619 réponses à ce sujet

[celticeagle13]

Nightwriter wrote...

Do not split an atom. Do not open Pandora's Box. Do not give advanced alien mind altering technology to Cerberus.

Sh*t WILL happen.

This guy seems to know whats up and i completely agree with him

[Vaenier]

You can always blow it up later, but you cant get it back after destroying it. Its not a decision that should be made in a firefight. If nothing else, you should keep it to make sure you want to blow it up. Weighing the moral ramifications of a Slurpee machine while your team is under fire is a bad thing to do.

[CmdrFenix83]

Vaenier wrote...

You can always blow it up later, but you cant get it back after destroying it. Its not a decision that should be made in a firefight. If nothing else, you should keep it to make sure you want to blow it up. Weighing the moral ramifications of a Slurpee machine while your team is under fire is a bad thing to do.

Except, you can't guarantee you're making it out of there alive.  Even being optimistic, you've had it drilled into you that people are going to die here.  Shepard is making that decision on the basis that (s)he might not even make it back out of the base.  You can't just assume Shepard will be around to make that decision.

[Halmiriliath]

Good to see a proper debate on topics like this. I think the old quote (referenced in Baldur's Gate) from Nietzsche sums up my opinion on this: 'He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster'. At what cost, and to what level, would you demean or contradict your own principles in keeping such nastiness about to further your own goals or to save the galaxy? Do you become as bad as the Reapers in doing so, and is the preservation of life worth the obvious horrendous losses it would require? Or do you destroy it, and galactic life goes out in a blaze of glory, safe in the knowledge that they have/had the moral high ground? Questions, questions, questions...

And on a side note, hi everyone!

[Lord Abrasion]

celticeagle13 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Do not split an atom. Do not open Pandora's Box. Do not give advanced alien mind altering technology to Cerberus.

Sh*t WILL happen.

This guy seems to know whats up and i completely agree with him

I wouldn't trust T.I.M. with a slingshot...

[Bigdoser]

Halmiriliath wrote...

Good to see a proper debate on topics like this. I think the old quote (referenced in Baldur's Gate) from Nietzsche sums up my opinion on this: 'He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster'. At what cost, and to what level, would you demean or contradict your own principles in keeping such nastiness about to further your own goals or to save the galaxy? Do you become as bad as the Reapers in doing so, and is the preservation of life worth the obvious horrendous losses it would require? Or do you destroy it, and galactic life goes out in a blaze of glory, safe in the knowledge that they have/had the moral high ground? Questions, questions, questions...

And on a side note, hi everyone!

I like this shame i havent played the BG series man, was that Nietzsche dude a good guy? cause that is some good advice.

[rabbitchannel]

F*** got accidentally deleted TWICE. GRRR.

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

rab****annel wrote...

Should be working on my essay but I can't resist! Damn you BW!

Your 1st fact does not mean anything. Just because something terrible happened in a certain location does not increase the probability that it will happen again in the same location, much less transforming that probability to 100%. Drawing one card out of a deck without replacement DOES increase the probability of drawing a certain card. They liquified people there. So what? Statistically incorrect.

Fact 2. Certainly, to my knowledge, that is true. However, this does not mean that this probability cannot be reduced. Again, I'm making the pan argument. This is what, the third time? If the pan is hot don't touch it. But if you can cool it a little or make it not hot at all, then you can. See, if there is a 100% chance of getting burned, why would you do it? If you can go in and make it less hot, then it becomes a viable alternative. We've already discovered indoctrination devices. All we need is to search for them and destroy them. Don't fill the base with people and have them stay there for extended periods of time. Have a small team scour a small section of the base then leave. With enough persistence, you should be able to find the indoctrination device/s.

Fact 3. If 100% of Cerberus experiments have been disastrous then why do they still exist? This is a conclusion drawn on select information. If Cerberus is such a failure, why are they so powerful? Why is TIM still in control? Do you count Shepards ressurection as a failure? The logical conclusion is that while only a small percentage of Cerberus' experiments have been unsuccessful, 100% of what has been exposed to Shepard is unsuccessful.

3 facts. One irrelevant. One malleable. One wrong.

The base is useful. Opinion.
The base is useless. Opinion.
The base is either useful or useless. Fact.

Speculations as to how useful or useless or to what extent help in measuring the potential risks against the potential benefits. Odds can always be manipulated. Odds of 100% doesn't make it a fact. It is a probability that can be altered.

I'm not making speculation.  I don't care what tech *might* be found in there.  Fact 1 only stated what the facility did.  Not what its' history is, not what happened there, what it *is*.  It's a giant blender to turn people into Reaper smoothie.  That is fact.  What else it could be, we don't know, and would be speculation.  Again, going by the fact and that alone.

Your counterpoint to Fact 2 is 'we might be able to change that?'  Again.  "Those who do not remember the mistakes of the past are condemned to relive them."  I don't remember where that quote came from, but I know it's famous.  The only fact you have is that Reaper tech has proven dangerous every single time.  That's it.  You can't say 'what if' without making it no longer a fact.  Your point is you're willing to risk it, that makes your stance Renegade right there.  You're willing to risk lives for potential success.  That's the definiton of Renegade!  The Paragon, instead of testing to see if he burns himself, will get a thermometer and check the temperature, or just wait until enough time has passed that the pan *will* be cool.  "We don't sacrifice lives for the sake of the mission, there's always a better way."  - Paragon Shepard in at least two situations in the game.

Yes, fact three is drawn from select information... the only information we have.  You can't derive facts from stuff you don't know.  That's speculation.  The only thing we *know* is that Cerberus is willing to commit atrocities, has done so in the past, and every single one we've seen turned into a horrible disaster. 

That's it, no speculation, no what if's, nothing but cold, hard facts.  Fact, the base's purpose was to juice living beings.  Fact, it's Reaper tech, and Reaper tech has always resulted in bad things.  Fact, Cerberus experiments are horrific and as far as we know, have always ended in failure.  The most likely scenerio is that... Cerberus uses facility, juices a bunch of people, get indoctrinated, and end up killing thousands more.  That's a reasonable conclusion based on what we *know*. 

F*** GOT DELETED TWICE. GRRR.

If you weren't using Fact 1 as a reason to destroy the base... why in the world did you mention it in the first place? Everyone knows they got juiced. Pointless?

A fanciful quote exagerrating a trend to prove a point. We are hardly "condemned". I never said it wasn't a fact. I said it could be manipulated. If the pan is hot, turn it off. You insist on it being dangerous when it could be otherwise. What is it with you and considering alternatives? Also, you and all the other I've presented the, "Indoctrination Devices can be scouted for by scouring small areas with small teams before withdrawal" argument to never address it. What is this about Renegade and Paragon? Again, I never said that. I said the decision to destroy the base is stupid and the decision to keep it is wise.

You really refuse to believe that 100% of Cerberus' experiments have been disastrous? Seriously? A track record like that doesn't really translate into a powerful intergalactic organization backed by influential men and women with dare I say, infinite resources. In fact, I doubt that even if that figure were 30% they would still be around. If you won't see this then I don't know what to do. The information is incomplete but logical reasoning should be able to tell you that. I haven't looked in my seatmate's bag, but I know there's not an elephant in there. But I don't know what's in there either.

Each side has facts and speculation. The keep the base side does. The destroy the base side does. Speculation is important as the combination of facts and speculation will weigh one side against the other. The possibilities of keeping it and the opportunity cost of destroying it. And vice-versa. Decisions are made with information known and unknown. To make a decision considering only the facts and not the possibilities and probabilities is foolish. If everything were known then we would not have to debate as the choice would be obvious. When faced with variables the solution is not to discount them but to weigh them carefully.

My most likely scenario is that Shepard keeps TIM in line and we use the base to defeat the Reapers. In the aftermath TIM tries to gain the upperhand but Shepard stops him/anticipated it.

Modifié par rabbitchannel, 02 mars 2010 - 11:50 .

[dragonic9100]

its EVIL! it must die

[Halmiriliath]

Bigdoser wrote...

I like this shame i havent played the BG series man, was that Nietzsche dude a good guy? cause that is some good advice.

To be honest I don't really know much about the guy, except that he was a clever eccentric who tended to be a bit bleak. Regardless, it's a good quote though! Anyway, back to Collectors and Reapers...

[rabbitchannel]

dragonic9100 wrote...

its EVIL! it must die

Oh fine, you win!
















Just kidding.

[CmdrFenix83]

rab****annel wrote...

F*** GOT DELETED TWICE. GRRR.

If you weren't using Fact 1 as a reason to destroy the base... why in the world did you mention it in the first place? Everyone knows they got juiced. Pointless?

A fanciful quote exagerrating a trend to prove a point. We are hardly "condemned". I never said it wasn't a fact. I said it could be manipulated. If the pan is hot, turn it off. You insist on it being dangerous when it could be otherwise. What is it with you and considering alternatives? Also, you and all the other I've presented the, "Indoctrination Devices can be scouted for by scouring small areas with small teams before withdrawal" argument to never address it. What is this about Renegade and Paragon? Again, I never said that. I said the decision to destroy the base is stupid and the decision to keep it is wise.

You really refuse to believe that 100% of Cerberus' experiments have been disastrous? Seriously? A track record like that doesn't really translate into a powerful intergalactic organization backed by influential men and women with dare I say, infinite resources. In fact, I doubt that even if that figure were 30% they would still be around. If you won't see this then I don't know what to do. The information is incomplete but logical reasoning should be able to tell you that. I haven't looked in my seatmate's bag, but I know there's not an elephant in there. But I don't know what's in there either.

Each side has facts and speculation. The keep the base side does. The destroy the base side does. Speculation is important as the combination of facts and speculation will weigh one side against the other. The possibilities of keeping it and the opportunity cost of destroying it. And vice-versa. Decisions are made with information known and unknown. To make a decision considering only the facts and not the possibilities and probabilities is foolish. If everything were known then we would not have to debate as the choice would be obvious. When faced with variables the solution is not to discount them but to weigh them carefully.

My most likely scenario is that Shepard keeps TIM in line and we use the base to defeat the Reapers. In the aftermath TIM tries to gain the upperhand but Shepard stops him/anticipated it.

You're not listening at all.  The base liquifies people.  That is its' purpose.  That's what it does.  That's why it exists.  For all you know, the only tech you could get from this, is a faster way to dissolve organics than using acid.  We don't know, and guessing anything beyond what you know is speculation.  You're *assuming* and *speculating* that it might be useful beyond this.  That's hypothesis and conjecture.  You have no proof, nor do you have time to research it.

The point about reliving the past is very relevant.  You do know what they call someone that does the same thing over and over expecting different results, right?  That's the definition of insanity.  Every bit of Reaper tech had produced disasterous result.  This is fact.  It's not debatable, you can't go 'well, it might change!' It's simple fact.  Expecting a different result is insane.  Is it possible that the base can be used for technological advances without negative consequences, absolutely.  However, you do not have any evidence to support this.  You're throwing caution to the wind and attempting to defy the logical conclusion.  In other words: It's an insane choice.

I never said everything Cerberus does is a failure.  I said every experiment we *know* of has been a disaster.  You're just assuming that since they get funding they must do something right.  That's an assumption on your part.  I'm going by what I've seen.  Rachni, Thorian Creepers, Husks, all of them were horribly failed experiments resulting in the deaths of the researchers and many innocents in the surrounding areas.  The Teltan Facility on Pragia.  Experimenting and torturing dozens if not hundreds of children.  The end resulting in the entire facility being destroyed when their test subjects got loose.  Nothing here is conjecture, nothing here is speculation.  We've seen this.  We know it happened.  Again, what are you expecting if you give them the base to experiment on?  If your answer is anything short of a disaster, then you're fitting the definition of insane.

You cannot approach the situation and look at the track record of Reaper tech and Cerberus and think there could possibly be any good that would come from it.  That's not to mention what the base itself is.  Why would you give an organic-juicing blender of Reaper Tech to an organization that's famous to you for repeatedly commiting atrocious failures, and expect that it would be the 'right' thing to do in any sense of the word?  If you want to risk it despite all the problems, then I'll bet you can wave to Hitler when you meet him.  Perhaps you can discuss how his invasion of Russia went.

[Kyria Nyriese]

My only reason for destroying the Collector base is the fact that I will NOT give it to TIM and Cerberus. They are not to be trusted in any way, shape, form or fashion.

[tropicalwave]

@CmdrFenix83 I never even thought of this because we are all thinking meta not at that exact moment in time "Except, you can't guarantee you're making it out of there alive. Even being optimistic, you've had it drilled into you that people are going to die here. Shepard is making that decision on the basis that (s)he might not even make it back out of the base. You can't just assume Shepard will be around to make that decision."



I keep reading what the OP says in response to others and I have not seen any facts in his argument. I see tons of speculation. The fact that he states it is stupid to destroy the base makes me even more believe it is emotional. The whole paragon/renegade argument comes in to play as someone is stating the OPs opinion falls right in line with the renegade thinking. The paragon goes right along with not wanting to deal with an unknown threat over something we do not know will produce any good.



There are no facts that say keeping the base is the best solution, only speculation that keeping it will produce good. While destroying something that we know is capable of being controlled by the harbinger and liquifies humans and creates at least a reaper. By destroying it we have elminated a repear creating base and isn't that we are trying to do, destroy the repears?

[CmdrFenix83]

tropicalwave wrote...

@CmdrFenix83 I never even thought of this because we are all thinking meta not at that exact moment in time "Except, you can't guarantee you're making it out of there alive. Even being optimistic, you've had it drilled into you that people are going to die here. Shepard is making that decision on the basis that (s)he might not even make it back out of the base. You can't just assume Shepard will be around to make that decision."

I keep reading what the OP says in response to others and I have not seen any facts in his argument. I see tons of speculation. The fact that he states it is stupid to destroy the base makes me even more believe it is emotional. The whole paragon/renegade argument comes in to play as someone is stating the OPs opinion falls right in line with the renegade thinking. The paragon goes right along with not wanting to deal with an unknown threat over something we do not know will produce any good.

There are no facts that say keeping the base is the best solution, only speculation that keeping it will produce good. While destroying something that we know is capable of being controlled by the harbinger and liquifies humans and creates at least a reaper. By destroying it we have elminated a repear creating base and isn't that we are trying to do, destroy the repears?

I actually roleplay my characters.    They all vary in their views, and it makes for different combinations of outcomes.  However, I'm glad I could invoke that type of thinking.  

[BurstAngel75]

Nietzsche was a german philosopher that pretty much pioneer nilism (spelling?)

During the victorian age alot of philosophers, was fusing western mentality with eastern metaphysics. It has some nuggets of truth but as a whole, is a deeply flawed and fatalistic idea. He was an atheist.

[rabbitchannel]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

rab****annel wrote...

F*** GOT DELETED TWICE. GRRR.

If you weren't using Fact 1 as a reason to destroy the base... why in the world did you mention it in the first place? Everyone knows they got juiced. Pointless?

A fanciful quote exagerrating a trend to prove a point. We are hardly "condemned". I never said it wasn't a fact. I said it could be manipulated. If the pan is hot, turn it off. You insist on it being dangerous when it could be otherwise. What is it with you and considering alternatives? Also, you and all the other I've presented the, "Indoctrination Devices can be scouted for by scouring small areas with small teams before withdrawal" argument to never address it. What is this about Renegade and Paragon? Again, I never said that. I said the decision to destroy the base is stupid and the decision to keep it is wise.

You really refuse to believe that 100% of Cerberus' experiments have been disastrous? Seriously? A track record like that doesn't really translate into a powerful intergalactic organization backed by influential men and women with dare I say, infinite resources. In fact, I doubt that even if that figure were 30% they would still be around. If you won't see this then I don't know what to do. The information is incomplete but logical reasoning should be able to tell you that. I haven't looked in my seatmate's bag, but I know there's not an elephant in there. But I don't know what's in there either.

Each side has facts and speculation. The keep the base side does. The destroy the base side does. Speculation is important as the combination of facts and speculation will weigh one side against the other. The possibilities of keeping it and the opportunity cost of destroying it. And vice-versa. Decisions are made with information known and unknown. To make a decision considering only the facts and not the possibilities and probabilities is foolish. If everything were known then we would not have to debate as the choice would be obvious. When faced with variables the solution is not to discount them but to weigh them carefully.

My most likely scenario is that Shepard keeps TIM in line and we use the base to defeat the Reapers. In the aftermath TIM tries to gain the upperhand but Shepard stops him/anticipated it.

You're not listening at all.  The base liquifies people.  That is its' purpose.  That's what it does.  That's why it exists.  For all you know, the only tech you could get from this, is a faster way to dissolve organics than using acid.  We don't know, and guessing anything beyond what you know is speculation.  You're *assuming* and *speculating* that it might be useful beyond this.  That's hypothesis and conjecture.  You have no proof, nor do you have time to research it.

The point about reliving the past is very relevant.  You do know what they call someone that does the same thing over and over expecting different results, right?  That's the definition of insanity.  Every bit of Reaper tech had produced disasterous result.  This is fact.  It's not debatable, you can't go 'well, it might change!' It's simple fact.  Expecting a different result is insane.  Is it possible that the base can be used for technological advances without negative consequences, absolutely.  However, you do not have any evidence to support this.  You're throwing caution to the wind and attempting to defy the logical conclusion.  In other words: It's an insane choice.

I never said everything Cerberus does is a failure.  I said every experiment we *know* of has been a disaster.  You're just assuming that since they get funding they must do something right.  That's an assumption on your part.  I'm going by what I've seen.  Rachni, Thorian Creepers, Husks, all of them were horribly failed experiments resulting in the deaths of the researchers and many innocents in the surrounding areas.  The Teltan Facility on Pragia.  Experimenting and torturing dozens if not hundreds of children.  The end resulting in the entire facility being destroyed when their test subjects got loose.  Nothing here is conjecture, nothing here is speculation.  We've seen this.  We know it happened.  Again, what are you expecting if you give them the base to experiment on?  If your answer is anything short of a disaster, then you're fitting the definition of insane.

You cannot approach the situation and look at the track record of Reaper tech and Cerberus and think there could possibly be any good that would come from it.  That's not to mention what the base itself is.  Why would you give an organic-juicing blender of Reaper Tech to an organization that's famous to you for repeatedly commiting atrocious failures, and expect that it would be the 'right' thing to do in any sense of the word?  If you want to risk it despite all the problems, then I'll bet you can wave to Hitler when you meet him.  Perhaps you can discuss how his invasion of Russia went.

Jesus. Did you not read my last paragraph about a holistic view and considering all possibilities? History repeats itself is true unless you introduce something new to the equation. An experiment is repeatable with the same variables and same conditions but once you introduce or REMOVE a variable, the outcome changes. Every bit of Reaper tech produced terrible results yes. But it DOESN'T mean that it will be so in the future especially if it is approached differently. Why would you approach it the same way?. Evidence of getting tech from the base without negative results. Evidence is not important in this case the mere possibility is reason enough. Even a the smallest of chances to give you an edge is reason enough. Did you read the last paragraph? The variables? The known and unknown? 

The Cerberus is a failure. You're being vague. omg. You're telling me that you don't consider them to be 100% disaster-ific yet STILL tell me that a result other than a catastrophe is unthinkable? They're one and the same.

The "right" thing??? Where did that come from??? I said it's the wise thing! The answer to your last question is very simple and is a basic instinct for all members of all races: To live. Anything that increases the chance to live is in. You positively refuse to see anything from any perspective other than your own. I address each of your points yet as you reply to mine you selectively choose fewer and fewer, repeating the same arguments in the same way. Trends, trends. The whole point of a trend is that you will be able to predict and change the outcome of the future result. 

Lastly, wow, was that that holier-than-thou card? 

I see I'm getting nowhere here. Debate over.

[Rebel_Guy]

Because the explosion is more satisfying.

[Vaenier]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Vaenier wrote...

You can always blow it up later, but you cant get it back after destroying it. Its not a decision that should be made in a firefight. If nothing else, you should keep it to make sure you want to blow it up. Weighing the moral ramifications of a Slurpee machine while your team is under fire is a bad thing to do.

Except, you can't guarantee you're making it out of there alive.  Even being optimistic, you've had it drilled into you that people are going to die here.  Shepard is making that decision on the basis that (s)he might not even make it back out of the base.  You can't just assume Shepard will be around to make that decision.

Even more reason to keep it. With Shep dead, there aint much hope for the galaxy. even with cerberus owning the facility, chances of victory are slim.

[Malastrail]

Cerberus has shown themselves to be highly unethical in the past. It would be extremely irresponsible to leave that technology to a group with practically no oversight IMHO.

[Bigdoser]

Rebel_Guy wrote...

Because the explosion is more satisfying.

Yeah i know blowing up the milkshake maker is so satisfying

[DarthCaine]

Why would anyone destroy the collector base?

maybe because you're giving the base to a terrorist ?

[lexicality]

That was a bad ending.



Basic warfare - know your enemy.

Want to roleplay as an engineer - then tech is a tool to be studied.



So for making the logical choice I am penalised as an evil xenophobe.



Surely the decision part where my nature would have influence would be on what I decide to do with the saved tech? Keep it for myself, give to the council or give to the xenophobes.

[ArcanistLibram]

Giving the Collector base to the Illusive Man can't possibly end well.

[KnotEngaged]

I tend to agree with Legion's logic. Every species should self-determinate and advance their technology through their own means at their own pace. By keeping the base you are continuing the trend of the Reapers determining the course of galactic technology and therefore the evolution of life as we know it.

This is even without mention the fact that TIM is the one you turn the base over to, and the base was home to massive human genocide.

As Harbinger would say, "We will find another way."

[CmdrFenix83]

rab****annel wrote...

Jesus. Did you not read my last paragraph about a holistic view and considering all possibilities? History repeats itself is true unless you introduce something new to the equation. An experiment is repeatable with the same variables and same conditions but once you introduce or REMOVE a variable, the outcome changes. Every bit of Reaper tech produced terrible results yes. But it DOESN'T mean that it will be so in the future especially if it is approached differently. Why would you approach it the same way?. Evidence of getting tech from the base without negative results. Evidence is not important in this case the mere possibility is reason enough. Even a the smallest of chances to give you an edge is reason enough. Did you read the last paragraph? The variables? The known and unknown? 

The Cerberus is a failure. You're being vague. omg. You're telling me that you don't consider them to be 100% disaster-ific yet STILL tell me that a result other than a catastrophe is unthinkable? They're one and the same.

The "right" thing??? Where did that come from??? I said it's the wise thing! The answer to your last question is very simple and is a basic instinct for all members of all races: To live. Anything that increases the chance to live is in. You positively refuse to see anything from any perspective other than your own. I address each of your points yet as you reply to mine you selectively choose fewer and fewer, repeating the same arguments in the same way. Trends, trends. The whole point of a trend is that you will be able to predict and change the outcome of the future result. 

Lastly, wow, was that that holier-than-thou card? 

I see I'm getting nowhere here. Debate over.

Again, you don't even know if the base has anything useful in it.  You're keeping it because it might, and risking everything that is likely from both Reaper and Cerberus history just for the sake of 'possibly getting something worthwhile' from it.  You blatantly refuse to realize that you're basing your decision on the *chance* of something useful, and not on anything concrete.  You're willing to risk negative consequences(keyword is Risk) for potentially nothing whatsoever.  This is why the decision is flat-out Renegade.  History will be the only one to tell whether it was right or wrong.  You can't know such things when making the choice, however.

You're failing to even understand your own perspective.  You're willing to risk keeping a known evil, and giving it to a known evil to use, just on the possibility that some good can come from it, while just flat out assuming your Shepard is omnipotent and capable of knowing if TIM will betray him/her before TIM takes action.  If your Shepard is an oracle and capable of knowing that the sacrifice is necessary, then by all means, go ahead and keep your human smoothie maker.

Lastly, no, I wasn't playing a 'holier than thou' card.  It's called a history lesson.  Napoleon attempted to invade Russia.  Russia employed their scortched-earth policy that ultimately ended in Napoleon's defeat.  Hitler, leading Germany, did the same thing near the end of WWII.  What was the result?  Russia instated a scorched-earth policy that ultimately led to Germany's defeat.  Now your Shepard, thinks it might be worthwhile to invade Russia.  You know very well the result would be a scorched-earth policy that would end with your Shepard's defeat.

It's the exact same situation you're trying to use here.  It's simply a lesson that should be learned, and you're ignoring it.  Repaer tech has been bad every time.  Every attempt to study it has ended horribly.  It's the same with Cerberus *as far as we know*.  Handing Cerberus the Reaper base is almost guaranteed to go badly. 

Even if you think there's a chance that it won't turn out badly, there's no guarantee that you'll find *anything* of value.  Nothing at all.  You're willing to risk the obvious threat, for a slim hope of there being something of value.  And that's what makes you a Renegade.  It's not the 'right' choice.  It's morally suspect, unethical.  The Renegade is willing to risk it, the Paragon won't.  It's just that simple.

Modifié par CmdrFenix83, 03 mars 2010 - 12:57 .