210 réponses à ce sujet

[Myrmedus]

SteelEagleShane wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

SteelEagleShane wrote...

I'm not disagreeing with most of what you said. Like I have said numerous times, I don't think that saving the town is less valid than saving the industrial sector. However, I will disagree with the simple idea that it is small losses versus large losses, though that is half of it. It is small losses and no more colony versus large losses but a continuing colony.

That's the thing though: it's not no more colony if you choose the spaceport, it's no more colony for awhile.

In addition, if you nuke the colony itself then that's pretty much no more colony for awhile aswell. The colony would lack the population to actively sustain itself and it wouldn't be possible to repopulate it for years due to nuclear fallout. You'd have to erect an entire new colony for people to live in which would arguably take even longer.

We can terraform planets to an extent in ME and, combined with the advances in medical technology as well as the ability to create isolated structures like prefab, the chances of a quicker recolonization with the industry intact is higher than it would be if you had to first evacuate people, come back to the colony later, put those people back down there, and rebuild the industries.


Not only for those reasons, but because the Alliance would probably dislike the idea of having to rebuild the industries from scratch just to get the colony back up to speed once the people get back. If industries are nuked, the people are still taken out. The likelyhood of the colony being recolonized does not really increase, because chances are that most of the colonists would likely choose to be diverted to new colonies instead of waiting.

I am not saying that choosing to save the industry is actually better: Personally, I wouldn't want to recolonize a place that had been nuked and it may/may not take longer. I just dislike people trying to say that this choice is easy peezy lemon squeezy. It isn't. The colony is ****ed and so are her people, each choice just bones them differently.

I found it easy to be honest. A colony is lifeless metal and tech, it's the people of the colony that make it worth something. I really could care less about the money, resources, time etc. required to recolonize another planet or location because the second you start evaluating people's lives on the premise of those things you've lost your soul IMO. Besides, even from a resources point of view if you choose to nuke the colony it makes no sense: even if you manage to counteract the nuclear fallout on the colony you'd still need to rebuild the majority of it due to sheer physical damage dealt by the blast. Rebuilding the colony would probably end up costing a similar amount of resources as rebuilding the spaceport so there's little to no disparity between the choices from that perspective either.

And again, I point to the fact that an industrial complex is more easier to evacuate than a denser populated area like a colony. In addition, barring no evacuation you still save more lives bombing the spaceport anyway. Even if the spaceport took a little more resources to rebuild it was an easy choice for me since I value human life above and beyond any of those resources - it's a no brainer.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 14 février 2010 - 02:44 .

[durasteel]

And if you were to ask the colonists, what would they answer? Would they be willing to lay down their lives to preserve the colony's infrastructure so that more colonists could come along later? What about the lives of their children?



Destroying the industrial sector gives the colonists a choice: they can abandon the colony or rebuild it. Your only other option is to strip away that and every other choice they might ever make. Life will be hard after the strike on the industrial sector, but a hard life is better than no life at all.



My Shepard isn't fighting for corporate profits or government authority. My Shepard is the all-mighty sword of righteousness that fights for those who can't fight for themselves. Often that means leaving a greasy smear where a threat used to be. I let Garrus take the shot, both times. I didn't let the Blue Suns walk away. My Shepard leaves piles of ash where sentient beings once stood, but the moment I forget who he's fighting for, he becomes no better than scum he blasts into oblivion.

[Gaudion]

You know how this missions should have ended?



CATS: "How are you, Shepard. You have no time for to make your escape."



Shepard: "Oh no. Someone set up us the bomb."

[Myrmedus]

What.

[Myrmedus]

What.

[SteelEagleShane]

durasteel wrote...

And if you were to ask the colonists, what would they answer? Would they be willing to lay down their lives to preserve the colony's infrastructure so that more colonists could come along later? What about the lives of their children?

Destroying the industrial sector gives the colonists a choice: they can abandon the colony or rebuild it. Your only other option is to strip away that and every other choice they might ever make. Life will be hard after the strike on the industrial sector, but a hard life is better than no life at all.

My Shepard isn't fighting for corporate profits or government authority. My Shepard is the all-mighty sword of righteousness that fights for those who can't fight for themselves. Often that means leaving a greasy smear where a threat used to be. I let Garrus take the shot, both times. I didn't let the Blue Suns walk away. My Shepard leaves piles of ash where sentient beings once stood, but the moment I forget who he's fighting for, he becomes no better than scum he blasts into oblivion.

The problem with that thinking is that it gives the colonists options they don't have.
They aren't given the option to stay. They will be evacuated. The colony will be lifeless and lord knows how long it will be until it will be repopulated. They will likely colonize new areas, probably safe ones. As I have said numerous times, saving the people is not wrong. But saying that this is a simple matter overall comes from a naive viewpoint- it isn't, and if you roleplay your Shepard and combine it with your own thoughts, then it becomes tricky.

Here is an example of my Shepard who saved the people thought:
Mostly Paragon, saved the council. Focusing on the Reapers, he didn't want the Alliance to worry about the Batarians until after.

The Shep who saved the industrial sector:
Mostly Paragon, let the council die. Convinced that the races of the galaxy will be slow to react and that he and his team are the only ones capable of defeating the Reapers or at least holding them off until the races can be brought to bear, he wants the Alliance to fight the Batarians for the good of humanity.

Shep who saved people two:
Mostly Renegade, let the council die. He wants the Alliance gone from the Terminus so that he can operate in opposition to the Reapers if they come there.

Sherp who saved Industrial two:
Fully Renegade, saved council. By letting the Alliance know he saved their base, he hopes to have an ally in his own personal war against the Batarians. He will do what it takes to defeat the Reapers, but doubts the ability of any military force in the Milky Way to be of any aid.

[SharpEdgeSoda]

You know what this reminds me of? The Death Star Attack in Episode 4.



The DS was dead set on destroying the Rebel Alliance base, crippling their war effort and potencially shutting them down out right.



In defense, the rebels sent out thier small force of fighters to blow up the Death Star before it blows up there base.



Of course, Luke Skywalker succeeds, and the Rebel forces are saved.



But this is what they don't tell you.



There were over a million people on the Death Star. The majority of them were actually civilians, who took the job because it was a high paying opportunity. This station was designed for long term service, and it had many luxuries for it's crew. Bars, clubs, food courts, lounges, plus the thousands of maintenance workers. The actual military garrison on the staion is relativly small, because they believed the DS was invincible.



And Luke Skywalker killed a million people (in self defense), to save a small military base, or rather, he killed a LARGE military base filled with civilians hired by the miliary, to save a small military base.



I know it's not exactly the same, but, for some reason, this reminded me of that.

[Yukon Jake]

I think the decision becomes morally ambiguous the moment you start weighing the value of a human life against the value of the infrastructure. Scary to think that some of you might be/become fire fighters, law enforcement, doctors, or corporate executives.



Even if there was only one person in the residential area I'd still nuke the infrastructure. Life is precious.

[newcomplex]

This is the stupidest moral choice in the entire game. The way they presented to you was basically the stereotypical bioware parodied stupid moral choices. It had no relavence to the quest, other then ZOMG WE ONLY GOT ONE DEACTIVATION CODE, U CHOSE.



Its pretty easy. Would you want your everyone in your neighborhood dead, or them having to move to chicago. Seriously.

[SteelEagleShane]

Yukon Jake wrote...

I think the decision becomes morally ambiguous the moment you start weighing the value of a human life against the value of the infrastructure. Scary to think that some of you might be/become fire fighters, law enforcement, doctors, or corporate executives.

Even if there was only one person in the residential area I'd still nuke the infrastructure. Life is precious.

It's called roleplaying. Get a glass of milk and stop worrying.XD You roleplay once as yourself, once as a dark you, and twice for a character. 

[SarEnyaDor]

As a person who grew up on Navy bases, I can tell you there were attack drills. People on military bases know there is a risk to living on one.



Bases are targets. That is why it is considered in very poor taste to hit a purely civilian target in war, and that is why terrorists are so despised - because they don't adhere to that code.

[SharpEdgeSoda]

Okay, I seriously had the decision screen up when I started this thread. This was an experiment to see what arguments there were for each side. I'm surprised that the debate remained as balanced as it did. Kudos Forumites.



I honestly was a expecting a bunch of simple "Save the people, Life is precious, go Paragon" post, that really don't go into analyzing consequences. I'm glad I saw some (but not all) people put more thought into it than that, for either choice.



It didn't want to hear what choice you think is right, I wanted to hear why the choice you picked was logical.



The industrial distract is critically important to the region, and losing it is a great loss, and likely won't be rebuilt for years or even decades. Saving it would mean all the Alliance had to do would be put up posters for new job openings.



The civilians have a right to live, and saving them means that they are free to continue serving for the Alliance if they so chose. Plus, it would make the Alliance look better with their "selfless" reputation, as they have already saved the Council in my tale.



I make this decision with great remorse...but...



I'm saving the civilians.



Now, I do not make this choice because it was the "right thing." I didn't do it because "I care about people more than structures."



No. I did it for "Reputation."



Showing the Alliance's (as that is how it will be represented in SPACE NEWS) compassion to save lives over expensive tactical structure will infact show all beings, Batarians, Humans, the Council, and beyond, more proof that Humanity is noble race, willing to sacrifice great things to save others.



Though, I do not do this lightly. I do believe that this will mean more attacks in the region, this may infact end up crippling more colonies that Shepard may not be around to save. I believe a possible outcome of this is losing far more human lives than if I kept that supporting colony intact. I can only pray that doesn't happen.



(Actually, part of me wishes it does happen, because I like it when BioWare does something to make you regret a "paragon" choice. CMON Balak, make me regret letting you go!)

[SharpEdgeSoda]

Damnit, I hate how the music, regardless of your choice, is all ominous afterward.



Foreboooooode

[durasteel]

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

You know what this reminds me of? The Death Star Attack in Episode 4.

[snip]

And Luke Skywalker killed a million people (in self defense), to save a small military base, or rather, he killed a LARGE military base filled with civilians hired by the miliary, to save a small military base.

I know it's not exactly the same, but, for some reason, this reminded me of that.

The Death Star was the ultimate weapon of mass destruction.  It had already obliterated Alderaan, and would no doubt do the same to other planets populated by billions of innocents.

Luke wasn't defending a small base, he was defending the entire galaxy far, far away.

[SteelEagleShane]

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

Okay, I seriously had the decision screen up when I started this thread. This was an experiment to see what arguments there were for each side. I'm surprised that the debate remained as balanced as it did. Kudos Forumites.

I honestly was a expecting a bunch of simple "Save the people, Life is precious, go Paragon" post, that really don't go into analyzing consequences. I'm glad I saw some (but not all) people put more thought into it than that, for either choice.

It didn't want to hear what choice you think is right, I wanted to hear why the choice you picked was logical.

The industrial distract is critically important to the region, and losing it is a great loss, and likely won't be rebuilt for years or even decades. Saving it would mean all the Alliance had to do would be put up posters for new job openings.

The civilians have a right to live, and saving them means that they are free to continue serving for the Alliance if they so chose. Plus, it would make the Alliance look better with their "selfless" reputation, as they have already saved the Council in my tale.

I make this decision with great remorse...but...

I'm saving the civilians.

Now, I do not make this choice because it was the "right thing." I didn't do it because "I care about people more than structures."

No. I did it for "Reputation."

Showing the Alliance's (as that is how it will be represented in SPACE NEWS) compassion to save lives over expensive tactical structure will infact show all beings, Batarians, Humans, the Council, and beyond, more proof that Humanity is noble race, willing to sacrifice great things to save others.

Though, I do not do this lightly. I do believe that this will mean more attacks in the region, this may infact end up crippling more colonies that Shepard may not be around to save. I believe a possible outcome of this is losing far more human lives than if I kept that supporting colony intact. I can only pray that doesn't happen.

(Actually, part of me wishes it does happen, because I like it when BioWare does something to make you regret a "paragon" choice. CMON Balak, make me regret letting you go!)

I like it when discussions on a forum are able to aid someone. It feels as though we aren't just wasting our time! So good thread.

[datakim]

Another issue that occurs to me is how this might affect the Batarians? I mean if you choose to destroy the spaceport, then that will result in the loss of the colony and the withdrawal of the alliance.

The Batarians are so pissed at humans because they wanted to colonize those planets instead. I seem to recall they wanted the council to declare those areas Batarian-only and quit the citadel when the council sided with humans. Essentially their primary motivation is to force humans to leave so they can move in.

If Shephard chooses the option that results in the colony being abandoned and the humans leaving, then he is sending a clear message to all Batarians that terror tactics such as the one here WORK. This might result in a lot more support from the Batarians for this kind of things, a lot more similar attacks on other colonies all over (since they now know it is a good way to force humans to leave), and in the long term the loss of far more civilian lives.

On the other hand, if Shephard saves the spaceport, the Batarians have just killed some civilians(which is naturally bad), but failed utterly in their primary objective (force the humans to leave the area). They have also lost a lot of troops in the process. This might make them less likely to commit similar acts in the future, saving many more innocent lives that would otherwise have been lost.


I personally saved the civilians, but its actually an annoyingly complex issue.

[GnusmasTHX]

You save the city, obviously.



What part of more lives lost don't you understand? It even says in the information box that at most, all they'll have to do is move to another colony.

[SharpEdgeSoda]

durasteel wrote...

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

You know what this reminds me of? The Death Star Attack in Episode 4.

[snip]

And Luke Skywalker killed a million people (in self defense), to save a small military base, or rather, he killed a LARGE military base filled with civilians hired by the miliary, to save a small military base.

I know it's not exactly the same, but, for some reason, this reminded me of that.

The Death Star was the ultimate weapon of mass destruction.  It had already obliterated Alderaan, and would no doubt do the same to other planets populated by billions of innocents.

Luke wasn't defending a small base, he was defending the entire galaxy far, far away.

I said it wasn't exactly the same at all. Just made me think about it. Just say it. Luke Skywalker killed thousands of innocent people in one stroke. Yeah, it had to be done, but how do you think it looked on INN (Imperial News Network) the next day?

"Hundreds of thousands of lives were taken today in a massive attack on the Imperial Navy's largest research station, by forces of the radical terrorist group, calling themselves, the 'Rebel Alliance'."
 
Of course they had to justify Alderran too...

[Ulicus]

SteelEagleShane wrote...

Kill a spider instead?

It's not up to me! (And, if it is, LOL religion)

[SharpEdgeSoda]

datakim wrote...

Another issue that occurs to me is how this might affect the Batarians? I mean if you choose to destroy the spaceport, then that will result in the loss of the colony and the withdrawal of the alliance.

The Batarians are so pissed at humans because they wanted to colonize those planets instead. I seem to recall they wanted the council to declare those areas Batarian-only and quit the citadel when the council sided with humans. Essentially their primary motivation is to force humans to leave so they can move in.

If Shephard chooses the option that results in the colony being abandoned and the humans leaving, then he is sending a clear message to all Batarians that terror tactics such as the one here WORK. This might result in a lot more support from the Batarians for this kind of things, a lot more similar attacks on other colonies all over (since they now know it is a good way to force humans to leave), and in the long term the loss of far more civilian lives.

On the other hand, if Shephard saves the spaceport, the Batarians have just killed some civilians(which is naturally bad), but failed utterly in their primary objective (force the humans to leave the area). They have also lost a lot of troops in the process. This might make them less likely to commit similar acts in the future, saving many more innocent lives that would otherwise have been lost.


I personally saved the civilians, but its actually an annoyingly complex issue.

I'm glad you said that AFTER I made the call, as that is a VERY VERY good point, probably would have made me think for another hour or so.

[Snowraptor]

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!

the funny thing is if you blow up the station, its the exact same one that had blue suns mercs in it, so i said **** blue suns

[Myrmedus]

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

Okay, I seriously had the decision screen up when I started this thread. This was an experiment to see what arguments there were for each side. I'm surprised that the debate remained as balanced as it did. Kudos Forumites.

I honestly was a expecting a bunch of simple "Save the people, Life is precious, go Paragon" post, that really don't go into analyzing consequences. I'm glad I saw some (but not all) people put more thought into it than that, for either choice.

It didn't want to hear what choice you think is right, I wanted to hear why the choice you picked was logical.

The industrial distract is critically important to the region, and losing it is a great loss, and likely won't be rebuilt for years or even decades. Saving it would mean all the Alliance had to do would be put up posters for new job openings.

The civilians have a right to live, and saving them means that they are free to continue serving for the Alliance if they so chose. Plus, it would make the Alliance look better with their "selfless" reputation, as they have already saved the Council in my tale.

I make this decision with great remorse...but...

I'm saving the civilians.

Now, I do not make this choice because it was the "right thing." I didn't do it because "I care about people more than structures."

No. I did it for "Reputation."

Showing the Alliance's (as that is how it will be represented in SPACE NEWS) compassion to save lives over expensive tactical structure will infact show all beings, Batarians, Humans, the Council, and beyond, more proof that Humanity is noble race, willing to sacrifice great things to save others.

Though, I do not do this lightly. I do believe that this will mean more attacks in the region, this may infact end up crippling more colonies that Shepard may not be around to save. I believe a possible outcome of this is losing far more human lives than if I kept that supporting colony intact. I can only pray that doesn't happen.

(Actually, part of me wishes it does happen, because I like it when BioWare does something to make you regret a "paragon" choice. CMON Balak, make me regret letting you go!)

Your avatar suits you, you heartless bastard!

xD

[AtreiyaN7]

I'm a paragon, but I saved the spaceport. Without the spaceport, you lose the planet entirely. I took into consideration the fact that the Reapers are coming and that we can't afford to completely ditch any planet. Didn't like it, but I sacrificed the colonists with that in mind.

[SharpEdgeSoda]

Myrmedus wrote...

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

Okay, I seriously had the decision screen up when I started this thread. This was an experiment to see what arguments there were for each side. I'm surprised that the debate remained as balanced as it did. Kudos Forumites.

I honestly was a expecting a bunch of simple "Save the people, Life is precious, go Paragon" post, that really don't go into analyzing consequences. I'm glad I saw some (but not all) people put more thought into it than that, for either choice.

It didn't want to hear what choice you think is right, I wanted to hear why the choice you picked was logical.

The industrial distract is critically important to the region, and losing it is a great loss, and likely won't be rebuilt for years or even decades. Saving it would mean all the Alliance had to do would be put up posters for new job openings.

The civilians have a right to live, and saving them means that they are free to continue serving for the Alliance if they so chose. Plus, it would make the Alliance look better with their "selfless" reputation, as they have already saved the Council in my tale.

I make this decision with great remorse...but...

I'm saving the civilians.

Now, I do not make this choice because it was the "right thing." I didn't do it because "I care about people more than structures."

No. I did it for "Reputation."

Showing the Alliance's (as that is how it will be represented in SPACE NEWS) compassion to save lives over expensive tactical structure will infact show all beings, Batarians, Humans, the Council, and beyond, more proof that Humanity is noble race, willing to sacrifice great things to save others.

Though, I do not do this lightly. I do believe that this will mean more attacks in the region, this may infact end up crippling more colonies that Shepard may not be around to save. I believe a possible outcome of this is losing far more human lives than if I kept that supporting colony intact. I can only pray that doesn't happen.

(Actually, part of me wishes it does happen, because I like it when BioWare does something to make you regret a "paragon" choice. CMON Balak, make me regret letting you go!)

Your avatar suits you, you heartless bastard!

xD

Now, I'm not completely heartless. I did wait FOUR HOURS WATCHING FORUMERS ARGUE before I made my decision. Logic mostly ditates that saving the industry is optimal in terms of the security of Humanity, and I turned that down to save lives. Plus, I let Balak go to save hostages!

WWTIMD?

He'd probably save the industrial district. 

[kalpain]

I must admit I spent some time with this as well. Probably not as long as you but I tried to way the pros and cons and ultimately decided that saving lives was more important that saving the spaceport. If only because I feel that's part of Shepard's mission. Screw the Alliance and the Batarians. The Alliance can build another base and if the Batarians get out of hand as they so often seem to Shepard will be there to deal with them. Though I do appreciate the complexity of the choice. It really forced me exam the issue but I just couldn't stand by and let them die knowing I could have prevented. I was so pissed at Zaeed for wanting to let those workers die just so he could get revenge on one guy. I just wish my Renegade Shepard had the ability to give him a more appropriate response.



On a side note, your comments about the Death Star made me remember this scene from Clerks, http://www.youtube.c...?v=n6lzEhoXads. It speaks more about the one from Return of the Jedi. But it still makes an interesting point. In my opinion...