653 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

Humans are all evil, because they aren't so cool as the aliens. Therefore, Cerberus is evil.



Proof.

[mopotter]

jklinders wrote...

Salarian STG and Asari commandos and the Turian military all answer to their respective governments. Cerberus answers to a single unelected individual with freaky eyes who is accountable to no one. That should be enough to be wary of them.

the wacky experiments and total disregard for individual lives are just the icing on the cake.

Agree.  The other problem is the people who work of Cerberus assume that as long as they get results, the boss (TIM) won't really care how they got them.  

As it is, he can say "I didn't know" to the child abuse, to the torture of military personal, to the torture/experimentation of human civilians. 

This to me implies that TIM has told his people results are what matters, but if I "hear" that you are doing anything questionable I'll throw you to the wolves.  TIM does not care how the results come about, he just does not want to have to admit he's a part of the problem, and for me - that's part of the problem.

[Xilizhra]

Of course, there is the disturbing possibility that Cerberus is answerable to Alliance leadership... and if it is, it raises the question of what to do about the Alliance.

[SFF19]

I'll admit it, while I found Cerberus' actions in the first game deplorable (rachi cloning, husk and creeper experiments, Kahoku and of course, Akuze), I could KIND OF understand TIM's point about how they're well intentioned extremists.

Then I learned the truth of Project Overlord.

Needless to say, I lost all respect for them after that and now consider them pure evil.

Modifié par SFF19, 26 novembre 2010 - 05:46 .

[Phaedon]

SFF19 wrote...

I'll admit it, while I found Cerberus' actions in the first game deplorable (rachi cloning, husk and creeper experiments, Kahoku and of course, Akuze), I could KIND OF understand TIM's point about how they're well intentioned extremists.

Then I learned the truth of Project Overlord.

Needless to say, I lost all respect for them after that and now consider them pure evil.

What about Pragia ?

[SFF19]

Phaedon wrote...

SFF19 wrote...

I'll admit it, while I found Cerberus' actions in the first game deplorable (rachi cloning, husk and creeper experiments, Kahoku and of course, Akuze), I could KIND OF understand TIM's point about how they're well intentioned extremists.

Then I learned the truth of Project Overlord.

Needless to say, I lost all respect for them after that and now consider them pure evil.

What about Pragia ?

Oh yeah...Pragia...

Once I played through it, THAT was when I started losing what little respect I had for Cerberus.  Overlord was merely the final nail in the coffin.

[MajesticJazz]

SFF19 wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

SFF19 wrote...

I'll admit it, while I found Cerberus' actions in the first game deplorable (rachi cloning, husk and creeper experiments, Kahoku and of course, Akuze), I could KIND OF understand TIM's point about how they're well intentioned extremists.

Then I learned the truth of Project Overlord.

Needless to say, I lost all respect for them after that and now consider them pure evil.

What about Pragia ?

Oh yeah...Pragia...

Once I played through it, THAT was when I started losing what little respect I had for Cerberus.  Overlord was merely the final nail in the coffin.

What about bringing Shepard back to life....which will  ultimately become the Hero of the Galaxy and save it from the Reapers?

[Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams]

SFF19 wrote...

Oh yeah...Pragia...

Once I played through it, THAT was when I started losing what little respect I had for Cerberus.  Overlord was merely the final nail in the coffin.

Yeah it's pointless for Cerberus to experiment on controlling synthetics. It couldn't possibly help in fighting the Reapers.

[luakel]

MajesticJazz wrote...

What about bringing Shepard back to life....which will  ultimately become the Hero of the Galaxy and save it from the Reapers?

Even that didn't work out perfectly; the work on Shepard wasn't completely finished yet, and everyone working on the project except for Miranda and Jacob is dead (and there had to be some skilled techies in that bunch, I doubt Miranda and Wilson were the only people actually doing anything). Sure, Shep's back, but Cerberus lost alot of people bringing him back (not to mention the 4 billion credits used to pay for it). Maybe it doesn't have the moral complications of Pragia or Overlord, but the Lazarus Project took a heavy toll on personnel for a group that (according to EDI) has only around 150 operatives.

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...

Yeah it's pointless for Cerberus to experiment on controlling synthetics. It couldn't possibly help in fighting the Reapers.

It's not a bad idea to experiment on controlling synthetics. It is a bad idea to do so in a way that could result in a technological apocalypse all by itself. Archer was acting extremely reckless and results-driven, and this led to him almost causing the thing his project was trying to help prevent. As much as his mentally-handicapped brother may have seemed like a good solution to controlling the geth, maybe it would have been a better idea to use someone who realized what was going on, even if it took longer? That way it'd be less likely to have them freaking out and killing virtually everyone in the project (which, again, is a pretty heavy death toll for an organization with only ~150 operatives), just to "make it stop".

[Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams]

luakel wrote...

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...

Yeah it's pointless for Cerberus to experiment on controlling synthetics. It couldn't possibly help in fighting the Reapers.

It's not a bad idea to experiment on controlling synthetics. It is a bad idea to do so in a way that could result in a technological apocalypse all by itself. Archer was acting extremely reckless and results-driven, and this led to him almost causing the thing his project was trying to help prevent. As much as his mentally-handicapped brother may have seemed like a good solution to controlling the geth, maybe it would have been a better idea to use someone who realized what was going on, even if it took longer? That way it'd be less likely to have them freaking out and killing virtually everyone in the project (which, again, is a pretty heavy death toll for an organization with only ~150 operatives), just to "make it stop".

Agreed. Hindsight is 20/20. They took a risk. It failed. The experiment, however, does not make them evil. It's simply a failed experiment.

[Il Divo]

Meh, evil is such a loaded term that I don't think it can do justice in explaining any group's motivations. Cerberus definitely has a spotty history, but then you can also look at all the different kinds of people who would join such an organization and see that the truth is rarely so clear cut. You have morally deplorable people like TIM and Miranda on the one side, then the more moderate members like Jacob and Kelly who view Cerberus as an active version of the Alliance.

[luakel]

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...

Agreed. Hindsight is 20/20. They took a risk. It failed. The experiment, however, does not make them evil. It's simply a failed experiment.

Oh, I agree they're not evil. But the experiment definitely doesn't help their track record, and it doesn't give much reason to trust Cerberus on those types of projects in the future. Sure, they can try to avoid their mistakes from Overlord... but they seem to make those kind of mistakes alot. You'd think TIM would have better judgement now vis-a-vis who he's picking as project leaders, or at least he'd keep a close enough eye on the projects to shut them down before they blow up.

I almost think the decision at the end of Overlord would have been better if you got the chance to take David to a seperate Cerberus cell, on top of the two choices we were given. As bad as his situation was, Cerberus may actually be able to help him more, and the data gained may be worth the ethical costs. But no way was my Shepard leaving him with the guy who screwed up majorly already, no matter how sorry Archer may be. And the fact that TIM criticized Shep for taking David away from Archer makes me wonder about TIM too. Does he know how to fire people, or does he just let them experiment as long as they don't get killed?

[SFF19]

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...

luakel wrote...

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...

Yeah it's pointless for Cerberus to experiment on controlling synthetics. It couldn't possibly help in fighting the Reapers.

It's not a bad idea to experiment on controlling synthetics. It is a bad idea to do so in a way that could result in a technological apocalypse all by itself. Archer was acting extremely reckless and results-driven, and this led to him almost causing the thing his project was trying to help prevent. As much as his mentally-handicapped brother may have seemed like a good solution to controlling the geth, maybe it would have been a better idea to use someone who realized what was going on, even if it took longer? That way it'd be less likely to have them freaking out and killing virtually everyone in the project (which, again, is a pretty heavy death toll for an organization with only ~150 operatives), just to "make it stop".

Agreed. Hindsight is 20/20. They took a risk. It failed. The experiment, however, does not make them evil. It's simply a failed experiment.

You don't think forcing an AUTISTIC man, who clearly doesn't like the idea, into becoming a living lab rat that is constantly flatout tortured by both the VI and the geth hive mind, all for some stupid failsafe for a hypothetical war that likely won't even occur  is evil?

I didn't say that Overlord itself was evil (but it WAS stupid), but the sheer torture and abuse of David by his own brother definitely was.

[Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams]

SFF19 wrote...

You don't think forcing an AUTISTIC man, who clearly doesn't like the idea, into becoming a living lab rat that is constantly flatout tortured by both the VI and the geth hive mind, all for some stupid failsafe for a hypothetical war that likely won't even occur  is evil?

I didn't say that Overlord itself was evil (but it WAS stupid), but the sheer torture and abuse of David by his own brother definitely was.

The ends justify the means. You're right, the Geth have never attacked humanity, and they have given every intention that they just want peace with us (/sarcasm). Also, insinuating that the crime was worse because David was autistic is sort of a messed up way to look at it. In my mind it would be no different if the unwilling victim was not impaired in any way.

[Xilizhra]

Well, autistic people do have greater trouble dealing with large amounts of stimuli... so yes, being hooked up into a machine where you're constantly bombarded with the communication of millions of geth programs is a bit worse if you're autistic, yes.

[Bad King]

TIM is a hero.



lol jk, but I can see him with his flashy new collector base providing some useful intel and firepower against the Reaper hordes.

[Theoristitis]

"Evil" is a matter of perspective. No one (almost) considers himself or herself truly evil. Even the Reapers believe they are in the right - and, since we don't know everything about the Cycle ("salvation through destruction" and all that business), it is difficult to pass a conclusive, objective judgment even on them.

If you believe the ends justify the means, then Cerberus is not necessarily evil. If you believe the means must fit a certain moral compass, then Cerberus is not necessarily good.

I don't think it's possible to put a subjective label on an objective state of being and call that label the "truth", but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

This kind of debate is fun, but though Cerberus' uniforms are black and white, they most certainly are not.

[Dean_the_Young]

Cerberus does evil things, but not all things Cerberus does are evil. Not all the things people accuse of being evil are evil as well: often there is misinterpretation, assumptions, or even factual error.

[SFF19]

Cerberus Operative Ashley Williams wrote...

SFF19 wrote...

You don't think forcing an AUTISTIC man, who clearly doesn't like the idea, into becoming a living lab rat that is constantly flatout tortured by both the VI and the geth hive mind, all for some stupid failsafe for a hypothetical war that likely won't even occur  is evil?

I didn't say that Overlord itself was evil (but it WAS stupid), but the sheer torture and abuse of David by his own brother definitely was.

The ends justify the means-

Yeah, no.

I don't care what the Heretic Geth are capable of.  NOTHING justifies putting an innocent man through 24-hour cold blooded torture like that.  Gavin Archer is one of the most repulsive characters in the series, and possibly in videogame history.

[General User]

I agree, the severely autistic cannot understand the world around them. David in particular relied on his brother. If how someone treats the helpless, helpless family no less, isn’t a way to gauge morality, I don’t know what is. By that measure, Cerberus in general, and Gavin Archer in particular are found severely wanting.

[PauseforEffect]

Is Cerberus evil? That's a complicated issue as to whether every member is or the organization in general.

That does not excuse them when they cause irreparable harm to others for selfish ambition

Torturing children on Pragia for biotic potential is unforgiveable to a lot of people. Please keep that in mind when claiming to do it for the greater good. There are lines that should not be crossed, otherwise you defeat the purpose

[Phaedon]

Yeah well, frankly, the phrase "the ends justify the means" only reminds you of how man can be ruthless and evil enough to come up with a line to satisfy his sense of guilt.

Anyway, here is what I posted on a thread identical to this one

We can argue over what moral is harmful or not for weeks, but we will be missing the point.

Was Pragia good ?
Was Overlord good ?
Was Akuze good ?
Was unleashing harmful radiation and killing colonists good ?
Was Ascension good ?
Was planting people with Reaper parts good ?
Was killing marines good ?
Was killing Kahoku good ?
Was attacking a fleet filled with millions of innocents good ?
Was the political assasination good ?

No.

The ends don't justify the means, it is the means that justify the ends.

Means? Abduction, torture and murder of children. Ends ? A single biotic.
Means? Murder of soldiers who enlisted on the SA to protect their family on earth. Ends ? Testing a trap ? I really can't see an end noble enough for mass murder.
Means? Destruction of a colony, countless victims. Ends ? A few good biotics.
Means? Abduction of a kid. Ends ? A single biotic.
Means? Same as Akuze.
Means? Torture and murder of an admiral who tried to find who killed his men. Ends ? Getting away with mass murder.
Means? Attack on a flotilla full of millions of innocents. Ends ? Getting a single man.
Means? Murder. Ends? Putting an extremist as the head of a political party.

Distinguishing between good and evil doesn't get any easier.

Modifié par Phaedon, 26 novembre 2010 - 11:13 .

[PauseforEffect]

Sorry, double post

Modifié par PrimalEden, 27 novembre 2010 - 05:37 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Torturing children on Pragia was also not a sanctioned act of Cerberus, and in violation of its own protocols. Please keep that in mind as well.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 26 novembre 2010 - 11:27 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Phaedon wrote...
Means? Abduction, torture and murder of children. Ends ? A single biotic.

Except, of course, Pragia was a rogue cell hiding its own actions.

Your ends is also mistaken: the product was Jack, but the lessons from it can and were applied elsewhere. Even Shepard can get a cutting-edge biotic upgrade from the facility, years after.

Means? Murder of soldiers who enlisted on the SA to protect their family on earth. Ends ? Testing a trap ? I really can't see an end noble enough for mass murder.

I assume you're referring to Akuze? In which case nothing suggests that was their ends... and sending a recon into an unknown danger isn't the same of murder, no matter how you spin it. The intent, purpose, and probabl cause don't add up. Why was the means to kill them, when the means were actually 'send them into danger there could be reasonable expectations they could be able to counter'? Fifty Alliance soldiers plus support equipment is hardly a paltry force.

Murder would only be aa reasonable charge if they knew the capabilities of the thresher maws, and killing Alliance troops was the point of the exercise.

Means? Destruction of a colony, countless victims. Ends ? A few good biotics.

Actually not sure what you're referring to. Not colony of the dead, but that's pretty much the only (baseless) accusation about colony killing throne at Cerberus, given that Cerberus's only known involvement was picking up husks after the process, and that never included biotics.

Means? Torture and murder of an admiral who tried to find who killed his men. Ends ? Getting away with mass murder.

Where do you get they tortured him? Murder, yes, but they didn't kill him for trying to find why his men died.

And why wouldn't their ends be 'protecting their organization and all the rest it represents'?

Means? Attack on a flotilla full of millions of innocents. Ends ? Getting a single man.

Oh, please. The ship that was targetted had nothing like that, You might as well call a murder in a new york a an attack on planet of billions. Grayson wasn't even their primary objective, either. The living super-special biotic super project was, and that's far more far reaching than a single person.

Means? Murder. Ends? Putting an extremist as the head of a political party.

Where do you get that Charles is an extremist? Why isn't he the more moderate, and his deceased rival an uncontrollable extremist?

Distinguishing between good and evil doesn't get any easier.

Extremely misleading exagerations and falsehoods certainly don't help in the process either.