrible acts, especially not when your horrible acts far outnumber your good ones. Hell, even their one good act was an indirect one.

Fine. TIM saved a lot of people by doing that. But that does not mean that the blood on his hands has been washed off.

[Urazz]

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

I truly enjoyed working for the illusive man, that guy have the same mindset as i have.

Does a "The means justify the end" attitude hold a high moral/ethical value compared to our 2010 western culture standards? Maybe not, but who cares? In a hostile universe as mass effect 2 it truly is survival of the fittest. And most self rightious good doers tends to end up dead.

The Illusive man has plans for humanity. He has ambition and he is strong and resourcefull and i wouldve followed him and cerberus to hell and back. Without him and cerberus recovering shepard the mass effect universe would probarly have ended in tragedy and annihilation.

I look foward to work for him, or even replace him in ME:3!

I agree with Cerberus' goals to an extent and had no problems working with the cerberus people on my crew, but I didn't trust the organization and Illusive Man.  They do go too far in their experiments or are too sloppy with them that it can cause problems for the galaxy (if you hadn't been there to clean up their messes in ME1 the feral rachni and thorian creepers would probably be a bigger problem).

Not to mention being led by just one man tends can lead to trouble, especially one as ammoral as the Illusive man who is out for nothing but advancing humanity at all costs basically.  If he wasn't  out to advance humanity at any cost then I would've gladly preserved the Collector base for him.  But he is and I think he would take using the Collector base too far or something (I.E. using it to try to make a reaper for him to control.).

Modifié par Urazz, 17 février 2010 - 02:46 .

[xxLDZxx]

glowing eyes are never a good thing when humans have them.



equals 100% evil



he cant be trustet

[SarEnyaDor]

How can you care about Humanity when you don't care about people as individuals?



TIM treats people like tools, everyone can be lost or replaced as long as his goals are met.

[Vaenier]

Remaix wrote...

Vaenier wrote...

For all the bad they have done, they did resurrect Shep, saving him from the Collectors. If not for TIM's actions, hundreds of thousands of lives would be lost to the human Reaper. So in my book, Cerberus is even.
If TIM cleans up his act, we could be good buds. If he goes back to more experiments and evilness, I will be forced to bring him down.

The world doesn't work like that. Good acts don't cover up horrible acts, especially not when your horrible acts far outnumber your good ones. Hell, even their one good act was an indirect one.

Fine. TIM saved a lot of people by doing that. But that does not mean that the blood on his hands has been washed off.

Would you kill an innocent hostage to save 10 others from blowing up? No other options, either you kill one yourself, or watch 11 die.
The blood is there on his hands, but the alternitive would have him bathing in it for doing nothing.

Modifié par Vaenier, 17 février 2010 - 02:56 .

[Remaix]

Vaenier wrote...

Remaix wrote...

Vaenier wrote...

For all the bad they have done, they did resurrect Shep, saving him from the Collectors. If not for TIM's actions, hundreds of thousands of lives would be lost to the human Reaper. So in my book, Cerberus is even.
If TIM cleans up his act, we could be good buds. If he goes back to more experiments and evilness, I will be forced to bring him down.

The world doesn't work like that. Good acts don't cover up horrible acts, especially not when your horrible acts far outnumber your good ones. Hell, even their one good act was an indirect one.

Fine. TIM saved a lot of people by doing that. But that does not mean that the blood on his hands has been washed off.

Would you kill an innocent hostage to save 10 others from blowing up? No other options, either you kill one yourself, or watch 11 die.
The blood is there on his hands, but the alternitive would have him bathing in it for doing nothing.

You are mixing up metaphors. It's not sacrificing few to make save many. It's sacrificing many. Then, later, saving others. It's an entirely different situation.
It's not like killing 1 hostage and saving 10. It's killing. Plain and simple.

[Vaenier]

Bottom line: Cerberus saved 10000 times as many lives as they ruined. This isn't about motives or morals, this is just the simple numbers. Everything beyond this is opinion of morality.

[nikki191]

considering those pricks spent part of ME1 trying to kill me, and finding out the sort of vile **** they are up to and the fact the illusive man keeps sending me and the people i know into traps ive got every reason not to trust them. they brought me back and thats going to be their downfall

[Urazz]

Vaenier wrote...

Bottom line: Cerberus saved 10000 times as many lives as they ruined. This isn't about motives or morals, this is just the simple numbers. Everything beyond this is opinion of morality.

True, but it's more of a matter of do you trust the Illusive Man to do the right thing with the Reaper base?  He won't as he does say he'll use it for human dominance as well.  And he does lack enough morals for you to call into question on what he is going to do with the station.

Not to mention Cerberus is quite sloppy in there experiments that it'll cause problems for the rest of the galaxy if ME1 is any indication (if you hadn't been around to stop the rachni and thorian creepers in ME1)

[Blind Lark]

One man's death is as tragedy. Thousands are just a statistic.



The question I find with Cerberus is "Do the ends justify the means?". It's obvious the Illusive Man will do whatever necessary to better humanity, but it's in a narrow one way perspective. Regardless of the sacrifice, he wants humanity to come out on top. This was the problem though. One of the main reasons I didn't save the base was because he wanted it so the humans could gain galactic "dominance". He's power hungry.

[Rieverre]

In the grand scheme of things, I don't give a damn about experimenting on Rachni. I do give a damn about Thorian Creepers and Husks. And even ignoring the fact that you're turning people into basically mindless shock troops, the justification for _why_ is so weak it makes me want to cry. It's a dead end in any large-scale engagement since a million expendable shock troops won't mean anything to an enemy who doesn't give a rat's ass about conventions and is willing to go straight to orbital bombardment.

Cerberus is also perfectly willing to throw its 'best and brightest', as in scientists and researchers, away as expendable when you'd really need them _most_ as evidenced by the Reaper IFF mission.

I expect any reverse engineering and research of the Collector Base will have similar results - TIM will throw one science team after another at it in the, likely futile, hope of grabbing any stray bits of technology. Call of Cthulhu 101, people. This _never_ turns out well.

And chances are, whatever you end up gaining from Collector-tech is going to be inferior to what the Reapers are fielding anyway. The Collectors are a client/slave species. Any technology the Reapers left them is, chances are, fatally flawed in some way that will allow the Reapers specifically to steamroll anyone using it. It's like setting up daycare in R'lyeh and expecting anything other than psychosis and abomination, fighting for peace, or frakking for virginity.

Bottom line is, bringing Shepard back was probably one of the few _correct_ judgment calls TIM has made, even if he did it for entirely the wrong reasons. He may be brilliant, but Samara pretty much call it - he lacks wisdom, and is too much of an egomaniac to even consider that as a possibility. Morality has very little to do with it.

Modifié par Rieverre, 17 février 2010 - 04:22 .

[Computron2000]

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...
The Illusive man has plans for humanity. He has ambition and he is strong and resourcefull and i wouldve followed him and cerberus to hell and back. Without him and cerberus recovering shepard the mass effect universe would probarly have ended in tragedy and annihilation.

I look foward to work for him, or even replace him in ME:3!

Heh, you have this idea that you are not expendable. Sorry wrong. Anything that ends up having no checks and balance becomes similar to a dictatorship. And you are always expendable in a dictatorship.

As for replacing him? Well you probably have about a week before the next stronger guy comes along, deposes you and cuts off your hands and legs as a trophy. Great ending

[boardnfool86]

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

I truly enjoyed working for the illusive man, that guy have the same mindset as i have.

Does a "The means justify the end" attitude hold a high moral/ethical value compared to our 2010 western culture standards? Maybe not, but who cares? In a hostile universe as mass effect 2 it truly is survival of the fittest. And most self rightious good doers tends to end up dead.

The Illusive man has plans for humanity. He has ambition and he is strong and resourcefull and i wouldve followed him and cerberus to hell and back. Without him and cerberus recovering shepard the mass effect universe would probarly have ended in tragedy and annihilation.

I look foward to work for him, or even replace him in ME:3!

Why? Because Cerberus tortured and murdered my entire unit on Akuze. Because they work with Batarian slavers... the same sort that killed my parents and tortured Talitha supplied the Telton facility with biotic children. Because they pulled the same thresher maw stunt on Admiral Kuhoku's men (so don't tell me it was an isolated incident) and killed him for finding out... while they experimented with thorian creepers, husks, and rachni, costing lives in the process. Sure Miranda does a fair job justifying those experiments... and she says the Telton facility went rogue... but because BioWare wanted morality a little less clear cut, Akuze, the other thresher maw attack and the fact that Rachni were unleashed on Alliance outposts monitoring the Geth go totally undiscussed... had I not been froma  sole survivor background my guy would not loath Cerberus quite as much... but I am so he does.

PS. BioWare, Sole Survivor was the 'quickplay' background in ME1... why is it not addressed? When Miranda and Jacob bring up Akuze, when you are talking to the Illusive Man, all the times Miranda justifies what Cerberus has done why can't I be like 'you bastards killed my entire unit on Akuze... and almost killed me... I will work with you to save human lives because I have little choice, but we are not allies'

Everytime someone is like 'hey you work for cerberus', 'f*** no' should always be my response

I just feel like Akuze is belittled for the sake of the story... losing your entire unit is traumatizing, no way Shep is so far past it that he doesn't even contemplate saying something