315 réponses à ce sujet

[Alphyn]

Hundreds, then.

[STG]

Alphyn wrote...

Hundreds, then.

And Destiny Ascension has a crew of 10.000.

Sounds almost renegade to me.

[Hyper Cutter]

Alphyn wrote...

Hundreds, then.

If you saved the Council, 2000-some humans die in the Battle of the Citadel.

[Mouton_Alpha]

Hyper Cutter wrote...

Alphyn wrote...

Hundreds, then.

If you saved the Council, 2000-some humans die in the Battle of the Citadel.

Seriously? That's like nothing in terms of a serious military conflict.

[NICKjnp]

I don't like being renegade... or paragade... or renegon. I like the morality system how it is. Of course there will be negative consequences if yout take the renegade path. The developers have stateds that it is the most expedient path. The paragon path is the "right" path. Do you really think that you should be rewarded for killing off the council? Really? You decided to put a minority in charge or the majority and killed the people who were in charge of galactic politics. What do you think would happen if lets say the National Guard of some US state came in to rescue Washington, DC but instead of saving the three branches of Government they just said, "We don't like them so they can die" and then they subsequently put only members from their state in charge of the country and said, "We are in charge and everyone has to follow our rules?" Obviously that would be a negative effect on the country and would lead to civil war.

[Mouton_Alpha]

Sadly, many of the choices - on both sides - are stupid simply for the sake of being different. Sigh.

[Nightwriter]

That's a very interesting point, Nick. It would've been something if killing off the Council led to civil war in the galaxy or something. That would actually have been a foreseeable outcome to that decision.

Now you've got a power vacuum, after all, and the other alien races are hardly going to let you just step in just because you knocked off three people.

[Substance-E]

Mouton_Alpha wrote...

Hyper Cutter wrote...

Alphyn wrote...

Hundreds, then.

If you saved the Council, 2000-some humans die in the Battle of the Citadel.

Seriously? That's like nothing in terms of a serious military conflict.

And as modern events will show us, destabilizing a government, moving in, and taking over isn't always easy or peaceful...

Not that the turians would be running around with IED's or anything... (though there is that guy with the big knife at the check in)

[NICKjnp]

Nightwriter wrote...

That's a very interesting point, Nick. It would've been something if killing off the Council led to civil war in the galaxy or something. That would actually have been a foreseeable outcome to that decision.

Now you've got a power vacuum, after all, and the other alien races are hardly going to let you just step in just because you knocked off three people.

I believe if you listen to the galactic news the Turians are doing a military build up.  That isn't for fun you know.  Also... the aliens on the citadel are not exactly fond of you if you let the council die.

[Miss Yuna of Atlanta]

Markinator_123 wrote...

Paragon choices should defintely bite you in the *** more. For instance, realistically speaking, Zaeed would never be loyal to you if you didn't let him kill Vido.

I agree with you, but I think the rationale behind it was that Zaeed fancies himself a professional, and a professional wouldn't let a personal vendetta get in the way of good business. The Paragon route has Shepard appealing to Zaeed's professional mindset, albeit in an extremely preachy, obnoxious fashion.

[CmdrFenix83]

Alphyn wrote...

There is no right or wrong decision; if you want to concentrate on Sovereign and kill the Council because you feel it's the right decision, by all means, do it. You'll be made out to be a human-centric douche-bag and you won't be able to throw around the word "Spectre" any more.

If you save the Council, you've killed millions of humans, and look like a naive dumb-ass who can't put his/her feelings beside him/her. The Council is grateful, but I doubt the millions of now-widows are.

The choice is yours.

Actually you get quantifyable numbers when talking to the reporter in ME2 about that.  If you save the council, the Alliance loses 8 cruisers with crews of 800 each for a total of 6400 dead.  However, the Destiny Ascention had a crew of 10,000.  In the end, you end up losing *less* lives saving the Ascension.

[CmdrFenix83]

NICKjnp wrote...

I don't like being renegade... or paragade... or renegon. I like the morality system how it is. Of course there will be negative consequences if yout take the renegade path. The developers have stateds that it is the most expedient path. The paragon path is the "right" path. Do you really think that you should be rewarded for killing off the council? Really? You decided to put a minority in charge or the majority and killed the people who were in charge of galactic politics. What do you think would happen if lets say the National Guard of some US state came in to rescue Washington, DC but instead of saving the three branches of Government they just said, "We don't like them so they can die" and then they subsequently put only members from their state in charge of the country and said, "We are in charge and everyone has to follow our rules?" Obviously that would be a negative effect on the country and would lead to civil war.

For someone that isn't Renegade and let's the Council die, it's a matter of galactic survival versus the lives of a few.  Not to mention that the new Council isn't entirely human unless you choose that option after the battle in ME1.  If you say you didn't do it for a power grab, then a new multi-species Council is instated.

If given the choice between ordering troops to stop the nuclear warheads about to rain down all over the planet or save a handful of politicians, you'd better believe I would choose to save the entire planet's population over a single governing body.  Politicians can be replaced, but if your species is extinct then there's nothing you can really do about anything.

Modifié par CmdrFenix83, 26 mai 2010 - 05:11 .

[TobiTobsen]

I fail to see any proof that the renegade choice is actually better than the paragon choice.

They say, if you saved the council, that the alliance lost 8 ships and 2000 people ... on the other side we have the renegade choice: Lost the Council, the DA and the 10.000 Asari who served on the ship.

[Bigdoser]

There is a simple answer to this question both sides are valid.

[scorptatious]

Bigdoser wrote...

Alphyn wrote...

There is no right or wrong decision; if you want to concentrate on Sovereign and kill the Council because you feel it's the right decision, by all means, do it. You'll be made out to be a human-centric douche-bag and you won't be able to throw around the word "Spectre" any more.

If you save the Council, you've killed millions of humans, and look like a naive dumb-ass who can't put his/her feelings beside him/her. The Council is grateful, but I doubt the millions of now-widows are.

The choice is yours.

You did not kill millions of humans.

That's right, you only killed around a hundred or so humans. If you didn't save the council, you'd lose thousands more lives as well as the council.

[BellatrixLugosi]

The one thing I want to say about op's collector Base statement based on either destroying it or saving it



Ok, now I know some Cerberus fans will hate me with this but I think it might be paragon for the fact that you know that TIM will use that base unscruplously in the future, as his methods are rather unnessacery and careless with the people he claims to protect anyway. Renegade choice for that just makes me scream "hmm giving collector and reaper technology to TIM.........How can this go wrong!!! derp!"

[CmdrFenix83]

scorptatious wrote...

Bigdoser wrote...

Alphyn wrote...

There is no right or wrong decision; if you want to concentrate on Sovereign and kill the Council because you feel it's the right decision, by all means, do it. You'll be made out to be a human-centric douche-bag and you won't be able to throw around the word "Spectre" any more.

If you save the Council, you've killed millions of humans, and look like a naive dumb-ass who can't put his/her feelings beside him/her. The Council is grateful, but I doubt the millions of now-widows are.

The choice is yours.

You did not kill millions of humans.

That's right, you only killed around a hundred or so humans. If you didn't save the council, you'd lose thousands more lives as well as the council.

6400 dead to save 10,000.  Stated in ME2 when talking to the punchable reporter.  It's a perfect example of how the paragon choices always end up witht he best possible result.

[trobbins777]

The Rachni Queen-if you save her you can say that she would make a powerfull ally against the reapers. Short sighted maybe but logically sound.


Collector Base-I wish bioware expanded the dialogue conversations a bit. The reason i always chose to destroy it is that if we did copy their technology the reapers could develop countermeasures to neutralize their own technology.

X57: Bring Down the Sky -I mostly agree with you here however Balak wouldn't have the men or the resources to try something like that again. He would probably spend the rest of his life hiding from the alliance.

Kasumi: Stolen Memory-completely agree with you here. Also i would like to add the fact that Kasumi seems somewhat obsessed with Keiji and though I do recognize her loss. I think destroying the greybox will help her move on.

Illos-once again i completely agree. However i think your confusing renegade with evil. Taking a renegade path isn't evil it's just a 'victory at all costs' path

Renegade Shepard needs to be more like House. Snarky, Calculating, and a mixture of badass and brilliant

Modifié par trobbins777, 26 mai 2010 - 06:03 .

[commander_shepard]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

NICKjnp wrote...

I don't like being renegade... or paragade... or renegon. I like the morality system how it is. Of course there will be negative consequences if yout take the renegade path. The developers have stateds that it is the most expedient path. The paragon path is the "right" path. Do you really think that you should be rewarded for killing off the council? Really? You decided to put a minority in charge or the majority and killed the people who were in charge of galactic politics. What do you think would happen if lets say the National Guard of some US state came in to rescue Washington, DC but instead of saving the three branches of Government they just said, "We don't like them so they can die" and then they subsequently put only members from their state in charge of the country and said, "We are in charge and everyone has to follow our rules?" Obviously that would be a negative effect on the country and would lead to civil war.

For someone that isn't Renegade and let's the Council die, it's a matter of galactic survival versus the lives of a few.  Not to mention that the new Council isn't entirely human unless you choose that option after the battle in ME1.  If you say you didn't do it for a power grab, then a new multi-species Council is instated.

If given the choice between ordering troops to stop the nuclear warheads about to rain down all over the planet or save a handful of politicians, you'd better believe I would choose to save the entire planet's population over a single governing body.  Politicians can be replaced, but if your species is extinct then there's nothing you can really do about anything.

I hate to be the numbers maniac but it was 300 crew on each cruiser and 8 cruisers lost so in total it was 2,400 human deaths.

I know this has been discussed (to death) already, bt I'm sort of critical of the whole saving the council decision. While it seems heroic and in hindsight it seemed like the paragon thing to do, this could have cost the humans the battle. It would be irresponsible to save the Ascension while giving Sovereign the free pass to contact his friends and commence with galactic genocide. Yes it's likely that the Ascension will play an important rule in the future but it's just ONE ship and it can be rebuilt whereas once the reapers pour through the citadel relay, not even the Ascension would be able to stop them. I mean if this wasn't a video game where the story is fairly linear, who knows what could have happened if the humans saved the council but ofcourse given the fact that it is a VG, I'll just take the stupid paragon ending and count my blessings.

On a side note, incase anyone didn't notice; during the Alliance's battle Sovereign, a geth ship could be seen in one of the cutscenes indicating that had the Alliance not wiped out the geth attacking the Ascension, they could have/would have come to Sovereign's aid.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Well saving the council you will lose the 8 ships saving the Destiny Ascension in ADDITION to the 2+ ships lost to Sovereign. So you might have ended up costing more lives, keeping the galactic government intact however.



However if you save the council, there will be no intergalactic build up in navies. Navies which would come in handy against the reapers. Who cares about intergalactic relations? Once the Reapers arrive all organic life will band together anyway.

[EricHVela]

IMHO, Paragon is someone that's a proper role model for kids (and adults even). They make the nice choices (which can easily bite them later, but they're willing to handle the consequences as they happen, sacrificing their time and effort for it). The paragon is not a bad-as.

IMHO, Renegade is someone that's not a proper role model for kids (and adults even), but gets the job done (without worry about the consequences or even bothering to deal with any if they happen). The renegade gets to be the bad-as.

They called it Paragon and Renegade because it wasn't about good or evil or right or wrong.

But people complained. They incorrectly thought that Paragon was good and Renegade was evil. They wanted to be 'good' bad-ases.

So EA obliged by making Paragon the right choice and often bad-as and renegade the mean(er) choice and usually just plain mean... because people didn't know what Paragon and Renegade meant. To further drive home this new definition, they pulled a KotOR on us with appearances going from hero to terminator.

I can name one instance where ME2 Renegade was pegged perfectly in the ME1 standard: Stabbing the mech in the back with an arc-welder, got the job done but wasn't exactly nice and wasn't wrong. Unfortunately, this adds to your mean-looking scarring.

I prefer the morally ambiguous, non-judgmental ME1 take on Paragon and Renegade. ME2's version feels like a passion-play, preachy.

Modifié par ReggarBlane, 26 mai 2010 - 06:19 .

[Nerevar-as]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

scorptatious wrote...

Bigdoser wrote...

Alphyn wrote...

There is no right or wrong decision; if you want to concentrate on Sovereign and kill the Council because you feel it's the right decision, by all means, do it. You'll be made out to be a human-centric douche-bag and you won't be able to throw around the word "Spectre" any more.

If you save the Council, you've killed millions of humans, and look like a naive dumb-ass who can't put his/her feelings beside him/her. The Council is grateful, but I doubt the millions of now-widows are.

The choice is yours.

You did not kill millions of humans.

That's right, you only killed around a hundred or so humans. If you didn't save the council, you'd lose thousands more lives as well as the council.

6400 dead to save 10,000.  Stated in ME2 when talking to the punchable reporter.  It's a perfect example of how the paragon choices always end up witht he best possible result.

The logic I use to save the Council is that I have now control of the Citadel and Sovereign is trapped inside, so it´s not such a great risk (at the moment of the choice you don´t know about HuskSovereign, nor that Sovereign can take a fleet without moving - ME3 is goning to be fun). Also, the DA is a powerful ship with crew of thousands, if the Council had been in a cruiser I would probably left them to die some playthroughs.

Is the situatuion in ME2 as bad if you put Anderson in charge? I mean, why would you put Udina? The guy backstabs you for political power without considering the consequences of you could be right.

[CmdrFenix83]

Nerevar-as wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

scorptatious wrote...

Bigdoser wrote...

Alphyn wrote...

There is no right or wrong decision; if you want to concentrate on Sovereign and kill the Council because you feel it's the right decision, by all means, do it. You'll be made out to be a human-centric douche-bag and you won't be able to throw around the word "Spectre" any more.

If you save the Council, you've killed millions of humans, and look like a naive dumb-ass who can't put his/her feelings beside him/her. The Council is grateful, but I doubt the millions of now-widows are.

The choice is yours.

You did not kill millions of humans.

That's right, you only killed around a hundred or so humans. If you didn't save the council, you'd lose thousands more lives as well as the council.

6400 dead to save 10,000.  Stated in ME2 when talking to the punchable reporter.  It's a perfect example of how the paragon choices always end up witht he best possible result.

The logic I use to save the Council is that I have now control of the Citadel and Sovereign is trapped inside, so it´s not such a great risk (at the moment of the choice you don´t know about HuskSovereign, nor that Sovereign can take a fleet without moving - ME3 is goning to be fun). Also, the DA is a powerful ship with crew of thousands, if the Council had been in a cruiser I would probably left them to die some playthroughs.

Is the situatuion in ME2 as bad if you put Anderson in charge? I mean, why would you put Udina? The guy backstabs you for political power without considering the consequences of you could be right.

I couldn't tell you.  I've always selected Anderson to join the Council, whether it be the original one or the new, multi-species one after letting the DA go boom in favor of focusing on Sovereign.

My logic was that eventually Sovereign will regain control of the station, and we have zero idea how powerful his shields/weapons are.  I personally wasn't going to risk losing the entire galaxy to save a crippled dreadnaught and a group of politicians.

[Nerevar-as]

I meant that in default ME2 the galaxy is going into cold war and there are more fascist moments in the citadel. Is it the same with Anderson?



I understand taking no chances with Sovereign. One of the main diferences between renegade and paragon is that the latter usually takes the more immediate risk.

[OneDrunkMonk]

It should be "Passive" option and "Agressive" option, that makes sense. There are times when passivity is the best option, other time aggression is best. Instead we tend to get "nice and rational Shepard" and "douchebag Shepard." Mind you ME2 is a little better about how it handles Renegade and Paragon.