210 réponses à ce sujet

[SharpEdgeSoda]

I felt this thread was very successful at bringing some great discussion to a very tough call you have to make in the Mission: "N7: Javelin Missiles Launched". I felt that I should call it Official and keep it alive for anyone else wanting to talk about this difficult ethical dilemma.

ORIGINAL POST:
"One kill switch, two nukes. One brain anuerism."

Even on my second playthrough, the decision, what to save from the nukes, makes me pause.

I am usually paragon but I don't do things the good guys does, just for the sake of being good. I try to find the most beneficial solution.

But man...save hundreds of lives, or save the one thing that make thier home worth living on.

I'd hardly call this black and white. The practical thing would be to save the industrial district, saving the Alliance a lot of time and possibly billions, if not trillions of credits.

But then I'm dooming hundreds of people.

But there are always more people...

But is it worth the cost of human life?

But is it worth the cost of one the Alliance's strongholds in the region?

But...GRAAAH!

Modifié par SharpEdgeSoda, 14 février 2010 - 03:55 .

[Spazticus]

If the majority live through it, they can re-settle somewhere else. There's your paragon answer.

[kennyme2]

Come on man, think about it simply. Lives or industry. People or government.

[SharpEdgeSoda]

Ohh, I know the Paragon answer. THAT is obvious, but is it worth the cost of losing a functional colony, losing a planet, for a decade or more, depending on how expensive and complex this industrial district is. I would bet it was built is a specific location for a reason, and it would be a long rebuild if you had to wait for nuclear fallout to clear.

[the_devils_aid]

kennyme2 wrote...

Come on man, think about it simply. Lives or industry. People or government.

there will always be more people you can transport quickly and cheaply.

[Odd Hermit]

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

Even on my second playthrough, the decision, what to save from the nukes, makes me pause.

I am usually paragon but I don't do things the good guys does, just for the sake of being good. I try to find the most beneficial solution.

But man...save hundreds of lives, or save the one thing that make thier home worth living on.

I'd hardly call this black and white. The practical thing would be to save the industrial district, saving the Alliance a lot of time and possibly billions, if not trillions of credits.

But then I'm dooming hundreds of people.

But there are always more people...

But is it worth the cost of human life?

But is it worth the cost of one the Alliance's strongholds in the region?

But...GRAAAH!

That sounds pretty sociopathic to me...
The 'good' answer is clearly saving the people, it's one of the most black and white decisions in the game.

[Hepzi3]

I went with saving the place for the Alliance.



They may need it against the Reapers.



That was my answer every time I could help the Alliance though.



Damn, I missed Hackett in ME2

[Brutalise]

I had the same problem man. I picked the complex. Seems the most logical

[Conway044]

If you save the settlers the colony is lost and the Alliance will lose its presence in that sector.


Pretty clear cut. Save the infrastructure. Finding a few hundred people is easy, building a colony on the border of the Terminus systems is hard.

edit:  I missed Hackett as well, biggest thing missing in ME 2 in my book.

Modifié par Conway044, 14 février 2010 - 12:15 .

[this isnt my name]

On my paragon I picked industry several reason

It supports the colony without it it will be left to die.

That industry could help the millatary in the war against the reapers.

There are lots of people, some places are overpopulated, more land means a better quality of life, and I doubt planets that can be safely colanised are common.

It saves the alliance money that can be used to better people elsewhere.



For me it saves more people in the long run.

[AddoExAtrum]

K lets make this simple. Its not just hundreds of lives if you take the Paragon choice. It's thousands. Now lets look at it from a Renegade view. It costs billions or trillions of creds to build the space port. It also cost quite a bit to build that residential area. Hell it probably cost even more in the residential area because you have people there that are trained for specific things. That said some of them are probably even truly irreplaceable.

Even from a Renegade view saving thousands of people seems more profitable than saving a space port. Besides if you save the people they can rebuild the spaceport all the faster since they already have workers on hand.

Saving the spaceport on the other hand leaves LOTS of death benefits to be paid out. Lots more work to be done rebuilding the settlement and even more money to be shelled out to find thousands of workers/colonists that are willing to come there and have the qualifications needed.

The only real choice to me Paragon or Renegade is to save the people. Its cheaper for everyone involved lol

And to everyone who said "You can always find more people to move cheaply" your not looking at the broader corporate picture. Even in the military death benefits have to be paid, training done, and the entire infrastructure of the colony has to be rebuilt. Food, Water, Waste, all of those questions have to be answered. Its not as cheap as you think

Modifié par AddoExAtrum, 14 février 2010 - 12:19 .

[Conway044]

AddoExAtrum wrote...

K lets make this simple. Its not just hundreds of lives if you take the Paragon choice. It's thousands. Now lets look at it from a Renegade view. It costs billions or trillions of creds to build the space port. It also cost quite a bit to build that residential area. Hell it probably cost even more in the residential area because you have people there that are trained for specific things. That said some of them are probably even truly irreplaceable.

Even from a Renegade view saving thousands of people seems more profitable than saving a space port. Besides if you save the people they can rebuild the spaceport all the faster since they already have workers on hand.

Saving the spaceport on the other hand leaves LOTS of death benefits to be paid out. Lots more work to be done rebuilding the settlement and even more money to be shelled out to find thousands of workers/colonists that are willing to come there and have the qualifications needed.

The only real choice to me Paragon or Renegade is to save the people. Its cheaper for everyone involved lol

Except your told in game saving the residential district will doom the colony and cause the Alliance to pull out of the system. 
I'm at a loss regarding the death benefits. I'm not sure how Life insurance is handled in the ME universe; but it seems likely that after Eden Prime and the Collector Raids, it would be hard to get a policy while living on the Terminus Border.

[Nyaore]

AddoExAtrum wrote...

K lets make this simple. Its not just hundreds of lives if you take the Paragon choice. It's thousands. Now lets look at it from a Renegade view. It costs billions or trillions of creds to build the space port. It also cost quite a bit to build that residential area. Hell it probably cost even more in the residential area because you have people there that are trained for specific things. That said some of them are probably even truly irreplaceable.

Even from a Renegade view saving thousands of people seems more profitable than saving a space port. Besides if you save the people they can rebuild the spaceport all the faster since they already have workers on hand.

Saving the spaceport on the other hand leaves LOTS of death benefits to be paid out. Lots more work to be done rebuilding the settlement and even more money to be shelled out to find thousands of workers/colonists that are willing to come there and have the qualifications needed.

The only real choice to me Paragon or Renegade is to save the people. Its cheaper for everyone involved lol

And to everyone who said "You can always find more people to move cheaply" your not looking at the broader corporate picture. Even in the military death benefits have to be paid, training done, and the entire infrastructure of the colony has to be rebuilt. Food, Water, Waste, all of those questions have to be answered. Its not as cheap as you think

This.

[Mikazukinoyaiba2]

How could a Shepard, who is part of the military, justify killing hundreds of civilians to save the lives of enlisted men and women who have sworn their lives to protect them?



Letting the base be nuked was the good decision and also the one that stuck to your duty code.

[SharpEdgeSoda]

It says in the text that it is hundreds of people, but otherwise I see your point.



But also, rebuilding is hardly cheap either. Plus, I'd imagine the industrial zone is built on a specific location. Having that place nuked would leave some very long term damage, it could take a decade to rebuild. People however can live anywhere. A prefabs can be built very quickly.

[Awesome Helmet]

i accidentally picked one too quickly. i still have no idea what i did.



oh the humanity.

[SteelEagleShane]

It is not black and white. Saving the Industrial sector leaves the colony viable, but lets many die. The colony can be repopulated, but still, people die.

Saving the people will force them to move, weakening the Alliance in the sector and allowing the Batarians a victory. Lives are saved, but the colony is still lost.

There are Paragon and Renegade answers, but there is no right and wrong answer.

[SharpEdgeSoda]

Awesome Helmet wrote...

i accidentally picked one too quickly. i still have no idea what i did.

oh the humanity.

That's an "Whoops!" moment if I ever heard one.

[Endo322]

is this a side quest or something? wth

[Mikazukinoyaiba2]

I don't know who would want to live in a colony knowing that if the Batarians ever attacked their government will wipe out the civilians.



How about we put this in the proper context, if say an extremist group was going to launch a nuclear device at either a military base or your town, which would you rather they hit? Sure the town could be rebuilt and repopulated.. eventually (by idiots) or the base can go and people who have sworn their lives to protect the civilians would die as heroes.



Hmm.. yeah such a hard choice.

[SteelEagleShane]

Mikazukinoyaiba2 wrote...

I don't know who would want to live in a colony knowing that if the Batarians ever attacked their government will wipe out the civilians.

How about we put this in the proper context, if say an extremist group was going to launch a nuclear device at either a military base or your town, which would you rather they hit? Sure the town could be rebuilt and repopulated.. eventually (by idiots) or the base can go and people who have sworn their lives to protect the civilians would die as heroes.

Hmm.. yeah such a hard choice.

Incorrect analogy. The better one would be a choice between nuking the only link that town has to the outside world, it's industrial sector, and the very meaning for that town to exist. Or you nuke the town and kill all the people that would be doing the work to make the place work.

Neither is right, but trying to simplify it belies the complexity of the choice.

[Schneidend]

This decision is easy. The military crap can always be rebuilt. If you let thousands of people get blown up, however, nobody is going to want to sign up to repopulate that colony.

[eternalnightmare13]

Hepzi3 wrote...


Damn, I missed Hackett in ME2

Yeah, I wish he had more of presence then a couple random emails.  

[Conway044]

1. The target is not a military base, its the colony's industrial sector and spaceport. You are standing in the military base.

2. The gov't isn't involved in the decision, a rogue para-military group is.

[this isnt my name]

Schneidend wrote...

This decision is easy. The military crap can always be rebuilt. If you let thousands of people get blown up, however, nobody is going to want to sign up to repopulate that colony.

Blowing up the industry would stop people repopulating the colony, this would encourage more bartarian attacks.