315 réponses à ce sujet

[Mouton_Alpha]

Shandepared wrote...

Gravbh wrote...

I never understood why shooting someone who pulls a gun on you is considered a renegade interrupt, but oh well.

Seriously, why does everyone treat Ash and I like some kind of murderer for shooting Wrex?

Human psychology. If someone shoots someone we really like (and we all love Wrex), then we consider the shooter a murderer, no matter what. We are protective of those who we consider close and lose perspective.

[STG]

It's annoying, no argument there. But if they did support you openly then ME3 wouldn't have a nice twist.

[zsom]

STG wrote...

It's annoying, no argument there. But if they did support you openly then ME3 wouldn't have a nice twist.

I honestly hope this isn't going to be the big plot twist in ME3. My guess is that we are going to spend most of the game convincing all alien races to prepare for war (like in DAO), then cerberus or Shep or someone else is going to come up with a deus ex machine which we'll have to detonate/install/start at some very unpleasant location, where we can have the last big boss fight, while the allied fleets try to hold the line.

Simply finding out that the council knew about the reapers, was preparing and now has a huge fleet would be boring as hell.

And besides.. that council was more than willing to ignore the geth threat until they marched in the front door... what makes you think they are suddenly all the wiser?

[Mouton_Alpha]

zsom wrote...
And besides.. that council was more than willing to ignore the geth threat until they marched in the front door... what makes you think they are suddenly all the wiser?

They are not idiots. They are just written like idiots. They are representatives of quite bright races and it wouldn't be inconceivable for them to finally come around. All depends whether Bioware takes care about the writing, though. they are getting more and more iffy over the years.

[Armatyr]

well it also comes down to character background spacer, earth born etc. each gives bonuses to either paragon or renegade when u make those choices reducing one or the other at times so that if u believe youre choice is right and its matching character style u wont be punished as much

[CmdrFenix83]

RiouHotaru wrote...

 What we've got here is a classic example of what TVTropes refers to as, "Gameplay And Storyline Segregation".

Bioware CANNOT make choosing one path patently worse than choosing the other, no matter how much the gamers demand it.  Because from a gameplay OR storyline standpoint, no one would ever want to pick that choice if they knew they were going to get screwed over for it.  So the demands that Paragons who saved the Rachni Queen or rewrote the Heretics should get hosed will likely be ignored.  It's just silly to expect BW to do otherwise.

Fable2 did it.  There's a sequence where you're undercover within an enemy's prison and have some form of device attached to you in an attempt to condition you to lose your free will and follow their way of thinking.  You are told to ignore the starving prisoners begging for food.  Every time you disobey and do what would be considered the 'right' or 'morally correct' thing, you are actually electrocuted and are forced to lose experience points. 

Other games have inflicted penalties and actual, tangible consequences for their actions.  BioWare has yet to do such.  As someone that's been an avid roleplayer for quite a long time, I personally would love to see them do such things instead of just spoonfeeding the best outcomes to the pure paragon choices.  It penalizes the player for wanting to do anything but blindly choosing the top right or blue dialogue choice at every turn.  Logical thinking and roleplaying are actually penalized from an in-game viewpoint.

[STG]

zsom wrote...
And besides.. that council was more than willing to ignore the geth threat until they marched in the front door... what makes you think they are suddenly all the wiser?

I hope that Sovereign's wreck was enough proof to make them believe your story about reapers.

Would be kind of bad storytelling if it would turn out that people who managed to become leaders of the Citadel Council are actually idiots.

[Kaiser Shepard]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

 What we've got here is a classic example of what TVTropes refers to as, "Gameplay And Storyline Segregation".

Bioware CANNOT make choosing one path patently worse than choosing the other, no matter how much the gamers demand it.  Because from a gameplay OR storyline standpoint, no one would ever want to pick that choice if they knew they were going to get screwed over for it.  So the demands that Paragons who saved the Rachni Queen or rewrote the Heretics should get hosed will likely be ignored.  It's just silly to expect BW to do otherwise.

Fable2 did it.  There's a sequence where you're undercover within an enemy's prison and have some form of device attached to you in an attempt to condition you to lose your free will and follow their way of thinking.  You are told to ignore the starving prisoners begging for food.  Every time you disobey and do what would be considered the 'right' or 'morally correct' thing, you are actually electrocuted and are forced to lose experience points. 

Other games have inflicted penalties and actual, tangible consequences for their actions.  BioWare has yet to do such.  As someone that's been an avid roleplayer for quite a long time, I personally would love to see them do such things instead of just spoonfeeding the best outcomes to the pure paragon choices.  It penalizes the player for wanting to do anything but blindly choosing the top right or blue dialogue choice at every turn.  Logical thinking and roleplaying are actually penalized from an in-game viewpoint.

Oh please, Fable 2 barely had a story (or gameplay, for that matter) and it was hard to actually care about what happened. The loss of experience points didn't make any noticable difference either.

What we're talking about here is you having a noticably or completely different gameplay experience as a result of your choices, such as a rachni army practically wiping out every enemy during a normally difficult mission or going on a completely different mission (Are you going to help the people on Caleston or those on Noveria? You can only choose one).

STG wrote...

zsom wrote...
And besides.. that council was more than willing to ignore the geth threat until they marched in the front door... what makes you think they are suddenly all the wiser?

I hope that Sovereign's wreck was enough proof to make them believe your story about reapers.

It wasn't...

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 29 mai 2010 - 04:37 .

[Panda Warlock]

^^^ Actually, that'd be very realistic. Ask any person from any country if he/she thinks their leader is an idiot.

[CmdrFenix83]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

 What we've got here is a classic example of what TVTropes refers to as, "Gameplay And Storyline Segregation".

Bioware CANNOT make choosing one path patently worse than choosing the other, no matter how much the gamers demand it.  Because from a gameplay OR storyline standpoint, no one would ever want to pick that choice if they knew they were going to get screwed over for it.  So the demands that Paragons who saved the Rachni Queen or rewrote the Heretics should get hosed will likely be ignored.  It's just silly to expect BW to do otherwise.

Fable2 did it.  There's a sequence where you're undercover within an enemy's prison and have some form of device attached to you in an attempt to condition you to lose your free will and follow their way of thinking.  You are told to ignore the starving prisoners begging for food.  Every time you disobey and do what would be considered the 'right' or 'morally correct' thing, you are actually electrocuted and are forced to lose experience points. 

Other games have inflicted penalties and actual, tangible consequences for their actions.  BioWare has yet to do such.  As someone that's been an avid roleplayer for quite a long time, I personally would love to see them do such things instead of just spoonfeeding the best outcomes to the pure paragon choices.  It penalizes the player for wanting to do anything but blindly choosing the top right or blue dialogue choice at every turn.  Logical thinking and roleplaying are actually penalized from an in-game viewpoint.

Oh please, Fable 2 barely had a story (or gameplay, for that matter) and it was hard to actually care about what happened. The loss of experience points didn't make any noticable difference either.

What we're talking about here is you having a noticably or completely different gameplay experience as a result of your choices, such as a rachni army practically wiping out every during a normally difficult mission or going on a completely different mission.

Again, there are other games that do stuff like that.  There's one coming out called Alpha Protocol that your missions themselves are actually done based on your choices.  You play in one manner, then you get a certain mission, you play a different way, you get an entirely different mission.

Your example would have been a perfect side-mission in ME2.  Rachni have taken over a couple space stations and you have to track them back to their hive where you're confronted by the Queen.  You find out that letting her go *was* a mistake and you have to rectify that mistake right now by putting her and her hive down.  That would have been excellent.  Perhaps even make it so that your first encounter resulted in being unable to recruit a squadmate, as they were killed by the Rachni before you got there.

Now make something similar that's only available if you took a renegade choice for a specific decision.  Things that you cannot metagame since you don't see the results of the action until a different game.  That would have been a perfect example of making your choices actually matter.

[STG]

Panda Warlock wrote...

^^^ Actually, that'd be very realistic. Ask any person from any country if he/she thinks their leader is an idiot.

Well sure, some may seem like idiots to the public, some may be intelligent and competent individuals and some may be idiots. It can go either way really.

I just can't see Bioware keeping the Council as stupid as they seem so far. At least not the asari and specially the salarian.

[Panda Warlock]

*Panda_Warlock casts a spell: Wall of Text!*

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Again, there are other games that do stuff like that.  There's one coming out called Alpha Protocol that your missions themselves are actually done based on your choices.  You play in one manner, then you get a certain mission, you play a different way, you get an entirely different mission.

Your example would have been a perfect side-mission in ME2.  Rachni have taken over a couple space stations and you have to track them back to their hive where you're confronted by the Queen.  You find out that letting her go *was* a mistake and you have to rectify that mistake right now by putting her and her hive down.  That would have been excellent.  Perhaps even make it so that your first encounter resulted in being unable to recruit a squadmate, as they were killed by the Rachni before you got there.

Now make something similar that's only available if you took a renegade choice for a specific decision.  Things that you cannot metagame since you don't see the results of the action until a different game.  That would have been a perfect example of making your choices actually matter.

Attention! Fnord!

Once again I will bring up the game I find unequalled in the matter of choices and consequences - "The Witcher". I only can dream ME3 (or any other future game) will have it's system based on something like that. When your decisions will have consequences known long after loading game state is a real option. And will shape the game in sometimes most uneqpected manner. It also has nothing to do with evil-good choices. Even what you'd think the best choice (siding neither with racist  Knights wanting to wipe out nonhumans nor with nonhuman rebels wanting to murder every single human they see) is punished most severly (both sides want your head).

This is what I want for ME3. Time-delayed consequences. Big, and even small choices shaping the world around you. Choosing your actions witch care and thought, for every choice has its pros and cons. And more choices morally grey. Make the player choose the lesser evil, but which one is it left only to his mind and guts.
[dream mode off]

Also: Fnord! Fnord!

STG wrote...

Panda Warlock wrote...

^^^
Actually, that'd be very realistic. Ask any person from any country if
he/she thinks their leader is an idiot.

Well sure, some
may seem like idiots to the public, some may be intelligent and
competent individuals and some may be idiots. It can go either way
really.

I just can't see Bioware keeping the Council as stupid as
they seem so far. At least not the asari and specially the salarian.

Yeah, I know. Most of the politicians seem stupid for citizens. But they usually are decent and smart people in real life. I like to kid myself think that Council is really just hiding their true intentions. I'm sure I wouldn't like Cerberus to know about my top secret military operations. Sometimes it's good for others to think of you as moron.
We talk with them for abou 5 min. Maybe they're not that bad most of the time fnord.

Modifié par Panda Warlock, 29 mai 2010 - 05:31 .

[Asheer_Khan]

There is one major difference between Witcher (i read that Witcher 2 will be even better than 1) and Mass Effect games... EA.



And about the Council... only time and Mac Walters mood will say how they will act in ME 3.

[Panda Warlock]

Yeah, I know that. But I am still naive enough to believe people should look for good examples and implement the best parts in their work. Just because other company had a good idea doesn't mean you can't... "borrow"some of it.

[zsom]

STG wrote...
I hope that Sovereign's wreck was enough proof to make them believe your story about reapers.

Would be kind of bad storytelling if it would turn out that people who managed to become leaders of the Citadel Council are actually idiots.

And why would they keep it a secret? Building up an army would cost a huge ammount of money. Getting it (or reallocating it) would be so much easier if they could convince the ppl it was necessary.

Besides.. how many times did we in real life elect complete idiots to lead us? (Some of them even got reelected ) Why would the asari and the turians be any different?