315 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightwriter]

You concede this reasonably and civilly? Oh, I do like you.

[Dean_the_Young]

Now that's an enticing thought. [/leer]

[ITSlinky]

[/quote]

Yeah I've seen the military at work up close and personal for the last 4 or so years and then some a couple of years before that as well, I've been to Afghanistan and am on my way to Kosovo soon and being a dick has never been an option, you have to be just as much a diplomat to get anywhere, you just need to know when it's time to stop being nice and start to unload into peoples faces..

[/quote]Thanks for your service, by the way. Yes, there's always room for diplomacy, but you know what I was talking about: there are people who respond well to dicks, who don't take it personally, who even respect it. Lord knows why, but you can be invited to the BBQ despite (or because) of being an ****, depending on which sort you are.

Heck, a number of Renegade options aren't even really dickish as much as 'I don't have time for your ****.'

It's sort of like that joke: "There are three types of people in this world: dicks, ******, and ****s..."

[/quote]

^ Previous qoutes from other people...didn't quote it right.

  Honestly can't say I agree.  I went to Afghanistan and I went to Iraq from 2001-2004.  I served in the Navy.  Quite honestly what most civilians consider to be the dick mentality is the "failure is not an option".  There's a difference between pushing someone to their peak and just pushing them to make them cry.  A "hard nosed" seargeant pushes to your limit and gets the most out of you by motivating you however needed.  He is not always hard and demanding, but only when he needs to be.  A douchebag seargeant gets jobs that are done to the bare minimum to avoid repercussion.  A douchebag is always a douchebag.

  Shepard is Alliance Navy, in any background he enlisted at 18.  He has risen to the rank of Commander and is the Excutive Officer of a starship, the most advanced prototype no less, at the start of ME.  There is no split second decision for a military personel to drop 100 innocent bystanders to kill 1 guy.  The motto of the US military "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic".  The key word there is DEFEND, that's what the military does.  Lives were on the line, civilians were on the DA.  As a military man....it's in his blood/brain/instinct/training to rescue those civilians.  All of us who have served will do what we can to ensure a civilians safety, we signed up to be expendable so you don't have to.  Yes it is the military's job to kill our enemies and do it in a tacticaly sound manor.  It is also our job to protect our country and its people, and this extends to our allies.  When Korea was threatening Japan, the US Navy was sitting off their coast telling them it was a bad idea.  I was there.  You want a valid logical reason for why Shepard would save DA?  It's his job as a military officer.

  On a side note, Joker said he could save the DA.  I'd have sent him in alone to do it in the Normandy because he's just that epic.  Remember who killed the giant reaper...that's right it was Joker...cause he's awesome.

Modifié par ITSlinky, 28 mai 2010 - 12:51 .

[Asheer_Khan]

It's true that vigil's program worked only temporal but catch is that to regain again control over Citadel relay was necessary to reinstall reaper program via console in Council room since any reaper signal to keepers thanks to Prothean scientists were on thier ignore list.



So in moment when Saren (in both cases as living turian and reaper husk) was taken out of the picture Sovieregin was practicly powerless since there was not possible for him to regain control over citadel systems without contacting keepers.



So ironically safety lock created by reapers to keep citadel secret undiscovered and assure thier return to Citadel space fail them in most critical moment.

[Nightwriter]

I feel like people are lulled into complacency too much in this game when it comes to being a dick.

This whole screw diplomacy be a dick thing doesn't get realistic enough ramifications. Renegades shove guns in people's faces rather than being diplomatic because to some extent they feel safe that Shepard as the protagonist won't die. They're the invincible badass. So why should they be nice? No one can mess with them.

In reality these actions might get you killed. You are most certainly not invincible; diplomacy is important, and smart.

[lovgreno]

In reality renegades are usualy unemployed. We are rather ruthlessly (heh, now that's ironical) weeding out anyone who cannot cooperate, show humility or admit being wrong. Paragons rule our world because they have the most important form of power: connections. You can only get connections if you can prove being thrustworthy and are ready to sacrifice something for someone else. As a bonus they have few enemies.

Modifié par lovgreno, 28 mai 2010 - 01:23 .

[CaptainZaysh]

Disagree. In my experience senior management is comprised of Renegades. People are not elevated to leadership positions because they are well liked but because they can create the results desired by the rich and powerful.

[Nightwriter]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Disagree. In my experience senior management is comprised of Renegades. People are not elevated to leadership positions because they are well liked but because they can create the results desired by the rich and powerful.

Creating the results desired by the rich and powerful is being well liked.

Success in life is based largely on emotional intelligence and people skills. People like you for what you do for them.

[CaptainZaysh]

Disagree. People follow you if they think they will profit by it.

[ITSlinky]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Disagree. People follow you if they think they will profit by it.

People follow a leader.  It requires people/social skills.  You can be the greatest whatever, but if you roll around in your own fecal matter you aren't going to inspire people to follow you.  It's more akin to manipulation than being "well liked", but remember the old saying: You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.  Think that sprang up for no reason whatsoever?

[Nightwriter]

People like you because of the way you make them feel. Profit is only one variance of this. Profit means money, money makes people feel good. Therefore you make them feel good.

[Christmas Ape]

Because Shepard has excellent instincts for when a problem can be solved by reaching out with sympathy, and when you need to reach out with a ten micro-gram slug at several times the speed of sound.

[CaptainZaysh]

Effective leaders in my experience do not necessarily have great people skills. You guys are describing sales reps, not CEOs.

[lovgreno]

Popularity and trust is what drives the economy and political systems. Military, probaly to a lesser extent but I don't think they can ignore it. To win this you can use manipulation, lies and secrets but only to a limited extent. There are always many you can't fool and it's foolish to underestimate people. Therefore honest good intentions proven by actions are vital to make a sucess in the long run. No one can avoid getting their hands dirty but in the long run it almost always backfires on you.



It has nothing to do with good or evil. It's about proving that you are a reliable ally.

[StrawberryViking]

ITSlinky wrote...

  Honestly can't say I agree.  I went to Afghanistan and I went to Iraq from 2001-2004.  I served in the Navy.  Quite honestly what most civilians consider to be the dick mentality is the "failure is not an option".  There's a difference between pushing someone to their peak and just pushing them to make them cry.  A "hard nosed" seargeant pushes to your limit and gets the most out of you by motivating you however needed.  He is not always hard and demanding, but only when he needs to be.  A douchebag seargeant gets jobs that are done to the bare minimum to avoid repercussion.  A douchebag is always a douchebag.

  Shepard is Alliance Navy, in any background he enlisted at 18.  He has risen to the rank of Commander and is the Excutive Officer of a starship, the most advanced prototype no less, at the start of ME.  There is no split second decision for a military personel to drop 100 innocent bystanders to kill 1 guy.  The motto of the US military "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic".  The key word there is DEFEND, that's what the military does.  Lives were on the line, civilians were on the DA.  As a military man....it's in his blood/brain/instinct/training to rescue those civilians.  All of us who have served will do what we can to ensure a civilians safety, we signed up to be expendable so you don't have to.  Yes it is the military's job to kill our enemies and do it in a tacticaly sound manor.  It is also our job to protect our country and its people, and this extends to our allies.  When Korea was threatening Japan, the US Navy was sitting off their coast telling them it was a bad idea.  I was there.  You want a valid logical reason for why Shepard would save DA?  It's his job as a military officer.

  On a side note, Joker said he could save the DA.  I'd have sent him in alone to do it in the Normandy because he's just that epic.  Remember who killed the giant reaper...that's right it was Joker...cause he's awesome.

Thanks for your service by the way, but I'll have to disagree with you on some points. You say that the key role of the military is to defend, which I do agree on. You also say that a valid and logical reason Shepard would save the DA was his/her job as a military officer, but that is also a valid reason for not saving the DA. By not saving it, you are helping to defend the rest of organic life in the galaxy by giving them a better chance of survival. 'The needs of the many outweigh the needs of few.' comes to mind. 

It comes off as a foolish and reckless decision to me to be risking the fate of the entire galaxy just so you can think ahead about the possible diplomatic relationship between the alien species and humans that might not even happen because you don't have enough of your forces left after saving the DA. All that matters at that moment is saving the galaxy, because if you don't, you can't think later, because you'd be dead.

I know that a "shoot first, think later" mentality isn't a very good outlook on life, and I honestly don't think that way, but when something that big is at risk, you have to be forced to think that way. Idealism isn't going to save you, nor is being a douchbag.

But the fact that you win either way was what bothered me. I honestly thought that at the moment, I could doom the entire galaxy if I picked the wrong choice. The people who chose to save the council might have known that you'd win either way, though I can't speak for them. My way of thinking led me to believe that saving the DA was the heroic thing to do. But heroic decisions are usually made without thinking, and is defined by involving self-sacrifice.

From Mass Effect Wiki:

"After
killing the operators of Citadel Control, Saren made his way toward the
Citadel's master control unit. He intended to transfer control of the
Citadel to Sovereign to activate the latent mass relay, paving the way
for the rest of the Reapers to enter through from dark space, but was
interrupted when Shepard and the Ilos ground team rushed in."

On another note, I will admit that I didn't know this, but I have to wonder if you were given this information at the time of your decision. From personal experience, I didn't notice this fact, but then again, I havn't played ME1 in some time, so it may have come up somewhere. If you weren't given this information, (or didn't infer it at the time), then it could affect your decesion, but this is purely from a non-metagaming perspective.


But the entire reason I made this thread was to argue the fact that naive idealsim is rewarded, even though some of the decisions are incredibly stupid (with or without metagaming), and what comes across as logical decisions are punished. (Not talking about pure renegade decisions.

Something I'd like to point out though. Many people (I'm inferring most are Paragons, though correct me if I'm wrong) argue against the douchebag attitude in the game, arguing that diplomacy is required. But I'm pretty sure most of everyone has punched the reporter (I will admit to that, even on my pure paragon). This goes against everything diplomatic, even if she was being twit. We do this because we either think it's funny or we didn't  like what she was saying. But either way, she makes sure she gets it on camera in both instances. The way you act toward her may or may not affect how Earth views and/or supports you. I'd be funny to see if that decision drastically affects the game.

[Nightwriter]

StrawberryViking wrote...

On another note, I will admit that I didn't know this, but I have to wonder if you were given this information at the time of your decision. From personal experience, I didn't notice this fact, but then again, I havn't played ME1 in some time, so it may have come up somewhere. If you weren't given this information, (or didn't infer it at the time), then it could affect your decesion, but this is purely from a non-metagaming perspective.

But the entire reason I made this thread was to argue the fact that naive idealsim is rewarded, even though some of the decisions are incredibly stupid (with or without metagaming), and what comes across as logical decisions are punished. (Not talking about pure renegade decisions.

Something I'd like to point out though. Many people (I'm inferring most are Paragons, though correct me if I'm wrong) argue against the douchebag attitude in the game, arguing that diplomacy is required. But I'm pretty sure most of everyone has punched the reporter (I will admit to that, even on my pure paragon). This goes against everything diplomatic, even if she was being twit. We do this because we either think it's funny or we didn't  like what she was saying. But either way, she makes sure she gets it on camera in both instances. The way you act toward her may or may not affect how Earth views and/or supports you. I'd be funny to see if that decision drastically affects the game.

Yes, we are told that Saren is using the Conduit to reach the Citadel and transfer control back to Sovereign. I can understand how it's something that might fade from memory, all you can really recall about the mission looking back tends to be just STOP SAREN STOP SAREN.

I do not believe that it is naive idealism that is being rewarded. Most of my paragon decisions I felt were logical, natural ones. I believe it's more an effort to go out of one's way to pursue idealism. Real idealism is unachievable; it's the pursuit that's important.

Also, don't be so quick to make that assumption - I did not punch the reporter. Many did not. I found using all the paragon options and making her look like a raving fool was so much better than punching her. With that I've proved I'm a violent brute; my way, she's proved she's an idiot, all the while making me look the good guy.

There's times when the renegade path is extremely unreasonable. I should hardly be surprised these courses are not rewarded. For instance it's actually easier to gas the Feros colonists. The renegade option there is totally unjustifiable.

[StrawberryViking]

Yeah, I can see where that might come into play, as I'm a very tunnel-vision kind of person.



But I guess that's why we're all different. As I felt that my major renegade decisions (as for the most part I'm a paragon, just when it comes to major decisions I tend to pick renegade(renegon I think)) were logical and/or reasonable at the time. In hindsight they don't seem smart, but that's metagaming.



About punching the reporter, I was under the impression that many people did, as most of the people I've talked to have, but I guess I'll make a poll to find out for sure.



But for me, on Feros, I decided to gas the colonist, but I ended wasting most of my grenades on thorian creepers because I thought they were the colonist (stupid I know) and my aim was pretty off. I tried to go up to them and knock them out with melee, but apparently I'd either not get close enough and accidentally shoot them in the face, or before I could get close to them, I'd die. So that decision for me was pretty much full of fail. But this particular decision differs from the rest because you actively have to pursue both ways. For me, it was harder to go the paragon path because my teammates would shoot at the colonists because they were shooting at them (even though I told them specifically not to). I ended up having to leave them behind to deal with the colonist myself (and the thorian creepers; never loved my shottie so much in my life). In my playthrough, it was easier to just kill them because I could bring my team, but yours was probably different than mine, probably contributing to our different play-styles.

[Nightwriter]

Ha! I did the same thing. I thought the colonists were the Thorian creepers and I wasted grenades before I realized the truth, had to reload. I never had much problem with squad fire though - I always gassed them very quickly.

It wasn't until my second or third playthrough that I noticed an easy-to-miss crate at the Feros camp where you can pick up almost a complete restock of grenades, too.

I guess I'm not a very proper gamer in that if a renegade decision hurts my gaming experience in the long run, and cripples my gaming enjoyment because of it, I'm not going to stick to it just for the sake of realism. However I don't come across such drastic cases of this often and most of the time I make my choices based on logic and personal judgment.

[StrawberryViking]

I'm not really like that. I only reload if I died... . But I'm more of a take the consequences of my actions kind of person, probably contributed to my militaristic father, but believe me, I do feel tempted to reload on my first playthrough when I end up screwing myself over with bad decisions because I don't have fore-knowledge.



But so I can stop rambling and get back on topic, a really good example of how I'd like the morality system to be would be, like many people have mentioned, the DA:O Harrowmont vs. Bhelen. Harrowmont was an honest man, and he was good to you, but in the end, he ends up screwing Orzammar, and further isolates them. Bhelen was an ambitious usurper who killed his own siblings just so he could make a grab for power, not to mention he acts like a jackass to you, even when you help him; but he makes controversial changes to Orzammar (like dictatorship, more contact with the topsiders) for the better. This decision has multiple shades of gray that make it a genuinely hard decision to make, especially if you are a dwarf noble.

[lovgreno]

@StrawberryViking: Sorry if we derailed your topic.
But to answer your question: I don't think either paragon or renegade realy gets rewarded actualy. Wich is a shame, it makes the decisions less interesting. Renegade often involves killing off interesting people like the council and Wrex, wich realy is enough reason for me to not do that. Not very realistic, I admit, but fun is more important for me. And renegade Shepard often just feels like a shortsighted tantrum kid but I guess that is a question of personal taste.

Good point about Harrowmont VS Bhelen, we could use some of those true dilemmas in ME too.

Modifié par lovgreno, 28 mai 2010 - 07:16 .

[CmdrFenix83]

Barquiel wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

 You can't just sit on your thumb and wait. 

Well, renegades hold back the fleet.

I think it's a terrible idea to ignore the geth fleet, allowing them to attack Hackett's ships from behind while they are trying to engage Sovereign. The citadel fleets are unable to defend their own flagship, they couldn't stop the geth (who worship Sovereign).

The Destiny Ascension is not the only ship in the Citadel Fleet.  The Geth are unable to break away.  If what you say was true, then the Geth fleet would be hitting the Arcturus Fleet when you let the Ascension blow.  They don't. 

[CmdrFenix83]

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

The game simplified the situation enough for you to understand which situation was tactically superior and which one wasn't. Everything else, all conjecture, flows from that. Not being able to defend the Destiny Ascension, a target ten times the size of any other ship short of the Reapers, does not mean the rest of the Citadel forces engaged would not keep the Geth busy.

Shepard doesn't know...
- How many geth ships are left
- How many council ships are left
(Admiral Hackett knows...and he thinks attacking the geth fleet is an acceptable tactical option)
We know: no council ship defends the DA. If these geth ships decide to defend their "god", nobody can stop them.

The alliance lost 3-4 cruisers against the geth...it is very unlikely that these ships would make a difference.

Hackett does *not* know.  The Arcturus Fleet is beyond the Mass Relay.  They have 0 tactical information on the battle.  They are relying on someone who's inside the Citadel that also has 0 tactical information ont he battle to make the decision.  Either way this was a *dumb* decision for an Admiral to leave to a Commander that has just as little information as he does.

[CmdrFenix83]

Nightwriter wrote...

Ha! I did the same thing. I thought the colonists were the Thorian creepers and I wasted grenades before I realized the truth, had to reload. I never had much problem with squad fire though - I always gassed them very quickly.

It wasn't until my second or third playthrough that I noticed an easy-to-miss crate at the Feros camp where you can pick up almost a complete restock of grenades, too.

I guess I'm not a very proper gamer in that if a renegade decision hurts my gaming experience in the long run, and cripples my gaming enjoyment because of it, I'm not going to stick to it just for the sake of realism. However I don't come across such drastic cases of this often and most of the time I make my choices based on logic and personal judgment.

I wouldn't say it would make you an improper 'gamer', but more that it makes you an improper 'roleplayer'.  I screwed up and got Mordin killed in the vents in my first ME2 playthrough(was thinking in Me1 terms where tech skills = engineer).  It was my mistake and my main Shepard will have to live with it.  It definitely gave me a very real sense of danger throughout that whole mission because of it, however.  The entire mission I spent worried someone else I cared about was going to die.  If I had gotten the everyone-lives achievement on the first try, I probably wouldn't have enjoyed it as much.

I too think about logic.  I consider myself downright pragmatic.  However, I still put myself in the character's shoes.  In my eyes, The Destiny Ascension was a crippled vessel.  Saving it literally just meant saving the lives on board at the cost of battle-ready ships.  The datafile Vigil gave me was stated as a temporary measure, meaning Sovereign needed to be dealt with ASAP.  I have seconds to make this decision or the DA will be blown up regardless through inaction.  I deemed it was too risky to save them, and ordered the fleet to focus on Sovereign.  I can't think long-term beyond this battle, because losing this battle means losing the entire galaxy... long-term political ramifications are completely irrelevant in light of that. 

It wasn't till my second playthrough where I was playing a 100% paragon as opposed to paragade that made me realize, "Yeah, I guess BioWare wouldn't really screw us like that..."  I guess I sort of treat RPGs like those old 'Choose Your Own Adventure' books where a bad decision can literally mean game over.

[CmdrFenix83]

Shandepared wrote...

Where did we get this idea that renegade = never being diplomatic? I seem to recall being able to renegade Tali and Legion into making friends and the same with Miranda and Jack. I was also able to tell off the Admiralty Board that way. I also recall winning over a snide reporter and an arrogant Rear Admiral.

Speak softly, but carry a big stick.

Or in the Renegade's case, yell loudly and carry a Cain?