798 réponses à ce sujet

[lovgreno]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

I think you guys are looking too much into this stuff.

But it's also fun!!  Come on, theorycrafting is an awesome pastime!

Overanalysing just because you can is a simple but good way of entertaining ourselves.

[belwin]

so i haven't read the 28 pages.

but do you think that Keji's Greybox (spelling?) might've then held some info on this subject?
seeing as Cerberus is a "vowed enemy of the council" (see the discussion in ME2 if you saved the council at the citadel) it would definately cause PR problems for the alliance if they are affiliated with cerberus.

amirite?

[wolfsite]

belwin wrote...

so i haven't read the 28 pages.

but do you think that Keji's Greybox (spelling?) might've then held some info on this subject?
seeing as Cerberus is a "vowed enemy of the council" (see the discussion in ME2 if you saved the council at the citadel) it would definately cause PR problems for the alliance if they are affiliated with cerberus.

amirite?

To be honest this can't really be answered until Bioware comes up and says it.  We have seen a lot of information to justify both sides of the arguement, but a lot of it is circumstantial or people twisting stuff to fit there view point.

I would just let this topic die (Like it almost did) and wait and see if ME3 comes out and says if it is or is not still part of the Alliance.


I'm in the camp that they are not part of the Alliance but they still have a handful of agents within the Aliance.

Modifié par wolfsite, 18 janvier 2011 - 12:40 .

[Zulu_DFA]

belwin wrote...

so i haven't read the 28 pages.

but do you think that Keji's Greybox (spelling?) might've then held some info on this subject?
seeing as Cerberus is a "vowed enemy of the council" (see the discussion in ME2 if you saved the council at the citadel) it would definately cause PR problems for the alliance if they are affiliated with cerberus.

amirite?

Yes, quite a few people thought this right the moment "Kasumi" came out. But I don't think so. There is a couple of Sovereign's pics in the graybox, so it must be something to do with the Reapers. Nothing extraordinary though, just the Alliance secretly falling in love with the Reapers, for the fun of fancy tech, that'd give us an edge over the aliens -- if it weren't the Black Widow kind of love, which the Alliance is going to realize only in ME3.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 20 janvier 2011 - 01:01 .

[Zulu_DFA]

It was General Williams, who started Cerberus.

[Encarmine]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

It was General Williams, who started Cerberus.

Encarmine Likes This

[Zulu_DFA]

Or, he rather arranged its "baptism of fire" on Shanxi, so one can say Gen. Williams was Cerberus' god father.

And chronologically, he was the one to introduce the famous fist clench.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 25 janvier 2011 - 04:32 .

[Arijharn]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

It was General Williams, who started Cerberus.

Lol, that's actually funny. It means Cerberus is in Ashley's blood just as much as the Alliance.

[Disquoveri]

I would love if this theory was true, but I doubt the creativity of BioWare.

[Zulu_DFA]

This here is another example of a loose usage of the word "rogue", in the Codex itself in Mass Effect 2 now.

Apparently, the entire Human race is considered "rogue", just like the North Koreans Batarians, even though the latter earned the title by breaking away from the Council rule, while the former did after commanding the Council rule.

      


In any case, if Cerberus is a "rogue" organization within a "rogue" race, it can mean one of the two things. Either the Human Alliance is evil, and then Cerberus is not so evil, or Cerberus is "rogue" because the whole human race is, and that means it's never broken away from the Alliance. Take your pick.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 25 janvier 2011 - 03:44 .

[Fixers0]

Again you only seem to assume things that could work to your advantage, but you seem to get sloppy, because you are forgetting 2 crucial things:

1. This does not have to Appear in everyone's Codex, if people people made other choices then you did, this information would have not been there, therfore this whole point would have been false.

2. The word Rogue comes from different perspectives, if point 1 doesn't apply to you then this: you can't just compare two words because they are the same, the Alliance considers Cerberus a Black'ops group that has gone Rogue, Whoever Considers Humantity rogue looks at it from a other perspective.

[Zulu_DFA]

Fixers0 wrote...

1. This does not have to Appear in everyone's Codex, if people people made other choices then you did, this information would have not been there, therfore this whole point would have been false.

1.1. It's on the default playthrough. Just saying - since you've brought this up. But it's irrelevant. This doesn't have anything to do with anyone's canon. (So it's you who fail at logic again, or, more precisely,  are demonstrating the lack of comprehension skills.)

1.2. I'm just indicating that the BioWare writers can put the R-word to all kinds of uses, so it's ambigous in what meaning it was put into Kahoku's mouth.

Fixers0 wrote...

2. The word Rogue comes from different perspectives, if point 1 doesn't apply to you then this: you can't just compare two words because they are the same, the Alliance considers Cerberus a Black'ops group that has gone Rogue, Whoever Considers Humantity rogue looks at it from a other perspective.

2.1. From what perspective did Kahoku look at it? A personal one, perhaps?

2.2. Because the Alliance does not consider Cerberus a "black ops group that has gone rogue". It officially considers Cerberus a "terrorist group that never had anything in common with the Alliance".

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 25 janvier 2011 - 05:03 .

[vanslyke85]

Not sure if it's been said, I'm not sifting through over 600 posts, but once you beat the Shadow Broker DLC you can watch some video clips in the back room. One of the clips is of Anderson meeting with a Cerberus agent. Verrrry interrrestink

[Fixers0]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

1. This does not have to Appear in everyone's Codex, if people people made other choices then you did, this information would have not been there, therfore this whole point would have been false.

1.1. It's on the default playthrough. Just saying - since you've brought this up. But it's irrelevant. This doesn't have anything to do with anyone's canon. (So it's you who fail at logic again, or, more precisely,  are demonstrating the lack of comprehension skills.)

1.2. I'm just indicating that the BioWare writers can put the R-word to all kinds of uses, so it's ambigous in what meaning it was put into Kahoku's mouth.

Fixers0 wrote...

2. The word Rogue comes from different perspectives, if point 1 doesn't apply to you then this: you can't just compare two words because they are the same, the Alliance considers Cerberus a Black'ops group that has gone Rogue, Whoever Considers Humantity rogue looks at it from a other perspective.

From what perspective did Kahoku look at it? A personal one, perhaps?

You are right to some degree, Bioware could put any kind meaning to a word, you always seem to asume that your interpretation is right, and as someone said before that you feel any uncertainty with. ''well obviously you can't prove me wrong, therefore my theory is correct''

You see there is no real reason to proof that your Theory, unless you look at each point from a certain perspective and then combine then all togheter to something that still doesn't say ''Cerberus is Part of the Alliance'' I can guarentee you that most players won't look at it from your perspective and certainly aren't going to put it togheter the way you did.

From a story perspective they are just the dark side of humanity in the Mass Effect Universe, they were part of a larger story, you just have to accept that.

Ultimatly the problem is not the theory itself which could have been very interesting, but the basicly what i have said before, you should be more open to other people and not be like ''my interpertation is correct and yours is wrong''.

[Zulu_DFA]

Fixers0 wrote...

Ultimatly the problem is not the theory itself which could have been very interesting, but the basicly what i have said before, you should be more open to other people and not be like ''my interpertation is correct and yours is wrong''.

This suggestion is a paradoxical self-contradiction.

Since you say that I should be "more open", it implies that you already are not like ''my interpertation is correct and yours is wrong".

Which means that you have to admit that it's possible that your interpretation of what I should and shouldn't may be incorrect. In which case I shouln't be "more open" at all. Luckilly, you can't really tell.

And, any post here is an opinion of the respective poster, and it doesn't need to be reiterated each time one is about to post something.

And we can argue, or we can refrain from arguing.

[mOOgBunny]

All I was trying to do was find a conceivable answer to how I was able to stay on, let alone remain upright & walk on the outside of the Shadow Broker's ship & I stumbled across this thread.



Zulu_DFA you have ruined my day! In a good way.



I had a feeling something was very wrong with the whole Alliance - Cerberus setup. Just finished my first play through the other day (only got it at Christmas) with my wayward Shepard (Mitsuko) & something was bugging me all along, just couldn't quite figure out what. Soldiering on it was Shepard Mizukis turn to save the universe in her more considerate fashion 6 hours in & I read your post!!!



I never did find the "suicide mission" in the whole game but now I realise the suicide mission just might be sticking with the public friendly side of the Alliance & doing the "right" thing. Cerberus had my loyalty from the get go, something just felt right siding with the only group that gave a damn. I was only going on the info gained in ME1 to which character would support them, which as the story unfolded in ME2 seemed more like misinformation.



But that screws up my characters, so now, I've got to finish what I started & then play through another time with them to hedge my bets.



So thanks, thanks a lot. I was actually going to try a bloke character for the third play but now...

aahh... I guess there's plenty of time before ME3.



As vanslyke85 states the Shadow Brokers videos with Anderson & Udina now also make a lot more sense. What would be the point of all the interesting info in those videos & documents if they are of no concern to us?



Appreciate your (Zulu_DFA) insightful opening post, seems to make a whole lot of sense to me & pulls all the outstanding issues I had together. Glad I gave Cerberus all the tech I could now, I would like the the Earth to survive the final part of the trilogy & I reckon there is only one group for the job. Still don't trust The Illusive Man though... and if we are barking up the wrong tree, well, at least it's another tree that's been barked at!?!?



...Cerberus we dirty our hands so you don't have to...

[Zulu_DFA]

mOOgBunny wrote...

Zulu_DFA you have ruined my day!

Yay!!!

mOOgBunny wrote...

In a good way.

Doh!

mOOgBunny wrote...

As vanslyke85 states the Shadow Brokers videos with Anderson & Udina now also make a lot more sense. What would be the point of all the interesting info in those videos & documents if they are of no concern to us?

Well, from the "third person omniscient" PoV (of Retribution novel), we know that Anderson for sure is actively anti-Cerberus.

In ME1 He also showed knowledge and extreme disdain of of the mysterious person named Amistan Banes, whose... let's say, "ghost", led Rear Admiral Kahoku his fatal encounter with Cerberus. However, both Anderson and Dr. Michel recognized Banes to have been a medium-to-high ranking in the Alliance hierarchy. Ultimately, that subplot led to a dead end. It is speculated that it's been cut from ME1 due to resource constraints, but I think, that maybe it was withheld, because the writers decided not to give out too much information on the Cerberus-Alliance connection, and leave us in the dark.

The meaning of that SB's vid of Anderson talking to a guy wearing a "Cord-Hislop" t-shirt is probably that, like TIM said, he was deliberately conveying rumors about Shepard working for Cerberus. He also was setting up the Collectors to run in Shepard on his, TIM's terms. As I speculate in that thread, Horizon may have been chosen for this "toe-to-toe" encounter due to the "evil" ulterior motive of punishing its colonists for their dissent of the Alliance. So the colonists were pretty much doomed to whatever the fate of all the other abductees. Naturally, the same fate was awaiting the Alliance personnel, that would come there to install defences and investigate Shepard and without knowing what was really going to hit them, and consequently without having a chance to fight back due to lack of necessary equipment (like Mordin's "countermeasures"). So it had to be Anderson's people, who are not on Cerberus' good side.

In other words, rather than to endanger a random Alliance unit (like it happened on Akuze), TIM decided to endanger a "bad" (from his standpoint anyway) Alliance unit.

[Arijharn]

I don't even think it was pre-meditated to that degree though Zulu.



I think the defense guns were put there in good faith in case something happened, although they had thought (or were told via higher ups) that it was Cerberus making the abductions. In a way, I actually think Anderson was deliberately duped into prioritizing the mission, choosing Shephard's old team mate purposely because they could be trusted (hero) and presumably because that person had prior knowledge of Cerberus activities. If TIM leaked that Shephard him or herself would be showing up, that probably sweetened the deal, but I think that's a whole in the narrative because Shephard (as the player) had most likely already visited the Presidium and talked to Anderson, thus making the point kinda mute from the Alliance's perspective, since they could have already arrested The Shephard.



I'm not sure why Horizon in particular was chosen though, maybe you're right (it is after all the most convenient in your example) so I'm not really going to debate it.

[Whereto]

Wow this thread what just doest die*tries stabbing it**miss's* Well ive read the hole thing as it developed from 11 month ago. I have to say some interesting theories but not sure. Ill with hold my judgement till me3 comes out

[Yeti13]

well if this is truth then its time to paint myself grey and go join the Geth!

[wolfsite]

Whereto wrote...

Wow this thread what just doest die*tries stabbing it**miss's* Well ive read the hole thing as it developed from 11 month ago. I have to say some interesting theories but not sure. Ill with hold my judgement till me3 comes out

True, main problem is this arguement can not have a real conclusion until Bioware comes out and says something, almost all facts for or against the notion have been twisted and contorted and mixed with pure speculation and opinion to the point were it's all grey and inconclusive.  Or some people just dismissing evidence since it doesn't fit there viewpoint.

Let the thread die, wait for ME3 and see what Bioware reveals, then we can see people on the forum praising themselves for being right or just dismissing it as poor writing on the developers part and that there own opinion is still fact.

[Pwener2313]

Thread necromancy set aside. People (forumites) don't like admitting anything if it contradicts they're pre-set points o views on a subject. Cerberus *is* part of the Alliance and when this is revealed in ME3, a lot of people will feel betrayed and/or mad that they were wrong. Bsically, Cerberus is a Black Ops division of the Alliance.



TIM (Jack Harper) sends a msg through the internet to form a protection against aliens after the first contact war. The Alliance picks up the msg, finds Jack and fund him an organization. That simple. Alliance is humanity, and so does TIM says Cerberus is.



Very well done Zulu. You are correct. Wathever Cerberus stays up or disbands will probably be one of the major decisions in ME3.

[Zulu_DFA]

Let's assume for a minute the Alliance is indeed at odds with Cerberus now, and has been so for an unspecified period of time. That only means that the Alliance is utterly inept. First off, because it has spawned around such inept black ops projects as Cerberus, Lord Darrius and the Corsairs. Then it allows these projects to backfire and go rogue. And then, the most inept of them all manages to infiltrate the Alliance to the point that several of its own ranking officers, including a lauded war hero, need to betray it to keep "fighting the good fight".

So, it's time to make up your mind: is the Systems Alliance evil, or inept?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 06 mars 2011 - 07:49 .

[Whereto]

"Die thread, DIE... I command you!"

[nevar00]

None of your "proof" means anything. How TIM got the information on SR-1 is most likely a "minor" plot hole that the writers figured nobody would think about. Or maybe TIM had an "infiltrator" high up enough that he could get the plans. Whatever the reason is, it's minor.

My guess is this: during ME 1 they used Cerberus as a minor side-mission evil group that was in fact a rougue Human black ops group or whatever. Then the writers saw the potential in the group and decided to reuse the name for ME 2; also this would have been a nice way to have shown the group in ME 2, albeit briefly. Notice how there is no mention of Toombs or your Akuze squad for the sole survivor to Miranda or TIM or anybody: my guess is that they hadn't intended for Cerberus to be the group from ME 2 so they decided to ignore that side plot.

I like the idea of Hackitt working with Cerberus, and I could see them ending up with Cerberus being part of the Alliance. But there really is no "proof" for that right now that could easily be explained away with some crap or just completely ignored (it wouldn't be the first time).