20813 réponses à ce sujet

[Pacifien]

Can we not go into real world sociopolitical territory here? It never ends well. People get upset. Feelings are hurt. I'd have to get involved. I prefer to focus my moderator powers elsewhere.

[SirOccam]

Pacifien wrote...

Can we not go into real world sociopolitical territory here? It never ends well. People get upset. Feelings are hurt. I'd have to get involved. I prefer to focus my moderator powers elsewhere.

Well for what it's worth, there doesn't seem to be any disagreement on the real-world stuff, just whether or not it applies to the ME2 topic in question.

Modifié par SirOccam, 24 décembre 2010 - 03:59 .

[goofyomnivore]

I think they both acted childish -- the conversation reminded me of your typical forum flame war.

Miranda isn't going to let herself be judged for something she had no influence on, and Jack isn't going to let the a-typical Cerberus Operative walk around like her conscience should be clean.

Jack is right that what happened there is very wrong, but she is IMO wrong for using Miranda as her scapegoat. Jack's emotions got the best of her, while Miranda's pride got the best of her.

Edit: For the record this dispute is one of my more favorite moments in ME2. Got to see the characters react in the heat of the moment -- We got a peak at each character's basic flaws and strengths. Reminded me of the Landsmeet in Dragon Age, no one was at their best and adults acted childish, but we got to see some strong values and flaws in each character, which makes them real or human.

Modifié par strive, 24 décembre 2010 - 04:17 .

[Errationatus]

Loki330 wrote...

Pft, I'm pointing out Jack's not very good at getting people to agree to things without threats of force or intimidation, something Miranda doesn't respond well to.

Jack was trained - by Cerberus - to be a weapon.  A killing tool.  To enjoy violence through the conditioning of a child, to manufacture a killer. 

Pity they skipped the social graces, but it wasn't exactly "Pygmalion" they were trying to achieve at Teltin.  Again, Miranda taking offence justifies nothing she so haughtily pronounced.

You're a case in point; push the right buttons and you can get even a reasonable person to become abrupt, accusative and rude.

You didn't push any of my buttons.  You're simply illustrative of what I meant by missing a point almost completely. At no time did I accuse an arguer of being stupid, simply the argument.  Such as it was.

[Errationatus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@JakeMacDon:

Jack's attitude *is* relevant to how the conversation goes. You know Jack - she'd barge into Miranda's office spoiling for a fight. Then she proceeds to threaten her with death by "smearing the wall" with her.

If I recall, Jack said, "Touch me and I'll smear the wall with you."  That is, if I'm not mistaken, the response TO a threat, a reaction to one, not the instigation of one. 

Calling that "being rude" is somewhat of an understatement, don't you think? I wouldn't give such a person an apology even if I thought she deserved one (I'm not saying Jack doesn't deserve one).

Well, since - see above - it is the response to a threat, Miranda made a threat initially - not Jack.  Therefore, which one is starting on the "shaky moral footing", so to speak?

As for "it wasn't Cerberus", there is no blaming the victim going on and no denying. Miranda doesn't tell Jack what she suffered through didn't happen, nor that the Teltin facility didn't start as a Cerberus operation. She just refuses to acknowledge that what happened to Jack was sanctioned by Cerberus' leadership.

This is frankly, bullsh!t on Miranda's part.  It was Cerberus.  Cerberus began and sanctioned it.  They then tried to erase the evidence.  This is complicity, plain and simple.  TIM did sanction it.  Miranda is being her usual apologist self.

It may sound like a flimsy excuse, but it's supported by evidence in the game - as opposed to all other Cerberus facilities in the game. You could reasonably expect Miranda to own up to all other Cerberus operations before this one.

Which evidence?  I saw the bit where in the after-mission report to or from TIM where he mentions his dismay that the cleanup crews left evidence to find.  How curious!  Unfortunately, thanks to Jack, there's no evidence at all now.  Nice how it all works out in the end, no?

To expect Miranda to apologize for something she can yet disown with some reason is unreasonable. She'd need more evidence before accepting such a thing. She should look for more evidence, she should've looked more
closely for years. That's her defining character flaw, and it's worse because otherwise she is something of an infovore, she collects information about everything and everyone. But that's the only thing I can fault her for. To say that she was part of any particular atrocity is an empty claim 100% unsupported by anything in the game or in other sources.

Let`s see.  Miranda is one of TIM`s most trusted agents.  She knew of the husks, the Thorian and, we can
reasonably assume, the Thresher Maw attack on Akuze.  She was tasked with retrieving and resurrecting Shepard - whom she then wanted to implant with a control chip - only stopped because TIM overrode her. She is, quite blatantly, on the ship to distract Shepard - she`s the sexy face and hindend of Cerberus.  She apologizes and tries to justify the things they do because she`s defending `humanity` - a humanity that
already has the respect of the Galaxy, depending on what you did in ME. 

She is not some minor agent - she is an intregal part of Cerberus.  That makes her complicit.  Why is this so hard for people?

BTW, that you discount her admitting that Teltin was amistake to Shepard as an act makes no sense. What if Shepard is Renegade, why doesn't she change her tune then? This, btw, from the woman who told you to your face she'd have implanted you with a control chip. I don't doubt she'd be capable of such an act, but it makes no
sense.

It makes perfect sense if part of Miranda's job on the Normandy is to actually get Shepard to join Cerberus.  A pure Renegade Shepard is a scumbag.  He's a bigot and ruthless, with little compunction.  He's a perfect candidate, hence his reply "I wished you asked me sooner."  Don't forget that this is part of Miranda's romance arc, as well, so why wouldn't she want him to join?  There is no mending of fences or taking responsibility here.  She's confessing nothing by admitting Teltin was a mistake.  It wasn't a fecking "mistake" - it was an abomination.

Your claim that Miranda knew everything about Cerberus operations is also based on mere supposition that goes against all reasonable black-ops practice.

If she were a standard agent in Cerberus, you would be correct.  But Miranda is anything but - like it's been said, she's called in when TIM needs the best.  Miranda is too intelligent not to know what's going on - she has her father's example.  It may be supposition, but it's based on what's been presented, or alluded. 

The cells are isolated so that if one cell is compromised, no link to others will be found. Only TIM knows everything.  All others, including Miranda, work on a need-to-know basis.  That the left hand doesn't know what the right one does is a standard covert ops modus operandi. Miranda probably knew more than the average
cell leader, but TIM would know which operations to shield her from if he's the master manipulator we think he es.

No direct and detailed knowledge of individual operations of differing cells does not excuse her from complicity. In Jack's case, she didn't know?  Fine.  By the time of the argument with Jack - SHE DID KNOW, and she maintained that Cereberus wasn't to blame when quite clearly they were.  To me that shows a marked lack of character.

And lastly, that you choose to dismiss the good things about Miranda - her love of her sister, the fact that she saved the Citadel from a terrorist attack - as irrelevant is telling.

Not at all.  Why is she protecting her sister?  Why did she save the Citadel?  Whose purpose was she serving in doing these things?  One was revenge on her father.  The other to serve Cerberus' ends.  Neither are particularly noble.  A criminal is a criminal no matter who they love. 

Together with everything else, it makes your reasoning a piece of one-sided propaganda the likes of which I can only compare to Zulu's pro-Cerberus campaign.

You can compare it all you like, it's inaccurate. I'm not propagandizing, and as yet, no one has actually refuted any assertion I've made.  Saying, "well, Miranda likes puppy dogs and flowers, and yer a big meanie" absolves her of nothing. 

So far the counter argument has basically been, "well, you can work for the mob, and advocate for the mob and fudge the system to get them out of jail or cover up a crime, and still not be a criminal", and I really have to wonder the state of mind that thinks that is either reasonable or logical.

Modifié par JakeMacDon, 24 décembre 2010 - 08:22 .

[Errationatus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Gethforceone wrote...
"...As if the fact that Jack has been a victim blinds people to her flaws, and that Miranda is Cerberus blinds people to her virtues."

That was posted in the Miranda thread. Not really sure what about that.

I posted that, and yes, that's the attitude I see at work in some people here (actually, mostly in one). \\\\

That one of course, would be me.

*Miranda loves her sister - doesn't count

No, it doesn't. 

*Miranda is clearly horrified when you take her to Teltin - doesn't count

She's standing there with a victim and a man she needs.  I'd act horrified too.

*Miranda admits that Teltin was a mistake - an act for Shepard's benefit

 To Shepard.  Who's participation is absolutely crucial.  Not self-serving at all.  Not at all.

*Miranda saved the Citadel from a terrorist attack - never mentioned.

Why did she do that?  To save aliens?  What was her great and noble reason?

*Miranda expresses doubts about the Collector base - doesn't count.

Sure it does.  That, however, is at the end of the game, after Miranda has been redeemed by the Mighty Shep Mojo.  I wasn't talking about the end of the game, but that particular instance in Miranda's quarters between she and Jack and all that led up to it, and what was motivating her behind all that.  I said nothing about how she began to change afterward, now did I?

This is ever so slightly disingenous on your part - and so is the next bit:

What should I make of that? What I see is "Miranda is Cerberus, of course she's so black inside she darkens the sun", and any evidence to the contrary is brushed aside because of course, Cerberus can't have remotely reasonable people working for them.

You can say that - but I never did. 

Modifié par JakeMacDon, 24 décembre 2010 - 08:31 .

[Errationatus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

SNIP

BTW, I'm not attempting to whitewash her. One aspect I like in her is that as a rule, pragmatism overrules ethical concerns if an important operation demands it, except in extreme cases. She is morally grey, she has a serious character flaw, and I like her that way, even if I don't like the flaw. But she is not the complete monster JakeMacDon paints her as.

I don't paint her as a monster.  I show her to be a ethically bereft agent of a criminal organization - a criminal. You can't redeem a monster.  But you can reform a criminal.  Miranda gets her chance in the end, and takes it.  I do not condemn her for what she becomes, only what she is in the incident in question - and that's the important bit you're ignoring.

[Errationatus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
I mean that it hasn't happened by the time this conflict takes place (unless for some reason you do one of their loyalty missions after the base).

My reponse to JakeMacDon was aimed at his general tendency to paint Miranda as black as he can, ignoring certain facts, inventing others and generally adopting the tone of a propagandist. The Jack/Miranda conflict is only a part of that.

You can keep say'n it, but it don't make it true.

[Errationatus]

adriano_c wrote...

JakeMacDon wrote...

The denier is attempting to abrogate and absolve a criminal organization of its greatest crime.  It is irrelevant if the denier is 30 and the survivor 80.  It is irrelevant that they weren't there.  The denier is tacitly supporting and apologizing for the organization that perpetrated the crime.  That makes them part of the crime, whether they were there or not, IMO.

Nah. That makes them either misguided or stupid, but hardly as categorically "guilty" as if they perpetrated the actual crimes in question like you're going on about. It's easy to obfuscate things when you're using a loaded example like the holocaust, not so much when you either shrink the scale or simply use something less emotionally charged. If I start trying to mitigate/defend/deny the damage done by Enron executives in 10-20  years, should I suddenly be considered to have partaken in the defrauding of countless people? If I start vehemently rejecting Charles Manson's guilt, does this "make me part of the crime"? Be serious...

Well, if you were associated with either the company or the Manson Family, does your tune change then?  Miranda is not on the outside looking in - she's sitting near the fvcking top watching it happen. 

This is an entirely different case from your example.

[jakeN7]

it does seem like propaganda. your making some pretty big jumps to come to the conclusion that miranda is responsible for teltin. we only know of 3. operations that miranda has been apart and they've all been incredibly noble. 1. she and jacob saved the citadel from batarian terrorists2. the lazarus project (to committ 2 years of your life to resurrect a man who saved the galaxy so he can do it again is noble in my books) 3. the suicide mission itself. she puts her own life on the line to save humanity/galaxy.



now unless im mistaken she's up 3-0 on the hero/villain scale. maybe you can make it 3-1 cause she was a little mean to jack.(i love jacks character by the way).

[adriano_c]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Well, if you were associated with either the company or the Manson Family, does your tune change then?

No.

I could have been working in Enron's mailroom (or even their boardroom) or been best friends with Manson himself. What I argue/defend after the fact doesn't make me guilty of their crimes if I weren't directly responsible or had no knowledge during.

Miranda is not on the outside looking in - she's sitting near the fvcking top watching it happen.

All available material we're given suggests the opposite, actually.

This is an entirely different case from your example.

Nope.

[Collider]

Oh sure, they're both stubborn, but Jack and Miranda pretty much took opposite paths in terms of personality in response to how they were "raised."

[Errationatus]

[quote]SirOccam wrote...
[/quote]

SNIP

[quote]
No, obviously TIM would know about them, but we're not talking about TIM, we're talking about Miranda. How do we know she knew about Teltin?
[/quote]

If you take her to Telin, she finds out all about it, doesn't she?  Even after seeing it firsthand, even after being "horrified", she still takes a big sh!t on Jack.  I guess she was justified since Jack so rudely invaded her space, etc.  /sarcasm

[quote]
Not being willing to apologize in the middle of an argument makes you guilty? That's absurd. She obviously doesn't like Jack--and that's not a crime--and in the middle of an argument she's supposed to grovel for forgiveness for something that happened when she was 11?
[/quote]

Not at all.  She doesn't need to apologize for herself.  I never said she did.  She doesn't apologize for anything, she rubs it in.  But doing so, she is condoning what happened to Jack.  That makes her no better than the people who tortured Jack in the first place.

[quote]
I'm sure she does agree that what happened at Teltin was horrific. In fact, as mentioned, you can see Miranda's reaction for yourself if you take her to Pragia. But Jack isn't immune to hostility just because she's been through something horrible. Miranda isn't obligated to like Jack, and she's certainly not obligated to apologize for it every time they speak. You're basing all of this on ONE encounter. The fact that she doesn't apologize there somehow means she secretly approves of it or something?
[/quote]

See above.

[quote]
Even if you want to persist in thinking that Miranda's a horrible person for not liking Jack or for not apologizing in that one heated moment, certainly holding her responsible for what happened to Jack is pretty clearly unreasonable, right?
[/quote]

I don't hold Miranda responsible for anything except being a Cerberus apologist and a vicious b!tch, when confronted with something Cerberus wrought has the gall to call her a "mistake".

[quote]
Uh, but we're not talking about Bush or Cheney or "their lieutenants," remember? It was some random Air Force general. Do you think everyone in every branch of the military should be held responsible for it?
[/quote]

Of course not.  I'm talking about ultimate responsibility.  Commanders are responsible for their troops - and what they do in the field.  To shirk responsibility is to become part of the crime. 

[quote]
I suspect you'll say no because you've now added "if you have the power to stop it and you do nothing" and "if you spin it or try to excuse it." Did Miranda have the power to stop it? She was 11, remember? Even if we talk about Teltin in general AFTER Miranda attained some kind of rank, you've no proof she had any knowledge of it whatsoever.
[/quote]

And you have no proof she didn't, and I never said she absolutely knew.  I said it was as likely, being as high in the organization as she undoubtedly was.  No, she didn't have the power to stop it, but she did have the power to take some responsibility for it, and she refused.  Apologizing to Shepard means nothing.  It didn't happen to him, now did it?

[quote]
And did she try to spin or excuse it? I don't think so.
[/quote]

"It wasn't Cerberus, not really - "  WTF is that if not spin?

[quote]
All she's "guilty" of is getting angry at and having words with Jack, and getting a bit defensive. I probably would be, too, if I were her. If you want to hold TIM responsible, or even say Cerberus as an organization is tainted because of it, then fine, but as I said, there's no proof that Miranda had any knowledge of it or ever had the power to stop it. And she never, to my knowledge, defends anyone who wasn't actually responsible.
[/quote]

She defend the entire organization, and she does it over and over.  Did you not pay attention to anything she actually said, or were you blinded by bodacious tatas?

[quote]
Don't get me wrong, Jack is probably my favorite companion out of anyone in ME2, but all this vitriol for Miranda based on outright assumption strikes me as odd.
[/quote]

I'm not basing it entirely on an assumption - far from it, as I've shown over and over.

[quote]
This only works if you make some major assumptions, the same ones you've been making. Anyone who knew about what they did and had the power to stop it but didn't should be held accountable, but how do you know Miranda knew about it and had the power to stop it?
[/quote]

Sigh.  I never said she could have stopped Teltin and didn't.  It was never about that, and I was fairly certain I had been clear, but apparently not, because you keep missing my point almost entirely.  I'm just going to assume that's my fault. 

[quote]
It's not that no one in the government should be held responsible, but certainly not everyone should be. If you want to lump Miranda in the group that should be held responsible, that's up to you I guess, but I haven't seen any sort of proof that she belongs there.
[/quote]

Again, you missed what I said or simply chose to ignore it. 

[adriano_c]

Laf, you're certainly on your grind with these responses...

[Errationatus]

[quote]jakeN7 wrote...

it does seem like propaganda. your making some pretty big jumps to come to the conclusion that miranda is responsible for teltin.
[/quote]

FFS.  At no time did I ever say that Miranda was responsible FOR Teltin.

[quote]
we only know of 3. operations that miranda has been apart and they've all been incredibly noble. 1. she and jacob saved the citadel from batarian terrorists2. the lazarus project (to committ 2 years of your life to resurrect a man who saved the galaxy so he can do it again is noble in my books) 3. the suicide mission itself. she puts her own life on the line to save humanity/galaxy.
[/quote]

All well and good, but I wasn't talking about those.

[quote]
now unless im mistaken she's up 3-0 on the hero/villain scale. maybe you can make it 3-1 cause she was a little mean to jack.(i love jacks character by the way).[/quote]
[/quote]

You've also completely missed the point of what I've been trying to say, and I'm not going to reiterate it.

[Errationatus]

adriano_c wrote...

JakeMacDon wrote...

Well, if you were associated with either the company or the Manson Family, does your tune change then?

No.

I could have been working in Enron's mailroom (or even their boardroom) or been best friends with Manson himself. What I argue/defend after the fact doesn't make me guilty of their crimes if I weren't directly responsible or had no knowledge during.

Well, their victims might think differently.

Miranda is not on the outside looking in - she's sitting near the fvcking top watching it happen.

All available material we're given suggests the opposite, actually.

Wow.  I really must have missed all of that then.  Did I hallucinate the power she actually has?  Well, I must be a completely biased moron to have missed it so utterly.  Well, then - I take back everything I said, and humbly beg leave to depart with tail between my legs, duly chastened.

Oh, wait, no, I don't. 

This is an entirely different case from your example.

Nope.

If you say so.

Modifié par JakeMacDon, 24 décembre 2010 - 09:13 .

[Collider]

I thought it was pretty clear that Miranda knew more about Cerberus than the average crew member.

[Errationatus]

adriano_c wrote...

Laf, you're certainly on your grind with these responses...

I don't like people to think I don't take what they say seriously - well, more or less - and I've got the time.

[jakeN7]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

SNIP

BTW, I'm not attempting to whitewash her. One aspect I like in her is that as a rule, pragmatism overrules ethical concerns if an important operation demands it, except in extreme cases. She is morally grey, she has a serious character flaw, and I like her that way, even if I don't like the flaw. But she is not the complete monster JakeMacDon paints her as.

I don't paint her as a monster.  I show her to be a ethically bereft agent of a criminal organization - a criminal. You can't redeem a monster.  But you can reform a criminal.  Miranda gets her chance in the end, and takes it.  I do not condemn her for what she becomes, only what she is in the incident in question - and that's the important bit you're ignoring.

you do paint her as a monster. i believe at one point you compared her to a holocaust denier and then claimed she was just as guilty as the people who actually carried out the holocaust.

[Errationatus]

jakeN7 wrote...


you do paint her as a monster. i believe at one point you compared her to a holocaust denier and then claimed she was just as guilty as the people who actually carried out the holocaust.

Well, in many countries, Holocaust denial is a crime.

To call victims of such a monstrous act as the Holocaust liars or mistaken is to justify the crime and make onself a part of it.

I think the problem here is the inability on the part of some to distinguish when one speaks completely literally and when one speaks a tad metaphorically.  It's a matter of discernment, not intent, and it's my mistake in assuming that people could make that distinction.

I shall endeavour to be more clear in the future.

As to the current topic, I've really said all I can say, and am not going to rehash it over and over.  So far, I see nothing aside from semantic nitpicking, and no real cogent rebuttal.  I'm not getting on that merry-go-round.

Modifié par JakeMacDon, 24 décembre 2010 - 09:21 .

[jakeN7]

[quote]JakeMacDon wrote...

[quote]jakeN7 wrote...

it does seem like propaganda. your making some pretty big jumps to come to the conclusion that miranda is responsible for teltin.
[/quote]

FFS.  At no time did I ever say that Miranda was responsible FOR Teltin.

[quote]
we only know of 3. operations that miranda has been apart and they've all been incredibly noble. 1. she and jacob saved the citadel from batarian terrorists2. the lazarus project (to committ 2 years of your life to resurrect a man who saved the galaxy so he can do it again is noble in my books) 3. the suicide mission itself. she puts her own life on the line to save humanity/galaxy.
[/quote]

All well and good, but I wasn't talking about those.

[quote]
now unless im mistaken she's up 3-0 on the hero/villain scale. maybe you can make it 3-1 cause she was a little mean to jack.(i love jacks character by the way).[/quote]
[/quote]

You've also completely missed the point of what I've been trying to say, and I'm not going to reiterate it.

[/quote]
well you've been saying alot of stuff.

[adriano_c]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Wow.  I really must have missed all of that then.  Did I hallucinate the power she actually has?  Well, I must be a completely biased moron to have missed it so utterly.  Well, then - I take back everything I said, and humbly beg leave to depart with tail between my legs, duly chastened.

No need to beat yourself up over it...

Cerberus is divided into numerous independent cells which have no knowledge of their counterparts. This ensures that should one cell be compromised, the others would not be captured. Each cell is led by an operative who reports directly to the Illusive Man.

Miranda Lawson (captain of the Lazarus Cell)

She leads the cell, yet remains a part of it, and is therefore subject to its rules (regarding anonymity and having information on a need-to-know basis).

Is there any particular reason (or evidence for) why you think she's this Goebbels-like figure?

-edit for weird formatting.

Modifié par adriano_c, 24 décembre 2010 - 09:49 .

[Errationatus]

adriano_c wrote...

JakeMacDon wrote...

Wow.  I really must have missed all of that then.  Did I hallucinate the power she actually has?  Well, I must be a completely biased moron to have missed it so utterly.  Well, then - I take back everything I said, and humbly beg leave to depart with tail between my legs, duly chastened.

No need to beat yourself up over it...

Thanks.

She leads the cell, yet remains a part of it, and is therefore subject to its rules (regarding anonymity and having information on a need-to-know basis).

Is there any particular reason (or evidence for) why you think she's this Goebbels-like figure?

Well, I never said nor implied that she was "Goebbels-like".  All I said was that she was an unrepenant apologist for Cerberus.  This is understandable.  She has to justify her own participation.  That she ignores a great many atrocities is inexcusable.  That she operates in an ethical vacuum is reprehensible.  That people use the flimsiest of semantics arguments and the shallowest of counters to justify her I find completely mystifying. 

"She loves her sister, and she's stubborn, therefore Jack was wrong to demand some kind of acknowledgement that maybe Cerberus was naughty. Jack was rude and belligerent to this classy lady and therefore in the wrong.  How dare she?  Thank goodness the aristocratic Miranda kept her cool when confronted with the abrasive and unladylike little psychotic criminal with bad manners!  Miranda supports and advocates a terrorist organization, but she's really a hero who has done may things with the noblest of intentions - even though everyone around her murders and destroys in the name of humanity.  Akuze? Husks and Thorian Creepers?  Someone else.  Death of those marines and Admiral Kohaku?  Someone else.  Teltin?  Nothing to do with her.  Some other organization named Cerberus.  Not her noble and selfless section of it!  So there!  And thus everything she may have done is justified and you're just a prejudiced meanie!"

Riiiiiiiight. 

That I'm speaking of up to the argument and a little beyond and not about after when Shepard begins to turn her (via romance or paragon example) simply seems to elude people. 

Modifié par JakeMacDon, 24 décembre 2010 - 10:51 .

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

strive wrote...

I think they both acted childish -- the conversation reminded me of your typical forum flame war.

Miranda isn't going to let herself be judged for something she had no influence on, and Jack isn't going to let the a-typical Cerberus Operative walk around like her conscience should be clean.

Jack is right that what happened there is very wrong, but she is IMO wrong for using Miranda as her scapegoat. Jack's emotions got the best of her, while Miranda's pride got the best of her.

Edit: For the record this dispute is one of my more favorite moments in ME2. Got to see the characters react in the heat of the moment -- We got a peak at each character's basic flaws and strengths. Reminded me of the Landsmeet in Dragon Age, no one was at their best and adults acted childish, but we got to see some strong values and flaws in each character, which makes them real or human.

Couldn't agree more. I like both characters and the fight did indeed allow us to delve more into their characters.

[adriano_c]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Well, I never said nor implied that she was "Goebbels-like".  All I said was that she was an unrepenant apologist for Cerberus.

But...

Miranda is not on the outside looking in - she's sitting near the fvcking top watching it happen.

She is not some minor agent - she is an intregal part of Cerberus.  That makes her complicit.

You've actually been pretty adamant that she was some sort of "top advisor" or "right-hand man" privy to all of Cerberus' dirty little secrets, when, on the contrary, the only thing we know with complete certainty is that (again) each cell (one of which Miranda operates and is part of) is independent of the rest in both practice and awareness. The only thing binding them together is a common goal, probable funding, and that old guy's general oversight.

So, really, like it or not, ignorance does relieve her of any personal guilt specifically to do with Jack that might act as an impetus to peacebly settle the situation.

Her (Miranda) being a stubborn, unsympathetic, two-faced (this last quality is the most repugnant) b*tch is another matter altogether.